A Little Media Bias for You, Courtesy of The Los Angeles Times

It’s subtle.

To someone from the left it’s artful, and to someone who doesn’t pay attention to politics it doesn’t even exist.

From the Los Angeles Times comes media bias at its finest, and it is a perfect example of what we must realize we are up against this election cycle if we wish to see Barack Obama become a one-term President.

The headline reads, “In a switch, GOP's Michele Bachmann talks of empathy.”

Switch? Really?

I would like to ask the editorial staff at the L. A. Times to please document exactly when Michele Bachmann has spoken out against the concept of empathy. I ask that they cite specific statements, during specific interviews, on specific dates and offer links to transcripts, video, or audio clips in which it can be clearly shown that Michele Bachmann does not have empathy for struggling Americans.

This hit-piece begins based in fact, which helps it appear relatively innocuous to the political novice.

In her first televised interview since declaring her presidential candidacy, Michele Bachmann accused President Obama of having a “shocking" lack of empathy toward Americans victimized by the struggling economy.

“I talk to people. I care about people,” the Minnesota Republican told Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity Wednesday evening. “The president has no understanding of what is happening in real people's lives.”

In the next paragraph there is a funny little grammatical error, but hey… they are the professional media, they’re smarter than us. The writer, James Oliphant, must have a good reason for leaving out the word “she” as he described the “generally” high marks Mrs. Bachmann has received since Monday night’s grunt-fest.. er.. debate hosted by CNN’s John King.

I mean after all, this is a conservative, a woman, and she has credentials beyond pretty much any woman the left has ever offered upon the political scene. Why on earth would the left-leaning media distort anything? Silly, silly me.

Anyway… back to the article.

“Bachmann has been highlighting her experience both in the House, as a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and her work as a tax lawyer—perhaps as a means to counter the tendency for many political observers to view her as simply a less bombastic and more disciplined version of Sarah Palin.”

Truly, there’s the most important element of all, buried carefully within that paragraph: the Sarah Palin comparison.

If you think you’ve seen all of that comparison you’re going to see… let’s just say I predict right here, right now that should Bachmann win the GOP nomination, MSNBC and most of the media will have them all but being married to the same man when it’s all said and done.

And the word, “Simply;” Do you think that word isn’t strategically placed? Remember, conservatives are "simple-minded" people according to the elite liberal media.

As a writer, I admire the use of the word “Bombastic.” What an excellent choice of words. After all, Sarah Palin has been labeled “Bombastic” since she came upon the national scene. Even as the Jared Loughner shooting of Gabrielle Giffords was discussed (after all he was the psycho who did the shooting, does anyone even know his name?) the word “Bombastic” was used in articles referring to Palin and her infamous "Cross-Hairs Imagery," as if Palin or any conservative had anything to do with Loughner's mental instability.

Therefore, why not go ahead and transfer that malicious word right on over to the new brunette female Republican on the scene?

And since we’re discussing the “New Tone of Civility;”

While President Obama was offering the idea that Republicans “Drove America into the ditch” I didn’t hear the word “Bombastic” used to describe him. When he said “The Cambridge Police acted stupidly” even though he admitted he didn’t have all the evidence, I didn’t hear “Bombastic” used to describe The President. And when President Obama flat-out lied as talked about how Paul Ryan’s budget plan would “Make poor children, children with autism, and kids with disabilities fend for themselves,” I heard no use of the word “Bombastic.”

“But her decision to address Obama’s purported lack of empathy is notable—largely because Bachmann emerged into public notoriety as a vanguard of the slash-and-burn “tea party” movement, which largely took a mistrustful view of government in any context. Moreover, the term “empathy” is one that has long been derided by conservatives.”

Notice, this writer did not even capitalize the words “Tea Party.” After all, this is not a serious political thought process so it does not command or even deserve the respect of capital letters when written.

And if by “Slash and Burn” the writer means we ask the people who represent us to treat our tax dollars with respect and stop spending money like drunken sailors (no offense to drunken sailors everywhere) then yes, slash and burn it is.

And you’re darned right we’re mistrustful of government. Please, don’t try to tell me government is steeped in empathy. Our government, under President Obama’s stimulus plan, spent $71,000 for researchers at Wake Forest University to see how monkeys react under the influence of cocaine and nearly $1 million for the California Academy of Sciences to study exotic ants. The United States government is out of control and barely recognizes the purpose for which it was created by The Founders.

Back to that headline; empathy, as I see it, is exactly what Michele Bachmann represents.

Conveniently omitted from this L. A. Times article is discussion the fact that Bachmann was raised by a single mother. Also not mentioned are the 23 foster children she and her husband Marcus raised, in addition to five of their own natural children.

It will be interesting to see how many articles omit this incredibly important piece of information Americans need to know, about this woman the left does not want Americans to get to know.

When Michele Bachmann says that she is pro-life, she puts her personal story on the line and it counts. Giving a child up for adoption is a commendable and extremely difficult choice, and raising an adopted child or foster child is a remarkable choice people make; a choice that gives life a chance when a child might otherwise not have that chance.

Michele Bachmann's story is the story that liberals don’t want you to hear, because she walks the walk that matches her talk.

Michele Bachmann has voted against the Republican establishment consistently on major fiscal issues. She understands true conservative thought, and she does not hesitate to put principle over party. Bachmann knows exactly who she is and what it is that she believes. She is no flip-flopper, and there is no question about her record. She will not pander to gain a vote; she will persuade with conviction in order to earn a vote.

Michele Bachmann represents everything the liberal political machine can not debate, and this article is just the beginning of a process of defamation that must be countered with fact.

Michele Bachmann, in part thanks to and in cooperation with Sarah Palin, may just be the individual that finally destroys the left-leaning media’s slanderous attacks on conservatism in America. For if the media attempts to destroy Bachmann as they have attempted to destroy Palin, they can not win.

To attack one conservative woman and be proven so hysterical in their efforts as has been the case with Palin is one thing, but to do it again to a second, possibly more reputable conservative woman with a clearly proven track record?

Bring it.