Journalism purports to be about "what is going on" - but journalism is actually about how important journalism is. That is where both the profit and the fun of journalism are.Journalism promotes itself by criticizing everyone who doesn't toady to it. It calls itself "objective," and it calls its toadies "liberals" or "progressives" - or "moderates" or "centrists."
There are very few actual conservatives in America; there is no ground for a conservative to stand on, really. Because the theme of America - the thing a conservative would conserve - is freedom. And freedom is not a truly conservative but a truly progressive value - it allows and fosters change. That is why "progressive" is a label journalists favor its toadies with, and "conservative" is the label journalists dismiss actual progressives with.
So-called "conservatives" are actually in favor of liberty, and are truly liberals in the lexicon of a century ago - and still today outside the US. Only journalists and cooperative intellectuals could have distorted the language in that way. Which is why the idea that journalist actually is objective is hilarious to me. What a joke that I avidly followed "the news" until I was thirty five years old! Now I mostly think of it as an advertisement for something I wouldn't buy.
"It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena - Theodore Roosevelt
When you asked, "Any good political news regarding the military out there?," my immediate reaction was, "Of course not!" So long as the definition of "news out there" is "what Big Journalism reports," there will never be good news about the military.The fundamental is that journalism has one overriding objective - to look important. Whoever promotes that objective gets praise, whoever competes with journalism for importance gets criticism.
Since journalism does nothing - except criticize, journalism is competing for importance with people who are providing food, clothing, shelter, fuel - and security. People who do things are the natural target of journalism; people who only complain - plaintiff bar, unionist, socialist politician, etc - mutually reinforce the complaining of journalism and are given positive labels such as "progressive," "liberal," and "moderate/centrist." In that context it is actually a smear to call those who promote liberty "conservative" - liberty is what allows change, and what "conservatives" conserve is the ability to change and progress.
Whereas socialism is actually reaction against the discomforts of change due to liberty. The very last thing socialism is is "progressive." Socialism is the (il)logical extreme of criticism and second guessing, the specialty of journalism which claims to be objective or which admits to being socialist. Ownership of the means of production is simply credit for developing the means of production (and the product which it produces as well, often enough). The socialist is a critic who wants to take from the producer the credit for the ability to produce.
The true progressive, the true liberal, agrees that
"It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena - Theodore RooseveltBut then, whoever agrees with that is opposing the arrogation of credit by journalism. And that puts you in the cross-hairs of journalism's very considerable ability to attack your reputation. Starting with deceptively labeling you, and assigning the labels that truly apply to you to your opponents - so that there does not exist an accurate, positive label for you. Newspeak lives!