freethought6t9

If you paid attention to news reporting during the election you would have noticed a distinctly different tone in regard to stories about the two candidates. Fox can also be demonstrated to treat information from the white house more than fairly.

But what is more important than this is the concept of story selection. If you look at the selection of stories across the entire media you will see a corporate bias. A good example to discredit this whole liberal bias nonsense is press treatment of business and labour. The NY Times, for example, an allegedly liberal publication, would be expected to be supportive of labour over business. So do this, compare the business section of the Times to the labour section. Only proble is the Times, nor any other major newspapers have a labour section, they do have a business section however.

I don't think you quite get the concept of socialism. You say socialised healthcare wouldn't work because you have a larger population? Well correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't that mean you would have more people paying for it? Thats the beauty of socialism, population is not a factor. As for Canada's healthcare system, sure it's probably got it's fair share of problems but I find your characterisation to be disingenuous, or based on press coverage of the system from your country, so you are pretty much proving my point.

The fact is, the US Government does not regard healthcare as a human right and the majority of the money the U.S. spends a year on healthcare goes to the pharmaceutical or insurance giants. They are the opponents of free healthcare in the US and the reason you won't see it.