BIASED TV PERSONALITIES.
They should tame their influence, if they have any.
The Benghazi attack, which one TV channel wants to make it into a scandal to favor Mitt Romney, the Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential election, is ridiculous.
When FoxNews TV has "Special Report" host, Bret Baire, featuring the attack as a political issue, with the usual contributors to his program, Charles Krauthammer and Steve Hayes, hammering on the idea that the United States government has failed to give the Benghazi consulate adequate protection, it placed it (issue) into the realm of "trial by TV" that started in Britain by David Frost in the despicable "Savundra" case in the 1960s.
Baire is turning an attack that has four bright Americans losing their lives, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Steven, to become a fodder for politicians, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, giving them the chance to criticize President Barack Obama for allowing it (attack) to happen.
He (Baire) as a journalist, has thrown objectivity out of the window, by gathering all sorts of information from Jennifer Griffin and other so called correspondents in Benghazi to make a case against the Obama administration.
That the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been making conflicting statements of how the attack happened; and that they were engaged in some sort of "cover-up" of the true story, and thus misleading the American people.
.... and also blaming Ms. Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, for saying that Islamists extremists took advantage of an anti-Mohammad film or movie, and that has started "spontaneous" demonstrations across the Muslim world, beginning in Cairo, Egypt, and to set the Benghazi mission ablaze and kill the four American diplomats.
When journalists decide to take sides in a situation, as the Benghazi attack, which will have an impact on an election and, perhaps, swing opinion to one side, it gives the profession a bad name; especially, when they use time-lines and emails that are being sent to the U.S. State Department and other federal offices to confuse the issue.
They maintain that Obama has not labeled the attack as an act of terrorism, which has been defused later on that he has done so within 24 hours of the attack at the White House.
He Obama has vowed to get to the bottom of what took place in Benghazi, and that subsequent investigations were underway to find the perpetrators and punish them.
However, Republican leaders, aided by people like Baier, were doing all they could to use it (attack) against the president, who was seeking a second term in a very tight battle with Mitt Romney, their party's candidate.
They (Republicans) were claiming that the film or movie did not have anything to do with the assault on the Benghazi consulate, and that it was a planned terrorist attack.
Well, everybody knew that there has been an attack, and that the ambassador and three other people have been killed; however, there must be a motive for that to happen. They (Republicans) could not provide one; but they would just rail against the assumption that the movie played a part in the Benghazi attack.
There is "cause and effect"; and they (Republicans) have provided the "effect" only, thinking that the American people will be persuaded by their argument that there is no "cause" to the Benghazi attack. That is being done to purposefully politicize the issue, and nothing else.
Yet, on the other hand, Obama wants to know the root cause of the Benghazi attack and uproot it; hence, the reason for initiating the many probes, and they are all still in progress.
The families of those brave men, who perished in such an atrocious incident, should wait for the several investigations being initiated, as said, by the U.S. government and the Intelligence community into the matter, to finish, and to have all the facts about how their relatives died, before they should jump to any kind of conclusion.
The American people would also have the patience to wait for the outcome of those investigations, and then the "... chips will fall where they may".
They know that a TV station or channel has the responsibility to report the news fairly and accurately, and that its correspondents and anchor persons would be objective in those news reports, and not attempt to sensationalize them for popular recognition for themselves, high ratings for their channel, and essentially financial profit for their editorial boardroom masters.
Baier and his friends at FoxNews.com are not supposed to influence opinion or voters; their job is to inform the people at large, without any bias.