In years past political pundits in print and on TV would fret about how Republicans couldn’t be too conservative or they would lose the independent voters. Hypocritically feigning concern for the welfare of the GOP, they’d push for the GOP to pick moderate candidates like the “Maverick” John McCain, who often bucked his party. They would do their best to undermine the conservative candidates trying to make Republican primary voters discount them and move to the moderates the media knew would not inspire the GOP base, leaving many listless, content to not vote.

Watching the Democrat field we see Hillary Clinton lurching to the far left to try to stop her poll numbers from sinking further. Up to her nose in legal jeopardy as the Justice Department confiscates her email server, now that it’s clear she perjured herself before a judge on the subject of classified emails on it—a felony.

Her main competitor is a creature the media calls a Democratic-Socialist. Rubbish, its darker than that. Bernie Sanders is number two in the Democrat field but he’s a man who loved the Soviet Union, actually spending his honeymoon with his wife in the suburbs of Moscow in the Soviet days. He made common cause with Communist Cuba and Communist Sandinista Nicaragua in the 80s. He’s quoted saying John F. Kennedy speeches on Communists and Castro’s Cuba made him “sick.”

A man who sided with Soviets in the old days, arguably a traitor to the United States … number two in the Democrat field. If that does not say something about who and what Democrats are today, I don’t know what does.

So I ask, where’s all the media chatter about the need for Democrats to move to the center to find moderates who will appeal to middle of the road voters? Why no fretting about the swing to the radical far left?

It seems to me the bulk of the media, being liberal, has no issue with the extreme far leftward lurch of the Democrats and we won’t see hand wringing about it. Keep their bias in mind while consuming their tainted product.

Tim Inwood

Wilmington