Starting off I feel the author had a specific point but did not execute it well for me to get behind. Many of his comments relate back to the fact that media coverage is different for the two situations to which supports part of his argument that Fox is mostly covering that of which is “traditional order” and highlighting that of which will get greater attention at the time (the undocumented individual) rather than an issue that has different points of view vastly across the nation and in some ways can be seen as old news. Secondly, the notion that you can expect Americans to be properly educated at the time of all mass media coverage all while using the lack of education to support you claims seems backwards. Relating back to the idea of the traditional order and that which felt threatened by the candidacy of a women, I strongly support the authors claims however on a personal perspective I do not carer what gender she is, Clinton is not the right women for the job.
Overall it makes sense. I see that the concept of corruption is skewed much like many things that take ethics into consideration for your formation of the thought. This is where law and government always get tricky. Doesn’t matter how bad one thing is compared to another. People weigh the difference in ethics and morals.