OK, I swore I wasn't going to write about John Edwards, but Stephen Green has a great post over at Pajamas Media on our bete noire, the New York Times:
It's understandable when Democrats want to sweep the story under the rug - Mickey Kaus valiantly excepted - but isn't the MSM in the business of providing news in exchange for money? Not at the New York Times, they aren't. NYT "Public editor" Clark Hoyt freely admits that his paper "never made a serious effort to investigate the story." Hoyt goes on to say that he doesn't think that "liberal bias had anything to do with it." However, in the very same column he admits that the Times freely reported totally unsubstantiated rumors about an affair involving John McCain. If you treat a Republican one way and a Democrat another and it isn't liberal bias - then what is it? A Sulzberger family suicide pact?It's surely a sign of mass dementia that many on the Left are convinced the media is in the bag for John McCain. As if.
Extra - From three weeks ago, but still relevant: "Belief Growing That Reporters are Trying to Help Obama Win"
That was posted just 2 hours before "The Daily Show" led off with a blistering John Edwards package.
Rugsweeper Democrats must not run the Daily Show with a liberal bias, or else the segment never would have aired.
Post a Comment