Media Bias?

Tucker replies:

Apparently you weren't watching Fox,...

Nope. Not Fox, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS or any of that garbage… if I can avoid it. I've found that it is much easier to sift through all the crap if you view a wide variety of newspapers, online journals, and talk radio (both conservatively biased shows and NPR), as well as the occasional television fluff.

Let's see. So all the best intelligence agencies throughout the world were all saying that Saddam had the WMDs and was poised to use them, but somehow Dan Rather was supposed to presciently know that they were wrong?

Forget the liars/ forgers (or just plain incompetents) at the White house, CIA and British intelligence. Scott Ritter, former head of weapons inspections in Iraq, said from the beginning that there were no WMD's. But he was dismissed by the administration as a "unreliable".
Does your favorite Brown Mtn liberal have ESP? Nope. But I knew that there were no weapons. So if I can figure it out, the friggin' President should be able to as well. They are either liars or incompetents, which is it?

Didn't you see all the air time that was being given to talking heads who insisted we try to "understand" the terrorists and their grievances?

The terrorists are not -repeat, not - equivalent to the citizens of Iraq. Let's get the terrorists, and leave Iraq alone. But for this post I'll do just like this administration: Get Iraq and forget about the terrorists. In an act of wrath (wrath, as well as pride, is a "sin" by the way), the US military has taken thousands of innocent civilian lives with its smart bombs. More than 10 times the number of folks killed on 9-11. That's retribution for ya'. "Don't mess with the US of A..we'll kill your mama, daddy, and probably grandma too!"

...we were only invading to steal Saddam's oil,...

So true, Steve. Except it should say "they were only…." And by they I mean the Bush administration officials who are either in bed with the energy companies, or are the energy companies (see Dick Cheney and Halliburton). If a person is so naïve as to believe all of the connections b/t the Bush admin./energy companies/ and the invasion of the nation with the world's 2nd largest oil reserve is just a coincidence, then he or she needs to wake up b/c that person is dreaming. Considering that the earth's fossil fuel supply will be gone in less than a century, it seems like now or never for capitalizing on the sinking ship that is non-renewable resources. Please don't use the lame response that "if we were really after the oil then why is the price for oil so high?" B/c that's an easy one…we're all getting taken for a ride.

I don't recall any of these hard-hitters ragging Bill Clinton about his plans to disastrously involve us in the mess in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

You're right. I suppose the "liberal" media was too busy grilling him about Monica. Yeah, the media was so easy on Clinton. And besides, Clinton isn’t the president and hasn't been for sometime, remember? Please, let us leave Slick Willy where he belongs…in the past.

...the majority of what little hard news is left, tends to be liberally biased.

Just because someone doesn't agree with a news story, that doesn't make it biased. Anyone who makes broad, sweeping claims of political bias in the media (conservative or liberal) is biased themselves. You can always find something if you are looking for it. Try viewing the news with an open mind…..wait, an open mind?... I suppose that would be too liberal.