Fox News website had this to say about today’s hearings:

Alito also tried to convince Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats that he will inject personal conservative views into his opinions, particularly when it comes to hot-button topics, if chosen to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Haw.

Paging Dr. Freud? I’m sure they meant to post “will not inject…”

still it is clear that the New York Times has quite a different perspective on the hearings for today, and it is less favorable to the President.

OK.

We’ll go with “weak example” on that one.

To make a case for bias, we’d need to know a bit more. The NYT isn’t the only outlet reporting that exchange as the lead.

Are you ever getting tiresome.

It’s always the same, except when it’s different, eh Frank?

But here’s a weak example:

Atlanta Journal and Constitution (online – homepage)

Alito vows to keep open mind on abortion

story headline
Alito Pleases GOP Senators, Not Democrats

so far, so good

Now, the New York Times (online)

Presidential Power Has Limits, Alito Tells Senators

As I said, a weak example, but still it is clear that the New York Times has quite a different perspective on the hearings for today, and it is less favorable to the President.

Because you know – blogs – they are not the media…

I mean, what newspaper would tell a story this way:

DENVER – (AP) – A man calling himself “Quaker in a Basement” said today that he was visiting his poor, ailing grandmother last Sunday.

“I spent the whole day watching reruns of Matlock and sipping hot cocoa,” the soft-spoken local resident said. “That’s my story. And I’m sticking to it.”

Denver police have identified Mr. Basement as the prime suspect in a rash of mattress tag removals that occurred on that same day. Removing the tag from a mattress is punishable by law.

I am more from the Nick Lowe school when I think “Whats so funny ’bout peace love and understanding” – because regardless of how many times I have fallen into the more base aspect of name calling etc. with you I still feel that it is best to understand where each is coming from and find that we are not so different.

Sorry about the post above – I am on a laptop and I hit a tab then enter and it saved my comment – I only meant to be curt in regards to who calls someone more names then most.

Many stories about the DeLay  scandal had headlines that indicated that DeLay was in serious trouble, or that the Republicans were in serious trouble. They would then quote several Democrats and liberal  political analysts saying that the  scandal spelled doom for the Republicans.

So name names. Who did this?

Zappa: You can think what you want, but don’t misquote me
Judging by this, and other blogs, there is way more venom aimed at conservatives by liberals than there is by conservatives at liberals.

Let me say this again, since you are pretending you didn’t get my meaning:
Why would you say I hate liberals, while saying you mistrust conservatives?

In my opinion, there is not one liberal commenter on this blog that doesn’t hate President Bush, to name one conservative / Republican.
And how about all this “Repug” and “Rethug” nonsense?
And calling people by names other than their chosen handles that demean and often insult the person? Who does that most?

I would say Quaker pretty much nails it; When you tally you have to take out all factual reports from consideration…a spade is a spade and if you find that there are more reports slamming libs/cons with facts to back it up you would have to conclude that one or the other deserve it. An op/ed is just that – an opinion…if you see more liberal opinions then maybe it is because folks are tired of the compassionate conservative BS we were sold.

I don’t know why you hate liberals. I do know why I distrust Cons.

Go Hawks!

“One must be very selective in picking which facts to present and which pictures to show.”

Resources aren’t limitless. There are only so many pages in a newspaper and so many minutes in the broadcast day. It’s not possible to write an article or produce a news segment that includes all the available information.

Judging by this, and other blogs, there is way more venom aimed at conservatives by liberals than there is by conservatives at liberals.
frameone, for example, is a one man venom dispenser.

But, secondly, I don’t accept the idea that bias is in the eye of the beholder. There is a truth, and liberals toy around with it. There is a political ‘center’ in this country, and judging by the quadrennial poll that preceded George W. Bush’s 2nd 4 year term, you would call that center conservative. or, at least you should.

The liberal bias in the press, especially the dead tree press and network TV, is very real, and not a matter of opinion.

And one can be very selective in picking which facts to present and which ones to not present. And which pictures to show and which to not show.

Not part of Frank’s equation.

His test was: is the story favorable or unfavorable to conservatives and the GOP?

The facts matter. If I’m caught robbing a bank, I can’t holler “media bias” when they print a picture of me caught on the bank’s security camera.

In a nutshell, bias can’t be determined only by whether there are an equal number of good and bad things said about one person, or an equal number of bad things said about two different people.

I truly don’t hate libs. I don’t hate the left posters on this site – most of whom are to the left of “liberal’. It would be a crappy world w/o libs (or conservs). And if we had a major network that was like, say, NewsMax, we would then have true conservative bias. CBS, ABC etc are the left wing equivalents of NewsMax in my book.
I still say CSPAN does what they do with a large degree of fairness and a lack of bias.

Dugger

This is a nonproductive argument.