Vietnam vet told to quit begging for spare change in front of News Corp building
Over at Investors Business Daily which is the Wall Street Journal for people who need Marmaduke explained to them, William Tate is pointing out media bias by the buttload:
The New York Times’ refusal to publish John McCain’s rebuttal to Barack Obama’s Iraq op-ed may be the most glaring example of liberal media bias this journalist has ever seen. But true proof of widespread media bias requires one to follow an old journalism maxim: Follow the money.
Even the Associated Press — no bastion of conservatism — has considered, at least superficially, the media’s favoritism for Barack Obama. It’s time to revisit media bias.
True to form, journalists are defending their bias by saying that one candidate, Obama, is more newsworthy than the other. In other words, there is no media bias. It is we, the hoi polloi, who reveal our bias by questioning the neutrality of these learned professionals in their ivory-towered newsrooms.
Which is Tate’s way of telling IBD that they are not an elite media institution headquartered in an ivory tower but, instead, are more like the PennySaver published out of a one-room apartment that smells like masturbation and ass.
Well it certainly looks like the good folks at Fox are hedging their bets and not exactly throwing their Mighty Murdoch Bucks at eighty eight year-old John McCain.
¿Dónde está Hannity? Doocy? Kilmeade? Why are they not rendering unto McCaesar the things which are McCaesar’s? I mean, at least O’Reilly has an excuse for being a little short on cash until payday.
The only fair and balanced conclusion we can arrive at is that nobody at Fox wants to place a bet on a horse that has a date with the glue factory….