Stephen A. Frye
safrye at CONCENTRIC.NET
Mon Dec 1 21:20:04 MST 1997
>No. That was Pat Schroeder, I just used it where appropriate by her
>definition. And the correct position is that its not the
>evidence but the seriousness of the crime that matters. This goes
>hand-in-hand with Sen. Gephardt's position: "the fact that there is no
>evidence is precisely why we must investigate." That was the "October
>Suprise" fiasco. You remember? When the media spent weeks and dedicated 1/2
>hour shows to this non-event. While the National Cemetary sales fiasco did
>not even get a mention until days later when everyone was already outraged.
>Neither turned out to be true (although one Arlington waver is pretty thin)
>but one received hours of coverage while the other received scant seconds.
>Some call this liberal bias in the media while others call it liberal
>hatred. If conservative talk radio can be called hate radio by liberals then
>I think liberal hatred if the correct usage.
I agree with most of what you say - however - I heard about the cemetery
scandal before I read about here. And how in the world did we go from my
reference to an unsubstantiated accusation by someone in this group to a
discussion of media bias?
More information about the Rushtalk