[jmcclain19]

And I've always hated the common thought of the "liberal" bias in the media.

I've always felt it was "conflict" bias, rather than "liberal" bias. Problem is that in the last 30 years, those in power, power being the White House, has been a Republican. Even when Clinton was in the WH he had a strong GOP dominated House and Senate to deal with.

Anybody who sits and analyizes the news down to the word by word you can always find some evidence of bias. It's bias against power. Heard an interesting quote from a show about reporters on Fox, can't think of the name off the top of my head, and someone on that show said that all reporters need to fight with those in power. I disagree, but it certainly confirms what I felt when I was in the biz and now as an outsider looking in.

That's why I hate the political coverage by the mainstream media.

You have hours and pages devoted to the inside baseball and the behind the scenes manuvering as well as the inter campaign bickering, rather than coverage about whether or not what either of these two candidates were shoveling piles of BS. It's not substantive, it's fluff, easy to cover and is full of conflict.

Look at all the 2008 stories already popping up in the news. And Pres. Bush hasn't even been inaugurated yet. Why is that? Because potential 2008 candidates will be looking to distinguish themselves from Pres. Bush, and that means more conflict.