The New York Times has no trouble reproducing damaging documents not meant for the public eye when the subject is national security - but not when the documents embarrass the "scientific experts" ...
Bloggers and Internet gossips complained when the New York Times lowered itself to question a nasty new word emerging in prime-time television: "douche."
The Sunday Washington Post carried a headline that claimed that 9/11 "could" be right or it "could" be wrong. It's grotesque for a newspaper to find neutrality on that horrific day.
First, anchormen didn't want to say the shooter was Muslim. Then they insisted there were also "Christian nuts." And then some asked: wasn't all this the Army's fault?
When Microsoft backed out of sole sponsorship of a raunchy live special from the makers of "Family Guy," it showed that sponsors don't want to be held accountable for subsidizing raunchy content. ...
The Republicans are in a "civil war," on a "disastrous turn toward extremism." But when Democrats embraced hard-core leftists like Ned Lamont, it was an "opportunity" and revenge of the "moderates."
A Washington Post poll suggests a new low for Republicans, causing the media to once again champion moderates in the party. But polls show solid gains for conservatives since Obama took office.
