I'm not surprised none of the liberals on this site have said anything about Pat's generalization. I suppose if a conservative member would have said something about Fox, we would've had a whole three page tirade.

Anyways, I didn't realize that one story, or support of one candidate in particular around election time, canceled out or superceded trends across years. After all, no liberal could ever support Bloomberg... :rolleyes:

Come to think of it, if we're judging by individual stories, the New York Times supported Kerry in the 2004 election. And they followed Dan Rather like an obedient little dog with the falsified documents scandal about President Bush's service record that brought down Rather's career and certainly damaged the credibility of the Times.

That's 2-to-1 Pat, in favor of liberal leaning, by your "logic." :rolleyes:

Best,
Double-J