More on the media's "liberal bias"As I mentioned in my previous essay, Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld said he'd seen "no hard evidence" of any Saddam-al Qaeda link. He also noted that, "It turns out that we have not found weapons of mass destruction." Those were the two main reasons cited by the administration for invading Iraq in the first place.
So to me, Rumsfeld's comments seemed like a pretty big deal to me. But some members of the "liberal" media didn't seem to think so.
The headlines for the main article on the front page of the following websites, news organizations labelled "liberal" by many, were:
The New York Times: Poll results show race for president is again a dead heat
The Washington Post: Bush has five point lead over Kerry in new poll
CBS News: CBS poll, Kerry bounces back
There was nothing, anywhere on these front pages, on Rumsfeld's admission.
Thank goodness for the BBC or I might never have heard about this.
[On a related note, I'm sick of hearing how President Bush makes "tough decisions." I'd rather start seeing some GOOD decisions on critical issues. Or at least non-catastrophic ones.]