Not a bad idea but quotes little substance and little info.

This takes a wildly meaningless Pew statistic that merely reflects that journalists are reporting horse race coverage of polls that don't favor McCain. That he then turns it into an indictment of media bias in reporting is unconscionable. All this stat confirms is a woeful reliance on lazy horse race coverage. If McCain was ahead in the polls this same stat would show a strong "media bias" for him regardless of the tenor of whatever else was being reported.

This is a downright offensive piece that posits largely unreasoning rage on the part of liberal women. Not being a woman, I have observed a mix of bemusement and horror as reactions to Ms. Palin from the liberal women I know. I have only observed what I would call murderous rage in Palin's whipped up conservative audiences that keep calling for blood.

This is highly biased lazy he said she said journalism at its worst. There is a headline quoting a talking point with zero fact checking to see if the candidate's words are accurate or are merely delusional wishful thinking. For those who only read the headline this would be potentially highly misleading.

This is one of the best things I've read on alternatives to the bailout that help the people not just the pirates on wall street.

This opinion piece is a wildly irrelevant musing on how Obama can best be most vindictive to Clinton by giving or not giving her the Vice presidential slot on the ticket. The article frames Obama's highest goal as vindictiveness and does a complete disservice to both Democratic Candidates and to civilized discourse. I don't doubt the similarity of this purely political choice to the beauties of sausage making, but tend to doubt the vindictiveness frame that tells us far more about the mind of the author than it will illuminate the eventual actions of either candidate. It does give a little info on the inordinate power of the Cheney Vice Presidency and the more traditional lack of power and influence that most VPs have endured.

Remarkable piece that starts with a shoe is on the other foot hypothetical to bring home how Americans would feel if what we were doing there was being done to us here. It goes on to a former soldier who ran aerial bombing in Iraq and looks at the big picture of what this new form of warfare crossing all borders means in the world.

My primary complaint is that this is written in a level of shorthand by assertion that anyone who is not already well informed will perhaps not feel compelled by. Even so, it is a good compilation notable for its resulting brevity. It misses many areas of insult and injury from regressive forces, focusing only on global warming in the environmental area but is plenty damning enough in areas where it does hit.

Hillary should certainly be called out on this trust infraction. But I would dearly love to see Fox say boo about the pre-vetted questions that Bush and Cheney consistently get in their only the party faithful town hall style canned events. Remember the video of the preparation of the completely pre-scripted questions from a group of soldiers for Bush? Amazingly, Bush even flubbed these. Could have been a nice comparison for some context.

This is a good clear eyed analysis piece by an expert in the field. It does have a strong slant, but it does not unfairly cherry pick facts to fit the slant.

This article does some very serious cherry picking to make its case that GM foods are panacea. At one point, it argues that chemical use is reduced then immediately turns around and touts roundup ready soybeans without once mentioning their name or their vastly increased herbicide use for a benefit in their reduced carbon footprint. I nearly got whiplash from the deceptively packaged logical 180. I did not disagree with all aspects of this thesis, but found the whole screed a wildly unbalanced presentation intended to obfuscate more than to inform.

This is a remarkably well documented compendium of history and well informed speculation about the future of the octopus like Bush/Republican election theft machine. It also documents the almost utterly ineffectual response by clueless Democrats to 8 years of stolen presidential elections that may well lead to 4 more years of fraudulent presidency. This is one of the most important issues that could be covered.

This is a hit piece that does not do a full analysis or recognize that a good portion of the high cost of living in New York is extremely high property values and resulting rental costs. This is much more relevant to his flawed argument than the relatively high taxes charged that he lays all the blame on.

Not remotely worth reading. Concludes that no one can know about Larry Craig which may be true and that liberalism is the root of all corruption in "big government". Ignores crony capitalism and quite a few forms of corruption that come in from the right as well

This story is looking at the actions of a specific supervisor in overruling science in endangered species decisions. It quotes both sides and accurately quotes a major critique of the limited scope of the resulting review.

This article is wildly ironic, calling out the AP for name calling and bias, and often in the same sentences doing similar when not far worse name calling at Al Gore and the recent UN report. It contains no real information to back up any of many assertions of scientific bias.

This is an intentional smear that willfully misinterprets the quotes it puts before us. Maher very specifically said he was quoting the statements and that they were not his feelings. The comments following the article tend to make the edited remarks that Mahrer was quoting look a little tame. All the while lamenting the lack of civility on the left. Quite ironic.

I don't disagree with a good portion of the article, but it completely fails to recognize the limits to the Democrat's power in a razor thin majority. Repealing any portion of the Bush tax cuts with Bush in office will require a veto proof majority. So it will require Republican defectors and I simply don't see this happening in what was a lockstep party in the last congress. I think he needs to get real on the difficulties Democrats face in the political dimension. Certainly the Democrats should force this issue to the fore even if it gets a certain veto, but this should not be judged a failure.

Saying that this article unfairly bashes the President is wildly ludicrus since the sole reason for the comment is an absolutely direct result of this President's lack of popularity. Yes, Jeb helped tarnish brand Bush by skewing the electoral feild for his brother in Florida, but his brother's miscalculations in office have I hope permanently sunk Jeb's chances for high office. Sadly, with the systemic historic amnesia this country suffers from, Jeb may be wrong.

This story is a tiny counterpoint to the huge money going into the fight over global warming science that goes almost completely reported on. That a vital educational non-profit appears to be thoroughly corrupted by this money is worth seeing reported.