About the admission from the Washington Post...

Show me any newspaper, TV news or any other news media that can truly be said not to be biased in some way or another and I'll throw up my hands in horror at your story. Otherwise, what did you really expect? Maybe they weren't really consciously biased. Maybe they reported honestly on what the majority always wanted.

I read a lot newspapers, and their stance becomes obvious to me rather quickly. It has gotten to the point where you cannot find an objective newspaper. It was not always like that. Since that is the case today, I might as well just buy the newspapers that are conversative.

Good to see a reporter proving what the rest of us have known for years. I'll give her credit though, it's rare to find a journalist who is willing to call their own to the carpet.

This also happened on national network TV stations. No big surprise.

Well, as the article plainly points out, 0bama is not facing the toughest things a president ever inherited, Reagan had much worse to deal with after that boneheaded Carter left. 0bama obviously is not going to be another Reagan, in fact it looks like he is going to be another Carter... and everything that he has said about his plans so far indicate that we will be in much worse shape when he leaves than what we are now. Between his plans to do his version of the Hitler Youth complete with mandatory service to his plans for socializing every aspect of our government and services. Add to that his very damaging ideas for energy production and fighting non-existant man made climate change, and his ideas to make us subservient to the UN and responsible for fighting global poverty with our tax dollars at a time when we can barely make ends meet, and you have a recipe for disaster. All the media is doing is paving the way for 0bama to break his campaign promises and then try to blame Bush for it. We already know that it is the democrats like Barney Frank and others who blocked the proposed changes of FannyMae and FreddieMac by Bush and McCain both while saying that there was NO problem with them, and we were in no danger of them failing. Well guess what... they failed , and in doing so they sparked the economic problems that we are now facing, and those problems have had a ripple effect throughout the entire world. While 0bam was running on the platform of change and Blaming everything on the last 8 years of failed Bush policies, the plain fact is that the blame falls squarely on the last 30 of failed democrat policies initiated by Carter and compounded by Clinton. To verify this, all one has to do is a little research, but far too many are way too lazy to do that. The media got 0bama elected, and now the media is going to be 0bama's cheering section, in the same way that they were Bush's detractors.

I read the original. They basically admitted some bias in some areas but all essentially for the greater good of getting the right guy into the right position. No apology whatsoever. The ends merits the means (or however that saying goes). The media has long been bias towards one or the other. If one doesn't do their own research to get a well rounded picture, one deserves what's coming to him/her. Unfortunately with this we all may get to suffer (or benefit; I'm hoping for the latter).

That was a very enlightening article and was further confirmation that IMO there was nothing fair or impartial about the whole campaign. That includes not only the media but the financial backing.