Fratricide?

No, it's a campaign.

I didn’t say anything this past week when the Lefty blogs all got their knickers in a twist about Tim Russert asking Barack Obama about Harry Belafonte’s anti-American remarks. The cries of “racist!” seemed too typical to be of any note. Ditto when the moonbats went ballistic about Chris Matthews comparing bin Laden to Michael Moore. While I was mildly surprised about Matthews’ comment, given the fact Zell Miller wanted to kill him (well, OK, duel him) during the Republican convention, I just didn’t think Matthews deserves any attention from me. At all. I have an active dislike for Matthews and MS-NBC, in general.

But the Left sure jumped on Matthews, big time. I read some of the Left’s self-righteous outrage and thought “fratricide; how droll” and let it go. But I did think it somewhat strange the Left would go after one of their warhorses, and not just one or maybe two of the smaller Lefty blogs, but it was the Biggies, and a lot of ‘em, too. And then there was that whole WaPo blog flap…more of the same outraged cries about right-wing bias from the Left. WTF? RIGHT-wing bias? Washington-frickin’-POST?

Then I read The Left's Revolution Against the Media in NRO. Bingo! Now it all makes sense, doesn’t it? Typical liberal left reaction when they hear something/anything they disagree with, or simply don’t like, even if it’s said by a brother-in-arms. Toe the line, guys, or we’re gonna kick your a$$. So what exactly are the Lefty bloggers saying?

Here’s some of the action at firedoglake: Get Katie Couric. Get the WaPO. Get Chris Matthews. Actually, I should have just given you the url for the blog and you could simply scroll down. About every third post is anti-media this or anti-media that. Over at dKos, the meme is pretty much the same. Here’s Crooks and Liars; just scroll.

So the Left is now whining the media is overwhelmingly right-wing? How quickly they forget. Here are the major newspapers’ presidential endorsements for 2004:

Kerry--The New York Times, the Boston Globe, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Miami Herald, Kansas City (Mo.) Star, St. Petersburg (Fla) Times, Akron (Ohio) Beacon-Journal, Florida Today, Palm Beach (Fla) Post, Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, Nevada Appeal, Grand Forks Herald, Sacramento Bee, Jackson (Tenn) Sun, Duluth News-Tribune, Charlotte Observer, Hawk Eye (Iowa), Free Press (Minn), Daily Camera (Boulder), the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News, and the Portland Press-Herald in Maine. The Oregonian in the other Portland (which had backed President Bush in 2000), and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The Detroit Free Press, Columbia (Mo.) Tribune, the Daily Star in Tucson, Ariz., and both of the big papers in Seattle -- the Times and the Post-Intelligencer -- have announced their support.

Bush-- the Chicago Tribune, Indianapolis Star, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Grand Rapids (Mich.) Press and Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch, El Paso Times, San Antonio Express-News, Dallas Morning News, San Diego Union-Tribune, Las Cruces Sun-News, Other endorsements are generally by small town newspapers in uncontested states, the WP reports.

Bush had exactly three major market endorsements as of October 18, 2004. And that's just an example of print media political leanings. For a comprehensive look at the liberal tilt in all media, see the October 2004 archives of OH, THAT LIBERAL MEDIA! Sure, it's a right-wing blog, but facts is facts, folks. Chase a few links, they speak for themselves.

This is the “right-wing media.” I think NRO is on to something here.