Ok Pat - these are taken from the dailyhowler - I'm including the links
On her attempt to show how slanted the media is by comparing the number of times the New York Times uses the word "far right wing" versus "far left wing" - http://www.dailyhowler.com/h051502_2.shtml
The New York Times is one of the most liberal rags around. I dont read it because I dont subscribe but I know this is very prevalent in all newspapers not just the Times. The reasons are obvious. If all the editors and writers are democrats so what would you expect. To say these publications do not slant left is ignoring the obvious
Again, trying to show how often the words "christain right" are used versus the made up "atheist left" - this also includes some of the review of Slander by Chistopher Caldwell from the Weekly Standard (and it ain't kind) - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh070902.shtm
I've seen Christan Right referred to in print but never Atheist left
On her attempts to show how often Bill Bradly was called the smart one - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071002.shtml
I read this in her book and frankly I found it annoying. If they found facts to support that Cerebral Bill was not referred to as such it would not sway me one way or the other
On her attempts to put words in people's mouths and then lie about it straight away - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071502.shtml
The Couric Story is what you are citing Dan
What’s the background to this story, which Coulter is now widely flogging? We’ll take a look at that tomorrow. But on page 51 of Slander, Coulter plainly says that Couric called Reagan an airhead. It isn’t until page 133 that she notes that Couric was actually quoting somebody.
So in the same book she clarifies her statement. What is the rub?
The stupid Couric non-story - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071702.shtml
Coulter mis-represents yet another Couric interview (don't get me wrong here, Pat, I think Couric is a fluff...but these are the foundations of Coulters arguments, so I'm including them.) - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071202.shtml
The misrepresentations begin on page one - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh071102.shtml
And the lies continue to the end - http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072302.shtml
I really think this book should have been called Pander instead.
The things Dan you mentiond were minor things that had no influence on my view of the situation. I would much rather them discuss the fact that the mainstream media called Florida for Gore well before the polls had closed costing an estimated 30,000 votes in the Florida panhandle or how they got the supreme court involved when Algore lost the election count after count. Let me get some of the hard facts from the book that I would consider debateable. Just so you know I do not think Ann Coulter would be a fun date but neither would James Carville
One thing I saw that was interesting on Donuhue the other night was he asked Andy Rooney if he felt the media was left wing and Andy said something to the effect that Ya I'm a liberal and of course I feel the media is liberal because you got people like Walter Conkite, Dan Rather and others that are left and of course they can control how new stories are slanted.
I found it refreshing that someone was honest about this especially coming on a show like Donuhue. By the way old Phil look dumbfounded.
