Ok here is a story with the main headline
"Dean Appeals For Money"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17261-2004Feb5.htmlYet it's not until the fifth paragraph that it barely mentions Dean raising over $700,00 (actually over $800,000) in ONE day.
Isn't that big news? Here is a candidate that in the Posts own words in the article is in a "Do or Die" situation and gets over $800,000 dollars in ONE day and they treat it like it's nothing new.
In fact most of the article is about Kerry. The only negative thing about Kerry is his stance on Gay Marriage, but the Post (very RW) doesn't attack him on this issue.
1st Kerry voted against the 1996 Marriage Act, but is opposed to Gay marriage? Isn't that flip-flopping on the issue? Dean would have been raked over the coals if he did that.
2nd Kerry makes the statement that the Massachusetts Supreme Court is wrong. Which is not true. They only ruled on the State constitution does not prohibit Gay Marriage and per the State Constitution they have to allow Gay marriage. In fact in the Court ruling they stated that the State Constitution mandates equal treatment and that the State Legislation needs to amend the State Constitution.
How could they be wrong?
Then Kerry says he thinks it's a states issue. Well if this state wants Gay marriage then why is he opposing it. Again the Post doesn't point the out the contradiction.
Right there's no media bias.
BTW Kerry is sounding kinda RW by accusing the Massachusetts Supreme Court of trying to legislate from the bench. Isn't that what Bush keeps saying?