Heh. There's a paragraph in there that reminds me of the Seinfeld episode concerning gays, where Jerry and George keep saying "Not that there's anything wrong with that."

It's the paragraph that starts with "None of this is to suggest that there aren’t legitimate questions that deserve to be asked..." and then goes on with "Nor are we trying to say that 'Fahrenheit 9/11' isn’t a powerful and effective movie that..."

These guys do not know how to slice properly like a $%&@*#! hammer.

Don't forget the hatchet jobs done on The Passion of the Christ MONTHS before it came out...the predictions of a Jewish purge, etc etc etc....

The media was scrutinizing every piece of leaked script they could find, searching for inconsistancies or anti-semetisms. Searching for a hole in the re-telling of a 2000 year old story.

But a story that happened within the last 4 years? No reason to fact check that. Move along, herd.

Ace, after your magnificent call on Andrew Sulivan, I am surprised you haven't worked out the media dilemma for the 2004 election.

Horn #1 - If they report the truth, i.e., that Bush will win against any Dem who has insufficient political sense to let himself get shoved to the fore as his opponent, then they have no story (Carl Lewis v. Michael Moore in a footrace, who will win?) and no reason for anyone to read/listen to them. Then everyone (as GWB is doing now) will tell them to f*ck off.

Horn #2 - If they slant every story they can to make Bush look bad, so that the election is more of an even race (at least until the polls close) they are going to look like complete fools even worse than "Dewey Defeats Truman". Then everyone (as GWB is doing now) will tell them to f*ck off.

Wait patiently, and see how they start hedging their bets as the election approaches. The backtracking and ass-covering should be most amusing.

"It's the paragraph that starts with "None of this is to suggest that there aren’t legitimate questions that deserve to be asked..." and then goes on with "Nor are we trying to say that 'Fahrenheit 9/11' isn’t a powerful and effective movie that..."

......You mean the Lord of the Jelly Donuts had some legitimate points? Like what? "Look at me, I'm a big fat sack of lying fat getting rich off the incredulity of the leftoid populace?"