It might be true that the fine folks at Newsweek haven't quite been shamed into adjusting their bias-driven style.

Might not be true. Hard to say really. Imagine Tevya mulling it over

but on the other hand...maybe they're just assholes?

In point of fact, I am one of those people wo do believe that Vince Foster's body was moved.

Why did White House staffers delay allowing the police into his office for so long? What were they doing in there, cleaning the carpet?

This site is full of nuts, but interesting reading on the Foster thing:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/FOSTER_COVERUP/foster.html

I'm neutral as to whether or not Dan Klaidman keeps a "jew oven" in his basement.

Notice that the "it might be true" standard does not apply to WMD in Iraq or possible Al-Qaeda or other terrorist connections with Saddam Hussein. Those are unequivocally NOT TRUE. Despite the fact that the Kay report is actually somewhat 'neutral' on that question. The MSM has determined that those two theories are dead. However, Koran-flushing might be true, so therefore it is true.

I wonder why there are two standards of evidence applied?

I'm neutral as to whether Michael Isikoff likes to dress up like Heidi of the Swiss Alps and sing "I'm so Pretty."

This is a bit like the NYT story a few posts down, or any story about coverage by MSN, Reuters, BBC et al ad nauseam.

I think I'm developing outrage burnout because these people just don't get it. They never express any genuine remorse, never clean up their acts, never show any institutional awareness or memory of their bias. Story after story, nothing changes and nothing ever will. There's a reason why the party symbol for these people is a dumb, stubborn barnyard animal.

I'm with utron. It's getting to the point where it's hard to get worked up about it anymore. I would expect no less from the MSM. Really unfortunate.

Other stories that might be true:

President Bush served his entire term in the TANG.
Senator Kerry didn't deserve his first Purple Heart.
Senator Kerry hasn't released his military records.
The Swift Vets were telling the truth.

Teddy Kennedy killed a woman.
Bob Byrd is a racist.

It's a long list.

Klaidman: We are neutral on whether any form of Koran desecration took place.

Kerrisst! We are neutral? We are neutral? We are what?

What this mealy mouthed mutha' fucka' really means is: we're neutral so please don't target us, we're neutral on the deaths and riots, we're neutral and we had nothing to do with it all even though it was our story that caused it all, we're neutral so don't get mad at us for it all, we're neutral so puleeeeeeze don't hurt us, cause we're neutral!

Spineless fucking Liberal Media worm!

utron

I think I'm developing outrage burnout because these people just don't get it.

Me too. But as an optimist I see it as more proof positive that the media is full of shit that even Liberals can't deny it. What am I saying? OK only those afflicted by shrieking dysentary will deny it. Ok, so that covers most Liberals. How about those on the fence are making up their minds about the truth of the charges conservatives have been making for thirty years.

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Default.aspx?CartoonDate=5/26/2005

In case anybody didn't post it yet. Also, the next day may be relevant.

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Default.aspx?CartoonDate=5/18/2005

Shit, forgot Muir violates one of the cardinal rules of web design -- your browser URL bar should always say where you actually are, not where the site begins. Anyway, the one from the 18th is what I was pointing to.

It might be true that Newsweek , the NYTimes, and CBS news are being paid to report newscopy handed to them straight from the King of Saudi Arabia.
I mean how would it read different if it were?

By the way - the Kyoto protocols are based totally on something that might be true, and leftie media types love those