Further proof there is not really a liberal biased media.

[trust no one]

Imagine the media eruption if a male escort had been detected operating as a credentialed correspondent in the Clinton White House, and not using his real name for his press credentials. Imagine that he was paid by an outfit owned by Arkansas Democrats and had been trained in journalism by James Carville. Imagine if this gentleman had been cultivated and called upon by Mike McCurry or Joe Lockhart—or by President Clinton himself. Imagine if this "journalist" had smeared a Republican Presidential candidate in the form of a question to the President of the United States, and had previously claimed access to classified documents in a national-security scandal. Imagine if a self professed “liberal correspondent” was caught telling lies to CNN, and spreading misinformation targeting former high ranking government intelligence officials during a White House press conference?

Rush, Hannity, Liddy, Medved, Savage, The New York Post, The Daily News, The Washington Times, Pittsburgh Tribune, and Drudge would be talking about this story for years. But, replace the word “Democrat” with “Republican” and these media watchdogs, as a matter of fact MOST media watchdogs, fall silent.

Would Sean Hannity call this liberal a “terrific bureau chief,” like he referred to the now disgraced, two faced liar, Jeff what’s his name? Or, more importantly, would The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, CNN, CBS News or the New York Times spread the same types of accolades on a “liberal” with the same resume as Jeff that Sean, Rush, and Zuckerman have all extended to our favorite Republican fibbing male escort?