[JoeSchem]

and eschews the skepticism of government at mainstream journalism's core

As we now know, CNN wasn't too skeptical about the assertions of Iraq's government. And I get tired of the likes of Dan Rather and Baba Wawa cooing over the likes of Saddam and Castro! Only when a government is free and democratic do 'mainstream journalists' show skepticism toward it.

And let's not forget about 'mainstream journalists' uncritically accepting Clinton's statement: "I did not have sex with that woman." In other words, only when a politician is honest, like Reagan or Bush, do 'mainstream journalists' act suspicious, and only when the politician is dishonest, like Clinton or Gore, do they act naively trusting. Maybe this says something about the character of 'mainstream journalists,' that they do not recognize the lack of integrity in themselves, and therefore they cannot recognize the lack or presence of integrity in others.

[Kip Lange]

only when a politician is honest, like Reagan or Bush, do 'mainstream journalists' act suspicious, and only when the politician is dishonest, like Clinton or Gore, do they act naively trusting

You're half right. It has nothing to do with integrity, though. It has everything to do with the media's own bias and the R's that are next to Reagan and Bush's names, and the D's that are next to Clinton and Gore's...THAT is why they attack Bush and give Clinton a pass.