I am glad that you are doing what you are doing; that work is necessary because at any given time there are people who need to be shown the tendentiousness which journalism is manifesting. I needed it in the 1970s, lots of people need it now--and wouldn't necessarily learn from examples from thirty years ago.What's the use of the Free Republic then if you know all you need to know?
The great virtue of Free Republic is that I not only can choose to read, I can help unify the current-events information on this site. My attempt to generalize the examples you and others compile is my modest contribution to the nation's intellectual discourse.If we-the-people merely subject ourselves to example after example of what Ann Coulter styles Slander, and have no more of a response than an annual vote among imperfet-to-criminal politicians--well, all it did was raise my blood pressure.
Your project is to "out" liberal tendentiousness whereever it appears. That is a Sysyphusian task, for it appears everywhere that people have been indoctrinated to expect to be given the truth. Especially in journalism and academia.
I once showed my Dad a trick which he didn't think really worked. He snorted, "Once in a million." I repeated the trick and he rejoined, "Twice in two million." He was half-joking, but the point is that he could talk that way because he was Dad. IOW, he was the Establishment in my family. You likewise face an Establishment, and you likewise are subjected to fundamentally impossible standards of proof.
My project is to transcend the unbounded standard of proof which the liberal establishment has been demanding of you for decades--and which that establishments fully expects to demand of your grandchildren, if they follow in your footsteps.