[Croooow]

I meant to say Fox employs more on the left than CNN does conservatives.

[Sonny M]

Your absolutley right. I always laugh when I hear people call Fox news conservative. They have noticable high profile liberals, and the so called conservative on the show, O'Reilly is pro-choice, anti death penalty, and appears to be pro gay adoption, he also supports enviormental regulations.

[ChicagoGuy]

I figured that was what you meant. But I still disagree. CNN has a smattering of conservatives (Novak, Carlson, folks on Capital Gang) just as Fox has its token libs (like that idiot Holmes, who I swear they must have put on just to make liberals look like bumbling idiots). Each has its own bias. As to either of them trying to call itself fair, balanced or unbiased, my dad always says "you can put a dress on a pig and call it Louise, but it's still a pig".

[AceofSwrds]

This was bound to happen. Brock's previous works have been underscored by one recurring theme: hedging his bets.

Take "The Real Anita Hill," for example. The introduction clearly states the book was not a dissertation on whether Clarence Thomas was qualified. This gave him an "out" if any liberals decided to take him to task about it because he could say, "But I didn't say Thomas was qualified." Ditto "The Seduction of Hillary Rodham."

I plan to pick up Brock's book for no other reason than to see if he hits the two-faced trifecta.