No I'm not saying he's a representative of the mainstream media at all. I'm saying the fact that they are covering this up proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the media is not "liberal" or "anti-Bush", in fact it's quite the opposite, it's a mouthpiece for the White House. This guy was not part of the mainstream media.
Running forged documents and trying to effect the outcome of an election, geez I wonder where you heard that line. See how the media tells you that it was "liberal" Dan Rather intentionally trying to hurt Bush? The guy's been around for about 30 years, he uses one bad source, and all of a sudden it's a liberal conspiracy.
Damn liberal media.
Imagine what it would be like if this happened under Clinton. Do you honestly think it would be conveniently left out of the news? Give me a break, they'd be talking about it day in, day out.
That's very true, but notice that they don't question ANY Bush policy until it gets proven a failure beyond a reasonable doubt? They parrot the White House line, Fox only exists to make the rest of them look unbiased or even liberal.
Take social security for example. Notice how no media outlet is questioning Bush's stance that it's in "grave danger" or a "crisis"? Yet the congressional study found that in it's current form, it will be fine until something like 2052. Notice how none of them mention that in 1978 Bush said that, without privatized accounts, SS will be bankrupt in 1988? Notice how they don't mention that the trillions wasted setting up these private accounts will be what bankrupts SS? Or the fact that republicans have wanted to get rid of social security since the day it was implemented? They know these things, they just don't report them. For a reason.