Rush Limbaugh is in trouble again. This time while talking to a caller he referenced what he dubbed a "phony soldier".

This incident has created a fire storm in the media. Immediately commentators all over television began condemning Limbaugh. The group MediaMatters.Org slammed Rush mercilessly. It got so much traction that it actually made it to the Congress of the United States where various elected officials made motions to condemn what Rush said.

The rest of the story: Limbaugh was talking about a "soldier" named Jesse Macbeth who chronicled horrible abuses of Iraqi civilians while on his tour in that nation. Well it turns out that Macbeth was only a soldier for 44 days before washing out in Boot Camp long before being assigned to the combat role that he claimed to have in his blog.

But don't look for a lot of media corrections and clarifications on this. Journalists say they're unbiased and non partisan - but watching some of the things they've done and said in the past year one can't help but wonder.

It was almost a year ago that Israel invaded Lebanon? And suddenly our media outlets were flooded with pictures of blown up buildings with a teddy bear laying out front or an old woman crying?...the same teddy bear/old woman in every single pic no matter how far away each spot was from each other?

You'd think that would have been a big headline, but no. Journalists have more important things to report on than the lies and distortions of their peers.

Remember March 2, 2007 when Bill Maher stated while talking about Dick Cheney

"I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact."

If you don't remember the comment, that's okay. Most people don't. More people remember

Ann Coulter's reference to that comment:

"if I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”

To this day Coulter is still hounded by non partisan media types about this statement. Even when Ann reminds her inquisitors (like Chris Mathews) of the contexts they ignore what Maher said and continue to pound her.

So either journalists are stupid or they're patently biased. You can suggest that certain people (namely the ones we disagree with) should be killed but don't you dare make similar suggestions about our guys.

Don't get me wrong at all. The media is free to write and say anything they want. What aggravates me is that despite of how obviously one sided they are about it they continue to claim otherwise. How stupid do you think we are?

And sometimes they can't even get the facts straight in stories that seem simple. Do a google search for "Jena 6" and you'll get several stories...all featuring slightly different facts about the same incident. Some of the stories say that the white victim (Justin Barker) was taken to the hospital. Others say he wasn't. Some of the stories claim that Barker pulled a gun. Others say that the gun was a separate incident a few days later (or earlier).

All of the stories agree (though they might not say it): there is still racism amongst whites and only the whites in the old south. All of the stories mention "history of Jim Crow" and the "all white jury" that convicted Mychal Bell. All of the stories mention the segregation of the 1950's.

Only one of the stories (the one on wikipedia) mentions that the Jena 6 beat Barker to unconsciousness. None of the stories note that the six *continued* to beat Barker after he fell unconscious. None of the stories mention that Mychal Bell has a history of violence. None of the stories think it's worth noting that Justin Barker had nothing to do with the "Noose Incident" that began the racial unrest.

So what are we supposed to think when we read/watch a single report on the Jena Six? Most people aren't going to read and compare all the media stories to see all the inconsistencies
in all the various versions of these reports?

It's obvious: that minorities are getting screwed by an evil white racist system. Only a person with no life like myself is going to uncover all the distortions being put out there like it's really news.

It's so strange to me. Right now all over the world people are struggling putting their lives on the line for freedom of speech and press. These people are tired of getting the one sided take on the news. And here in the United States we have free speech and press and still pretty much only get one take on the news. When another voice does come out, left wing politicians suggest that these different takes be "balanced" out with the same old crap from the major outlets (see talk radio.)

How sad is that?