Well, I guess I'd guess I'd ask you DGF, what exactly is a "media elitest" ?

Put to the emprical test by Geoffrey Nunberg, a Stanford professor of linguistics and research scientist, the Republicans assertion of a liberal media, as far as major newspapers were concerned, proved to be totally false. . Using a datbase that included the twenty top American daily newspapers, Nunberg tested the liberal media bias hypothesis with the names of "well-known politicians, five liberals and five conservatives." To his suprised he found that the average liberal had "a better than 30 percent likelihood of being given a political label than the average conservative does."

        But it doens't end there, DGF.

Barney Frank, the gay Democrat from suburban Boston, was called liberal more than twice as frequently as Dick Armey, the fundamentalist Republican from suburban Dallas (who once called Frank "Barney Fag" on the House floor).

        Republicans also insist that conservitive celebrities, such as Tom Seleck and Bruce Willis, are labeled more often than their liberal counterparts. Again Nunberg found him to be completely wrong. Barbra Streisand and Rob Reiner were identified by their idealogy four times more often than Selleck or Willis.

        The Stanford professor did some additional research of his own. "In the newspapers I looked at," he wrote in the American Prospect, "the word 'media' appears within seven words of 'liberal bias' 469 times and within seven words of 'conservative bias' just 17 times--a twenty-seven-fold difference. Now, THERE'S a difference that truly deserves to be called staggering...Certainly critics on the left haven't been silent abput what they take to be a conservative bias in the media , whether in the pages of poilitcal reviews or in dozens of recent books. But the press has given their charges virtually no attention, while giving huge play to complaints from the right about liberal bias." Those numbers show that the media are slanted in favor of critics like Bernie Goldberg and Anne Coulter, which helps explain why their books sold so well despite its intellectual vacuity.

        But, I guess you don't have to trust me, but what about other conservatives?

        Back in 1995, the witty and sometimes candid conservative commentator Bill Kristol cpmfessed that his movement had little reason to complain. "I admit it," Kristol told the New Yorker. "the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." (Evidently Kristol, who edits the Weekly Standard, still hasn't let his coeditor, Fred Barnes, in on the joke. Barnes continues to solemnly flog "liberal bias" in their magazine and on Fox News). Rush Limbaugh made a similar point after the midterm election, when he gloated over Democratic complains about right-wing talk radio. "There's been a massive change in media in this country over the last ffiften years," he said. "Now it's 2002 and the traditional liberal media monopoly doesn't exis anymore."

        For the record, this is my nutsack on your chin DGF. I can go back and get some more if you truly want to bang.