You wrote: "...and sorry, but Kalb has no real rebuttals."

Really? We're all still waiting for a believable explanation from anyone about the obvious media bias in going after an innocent man - that's President Clinton, who was cleared of all allegations in the Whitewater affair - while giving a free ride to Republican insiders, including several with that same, familiar last name.

Kalb directed just this question at Goldberg, who sputtered, agreed it had occurred, but offered no rationale.

You also wrote: "The mainstream media got onto the Clinton story after they were dragged there kicking and screaming..."

Sorry. I remember none of the kicking and screaming, unless it occurred during one of the media feeding frenzies, first for Whitewater, and when then that amounted to zip, for the Lewinski Affair.

Ken Starr spent $40 million to produce a 400 page report which mentioned Whitewater exactly twice.

I don't care how many media personnel identify themselves as liberal or conservative. That's really irrelevant to the issue at hand. Until somebody reconciles the media's behavior toward Clinton with it's curious lack of attention to apparently serious transgressions and violations of the law within the Bush family, your claims of liberal media bias are simply not credible.

I'm talking about a specific incident, or series of them, when lies and unfounded allegations were made daily in the national media, led by the Washington Post and New York Times.

Somehow, that just doesn't add up to a liberal bias, spin it however you like.

sp

sp