There is no way that anyone could keep a straight face and say that John Dickerson, political writer for Slate, is not an extremely biased political writer. His work against Hillary Clinton and his promotional work for Barack Obama was so evident, that his defenders on Slate resorted to saying that Slate was biased, DUH, of course, because it was a site dedicated to commentary.

Of course, all that Slate commentary is laden with sexism. (Recall the screechy anti-Hillary stance of the site? And who could forget Hillary Deathwatch on Slate?) And neverumind the fact that the site has branded itself as a site of journalism, as an online “magazine” not on online OP/ED site. It crows about its National Magazine Award and tips its hat in the direction of straight journalism in an effort to help readers forget they are coming to a site that is about as unbiased as a magazine written by Obama staffers.

Slate even offers links to “other magazines” such as The New Yorker, in a attempt to play down the fact that the site is nothing more than an OP/ed site, not an online magazine with true journalistic principles—whatever those are in the age of All Obama All the Time in the American “free” press.

Today Jon Dickerson wrote an apologist item for Obama titled: “Obama’s Flip-Flop on Torture Pictures Explained.”

Dickerson winds Obama up as the centrist/ pragmatist who needs to straddle a difficult “parking space.” Ugh! Poor BO, get behind him now, even if he's playing politics with torture. It will serve Obama in the end, and all that serves Obama serves the citizens of Obama...or so goes Dickerson's thinking.

Underneath that item is another story headlined: “Pelosi Knew about Water Boarding.”
Hmmm, yes Pelosi knew, duh, but note the lack of a protective “journalist” cuff around the female? Note the headline! To date there is no proof that Pelosi knew, at least not yet....But get the header! If readers see it, it becomes imprinted as truth in their minds! Oh so clever, Slate.

Then moments later, John Dickerson posts
this item titled: "Did Pelosi Condone Torture?"
in which Dickenson refuses to paint Pelosi as a pragmatic leader, rather she is a cold “tough” liar, manipulating the CIA and the public and “picking fights.” Dickenson can’t help himself from offering up Obama as a car hit by Out- of-control-Train-Wreck Pelosi.

Really folks, liberals or conserves, if you read John’s two stories one on Obama’s torture problems and the other on Pelosi’s it is all but impossible to see the difference in tone, style and intent.
http://www.slate.com/id/2218360/
http://www.slate.com/id/2218392/
Side by side read these and you will understand the sexism that fuels Master Dickenson.

And then recall that a Header already proclaimed that Nancy Knew, even as the stories it linked to offered no proof.

Now why am I writing all this about John (works-for-Obama) Dickerson? Because the twit had the nerve to write the below in an attempt to show that his is an unbiased journalist.

• Dickerson learned from Twitter that people regularly confuse a fact that you report with advocacy for the fact you’re reporting. “So if you quote the president, they assume you approve of the quote. I know people did that, of course, but I’ve been surprised how much they respond that way to items I write on Twitter,” he said. “It’s reminded me that this is sentence structure, since a sentence is about all you get on Twitter.”
http://mashable.com/2009/05/14/twitter-journalism/

No John is not that you quote the President that we think you are advocating for him…it is because you refuse to quote those who would shine Obama in a negative light. It is because you are so selective in what you agree to print and that you are so biased in word choice and quote picks in an attempt to build the case for Obama that you want to build. It is that you use SELECTIVE reporting to build a case against, say Hillary, and for, say Obama. The players will change, but unless it is Michelle Obama, coated in Barack black Teflon, you will never report in an unbiased fashion upon the ladies.
Today's twin stories by Mr. Bias Dickerson showcase his male/female split in reporting on political figures. Both Blue but one has the Right Package.

Obama decides to use a parking metaphor to paint himself in positive light and you Master Dickerson, like a handfed pet, oblige Obama and use what Obama has handfed you to paint him in a positive light! Really, if Obama is not paying you he really ought to!

I wonder if Pelosi got an aide of on the line and talked to Master Dick about parking spaces and maneuvering in difficult traffic if perhpas then he'd fashion an apologist story around her torture problems. Folks don't hold your breath!