To Slate publishers:
Your editorial staff obviously has way too much time on its hands. I understand that true investigative journalism has given way to supermarket checkout "Gotcha!" stories, but surely there are more fruitful enterprises than tallying the number of self-references to various years to see what, if anything, might be lurking, unsaid. In fact, given the shrill and shallow nature of current political discourse, the mere fact that the bar graphs shows many periods with far fewer self-references than other periods is likely to be interpreted by a beetle-browed mutter of suspicion: "Huh! What is he trying to hide?"

I commend this uncharacteristically inane item in Slate to those who think that the press is devoted to supporting Obama. No, folks. The press is still reeling, 8 years later, from the most brilliant maneuver in the Rove repetoire -- accusing the media of liberal bias, which rhymes with anti-Americanism. Since then, the media have, with few exceptions, taken a hands-off approach to every jaw-droppingly blatant lie told by the Bush administration while simultaneously adopting a new policy of "Gotcha!" journalism in covering Democrats. This idiotic timeline is just part of that pattern.

A larger barrel of red herrings than I have seen in many a year. Obama references certain years over others. Why? Simple enough Steve?

I thought Slate's editorial staff writers are bashing McCain... and I still believe the media is liberal bias. Look at my other posts with facts to argue such.

Due to low ratings and decrease in readership they are force to act like moderates and playing the "Gotcha" style of journalism is one way to draw more viewers and readers.