Got the e-mail list of Bush-isms.

It's very similar to the list

of Gore-isms that surfaced a few months ago.

Bush and Gore have both made

a lot of statements that, if taken out of context and analyzed, make them

look like total morons.

Guess what... so would you

if you spent 12 hours a day making speeches and answering a hail of questions

from reporters and attendees at public forums. Pick a subject and try

talking into a microphone off the cuff for 30 minutes let alone 12 hours

then print out everything you said and take a look at it. You'll think

Forest Gump was a genius.

But there is a difference between

the Bush-isms and the Gore-isms. The Bush-isms will be repeated more often,

will be talked about and written about by columnists and commentators

far more, and will be taken far more seriously than the Gore-isms.

For some reason, conservatives

tend to balk at using tactics like trying to make a candidate look like

an idiot by taking isolated bits out of thousands of hours of tape, and

then running a campaign based on the premise that "My opponent is

dumber than me."

And conservatives in the press

me and the other guy also tend not to press that pedal too much.

Anytime I get close to the

subject of the liberal bias in the media, my liberal friends use the same

argument, which consists of repeating the words "Yeah, it's that

liberal media bias" in a sarcastic tone of voice as if treating facts

with sarcasm will somehow erase them.

Don't pin me with the "conspiracy

theorist" label, though. I don't think there's anything other than

basic human nature behind what's happening.

It's an established fact that

about 70 percent of the people who work for newspapers, magazines, radio

and television stations are liberal. And the liberal philosophy, at its

very core, is opposed to the idea of rules and standards.

In journalism training, we

are taught to set aside our biases and work diligently for that exalted

state known as objectivity. The more we disagree with someone's point

of view, the harder we are supposed to work to present that point of view

accurately and fairly in reporting on controversy.

Nobody is perfect on that score,

least of all yours truly. But nobody tries harder to achieve it.

And don't get me wrong. I know

plenty of liberal folks in the media, on the local level, who also do

their best to be objective when writing news stories.

But on the national level,

the liberal idea surfaces that you should not only report the news but

also "explain" it so people know what to think about it. The

bias is so obvious you can't miss it unless you just want to. It's like

a giant, festering boil on the face of our profession.

Try an experiment. Watch all

the news you can on TV for a week. Count the number of times the reporters

focus on "mistakes" in the Bush campaign as opposed to simply

reporting on the ideas he puts forth in his campaign events, and count

the number of times the reporters cover positively the Gore campaign.

See how many of them report his "mistakes."

You'll find that Gore does

make mistakes. I promise you he does, and if you watch enough TV, you'll

find somebody on a midnight recap who will dare to mention one of them.

Likewise, you'll find that Bush does do a lot of positive campaigning,

but you'll only see a glimpse of it here and there.

You'll see a lot of photo opps

of Gore making cute jokes, hugging and kissing his wife, waving and smiling

and similar setups. You'll see a lot of video of Bush sitting at awkward

angles, having goofy looks on his face, or saying things that sound silly.

You may think that's because

Bush spends all his time looking goofy and sitting at awkward angles,

but if the reporters were so inclined, the whole situation could be completely

reversed.

Bush's campaign seems to be

headed downhill, and I'm not by any means saying that he and his staff

aren't responsible for that, or that they can't turn it around if they'll

learn from their mistakes.

But I am pointing out that

biased reporting is a part of the landscape they have to deal with, just

like sports teams sometimes have to deal with a less than competent referee.

It's something they're going

to have to overcome, in addition to finding ways to get their message

out.

The key will be the debates.

Gore's tactic will be to come up with some sarcastic one-liners similar

to the "You're no Jack Kennedy" line of the Quayle-Bennett debates,

and try to make Bush look dumb.

Bush had better bet ready with

some good comebacks, along with doing his homework and being able to talk

intelligently about the issues.

Or he's a goner.