You're correct; all three are mouth pieces for the
(establishment) right.  The difference is that some are more
right than others.

B. Taylor


----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Eric J. Burton" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NY Times - no hockey content
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:20:07 -0600
> There is nothing wrong with that type of news paper
> especially if your are pro dems and anti Bush and good for
> you. However, I find it objectionable that these same
> people who think the NY Times is an accurate news source
> will turn around and call the WSJ or Fox News a mouth
> piece of the right. So it goes both ways.
> 
> I am glad you can notice the difference.
> 
> Eric J. Burton
> (701)-610-9466
> The Tree of Liberty Must be Refreshed From Time to Time
> with the Blood of Patriots and Tyrants.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Rowe, Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:04 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: NY Times - no hockey content
> 
> 
> Gee.  That's too bad.  And here I thought I was getting
> the news by reading it.
> 
> At one time, I had a subscription to the Wall Street
> Journal, and read the NYT on the web.  The differences in
> viewpoint was astounding - one would think they were
> reporting on news from two different countries. The
> factual reporting was the same, but the spin on the
> article, and the choice of what to feature or not,
> represents the great political divide between the far left
> and far right.  In the end, with my liberal bias, I find
> the NYT a more agreeable way to get the news than the WSJ.
> 
> Of course, neither is worth the paper its written on for
> hockey content.
> 
> Tom Rowe
> --------------------------------------------
> Sure I'm a solipcist.  But that's
> just one man's opinion.
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bob
> Woodbury Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 11:34 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: NY Times -