Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
 Originally Posted By: the G-man of Zur-En-Arrh
...
Furthermore, even if BSAMS is partisan ...


He is according to Rex's definition. Does anyone have a problem with the definition?


As noted above, the question of BSAMS alleged biases is irrelevant to a discussion of bias at the AP. Therefore, you are trying to change the subject.

 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man

It's a Palin talking point that pretends one story by the AP about the health care bills equals one story about her book. I think most people understand that the AP probably has more resources invested in the health care bills on a regular basis than a short term time investment it used for the Palin book. It's a classic dodge by Palin herself to distract from her actual mistakes she made in the book. She seems to be good at that as well as blaming others and quitting.


As I wrote over an hour ago:

 Originally Posted By: the G-man of Zur-En-Arrh
... a search of the past seven days of the AP's archive shows 51 additional stories that mention Palin. So, clearly, the AP isn't done covering her either.


And:
 Originally Posted By: the G-man of Zur-En-Arrh

Furthermore, neither you ... or the AP can predict with certainty when a bill will pass. With that in mind, the idea that a chatty tell-all book about last year's campaign is a priority over major legislation becomes even more nonsensical.


In addition, I note that the AP laid off staff last week. This means that their resources will be more, not less, stressed in the coming weeks and months. With diminishing staff comes diminishing ability to cover healthcare. Accordingly, the decision to devote so much of their (shrinking) staff's time to a biography over policy at this point in time would seem to demonstrate that their priorities lie less in good government and more in attacking politicians they disapprove of.