Surely the Times,a lamestream poster child, isn't calling itself a "reputable media outlet" while implying in this same writing that 10 thousand readers who cancelled their subscriptions over the Schwarzenegger meanderings were somehow misguided and now repentant.

Most people are idiots. Sad but true.

Thank you. The "gotcha" question, for Gingrich was something akin to, "what do you think of Paul Ryan's plan?" Pretty tricky, I must say. For Palin it was "what newspapers and magazines do you read?" Again very, very sneaky. Of course I am paraphrasing the exact question, but really that is very close? By the way, I don't have a problem with Gingrich's answer..he was honest in how he felt about the plan. You don't have to agree with him, just agree that it's worth discussing.

Got to love that the first two comments only illustrate the article's point.

"Major, reputable, media outlets"? Yeah, right. You mean "outlets" that employ Andrew Sullivan, Katie Couric, & Chris Matthews? Sarah Palin's great legacy will be her heroic, tireless effort to make the old, mainstream media totally irrelevant to the political process. God bless her.

From a moderate who is way more liberal than conservative: Must admit The Times liberal bias is obvious. A wise person will NOT trust any media source or government--read, watch and listen with an open mind, do your own research and make a judgment as to the truth. MSNBC and Fox, for example, are just propaganda networks, and CNN is all about special interests, cutting and pasting video and inserting commentary to create their own news stories--not even as real as the reality shows. As for Arnold, the "lies have a familiar ring" column had a hostile tone--not objective or analytical--for what other reason than a liberal seizing the opportunity to denigrate a conservative...insults are fair if limited to political performance, flinging the hardball back and forth with invective about your opponent's personality and such; but remarking on steroids and big biceps etc, and expressing outrage over an extramarital affair? Who's angered by infidelity; wrong of course but happens every second of the day. The rancor stems from political bias, L.A. Times, so why not admit it.

The only people saying the LA Times is not a pro-Leftist paper...seem to work for the LA Times.

Any LA Times editors take a non-PC stand on: gay marriage, more taxes, illegal immigration, gun control, abortion, global warming, affirmative action, more gov't, Federal Reserve money printing, Obama, Dem's, low-flow toilets, fluorescent light bulbs or plastic shopping bags? Yeah, I don't see them either.

Apparently they'd rather go broke printing Lefty spin they want to write (& believe their neutral!) than honest reporting their vanishing readers want to see.

Denial, more than a river in Egypt.

Many people are pro-lifers who think no one should have an abortion. Well, this child was born. Pro-lifers should be happy. Affairs shouldn't happen. Women shouldn't involve themselves in others' relationships (and perhaps should be sued like the woman in North Carolina was who had an affair with a woman's husband. Maria should sue all women coming out of the woodwork). No one should toy with others, lie, dupe them. Life isn't perfect, though. How many famous people have had affairs, had babies with others other than their spouses, how many husbands think kids are their own, how many kids think their fathers are their father when they aren't (well, are later in a parent way), how many have had abortions. Dear pro-lifers: if any of you are denigrating Arnold, then perhaps you should be quiet because he got someone pregnant, she kept the baby, and now is now. If you want to be pro-life people with mouthy repercussions ongoing, then state that upfront with your beliefs - that all babies should be kept, but those creating children should be harassed forever, made to pay the price, never be allowed to move on. Re. the 16 yr old who had an affair later. She obviously wasn't traumatized - and hurt Maria on a universal level. Her behaviour toward Maria was awful, and now hiring Gloria just as revolting. Arnold's behaviour speaks for itself, but isn't unlike JFKs or Bobby's. America's divorce rate is high, affairs are rampant, and yet many still want things to be black and white and upright - never was with many famous, powerful people, never will be. People should be honorable, but most aren't. Just look at those vilifying Arnold when their lives are likely in the sewer. I don't know why Arnold was elected in the first place, but it wasn't because he was a saint.

Perhaps Schwarzenegger comment should have been elsewhere or nowhere! but re. media outlets - there are so many newsfeeds resulting in the same info everywhere, it is nice to read anything that is different. Many read alternative news just to get away from the exhausting over and over again of CNN reporting and papers with the same info reported over and over again. News venues aren't static, though, reporters, managers, etc. come and go and over time things change - not always depending on where money comes from, though. What exactly did happen re. no one wanting to pick up The Kennedys, the miniseries finally aired by the History Channel. Money is in the background far too often. It is scary to think that religious fanatics try to control the news - something Palin and those of her religious ilk (love that word ilk!) would love to do, but often can't, so they look elsewhere. I can't believe Americans would even entertain the thought of electing a religious fanatic like her, or her or those much like her at all. Religion should be dispensed with and spirituality only encouraged. Life would be so much better without the dogma, brainwashing, and all the them versus us - with spirituality there wouldn't be any of that, or would there. Regardless, the news is exhausting now because there has to always be more. Tsunamis are boring after awhile to many, tornadoes - more of the same, an affair - not really that exciting to many - but now Arnold - there are affairS, there are maybe babies - but then what after? How is the insatiable appetite for MORE ever going to be filled after a certain point. Maybe people will get sick of the all of it, the over the top drama, the exhausting need for more and more. Worldwide info is becoming overwhelming as it is with each story ongoing til the next comes along.

And conservatives, whenever you feel that the media, or even the world, seems to be against your views, it's probably because they are.

Conservatism is inherently regressive and reactive. It's all about holding onto imagined past ideals and nostalgia. Liberalism is about moving forward and progress. Smart people like progress. Smart people tend to have more intellectual jobs like editing newspapers and writing and teaching.

So when you guys whine about college professors and newspapers and scientists all exhibiting liberal tendencies... well, it's because they are.

It's so instructive to read the comments section. Look at every comment from a liberal. No ideas, no refutation, just insults to conservatives. Liberals love tolerance, unless they're being asked to tolerate people they disagree with. Then they feel free to spew the most vile hate their fingers can put forth.

Who wrote this stupid Op-Ed piece? No doubt someone from the Lame-Stream Media. Well here's a clue: Stop being the PR arm for Left-Wing politicians and we'll stop calling you the Lame-Stream media. I much prefer Left-Wing Media myself.

I agree with this opinion piece. The Times publishes several blogs and opinion pieces--some liberal, some not, some somewhere in between. I even read the Jonah Goldberg pieces and take them for what their worth. I agreed with his criticism on Trump. It's unfortunate that we seem to be living in such a polarizing environment, and that we seem to believe that people/organizations are either "for you" or "against you." That's a very simple-minded mentality. The world is far more complex. Economics is complex. Society changes at a rate faster than most can comprehend, yet we make snap judgments using our inherently flawed lens. Can we learn to take a deep breath on certain issues? In a day and age when information is so easily and quickly accessible, can we take that extra time to take a more independent approach to issues? I hope so.

"...Palin and her ilk..."

And there you go. You could have chosen to make your point in a professional manner. There is some substance in what you were attempting to say.

But then you commit the very act you are decrying.

And by doing so only underscore and make more valid what Palin had said.

Doubt the Lamestream Media label ?.....Ha!
The LAT might as well say the sky is falling and tell readers not to believe their lying eyes as it does daily on issues of open borders and illegal immigration, etc.

What's the last book you read, Palin. Gotcha!

So Whitefield's contention is that namecalling not content has convinced a sizeable portion of our population that the LA Times has a liberal bias? That is appareantly the gist of this opinion piece. Good job rolling a Schwarzenegger/Palin hit piece together with a we're not biased piece though. Extra points from the editor for that, I'm sure.

Yesterday I wrote that most people are idiots. Reading the subsequent comments, a few bright spots notwithstanding, has done nothing to change my opinion.

Unfortunately for your advice to tell Ms. Palin what Thomas Jefferson said, she mnay not have heard of Thomas Jefferson. If she has, she only cares about those of his sayings that can be exerpted to support her nonsense.