It's sort of laughable when some here claim that the media isn't biased. Or the best was when some lunatic here proclaimed that journalism didn't inject their biases into their reporting.

MATTHEWS: One concern about this, Mark, and you cover this every day. I wonder if the President can handle this debate. If he gets into a debate for an hour and a half this fall with Romney, who knows all the thickets and jungle work. He was in there, he knows where he was. He knows every dollar he lost, every deal he made. How does Obama get in there and debate him on his own turf? How can he possibly know as much as Romney does about how he made or didn’t make money?

HALPERIN: I don’t think he needs to, I think in a debate he can bumper-sticker it and make it clear. And again, the press — this is one of these instances where the press is very sympathetic to the Obama narrative on Bain, and not all that sympathetic to Governor Romney. He needs to make an argument so compelling that it finds an audience in the press, if he can do it, and an audience with the public. I think in a debate, again, we know what the President will say, and I think he’ll be pretty effective.

And heh - on the irony of Chris Matthews attempt to forment a class war:

MATTHEWS: Do you think the reason the press is on Obama’s side against Romney, besides sometimes partisanship obviously, is the fact that equity people make 20 or 30 times a year what newspaper people make?

HALPERIN: Not necessarily what TV people make, Chris.

MATTHEWS: Well, that’s true.