In today's OpEx section ( a weekly expanded editorial section in the Sunday Star Tribune ) I found an article titled "Bloggers weigh in on Bush's military service" (I was unable to find a link) that purported to present a sampling of opinion from the world of weblogs. The less than extensive list included seven sites: TAPPED, Eric Alterman's Altercation, Joshua Marshall's Talking Points Memo, awolbush.com,Greg Palast(a writer at the Observer), National Review Online, and Intel Dump. Five sites hostile to Bush, and two that are not. Apparently, this is how the Star Tribune defines 'fair and balanced'. May I suggest that the Star Tribune owes Fox News an apology?
Update: I neglected to include a link to Greg Palast's site and I had also incorrectly attributed his views to the BBC. Both of these errors have been corrected above.