Adele claims in her article, that in the good old days, “there was not a scintilla of bias one way or the other.” Get real Adele. You have been biased and Republican for as long as I have been reading your column — and that goes back, “quite a few years ago.”

Also, you state, “The slant, no one denies, is definitely to the left,” and you go on from there bleating about Democrats. Isn’t that bias in its truest form?

Move to your left Adele, and read Lary Coppola’s article, your editor! He felt it was necessary to share with us what was discussed at a luncheon regarding Maria Cantwell’s wealth, how she accumulated it, spent it on her campaign, and ends up with, “is that a good quality in a Senator?”

Next in line is Senator Patty Murray, she is, “the one who comes in dead last when they do assessments of intelligence of members of the Senate.

Oh, and last but not least, gets Hillary Clinton, Senator Hillary Clinton, but Lary doesn’t give her the courtesy of her new title. He states, “Hopefully the women of this country will be smarter than the people of New York, when four years down the road she faces George Bush.”

Am I reading you right sir? Are you calling the women of New York stupid?

Well I am still laughing at both articles. This is unbiased reporting? How far to the right can you both go without falling off the edge?

Alma Lyons
Bremerton

(Editor’s Note: Both Adele and Lary’s columns are opinion columns, and as such, run on the OP/ED page. They don’t appear on the news pages disguised as factual reports. The point being made about media bias is that reporters all too often express personal opinions in news accounts and report them as fact. Their job is to strictly detail the facts of a story accurately, sans opinion. As for Senator Clinton: She didn’t warrant being referred to by the title until she was sworn in as a Senator — which she wasn’t at the time the column ran. Rest assured future references will contain her title.).