I admit you make some valid points, but I disagree with you.
For example, remember that claim about WMDs? If the media was liberal, wouldn't they have pointed out that Bush claimed that this was our ORIGINAL porpuse to go to war. Or at least, that's what Bush said was the reason for war. While our intelligence may have said that they had weapons, then why didn't the media make a big deal about Bush giving out the highest civilian honor to someone who ran the CIA when they neglected to forsee 9/11 and caused this intelligent failure in the first place?
Not to mention that a study by the independent Pew Charitable Trusts show that the percentage of positive stories for Bush, 24%, was nearly TWICE as large as the percent of positive stories for Gore, 13%, in the 2000 election. (I do not have the numbers for the 2004 election)
And what about the way he handled the war on terror? I am reffering to the fact that he probably knew about the attacks BEFORE he went into that Florida photo-op. Skeptical? visit http://www.tbtmradio.com/geeklog/public_html/staticpages/index.php?page=20040606205339801
And on the terrorism subject, what about Bush escorting Saudi royales and members of the Bin Laden family out of the country following 9/11? Why didn't the media cover that?
But I don't think the media is politically motivated, only motivated by ratings. Which is why they obsess over war and sex scandals.
However, this is only my opinion, not proven fact. (obviously)