Lately, there's been a lot of complaining about bias in the media. A recent book called Bias claims that the media has a liberal bias, and that news reporting is "slanted to the left." However, an even more recent book, called What Liberal Media? The Truth about Bias and the News argues that not only is there no liberal bias in the media, but that the right wing has deliberately concocted a myth of liberal bias, constantly repeating that it exists when they know perfectly well that it doesn't, in order to perpetuate the conservative bias that in fact does pervade the media.

I started brooding about all this recently when I realized that for the past seven years, I've been writing a column in this newspaper, which technically makes me "the media." During that time, people have occasionally said to me, "You know, your columns are so brilliant and incisive, so witty and scintillating, that you really should be writing for a larger publication." Okay, it was my mother who said this.

In any case, my response has always been that I could not possibly write for anyone but The Takoma Voice because as far as I knew, the Voice was the only place I could have gotten away with printing a column that talked about what terrible people Republicans are, which I have done on more than one occasion. I can't see Time or Newsweek or even the ostensibly (but really, not) liberal Washington Post permitting that kind of ob-vious "left-wing bias," can you?

So I must say, I was a little nervous when the Voice expanded into Silver Spring. While Takoma Park is renowned as a bastion of leftist politics, environmentalism, and folk music, Silver Spring is known as....hmmn, I forget. Though I lived in Silver Spring for four years, I never quite figured out what, or even where, it was. I remember in the Ô70s when Silver Spring was renowned as the location of Gifford's ice cream parlor, but apart from that, Silver Spring seems to be best known for being the future home of the AFI Silver Theatre (any day now), the place that almost had its own Mall of America, the place that let its cute down-town slip into a decline, even though it was one of the first Metro stops on the Red Line, for reasons that no one understands.

Well, I've given this some thought, and I've decided that since I can't be sure how Silver Spring would feel about the blatant left-wing bias that this column sometimes manifests, I should really stop saying unkind things about Republicans and the right wing.

Instead, I'm just going to talk about the Good and the Bad.

In recent months, it seems that the Bad have leapt into an ascendancy that would make Mussolini proud. For example, apparently, here we are, as I write, about to go to war with a country that has not committed any direct acts of aggression toward us, simply because we think they might be thinking about doing so. The Bad, spearheaded by a president who was appointed, not elected, to office, have whipped everyone into a martial frenzy by implying (though never actually proving) that there is a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda, so the average American thinks that by beating up Iraq, we're somehow going to stop Osama Bin Laden.

The Bad ran for office on a ticket that claimed to support education; however, it also supported tax cuts for the rich, which prevented the funding of education. In Maryland, 1/3 of the latest round of state budget cuts (necessitated in part by tax cuts) will be borne by the University of Maryland system, shifting the burden of the budget deficit onto college students and their parents. So much for education.

The Good, on the other hand, favor dip-lomatic solutions to international problems. We (of course, I include myself) are willing to pay taxes in order to help other people (though we may be reluctant to hand over our money to the defense industry).

The Bad, however, are sick of helping other people. How do I know this? The other night, I was at a party with a friend of mine whose husband John, it turns out, is Bad. (I know, I should do a better job of screening my friends' husbands.) "The Democrats just want to throw money at problems," he said. "They want to give money to a drunk guy lying on a park bench. If you want to help that drunk guy on a park bench," Bad John said, "you go write him a check. But don't take my money and give it to him."

"Is that what you think the Democrats want to do?" my husband asked, amused. "Give money to drunk people on park benches?"

Bad John asserted that that was indeed what he thought.

"I think it's a little bit more complicated than that," my Good husband said, smiling, shaking his head, and no doubt stifling the urge to wrestle Bad John to the floor and pummel him.

"Go write the guy a check," Bad John repeated, adding, "That's where the rubber meets the road."

As I reflected on this incident, it became clear to me that while the Good seem to be motivated on behalf of other people's well-being and that of the body politic in general, the Bad are motivated by a desire for corporate, and thereby personal, gain. Let's review the bidding:

What do the Bad want? Higher corporate profits, which lead to higher profits for rich individuals. Unregulated corporations (which lead to higher corporate profits). Low taxes for corporations (ditto). The eradication of social programs (which leads to low taxes, which lead to higher corporate profits). Iraq's oil (and the corporate profits therefrom). War (a boon to the defense industry). A cap on awards to plaintiffs in lawsuits (because these awards cut into corporate profits). Control of the media (so no one can object publicly to the corporate profits. And since the media—except for The Takoma/Silver Spring Voice—are all controlled by these same corporations, they are apparently happy to comply). The stifling of dissent (because dissent would interfere with corporate profits). The muzzling of opposition (ditto).

What do the Good want? Alternatives to war (so no one will be hurt). Eradication of poverty (so no one will be hurt). Preserva-tion of the environment (so future genera-tions can breathe). Education (so people can better themselves). Civil rights... universal health care...freedom of speech... compassion...equality...peace, love, understanding, and Gifford's ice cream.

What do you notice about these lists? It should become apparent to you that while the Good are motivated by concerns about the wellbeing of other people—the poor, the homeless, the uninsured, the world's children, the drunk guy on the park bench—the Bad are motivated purely by one thing: desire for corporate gains that will enhance their own personal finances. While the Good want to fund resources that will help others, the Bad want trickle-down economics that never really trickle down.

Unfortunately, recently, the Bad politics of selfishness have prevailed, in part because the Good cannot make their voices heard. While the Bad have flooded Capitol Hill with their campaign contributions and cigar-smoking lobbyists, the Good stand in the freezing cold in front of the Capitol, waving signs. The Bad control the corporations, who in turn control the media. The Good—well, we write for The Takoma/Silver Spring Voice.

So let's do away with those meaningless terms, liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat. Let's just call this Manichean struggle what it is: the Good—motivated by concern for other people, animals, and our planet—vs. the Bad—motivated by desire for personal gain. And because the Bad have all the money, they control everything, so the voices of the Good are only heard bleating faintly in the wind.

Don't forget, you read about it here.