By Tom Blumer | January 11, 2008 | 1:36 PM EST

In an article about the status of Massachusetts's health care system on January 6, Associated Press Writer Steve LeBlanc seemed to be auditioning for a spot at the BBC.

Until just a few years ago, when the cost, sanitation, treatment and other problems at the British National Health service (NHS) became so obvious that they could not be ignored, the BBC could be counted on to give glowing reports on the NHS, regardless of the reality.

LeBlanc's opening paragraphs, carried in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, could have been taken straight from 1990s-and-prior BBC missives:

Massachusetts is facing a daunting goal as it enters the second year of its grand experiment of extending health care coverage to nearly all citizens - reining in spiraling costs that could threaten the landmark law.

"The sustainability of reform depends on our ability to restrain or constrain or moderate the increase in costs," said Jon Kingsdale, executive director of the Health Insurance Connector Authority, which oversees the health care law.

"That's going to take a huge concerted effort by all players in the health care area," he added.

For Massachusetts residents deemed able to afford health care, but refuse, that means facing new monthly fines that could total as much as $912 for individuals and $1,824 for couples by the end of the year.

By Tim Graham | October 23, 2007 | 6:49 AM EDT

Journalists often the define the news as a "man bites dog" story. In that case, what about when an abortionist kills the woman seeking an abortion? Our "pro-choice" media is allergic to occasions when this occurs. (Remember Holly Patterson? Most don't.

By Robert Knight | June 15, 2007 | 12:35 PM EDT

After the Massachusetts Legislature voted to crush the marriage amendment ballot measure yesterday, the networks largely ignored the story. But ABC’s Web site carried this headline: Gay Marriage Safe in Massachusetts: A Vote to Redefine Marriage as a Union Between a Man and a Woman Was DefeatedTo ABCNews.com, defining marriage the traditional way is a radical “redefinition” of the institution.

By Lynn Davidson | May 14, 2007 | 4:36 AM EDT

The Volokh Conspiracy reported that yet another college has cracked down on a conservative student paper. The Primary Source, published a fake ad called “Islam--  Arabic Translation: Submission.” It satirized the events of an upcoming Islamic Awareness Week which quoted verses from the Koran and included unpleasant but true statements about Islam and ended with the statement, "If you are a peaceful Muslim who can explain or justify this astonishingly intolerant and inhuman behavior, we'd really like to hear from you!" This earned the students a quick trip before a disciplinary committee facing charges of "harassment and creating a hostile environment." The school ultimately decided not to punish the students, but from now on, TPS must identify who created which content. Liberally-minded people and liberal institutions may say that they support free speech, but that claim is parsed down to what the definition of “is” is. This is yet another example of “hate speech is not free speech.” Stepping on and even burning the American flag is allowed (as it should be), but stepping on a flag that has the name of Allah written on it, such as a Hamas flag is not. It is fine for atheists to criticize or make fun of Christianity, but they are not allowed to criticize Islam. A liberal calling Condoleeza Rice Bush’s “house n***a” is acceptable, as is using digital blackface, but conservatives  who say “tar baby”  are hounded. The idea of “hate speech” is rarely applied equally.

By Tim Graham | October 28, 2006 | 10:58 AM EDT

The other governor’s race in America with a Mark Foley echo is in Massachusetts, where Democratic hopeful Deval Patrick, a former Clinton Justice Department official, whom the Washington Post profiled on Wednesday in a feature by staff writer Wil Haygood that was so positive, a liberal blogger characterized it as a "sweet send off for him...I hope he can feel the tail wind."One reason was that Haygood and the Post completel

By Clay Waters | June 29, 2006 | 12:47 PM EDT

<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">The On Point radio show on <a href="http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2006/06/20060629_a_main.asp" target="_self">WBUR public radio </a>in <city w:st="on" /><place w:st="on" />Boston (no liberal leaning there!) featured host </place /></city />Anthony Brooks and several panelists chewing over the NY

By Matthew Sheffield | April 21, 2006 | 1:39 PM EDT

Boston Globe:

A new conservative student newspaper, which bills itself as not for ''the faint of heart," hit a snag during its debut this week at Northeastern University.

By Lyford Beverage | December 30, 2005 | 5:11 PM EST
One of the central political issues facing the American People over the past few years, and certain to be one in the next few, is the issue over whether or not governments are required to recognize same-sex relationships in the same manner that marriages are recognized. Ground-zero in that debate, and one of the places where that discussion has joined arm-in-arm with the debate over judicial activism, is the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In November of 2003, in the case of Goodridge v.