OK. I get you. You guys have behind the scenes knowledge.

I was only going on his written columns.

Also, I am aware of what Anon C is writing when she says Bernstein tried to intimidate her. Mark knows about it to. It’s Anon C’s place to tell you the story if he/she wants to.

I agree, we all need to lighten up.

It’s just the Bernstein has his ethics. Accusing him of reporting with bias is a serious accusation at least for a reporter.

Honestly, Alan Bernstein could be as liberal as heck. I just haven’t seen that in his reporting.

If Bernstein has a scarlet L tattooed on his forehead, then my honest impression is that he’d be pulling for Lykos. I think Seigler is a much more formidable candidate in the general election than Lykos.

My first choice is Leitner. However, he just seems to be a somewhat marginal candiate.

It will be an interesting race in March and November.

As far as drawing comparisons between the liberal and the racist labels…ummm…they seem radically different from where I’m sitting. I don’t even see the word “liberal” as a label at all. Isn’t it just a political stance? Just like the word “conservative”? You can call me conservative all day long and I’d be 100% not offended.

Being a liberal is nothing to be ashamed of, Ron. Walk proud, if you are one.

As far as AB facts, since I‚Äôve been having a darn good day, thus far, and have no wish to spoil it by painstakingly dredging up unpleasantness best forgotten, I‚Äôd simply refer you to my comment at the end of AHCL‚Äôs “It‚Äôs Day 13, Alan Bernstein” post.

Hang in there, Ron. Remember‚Ķit‚Äôs not personal. It’s just blogging.

You sound surprisingly like - Pat Lykos.

All you nned is a cigarette in your hand.

Since you’re big on facts - provide me one instance of Bernstein trying to intimidate someone.

You get quickly offended when someone throws out the racist label yet you’re awfully fast on the draw with the “liberal” label.

I’ll also give you extra points for style and grammar. Snookums.

As far as AB goes, I do not believe that he “tries quite hard to avoid bias in his writings”. In fact, he tries to intimidate people who call him out on his obvious biases.

So, I guess we just need to agree to disagree there.

As for Trent, I think that writing that e-mail was idiotic and that his explanation was only a misguided attempt to cover up for the political slam. It was laughable.

So, you won’t find me cheerleading for Trent anytime soon. I never have in my posts and I never will.

You just have yourself the best day ever, snookums!

You’re really an interesting piece of work. Bernstein is not my “buddy.” I do think that a lot of people are trying to attribute to him an agenda that I frankly don’t see. It’s not easy being a journalist and I suspect he tries quite hard to avoid bias in his writings.

It’s really not a matter of whether Freyer or Trent or Seigler are per se racists. The fact of the matter is that they are products of a culture that certainly didn’t actively discourage racism.

So, fair or not, they have the stigma of being products of a culture that is suspect.

Personally, I don’t find Mike Trent’s explanation of believing that there were really Canadians on the jury as credible. Even with the process of using driver’s license records to select potential jurors, I’m sure any Canadian citizen with a Texas DL use the “out” that they are not a US citizen to avoid jury duty.

I highly suspect that there are subversive Canadians out to torpedo Texas justice, so I’m officially calling BS on Mike Trent.

I’m still not calling Mike Trent a racist. I’m calling the culture at the Harris County District Attorney’s office highly suspect.

I remember those work-out videos, too! I did many a leg lift to Jane Fonda!

In fact, I feel a very intimate connection with her.

I really look up to her, if you wanna know the truth. She sorta voices what I feel inside. Do you get what I mean?