When the attack on the Holocaust Museum was first reported, you could almost feel the fear in every reporter's voice. Since the target was a Jewish memorial, the culprit might logically be expected to be some sort of Muslim extremist, or even worse (for them) a "person of color."

But then the shooter turned out to be an old white guy, and better yet, a "white supremacist." Well, Hallelujah! It was a left-wing journalist's dream come true. And the propaganda floodgates opened.

On every network, those annoying panels of "experts" popped up like mushrooms (consisting almost exclusively of left-leaning pundits, of course). Furrowed brows required. Predictable at these hand-wringing sessions was the term "white supremacist" - repeated over and over with undisguised relish. Another buzz-phrase, "right-wing extremists" popped up almost as often.

But the big talking point was how this attack supposedly legitimized the recent Homeland Security memo warning of the "rise of right wing extremism" - the same report that basically accused every military combat veteran, pro-life advocate, and gun owner of being a potential domestic terrorist.

Following closely on the heels of the shooting of Dr. Tiller, a despicable late-term abortion doctor in Kansas, the Holocaust Museum shooting seemed like a gift from the (media) gods. Here, finally, was the "proof" validating the liberal paranoia about hordes of gun-toting "right-wing" (hint: Caucasian) males massing for an all out assault on the commonwealth.

Note that, like the press, the HS report did not see fit to even mention truly radical left-wing groups like ELF (the "Earth Liberation Front"), who have actually committed violent acts of domestic terrorism.

Now compare today's reporting with the coverage of the "Beltway Sniper" shootings in 2002. It was by any measure a far more deadly rampage, with more than a dozen people murdered. For weeks, the entire tri-state area around Washington D.C. was paralyzed with fear.

You may also remember that prior to the capture of the two men who carried out the attacks, all of the media "experts" predicted with complete confidence that the killer would surely turn out to be a "young, white, likely Christian male."

When the actual shooters turned out to be a pair of black men, a teenager and his older "mentor," well, damn, that presented a conundrum to more than a few in the press, who simply hate to publish stories in which the villains are "minorities" under any circumstances.  Note how often the press avoids giving physical descriptions of at-large suspects in rape cases (unless the rapists are white - in which case the description will be circulated with near hysterical abandon).

More to the point, in the Beltway Sniper case, the press did everything possible to downplay what was a very significant fact - that both men were recent converts to Islam. Now, in a world rife with Muslim extremists, such a discovery should elicit at least a modicum of curiosity from anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty.

But not our illustrious press. No discussion panels. No endless surmising as to the "larger significance" of the perpetrator's "Muslim connection." On the contrary, the press bent over backwards to dismiss the very idea that their religious affiliation had ANYTHING to do with their actions. Oh, no. Simply not possible. The result is that even today, few people remember that the killers were indeed Muslims.

This sort of selective reporting is not new. Most people recall the Unibomber as one of America's most famous home-grown terrorists, but very few know that he was a militant environmentalist, and that his targets were selected precisely because they offended his radical left-wing sensibilities.

But the mostly liberal press couldn't stand the thought of having to point out that ANYONE associated with the environmentalist movement (which they overwhelmingly support) was a vicious, murdering terrorist. So they dutifully skewed the coverage to paint the Unibomber as "anti-business" - a view the press also shares - and buried Mr. Kaczynski's real motivation: his radical, and unarguably left-wing, views.

Then there was the term "hate" - which was (excuse the expression) liberally sprinkled throughout the reporting on the Holocaust Museum attack, usually in connection with accusing anyone (especially a conservative talk show host) who criticizes the policies of the Obama administration of "encouraging" acts of violence. And being a racist, of course.

What utter nonsense - their has never been as much genuinely hateful rhetoric as is found on the American Left today. From David Letterman's vile remarks about Sarah Palin's daughter, to the the vicious rantings of MSNBC's left-wing media brown shirts Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, the hate-filled commentary from the Left is relentless.

And that's just the TV media. If you want REAL hate, just check out the Daily Kos or MoveOn.org. where they routinely wish ill of anyone with whom they disagree, including expressing hope that their opponents "die a long and painful death."

But don't hold your breath waiting for the American press to begin doing anything approaching real reporting on violence-promoting left-wing organizations. It simply doesn't fit with their ideology. And in the mainstream media today, ideology trumps truth.

Every time...