Going to the UN is a formula for delay, at best. Too often it is a formula for doing nothing -- elaborate, complex and time-consuming nothing. The United Nations has long been the favorite cop-out of people who don't want to take decisive military action. Look at the UN-lovers and look at those who have for decades opposed military spending or the use of military force, and you will find that most of them are the same people -- including Senator John Kerry.
Why are so many in the media so ready to hype or suppress news according to whether it helps or hurts Bush or Kerry? It's not that the media hate President Bush or like Senator Kerry.
Almost nobody really likes John Kerry. But the Massachusetts Senator is the one hope of those who want to see power put back into the hands of those who think like the liberal media on both domestic and foreign issues.
It is not a partisan thing. The media certainly do not like a conservative Democrat like Senator Zell Miller and they like Republicans who support liberal causes like abortion or campaign finance reform.
The question is not whether the media should express opinions or give editorial endorsements favoring one candidate or another. The issue is whether their main function -- supplying information to the public -- is corrupted by double standards in how they report or withhold news that could help or hurt their favorite causes and candidates.
Unsubstantiated claims about George W. Bush's National Guard service more than 30 years ago have been hyped in the media for months, even before the forged documents were used by CBS News. But eyewitness accounts by veterans contradicting Kerry's version of his service in Vietnam have been kept out of much of the media.
There have been numerous other examples of similar double standards. When integrity is missing, that is far more dangerous than "missing" explosives.