The most biased Climategate story I've heard

This morning driving to the coffee shop (and again on the way home) I heard a story on NPR by Richard Harris about "climategate." It was so appallingly biased I almost couldn't believe that even NPR, darling of the left, would put it on the air. "The deniers" who don't believe in AGW (man caused warming through CO2) were depicted as knuckle dragging, politically motivated morons who couldn't think their way through a kindergarten playground maze. I hope you all remember the next time we're asked for money through one of their boring, happy clappy, fund raisers.

Now the MSM is using the word "stolen" to describe the damning evidence that the so-called scientists e-mailed, distorted, and prevented from making it into daylight. When the story first came out on Nov. 20, they ignored it. When they realized it could be serious, they started with the word "hacked," you know, like Sarah Palin's e-mail was hacked--don't think they said it was "stolen." Actually, it's pretty clear this was the work of an inside "whistle blower," usually someone admired by the left, unless it's their team that gets the whistle and a penalty.

Harris never mentions the thousands of scientists who've been denied a voice, who have web sites, who've been sounding the alarm for years as they've been denied access to peer review journals, places at symposiums, or the lush government grants. He doesn't note the lost, destroyed, or paltry evidence for AGW. Money? Politics? He can only find the trail when it is coming from the other side, as though the thousands of bloggers and amateurs are being bought by big energy interests (who, by the way, are the same folks funding and supporting all the green angles).

And he's on his way to Copehagen. Wonder who's paying his way?