The Wall Street Journal is miffed at news coverage of the economy.

Media coverage of President Bush’s tax cuts has been particularly slanted. During the 2003 tax-cut debate, three of every four major TV network news stories were negative. The favorite criticisms were liberal echoes that it would bust the budget and favor the rich.

Do you think the fact that the cuts did “bust the budget and favor the rich” have anything to do with the coverage? Or like my previous post suggests, there should be both sides of an argument presented even when the other side is patently preposterous?