This is actually a perfectly good reason to consider all of your sources.
I'm actually quite glad you posted this, it shows not only how severely some items get slanted by the media, but also should serve as a huge reminder to follow the money. News stations don't slant by the preference of their anchors or the writers that are there... the low-level news reporters slant their stories because their paychecks depend on it.
Whenever and wherever you are receiving the news, keep in mind that there is always an agenda.
I have a question about number 40. Why is that included in one of the worst moments? IIRC, and I'm pretty sure I do, Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives. The Senate refused to convict him, even though he clearly lied while under oath on a matter that was material before the court, but the House did impeach him for that perjury.
Bill Clinton, Democrat, was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on articles charging perjury (specifically, lying to a federal grand jury) by a 228–206 vote, and obstruction of justice by a 221–212 vote. The House rejected other articles. One was a count of perjury in a civil deposition in Paula Jones's sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton (by a 205–229 vote) and an article which accused Clinton of abuse of power by a 48–285 vote. President Clinton was acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999. The Senate vote fell short of the necessary 2/3 needed to remove him from office, voting 45-55 to remove him on obstruction of justice and 50-50 on perjury.
Is telling the truth of the matter somehow a bad thing to do in the minds of these "progressives" such that a conveyance of the truth is fodder for their list of worst moments?
