So your saying he didn't vote no 2x and kill it again in committee? If the right wing bias is wrong please enlighten me with info otherwise.
No.
Im saying you used a right wing website to support a right wing view.
Particularly a website that on its face seems to be positioning itself to be unbias with names like "Media research Center" "NEWSBUSTERS"
Then it exposes itself as being a right bias media with the term
“Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”
Not exactly an unbias source.
Right wing media bias is as bad as left wing media bias.
Why not just report without bias. Or expose the bias on both sides?
That would kinda add to their credibility more.
For that matter I could start a website doing the same thing.
Give it a cute little name like. "The Center for Media Research"
And put my own little spin on stories to suit my view. (hmmmm)
It wouldnt make me credible
Im not defending his alleged vote (Havent had the time or inclination to verify it)
But there are any number of reasons why he may not have voted in favor of that particular bill.
Or any legislator on any bill
What else was tacked onto the bill?
Often things are brought forward for a vote that include other neat little christmas tree type items that doesnt get much attention.
Course when the media or political opposition gets ahold of it and spins their own story to it...
Again I havent had time to t look into the thing so I dont know