I don't understand your point here, or why you don't distinguish between straight-news journalists and op-ed pundits, or why you find it necessary to name-call in so many of your posts.
All I know is, it shouldn't be surprising or dismaying to see people who are paid to express their opinions, express their opinions. It's fine to disagree with some or all of the opinions, but absurd to object to them doing their jobs. None of the people you mentioned is expected to be unbiased.
in this case I am calling the kettle beige because it is beige - as for name calling, lets look at Pitts Op-Ed piece as primer on how to name call. rather clever of him until you realize that he is using a disagreement between Rice and her former church to make pedestrian political point.
1) there is no such creature as an Op-Ed journalist - if a commentator chooses to use newpaper columns to voice his or her agenda then they are not journalists - period.
2) Pitts is an Op-Ed columnist, just like dozens of others who either chose to mask their partisanship or openly advertise it. Pitts is hypocritical about his partisanship, Krauthammer for example is not.
3) As a Rush 24 / 7 member since the late 1990's, I most definitely have no problem with people being paid to express their opinions - I participate in the honest end of that cycle. Pitts is a part of the dishonest end centered on the MSM.