Due to bias, the following sites should not be used when discussing political issues

[nodoginnafight]

MY biased media is OK. THEIR biased media is crap.

We will dig ourselves out of the hole that the hyper-partisan, ideology-above-country, zealots have put us in. But it won't be easy.

 

[Mac1958]

MY biased media is OK. THEIR biased media is crap.

We will dig ourselves out of the hole that the hyper-partisan, ideology-above-country, zealots have put us in. But it won't be easy.

I don't know how, but here's hoping.

They have a stranglehold on all political conversation right now, and on the electoral process.

They're killing us, and they're too narcissistic to care.

.

 

[nodoginnafight]

MY biased media is OK. THEIR biased media is crap.

We will dig ourselves out of the hole that the hyper-partisan, ideology-above-country, zealots have put us in. But it won't be easy.

I don't know how, but here's hoping.

They have a stranglehold on all political conversation right now, and on the electoral process.

They're killing us, and they're too narcissistic to care.

.

I think we will, because I think it is going to become increasingly obvious that we have to.

We can't afford to keep indulging this "Red-Blue" pissing match to the detriment of our nation.

 

[mudwhistle]

MY biased media is OK. THEIR biased media is crap.

We will dig ourselves out of the hole that the hyper-partisan, ideology-above-country, zealots have put us in. But it won't be easy.

I don't know how, but here's hoping.

They have a stranglehold on all political conversation right now, and on the electoral process.

They're killing us, and they're too narcissistic to care.

.

I think we will, because I think it is going to become increasingly obvious that we have to.

We can't afford to keep indulging this "Red-Blue" pissing match to the detriment of our nation.

They probably said the same thing about the Arab/Israeli conflict at one time.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I don't know how, but here's hoping.

They have a stranglehold on all political conversation right now, and on the electoral process.

They're killing us, and they're too narcissistic to care.

.

I think we will, because I think it is going to become increasingly obvious that we have to.

We can't afford to keep indulging this "Red-Blue" pissing match to the detriment of our nation.

They probably said the same thing about the Arab/Israeli conflict at one time.

I get it. Right now it may look like the divide is similar to Arab/Israel divide, but it's not. It hasn't been going on nearly as long and it hasn't been nearly as bloody. We just have to reward candidates who promote bi-partisanship. The middle is often called the silent majority. Just because they aren't making a lot of noise, don't think they've disappeared.

 

[healthmyths]

MY biased media is OK. THEIR biased media is crap.

We will dig ourselves out of the hole that the hyper-partisan, ideology-above-country, zealots have put us in. But it won't be easy.

I don't know how, but here's hoping.

They have a stranglehold on all political conversation right now, and on the electoral process.

They're killing us, and they're too narcissistic to care.

.

I think we will, because I think it is going to become increasingly obvious that we have to.

We can't afford to keep indulging this "Red-Blue" pissing match to the detriment of our nation.

It isn't "red-blue" It is fact versus fiction.
For example: It is a fact that GWB faced 4 monumental events NO other President has faced.
Dot.com bust-recession / 9/11, worst hurricane seasons in history/ housing collapse recession...
These events started before GWB and this is a fact.
Yet most people including conservatives blame Bush for what?
Keeping America going when jobs were being lost due recession/9/11/hurricanes.
Federal revenue increasing in spite of the above events THAT cost tax revenue.
And all the while we had the MSM along with political rats doing what they said was their job "bashing the president"...
All the while with statements like "air raiding villages, killing civilians", US troops are terrorizing women and children"..
helping and encouraging terrorists these same MSM call Obama a sort of God!

So tell me where the "red-blue" comes from when the MSM keeps presenting biased news which influences much of the uninformed!

 

[blackhawk]

People can use any source they want and as always I will take the reputation of the source into account.

 

[nodoginnafight]

It isn't "red-blue" It is fact versus fiction.

That's exactly what the "other" side says.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Looking for a site, person etc without bias is like looking for a unicorn.

People have used the word "bias" to dismiss information when everything ran by humans is bias. But it sure sounds good.

And its a great way to ignore information that doesnt mesh with your bubble. I always encourage the youth to ignore "certain" information...because thats what smart people do. /sarcasm

 

[Luissa]

The Blaze is solid reporting.

you funny.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Looking for a site, person etc without bias is like looking for a unicorn.

People have used the word "bias" to dismiss information when everything ran by humans is bias. But it sure sounds good.

And its a great way to ignore information that doesnt mesh with your bubble. I always encourage the youth to ignore "certain" information...because thats what smart people do. /sarcasm

You are right - of course.
Every human has their own biases. That includes journalists. But there used to be a rule that you do your best to not let your own bias creep into a story - and be fair. Make sure everyone who has a say, gets to air that opinion with respectful treatment.

That has been cast aside.

So now the information consumer has to do a little more work. You have to seek out opposing opinions and you have to critically evaluate the information you receive.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

You forgot to include the truly vile worst offenders. The New York Times, The Washington (Com)Post, SEE B.S. "News," NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, etc., etc., etc.

Apparently only a hint of a glimmer of distortion from the right side of the political spectrum "offends" you.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Looking for a site, person etc without bias is like looking for a unicorn.

People have used the word "bias" to dismiss information when everything ran by humans is bias. But it sure sounds good.

And its a great way to ignore information that doesnt mesh with your bubble. I always encourage the youth to ignore "certain" information...because thats what smart people do. /sarcasm

You are right - of course.
Every human has their own biases. That includes journalists. But there used to be a rule that you do your best to not let your own bias creep into a story - and be fair. Make sure everyone who has a say, gets to air that opinion with respectful treatment.

That has been cast aside.

So now the information consumer has to do a little more work. You have to seek out opposing opinions and you have to critically evaluate the information you receive.

No it hasnt people just want to feel that way because it helps them cope with information that interrupts their bubble

 

[Stephanie]

How about the daily White House press briefing???

that should of been NUMBER 1

Or anything off the Obama regime gov. org or net or com site or anything the spill from them

 

[Luissa]

1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)

2) Forbes.com

3) MSNBC

4) The Blaze

5) The Huffington Post

6) The National Review

7) The Daily Caller



Feel free to add any more.

You forgot to include the truly vile worst offenders. The New York Times, The Washington (Com)Post, SEE B.S. "News," NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, etc., etc., etc.



Apparently only a hint of a glimmer of distortion from the right side of the political spectrum "offends" you.

Msnbc is on his list.
Along with the Huffington Post.

 

[rightwinger]

snopes

snopes blows away rightwing propaganda. They must be biased

 

[nodoginnafight]

Looking for a site, person etc without bias is like looking for a unicorn.

People have used the word "bias" to dismiss information when everything ran by humans is bias. But it sure sounds good.

And its a great way to ignore information that doesnt mesh with your bubble. I always encourage the youth to ignore "certain" information...because thats what smart people do. /sarcasm

You are right - of course.
Every human has their own biases. That includes journalists. But there used to be a rule that you do your best to not let your own bias creep into a story - and be fair. Make sure everyone who has a say, gets to air that opinion with respectful treatment.

That has been cast aside.

So now the information consumer has to do a little more work. You have to seek out opposing opinions and you have to critically evaluate the information you receive.

No it hasnt people just want to feel that way because it helps them cope with information that interrupts their bubble

Well, I guess that's possible. It's just that there are several outlets who NEVER ask the other side for their point of view (or if they do, they shout them down so you never hear what they are saying.)

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

1) Fox News (this cannot be stressed enough. Bullshit city)
2) Forbes.com
3) MSNBC
4) The Blaze
5) The Huffington Post
6) The National Review
7) The Daily Caller

Feel free to add any more.

I agree with all except for Forbes and I'm speaking specifically of their online blog. Probably should list the WSJ, too. They have an Op-Ed page which should just be renamed "Why We Hate Obama".

 

[Avatar4321]

Who cares what site you use? The existence of a bias doesn't invalidate arguments. If it did, no one would be able to successfully argue anything.

And if we are going to ignore posts that include bias, let's start with the OP.