What Is Your Most Trusted Source for Political News?

Interested to see what some of you think about this. Who do you trust THE MOST to be accurate?

 

You need an all of the above option.

 

Honestly, I chose CNN only because they cover news all day, unlike NBC and other nightly news programs. Also, despite leaning conservative as my political stance, I just can't watch the bias of Fox News anymore. I agree with things that they say at times, but the bias is apparent and has been the case for quite some time. Whether it represents your side, it's hard to watch them bash Democrats. It lets me know the news is not objective and fair. Republicans, unlike what some people think, are NOT right 100% of the time. No one is. That's why I like to watch BBC for world news at times to get a different perspective to compare what America is saying.

But in all respect, I tend to look more at alternative sources for news rather than mainstream, you'll buy what we're selling because we're backed by authority, news.

 

I can't watch Fox News. It's not that they are biased, it's that it's a smug, insulting bias. Even O'Reilly has turned into a jackass and I used to like him. I lean right, but I embrace all sides and Fox is just politically intolerant.

Now Fox is The Mitt Romney Channel and he's the only Republican candidate that would tempt me to vote for Obama.

The only show I watch on Fox is I record Redeye every night.

 

It is by far the best show on Fox, and might be the best show on any cable news network.

Fox is good on Sundays with Chris Wallace, but Hannity has gotten really old, O'Reilly thinks he is just too great, and mornings with Fox and Friends makes me want to put a gun in my mouth.

I like CNN's straight news, as well as "Reliable Sources" and even AC in small doses, but Fareed Zakaria's smug Obama cheerleading and globalist idiocy are way over the top. Not sure how Piers Morgan still has a job, since the only people he can get an interview with are other CNN broadcasters(not to mention he is another CNN leftist idiot).

For real laughs, you have to tune in MSNBC and watch Ed Schultz. The guy is so angry and fat, the veins are always sticking out of his face when he screams his fairy tales at the camera. I'm quite confident he is going to have a heart attack on national television, which is why I watch his show religiously. Its gonna happen, mark my words.

I used to watch a lot of Maddow, but the smug has gotten to be too much. Shes worse than O'Reilly, and equally stupid. They just hired a new leftist anchor, Mellisa Harris-Perry, who is actually pretty watchable. She's opinionated and left, but I have yet to see her hard sell the B.S. most of their other "anchors" vomit out on a regular basis.

Almost left out Chuck Todd, the supposedly "straight news" guy with neatly trimmed and sparsely grown prison pu**y. He should just get the sex change operation done and over with. If he is married, I guarantee his wife takes him nightly with large latex prosthesis. As you can tell, he's my favorite.

 

Is this vote / thread meant to be a joke ?

You lean right, can't watch Fox, but CAN watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central.. ? Uhhhh, whatttt ? lol

 

Corwin dislikes Romney, so any channel that fails to present/challenge Romney as the corporatist muppet Corwin feels he is, is going to get turned off.

Besides, Jon Stewart is just funny. Unnaturally funny. Not sure what to say about Colbert. He's loony left, and completely without talent.

@Corwin: I'll bet you $100 donated to any legitimate charity you don't pull the lever for Obama this November. I'll bet you another $25 you pull the lever for Romney, should he be the candidate. Not sure how we would go about verifying it....

 

I was waiting for a comment like this.

I "lean" right. To you, does that makes me a right-wing extremist? Does that mean to you I must completely embrace Fox News and watch them religiously?

I LEAN right. That means I also vote for Democrats sometimes. I like Ron Paul. I support Roe v Wade because I've actually read the decision. I won't be patronized for my political beliefs.

Does that blow your mind, @grpaul?

No, I don't "dislike" Romney, I just have no idea what he stands for in terms of policy, same as when he was my governor here in Massachusetts. I'm also not convinced he can beat Obama because campaign ads can easily show him as out of touch with the middle-class. Romney is the Republican candidate that the Democrats have selected.

If Obama is the perfect candidate Democrats created in a university laboratory, then Romney is the perfect candidate Republicans built in a Fortune 500 boardroom. They are both Stepford politicians mae to pander to their base.

OTOH, I won't really pay attention to the candidates until August because I have better things to do.

 

Guess the answer to my question is yes.

 

I feel the same way about Santorum as Corwin feels about Romney in terms of almost voting for Obama, yet not for the same reasons. If that were the case in terms of nomination, I simply wouldn't vote. There's no point in my eyes voting for someone I see as bankrupting the country and signing horrid legislation just out of spite of the uber religious bible thumping zealot knucklehead. I simply can't bring myself in good conscious to vote for either. If it's Romney, despite not liking the corporate puppet, status quo, flip flopper, I still think he's better than Obama.

And grpaul, who cares what people watch out of comedy. You don't have to agree with their stance to find them amusing. I used to do it all the time with Bush and I voted for him.

 

Assuming everyone that watches Fox is a "right wing extremist" is a fallacy often peddled, but their viewership is substantially higher than CNN or MSNBC news, which precludes the possibility only "right wing extremists" are watching it. The term "right wing extremist" is kinda silly anyway.

I'm basically centrist with a slight edge to the right based on surveys readily available... and I watch Fox because during the 2008 election cycle the guys at CNN and MSNBC that I liked did everything but wear Obama buttons on the air and it got annoying. I still check out other sources, but Fox has consistently picked up stories the others studiously ignore, and if you dont *want* to be intentionally misled by serious omissions of fact, you pretty well have to watch Fox or you miss the story entirely.

I'm aware of their obvious preference for the right-wing and factor it in, but if you try to do the same while watching only the other networks... you cant factor it into stories they simply don't cover.

 

Anyone is better than Obama.

LOL, wow.

I could care less what he does, but putting "What Is Your Most Trusted Source for Political News?" as a thread headline and then ticking "Comedy Central" ... . . Is simply humorous.

 

I'll second the "anyone is better than Obama" statement.

As far as voting for Obama if I dont like the candidate fielded by the GOP... that isnt happening. There is no way in hell I'd chance allowing Obama another four years to keep taking bites out of the bill of rights. I didnt want him in office to begin with, and Obama has actually been worse than I expected.

Allowing Holder to remain AG just tells me Obama was in on the Fast and Furious thing. It was not a "botched" operation {except for getting exposed}. It was clearly an attempt to shore up the *90% of all guns crimes in Mexico are committed with guns that came down from the US* story Obama started peddling when he hit office. Holder is so crooked that when he dies they'll have to screw him into the ground, and I dont want an AG or a president with a serious distaste for parts of the bill of rights.

 

While I agree with your post, would you really vote for Santorum?

It really is stunning how many newsworthy stories get completely ignored by nearly all the major cable and network news channels. With all the ridiculous crap that makes it to air, did not one of the other channels feel this story was newsworthy?


There are quite literally hundreds of stories like this each year, that never make air anywhere else, leaving those who refuse to watch or read Fox stories with a very one sided view of the world

There are also stories that Fox won't bring to air, which creates the same issue in the opposite direction. Strangely those stories get airtime on practically every other chahnel, as if some great press office in the sky hands down a single list of what to report on each day.

Either way, it once again leaves "all of the above" as the only way to stay informed.

I do believe CNN makes an honest effort to reign in the bias of their reporters, which perhaps makes them the most dangerous of the group. Fox and MSNBC remind us daily that reporters have opinions too, but if one watched only CNN, it would be easy to slip back into the ignorant belief in unbiased press. CNN does a pretty good job, but now and again they slip bigtime, and it is almost always to the left.

Does anyone remember the gay general Anderson Cooper brought in to the Republican primaries to hassle the candidates about letting gays serve openly in the military? After that, I wouldn't have been shocked to members of the gun control lobby being given the stage to press Republicans for repeal of the 2nd amendment, or perhaps a pro abortion person asking why the candidates don't support late term abortions. I wonder if Anderson would let a member of the NRA ask questions at a Democratic primary....

 

I forgot about Holder. O.K., I'd vote for Romney just to keep Holder away from the A.G. office.

 

If the choice was between him and Obama? In a heartbeat. He's made some noises to play to the religious right, but he's such a boy scout he's not going to do the behind the scenes crap to implement his personal agenda despite lack of congressional approval the way Obama has. I don't have to agree with every facet of the guy's personal likes and dislikes to prefer them over someone that has in my opinion made several backdoor attempts to circumvent the bill of rights.

Just a couple of days ago, March 16, Obama, with no hint of bothering to discuss it publicly or with Congress, signed an Executive Order granting the President control of ALL resources in event of war OR emergency? Problem with that?

-1- Fast and Furious tells us he isnt above manufacturing a politically expedient crisis. Obama is on record telling a gun control group that he had things working "in the background" that would make their case easier, and he was on record making patently false statements {still on you-tube} about 90% of the guns used in crimes in Mexico coming from the US. Then suddenly federal authorities lean on gun dealers and MAKE them sell to straw buyers, and the guns that were to be tracked "accidentally" arent... and end up in Mexico. That wasn't an accident, that was by design.

-2- He tapped our Emergency Petroleum Reserve last June on a weak reason. Prior to that it had been tapped three times since its existence in the early 1970s, and not for simple political expedience. Either he doesn't recognize what an actual emergency is or doesn't care.

-3- He continues to support an attorney general that has been caught red-handed lying to congress and is STILL refusing to turn over specific documents that have been subpoenaed in FnF hearings. * Holder dropped the case against the Black Panthers parading outside a polling place with weapons in paramilitary garb, but feels Texas is engaging in voter intimidation by asking for a photo ID to vote. * Holder has sent armed agents to harass a legitimate business owner {Gibson Guitars} that donate to GOP candidates while ignoring those with the same {legal} practice in the same industry. Holder is nothing but a political henchman doing dirty jobs for Obama under color of law.

-4- He signed a bill last week that basically allows the secret service to decide who has a right to free speech, who has a right to petition the government for redress of grievances, and others that do so within proximity of events attended by the secret service are guilty of a FELONY. Seriously, a felony? Every SOB that voted for that bill {from either party} deserves to be voted out of office if not arrested for treason.

-5- Obama claims we cant drill our way to lower gas prices, which suggests he's blind to the laws of supply and demand, but then that coincides with having an energy chief that openly stated he wants our gas prices to rise. Though he claims he's done all he can on energy, his administration is responsible for the decrease in permits on government land hide and he personally nixed the XL pipeline for political purposes. Hide and watch, sometime in the next few months he WILL tap the emergency Petroleum Reserve again hoping to shore up his waning popularity.

-6- His handouts of billions of dollars to highly connected Democrats under the guise of "investing" in alternative energy will be recorded by history as some of the most blatant crony politics since Andrew Jackson.

-7- Does anyone remember the promises about him bringing in the most transparent administration in history? Remember... he was going to ban lobbyists from working in his administration? He was going to put discussions with lobbyists on the internet for viewing. He promised all kinds of transparency that hasnt happened, and even left-wing watchdog groups rate his admin below Bush for being secretive and behind the scenes in their dealings.

-8- Do citizens have a right to a trial or can they be executed if the president says to do it? The constitution says one thing, he says another. Isn't he supposed to be a constitutional scholar?

-9- Let's talk about his "recess appointments" that were done while Congress was not recessed. Can you say "illegal grab for power"?

-10- Anyone recall his promise before election saying he'd ALREADY identified items that would knock spending down and by the end of his first term he'd have the deficit cut in half? Remember him calling Bush unpatriotic on that topic? He had a majority in Congress for two of the three years he's been in office but still he went from "Yes We Can" to "Why We Couldn't". Screw getting anything done, just blame Bush or Congress. Despite a majority in both houses two of three times, we STILL we havent seen a budget passed during his administration. What we have seen is deficit spending way more than his predecessor and our credit rating drop as a direct response.

THAT'S MY SHORT LIST
So would I vote for a candidate I'm not especially fond of just to get rid of Obama? Oh HELL yes.

 

@Rob: Nice rant. Yes, he is a worthless turd, and for a long laundry list of reasons. I always tend to point out the broken promises he's made to the left (Guantanamo closure, military tribunals, etc), but your list covers a nice variety of issues that should cause genuine bi-partisan alarm and outrage.

No, we can't accuse Santorum of the unscrupulous and outrageous double speak that Obama is now famous for, but on many other fronts (youthful inexperience, inappropriate use of government authority, non-existant executive track record) he is like Obama's long lost brother. There's an argument to be made for removing a liar, propagandist, and despot from office, even if it means replacing him with satan lite, but I should hope it doesn't come to that. Its a near impossible sell to independents, even if the incumbent looks like he will collapse the nation's economy in 18 months by means of entitlement spending and federal debt. Its the devil you know.

Hopefully in November nobody will have to make that choice, but even with Romney as the candidate I'm cynical. Much of the money from Obama's stimulus only became available a few months ago, timed for optimal political value in the 2012 election cycle. Watch him release oil from the reserve to bring the gas down to $4 a gallon, and you might see enough voters say, "Look, things are getting better", in spite of a 30 year high in the number of people unemployed.

Lets face it. Obama has skills that would have made Orwell blush.

 

Honestly doubt tapping the crude oil reserve (a quantifiable finite resource) will have a drastic effect on the cost of gasoline... But even if it does, that would rip a hole in his story that we cant drill our way to better prices.

I have yet to figure out why these enviro-twits dont want us to have access to our own national resources. We will have a couple of hundred years to develop alternative forms of energy to replace it. Hell by that time we might even be able to cheaply synthesize it as we have other resources. Stopping now is like getting out of the car and walking because we know we have half a tank left and it will eventually run out. Sane people keep driving while looking for a freakin Exxon sign.

 

Thought this was fitting.

 

@Rob, wonderful post.

It always amuses me - Conservatives expect their candidates to live up to their promises, but meanwhile liberals will invent any and all excuses as to why their candidate deliberately screwed over the people that voted for them. My favorite is:
"He didn't want to do it, they MADE him do it!"
Response: "WHO made him do it?"
Answer "..."