So what?

And in your all-fired cherry-picking rush to tar and feather any media that's not conservative, you completely missed the point of the article AND my post. And that point is that the very objectivity and self-introspection that the article and my post raised is brazenly lacking when the shoe is on the conservative foot.

Further, all one need do to find some of the worst vitriol on the planet is to visit the conservative Freepers forums at The Free Republic website.

-Kerry O.

Pretty weak rebuttal, huh? With a little "Mee TOO!" thrown in for good measure. I guess someone didn't have enough time to do research because the computers were unplugged while the Illegals were cleaning the Conservative Treehouse. :)


-Kerry O.

OK. I'll expand on that remark. Because it came from the Huffington post, that seems to mean something significant. I would like to know what that is with regards to this news item. That's why I posed the question, "So what"? I have no reason to suspect that the Huffington Post reported something that was not true. I have always found the HP to be quite truthful. I can't say the same for the National Review. So, what is the significance of, "This article is from the huffington post. Doesn't get much more progressive than that."?

I'd say they were playing 'Gottcha', the way lay people often think they can do with the Law. See, they think this like an episode of Perry Mason where the Huffinton Post is their surprise, 11th hour witness who affirms their Kangaroo Court verdict with which they started. Only, in the REAL world, there are processes like discovery and full disclousure. Thing is, we never get to depose news sources like NewsMax, The National Review, WorldNetDaily or The Free Republic.

I'll bet you dimes to donuts that the OP doesn't regularly read The Huffington Post and got the link from somehere along Conservative Tree House network. And the thinking goes, "See!!! Seee!!!!!!!! Even a _PROGRESSIVE_ news source says the whole Pro....errrr... LIBERAL news media is BIASED--- BIASED, I SAY!!!"

To be sure, there are conservative and Libertarian voices who aren't exactly enamoured with the Right Wing Noise Machine and say so if they can get a word in edgewise. I say, "Good for them!" But I don't think it really proves anything.

The 'proof' is in the analysis. One needs to ask themself "Is this news, editorializing or just plain propaganda" when reading from ANY source. Only then can you be an impartial jurist for the crimes of the Body Politic.


-Kerry O.

Technically speaking shouldn't they both be biased? I mean you make the distinction that there is liberal and conservative...

so...

you have a pot and a kettle...good news they are both black....

bad news .... the argument about color is still going on....

R, you are so smart, you're sexy!!

Both sides has their own lunatics and ideologically deeply brainwashed individuals. There is a crisis going on and the divisive propaganda is getting louder by the day.
If you haven't noticed, you could already draw a line across USA and split it into 2 by just following the political aligment of the people. It might even happen in the future, I wouldn't be surprised, but before that there would be a civil war, and I know some people are wishing for that to happen, not realizing the consequences on the long run.

But it's an argument that needs to be repeated endlessly because it's about nothing less than the people's right to know. The Founding Fathers themselves said that a free press is essential to the political well-being of We The People. If it's being corrupted into a machine to keep The Few taking advantage of The Many, we need to know that, too.

Margaret Thatcher once said "Being powerful is like being a Lady-- if you have to tell someone you are, you aren't." So it goes with organizations like Fox News who tried to actually trademark the term "Fair and Balanced."



-Kerry O.