If this is your first visit to the Roth Army, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
...I'll agree that the NY Times and LA times lean left...to a degree.
But there is a difference between occasional biased reporting or a bad apple (Mr. Blair - WHO WAS FIRED)...vs. a sea of propoganda.
Unfortunately, I read the Washington Times just about every day...so I am a pretty knowedgable about it, I think...I try to keep an open mind, but after seeing it so many times, I think the thing is worse than a tabloid...it's akin to a cult.
Tabloidish papers like the NY post will at least use stuff like exclamation points in their banner headlines...in a subtle way of undermine their own credibility. Whereas the W Times uses the subtler tactic of simply not reporting anything about news that might reveal a liberal has done something correct. There is no debate inthe paper...they simply just do not report one side of the news.
It goes beyond the news as well...there is not one single liberal-leaning opinion columnist in the paper, not any on the editorial staff.
Whereas, the Washington Post's opinion columnists are about 50%/50%...you've got Krauthammer, George F. Will, Robert Novak, regular articles by Rumsfeld and Rice, etc...there are no such counter voices in the W Times.
Every single news story besides the one main front page banner headline - every single day - is a Republlican Party talking point in disguise...not some of the headlines, every single one.
Comment