Hello group....my name is Opie...

[dkp993 6,545]

4 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Also saying except Fox News and talk radio is a pretty big caveat. Fox News was the most watched news network in the country at the time by a very wide margin and 6 of the top 10 radio shows in the country were conservative political programs. 

So kinda like if I said Androids are the best phones on the market if you don’t count Apple products 

[The Commish 12,656]

4 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Also saying except Fox News and talk radio is a pretty big caveat. Fox News was the most watched news network in the country at the time by a very wide margin and 6 of the top 10 radio shows in the country were conservative political programs. 

Breitbart

Infowars

Daily Caller

Red State

Blaze

Conservative Tribune

Federalist

Drudge

NY Post

Daily Mail

Probably some I forgot, but take away FoxNews and there's still plenty in the "completely pointless propaganda" department.

 

 

[Ilov80s 27,084]

Just now, dkp993 said:

So kinda like if I said Androids are the best phones on the market if you don’t count Apple products 

That’s a bit a extreme since there are so many other news outlets in existence. Still there is a weird disconnect with Fox where many of their viewers and even hosts don’t see it as MSM. For example Tucker Carlson will go on and on about “elites” while failing to acknowledge he is a millionaire several times over with a father who was an ambassador and media executive and a stepmom who was an heir to the Swanson frozen food fortune with a weekly platform on one of the most watched news networks in history ran by a man worth $20 billion. The Tucker Carlson show on Fox is as elite and MSM as it gets.

[Ilov80s 27,084]

6 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Breitbart

Infowars

Daily Caller

Red State

Blaze

Conservative Tribune

Federalist

Drudge

NY Post

Daily Mail

Probably some I forgot, but take away FoxNews and there's still plenty in the "completely pointless propaganda" department.

 

 

Those are probably small potatoes compared to NBC News or CNN. 

[dkp993 6,545]

9 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

That’s a bit a extreme since there are so many other news outlets in existence. Still there is a weird disconnect with Fox where many of their viewers and even hosts don’t see it as MSM. For example Tucker Carlson will go on and on about “elites” while failing to acknowledge he is a millionaire several times over with a father who was an ambassador and media executive and a stepmom who was an heir to the Swanson frozen food fortune with a weekly platform on one of the most watched news networks in history ran by a man worth $20 billion. The Tucker Carlson show on Fox is as elite and MSM as it gets.

Fair and balanced....

[The Commish 12,656]

10 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Those are probably small potatoes compared to NBC News or CNN. 

Every one of them has seen an uptick in viewership. There would be no place for them if a significant desire to shift right didn't exist.

Id hope they have a smaller foot print than those you listed. And i shouldn't consider the ones you listed as propaganda. Different category

Edited May 26, 2019 by The Commish

[jon_mx 8,698]

Everytime I see this thread title, this song pops into my head....darn you!  

My name is Luka
I live on the second floor
I live upstairs from you
Yes I think you've seen me before....

[Ilov80s 27,084]

32 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Every one of them has seen an uptick in viewership. There would be no place for them if a significant desire to shift right didn't exist.

Id hope they have a smaller foot print than those you listed. And i shouldn't consider the ones you listed as propaganda. Different category

I don’t think we were differentiating between propaganda or anything, just media bias

Edited May 27, 2019 by Ilov80s

[The Commish 12,656]

6 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

I don’t we were differentiating between propaganda or anything, just media bias

Then it's roughly the same in the number of sources....a few more "liberal".  With groups like NBC, NPR, BBC, Reuters, ABC and CBS being squarely in the "neutral" category compared to all the possible sources.

Edited May 27, 2019 by The Commish

[Ilov80s 27,084]

5 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Then it's roughly the same in the number of sources....a few more "liberal".  With groups like NBC, NPR, BBC, Reuters, ABC and CBS being squarely in the "neutral" category compared to all the possible sources.

I’ll be honest this is a boring element of the discussion because it’s been talked to death and people won’t fully agree on what’s neural or not so we know where it ends. 

[Herb 1,771]

My favorite part of the "liberal media" argument is that no one realized just how pervasive and awful and slanted it was until Rush Limbaugh and Fox News enlightened us all about it. Thank god they came along when they did.

My second favorite part is how the individuals that rail hardest against those awful, biased lib outlets are the same people that openly embrace the incisive, bold, balanced investigative reporting excellence offered by Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al.

[The Commish 12,656]

59 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

I’ll be honest this is a boring element of the discussion because it’s been talked to death and people won’t fully agree on what’s neural or not so we know where it ends. 

Yeah...I leave it to the experts.  

As I said before....if it's in comparison to Fox...you're hard pressed to find any large news source that isn't "left" of them....thus the problem

Edited May 27, 2019 by The Commish

[urbanhack 11,830]

Then you have subtle things like this that happen frequently...but yea, lib media and all. 

https://twitter.com/spanbergerva07/status/1132746829018357760?s=21

[jon_mx 8,698]

9 hours ago, The Commish said:

Yeah...I leave it to the experts.  

As I said before....if it's in comparison to Fox...you're hard pressed to find any large news source that isn't "left" of them....thus the problem

They are biased period.  MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration.   If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching.   That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV.  This is not even a topic which should be debated.  It is obvious.   

Edited May 27, 2019 by jon_mx

[moleculo 8,799]

3 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

They are biased period.  MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration.   If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching.   That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV.  This is not even a topic which should be debated.  It is obvious.   

Could it be that if an intelligent person actually took time to look into a topic deeply, the viewpoint they come away with would be considered "liberal" by today's standards?

Let's start with the obvious: global warming.  97% of all people qualified to study it have come to believe it's man-made (or something along those lines), yet this is still debated along partisan lines.  If media reports it as fact, "LIBERAL BIAS!"

[moleculo 8,799]

One other point: of course media is not conservative.  By definition. Conservatives are against change - they want gov't to have as light of a touch as possible, to maintain status quo.

Progressives see the ills of society and want change - rights wronged, innocent protected, etc. 

Which side sells more papers or gets more clicks: "everything is fine, nothing to see here" or "OMG, won't someone think of the children?"

[The Commish 12,656]

27 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

They are biased period.  MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration.   If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching.   That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV.  This is not even a topic which should be debated.  It is obvious.   

 As I said:

12 hours ago, The Commish said:

Oh...and "bias" is absolutely going to lean left when the GOP is basically sprinting to the right faster than Hillary and her purse of hot sauce on the way to BWW!!

L<----------x---------->C

L<----------x------------------------------------------------------------------------->C

And the x didn't even move.

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger".  When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible".  When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".  

I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea.  I never said they weren't biased.  That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%.  The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner?  Now, for me, I don't think they do.  I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views.  It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.  

[jon_mx 8,698]

31 minutes ago, moleculo said:

Could it be that if an intelligent person actually took time to look into a topic deeply, the viewpoint they come away with would be considered "liberal" by today's standards?

Let's start with the obvious: global warming.  97% of all people qualified to study it have come to believe it's man-made (or something along those lines), yet this is still debated along partisan lines.  If media reports it as fact, "LIBERAL BIAS!"

That is an extremely condescending point of view.   Just because there is a problem such as man-made emissions, does not mean the solutions being proposed are correct.   It does not justify exaggerating the doom and gloom scenerios.   Look at how the media fawns all over the New Green Deal when in fact it is almost entirely a socialistic laundry list of a huge government takeover of our economy that only pays lip service to solving climate change.   There are a lot of issues with how many in the GOP deny the basic science, but that does not mean the media is playing it straight either.  

[jon_mx 8,698]

36 minutes ago, The Commish said:

 As I said:

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger".  When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible".  When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".  

I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea.  I never said they weren't biased.  That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%.  The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner?  Now, for me, I don't think they do.  I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views.  It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.  

Mischaracterizing what "conservative's" position on abortion kind of illustrates my point.   One law does not define what conservatives think and even that law is widely exaggerated on what is actually does.   

[moleculo 8,799]

15 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

 Just because there is a problem such as man-made emissions, does not mean the solutions being proposed are correct.

 Are there conservative solutions proposed that the media ignores?  I really hope so, because all I hear from Conservative media, POTUS, and my dad's Facebook feed is that global warming is a hoax.

[The Commish 12,656]

3 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

45 minutes ago, The Commish said:

 As I said:

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen", yeah...MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "we can see a need for it if the mother's life is in danger".  When the "conservative" position is "climate change isn't a real thing" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe we should be looking at the science and doing our part to make sure our impact is as small as possible".  When the "conservative" position is "we need to separate children from their parents at the border as a means to try and deter them from seeking asylum" the MSM is going to appear "liberal" when they say, "maybe using children this way isn't a good idea".  

I could go through every single issue but I think you get the idea.  I never said they weren't biased.  That should never be the question because we will never be able to remove bias 100%.  The question is, do they cover the subject matter in a genuine, honest manner?  Now, for me, I don't think they do.  I think they cover it the way that will get them the most views.  It's why I don't use our MSM for much of anything and I'll never understand why people use them as a gauge of anything, especially people who think they are so obviously flawed.  

Mischaracterizing what "conservative's" position on abortion kind of illustrates my point.   One law does not define what conservatives think and even that law is widely exaggerated on what is actually does.   

This is the exact reason I was careful to use quotes because this is what you do.  I gave you specific instances and no where did I ever say it applied to all conservatives.  You aren't illustrating anything other than your desire to be disingenuous and purposefully missing the point starring you right in the face in order to "win" some argument on the internet.

The best part of this whole line of argument for you is that you continually complain about the "echo chamber" you so willfully participate in.  

[jon_mx 8,698]

30 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This is the exact reason I was careful to use quotes because this is what you do.  I gave you specific instances and no where did I ever say it applied to all conservatives.  You aren't illustrating anything other than your desire to be disingenuous and purposefully missing the point starring you right in the face in order to "win" some argument on the internet. 

....You said:

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen"

That sounds like that is 'the' position for all conservatives.  

[jon_mx 8,698]

41 minutes ago, moleculo said:

 Are there conservative solutions proposed that the media ignores?  I really hope so, because all I hear from Conservative media, POTUS, and my dad's Facebook feed is that global warming is a hoax.

I did not criticize the media for taking on the position that many in the GOP thinks it is a hoax.   My issue with the bias is the media is not critical of the liberal position and the media in most cases actively participates in the exaggerated fear-mongering.  Maybe it is just the sensational headlines is to attract viewers, but the sensationalism in the media is usually to the left. 

[moleculo 8,799]

29 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I did not criticize the media for taking on the position that many in the GOP thinks it is a hoax.   My issue with the bias is the media is not critical of the liberal position and the media in most cases actively participates in the exaggerated fear-mongering.  Maybe it is just the sensational headlines is to attract viewers, but the sensationalism in the media is usually to the left. 

but why is there even a liberal position?  Why has discussion of science and its implications devolved into conservative and liberal?

and of course sensational headlines drive viewers.  Who wants to read an article titled "Global Warming Might be Quite Pleasant"?

[Ilov80s 27,084]

2 hours ago, moleculo said:

One other point: of course media is not conservative.  By definition. Conservatives are against change - they want gov't to have as light of a touch as possible, to maintain status quo.

Progressives see the ills of society and want change - rights wronged, innocent protected, etc. 

Which side sells more papers or gets more clicks: "everything is fine, nothing to see here" or "OMG, won't someone think of the children?"

This is certainly a factor as well and no coincidence the conservative media took off when they found a way to sell their viewpoint as part of a persecuted majority.

[Ilov80s 27,084]

10 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

sensationalism in the media is usually to the left. 

No way. Sensationalism is part of all media.

[The Commish 12,656]

45 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

....You said:

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "under no circumstance can an abortion happen"

That sounds like that is 'the' position for all conservatives.  

I don't know how to say it differently.  How about this as a continuation.....

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "it's absolutely disgusting as a go to method of birth control" it isn't as "conservative" as "under no circumstance can an abortion happen".  So when the media is reporting on abortion these days, it's on these positions that are so absurdly "conservative" because those are the positions being offered.  They aren't making the position up.    

I can't believe I have to break down simple English, but I'm willing if it helps get the point across.  WHEN here is to read "in the instance of" or "the times where".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's the root of it all jon......while you have been  about AOC and stumbling over yourself trying to prove she's the end of civilization as we know it the GOP and Trump have taken the label you identify with and completely changed the meaning.  How do I know this?  Because I identified with it to.  "Conservative" no longer means what it did even 15 years ago.  There is NO room in the "conservative" movement for someone who thinks abortion is understandable when the mother's life is in danger.....just one example  I can illustrate this sprint to the right phenomena in just about any topic you want to bring up.  You choose.  

So while I agree and have said such three times now in this thread alone that bias is throughout media, I completely disagree with the perceived reasons for the bias.  It seems pretty clear and painfully obvious that, as I said above:

liberal ----------x----------conservative

has become

liberal------------x-------------------------------------conservative

Yeah....there's some lean there, but that lean is GREATLY exaggerated by people unwilling to look inward and realize what's happening with the term "conservative" and the group who identifies as such.  The further right this thing goes, the more crazy even moderate positions look.  That speaks to the shift, not the position remaining constant.

Edited May 27, 2019 by The Commish

[jon_mx 8,698]

25 minutes ago, moleculo said:

but why is there even a liberal position?  Why has discussion of science and its implications devolved into conservative and liberal?

and of course sensational headlines drive viewers.  Who wants to read an article titled "Global Warming Might be Quite Pleasant"?

There is always a fight between liberals and conservatives between government intervention and market-based solution.   Global warming was used as a power grab and eventually the right was able to fend it off with the hoax rhetoric.   There should be a discussion on the topic without all the big socialists programs attached to it and without all the hoax stuff.   But unfortunately that is where politics is today with the wings controlling too much of the discussion. 

[Slapdash 16,231]

1 minute ago, jon_mx said:

There is always a fight between liberals and conservatives between government intervention and market-based solution.   Global warming was used as a power grab and eventually the right was able to fend it off with the hoax rhetoric.   There should be a discussion on the topic without all the big socialists programs attached to it and without all the hoax stuff.   But unfortunately that is where politics is today with the wings controlling too much of the discussion. 

Seems like you, or the media you watch, is vastly misrepresenting the debate over solutions to climate change

[jon_mx 8,698]

6 minutes ago, The Commish said:

I don't know how to say it differently.  How about this as a continuation.....

When the "conservative" position on abortion is "it's absolutely disgusting as a go to method of birth control" it isn't as "conservative" as "under no circumstance can an abortion happen".  So when the media is reporting on abortion these days, it's on these positions that are so absurdly "conservative" because those are the positions being offered.  They aren't making the position up.    

I can't believe I have to break down simple English, but I'm willing if it helps get the point across.  WHEN here is to read "in the instance of" or "the times where".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's the root of it all jon......while you have been  about AOC and stumbling over yourself trying to prove she's the end of civilization as we know it the GOP and Trump have taken the label you identify with and completely changed the meaning.  How do I know this?  Because I identified with it to.  "Conservative" no longer means what it did even 15 years ago.  There is NO room in the "conservative" movement for someone who thinks abortion is understandable when the mother's life is in danger.....just one example  I can illustrate this sprint to the right phenomena in just about any topic you want to bring up.  You choose.  

So while I agree and have said such three times now in this thread alone that bias is throughout media, I completely disagree with the perceived reasons for the bias.  It seems pretty clear and painfully obvious that, as I said above:

liberal ----------x----------conservative

has become

liberal------------x-------------------------------------conservative

Yeah....there's some lean there, but that lean is GREATLY exaggerated by people unwilling to look inward and realize what's happening with the term "conservative" and the group who identifies as such.  The further right this thing goes, the more crazy even moderate positions look.  That speaks to the shift, not the position remaining constant.

How about characterizing 'the conservative position' as what it actually is which is the extreme wing of the conservative position?

[moleculo 8,799]

25 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

There is always a fight between liberals and conservatives between government intervention and market-based solution.   Global warming was used as a power grab and eventually the right was able to fend it off with the hoax rhetoric.   There should be a discussion on the topic without all the big socialists programs attached to it and without all the hoax stuff.   But unfortunately that is where politics is today with the wings controlling too much of the discussion. 

but that's the problem: any rational response requires governmental intervention.  People aren't going to stop burning fossil fuels without it.   There is no market based solution, because there is no mechanism without governmental intervention to tie  the true cost of CO2 emissions to the producer.

As long as any government intervention is labeled as "socialist" or a "power grab", we have a problem.

[sho nuff 15,650]

2 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

How about characterizing 'the conservative position' as what it actually is which is the extreme wing of the conservative position?

You just admitted the conservative position was calling it all a hoax earlier to defeat the left.  Didn’t you?  So what Ian the position now?  Other than POTUS denying all of it...

Also, there was no hoax.

[jon_mx 8,698]

16 minutes ago, Slapdash said:

Seems like you, or the media you watch, is vastly misrepresenting the debate over solutions to climate change

The most talked about 'solution' in the media and by Democrat Candidates is the New Green Deal.   

[jon_mx 8,698]

13 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

You just admitted the conservative position was calling it all a hoax earlier to defeat the left.  Didn’t you?  So what Ian the position now?  Other than POTUS denying all of it...

Also, there was no hoax.

You are crossing discussions.  That mischaracterization was about abortion.

[KarmaPolice 14,371]

3 hours ago, jon_mx said:

They are biased period.  MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration.   If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching.   That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV.  This is not even a topic which should be debated.  It is obvious.   

That link had a ton of options in the middle or just slightly leaning one way or the other.  You can choose to use those outlets.  

Like somebody said, when Fox is the most watched and you see where that lands, sure everything else is going to feel like it is all liberal bias.  

[sho nuff 15,650]

1 minute ago, jon_mx said:

You are crossing discussions.  That mischaracterization was about abortion.

My fault...but the point would remain about abortion.  What is the conservative position?  Because his was pretty spot on what the party is pushing.

I also think it was odd to celebrate the right defeating a hoax that wasn’t a hiax by claiming it was one.  

[jon_mx 8,698]

15 minutes ago, moleculo said:

but that's the problem: any rational response requires governmental intervention.  People aren't going to stop burning fossil fuels without it.   There is no market based solution, because there is no mechanism without governmental intervention to tie  the true cost of CO2 emissions to the producer.

As long as any government intervention is labeled as "socialist" or a "power grab", we have a problem.

Of course there are market based solutions and we are doing it today.  We are subsidizing and advancing technology so that it actually makes economic sense to implement green solutions.  The ultimate solution requires more of a partnership than just hard government mandates which always end up having unintended negative consequences. 

[jon_mx 8,698]

3 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

That link had a ton of options in the middle or just slightly leaning one way or the other.  You can choose to use those outlets.  

Like somebody said, when Fox is the most watched and you see where that lands, sure everything else is going to feel like it is all liberal bias.  

It does not 'feel' left, it is left.  

[KarmaPolice 14,371]

7 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

It does not 'feel' left, it is left.  

So you don't agree with that chart is what you are saying.  Something they classify as skews right or minimal lean right (but still use fact reporting) like CBS news or WSJ are left?  That chart is a lie?   

ETA:  if this is the type of stuff you are claiming, I think you are proving The Commish's point.  

Edited May 27, 2019 by KarmaPolice

[jon_mx 8,698]

7 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

So you don't agree with that chart is what you are saying.  Something they classify as skews right or minimal lean right (but still use fact reporting) like CBS news or WSJ are left?  That chart is a lie?   

ETA:  if this is the type of stuff you are claiming, I think you are proving The Commish's point.  

Which chart?  The best source for grading media bias is here and they grade CBS as left-center. 

[Ilov80s 27,084]

24 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

The most talked about 'solution' in the media and by Democrat Candidates is the New Green Deal.   

Maybe it’s just my media consumption but most of the things I saw or read about The Green New Deal were hit pieces on it.

[Mile High 4,706]

3 hours ago, jon_mx said:

They are biased period.  MSM source openly favor abortion rights, openly favor government mandates on carbon emissions, favor liberal immigration policies, favor highly progressive tax, favor spending on infrastructure, and are far more negative on GOP administration.   If you don't see that, I am not sure what you are watching.   That is the whole reason Fox News succeeded, because conservatives were sick of watching news which was hostile towards their POV.  This is not even a topic which should be debated.  It is obvious.   

"Hostile towards their point of view." That's why I'm for this country needs a divorce.  The point of views are pass the point of no return of going back to the middle imo. It was a good run, no need to make it messy,  just agree to split and move on from each other. 

[KarmaPolice 14,371]

3 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Which chart?  The best source for grading media bias is here and they grade CBS as left-center. 

The chart that was linked in The Commish's post that  I assumed you clicked on.  

 

[Ilov80s 27,084]

The entire left vs right, liberal vs conservative dichotomy  is rather outdated and unspecific imo. 

[The Commish 12,656]

1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

How about characterizing 'the conservative position' as what it actually is which is the extreme wing of the conservative position?

That's what I did...you protested.  I was even specific about the position, you protested.  What you post here is a generalization.  Am I supposed to believe that you'd be better with this generalization rather than the specific?  Give me a break jon.....I tried  

[The Commish 12,656]

19 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

The entire left vs right, liberal vs conservative dichotomy  is rather outdated and unspecific imo. 

Unless you're talking about the specific position  

[The Commish 12,656]

1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

1 hour ago, KarmaPolice said:

That link had a ton of options in the middle or just slightly leaning one way or the other.  You can choose to use those outlets.  

Like somebody said, when Fox is the most watched and you see where that lands, sure everything else is going to feel like it is all liberal bias.  

It does not 'feel' left, it is left.  

Of course it's "left"....the problem is the starting point (FoxNews)...very little is "right" of it, so most everything is "left" of it.  That's not a problem with those other things, rather using FoxNews as your starting point in a discussion of things "left" and "right".

[Mister CIA 7,957]

4 hours ago, moleculo said:

By definition. Conservatives are against change - they want gov't to have as light of a touch as possible

That's an outdated script. 

[moleculo 8,799]

26 minutes ago, Mister CIA said:

That's an outdated script. 

so it seems.  somehow "conservative" has morphed into "authoritarianism".  Didn't see that one coming 3 years ago.

[jonessed 3,213]

4 minutes ago, Mister CIA said:

That's an outdated script. 

It’s complete nonsense.  Both parties are pulling in completely opposite directions.  Anybody that believes that either is rooted firmly in the status quo isn’t paying attention.