Can’t be done; as the line goes, “reality has a liberal bias”. The Right in this country is sufficiently out of touch with reality that catering to their beliefs and being a capable, honest news service are mutually contradictory. Because a capable, honest news service speaks the truth, and too much of what American conservatives believe is simply flat out wrong.
Leave the personal sniping out of this thread, both of you. Attacks on the maturity and critical thinking of other posters should go in the Pit, not here.
Actually, Bricker and I are in the minority of folks in this thread who are not making that mistake.
Look, like I said, I understand how difficult it is to be confronted with a point of view other than your own. The trouble is that the irony of those who would like the SDMB to be even more of a left-wing echo chamber complaining about people who only watch FOX because it confirms their bias does not escape me.
But pages and pages of people flailing around screaming “look at all the terrible things Fox said” and then insisting that when the MSM does the same or worse ‘that doesn’t count, and it didn’t happen, and it doesn’t count, and IT DIDN’T HAPPEN, AND IT DOESN’T COUNT, AND THERE IS NO BIAS DAMMIT!’ is not real convincing.
Rather entertaining, but not convincing.
Regards,
Shodan
I suggest you take a look at, say, the Hannity forums, if you want to see blind hyper-partisanship. Compared to that forum, the SDMB is all cuddles and kittens. The only reason you see the SDMB as left-leaning is because you feel it justifies your worldview to do so. Maybe instead of complaining all the time about the SDMB being left-leaning, you should examine why you feel the need to say it is.
I love people who are broken too. Feel free to love them, but it’s still okay to think their ideas are half-formed and based on wants, not facts.
A lot of people who are unable to defend their opinions claim persecution.
This isn’t a pile on, this is what happens when your arguments are based on nothing but your desires. When the other side has facts and they keep rubbing your nose in them, it feels shitty. It’s supposed to. That’s when you’re supposed to re-evaluate your ideas and realize how utterly without merit your former position was.
But you won’t do that, will ya? 
He didn’t call it left-leaning. That would have been accurate, because it seems to be left-leaning. He called it “a far-left message board.”
The only possible explanations for that I can see is a complete absence of exposure to the far-left ever; a deliberate misinterpretation to try to make a point; or, a confused belief that atheism and far-left are synonymous.
I don’t need to - the SDMB is an excellent example of that. And, as mentioned, the fact that you need to deny this gives us valuable information on how seriously one needs to take your opinions.
But think about it. You claim the Hannity forums are blindly hyper-partisan. Are you a member in good standing there? Do you have 16K+ posts there? Are you capable of arguing your point of view there mostly without a Greek chorus of partisans who agree with you to back you up? Are you capable of considering opinions put forth there if they seem reasonable?
Or do you prefer to spend most of your online posting in an echo chamber where hardly anyone will challenge your thinking?
Then compare that with, for instance Bricker or Scylla or Mr. Moto. Which would you think is the better example of someone who is willing to consider all points of view?
Regards,
Shodan
Strange how this left wing echo chamber has as many righties defending Fox as it has lefties laughing at the absurd idea that Fox is a news organization. Yet the righties keep crying about how unfair it is. Now that is Fox news attitude. It is live and well on the Dope. It is so unfair all these lefties picking on the couple righties. Only .it is not true.
I feel sorry for some of the Fox Gnus commentators trying to hold the line against the lefty onslaught.
http://www.wikio.com/video/sharron-angle-flunks-fox-news-interview-3678721
Here is Cavuto begging Sharron Angle not to be stupid and failing. It is a tough job, but it must pay very well.
Actually, since you asked- I got kicked off after a few weeks, when they claimed I was a sock (or what they call a “retread”)… despite the fact that I’d never been there before. Liberals get kicked off of that forum all the time. Funny how Conservatives never seem to get kicked off of this forum for partisan reasons, ain’t it?
You’d probably fit right in over there.
Far left is the Huntington Post. Incidentally, that is also the organization that people tend to say has the equivalent bias of Fox.
I also would like to see someone prove that other sources changed their opinion on nearly everything when the presidential party changed, like Jon Stewart did for Fox News. (sorry if Bricker covered this already)
And, yes, if someone watches Fox, I assume they are my type of people. They may not leave them on for long, but they at least experiment with shows. Fox news: I dunno, but when someone puts Glen Beck as their favorite, when not even he believes his nonsese (as confirmed in a USA Today interview, of all places), I definitely think poorly of their ability to think rationally–as the guy is just one huge appeal to emotion and paranoia.
Here is where you demonstrate that you missed the point.
The point me and many others were making is that indeed there is bias in all media.
Your mistake and Bricker’s is to assume that that bias is the same or at the same level in all media. Or that the bias is in direct opposition to FOX. (Your argument is really the fallacy of the excluded middle)
What that “watershed event” showed me was that **some **conservatives in the SDMB will happily ignore that liberals do not see the mainstream media as their friend.
While conservatives acknowledge that FOX is their friend most of the time, some conservatives* will continue to even deny that liberals do not see most of the mainstream media as their friend or supporter. This is key to their extreme conservative view point so it has to be denied at all costs.
- Shodan Bricker and others ignore this. However there are conservatives here that do notice this even in this thread. They disparage FOX for the reasons mentioned and many others. That IMHO is the watershed moment to me.
What the fuck is the Huntington Post? I’ve never heard of it, and google turns up nothing. Is it some obscure blog or something?
IRONY BAT! HIT YOU IN THE FACE!
You are the most partisan poster on these boards. The 93% of your posts on the board are drive by political snark and silly tu quoques.
Seriously, there’s no one as blindly partisan on the boards as you. I’m sure you’ll accuse me of being a blind leftist, but you won’t catch me saying that about Sam Stone, John Mace, or Bricker even though they’re generally defending the right wing point of view.
So for you to go around pointing out and criticizing how extremely partisan the boards are is just so obnoxious that I can’t contain myself. The idea that this board is “far left” is just silly - by world standards it’s probably centrist-right to moderate right, and even by US standards, it’s moderately left. The need to overemphasize how far from center your opponent is… is just silly nowadays. “Liberal” isn’t a dirty word anymore, and so you throw around “socialist” and even that may not be bad enough so you start yelling “communist!” or “Hitler was a socialist too!”. “Moderate left” becomes “so super far left that my balls just exploded!” and you act like everyone on this board is Der Trihs.
This board doesn’t discourage right-wing viewpoints, though. No one is moderated or banned for expressing right wing viewpoints. They aren’t even routinely ignored. The members of this board are willing to engage with anyone on any topic.
Which then leaves an interesting question. Why does this board lean left? Why does a board focused on stamping out ignorance and promiting intellectual discussion, seem to, with a few very important exceptions, lack much of a conservative cadre?
I believe he is referring to the radically Trotskyist Huffington Post. I would post a link but fear to bruise delicate centrist sensibilities, such as Shodan. Founded by Athens-born immigrant Arriana Huffington, who has a remarkable history of political self-invention, it is widely known for posting lurid and sensational internet pictures. Which is to say, beware of Greeks bearing .gifs, doncha know.
Ah, HuffPo.
Yes, it’s a lefty site, but it’s an openly lefty site which makes no claim to objectivity or lack of ideological slant.
As far as I know, it also doesn’t falsify facts.
And it’s not a national cable news network. it’s just a website.
Oh, and it’s not all that “far left.” it’s mainstream, American center-left. There is a a LOT of room to the left of HuffPo.
Indeed, while the site is recommended when dealing with political issues I have to warn many that the big blind spot for the Huffington Post are reports on medical and nutrition issues, they give too much space to woo proponents like anti-vaccine people.
On edit:
Well Diogenes, unfortunately on the anti-vaccination they do fudge the information, of course being a blog one has to put most of the blame on the posting anti-vaccination celebrities. I may be a partisan, but for me science triumphs, the Huffpo needs to clean their act a little bit more.
I am sure that, just as the mods at the Hannity forums would deny that you were banned for being a liberal, the mods here would deny that they were anything but completely fair in their application of the rules of this board. A rule defining misleading thread titles as trolling would never be applied selectively, for instance. 
This is not the problem. Liberals do not necessarily see the MSM as their friend and supporter; they see it as neutral even when it is not. (They also fail to see Fox as neutral even when it is, but that is a somewhat different mistake.)
This goes to what I said earlier - much of the problem with the MSM is that they assume that the liberal position is the center. Thus they assume the media is being neutral when it is not.
In really extreme cases, it leads to nonsense where people will claim even the use of forged documents, lying about what their experts found, and memos to reporters explicitly instructing them to slant their coverage to try to affect the election, are presented as if they were neutral, fact-based news coverage.
Like I say, not very plausible. Amusing in a sort of trip-to-Bedlam, point-and-laugh kind of way, but not much by way of establishing anything beyond a gauge to see what the drums are saying on the Looney Left.
There there, dear - close your eyes and wish really hard, and the Blue Fairy will make the nasty ol’ reality go away.
Regards,
Shodan
Wrong, as even a casual read of the DU cite shows, and I already posted a cite that reported why corporate media is not a liberal friend most of the time.
As I said, never mind. You have your unmovable point of view. I will be content by having the freedom to criticize liberal sites and right or left of center network news. (Or as the eternally missed point says: the excluded middle of the road news media)
Ok, well I said “as far as I know.” I don’t read it that often. I don’t read lefty sites in general very often. I already know what my own opinion is. I’m morbidly drawn to right wing media, though. Reading Free Republic is like watching cockroaches fuck. Utterly repulsive, yet grotesquely fascinating at the same time.