What news station do you think has the most accurate information about each Obama and McCain?

14 Responses to “What news station do you think has the most accurate information about each Obama and McCain?”

1. Caribou "LIPS" Barbie™ Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 3:54 pm

   CNN
   References :

2. Unka Dano Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 4:27 pm

   BBC America does a fine job.
   References :

3. College Sutdent Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 4:43 pm

   CNN is the best, especially with their NO BIAS NO BULL Test
   Please answer my question:

   http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=An1G.X5iejvosL.gDDlz34Dsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20081030204239AADN4SC
   References :

4. The Beast Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 5:00 pm

   that would be NO news station. any station covering this campaign has engaged in the manufacture or twisting of news stories to fit their choice of candidate. no longer does media report news in an unbiased fashion to let the people decide on their own which side to support. everything comes tainted with a predetermination at the outset. i wouldn’t look for any news station to provide you with straightforward info on either candidate. you’ll have to hit the library, history books, public records, and other unbiased sources. unfortunately, the average american won’t bother. it’s back to the ease of voting party line. sad.
   References :

5. meeomyo Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 5:20 pm

   none of em
   References :

6. FredfromCBS Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 6:08 pm

   CBC.com
   CTV.com
   Canadians do their own research and don’t buy into all the American news agency propaganda. When they are running their own elections, different story though…
   And the best place to get a good feel for the next best president:
   Jon Stewart – The Daily Show
   References :

7. Aviatrix Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 6:48 pm

   I’d say BBC on the TV, I listen to NPR on the radio which has awesome music and provides bipartisan and non-biased news/info on both the candidates.
   I’m not old enough to vote yet, but I think it’s really important to research the candidates. The problem is when the media researches so deep that they start bringing up personal issues of the candidates. I try to research well… but I’m a bit biased with who I support : )
   References :

8. raveniiz Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 7:05 pm

   I agree it’s difficult. I think BBC is the best option. Another thing I try to do is watch both sides of the networks…Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, Hardball with Chris Mathews and then Fox news channel for the other side…each will put out the stories on the other and you can compare/contrast and sometimes see backstories on each candidate that shows how they are lying now. The best is when they show McCain during his last try for president…his views and statements are opposite of what he is saying this time…so it’s not biased, it’s showing true flip flopping.

   Good for you that at such a young age you are showing great intellect by attempting to gather the truth and for not being so gullible as to believe that our "news" is telling us the truth!
   References :

9. cleavetoo Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

   Hmmm….if you want news, you have to catch the midday shows. MSNBC’s David Shuster or Fox News Shepard Smith are pretty balanced journalists who ask the tough questions of either side. For getting the real truth about things the candidates say, http://www.factcheck.org or http://www.politifact.com are both very good and often reference each other when correcting the lies and misinformation of the campaigns.

   You should definitely be clear on what each candidates’ stand on the issues are but remember that they’re applying for a job, not sainthood. These people are people and are bound to be imperfect. Knowing their records becomes and ominous task. Many times a candidate’s vote on a particular issue will have little to do with their stand on the actual issue but more to do with other things that are often attached to a bill. Such as how McCain voted against a bill which funded the troops because the bill in question included a time line for withdrawal for Iraq. Obama voted against a similar bill to fund the troops because it didn’t include a time line. Neither vote says much about their "record" on voting for military issues but speaks volumes about their stand on Iraq. So, if you start looking at their voting records, you’ve then got to read the bills to really know why they voted the way they did.

   I’ve been fascinated by both candidates and have digested every bit of information I could get, this election.
   References :

10. joe_republican Says:
    April 18th, 2010 at 8:14 pm

    I prefer FOX but i am a republican so that is where I turn
    just like democrats go to CNN
    personally i think MSNBC is unbiased as you can possibly get without the other side complaining
    References :

11. don't taze me bro! Says:
    April 18th, 2010 at 8:47 pm

    You’ve got to watch some of them all. Take both sides and make up your own mind. Unfortunately that means listening to a certain amount of bullcrap, but it’s still interesting.
    The only guys I cannot stand for very long are Rush, Keith Olberman and Bill Maher.
    By the way, Avia, though NPR is delightful, they are totally left leaning all the way. "National Public Radio"? Think about it.
    References :

12. john j Says:
    April 18th, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    NONE are Accurate. They are Slur the truth to make a good story, That’s what makes NEWS.

    BIASED totally favoring Only one candidate

    MSNBC absolute worst I’ve ever seen
    CNN not very fair either
    FOX is getting closer to being fair, there usually at least truthful in there statements.

    and whats all this about NEWS MEDIA publicly supporting a candidate. I thought the news was to inform us on issues and help Americans vote for the right person, They all seem to be telling us who to vote for. How absurd!
    We want the truth, but apparently we can’t handle the truth.
    References :

13. A B Says:
    April 18th, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    none of them have this, unfortunately.

    Tell your friends, and show them the proof.

    Adolf Hitler was well-known to have used hypnosis on crowds to gain power in Germany. (Just Google it if you doubt it.) So why cant this happen in America? It is happening.

    Now, this document, An Examination of Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches is really spreading. Many people, including young people, are starting to wake up.

    Young people have come up with a saying, "Don’t drink the kool-aid Obama is pushing on you."

    Obama has no accomplishments, we don’t know him, he wrote a memoir, he has racist connections, he is using hypnosis, and he thinks he’s the Messiah and that he should be in control of the world. We’ve seen this story before in Germany in the 1930’s, haven’t we? We know what happened there.

    Obama’s use of hypnosis in speeches is why:
    -nothing sticks to him
    -the huge crowds
    -the huge money contributions
    -the mesmerized effect, especially in young people, who, because of their imaginations are more susceptible to hypnosis (read the document)
    -the exorbitant election fraud, rule-breaking and bias in the media
    -he gets away with changing every position
    -people are calling him the "greatest leader of a generation" with no accomplishments

    You have to read this document to understand how his hypnosis works. Logically and rationally, why not get to know this guy a little more before handing the world over to him? Why not wait?

    An Examination of Obama’s use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches can be found at
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/7470439/Obamas-Use-of-Hidden-Hypnosis-Techniques-in-His-Speeches

    The media must feel compelled to cover this information and decide to let informed people decide.

    PS – "Dont drink Obama’s Kool-Aid"
    References :

14. youngj042004 Says:
    April 18th, 2010 at 10:49 pm

    CNN because that’s the news channel i watch the most.
    References :

Leave a Reply