Rev. Moon , famous radical right winger and founder of a "church" was the founder of the Washington Times.

In Washington, the Washington Times is considered a joke. Not a serious newspaper.

But right wing Americans consider a legit source because it's from Washington. That is so wrong.

It was the paper of Moon. It will continue to be the paper of Moon. It was and continues to be his propaganda organ.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/2/editorial-rev-moon-rest-peace/

His sense of mission remains the guiding light of The Washington Times

I am a proud right wing American. I don't consider the Washington Post a legitimate source of news just because it is based in DC. I don't consider it a legitimate source because it is the.semi-official voice of the Obama campaign and the Democratic party, much as most of the left wing liberal media is.

The Post is a great world class newspaper. Period. Objectively so.

The Post is a great world class newspaper. Period. Objectively so.

'Objectively'? Are we talking about the same paper dubbed Pravda on the Potomac during the 70's?

The Post is a great world class newspaper. Period. Objectively so.

And I like chocolate ice cream. It's all a matter of perspective and personal opinion.

All media news is biased in one direction or another, because it is written by a person/persons who themselves have views and opinions.

Some of these may be obvious, others less so.

Never believe any one source of news, but try to balance the presentations of half-a-dozen or more publications - and never believe any Facebook or Twitter reports.

No, there are objective standards of journalism. The Post is top rated. The Wash. Times is like I said, a joke.

After looking at some of the tripe that you have posted on this forum as "fact", the Washington Times is looking like a pretty legitimate publication.

Ouch! They are just rags....something to hold your fish n chips....

I am a proud right wing American. I don't consider the Washington Post a legitimate source of news just because it is based in DC. I don't consider it a legitimate source because it is the.semi-official voice of the Obama campaign and the Democratic party, much as most of the left wing liberal media is.

Isnt FOX there to provide the other viewpoint?

I am a proud right wing American. I don't consider the Washington Post a legitimate source of news just because it is based in DC. I don't consider it a legitimate source because it is the.semi-official voice of the Obama campaign and the Democratic party, much as most of the left wing liberal media is.

Isnt FOX there to provide the other viewpoint?

I don't get Fox and haven't for a number of years. I use Drudge Report to get my news since they link to both sides of most positions.

The only news sources I get are CNN International and BBC. Who do you trust comes to mind here.

I am a proud right wing American. I don't consider the Washington Post a legitimate source of news just because it is based in DC. I don't consider it a legitimate source because it is the.semi-official voice of the Obama campaign and the Democratic party, much as most of the left wing liberal media is.

Isnt FOX there to provide the other viewpoint?

I don't get Fox and haven't for a number of years. I use Drudge Report to get my news since they link to both sides of most positions.

The only news sources I get are CNN International and BBC. Who do you trust comes to mind here.

I find aljazeera gives a different and interesting slant

I am a proud right wing American. I don't consider the Washington Post a legitimate source of news just because it is based in DC. I don't consider it a legitimate source because it is the.semi-official voice of the Obama campaign and the Democratic party, much as most of the left wing liberal media is.

Isnt FOX there to provide the other viewpoint?

I don't get Fox and haven't for a number of years. I use Drudge Report to get my news since they link to both sides of most positions.

The only news sources I get are CNN International and BBC. Who do you trust comes to mind here.

I find aljazeera gives a different and interesting slant

I received this network in Saudi and agree. They often get stuck on the Islamic side of things but their slant on news seemed rather neutral.

I received this network in Saudi and agree. They often get stuck on the Islamic side of things but their slant on news seemed rather neutral.

It's just good to see the other side of the story, or like you say from a neutral viewpoint.