can we ban politico here? at least as an lbn source?

[mopinko]

how many times do they have to slime a dem president before we stop listening to them? there is at least no reason to allow them as an lbn site.

[NightWatcher]

1. Ban them all together as a news source/reference

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. Why?

:shrug:

[xultar]

2. So, are you saying what they said isn't true? They aren't the only source with the story. So, WTF?

[mopinko]

6. just because others in the echo chamber are picking up their shit doesn't

make it true.

[xultar]

11. So you're saying it isn't true. I hate to tell you but I'm pretty sure it is.

And it wouldn't be a stretch from what is going on.
Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it isn't true.
I don't like Politico either but this story sounds about right.

[mopinko]

22. they are liars, but just this once they are telling the truth?

or just this once, i agree with it? whether it is true or not? or?

[chimpymustgo]

37. Would you care to share some specific examples of their not telling the truth?

[CTyankee]

3. I think we need to know what is "out there." Politico is not some totally off the wall

right wing organization. They are main stream media and we need to be informed as to what the MSM is saying so we can be in the mix of the debate. We can't and we shouldn't ignore them. Find out their arguments and then defeat them...

[Echo In Light]

12. True, although much M$M is fairly predictable re 'acceptable' framing of issues

As in, if you've seen one, you've pretty much seen them all.

Odd though, cause I avoid Politico for being wayyy too rightward/profe$$ional class leaning. Not in the FAUX format, but catering to a very narrow framework that would, by default, marginalize lefties and progressive voices.

[CTyankee]

20. Oh, we have our work cut out for us, that's for sure.

But we need to listen carefully and plan our attacks accordingly. Much as I disdain Morning Joe I do listen carefully at what the Politico assholes have to say first thing in the morning to know what we are up against for the foreseeable future...

[laughingliberal]

25. If we're going to ban new sources that marginalize lefties and progressives, that doesn't leave us

too many news sources. Come to think of it, it would leave out a quite a few of the posts on DU some days, too.

[Luminous Animal]

28. Actually, they are rightwing.

"The Right-wing Politico Cesspool"
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/30/allen/index.html

[Individualist]

4. I oppose censorship

[NightWatcher]

5. (edited) this is a privately owned website and Skinner can prohibit anything/anyone he wants

on edit:

Ok fine, so censorship doesnt have anything to do in this case with the government. Do you agree that it is a good idea that some sources should not be allowed or referenced?

[Individualist]

7. Government banning?

:crazy:

Censorship is the practice of censoring, regardless of who does it. See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship

[NightWatcher]

10. well shit, lets let in all sorts of garbage: freeps, world nutters, alex jones'ers

it's about quality control

[Greyhound]

14. They are biased, but not as much as Faux, and I see no calls to ban Faux.

Some censorship is obviously necessary to the function of the site, but it should remain a last resort.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. It is indeed censorship, just private censorship and not subject to the 1st Amendment

The hair split complete, I don't think it should be banned.

[Greyhound]

9. Only in a legal sense. Censorship is still a bad idea even though sometimes necessary. n/t

[demmiblue]

13. Perhaps you need to contact the administrators of this site

"Forum Administration: Respect the moderators and administrators, and respect their decisions. You can help make their job easier by clicking the "Alert" link on any post that might need moderator attention. Please understand that moderating errors and inconsistencies are inevitable on a large website like this. If you have a question about DU policies, or if you have a concern about an action a moderator has taken, please contact an admin privately."

[WeDidIt]

15. come on, they're every bit as reliable a news source as Fox News

which is to say, not at all.

[optimator]

16. the white house is the only valid source, right?

I'm so disgusted with obama cheerleaders.
You guys actually WANT tyranny.

[jonnyblitz]

17. the whitehouse and Bareback Andy Sullivan. nt

[tularetom]

18. politico is the drudge report in a coat and tie

And they shouldn't get the hits.

From us at least.

But I have no opinion if somebody wants to ridicule something they have posted as in "You'll never believe what those douchebags at politico said now".

[bermudat]

21. Well said.

Have always wondered why folks here keep using drudge or politico as a news source.

I see politico as a more sophisticated version of faux news.

[EFerrari]

19. The WaHo is nearly as bad. So is the AP and Reuters.

Our media suck.

[phasma ex machina]

23. Politico be a nasty old troll.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. What horrible lie have they published this time?

:shrug:

[anigbrowl]

26. I would prefer not

They have a right wing slant but it's not what I would call yellow journalism. There is a lot worse that is acceptable here and Politico is reasonably grown up as news sources go.

[Cleita]

27. I thought it was against the rules to post links to conservative

news websites. How do they keep sneaking in? They aren't a credible source.

[mopinko]

29. actually,

it is against the rules to post links to websites with hateful and bigoted content. totally looney tooney, as well, like rense.
but it is against the rules of lbn to post links to sites that are opinion, and not news.

[mopinko]

30. hmmm. unreccers sticking up for poitico.

hmm.

[girl gone mad]

31. Can you at least admit that they were dead right?

Sorry you didn't get your way.

[xultar]

33. This shit is cracking me the fuck up. I had to get up early to kick these threads

from yesterday.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. Why not? What did they get wrong this time?

:shrug:

[sendero]

35. Nobody wants to answer you..

... because they didn't.

[xultar]

32. kick

[Freddie Stubbs]

36. Why? What did they get wrong this time?

:shrug:

[xultar]

38. nothing, yesterday was a TRIP quite a few DUers wanted to ban Politico because

there was no way that the WH would make a deal with holy joementum.

I'm just teasing the people from yesterday because they love to try and ban sources and people they say shit they don't like.