Their headline read that the immigration bill fell to politics.  Their story only reported what the idiot that is Edward Kennedy stated.  The republican response was a smaller story buried deeper within their website.  I really don't understand it.  And this has become the practice rather than the exception. Wouldn't it be better if we were given both sides and allowed to discern the truth for ourselves?  Don't most of us find the truth somewhere in the middle?  I know that I certainly don't think that a man who left a woman to die in the bottom of a river while he covered his behind the beacon of integrity the Yahoo obviously does.
199792
Two thoughts.\n\nFirst, I think the headline "Immigration Bill Falls Victim to Politics" IS factual reporting.  The group that had coalesced behind this bill could not hammer out their differences in the details, so members from both parties withdrew their support - for now, at least.  What is unfortunate is the finger-pointing on both sides in a juvenile attempt to win political points; this childish behavior only makes future compromise more difficult.\n\nSecond, why on earth do we expect (or even want) unbiased reporting?  To expect another human being to relay facts, quotes, statements, etc. in a completely dispassionate way is unrealistic.  I can't leave my biases out of telling even the simplest stories, because I see things from only my limited point of view.  I wouldn't expect a reporter - who is only human, after all - to do otherwise.\n\nI, for one, am glad that we have a variety of media outlets from which we can get our information.  Hearing information from different sources causes me to CHALLENGE my own limited perspective and forces me to think more deeply than I would have allowed myself had I listened only to one news source that serves only to reinforce my biases.  So what if Yahoo! takes a headline from a Ted Kennedy quote?  Sure, some people (as you suggested) see him as an selfish idiot who cares nothing for others, but others view him differently.  As you very correctly indicated, the truth - about Kennedy, about everything - is somewhere in the middle.
21274
Ya know, I was going to ask that very same question-- but you beat me to it! :)\nI've noticed a multitude of negative postings- not inasmuch as real questions, but merely rantings- about the President. Now if they could only put some basis of fact behind their rant, it might be construed as a good debate. But negative criticism-- which the left deplores when used in the school system or the job place, but seems to enjoy using in politics and in the media as a tool-- is never a positive stepping stone to any type of political argument, is it? How about a little constructive criticism for a change? Or has Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi outlawed anything with a positive tone from their constituents in such matters?
623168
EXACTLY!!!\n\nThere is a story circulating right now about the Bush administration, ONCE AGAIN, violating privacy laws by getting access to all banking/financial transactions; although, they claim to have only looked at international transactions. They have the authority to do this BUT not until they go before a judge and get approval. Of course with Bush not believing in the consitution, he did not do that = broke the law AGAIN!!\n\nNow, to counter this Bush has been bombarding talk radio and Fox News (even saw an upset guy on pbs The Newshour yesterday about it) with propaganda that does not explain the entire story as I did in the first paragraph. \n\nTheir defense is we are in a 'war on terror'. So, basically because we are in a war on terror, they believe they can ignore all the laws and ppl's right to privacy, etc...\n\nSo, as you stated... with them attacking the press for reporting this story.. there goes freedom of speech and the press.\n\nBtw, the laws about a reporter revealing his/her source are very vague. A reporter does have the right to tell his/her source but most don't because that hinders ppl from wanting to tell them things later. I personally think that if someone tells a reporter something and the act of telling is in itself breaking the law then the reporter SHOULD be required to tell his/her source. IE, this Carl Rove thing about the CIA agent leak. We all know he was behind that but the reporter won't tell.
465036
I think it was wrong for them to drop the comment..  It was very articulately written, no foul language, I was impressed by it. I would say that a comment posted on a site like that is purely for the expression of opinion. Why it was removed is not really a question..  They dont want people to broaden their thinking to that of your friends' thinking.   What I didn't like about the show was that I had to rewind it (with the help of TIVO) to catch the part where he informs millions of people that the guy passed another independent lie detector test. I barely caught that, so I am quite positive a large number of people missed it as well..  I have my own opinions on the guys innocence..  But as far as the way the public was basically persuaded to believe the guilt, I dont think it was right..  By the way, your friend is amazing with words..
366689
That's a good idea they can track the cows right to their stalls.But they wont,that's too smart isn't it?\n\nHere's a question that got deleted by the brave people here.I don't see the violation \n\nIf Democrats win the House and/or the Senate, will it be harder?\nQuestion Details: for the Bush administration to push through so-called free trade agreements and the free-trade-at-all-costs agenda? What do you think ? Do you favor this plan for free trade or not ?\n\nReason of Violation:Chatting & Personal Communications\n\nThats the entire question ,I had closed it and chosen the best answer before someone went back on my questions and reported it.Its very frustrating,but I am just amazed at people.
427955
The word must be out that leaks will be anonymously taken at the NYT. I think both sides are leaking to the paper. Some things should be leaked, others shouldn't. It keeps the murky waters of our government slightly more transparent.
136944
I think he is in deep, deep trouble over this one.  His answers on the News tonight left a lot to be desired......\n\n(I bet the Americans have not got a clue what we are on about.  Also, very nice to see correct spelling and grammar).
66528
Wow! Such a grammatically incorrect posting with abysmal spelling skills. And we conservatives wonder why we cannot rationalize with liberals ...\n\nObviously, I disagree.
405305
As a conservative, I strongly oppose any reporting of ANY kind whatsoever.  Trust me, that "conservative", if we are sure that it was a con that did it, was not acting in a conservative way.  This action is not typical of conservatives, and I hope to not be grouped in with this person whatsoever.  Lib or con, everyone needs to lay off the red flag and just answer, agree or disagree, or at most ignore, and most of all, refuse to report!  Nothing will be accomplished by reporting, and we all suffer the consequences when reporting is done!  That's my rant, and my 2 cents.  Whatever, everyone take a break and have a beer.  We'll resume in 5 minutes
601655
do you know what is amazing... conservatives can see though the bias of your site, yet say O'Riley is unbias?\n\nIt's really crazy, if they have enough logic to see through one person's bias, but no enough to see through bias on their own side... O'Riley doesn't even try to hide it... \n\nI mean I can see Franken and Moore are bias... it's blatantly obvious... yet I don't think it's even as obvious as Coulter, Rush, Hannity and O'Riley... oh well, I guess they have the rose colored glasses on...
385679
Some people on this site need to let things go and "get over" themselves. I have been reported unfairly too. It is a shame that people cant seem to handle the truth about things and them reporting your Friend, me and anybody gives them a sense of control, they can delete your questions, however they cannot erase real life and so what if its chatty I have seen things on this site that would make a longshoreman blush and nothing is said.\nLike I stated before some  people REALLY need to get over themselves.
327758
I don't think that is what is going on at all. You people are missing George Bush's Republican politics. It's always about the Republican agenda. The Bush Administration is ruled by the base, and they don't like Mexicans. You people should know that by now after all of the bashing you have been getting. These people are bigots and racists, they actually hate other races, and they have been telling you this all along. Republicans hate Democrats too, it's being said every minute on these web pages. I am a Democrat, and I am a Liberal with my politics, and the Latinos should just be signed up, and the employers should be convicted of their crimes. I don't see why people that have been used and abused should suffer for the crimes of American criminals. You shouldn't. I wouldn't worry about any of it, because George Bush isn't going to do anything about it anyway, he is liar on most issues. Why should this one be any different, he is just talking to his stupid base, that will listen, for votes in November. The best thing the Latinos can do is vote Democrat, to get a reasonable legislation passed by Democrats, that will protect Civil Rights of all the people, including illegal immigrants. I wouldn't turn myself in at all, that would be stupid to trust these liars, they want to stab you all in the back like everybody else.
405635
I haven't yet figured out the liberal state of mind. There is no pattern or clues to how they are thinking or why. I just know I'm not a liberal and I really dislike Moore and Pelosi but I really do think Ann Coulter is the greatest cause she tells the fact based truth. Moore went out there with all kinds of lies and twisted facts thinking I guess no one would research them and find out the truth. Pelosi just doesn't get it. Ann C. on the other hand encourages you to check out what she says for yourself.
299335
My Grandparents came here around the 1912 or so.If you deleted anything concerning Illegal Immigration because of some misguided ideology that smells of media censorship. I broke no rules.What I have to say is for the access of anyone to use or not.This is not a private forum.Is it that you are feeling the heat because I tell the truth.Listen what I have said or not said is not the issue.We need to make people aware of certain questionable actions or half truths.This is one of last forums that host freedom of thought.Please tell me what was so offense that it caught your attention!
672241
"through the use of fear, societies gave up their rights under the guise of security."  i think this statement sums up best all the uproar over what the bush administration is or isn't doing to 'protect' us as americans. there is a fine line being walked (and not very delicately if you care to notice the details) between "security" and "loss of freedom". and the culture of fear and separation noted in the article is all too apparent today... after all you're either a "patriot" or you "support the enemy". \n\n"those in power are of a smaller segment of society, but they hold the wealth and control" is an accurate description of where america is today. a minute percentage of people possess the lion's share of the wealth: the inequality has always been present but never to this degree. if this is indeed a part of the definition of fascism, you could argue that we are getting closer...\n\n"fascist nations... typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections." let diebold reign! here's to florida, and to ohio, proud supporters of the winning side!\n\n"governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion...." and how often to religious leaders echo the sentiments exactly of the us government? do you watch the 700 club?\n\nwhere did the platform for intelligent discussion of the issues facing the US go? why are people (being manipulated?) becoming so polarized? where has 'the beauty of the gray' disappeared to? isn't it funny how so many things in life are suddenly black and white, like apples and oranges?\n\nif you deceive often enough and use the proper (official?) channels, one of two things will happen. they will come to believe it as gospel ("this is a delicious orange! when did they start growing stems?") or they will use the knowledge they already have to resist ("THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!" -jean-luc picard) the lies. \n\nare you really willing to doubt that this is in fact an apple? and will we be reluctant to let go of a moniker we've worn proudly for over two centuries? stay tuned...
599993
You have clearly misunderstood the purpose of the Yahoo! Answers forum. The purpose is to pose questions and answers. \n\nDiatribes are a violation of the Terms Of Service. \n\nMy strong recommendation to you is that you post this sort of content on a political action forum, such as you'd find at http://www.craigslist.org - this is not the appropriate place. \n\nFinally, you say "Needles to say, I will not identify this Federal employee since they stuck their neck out when they told me all this, they obviously felt these laws were ludicrous just as I and most other Americans feel they are..."  - I fail to see why your posting an unattributed content of information (which you CLAIM you go from a federal official) is 'needles' to attribution.
567902
here is another link, its also part of the congressional record, it happened yesterday and they also voted down another amendment which would have refused to fund anything that intentionally ignored the law (FISA, specifically). this is the sad state of the repub congress (and how much "liberal media" coverage has either vote gotten? NADA!\nthe link at the top includes a screenshot of the roll call with the vote results. indisputable!