Who Do YOU Turn to for Political Analysis?

I don't really watch much political analysis these days because I don't have the time. I do try to catch Bill O'Reilly on Fox News once in a while. He often covers stories that other networks and news outlets ignore. As matersfish said, he does his best to make sure opposing points of view are presented and forces people to stay on topic rather than allowing them to make uninterrupted speeches as I've seen on other shows. He's clearly conservative, but I think he makes a genuine effort to be fair on his show. I used to watch Campbell Brown on CNN from time to time for many of the same reasons I watch O'Reilly. Unfortunately her show was cancelled last year.

for political analysis, we benefit from those experts about their views. some of them might have studied the political system, history and dynamics of the political developments. however, there is no analysis better than what we make. after having known necessary views and opinions, we make our own analysis. so that we feel that we are the drivers of this nation, and not the political analysts who are driven by their own interests and agenda.

Lately, I turn to myself more than any so called "professional" analyst. I take Rush for very long, Mathews is nothing but a loose cannon and an a$$ (and I have a very personal issue with him as well), Stewart? How did his name get in this list? He's a comedian. Even he would tell you (and I have heard him say this) that he isn't a political anything other than comedian. I also can't stand Hannity, don't watch O'reilly much, or most commercial "analysts" for that matter. I do watch Judge Napolitano's show as often as I can as I find it pretty informative in general in both political happenings and libertarian issues. But mostly myself, my own eyes and ears. I take politicians and analysis of them from their own words and actions.

Although I don't always agree with him, I think Charles Krauthammer is a very intelligent and insightful commentator and analyst. He tends to approach an issue in a manner devoid of emotion but relying strictly on facts and logic. He's like the Spock of politics, except that, although his humor is dry, he's very, very witty. He fills the place left vacant by the late William F. Buckly Jr. I used to listen to O'Reilly more and found that I often agreed with him but many times for different reasons than he used to reach his conclusions. Nowadays, he seems to try to find reasons to take moderate positions. I don't have a problem with that, as long as he is doing it honestly and not so he can appear more fair and unbiased. For the Libertarian view there is John Stossel or Andrew Napolitano. For a more liberal view, you don't have to go further than Fox, since they regularly have Juan Williams and Mara Liasson on and both are liberal with Juan being slightly less liberally-biased. And really, Shep Smith is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal and he's on twice a day with his own two hours of news and commentary. What could be more liberal than the vociferous Bob Beckel who is surprisingly a regular on Hannity? Generally, however, I make up my own mind and enjoy listening to people who challenge me to think. MSNBC is opinion dressed up as news and that is to keep anyone from thinking. Fox allows for more views, even if their opinion shows tend to be hosted by more conservative talking heads.

I try to read and hear the facts to do my own analysis. When I do hear news analysis I like to hear all sides of an issue. I believe I am a thoughful conservative. I'm leery of the opinion analysis given by the talking heads on the cable news channels, whether FOX, MSNBC, etc. I find that FOX tends to mix news with too much commentary; if you just listen to FOX you get only their right-wing and Republican slant on the issues. I find Sean Hannity a johnny-one-note using non-stop repetition that makes him sound like a right-wing propaganda machine. O'Reilly's type of attack journalism galls me even when I agree with his positions. As a clever and glib journalist controlling his show's agenda, he sets up a straw man and attacks it. He can also be smug. I also notice that he feigns an objective manner but at the same time intersperses his commentary with pejorative-sounding terms (e.g., so and so is an avowed liberal). Glen Beck can be a compelling speaker but seems like a hatchet man and conspiracy-theorist finding evil in those alleged to be left-wing or liberal. While he's apparently entertaining to many. he is hardly a quality journalist. I occasionally listen to talk radio and cannot understand anyone taking Rush Limbaugh seriously. To me, he is a glib, quick-on-his feet medicine man out to propagate right-wing ideas and destroy any heretic disagreeing with his self-anointed conservative agenda. Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Bill Maher can be witty and entertaining despite their liberal biases but Maher is often full of himself.

No one in particular, I usually look at stuff from mainstream democrats, moderates, republicans, and of course, libertarians.

I like Bill O'Reilly. I used to only watch on Wednesdays for Dennis Miller, but now I watch on Monday, Wednesday and some Fridays. Now, I can't speak for everyone, as I don't watch/listen to everyone, but Bill O's the only person in news I've ever seen bother to apologize for getting something wrong. Others I've seen just spout the nonsense they want and ignore it if it's wrong. His uberChristian traditionalist approach to life gets under my skin sometimes. The old-school, I-don't-know-what-Twitter-is crap is also a little boring. But for political analysis, I know that I can hear ALL SIDES of a debate with O'Reilly, and I know he'll keep his guests on topic and won't allow them to run away with a prepared speech instead of answering a question. Since I have to constantly read and write for a living, I prefer to watch my news. I need the entertainment. Some of these other people I've tried to watch are just ridiculous with how one-sided they are. And what's worse is that they pretend it's a balanced view. I realize I'm watching for entertainment and that it's not hard news. But that's fine with me. I don't know anywhere else I can turn to for all sides of an issue. I've tried elsewhere, but the setup is always the same: liberal host brings on liberal guests and they agree on every word, a loopy right winger is occasionally brought in and made a fool of. Their own version of the fairness doctrine, I guess. I'm surprised at how many people turn to Jon Stewart. I think MSNBC has tried to follow Comedy Central's formula. They're just not funny.

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. If you can't laugh at the news, then what can you laugh at? Fact-wise I try to stay away from the commentaries. It seems so hard to get unbiased news now, but the internet helps. The AP-wire is one of the few "here's the facts; move on" sources. If I have to watch a full news program I try to catch BBC International News.

I think Jon Stewart is responsible for good