Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Editorial Government Politics

Your Favorite Political Weblogs? 785

worm eater would like to know: "As the mainstream media is coming under closer scrutiny from the 'blogosphere,' and is having to actually respond to these journalists in pajamas, I thought I'd ask Slashdot: what are your favorite political blogs? Lately I've been reading Talking Points Memo, a liberal weblog by Joshua Micah Marshall, and a blog by Andrew Sullivan, a conservative writer. Where do you go when you want to see the mainstream media dissected and poked at?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Your Favorite Political Weblogs?

Comments Filter:
  • Drudge Report (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Drudge Report [drudgereport.com]
    • Re:Drudge Report (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Seoulstriker ( 748895 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:07PM (#10302764)
      Is the Drudge Report really a blog? I see it more as a "new media" agent who tries to report raw news which major news outlets refuse to report on. Most recently it was Rathergate, but a few years ago it was the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
    • Re:Drudge Report (Score:2, Insightful)

      by casuist99 ( 263701 )
      Beware getting actual "news" from this site - it can point you in the right direction, but Drudge has an agenda (just like nearly ALL other online news sources). Use it as a starting point, but try to verify something with several sources that you consider reputable before accepting something that you read online or at Drudge's website.
      • Re:Drudge Report (Score:4, Insightful)

        by BladesP9 ( 722608 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:14PM (#10302847)
        Like what? The New York Times? C... BS? No thanks. Drudge more times than not is nothing more than a page of links that lead you directly to these news items. The things that he breaks himself are usually things that the "source that you consider reputable" won't cover.

        As with anything, be critical of what you read, but Drudge has proven himself right more times than the elite media cares to admit.
    • Re:Drudge Report (Score:3, Interesting)

      by weez75 ( 34298 )
      To be "fair and balanced" I prefer Rogers Cadenhead's Drudge Retort [drudgeretort.com].
  • Informed Comment (Score:2, Insightful)

    Is the best blog about Iraq around
  • michaelmoore.com (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    A touch of reality [michaelmoore.com]

    • by ltwally ( 313043 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:04PM (#10302747) Homepage Journal
      Michael Moore claiming to be in touch with reality...

      ...and who said he doesn't have a sense of humour!

    • Propaganda (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I guess it hasn't hit you yet that his Fahrenheit 9/11 movie is textboot propganda. Go look at the definition of propaganda and look at Michael Moore quotes where he adamantly agrees that his films are purposely meant to change the minds of voters. He is a kook that wants to push his "man of the people" image off on the viewing audience. Everything he said has been debunked by independant think tanks and individuals.
    • by Locky ( 608008 )
      Let the conservative original and funny 'Moore is fat' comments flow!

      They'd be even funnier if the aforementioned link contained Moore's opinion, rather, it is him linking to other news articles hosted by various news agencies.
  • by jhouserizer ( 616566 ) * on Monday September 20, 2004 @06:57PM (#10302660) Homepage

    Spinsanity [spinsanity.com] is a great site for articles that point out all of the spin from both parties.

    They seem to do a pretty good job of showing the foolishness of both sides - which is refreshing, since IMHO both parties suck bad, and I therefore get very annoyed at sights that are focused on making one party or the other look bad, while ignoring their own parties major issues.

    • It only seems fitting to de-spin your endoresement of spinsanity. Don't get me wrong, it's a generally useful site, but often falls for the same analytic fallacies as sites like snopes.com. You can only rely on it for so much.

  • My 'Favorites' (Score:2, Informative)

    by OverlordQ ( 264228 ) *
    Little Green Footballs [littlegreenfootballs.com]
    IMAO [www.imao.us]
    RWN [rightwingnews.com]
    and musn't forget
    Drudge Report [drudgereport.com].
  • Annenberg FactCheck (Score:5, Informative)

    by linuxwrangler ( 582055 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @06:59PM (#10302673)
    Don't know if it qualifies as a "blog" but I regularly check FactCheck: http://www.factcheck.org/
    • by On Lawn ( 1073 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @10:07PM (#10304446) Journal
      Yeah I have to agree, Fact Check is pretty good.

      MensNewsDaily.com [mensnewsdaily.com] collects pretty good commentary from a number of contributers on a number of issues that aren't forefront on the MSM. Their articles are short and poigniant. They have a forum you can discuss the articles in, so I would call that a blog.

      Powerlineblog.com [powerlineblog.com] is pretty reasonable for commentary and was one of the big players in Rathergate. INDCJournal might be less reasonable but they have the quickest footwork in the business. They'll be the ones to call the sources, call experts, etc... Footwork that is a lost art in journalism. But their commentary is a bit off-balance and can often trip themselves up.

      Little Green Footballs is often misunderstood, but I like them. They do their job very well. Even better though is Watch [windsofchange.net] which is devoid of the sophmoric commentary.

      But then there is an upper eschelon, which FactCheck belongs to, as does Belmont Club [blogspot.com]. When Belmont treats an issue, you've got gold.

      But the absolute MOAB of the blogosphere is Bill Whittle. He posts seldomly, and when he does it is incredibly long. But there is no better writer on the Internet that I've found. As it says on his website: If Steven den Best is Spock, he is the Captain Kirk [ejectejecteject.com]. Seriously there is no finer work on the internet than his "Strength" series, followed closely by "Empire".

      For humor, Scrappleface and CoxandForkum are great. They not only give you the humor but they give you the stories that inspired it.
  • Check out the Robocratic's blog at Robocratic.com [robocratic.com] . Because Electric-Americans deserve to have a greater hand in deciding the future of this great nation.
  • Blognarik!! (Score:2, Informative)

    Michael Badnarik, the subject of the recent Q&A session, has his own blog. Check it out: http://www.badnarik.org/blog/ [badnarik.org]
  • username dumpster_baby.

    THis is the blog for most of the Democratic party activists. Some very informed people there. Also, some real leftists, although most are just typical centrists.

    Also, kuro5hin.org

    Originaldissent.com is also OK.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    from the sidelines
    http://oligopolywatch.com/ [oligopolywatch.com]

    there can be only one, then it is the end.

  • Fafblog! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by silvergoose ( 807387 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:00PM (#10302681)
    Definitely the fafblog.


    Anyone else know of it?
  • Who is Andew Sullivan? Don't you people check links? Pretend it is "speak like a pirate day" and put that "r" back in there!
  • Mine is sensibleerection.com

    I mean sensibleelection.com

  • DailyKos (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sg3000 ( 87992 ) * <sg_public@nOSpaM.mac.com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:01PM (#10302700)
    I like DailyKos [dailykos.com].

    politics.slashdot.org is rapidly turning into one of my least favorites because I've noticed that the moderation system is running amuck! Never before have I seen such a split in moderations where a single comment can be rated "informative" and "troll" numerous times in the same story. And many moderators with a chip on their shoulder start using "offtopic" and "overrated" to try to protect their own karma during metamoderation. Here's an example [slashdot.org] of where it happened to me recently. And it's not just the political posts (though I suspect it happens there most often), but in a Star Wars story. I still can't believe this post [slashdot.org] got called a "troll"! I'm sure many others can come up with their own examples.

    It seems that there may be too many people moderating these days, and little accountability, a single person doesn't have to have an agenda [slashdot.org]; you can have a group of likeminded people who want to squelch dissenting opinions pummel a relatively decent post down into the noise of hot grits posts.

    DailyKos has a better system where moderations aren't anonymous, so you can see how people are moderating. Then again, if DailyKos had the same traffic as Slashdot, maybe its moderation system would get corrupted too.

    Maybe the ultimate problem is that people don't respect others' views, or they prize too highly the views of people that they may agree with but use bad logic or specious reasoning. It's probably indicative of the growing polarization in our country. As people start migrating to sandboxes where only likeminded people congregate (which blogs, especially political ones, can lead to), they become less tolerant of opinions that challenge their own.
    • Re:DailyKos (Score:3, Insightful)

      I completely agree. There seems to be a number of rather reactionary slashdotters who are perfectly happy to bury a perfectly good post as "Flamebait" or "Troll" because it doesn't fit their perspective.

      And it happens from both directions - I've seen some perfectly rational discussion by some clearly right wing people get buried as Flamebait or Troll for no apparent reason. However, that said, I've noticed that the people who get the shortest end of the stick are Greens and Leftists, especially when they

    • Re:DailyKos (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:30PM (#10303002) Journal
      No offense, but your other post that you linked to WAS a troll post, and I'll even be glad to analyze why for you ;)

      sentence #1 It is completely ridiculous to suggest that the press has spent more time investigating Bush than they did giving free press to the lying SBVT group.On the other hand, Bush has gotten a free pass for

      a) Using political connections to get in to the National Guard, when he was far from the best candidate to get in
      b) Not fulfilling his duty once he was in there
      c) Lying about his service and claiming he flew with his unit for years

      a) You assume some political connections were used? What were they? Who alleges this? Did Bush himself do anything? Do Bush's FATHER do anything? Who is to blame for this. Unsubstantiated FUD. Troll.

      b) Not fulfilling his duty...who knows, I'll give you that one.

      c) "Lying about his service and claiming he flew with his unit for years" Show me that he didn't fly? Probable troll.

      Official National Guard records, including those released by the White House, contradict Bush's statements. Others in the National Guard corroborate the fact that Bush did not fulfill his duty. To this day, Bush has been incapable of naming a single person who saw him in Alabama when he was supposed to be training there. Bush claims he signed up for a unit up north (Connecticut, I think), but he never showed up to that at all.

      Guess you haven't been watching the news recently when Staudt and others in the guard and of the guard went on TV. Troll.

      The national media ignored Bush's stint with a champaign unit in the National Guard during Vietnam, with small exceptions, during the 2000 campaign. I know many Bush supporters would like to believe otherwise, but it's fact.

      It hink the bigger point is "who cares at all?" and if anyone cares, is there any evidence to prove it? There is not, as the extremely poorly forged documents of this last month show, most recently. That's how fast the liberla media jumped on this story once they thought they had something they could run with--did no basic fact checking (re, Staudt) and couldn't even realize that the documents were CLEARLY forged on MS Word.

      Then I did a search for "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" and "John Kerry" and "Vietnam" in the past six months. How many hits? 248!

      I'll take this slow for you. How many times did Bush say that he should be president because of his experience in the guard? How many times did Bush campaign on ANYTHING he did in his youth? Never. Quite the contrary, Bush is a man reborn and he was not running on his record of 30 years ago. Kerry on the other hand "Reporting for duty!" (DNC) based his entire campaign on his Vietnam experience and rarely faield to mention Vietnam in his speeches. IT's only natural that he comes under attack for this stance.

      Is Bush's Vietnam record (or lack of it) relevant to today? To some extent, no. The war was more than 30 years ago. But for a president who calls himself the "war president", who insists he was for the Vietnam war, who started an elective war under false pretenses and shifting reasons, and who is dangerously stretching our military resources, it is important to know what that person was doing when it was their time to serve.

      He's a war president because the country went to war, not because he fought in some war 30 years ago. Were Eisenhower or Grant war presidents? No? Roosevelt? Who? Troll. False pretenses? THe pretenses were false only in that the CIA, British intelligence and others dropped the ball. Is there any evidence Bush himself knowingly lied? Troll. And you're absolutely right, it is important to know what did when they were called up to serve--thus the Swift Boat Vets. You can't say it's important and try to suppress them at the same time. Troll yet again.

      Does anyone else find it distasteful when a draft dodger calls into question the medals of a war hero?

      and that is why you were trolling (lies!) ;)
      • Re:DailyKos (Score:5, Informative)

        by sg3000 ( 87992 ) * <sg_public@nOSpaM.mac.com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @08:23PM (#10303458)
        > a) You assume some political connections were used? What
        > were they? Who alleges this? Did Bush himself do anything? Do
        > Bush's FATHER do anything? Who is to blame for this.
        > Unsubstantiated FUD. Troll.

        Ben Barnes, then Lt. Governor of Texas, admitted he got Bush into the National Guard:

        > "I got a young man named George W. Bush into the Texas
        > National Guard when I was lieutenant governor, and I'm not
        > necessarily proud of that. But I did it.

        Bush was son of a then senator and former ambassador. He served in what many called the "champagne" unit in the Texas National Guard. Bush admitted he had no experience to get him into the guard, and he scored in the bottom 25% on the pilots' test. Bush's records admit this.

        > Guess you haven't been watching the news recently when
        > Staudt and others in the guard and of the guard went on TV.

        > That's how fast the liberla media jumped on this story once
        > they thought they had something they could run with

        The questionable documents have done a lot to muddy the waters, but the fact remains that the crux of the question of Bush's service was not dependent on a single document. I agree that CBS News should have fact-checked better. However, it would be nice if the Bush supporters as charged up in determining the authenticity of a now-shown fraudulent document that lead us to war [boston.com].

        But that doesn't absolve Bush from not finishing his duty, which has been corroborated in ways apart from the documents. For example, in Bush's records, Bush flew only 22 months of the 53 he owed. Salon has more details [salon.com] on the documents that Bush should have filed but did not when he decided to stop flying:


        > Bush flew for the last time on April 16, 1972. Upon entering
        > the Guard, Bush agreed to fly for 60 months. After his training
        > was complete, he owed 53 months of flying.

        > But he flew for only 22 of those 53 months.

        > Upon being accepted for pilot training, Bush promised to
        > serve with his parent (Texas) Guard unit for five years once he > completed his pilot training.

        > But Bush served as a pilot with his parent unit for just two
        > years.

        > In May 1972 Bush left the Houston Guard base for Alabama.
        > According to Air Force regulations, Bush was supposed to
        > obtain prior authorization before leaving Texas to join a new
        > Guard unit in Alabama.

        > But Bush failed to get the authorization.

        > In requesting a permanent transfer to a nonflying unit in
        > Alabama in 1972, Bush was supposed to sign an
        > acknowledgment that he received relocation counseling.

        > But no such document exists.

        > He was supposed to receive a certification of satisfactory
        > participation from his unit.

        > But Bush did not.

        > On May 26, 1972, Lt. Col. Reese Bricken, commander of the
        > 9921st Air Reserve Squadron at Maxwell Air Force Base in
        > Alabama, informed Bush that a transfer to his nonflying unit
        > would be unsuitable for a fully trained pilot such as he was,
        > and that Bush would not be able to fulfill any of his remaining
        > two years of flight obligation.

        > But Bush pressed on with his transfer request nonetheless.

        > Bush's transfer request to the 9921st was eventually denied by
        > the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver, which meant he
        > was still obligated to attend training sessions one weekend a
        > month with his Texas unit in Houston.

        > But Bush failed to attend weekend drills in May, June, July,
        > August and September. He also failed to request permission
        > to make up those days at the time.

        > According to Air Force regulations,
  • Ian Lyon [ianlyon.org.uk]
  • correction (Score:4, Informative)

    by ltwally ( 313043 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:01PM (#10302704) Homepage Journal
    The link to Andrew Sullivan's site isn't right. It should be www.andrewsullivan.com [andrewsullivan.com]
  • ...Conservative.

    Try going to DrudgeReport and then clicking on any of the columnists - they usually do a good job of ripping the mainstream (i.e. Liberal) media.

    But it doesn't matter - we're all gonna die anyway.
    • Re:Anyplace... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Sean80 ( 567340 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:08PM (#10302776)
      I guess the biggest problem I'd have with the drudge report would be the fact that it has been linked so often to the Republican smear machine.

      Don't get me wrong, I've recently seen the light and realized once again that -all- politicians suck after a brief fling with the belief that the Democrats were On My Side. But, Drudge just seems to be out for a slanderous story, and well, it doesn't even have to be true to generate some traffic now does it?

      Of course, this website is not the only one, nor is it a factor of it being right-leaning (Michael Moore anybody?) but there you go.

  • Tom Tommorow's (Score:5, Informative)

    by Snagle ( 644973 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:01PM (#10302712)
    http://www.thismodernworld.com/ [thismodernworld.com] good bloggage and good cartoons too
  • Wonkette (Score:3, Funny)

    by ellem ( 147712 ) * <.ellem52. .at. .gmail.com.> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:02PM (#10302713) Homepage Journal
    but I really like dick jokes... so maybe it's just me.
  • When you've had enough of Drudge and MoveOn, and you're ready for dessert, it's time for http://wonkette.com/ [wonkette.com]!
  • News Hounds (Score:4, Interesting)

    by b3d ( 525790 ) <slashdot@nOsPAm.itdepends.com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:04PM (#10302740) Homepage
    www.newshounds.us [newshounds.us]
    Their motto is "We watch FOX so you don't have to." They monitor the political slant of FOX News. The people that run this blog are the media monitors from the movie "Outfoxed" by Robert Greenwald.
  • by valmont ( 3573 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:04PM (#10302741) Homepage Journal
    BuzzMachine [buzzmachine.com] covers many topics from journalism, to every day life, to politics. Jeff started blogging after living through 9/11 [tvheaven.com] first-hand. His political views tend to really be near the center. What I like about his political blogging is that he strives to stay away from the simplistic polarized political rants, and "gotcha [buzzmachine.com]" politics that plague so many other blogs i've seen, as well as mainstream media. He recently started spurring very intelligent and useful debate about various specific 2004 election issues [buzzmachine.com]. Jeff welcomes disagreement and all forms of thought-provoking debate, which is precisely what he has been yearning for, for years. To me, Jeff Jarvis' blog embodies that the Internet should be all about: less about mudslinging, more about exchange of thoughts. If he ever was to run for President, he'd get my vote.
  • by Scareduck ( 177470 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:04PM (#10302743) Homepage Journal
    Some names I know from people who enjoy that kind of stuff, and/or things I read because of similar interests:
    • Baseball Crank [baseballcrank.com] (baseball + conservative politics)
    • Wonkette [wonkette.com] (more People mag, less politics)
    • The Daily Kos [dailykos.com] (liberal, had a quick but unfortunately wrong analysis [dailykos.com] of the now-thoroughly-discredited Rather memos)
    • Priorities and Frivolities [tagorda.com] (minimal baseball, principally politics from a centrist and semi-libertarian viewpoint)
    • The Daily Kos (liberal, had a quick but unfortunately wrong analysis of the now-thoroughly-discredited Rather memos)

      Never retracted it, either. Which is a damn shame and more than a little ironic, if you think about it. I mean, even CBS has retracted their story now, but Markos Zuniga can't be bothered to retract a full-throated defense of something that turned out to be a massive lie.

      Whatever you do, don't go to Markos' site looking for things that are true.
    • Just a sort of small correction:

      You say Kos "had a quick but unfortunately wrong analysis of the now-thoroughly-discredited Rather memos."

      This isn't quite accurate. "Fortune" implies some sort of luck was involved. But in actuallity, Kos mounted a furious and quite deliberate defense of something that he passionately believed should have been true. He was sure that anyone who believes anything different from what *he* believes must be a lying scumbag, and that attitude caused him to insist that his versio
    • The bit about DailyKos is true, aside from the implication that it was Kos himself who posted that, as well as the implication that Hunter, who did post it, was actually wrong.

      He wasn't, because he never said that the documents were genuine; he simply pointed out that the people who were arguing that they were forgeries were, frankly, full of it. In the long run, they may have been right, but their arguments weren't -- their arguments involved a great number of claims about what was and wasn't possible wi
  • You gotta love Oliver Willis [oliverwillis.com] and for that matter all of the Media Matters [mediamatters.org] people.

    A little too extreme at times, but overall a very down-to-earth and likable guy.

    If you want to make them mad, you could say the people over at metafilter [metafilter.com] (currently down) make for a good political blog. (snicker)
  • I really love Antiwar.com and it has a blog.

    This site is really my favorite political news source.
  • Sullivan (Score:3, Informative)

    by zaxios ( 776027 ) <zaxios@gmail.com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:05PM (#10302753) Journal
    Andrew Sullivan is a conservative journalist who often writes for TIME. His gay rights stance is also notable (he's a homosexual himself). Here is the correct link [andrewsullivan.com] to his site.
  • The Daily Show (Score:3, Informative)

    by RubberChainsaw ( 669667 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:06PM (#10302754)
    "Where do you go when you want to see the mainstream media dissected and poked at?"

    The Daily Show with John Stewart. Its not a blog, its a comedy show on Comedy Central. But it seems to be one of the few places where politicians and the media have their stupid blunders pointed out. Plus its pretty entertaining.

  • ...which I am (Let's go Holden!)

    If you're uninformed or just love long lists of candidates and political parties across the nation, as well as the best commentary around, read...

    Politics1 [politics1.com]

    ...and if you're a liberal...which you are, RIGHT?
    Check out...

    DailyKos [dailykos.com]

  • Aren't the alternatives to BIG MEDIA outlawed by the Bush Administration, with the Ministry of Truth being formed as we speak from the Faux News executives?
  • Jerry Pournelle (Score:4, Interesting)

    by chroma ( 33185 ) <chroma.mindspring@com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:09PM (#10302791) Homepage
    The mail section of Jerry Pournelle's website is great. He takes on many topics including computers, technology, and education, not just politics. Yes, it's Jerry Pournelle of Byte's Chaos Manor and SF authordom.

    Web site:
    http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/currentm ail.htm l
    • Re:Jerry Pournelle (Score:3, Insightful)

      by JabberWokky ( 19442 )
      Seconded. Dr. Pournelle gathers information and does commentary and periodic essays on what is going on in the United States. His Republic versus Empire essays are very insightful and I've pointed many people to them. He is also an excellent example of the classic conservative as opposed to the neo-con religious right that now holds office.


  • by manyoso ( 260664 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:10PM (#10302803) Homepage
    No self-respecting, heterosexual, republican male, should go without a visit every couple days to General JC Christian, patriot. [blogspot.com] The general provides a welcome tonic for all the inner frenchmen leaking out of the mainstream press.
  • http://blog.zmag.org/ttt/ Love Chomksy or hate him, you have to admit he incluences political thought in the US and the world and is therefor worth paying attention to.
  • Electrolite [nielsenhayden.com] is a blog by Patrick Nielsen Hayden, one of the leading book editors in the science fiction field. His blog is now almost all Democratic politics, occasionally as seen from an SF fan's perspective but always from a viewpoint of solid common sense.
  • by Ignorant Aardvark ( 632408 ) <cydeweys&gmail,com> on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:13PM (#10302833) Homepage Journal
    I'll have to go with "None".
  • blogs to read (Score:3, Informative)

    by mycal ( 135781 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:14PM (#10302855) Journal

    http://www.instapundit.com/ - the king of all blogs
    http://andrewsullivan.com/ - gone way down hill but still readable
    http://www.allahpundit.com/ - good mix of political fun
    http://claytoncramer.com/weblog/blogger.html - guns and fun
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/ - more right slant fun.

    http://www.iraqthemodel.com/ - differnt view inside Iraq
    http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/ - more good insight in iraq
    http://www.iraq-iraqis.blogspot.com/ - and again

    http://cbftw.blogspot.com/ - used to be one of the best blogs in Iraq until the man cracked down on him. But MUST READ THE ARCHIVES!


  • by sphealey ( 2855 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:16PM (#10302869)
    Daily Kos [dailykos.com]

    Washington Monthly (by Kevin Drum) [washingtonmonthly.com]

    Talking Points Memo (Josh Marshall) [talkingpointsmemo.com]

    Atrios [blogspot.com]

    Matthew Yglesias [typepad.com]

    Digby's Blog [blogspot.com]

  • My favorites (Score:5, Informative)

    by TTop ( 160446 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:16PM (#10302870)
    Oh, it's hard to narrow it down to a small list.

    The previously mentioned Talking Points Memo [talkingpointsmemo.com] is quite good.

    Also see:

    Washington Monthly [washingtonmonthly.com] (Kevin Drum, formerly of Calpundit)
    Altercation [msnbc.com] (what liberal media?)
    Daily Howler [dailyhowler.com]
    Columbia Journalism Review [campaigndesk.org] de-spins the media.
    Juan Cole [juancole.com] (very insightful Iraq commentary from this professor of history)
    White House Briefing [washingtonpost.com] (political round-up)

  • Some of my picks: (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Masker ( 25119 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:20PM (#10302908)
    All are liberal, of course.

    1. Ugga Bugga [blogspot.com] has good charts/info compression and researching.
    2. Wonkette [wonkette.com] for shear entertainment value. She's great, and she has "scooped" [wonkette.com] the mainstream press, too.
    3. Majority Report Radio [majorityreportradio.com] has a blog that can be a good news source.
    4. News Hounds [newshounds.us], the anti-Fox. "We watch Fox so you don't have to."
    5. Greg Palast [gregpalast.com] has a very informative and well-researched blog.
    6. Salon's War Room '04 [salon.com] is awesome, even if you have to watch a 30-second ad to read the whole thing. Not really a "blog" per-se, but sort of blog flavored...

    I tend not to read conservative blogs because I like my blood-pressure where it is. And, really, I read enough conservative BS when I read the stories that are run in the normal "liberally biased" press. In their zeal to be "balanced", news outlets feel they need to print a bunch of lies & distortions from the right in order to balance anything not from the right.
  • There was a time when Andrew Sullivan could have conceivably been labeled a conservative, but it's passed. Sullivan's analysis of the war on terror used to be interesting, but since he become a single interest voter over the issue of gay marriage, it's colored the rest of his thinking and writing. These days he's probably best described as an "angry moderate."

    If you really want to read a high-quality conservative blog, here are two from National Review Online [nationalreview.com]:

    • The Corner, [nationalreview.com] a braided-blog with constributions by many of NR's writers, run by Kathryn Jean Lopez, and
    • The Kerry Spot [nationalreview.com], penned by Jim Geraghty, whichs follows Kerry and his campaign closely, as well as related subjects. (The Kerry Spot was one of the best sites to follow for updates on Rathergate.
    Speaking of Rathergate, a seminal blogsphere watershed that Slashdot has not chosen to feature on its front page, here are some of the key blogs which helped break open the Rathergate story:

    Well, that should get you started. in truth, except for the NR blogs, I was only an occasional readers of the others before the Rathergate story broke, but now I'm much more of a regular reader, much to the detriment of my productivity...

    • by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) * on Monday September 20, 2004 @08:19PM (#10303427) Homepage
      There was a time when Andrew Sullivan could have conceivably been labeled a conservative, but it's passed.

      I disagree. Sullivan does focus heavily on gay rights (goshIwonderwhy,) but he's still very much a 'classic' conservative. While gay rights may be his biggest cause, he continues to make a lot of noise over things like fiscal responsibility, smaller government, keeping government out of private spheres, and accountability. He's decidedly gone out of step with Bush's neoconservatism, but frankly, I'd say that Bush is the one who left conservatism--not Sullivan.

      For example, his current front-page articles include:

      • 18 posts about the Iraq war, from a variety of angles
      • 4 posts about gay rights and marriage
      • 4 posts castigating Dan Rather and the forged memos
      • 2 posts regarding unbecoming political conduct in the GOP
      • a smattering of random stuff

      While it's fair to say that he's big on gay rights, it's disingenuous to dismiss him as single-minded and 'no longer conservative'. Andrew Sullivan is decidedly conservative, even if a lot of other conservatives out there would rather not count him among their numbers...

  • Good Liberal blogs (Score:3, Informative)

    by KaiserSoze ( 154044 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:22PM (#10302932) Homepage
    In no particular order:As mentioned in the post itself, Talking Points Memo is also excellent. Sorry I don't have any conservative blogs listed; I don't have a fondness for lies and general evilness.
  • by Syncdata ( 596941 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:23PM (#10302944) Journal
    Instapundit [instapundit.com] is hands down my go-to political weblog.

    It offers a nice round-up of links from the blogosphere, along with the his own commentary.

    It's run by Glenn Reynolds [google.com], a University of Tennessee law professor, and social liberal, everything else conservative.

    The beauty of blogs is that Bias is readily apparent, and seldom denied, unlike oh, say, some cats in the mainream media. [ratherbiased.com]
  • by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:24PM (#10302954) Homepage Journal

    He always comes out and says it, do not believe a thing on his page or what he says unless you know it to be the truth.

    Boortz is responsible for switching me to the Libertarian platform in most respects. I will even give him credit for my quitting smoking as he pointed out very correctly that it is for losers.

    While I don't care for his show very much his written articles are hard hitting and even fairly accurate at times.

    He leans right but that is a Libertarian trait. We have to be responsible for ourselves first and should not use the Government to exploit others for our own benefit.

    He always posts a good selection of daily stories.

  • Swingstates. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MoNickels ( 1700 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:25PM (#10302958) Homepage
    I really like Swing State Project [swingstateproject.com]. Even-handed, even-toned, and factual.
  • by TheRealSlimShady ( 253441 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @07:45PM (#10303144)
    ...is complete without a link to SullyWatch [blogspot.com]. It keeps an eye on some of the more obvious inconsistencies in Mr Sullivan's writing - of which there are many.
  • Eric S. Raymond ... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Etcetera ( 14711 ) * on Monday September 20, 2004 @08:35PM (#10303613) Homepage
    ... has his own blog. While not restricted only to polictics (few blogs are), he has a lot of insight into worldly things... I'm especially fond of this piece on the Mainstream Media's waning influence in swinging elections:

    http://esr.ibiblio.org/#154 [ibiblio.org]

    Other blogs worth checking out:
  • Best Poli-Blogs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Devlin-du-GEnie ( 512506 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @08:40PM (#10303680)
    Polling: Daily Kos [dailykos.com] Wonderful poll analysis, great community, lots of smart commenters

    Economics: Brad DeLong [j-bradford-delong.net] He's a PhD economist and a former economic advisor to the Clinton administration

    Social Policy: Body and Soul [typepad.com] She blogs the uncomfortable places where others won't go.

    Politics: Atrios [blogspot.com] The man reads everything. This site is especially good for U.S. politics.

    Snark: Sisyphus Shrugged [livejournal.com] This woman has it. Her recent posts on Nader are vicious and painfully accurate.

    Satire: Fafblog!!! [blogspot.com] The world's only source of Fafblog. Do not drink while reading. Your keyboard will thank you.
  • by Alaska Jack ( 679307 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @08:43PM (#10303714) Journal

    1. Instapundit. [instapundit.com] Written by a Glenn Reynolds, a libertarian law professor at the University of Tennessee whose expertise is in second amendment issues, technology and communication. Perhaps the most influential and widely read blog.

    2. The Corner [nationalreview.com]. National Review's group weblog. Lots of contributors, who vary widely in tone (after you read it a while you come to recognize who the various authors are, and what points of view they hold). If you're not a conservative, you should check it out -- you won't agree with most of the stuff, but after a while you might learn that the folks on the "other side" aren't a bunch of moronic power-mad nazis: They actually have coherent reasons for believing what they believe, and can ably articulate those views. Understanding their arguments will help you sharpen your own.

    3. The Volokh Conspiracy [volokh.com]. A group weblog of libertarian and conservative law professors. The lead conspirator, Eugene Volokh, is a computer programmer-turned UCLA law professor; he is an expert in free speech issues, with some expertise in the second amendment as well. A lot of bloggers could learn from the civil tone of this blog -- i.e., no yelling, taunting or name-calling. Volokh believes writers should try to persuade others, not alienate them with overheated rhetoric.

    Note that Volokh, like Reynolds, is a true libertarian: Conservatives are unlikely to agree with either of them on things like abortion and homosexuality.

    4. Andrew Sullivan [andrewsullivan.com]. An influential writer for Time, The New Republic and other print outlets. Perhaps the best-known openly gay conservative.

    5. Kausfiles [msn.com]. A moderate-to-conservative Democrat, Mickey Kaus is utterly unsparing (and occasionally downright brutal) in his criticism of liberal excess, fellow democrats and the media. Doesn't write a lot, but is witty and sometimes offers extraordinary insights you won't get anywhere else.

    6. Best of the Web [opinionjournal.com]. The Wall Street Journal's blog, written by James Taranto. A once-a-day read, it sums up a lot of current issues from a conservatives' point of view.

    Yes, there are many many many many others. But if the conservative/libertarian blogosphere is like a tree, these are the trunk.

    - Alaska Jack

  • Billmon (Score:3, Informative)

    by ttfkam ( 37064 ) on Monday September 20, 2004 @11:55PM (#10305079) Homepage Journal
    The Whiskey Bar [billmon.org] is absolutely wonderful. Well written. Great op-ed. Fact checking up the wazoo -- something sorely missing from most blogs. The guy definitely knows what true journalism is. Unfortunately, the site's been silent for the last month.

    Check the archives though. It's worth it. It'll take weeks just to read through it all and each one is as good as the last.

Disraeli was pretty close: actually, there are Lies, Damn lies, Statistics, Benchmarks, and Delivery dates.