E2

1) I visited redstate.org

2)The article about the repeal of Obamacare discussed Akin and Mourdock and asserted that they were misunderstood. This moved beyond fact and into opinion, the author stated, "Republicans must rally to two gentlemen who are committed pro-lifers, but who said things in defense of children that others have decided to beat them up about." He even went so far as to say later in the article, "So suck it the hell up and get in line for Todd Akin (I’m looking at your NRSC) and Richard Mourdock."

3) Although the previously discussed article was almost entirely opinion the article about Hurricane Sandy began with a long list of statistics. It discussed the number of homes damaged and the economic ramifications of this destruction. The article was certainly still biased as it said that Romney "withdrew" from campaigning while Obama was "forced off." Despite this, the combination of fact and opinion made for a much more convincing article than the one discussing Obamacare.

4) Many of the articles have links that back up their facts or statistics. It also listed sites such as Revealing Politics where articles were cross referenced.

5) This site is clearly based on a conservative ideology. This is clear in that the description of the site is "Conservative Blog & Conservative News Source for Right of Center Activists."

6) While this site is a great place for politically-minded people to express their thoughts and read about issues, it is certainly not an unbiased news source. If a member of the electorate who was not already informed about current events visited this site they might be influenced by the way the stories are presented. This biased understanding of a key issue might influence the way this member of the electorate votes and chooses representatives.