The Central Texas Corinthian

My Search for Reliable Right Wing News

Rate this Entry
With Fox News beginning to soften up, and turning slightly liberal, and the local papers getting more and more unreliable, I decided it was time to hunt down some new, reliable right wing news sources.

(Be sure to check the end of the blog entry and comments for Updates)

Here are the ones I found: (followed by some I rejected)
Newsmax - Nice balance - some variety - very little noise

Breitbart News - Texas - partners with Fox and has links to them

Might Still Consider:
Washington Post - Not completely free

News Aggregaters

Olive Tree News Israel Centered - some foil hat stuff

Rapture Ready News News that points to the imminent Rapture

Sipsey Street Irregulars Defending against the mirror image evils of Tyranny and Anarchy

Drudge is read by everyone, of course

Considered then rejected, didn't meet my needs

American Spectator Very low volume, not really "New" news
SubSection - The Spectacle Blog

The Blaze Maybe as a low volume international feed

Canadian Free Press Just a little to much aluminum foil hat flavor

The Daily Mail Would be a likely candidate, were it not for the gratuitus and deceptive, anti-2nd amendment
propaganda included in the story they ran on the death of Veronica Rutledge

The Examiner - maybe too much variety
In depth coverage of many topics - but no index - very crude search

Heritage Foundation - not really a news service - does in depth analysis

National Review Likely, but neocon - possibly best variety
No search function, possibly anti-Christian?

Red State news and blog Nope - way too low volume - not enough news

Stormfront Nope - racist and antisimitic

Weekly Standard Nope - presented as a conservative but who actually favors big government,
interventionalism, and a hostility to religion in politics and government
0 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes, 0 LOL, 0 Saddened by

Updated June 16th, 2015 at 8:58 AM by Mestral

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. Mestral's Avatar
    Fox News may be turning even more liberal in the near future.

    From someone who is unapologetically right.
    Five years ago, I made a prediction.

    Specifically, here’s what I said publicly five years ago: “I have to tell you … this may be a little controversial, but I believe, a lot of people look at Fox News as, you know, their alternative choice for TV. I think Fox has a lot of limitations. I am not particularly excited about it but one thing I do know is, that whatever it is doing well right now, it is not going to continue doing well into the future because it depends on two human beings who are both in their 80s – Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch. They’re not going to be around forever, and when they leave, inertia, that is very familiar to me from my many years in the ‘mainstream’ media, will take Fox News right where CNN is. … The children, the Murdoch children, have said they can’t wait to make Fox News more like CNN. Now why would you want to make the successful Fox News more like the unsuccessful CNN? Because, you get invited to better cocktail parties in Manhattan when you do that – it’s that simple.”

    I predicted an implosion of Fox News that would happen quickly after Murdoch and Ailes retired.

    Here we are, right on schedule.

    Rupert Murdoch’s son, James Murdoch, who resigned from News International – the publisher of several overseas tabloids and newspapers will soon become the new CEO, CNBC reported. The elder Murdoch is reportedly staying on as chairman, while another son, Lachlan, becomes executive co-chairman.

    All this is taking place just as the 2016 presidential election gears up. Why is that significant?

    James Murdoch gave $2,300 to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. He also donated between $1 million and $5 million to the scandal-plagued Clinton Foundation. The elder Murdoch, meanwhile, has donated to both establishment Republican and Democratic campaigns, including those of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Sen. Lindsey Graham, Sen. Cory Booker and Rep. Steny Hoyer.

    Significantly, James Murdoch has a good relationship with Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of Fox’s top shareholders.

    It will take time, but the very elements that allowed Fox to rise to the position of cable news ratings king will be stripped from the programming. It won’t happen overnight. It will be a process that develops over the next two or three years.

    It’s good news for the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s good news for “progressives” re-establishing a hammerlock of control over TV news. It’s bad news for dissent, debate and for fairness and balance in reporting.
    0 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes, 0 LOL, 0 Saddened by
  2. Mestral's Avatar
    Looks like "The Examiner" has moved left and is now censoring news based on content. I haven't completely researched this, but it does look that way to me, no matter what their excuse. Anyone interested can read about the whole ordeal by following the link.

    In related news, I may have stumbled across the source where Grammar Rules got her idea to insult me by calling me an ammosexual. It appears to have originated with an atheist or pantheist (not sure which he is) author on a God hating page of that same website.
    I've been writing for them since 2008, and never had a column pulled before. Now they've sunk two in a row, and have clammed up on their reason, to boot.

    A full week after "unpublished" my Hastert column, and five days after they torpedoed my follow-up column about a media subscriber news service including that story in an alert to members, they still have not responded to multiple inquiries asking why. That's in spite of their instruction to "Contact support with any questions."

    That they would let a content provider spend hours researching, writing, publishing and publicizing an article, pull it, and then go into hiding, is indicative of the "leadership" routinely endured over the years, and leads to natural speculation as to what "offense" against "standards" could have possibly occurred this time. If tough to know what's allowable when anti-gun "progressives" are permitted to outright lie and call gun owners who believe in their rights "ammosexuals" (that's actually a keyword tag on the Examiner site).
    Yep. Censorship of content, plain and simple.
    UPDATE: Well, that was quick. At least it shows they can move when motivated. They fired me, and warned me not to show anyone the termination notice because that would violate a confidentiality agreement. I'll match their agreement violations over the years against mine if they want to pursue this, because I maintain this is definitely in the interests of pursuing a story about cheesy practices:
    0 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes, 0 LOL, 0 Saddened by
    Updated September 17th, 2015 at 6:22 AM by Mestral