[dragontamer]

I will note that CSPAN / the debate on the US Congress (both the House and the Senate) are surprisingly well informed about politics.

Its a bit of an investment: it takes a while to learn the "rules" of discussion (and the rules are different for the House and Senate). And its highly opinionated as well. But if you want to know what the big issues are on any given day, its hard to beat Congress.

Seriously. Give CSPAN a try. Its boring as heck but welcome to reality. Do you want to know the opinions of some random blogger with no power? Or do you want to know the opinions of the literal lawmakers of this country?

If you're going to read / study opinion pieces, its clear who's opinions are most important. Its not a pundit on NBC, its not the pundit writing articles for (insert paper here). Those people have no power and are basically armchair quarterbacks.

[dragonwriter]

> Do you want to know the opinions of some random blogger with no power? Or do you want to know the opinions of the literal lawmakers of this country?

Congressmembers are not giving their unfiltered opinion in floor (or committee) speeches, they are very conscious of the public eye and are saying what they think they need to be heard saying to achieve their goals. If you aren't following other information sources to contextualize what you are hearing, this is equivalent to getting your news about an industry exclusively from the press releases of the two biggest firms in the industry.

[dragontamer]

The bias is obvious however: you can instantly pick out Democrats from Republicans.

I don't read / watch opinion pieces to know how to think. I read / watch opinion pieces to know _what other people are thinking_.

And I don't really care what a politician thinks/feels deep down inside. I care about what a politician is calculating in their public image: why they're voting for (or against) particular measures. Sure, they might change their opinion a year or two from now, but if we're talking about the important issues affecting our country today (ex: debt ceiling and its knock-on-effects)... what these politicians are saying today is the opinion that matters.

-----------

> this is equivalent to getting your news about an industry exclusively from the press releases of the two biggest firms in the industry.

The issue is that far too many people don't even use this source of information at all, and are instead getting their opinion / reviews from pundits who really don't matter at all in the great scheme of things.

Today's citizen is more likely to be "informed" by some random talk-show host, or crazed nut over the radio that no one gives a care about... rather than know what our actual leaders are doing.

--------

In any case, the infographics / arguments used by people in Congress are pretty compelling in general. Yeah, there's some complete crap here and there, but its important to also know the bullcrap some people think.

A lot of information is from very solid sources: they interview Generals / Commanders from Afghanistan, so we get to hear the direct witnesses / decision makers to various events. They can pull in statistics from CDC, FDA, BLS, Fed, State Department, etc. etc. Think-tanks are commonly quoted to various degrees of success (some think-tanks are fine, others are clearly biased).

The quality of information presented is just head-and-shoulders above the average newspaper / blog / radio host.

[mkr-hn]

There's SCOTUSBlog for the Supreme Court. People often mistake it for being from the court, but it's independent. Legal Eagle on YouTube is good if you don't mind video.