CNSNews conservative?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

I question why the CNSNews website won’t provide an online facility which allows web readers to contact them with a suggestion or comment box. From my present perspective and viewing, such a contact facility isn’t highlighted on the CNSNews homepage. And, if it exists, it isn’t that noticeable for easy access like many websites.

Furthermore, I recently witnessed that online CNSNews does not accept particular Conservative comments of mine in which I logically substantiated my opinions with evidence. In the one news piece, was a rejected comment in which I used a logical and viable Hitler comparison, vis-à-vis the American genocide, reality. More recently, in another news piece, (about government forced contraception usage and payment), I referenced in my comment, (which was rejected), “eugenics,” “population control,” “genocide,” and “black genocide.” [And, I will add that my comments were germane to the news piece. My comments were proper and contained no foul language]

I will also add that CNSNews does not cover the Constitutional eligibility issue of the Barack Obama “presidency.” It will not cover that issue; even though it claims on its “About Us” page, the following:

 …..Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes “news.”

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.

CNSNews endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story and debunk popular, albeit incorrect, myths about cultural and policy issues…… [CNSNews “About Us” page]

Frankly, I think that CNSNews ought to revisit its [“inside the box”] criteria and be less disingenuous and hypocritical – thus, living up to its own self designed journalistic standards. I may as well add that I think its founder, who regularly is a guest on the FOX News Network, is [therefore] being disingenuous in his weekly upbraiding of the liberal mainstream media.

Consequently, I have decided at this time to cease accessing CNSNews, in the same manner as I have disengaged, in visiting Drudge because of his non journalistic political campaign bias. Also, I will not promote or recommend CNSNews. I will also relate to others my experience of the censor of my opinion comments at CNSNews and its omission of viable “eligibility news,” when I deem appropriate and when the subject of “Conservative” news, and also, media censor discussion, is broached.

Finally, there are other media which, to my knowledge, do not behave and act inappropriately and with censoring, as does CNSNews. I will frequent sites such as ConservativeNewsandViews ; WND ; Conservapedia and Canada Free Press and, other websites which will not discriminate against Conservative posted comments.

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel

NOTE: The views expressed by the author of any Letter to the Editor are his own and are not necessarily those of CNAV or its administrators.

Website | + posts

Contented baby boomer; like working on my "The Christian Message" site:

4 Responses to CNSNews conservative?

  1. An Update:

    Since submitting this piece to Conservative News and Views I have returned to visiting CNS News, – although, it seems, not as often. There are simply too many other sites which do not censor my comments. I’d rather give them my web views, – and, offer them my comments.

    Very recently, I posted a comment in response to a Brent Bozell commentary. Presently, my recall does not serve me adequately to do an extensive online search for the particular commentary. Perhaps, it has been scratched by CNS. But, be that as it may, the same censor experience (as before) occurred following my posted comment reply. I can only conclude that CNS will not allow comments to substantiate one’s assertions if there is any reference to certain words, – such as, Obama and black genocide; Obama and hate-mongering and Obama and infanticide.

    Perhaps, CNSNews did not like it that I substantiated my comment with the two following topical messages of mine:

    “The President of the United States: A Sex Offender? – Why Obama’s support of the abortion industry is the worst molestation of youth:”

    The Infanticide / Abortion Genocide US “President” Obama

    Having stated all of the aforementioned and my posted initial Conservative News and Views guest commentary, I am (nevertheless) grateful that CNSNews still allows me to post my comments following most of their news pieces. But, be that as it may, I wish that CNSNews would break away from its selective censoring, and allow substantiated comments to include ideas and comparisons to history’s past human atrocities, – aka, the holocaust, Hitler’s Nazi Germany, American genocide, etc. After all, Mr. Brent Bozell is considered a media watchdog, not a media censoring editor as CNS’S own website presently professes.

  2. Here is another update example of CNSNews apparent selective censoring. I commented the following after this news piece, only to have it immediately disappear when I refreshed my computer screen:

    Garry Trudeau Likens Pre-Abortion Sonogram to Rape: ‘You Tell Me The Difference’

    My comment, which CNSNews, apparently deleted:

    Trudeau has his head in the sand. He ought to consider working on some cartoon exposure targeting some real molestation:

    The Infanticide / Abortion Genocide US “President” Obama

    “The President of the United States: A Sex Offender? – Why Obama’s support of the abortion industry is the worst molestation of youth:”

    I have looked on the CNSNews home page for commenting guidelines and have found none. I again ask myself: “What gives?”

  3. Update on Apparent CNSNews censoring comments [of mine] and its apparent schizophrenic liberality to accept raunchy comments:

    CNSNEWs has done it again. [Or, rather, what they are failing to do] I commented the following in response to the priest that denied Christian Holy Communion to the lesbian:

    “Father Marcel Guarnizo: ‘I Did The Only Thing a Faithful Catholic Priest Could Do:'”

    My comment, that CNSNews apparently chose not to post:

    Priest Marcel Guarnizo apparently carried out his duties faithfully. So why the publicity? I can only think it is because Barbara Johnson did not qualify. End of story. Homosexual activists would like to be treated as if they are within the norm. Now, they are attempting to force their way into the Christian religion to be accepted just like everyone else.

    I find it pathetically astounding that homosexual activists want to stand out in the crowd and trumpet their views, yet, are very intolerant to allow non homosexuals to practice their views. But, I’ve come to the conclusion why homosexual activists act in the manner they do:

    Now, please tell me that my comment was raunchy and out of personal opinion place after reading some of the following comments I found posted after the same news piece about the priest denying the lesbian communion:

    D—- R–:

    “Too many catholics are corrupted pedophiles who do nothing but worship idols. Brainwashing is what they do best!”

    “Too many pedophiles are in the catholic churches. Please don’t lecture anyone on morality. Hypocrites make me want to vomit! The churces are full of them too.”


    “Lesbians don’t need Holy Communion as they are destined for Hell anyway.”

    D—- R–:

    “f#*ck you and your hypocrite ways! who the f#*ck are you to judge anyone? c*#ks^ker?”

    L—— P——-:

    “When are real Catholics going to stop turning the other cheek when dealing with this -Gay- abominations. They are not normal human beings, they are pure -Evil- and -God- will destroy them like rabid animals…”


    “Another ridiculous Catholic rule”? I suspect that if we all made up our own rules, you would be the first to complain about the chaos. The 60’s are over and the Church has paid dearly for the excesses of those who made their own rules.




    What a low life.


    Yea, that bull sure is vile, brining her l#%^*d l*#^king femi-nazi partner up to a Priest expecting him to break his vows.

    There – that should give you an idea. Granted that most of the comments were proper, – as were mine, which weren’t apparently, allowed.

    I again ask, “What gives?” I can only conclude that has double standards like the liberal media, which they so readily criticize. Or, should I also conclude that is cowardly, bowing to the false god of homosexual political correctness?

    • Further Update – To be fair to

      Tonight I posted the same substance (of my previous comment, here) to the same article, without my link to my Christian Message website. So far, after about an hour, it is still posted without removal.

      Shall I then conclude that does not accept links to substantiate comments? Or, don’t they accept the links of people’s own websites, regardless if those people authors are recognized as having been “published?”

      I suppose I won’t know the answers to these questions because doesn’t have a readily available web page to explain their comment guidelines. At least, I haven’t found any yet.

      Finally, I didn’t go back on the CNS news piece and check to see if the nasty forum comments I referenced in my previous comment [here] eventually got deleted.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.