Politically-biased news sources

We all like to complain about about Fox News for being a right-biased source, or MSNBC being left-biased etc, but don't we all have a personal bias of some sort? We always choose the sources that share our views. So, I dedicate this thread to a recommendations of biased sources.

For conservatives:
Fox News (foxnews.com)
CNS News (cnsnews.com)
Telegraph (telegraph.co.uk)
Drudge Report (drudgereport.com)
Worldnet Daily (worldnetdaily.com)
Life news (lifenews.com)
The Washington Times (washtimes.com)

For liberals:
BBC (bbc.co.uk)
MSNBC (msnbc.com)
The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)
New York times (newyorktimes.com)
ABC news (abcnews.com)
CBS news (cbsnews.com)
Washington Post (washingtonpost.com)
Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

Feel free to add your own recommendations.

http://boingboing.net/2012/01/25/us-slumps-in-press-freedom-ran.html

Press freedom in US slumps to number 47. This is pathetic for a Western nation. Seriously.

>>17
Well, honestly, I'd rather have the BBC for a news source than say a news source from an Eastern European country (if I were living in such a country). But it's not inconceivable that British (and possibly American) intelligence agencies manipulate the news (like the BBC) as an ad hoc form of propaganda for their own little agendas (barring really out there conspiracy theories). Read about Chomsky's Propaganda Model, and you'll see how Labour (or is it New Labour?) under Tony Blair was able to propagandize the masses into initially supporting the Iraq War.

In summation, the BBC is in and of itself not considered harmful, but some things it reports on and the way it reports them can be, so proceed with caution. Publications like the Daily Mail, are to be considered harmful, though.