Some of what he said was pretty harsh, but when wining and dining a $5 million contributor, I could see vociferiously agreeing with whatever was said.
Yeah, this is definitely something that should be taken into consideration when discussing this. $5 million is a fuckton of money. He probably would have put on a dress and danced the can can if he was asked.
They do a pretty good job of being unbiased but they shouldn't accept federal funding, it just looks weird for a news agency to get money from the government.
Yeah, it's so weird. Nobody else has public news broadcasting.
Except the UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada,, [tiny]Italy, Spain, Argentina, the Netherlands, Ireland, India...[/tiny]
Isn't Al Jazeera funded by Qatar?
Wait, that probably won't help the argument with conservatives.
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with a conservative/liberal inclination, I just think it is easier to accept the credibility of a news source that has fewer string attached to it than one who doesn't.
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with a conservative/liberal inclination, I just think it is easier to accept the credibility of a news source that has fewer string attached to it than one who doesn't.
What news source doesn't have a string attached to it from somewhere?
?
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
They do a pretty good job of being unbiased but they shouldn't accept federal funding, it just looks weird for a news agency to get money from the government.
Yeah, it's so weird. Nobody else has public news broadcasting.
Except the UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada,, [tiny]Italy, Spain, Argentina, the Netherlands, Ireland, India...[/tiny]
Isn't Al Jazeera funded by Qatar?
Wait, that probably won't help the argument with conservatives.
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with a conservative/liberal inclination, I just think it is easier to accept the credibility of a news source that has fewer string attached to it than one who doesn't.
The problem is that all news sources have strings attached and it just depends on whose strings you're less afraid of.
Maybe having news sources with corporate strings attached and news sources with government strings attached and news sources with university strings attached and news sources with church strings attached is healthy for democracy?
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
what he said is that liberals are better and more widely educated, which is pretty easy to bear out with basically data about education level
The respective educational levels of people with different ideologies is pretty irrelevant. The fact that this guy has so little judgment as to say the things he did is funny.
Whatever. This is a a minor little controversy on a slow news day. It should be a lesson about too much candor being a bad thing.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
They do a pretty good job of being unbiased but they shouldn't accept federal funding, it just looks weird for a news agency to get money from the government.
Yeah, it's so weird. Nobody else has public news broadcasting.
Except the UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, Canada,, [tiny]Italy, Spain, Argentina, the Netherlands, Ireland, India...[/tiny]
Isn't Al Jazeera funded by Qatar?
Wait, that probably won't help the argument with conservatives.
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with a conservative/liberal inclination, I just think it is easier to accept the credibility of a news source that has fewer string attached to it than one who doesn't.
And corporate organizations which are beholden to their stockholders, advertisers, viewers, and executives have less strings than impartial and no-strings-attached funding from the government?
adytum on
0
Options
BarcardiAll the WizardsUnder A Rock: AfganistanRegistered Userregular
Self-important liberal gets in trouble for something he said over a meal at Cafe Milano.
Seems strangely fitting, for some reason. Just walking into that place automatically makes you a douche if you weren't one already.
Self-important?
He's certainly happy to dismiss tens of millions of Americans as stupid for having the nerve to disagree with him.
Oh boy! White-knighting for tea partiers!
The tea party and its members don't bother me, and I think they're generally a positive force in the country, overall. I especially like the fact that they can make so many liberals froth at the mouth in outrage.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Self-important liberal gets in trouble for something he said over a meal at Cafe Milano.
Seems strangely fitting, for some reason. Just walking into that place automatically makes you a douche if you weren't one already.
Self-important?
He's certainly happy to dismiss tens of millions of Americans as stupid for having the nerve to disagree with him.
Oh boy! White-knighting for tea partiers!
The tea party and its members don't bother me, and I think they're generally a positive force in the country, overall. I especially like the fact that they can make so many liberals froth at the mouth in outrage.
oh yeah man you're on to us we just can't contain our rage. Its all over my keyboard.
Maybe having news sources with corporate strings attached and news sources with government strings attached and news sources with university strings attached and news sources with church strings attached is healthy for democracy?
Thats the thing, since its impossible to have a no-strings-attached media outlet its better to have multiple outlets with different attachments.
So the MSNBC thing wasnt terrible, it was basically the guest talking about how James O'Keefe is known for making flawed shock journalism pieces while Tamron Hall just kept saying O'Keefe didnt make the guy say those things. It still ignored that he was sitting down with a potential donor and its possible that he was just saying things to get the monies.
EDIT: Also, MSNBC is reminding me why I dont watch MSNBC.
It's weird that nobody did a background check on the supposed donor with $5 million at his disposal. Even if you aren't suspecting a crazy right-winger to ambush you, it makes sense to know the interests and history of whomever you're talking to before engaging in a meeting.
Is the "tea party is a force for good in spite of multiple extremely damningly racist and offensive things they have said and done" still even a meme?
I wasn't even aware of this
The Tea Party is a movement comprising millions of people. Some of them are racist douchewads, yes. Such is the nature of any large movement, especially ones that are pissed off at the status quo.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Yeah, I'd appreciate more candor from news organization and people in positions of influence, not less.
In Washington, too much candor can be dangerous to one's career.
I thought everyone got that as part of their "Welcome to DC " packet from the DC government.
Ah, "bad thing," was a little vague. If we're just talking about this in regards to the effect candor may have on a career, then obviously it does pay to never fully reveal your true feelings and intentions.
"You have this very large un-educated part of the population that carries these ideas." Yes, most of the population is uneducated and possessed of cripplingly backward ideas about religion, history, politics, and even basic geography. I know it's not exactly popular to say such things about "middle America," because they're used to being pandered to and praised for their "realness" and "Main Street values" and "down-to-earth common sense," but seriously, when your Main Street values encourage things like tying gay men to fence posts and pistol-whipping them to death, calling you anything other than a gibbering dumbshit hick is too generous.
WTF.
I'm from LA. Do my "liberal left coast values" encourage things like killing 5 year old bystanders in drive-bys? Because that happens a lot more down here than Matthew Shepards happen anywhere in middle America.
It never fails to amaze me how the right will vilify the fuck out of a person, organization or movement and then be just SHOCKED when that person, organization or movement holds a negative opinion of them.
What I mean is, the tea party is in theory a good idea
But in practice and execution they have been demonstrably terrible- and it is hardly shocking what this individual said over lunch.
Depends on where you sit on the political spectrum, I guess. They helped a bunch of Democrats lose their jobs. They provided a goodly number of the campaign footsoldiers this last time around.
It never fails to amaze me how the right will vilify the fuck out of a person, organization or movement and then be just SHOCKED when that person, organization or movement holds a negative opinion of them.
I am stealing this for personal use, if you don't mind
What I mean is, the tea party is in theory a good idea
But in practice and execution they have been demonstrably terrible- and it is hardly shocking what this individual said over lunch.
Depends on where you sit on the political spectrum, I guess. They helped a bunch of Democrats lose their jobs. They provided a goodly number of the campaign footsoldiers this last time around.
So its ok to witch hunt people you disagree with......because they should have known better?
Who is witch hunting this guy?
They cost you guys the senate last election and will give Obama a second term by making it impossible for the GOP to nominate a candidate who's palatable in the general.
What I mean is, the tea party is in theory a good idea
But in practice and execution they have been demonstrably terrible- and it is hardly shocking what this individual said over lunch.
Depends on where you sit on the political spectrum, I guess. They helped a bunch of Democrats lose their jobs. They provided a goodly number of the campaign footsoldiers this last time around.
Sounds like a force for good. YMMV, of course.
Right, but again
This isn't Machiavelli here (cue someone explaining how I am misinterpreting Machiavelli)
Just because they got some Democrats out doesn't mean that they way they did it is acceptable, or their current behavior is acceptable.
Sorry if I don't think the ends justify the means, regardless of political persuasion.
So, MM, you're fine with all the bigotry and hate the Tea Partiers (newly elected, insiders who have flocked to their banner, and their supporters) have spouted? That's just fine if they beat a few dozen Democrats?
"Ron Schiller has informed us that, in light of the controversy surrounding his recent statements, he does not feel that it's in the best interests of the Aspen Institute for him to come work here," a statement from the nonprofit read.
I saw the MSNBC bit as well. It seemed like they were shitting on O'Keefe with the truth about his past dealings pretty hard. The guy deserves it, but I hate seeing that tone coming from news regardless of loyalties. And I guess his website is called Veritas? The irony actually made me wince
Bullio on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Yeah, apparently he'd tendered his resignation with plans to start a new job
Smear piece is aired, NPR essentially makes his resignation effective now instead of when the new job is ready, and then the new job offer is rescinded.
James O'Keefe: never not making someone's life worse
What I mean is, the tea party is in theory a good idea
But in practice and execution they have been demonstrably terrible- and it is hardly shocking what this individual said over lunch.
Depends on where you sit on the political spectrum, I guess. They helped a bunch of Democrats lose their jobs. They provided a goodly number of the campaign footsoldiers this last time around.
Sounds like a force for good. YMMV, of course.
Right, but again
This isn't Machiavelli here (cue someone explaining how I am misinterpreting Machiavelli)
Just because they got some Democrats out doesn't mean that they way they did it is acceptable, or their current behavior is acceptable.
Sorry if I don't think the ends justify the means, regardless of political persuasion.
AFAIK, they got Democrats out of office through the democratic process. Unless I missed the Tea Party coup and the subsequent firing squads for Democratic legislators.
Yeah, the Tea Party played political hardball. But everything they did was legal and within the rules of politics in this country.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Posts
Yeah, this is definitely something that should be taken into consideration when discussing this. $5 million is a fuckton of money. He probably would have put on a dress and danced the can can if he was asked.
what he said is that liberals are better and more widely educated, which is pretty easy to bear out with basically data about education level
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with a conservative/liberal inclination, I just think it is easier to accept the credibility of a news source that has fewer string attached to it than one who doesn't.
What news source doesn't have a string attached to it from somewhere?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Oh boy! White-knighting for tea partiers!
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Yeah it really would have been something if he had said that.
The problem is that all news sources have strings attached and it just depends on whose strings you're less afraid of.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Whatever. This is a a minor little controversy on a slow news day. It should be a lesson about too much candor being a bad thing.
Rigorous Scholarship
And corporate organizations which are beholden to their stockholders, advertisers, viewers, and executives have less strings than impartial and no-strings-attached funding from the government?
Rigorous Scholarship
I hadn't really considered the dog whistle aspect of this.
Liberal (gasp) meets at fancy restaurant (Gasp) to talk to Muslim (Faints).
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
oh yeah man you're on to us we just can't contain our rage. Its all over my keyboard.
Thats the thing, since its impossible to have a no-strings-attached media outlet its better to have multiple outlets with different attachments.
So the MSNBC thing wasnt terrible, it was basically the guest talking about how James O'Keefe is known for making flawed shock journalism pieces while Tamron Hall just kept saying O'Keefe didnt make the guy say those things. It still ignored that he was sitting down with a potential donor and its possible that he was just saying things to get the monies.
EDIT: Also, MSNBC is reminding me why I dont watch MSNBC.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
what, because the truth makes tea partiers uncomfortable?
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
I wasn't even aware of this
I think reality makes tea partiers uncomfortable.
I thought everyone got that as part of their "Welcome to DC " packet from the DC government.
The Tea Party is a movement comprising millions of people. Some of them are racist douchewads, yes. Such is the nature of any large movement, especially ones that are pissed off at the status quo.
Rigorous Scholarship
Ah, "bad thing," was a little vague. If we're just talking about this in regards to the effect candor may have on a career, then obviously it does pay to never fully reveal your true feelings and intentions.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
But in practice and execution they have been demonstrably terrible- and it is hardly shocking what this individual said over lunch.
Next thing you know, the Hollywood Ten will get caught talking to communists.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
WTF.
I'm from LA. Do my "liberal left coast values" encourage things like killing 5 year old bystanders in drive-bys? Because that happens a lot more down here than Matthew Shepards happen anywhere in middle America.
Sounds like a force for good. YMMV, of course.
Who is witch hunting this guy?
Rigorous Scholarship
I am stealing this for personal use, if you don't mind
I don't know what else to say.
They cost you guys the senate last election and will give Obama a second term by making it impossible for the GOP to nominate a candidate who's palatable in the general.
Right, but again
This isn't Machiavelli here (cue someone explaining how I am misinterpreting Machiavelli)
Just because they got some Democrats out doesn't mean that they way they did it is acceptable, or their current behavior is acceptable.
Sorry if I don't think the ends justify the means, regardless of political persuasion.
You are right!
Luckily no one is
Not anymore.
I saw the MSNBC bit as well. It seemed like they were shitting on O'Keefe with the truth about his past dealings pretty hard. The guy deserves it, but I hate seeing that tone coming from news regardless of loyalties. And I guess his website is called Veritas? The irony actually made me wince
Smear piece is aired, NPR essentially makes his resignation effective now instead of when the new job is ready, and then the new job offer is rescinded.
James O'Keefe: never not making someone's life worse
edit: beat'd
Yeah, the Tea Party played political hardball. But everything they did was legal and within the rules of politics in this country.
Rigorous Scholarship