Options

News Media Personalities of America

123457

Posts

  • Options
    Xenogear_0001Xenogear_0001 Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    That's really the only thing I can come up with.

    I mean, I'm trying to imagine what traumatic event could so fundamentally break ones ability to reason and I'm coming up with very little.
    9/11 did this to Dennis Miller.

    It also broke his funny bone.

    Xenogear_0001 on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    HavelockHavelock Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    Havelock on
  • Options
    wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Options
    Xenogear_0001Xenogear_0001 Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Xenogear_0001 on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    Does making shit up for political gain count as malice?

    HamHamJ on
    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    That's really the only thing I can come up with.

    I mean, I'm trying to imagine what traumatic event could so fundamentally break ones ability to reason and I'm coming up with very little.
    9/11 did this to Dennis Miller.

    It also broke his funny bone.

    Oh Christ, his funny bone was broken before 9/11. I saw a comedy special of his a couple months ago that was recorded during the 90's and it was terrible. I thought the jokes about him making random, niche historical references were exaggerated but it's true. He was only ever funny when on SNL, when other people were writing the jokes and his job was to deliver them.

    Also, Dennis Miller counts as a news media personality because, surprise, he likes to go on the air and give his crazy opinions on things.

    Edit - By extension, Ben Stein counts too.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    They get paid lots of money to be that way.

    Exactly. The Daily Show did a pretty great bit on one of Fox's resident airheads not actually being an airhead at all in Gretchen Carlson, what with her graduating with honors from Stanford with a specialized sociology degree. (paraphrasing wikipedia).

    I was going to float a theory that perhaps she had the same thing happen to her that happened to all those pot smoking hippies from the sixties who lost their ideals in pursuit of the suburban american dream. But then I noticed in the wiki that her nannie as a child was Michele Bachman so...so much for that.

    Though I still think it's mostly about money and career for these people. I guess they could believe what they peddle, but I kind of doubt it, or maybe superficially at most. I think it's more the atmosphere and culture that fox news corporate sets, and the money.

    Edit: Also probably because people like Gretchen Carlson are smart enough to realize who their audience is and that dumbing down their presentation serves as job security on a network like Fox.

    Dark_Side on
  • Options
    BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Is it wrong that I spend time thinking about what had to have happened in the pasts of the hot female anchors on FOX to make them so irredeemably broken in the head?

    They read a script off a prompter and are attractive with good hair, like every other person in TV. They're found in casting calls. Attributing any ideological devotion to them because they read lines off a prompter is silly. Before Laurie Dhue worked at Fox News, she worked at MSNBC.

    You wanna be a journalist, go buy an index card to stick in your fedora. You wanna be rich and famous, come audition for this TV show.

    BubbaT on
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    They get paid lots of money to be that way.

    Exactly. The Daily Show did a pretty great bit on one of Fox's resident airheads not actually being an airhead at all in Gretchen Carlson, what with her graduating with honors from Stanford with a specialized sociology degree. (paraphrasing wikipedia).

    I was going to float a theory that perhaps she had the same thing happen to her that happened to all those pot smoking hippies from the sixties who lost their ideals in pursuit of the suburban american dream. But then I noticed in the wiki that her nannie as a child was Michele Bachman so...so much for that.

    Though I still think it's mostly about money and career for these people. I guess they could believe what they peddle, but I kind of doubt it, or maybe superficially at most. I think it's more the atmosphere and culture that fox news corporate sets, and the money.

    Edit: Also probably because people like Gretchen Carlson are smart enough to realize who their audience is and that dumbing down their presentation serves as job security on a network like Fox.

    It's frustrating as fuck that people who are smart, capable, and above that shit sink to it for a paycheck though. I can understand that being a TV personality means fame and fortune, but for god's sake they're poisoning the political environment.

    The one instance I've seen of Gretchen being intelligent was when Kilmeade was making his "pure genes" comment. Like, long before he was getting into it she was trying to interrupt him because she knew where he was going. So, she has that much to her to respect.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    ApollohApolloh Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    Does making shit up for political gain count as malice?

    Yes. And in the above post he is correct. Breitbart has fucked himself into a hole by continuously being a disingenuous prick. Discovery is just dandy.

    Apolloh on
    smb3banner.png
    XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
  • Options
    Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Apolloh wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    Does making shit up for political gain count as malice?

    Yes. And in the above post he is correct. Breitbart has fucked himself into a hole by continuously being a disingenuous prick. Discovery is just dandy.

    Yeah, he's gotta be looking for the quick settlement out of court here, there is absolutely no way he wants to get mired into a discovery process, because its seems almost incredibly clear here that he's been doing stuff like this with full intent to damage the political parties involved, while actual facts be damned.

    It will be interesting to see if the GOP comes to his aid or leaves him to hang for it.

    Dark_Side on
  • Options
    deowolfdeowolf is allowed to do that. Traffic.Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Liberal trial lawyers in need of redemption?

    Light the Edwards signal!

    deowolf on
    [SIGPIC]acocoSig.jpg[/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    RustRust __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2010
    deowolf wrote: »
    Liberal trial lawyers in need of redemption?

    Light the Edwards signal!

    Edwards can rot in obscurity where he belongs

    Rust on
  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Rust wrote: »
    deowolf wrote: »
    Liberal trial lawyers in need of redemption?

    Light the Edwards signal!

    Edwards can rot in obscurity where he belongs

    goddamnit you made me lime rust you fucker

    Captain Carrot on
  • Options
    ZythonZython Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Apolloh wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    Does making shit up for political gain count as malice?

    Yes. And in the above post he is correct. Breitbart has fucked himself into a hole by continuously being a disingenuous prick. Discovery is just dandy.

    Yeah, he's gotta be looking for the quick settlement out of court here, there is absolutely no way he wants to get mired into a discovery process, because its seems almost incredibly clear here that he's been doing stuff like this with full intent to damage the political parties involved, while actual facts be damned.

    It will be interesting to see if the GOP comes to his aid or leaves him to hang for it.

    Talk about a win/win situation.

    Zython on
    Switch: SW-3245-5421-8042 | 3DS Friend Code: 4854-6465-0299 | PSN: Zaithon
    Steam: pazython
  • Options
    HavelockHavelock Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Apolloh wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but it looks like Sherrod is going after Breitbart

    Also, can't find the link, but CNN is floating the idea of starting a show that examines Glenn Beck's claims concerning the colonial era and the Founders. Usually I would call this a great idea, but 1) it's CNN, 2) Glenn Beck doesn't need the extra attention, and 3) it's CNN.

    So they're mining Howard Zinn for material then? Because otherwise, it's crap.
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I'm sure there is a line of liberal trial lawyers who can't wait to help Sherrod bury Breitbart.

    Last time I checked, libel and slander were still illegal, though people are rarely charged with the crime. This seems like a pretty open-shut case, barring his BS argument about how he didn't edit that video.

    Not really...there's a reason its hard to bring a defamation suit against the media. Beyond the truth being an absolute defense, she would have to prove malice - either actual or reckless. This, however, is what makes her suit so dangerous to not only Breitbart, but all of his cronies as well. To prove malice, they would seek to show a pattern of behavior - which means that you would have her lawyer seeking discovery on the whole ACORN fiasco,and have a good chance of getting it.

    Does making shit up for political gain count as malice?

    Yes. And in the above post he is correct. Breitbart has fucked himself into a hole by continuously being a disingenuous prick. Discovery is just dandy.

    Yeah, he's gotta be looking for the quick settlement out of court here, there is absolutely no way he wants to get mired into a discovery process, because its seems almost incredibly clear here that he's been doing stuff like this with full intent to damage the political parties involved, while actual facts be damned.

    It will be interesting to see if the GOP comes to his aid or leaves him to hang for it.

    Like Zython said, it's win/win either way. But the GOP is totally going to chuck his ass under the bus. The way I see them rationalizing it is that it was a good run, but Breitbart's officially outlived his political usefullness to them by turning into a liability with the Sherrod deal. So, under the bus he goes.

    The downside though is that, even if Breitbart is officially outed as the lying POS that he is, the damage has already been done and you have a good chunk of an American political demographic that believed and will still believe the crap he was peddling.

    Havelock on
  • Options
    Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »

    snip...........



    Like Zython said, it's win/win either way. But the GOP is totally going to chuck his ass under the bus. The way I see them rationalizing is that, it was a good run, but Breitbart's officially outlived his political usefullness to them by turning into a liability with the Sherrod deal.

    The downside though is that, even if Breitbart is found out as the lying POS that he is, the damage has already been done and you have a good chunk of an American political demographic that believed and will still believe the crap he was peddling.

    Well it's important to note that at least from a PR standpoint, Breitbart's hit piece was a stunning success. The Obama administration got a pretty good black eye from this, and just the other day I saw a roundtable on Fox with Bill fucking Kristol floating that ridiculous new criticism concentrating on the admin's reaction rather than the nasty slime piece itself, and no one seems to really be directly attacking Breitbart on the GOP side of the issue. You really have to applaud the kind of catch 22 like cynicism it takes to criticize a reaction from a cause you yourself made. And I could see the GOP wanting to keep sniveling little weasels with chips on their shoulders around, you can despise Breitbart's methods, but there's no arguing that he's scored two high profile successes for the GOP.

    Dark_Side on
  • Options
    wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    I'd love to see the case go to trial. Once Breitbart gets completely destroyed, it'll have a chilling effect on others who would style themselves after him.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Options
    HavelockHavelock Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »

    snip...........



    Like Zython said, it's win/win either way. But the GOP is totally going to chuck his ass under the bus. The way I see them rationalizing is that, it was a good run, but Breitbart's officially outlived his political usefullness to them by turning into a liability with the Sherrod deal.

    The downside though is that, even if Breitbart is found out as the lying POS that he is, the damage has already been done and you have a good chunk of an American political demographic that believed and will still believe the crap he was peddling.

    Well it's important to note that at least from a PR standpoint, Breitbart's hit piece was a stunning success. The Obama administration got a pretty good black eye from this, and just the other day I saw a roundtable on Fox with Bill fucking Kristol floating that ridiculous new criticism concentrating on the admin's reaction rather than the nasty slime piece itself, and no one seems to really be directly attacking Breitbart on the GOP side of the issue. You really have to applaud the kind of catch 22 like cynicism it takes to criticize a reaction from a cause you yourself made. And I could see the GOP wanting to keep sniveling little weasels with chips on their shoulders around, you can despise Breitbart's methods, but there's no arguing that he's scored two high profile successes for the GOP.

    That's a fair point. I can see them distancing themselves from him, but not completely ridding themselves of him. If getting rid of weasels that got found out were commonplace, a good chunk of FOX would have been long gone by now, and it's not like the GOP even has control over their own noise-machine, as evidenced by Steele apologizing to Limbaugh.

    Havelock on
  • Options
    Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »

    snip...........



    Like Zython said, it's win/win either way. But the GOP is totally going to chuck his ass under the bus. The way I see them rationalizing is that, it was a good run, but Breitbart's officially outlived his political usefullness to them by turning into a liability with the Sherrod deal.

    The downside though is that, even if Breitbart is found out as the lying POS that he is, the damage has already been done and you have a good chunk of an American political demographic that believed and will still believe the crap he was peddling.

    Well it's important to note that at least from a PR standpoint, Breitbart's hit piece was a stunning success. The Obama administration got a pretty good black eye from this, and just the other day I saw a roundtable on Fox with Bill fucking Kristol floating that ridiculous new criticism concentrating on the admin's reaction rather than the nasty slime piece itself, and no one seems to really be directly attacking Breitbart on the GOP side of the issue. You really have to applaud the kind of catch 22 like cynicism it takes to criticize a reaction from a cause you yourself made. And I could see the GOP wanting to keep sniveling little weasels with chips on their shoulders around, you can despise Breitbart's methods, but there's no arguing that he's scored two high profile successes for the GOP.

    That's a fair point. I can see them distancing themselves from him, but not completely ridding themselves of him. If getting rid of weasels that got found out were commonplace, a good chunk of FOX would have been long gone by now, and it's not like the GOP even has control over their own noise-machine, as evidenced by Steele apologizing to Limbaugh.

    Never underestimate the usefulness of a ethics-less, earnest, flunky. Those kind of people are easily predictable and can be controlled, and are usually too dumb to guard against becoming fall guys.

    Dark_Side on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Well, and the mainstream media's take has shifted to "it wasn't very nice of Sherrod to call people racist."

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Souless?

    God I hope so.

    "Our tribe has lost its way, sure we're powerful and rich, but what is the price of our souls?"
    "6 million a week"
    "That sounds about right"

    override367 on
  • Options
    HavelockHavelock Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Well, and the mainstream media's take has shifted to "it wasn't very nice of Sherrod to call people racist."

    It's because of that and the fact that people like Breitbart get away with their crap almost all the time when it comes to the press and MSM that I'm happy I only wasted a Minor in Journalism and not a Major.

    Probably the wrong attitude to have, but, meh.

    Havelock on
  • Options
    nstfnstf __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2010
    Havelock wrote: »
    Well, and the mainstream media's take has shifted to "it wasn't very nice of Sherrod to call people racist."

    It's because of that and the fact that people like Breitbart get away with their crap almost all the time when it comes to the press and MSM that I'm happy I only wasted a Minor in Journalism and not a Major.

    Probably the wrong attitude to have, but, meh.

    Breitbart gets away with that sort of crap because he is telling people what they want to hear. People already have a narrative in their mind and he just arranges the facts in a way that backs their narrative.

    Michael Moore engages in this sort of crap as well.

    There isn't a point in the MSM countering this sort of stuff since everybody has already made up their mind. They'll just shove their fingers in their ear and look for a source that backs their world view.

    nstf on
  • Options
    kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    nstf wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Well, and the mainstream media's take has shifted to "it wasn't very nice of Sherrod to call people racist."

    It's because of that and the fact that people like Breitbart get away with their crap almost all the time when it comes to the press and MSM that I'm happy I only wasted a Minor in Journalism and not a Major.

    Probably the wrong attitude to have, but, meh.

    Breitbart gets away with that sort of crap because he is telling people what they want to hear. People already have a narrative in their mind and he just arranges the facts in a way that backs their narrative.

    Michael Moore engages in this sort of crap as well.

    There isn't a point in the MSM countering this sort of stuff since everybody has already made up their mind. They'll just shove their fingers in their ear and look for a source that backs their world view.

    More specifically, even if he gets sued and loses horribly, he'll just be back doing it again because the story of him being full of shit won't be news worthy (either because people don't want to hear it, or because the news agencies would have to cop to having run really bullshit stories from his stuff)

    Just look at the ACORN pimp. People still seem to believe ACORN was found guilty of a bunch of wrongdoing over it, when the reality is the exact opposite.

    kildy on
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    nstf wrote: »
    Havelock wrote: »
    Well, and the mainstream media's take has shifted to "it wasn't very nice of Sherrod to call people racist."

    It's because of that and the fact that people like Breitbart get away with their crap almost all the time when it comes to the press and MSM that I'm happy I only wasted a Minor in Journalism and not a Major.

    Probably the wrong attitude to have, but, meh.

    Breitbart gets away with that sort of crap because he is telling people what they want to hear. People already have a narrative in their mind and he just arranges the facts in a way that backs their narrative.

    Michael Moore engages in this sort of crap as well.

    There isn't a point in the MSM countering this sort of stuff since everybody has already made up their mind. They'll just shove their fingers in their ear and look for a source that backs their world view.

    I will agree with what you said about Moore but cmon, there's editing to get a reaction and there is editing to cause direct harm to another human being

    override367 on
  • Options
    YougottawannaYougottawanna Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    More for the highlight reel:

    The Los Zetas gang seized two ranches in Laredo! This could be interpreted as an act of war! The source was a San Diego blogger, but the story was quickly picked up by Michelle Malkin and (who else) Andrew Breitbart.

    The only problem? It didn't happen. (TPM story)

    Yougottawanna on
  • Options
    Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    More for the highlight reel:

    The Los Zetas gang seized two ranches in Laredo! This could be interpreted as an act of war! The source was a San Diego blogger, but the story was quickly picked up by Michelle Malkin and (who else) Andrew Breitbart.

    The only problem? It didn't happen. (TPM story)
    Michelle Malkin amended her original post with an update that reads: "Updated: No US ranch seizures, 51 bodies discovered in Monterrey,"


    Nice try Michele.

    Dark_Side on
  • Options
    kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    More for the highlight reel:

    The Los Zetas gang seized two ranches in Laredo! This could be interpreted as an act of war! The source was a San Diego blogger, but the story was quickly picked up by Michelle Malkin and (who else) Andrew Breitbart.

    The only problem? It didn't happen. (TPM story)

    It's the perfect loon story. Even if every source says Bullshit, it can just be considered a government coverup and woo conspiracy theory!

    I'm waiting for more of this to happen as blogs begin to realize they can troll news orgs.

    kildy on
  • Options
    HavelockHavelock Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    More for the highlight reel:

    The Los Zetas gang seized two ranches in Laredo! This could be interpreted as an act of war! The source was a San Diego blogger, but the story was quickly picked up by Michelle Malkin and (who else) Andrew Breitbart.

    The only problem? It didn't happen. (TPM story)
    Michelle Malkin amended her original post with an update that reads: "Updated: No US ranch seizures, 51 bodies discovered in Monterrey,"


    Nice try Michele.

    It's like watching a perpetual motion machine of terrible. Can't stop won't stop.

    Havelock on
  • Options
    Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2010
    I am sorry for going this route, but I need some help on this issue.

    There is a fellow employee of my organisation that believes Glen Beck is an honest, upright individual. On an intellectual level, I know Glen Beck is a cancer of the media. I would love to set him straight, but I don't watch television.

    Key points that came up today include that he believes Glen Beck is honest, and that Beck didn't jump on the racism bandwagon over the USDA thing, which was commented on... on page six, I think.

    The more examples I can get of Beck being dishonest the better. I know dishonesty is hard to prove compared to simply being incorrect, but you all know enough about him to come up with more than enough examples, I think. I have faith in you.

    Bonus points for examples of Beck admitting to saying something on his show that he doesn't believe. If you can come up with examples of that I will love you forever.

    If the thread council feels that this discussion isn't worth clogging up the thread with, please respond via PM. Thank you in advance.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • Options
    Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    About the only good thing you can ever say about Glenn Beck is that he really isn't a racist at all.

    Everything else though, man.

    He's one hell of an actor.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    I am sorry for going this route, but I need some help on this issue.

    There is a fellow employee of my organisation that believes Glen Beck is an honest, upright individual. On an intellectual level, I know Glen Beck is a cancer of the media. I would love to set him straight, but I don't watch television.

    Key points that came up today include that he believes Glen Beck is honest, and that Beck didn't jump on the racism bandwagon over the USDA thing, which was commented on... on page six, I think.

    The more examples I can get of Beck being dishonest the better. I know dishonesty is hard to prove compared to simply being incorrect, but you all know enough about him to come up with more than enough examples, I think. I have faith in you.

    Bonus points for examples of Beck admitting to saying something on his show that he doesn't believe. If you can come up with examples of that I will love you forever.

    If the thread council feels that this discussion isn't worth clogging up the thread with, please respond via PM. Thank you in advance.

    There's a huge scandal involving shady dealings with the gold trading firm he shills for.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Glenn Beck thinks the Weather Underground is the reason for Homer Simpson who is destroying America.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited July 2010
    I... I can't tell if you are being serious.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    Not really.
    But is this line of thought -- is this apparent in our world today? I hate to sound like my grandfather here, but I want to show you something. Before the Weather Underground came, father and the role of father in the house -- the family unit is being attacked, and it's all right here. The role of a mom, stay-at-home -- a stay at home mom. How many women in our society say, "I'm just a mom?" You're "just a mom" is being demeaned and ridiculed. You can't even teach your own children anymore. "You're not capable. You're a stay-at-home mom."

    With the exception of The Cosby Show, I can't think of very many TV shows where the dad is the smart one. Before the 1960s, these were the shows on television. This was Father Knows Best. Can you even imagine a show named that? This is My Three Sons. Ward Cleaver, Leave It To Beaver. The role of father was strong, but now -- I mean, I hate to be my grandfather and say, "We didn't even have Rice Krispies back then" -- but look at the difference.

    This was before these guys showed up. Now look at our culture. [The Simpsons] is the funniest show ever written on television. I love this show. But dad's a schlub. How about Everybody Loves Raymond? Dad's a schlub. Great show, one of my favorite shows again, but the roles are reversed.

    This isn't a mistake. Let me quote again. The crisis -- "The crisis in imperialism has brought about a breakdown in culture and ideology. The family falls apart. The kids leave home. Women begin to break out of traditional female and mother roles. There develops a generation gap and a youth problem."

    Do you see? The breakdown in our culture isn't a cause of the rise of this crazy ideology. It is the result of this. It depends on it. It's a path to power for the radicals. They must have it. They consume it. They feed off it.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    So wait, the fact that some women don't live by traditional roles and the fact that fathers in households are recognized as being capable of fuckups or goofs is destroying America?

    Henroid on
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    ahahahahaahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaahahahahah

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    JepheryJephery Registered User regular
    edited July 2010
    I have to admit, Beck could probably make his regular audience be afraid of anything. He should start trolling them. Like, telling them that there are monsters in the closet, then point them to some wizard who sells magic potions for getting rid of monsters. Oh wait, hes already doing that. The wizards are Republicans and the magic potion is Conservatism!

    Jephery on
    }
    "Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Sign In or Register to comment.