GostHacked Posted June 6, 2010 Report Posted June 6, 2010 And yes, I referred to you as a hypocrite. Why? Because you pick and choose which "unacceptable" behavior you rally against. lololoooolllolololol Quote
punked Posted June 6, 2010 Report Posted June 6, 2010 So here is another "gem" from Shady's man Beck. http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006040053 On his radio show he recommended the readings of one Elizabeth Dilling. Elizabeth Dilling was a rabid antisemite who during WW2 supported Hitler. Some great quotes from Elizabeth would be the nick-man given to Dwight Eisenhower who was called "Ike the Kike" by one Dilling and labeling President Kennedy's New Frontier program the "Jew frontier." I mean at least he stopped short of naming mein kampf his book of the year. Maybe he is waiting until his ratings drop a little more right Shady? That's your boy. Quote
bloodyminded Posted June 6, 2010 Report Posted June 6, 2010 If I see David Frum, or David Gergen on TV as I'm flipping through the channels I always stop to hear what they are saying. The same used to go for William F. Buckley. Yes I watched an interview Buckley did with Noam Chomsky. And while the argument got heated, both men--understanding how civil debate works--remained pretty respectful ( a few pointed barbs aside). Which reminds me...such an interview is practically unthinkable nowadays. Too bad. Folks on another web board post these "Bush did 9/11" videos that are, like, one hour long. After five minutes, I know what it is so I stop watching. These people accuse me of being closed minded, presumably because I didn't waste 55 more minutes watching more of the same. I hear you. I was charged with being a "left gatekeeper," an "establishment" voice determined to support the machinery of a lawless state through mny false pretences to dissent and criticism. However, so far as I can even summon an answer to this indictment, I disagree. I realize it's sad for the idealogues on this board, but the big left-right battles were mostly fought in the 20th century. Commie. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Michael Hardner Posted June 6, 2010 Report Posted June 6, 2010 Yes I watched an interview Buckley did with Noam Chomsky. And while the argument got heated, both men--understanding how civil debate works--remained pretty respectful ( a few pointed barbs aside). Which reminds me...such an interview is practically unthinkable nowadays. Too bad. But as one medium declines, another rises to take its place. Smart people still exist, they just don't watch Cable News, unless they're bored, looking for stupid amusement, and NASCAR or wrestling isn't on yet. The 'other' is MLW and similar webs. Large changes in societies often seem to go hand-in-hand with changes in communication. There should be a rule that after 5 years, or 5000 posts whichever comes first, you should be obliged to debate with people who agree with you politically, but are more junior in their web experience. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bloodyminded Posted June 6, 2010 Report Posted June 6, 2010 But as one medium declines, another rises to take its place. Smart people still exist, they just don't watch Cable News, unless they're bored, looking for stupid amusement, and NASCAR or wrestling isn't on yet. The 'other' is MLW and similar webs. Large changes in societies often seem to go hand-in-hand with changes in communication. Excellent points. I'd only counter that more intelligent political debate on television would, by definition, increase the amount of intelligent political debate that exists. I see no reason for it to be either/or. And I don't buy the notion of "market forces," or "the market demands...." either (not that you claimed it, mind you, but I'm anticipating somebody mistaking Economics 101 Market Theory for proof that it objectively exists without comlications and nuance). Because there is clearly an audience hunger for more intelligent dramas and comedies, a need which HBO and a handful of other outlets have been eagerly trying to fulfill. So I don't see any good reason why such quality and intelligence can't translate into the political-debate field. It's not even that none exists; it's that even the better ones have attuned themselves to quick soundbytes so that ideas can't get fleshed out. If you watch Buckley's '69 debate with Chomsky, you don't see some radical "America-hatin'" moron; you see a man with an encyclopedic knowledge of the Vietnam War making a moral argument, at length (the only way to navigate such complex matters); and you see a similarly knowledgeable host debating him; and you see the two men granting one another excellent points when they are made...rather than shutting off mics, O'Reilly style;, or drawing loopy, meaningless diagrams on a blackboard to "demonstrate" that Progressives are Nazis, like Beck; or to watch uninformative joke-fests by Bill Maher. (I was previously maybe too hard on Maher...but I don't quite understand why so many people think his shows have been the apogee of enlightened debate. They barely scratch the surface.) Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Jack Weber Posted June 7, 2010 Report Posted June 7, 2010 Excellent points. I'd only counter that more intelligent political debate on television would, by definition, increase the amount of intelligent political debate that exists. I see no reason for it to be either/or. And I don't buy the notion of "market forces," or "the market demands...." either (not that you claimed it, mind you, but I'm anticipating somebody mistaking Economics 101 Market Theory for proof that it objectively exists without comlications and nuance). Because there is clearly an audience hunger for more intelligent dramas and comedies, a need which HBO and a handful of other outlets have been eagerly trying to fulfill. So I don't see any good reason why such quality and intelligence can't translate into the political-debate field. It's not even that none exists; it's that even the better ones have attuned themselves to quick soundbytes so that ideas can't get fleshed out. If you watch Buckley's '69 debate with Chomsky, you don't see some radical "America-hatin'" moron; you see a man with an encyclopedic knowledge of the Vietnam War making a moral argument, at length (the only way to navigate such complex matters); and you see a similarly knowledgeable host debating him; and you see the two men granting one another excellent points when they are made...rather than shutting off mics, O'Reilly style;, or drawing loopy, meaningless diagrams on a blackboard to "demonstrate" that Progressives are Nazis, like Beck; or to watch uninformative joke-fests by Bill Maher. (I was previously maybe too hard on Maher...but I don't quite understand why so many people think his shows have been the apogee of enlightened debate. They barely scratch the surface.) I happen to like Bill Maher,not because I agree with him,but because the show is a generally light hearted look into serious issues.If that's what it takes to get a serious discussion started,so be it...Same thing for Stewart and Colbert. The problem I have with Olberamnn,Beck,and,O'Reilly is that they're basically carnival barkers of different ideologies pretending to be serious journalists.Beck tries the "I'm not a journalist" proviso,but it's a fairly lame attempt.They all occasionally make a serious point,once in a while,but it's usually ideologically driven mind fluff.And sometimes,in the case of Beck,it get's into some seriously dangerous territory.If one can seperate the chaffe from the wheat,it can be entertaining stuff.If you can't,all three ar just a waste of time. William F.Buckley and Noam Chomsky debating each other...I would pay good money to see that... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Shady Posted June 7, 2010 Report Posted June 7, 2010 With Buckley no longer with us, I think George Will best fills that space. He's amazing. George Will vs Stephen Colbert <--- first time I've ever seen Colbert get owned! Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted June 7, 2010 Report Posted June 7, 2010 With Buckley no longer with us, I think George Will best fills that space. He's amazing. George Will vs Stephen Colbert <--- first time I've ever seen Colbert get owned! I think we watched a different interview, that guy actually said what he is after is like Christian science without the Christianity. Which is nothing, Christian science isn't exactly scientific so you take the Christianity out you've got nothing left. Is this guy a joke? Quote
Shady Posted June 8, 2010 Report Posted June 8, 2010 I think we watched a different interview, that guy actually said what he is after is like Christian science without the Christianity. Which is nothing I guess that flew completely over your head. What's Christian science without the Christian? Just science. He's agnostic. How did that so confuse you? Is this guy a joke? George Will is a lot of things. Joke isn't one of them. Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted June 8, 2010 Report Posted June 8, 2010 I guess that flew completely over your head. What's Christian science without the Christian? Just science. He's agnostic. How did that so confuse you? "Christian Science" isn't science a all, "Christian Science" is moronic. This is "Christian Science". So who's head did it go over? Quote
sharkman Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 I guess that flew completely over your head. What's Christian science without the Christian? Just science. He's agnostic. How did that so confuse you? George Will is a lot of things. Joke isn't one of them. I"ve seen him a time or two, but he's been under my radar. If TrueMetis doesn't like him, that's good enough for me! Quote
Shady Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 "Christian Science" isn't science a all, "Christian Science" is moronic. This is "Christian Science". So who's head did it go over? Apparently still yours. He said WITHOUT THE CHRISTIAN. Meaning just science. Like I've already said, he's not religious. I guess you just don't get it. Quote
Shady Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 I"ve seen him a time or two, but he's been under my radar. If TrueMetis doesn't like him, that's good enough for me! You should watch the video of George Will having Bill Maher put his foot in his mouth a few weeks ago. It's awesome. It's funny to watch Bill Maher assert what he believes. As though it's fact. He does it all of the time on his show too. The actual facts of Brazil: Brazil is the eighth largest consumer of oil in the world burning 2.372 million barrels a day. That places them ahead of Canada, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Mexico, France, Great Britain, Italy, and Spain. Furthermore, according to the CIA, Brazil is the thirteenth largest producer of oil in the world putting them ahead of Iraq, Kuwait, Algeria, Nigeria, Angola, Libya, and Great Britain. Way to go Billy! You make Glenn Beck look like a genius! Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Apparently still yours. He said WITHOUT THE CHRISTIAN. Meaning just science. Like I've already said, he's not religious. I guess you just don't get it. If that's what you get from it fine. But if you take Christian science, which doesn't contain any science, and take out the Christian part what do you have? This really shouldn't be that hard. It's like saying Atheist faith, without the Atheist part. It doesn't mean anything. Edited June 9, 2010 by TrueMetis Quote
bloodyminded Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Apparently still yours. He said WITHOUT THE CHRISTIAN. Meaning just science. Like I've already said, he's not religious. I guess you just don't get it. But Shady, if you were to call yourself "an Islamist conservative...only without the 'Islamist'...." Well, we might have a difficult time understanding what you were trying to get at. (Sorry Truemetis...you beat me to it, but i posted before I noticed.) Edited June 9, 2010 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Shady Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 But Shady, if you were to call yourself "an Islamist conservative...only without the 'Islamist'...." Well, we might have a difficult time understanding what you were trying to get at. (Sorry Truemetis...you beat me to it, but i posted before I noticed.) No. George Will didn't bring up the term Christian science. Stephen Colbert did. In which Will immediately dismissed. Once again, George Will is many things. But a joke isn't one of them. Especially when compared to you two intellectuals. Quote
bloodyminded Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 No. George Will didn't bring up the term Christian science. Stephen Colbert did. In which Will immediately dismissed. Once again, George Will is many things. But a joke isn't one of them. Especially when compared to you two intellectuals. Well, true, I am presumably of only roughly the intellectual capacity of George Will--pretty average, I would say. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Jack Weber Posted June 9, 2010 Report Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) I liked George Will when he was discussing Rube Wadell and Ty Cobb in the Ken Burns Baseball documentary? I liked his book "Bunts"? Edited June 9, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
BubberMiley Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 It's a sad day. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Jack Weber Posted April 9, 2011 Report Posted April 9, 2011 Yes... It's a sad day for comedians everywhere... Beck was a goldmine of material...A gift that kept on giving!! A moment of silence for a lunatic's lunatic.. Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
sharkman Posted April 9, 2011 Report Posted April 9, 2011 Cheer up all you Beckies! If you think he won't pop back up like a whack-a-mole, then you have a short memory indeed(think CNN). And he may seem kind of crazy(kind of like Michael Moore), but he has an irritating habit of being right now and then. You can ask Van Jones about that... Quote
bloodyminded Posted April 9, 2011 Report Posted April 9, 2011 Cheer up all you Beckies! If you think he won't pop back up like a whack-a-mole, then you have a short memory indeed(think CNN). And he may seem kind of crazy(kind of like Michael Moore), but he has an irritating habit of being right now and then. You can ask Van Jones about that... I personally think he was quite wrong in promoting books by a rabid conspiracy-theorist and anti-semite. But his admirers decided to give him a pass for that; unless they agreed with the sentiments, of course. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
bud Posted April 9, 2011 Report Posted April 9, 2011 http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/lk040811dBP-500.jpg Quote http://whoprofits.org/
jbg Posted April 11, 2011 Report Posted April 11, 2011 Yes... It's a sad day for comedians everywhere... Beck was a goldmine of material...A gift that kept on giving!! A moment of silence for a lunatic's lunatic.. The Charlie Sheen of the right? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.