the juan williams affair - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ASU2003 · 10-24-2010, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I noticed you used the word "more" above, why?

Williams did not give a ranking nor did he quantify his amount of worry. Are you actually different than he is on this point?

Because it is 'more' likely that sitting next to those people will actually impact the quality of my flight compared to sitting next to a woman in a burka.

roachboy · 10-24-2010, 04:13 PM

michael moore's article from the huffington post.

Quote:

An Open Letter to Juan Williams

Dear Juan,

Sorry to hear you got fired by National Public Radio for saying on Fox that you get nervous when you see Muslims on a plane with you. It was dumb to say such a thing, but I don't think saying one dumb thing should be a firing offense. (I do think an NPR journalist wanting to take money from Fox News to be a regular commentator should be a firing offense, but that's another story).

But there's more to this -- and some important things that everyone is missing.

For instance, what you said about Faisal Shazad, the Pakistani immigrant who wanted to bomb Times Square. When he was being sentenced this month, he claimed, according to you, that his attempted attack was just "the first drop of blood." We can't let political correctness blind us to this, you explained.

I guess Shahzad made a big impression on you, because after being fired you went back on Fox and told them, "You can't ignore the fact what has recently been said in court with regard to 'this is the first drop of blood in a Muslim war against America.'"

Sadly for you (and this is also why you shouldn't be working for a real news organization like NPR), Shahzad never said that. If you were a real journalist, you would have quoted him accurately. What he actually said was that he was the "first droplet of the flood," not blood. But I know how easy it is to mishear things when scary Muslims are talking. And I guess it's not a huge difference anyway.

What really matters is that you're 100% right: We shouldn't let political correctness stop us from paying close attention to what people like Shahzad say. The problem is you just haven't taken it far enough.

So Juan, I'm asking you to join me on a crusade -- whoops! scratch that, let's call it a "mission" -- to publicize these statements by Faisal Shahzad as widely as possible. Because most of the media have not spent much time on what he had to say.

Here's what he said at his recent sentencing (after talking about being a droplet in a flood):

[Saladin] liberated Muslim lands... And that's what we Muslims are trying do, because you're occupying Iraq and Afghanistan... So, the past nine years the war with Muslims has achieved nothing for the U.S., except for it has waken up the Muslims for Islam. We are only Muslims trying to defend our people, honor, and land. But if you call us terrorists for doing that, then we are proud terrorists, and we will keep on terrorizing until you leave our land and people at peace.

And this is what Shahzad said when he plead guilty back in June:

I want to plead guilty, and I'm going to plead guilty 100 times over, because until the hour the U.S. pulls its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, and stops the drone strikes in Somalia and Yemen and in Pakistan, and stops the occupation of Muslim lands, and stops killing the Muslims, and stops reporting the Muslims to its government, we will be attacking U.S., and I plead guilty to that.

Then there's email that Shahzad sent to a friend in 2006:

Everyone knows the current situation of Muslim World... Friends with peaceful protest! Can you tell me a way to save the oppressed? And a way to fight back when rockets are fired at us and Muslim blood flows? In Palestine, Afghan, Iraq, Chechnya and else where.

And then there's what Shahzad was telling friends and relatives even before that:

Mr. Shahzad had long been critical of American foreign policy. "He was always very upset about the fabrication of the W.M.D. stunt to attack Iraq and killing non-combatants such as the sons and grandson of Saddam Hussein," said a close relative. In 2003, Mr. Shahzad had been copied on a Google Groups e-mail message bearing photographs of Guantánamo Bay detainees, handcuffed and crouching, below the words "Shame on you, Bush. Shame on You."

So what do you say, Juan? Now that you have a new $2 million contract with Fox, let me come on with you for some in-depth discussions about the terrorists' real motivations. We can't let another day go by letting the PC brigade stop us from telling the truth: Terrorists aren't trying to kill us because they hate our freedom. They're killing us because we're in their countries killing them.

Yours,

Michael Moore

P.S. If you want to understand suicide bombings, be sure to read the new book that studied every instance of it for the past 30 years. It's been used by many groups of many religions, not just Arabs and not just Muslims. And almost all such terrorism has one motivation in common: occupation by foreign militaries.

P.P.S. Here's something else that I'd sincerely love to talk about with you: what do you think when you see rich middle-aged white men talking on TV about how they get nervous around African Americans on the street? And then they explain that we can't let political correctness stop us from talking about black-on-white crime?

Does it drive you crazy that they say this without even being conscious of the history of far greater violence by white people toward blacks? And do you maybe understand now how those middle-aged white guys get it so wrong?

UPDATE: Juan, you probably remember in 1986 when the Washington Post Magazine ran a Richard Cohen column defending jewelry store owners who wouldn't buzz in young black men. It caused such a big controversy that the New Republic ran a bunch of responses to it, including one by you. You might find it interesting to go back and read what you wrote then -- for instance, "Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment... Common sense becomes racism when skin color becomes a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me."

Michael Moore: Juan Williams Is Right: Political Correctness About Terrorists Must End!

i think it speaks for itself.

FoolThemAll · 10-24-2010, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

so wait....now finding fox news contemptible is another example of how the big bad Other victimizes conservatives? that's hilarious.

Were you responding to me here?

I hardly think it's a phenomenon limited to one particular ideology, nor does my post indicate such a view. I'm not the kind of poster to note the darker parts of human nature and then attribute them to some mythical <insert ideology here>land in that snide way that discourages anything like productive discourse and encourages petty partisan mudslinging. That sounds like someone else.

roachboy · 10-25-2010, 05:02 AM

how interesting, fta.

if you think there's a dialogue to be had, initiate one.

but there's nothing mythical about the existence of populist conservatism. it's a discourse. it has consistent signifiers and logics. it's pretty well-known and is easy to find. you could find it. anyone can.
and if you looked at that discourse, you'd know that more often than not, when an issue is processed through it that processing operates in a cookie-cutter way.

that obviously doesn't account for all the ways in which people use the discourse. i would hope no-one is exactly point-for-point an intellectual reproduction of it.

but i see no problem with analyzing and manipulating conservative discourse here because the way the statements about the world work, and the ways the logic they enact works, shapes how they're used.

i've never claimed to be doing anything different.

btw passive-aggressive isn't very conducive to dialogue either. fyi.

mixedmedia · 10-25-2010, 05:13 AM

excellent, roachboy. thanks for posting that. (the Moore letter)

Now that everything has stewed a bit, I'm starting to think that Juan Williams knew exactly what he was doing. He upped his media value and Fox News obtained a martyr done wrong by his liberal benefactors. How very sexy, as they say in journalism today.

roachboy · 10-25-2010, 06:27 AM

it's starting to look that way, isn't it?

i wonder if fox is now paying him more than they would have had he simply resigned fro npr in order to splash about there.

and npr's issued a mea culpa on process grounds.

Quote:

*

NPR CEO apologizes for handling of Williams firing

Vivian Schiller, the NPR CEO who has gotten criticism from all sides about NPR’s decision to fire Juan Williams, apologized to her colleagues Sunday evening for the way the firing was handled.

Among the most problematic aspects of the firing was the NPR’s initial statement suggesting that Williams's statements on “The O’Reilly Factor” were to blame. Schiller later said that Williams had long been in hot water at NPR, and the recent statements were simply the last straw, but the timing of his firing undermined this argument.

In her latest statement, Schiller acknowledges that “reasonable people can disagree about timing” and apologizes for firing Williams over the phone, but doesn’t back down from the decision itself.

The letter:

Dear Program Colleagues,

I want to apologize for not doing a better job of handling the termination of our relationship with news analyst Juan Williams. While we stand firmly behind that decision, I regret that we did not take the time to prepare our program partners and provide you with the tools to cope with the fallout from this episode. I know you all felt the reverberations and are on the front lines every day responding to your listeners and talking to the public

This was a decision of principle, made to protect NPR’s integrity and values as a news organization. Juan Williams’ comments on Fox News last Monday were the latest in a series of deeply troubling incidents over several years. In each of those instances, he was contacted and the incident was discussed with him. He was explicitly and repeatedly asked to respect NPR's standards and to avoid expressing strong personal opinions on controversial subjects in public settings, as that is inconsistent with his role as an NPR news analyst. After this latest incident, we felt compelled to act. I acknowledge that reasonable people can disagree about timing: whether NPR should have ended its relationship with Juan Williams earlier, on the occasion of other incidents; or whether this final episode warranted immediate termination of his contract.

In any event, the process that followed the decision was unfortunate – including not meeting with Juan Williams in person – and I take full responsibility for that. We have already begun a thorough review of all aspects of our performance in this instance, a process that will continue in the coming days and weeks. We will also review and re-articulate our written ethics guidelines to make them as clear and relevant as possible for our acquired show partners, our staff, Member stations and the public.

The news and media world is changing swiftly and radically; traditional standards and practices are under siege. This requires us to redouble our attention to how we interpret and live up to our values and standards. We are confident that NPR’s integrity and dedication to the highest values in journalism and our commitment to serving as a national forum for the respectful discussion of diverse ideas will continue to earn the support of a growing audience.

I stand by my decision to end NPR’s relationship with Juan Williams, but deeply regret the way I handled and explained it. You have my pledge that the NPR team and I will reflect on all aspects of our actions, and strive to improve them in the future.

Please feel free to share your concerns and suggestions.

Respectfully,

Vivian Schiller

NPR CEO apologizes for handling of Williams firing - On Media - POLITICO.com

the decision is based on professional misconduct and the premise for that outlined in the paragraph in bold. it appears that the usual process leading to the firing was followed even if the handling of the firing itself was maybe a problem (i didn't know about the phonecall. but my personal interest in this lay elsewhere, in the mis-statement of the situation by the conservative punditocracy and how that played out.)

appearing on o-reilly and hannity and being baited into playing the rhetorical game (to put it charitably with respect to williams) is a problem because those shows are infotainment, not journalism. they are editorials with a shabby footnote apparatus. i'm glad that the distinction between types of side-show at fox gets made.

but i wonder the extent to which fox's response is about protection of its business model. because the williams firing raises problems for it at the level of revealing how fox news is perceived beyond the limits of itself, beyond its own self-framing. it's one thing to have people in a disempowered public scoff at fox---it's quite another for a broadcast outlet to effectively argue that fox has programming that violates professional standards for journalism (even as that should be obvious.) so maybe the tempest in a teapot from the right was also a defense of the television outlet that is at this point the most important mobilizing tool they have.

aceventura3 · 10-25-2010, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

excellent, roachboy. thanks for posting that. (the Moore letter)

From the Moore letter, agree or disagree with the war but why ignore this?

Quote:

But if you call us terrorists for doing that, then we are proud terrorists, and we will keep on terrorizing until you leave our land and people at peace.

If this is "Bush's war" it seems to me if they wanted us to leave their land in peace, a first course of action would be to support the majority of Americans who want to bring our troops home and give Obama a chance. There is no need to target an kill innocent people in the name of peace.

And, you want to pretend that terrorism is not a concern that people should actually talk about???

I am curious because I see this as a cultural issue - is this the way some of you live your lives? Do you pretend problems are not real? And by not talking about them do you think the problems disappear? Williams is an adult, and he will be fine, and NPR can fire who they want for whatever reason from my point of view - but the real issue is the pretense about all of this - another one of those I don't get it moments involving liberals.

---------- Post added at 04:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:34 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

No one is pretending that he can't have ulterior motives. Everyone has ulterior motives. The thing is that we don't really have any evidence either way. Your issue is that you assume that I'm being naive for not insinuating something for which I have no evidence. I admit it, I think that it is unlikely that Soros views contributions to the Harlem Children's Zone as a viable means of waging war on Fox News. That doesn't make me naive. It makes me sane and rational. What power does the Harlem Children's Zone have over Fox News?

Furthermore, if Soros were attempting to buy off poor people (as you seem to be insinuating that he is, or at least that he might be, you don't know, but you know that he could so it's obviously worth mentioning as though it's plausible), the fact that he contributes to a limited-scope child educational program in New York would be one of the least efficient ways of doing so. So your "I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin'" accusatory nonsense doesn't even make sense.

Here is an interesting editorial, in today's IBD:

Quote:

Media: Does George Soros have a bad case of Fox envy against media mogul Rupert Murdoch? Or has he decided the main reason Americans won't embrace socialism is Fox News? Either way, he's now buying the news.

Soros, the billionaire speculator famous for bankrolling leftist causes, recently declared he was through with politics this election season because "I don't believe in standing in the way of an avalanche," referring to the likely GOP victory in November.

The 80-year-old leftist didn't earn his $14 billion fortune making bad bets. So although he's given "only" $53,100 in 2010 to Democratic candidates and causes (and his 24-year-old son has donated $73,000), it's worth noting that Soros has shifted his attention to influencing the media message, with his cash following.

On Oct. 18, Soros donated $1.8 million to National Public Radio to hire 100 new reporters for a project targeting state governments called "Impact of Government."

With the news industry laying off reporters, his idea is to fill a gap in coverage with all these spare journalists. But the new jobs won't precisely amount to truly independent ones — the reporters will have implicit obligations to Soros, who signs their paychecks.

Soros' idea isn't new. The model for this influence over the media via patronage journalism comes from Soros' allies Herb and Marion Sandler who made their fortune from issuing subprime mortgages.

Leaving that business just ahead of the 2008 crash, they set up Pro Publica to conduct investigative reporting and give it away free to the mainstream media.

The strings seem to be showing on the Soros donation to NPR, too.

Days after the Soros windfall was announced, National Public Radio fired liberal news analyst Juan Williams after he expressed an inoffensive personal view on the popular Fox News Channel.

Up until then, opinions by NPR correspondents and analysts had been expressed in abundance, but Williams' statement on Fox, because it was expressed on Fox, amounted to apostasy. The firing sends a message that Fox is beyond the pale and must be silenced.

If it sounds far-fetched, then how does one explain that Soros also made his first direct donation to Media Matters last week, reportedly at $1 million, just after donating to NPR?

Led by disgraced journalist David Brock, Media Matters is a fringe-left nuisance organization that spends much of its time trying to dig up dirt on Fox News. Its Web site actually has a whole section devoted to criticizing Fox opinions and claiming they are lies.

Posted 10/22/2010 07:22 PM ET

The value to Soros is that it drives the news narrative leftward and attracts attention to its left-leaning message. After all, there's nothing the mainstream media in its vanity likes more than someone writing about it.

Yet another Soros donation worth noting came in September, when he shoveled $100 million to the nongovernmental organization Human Rights Watch. It came shortly after HRW's then-operations director, Suzanne Nossell, was caught on a secretive list called JournoList actively plotting with other Soros-funded leftists to smear the political campaign of then-vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

"I think it is and can be spun as a profoundly sexist pick. Women should feel umbrage at the idea that their votes can be attracted just by putting a woman, any woman, on the ticket no matter her qualifications or views," Nossell wrote to the others.

When news of that broke, Palin had become a Fox News commentator and the Soros donation followed.

These aren't the first forays into media that Soros has attempted.

His Center for American Progress is obsessed with media ownership and using the "Fairness Doctrine" to silence Fox News.

He's also ventured into crazy left-wing radio like Air America, which failed to attract enough listeners and went bust. But this new wave of donations seems to arise out of a desire to seize control of a message in the wake of Democrats' unpopular socialist policies.

We've got news for Soros — Fox News follows what the people think, it doesn't issue its views from the top down. All the same, there's something strange and disturbing about a radical left-wing billionaire so obsessed with the success of Fox News.

George Soros' War Against Fox News - Investors.com

filtherton · 10-25-2010, 09:55 AM

Ah, yes. The clearly objective IBD has all the answers (at least the ones that fit their narrative). They don't seem to mention Harlem Children's Zone. Soros does make a covenient bogeyman to help rally the troops around the persecuted entity that is Fox News.

*edit*

What could have possibly convinced you that that IBD editorial by itself was a meaningful response to anything I've written in this thread?

Tully Mars · 10-25-2010, 11:22 AM

You could easily make the same arguments in reserves by simply replacing the name Soros with Koch or Mellon.

boink · 10-25-2010, 11:29 AM

Yay George Soros !

roachboy · 10-25-2010, 11:40 AM

ace, dear, the rationale for firing williams was pretty clearly articulated in the letter i posted above you.

appearing on o-reilly and hannity amounted to a violation of npr's code of conduct for reporters. he had been warned about it repeatedly. it just turned out that this time he said something of such a high and focused level of boneheadedness that they felt compelled to act.

you've got no defense of the content of what williams said. in the letter, npr says it was enough that it was controversial. because it was stupid and bigoted. you may live in a "different culture" in which being a bigot isn't controversial. i suppose there's always been such pockets out there. i mean, any racist is normal in **some** context.
that there are such contexts that normalize different forms of bigotry doesn't mean that being a bigot is ok. but it appears that's what you're arguing.

before you were defending williams "right" to say stupid things.
now you try to defend william's stupid things implying that he's a bigot.

and the soros piece from idb is really funny. a series of articles in the legit press appear tracking down the funding networks behind the tea party that show it's largely the same old same old and not some "renegade" astroturf movement and the following monday idb edito is rehearsing stuff we all already know as if it justifies what the right is doing. same as it ever was.

aceventura3 · 10-25-2010, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Ah, yes. The clearly objective IBD has all the answers (at least the ones that fit their narrative).

Sorry, I don't post the items from the IBD editorial pages that I don't agree with. There is no doubt that IBD is a business paper with a business and conservative bias (wow, imagine actually understanding that and being willing to say it), but they present liberal view points every day on their editorial page.

Quote:

They don't seem to mention Harlem Children's Zone. Soros does make a covenient bogeyman to rally the troops around the persecuted entity that is Fox News.

Here is the long and short on billionaires, all of them. If concern for the human condition was their number one priority or even a higher priority than making money, they would not be billionaires. You can put Soros on a pedestal if you want, I'll just keep alert to what he is doing and how he may be trying to exploit the system. It is a dog eat dog world.

---------- Post added at 09:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tully Mars

You could easily make the same arguments in reserves by simply replacing the name Soros with Koch or Mellon.

I do. I trust my mother and my wife. And my trust of my wife is like a blind faith thing based on a foolish thing called love (sorry that may be the lyrics of a song, but true).

---------- Post added at 09:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

ace, dear, the rationale for firing williams was pretty clearly articulated in the letter i posted above you.

appearing on o-reilly and hannity amounted to a violation of npr's code of conduct for reporters. he had been warned about it repeatedly. it just turned out that this time he said something of such a high and focused level of boneheadedness that they felt compelled to act.

you've got no defense of the content of what williams said. in the letter, npr says it was enough that it was controversial. because it was stupid and bigoted. you may live in a "different culture" in which being a bigot isn't controversial. i suppose there's always been such pockets out there. i mean, any racist is normal in **some** context.
that there are such contexts that normalize different forms of bigotry doesn't mean that being a bigot is ok. but it appears that's what you're arguing.

before you were defending williams "right" to say stupid things.
now you try to defend william's stupid things implying that he's a bigot.

and the soros piece from idb is really funny. a series of articles in the legit press appear tracking down the funding networks behind the tea party that show it's largely the same old same old and not some "renegade" astroturf movement and the following monday idb edito is rehearsing stuff we all already know as if it justifies what the right is doing. same as it ever was.

Perhaps it boils down to a question of consistency.

If NPR holds everyone to the same objective standard, good. I just want honesty. Say you fired him because he appears on Fox News if that is the case, don't fabricate a reason and expect thinking people to buy it without question.

If liberals are fit to be tied by big money going into conservative causes because they fear it buys influence and will "destroy democracy" or whatever (which has never been proven) then be consistent about it when looking at money flow going to liberal causes.

If you claim IBD has a bias, be willing to acknowledge a NY Times bias.

If you call a conservative a racist for what may be irrational fears, say the same about a liberal with what may be irrational fears.

If you want to make fun of O'Donnel, make fun of Alvin Greene running for Senate in SC.

The list can go on and on, but I am sure you get the point (but won't acknowledge it, my oh my the thought of trying to be objective).

filtherton · 10-25-2010, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Sorry, I don't post the items from the IBD editorial pages that I don't agree with. There is no doubt that IBD is a business paper with a business and conservative bias (wow, imagine actually understanding that and being willing to say it), but they present liberal view points every day on their editorial page.

And? It's an editorial, hence the loaded language and poorly elucidated facts. It doesn't mean much more than a mouse fart in the night.

Quote:

Here is the long and short on billionaires, all of them. If concern for the human condition was their number one priority or even a higher priority than making money, they would not be billionaires. You can put Soros on a pedestal if you want, I'll just keep alert to what he is doing and how he may be trying to exploit the system. It is a dog eat dog world.

Who has put Soros on a pedestal? I don't know anything about the man, my default assumption about his is that he's an asshole. If you really want to "keep alert to what he is doing" (sounds like an obsession to me

) I suggest you avoid opinion pieces from folks predisposed to talk shit about him.

What I do know is that you and otto (and a whole collection of the usual right wing opinion-makers) are fond of making fairly illogical, unsubstantiated claims about who he is and the things that motivate him. If I were more like you or otto, I'd make some sort of foolish connection between your obsessions with Soros and some sort of deep seated fear of his power. But that would be dumb, so I won't do it.

I will reiterate that talking about ol' moneybags mcliberal does seem to be a convenient way of reinforcing the laughable notion that the conservative perspective is currently under credible attack, and is therefore a useful strategy for rallying the thoughtless. So, in other words, you're being chumped out.

aceventura3 · 10-25-2010, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

And? It's an editorial, hence the loaded language and poorly elucidated facts. It doesn't mean much more than a mouse fart in the night.

And that is why no one ever addresses the points in an editorial they disagree with...why even read it? I wrote that it was from IBD's editorial pages. Each time, we get the same ad-hominim response. The response lacks credibility.

Quote:

Who has put Soros on a pedestal? I don't know anything about the man, my default assumption about his is that he's an asshole. If you really want to "keep alert to what he is doing" (sounds like an obsession to me

) I suggest you avoid opinion pieces from folks predisposed to talk shit about him.

I read a lot of stuff, there was a reason why I shared this with TFP,

Quote:

What I do know is that you and otto (and a whole collection of the usual right wing opinion-makers) are fond of making fairly illogical, unsubstantiated claims about who he is and the things that motivate him. If I were more like you or otto, I'd make some sort of foolish connection between your obsessions with Soros and some sort of deep seated fear of his power. But that would be dumb, so I won't do it.

I stated that I don't know his intent, and I made that clear a couple of times.

Quote:

I will reiterate that talking about ol' moneybags mcliberal does seem to be a convenient way of reinforcing the laughable notion that the conservative perspective is currently under credible attack, and is therefore a useful strategy for rallying the thoughtless. So, in other words, you're being chumped out.

Yet, do you buy into the NPR stated reason for firing Williams or do you agree the reason stated was B.S.?

Heck, even the CEO saying Williams veered away for news analysis and gave opinion, veered away from new analysis and gave her opion when she suggested that William share his feeling with a psychiatrist or his publicist, suggesting he is either mentally imbalanced or in it just for the money. Is that the NPR standard? Didn't think so! And you folks get upset with me for cutting through the B.S. and calling it the way it is.

mixedmedia · 10-25-2010, 02:34 PM

ace, I'm not sure what you mean by your remark.

I'm not apt to engage in a lengthy debate because I've grown kind of fond of the pseudo-pithy manner of TFP participation that I've adopted of late. It's pleasant.

But if you want to clarify what you want me to respond to, then I will probably try.

filtherton · 10-25-2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

And that is why no one ever addresses the points in an editorial they disagree with...why even read it? I wrote that it was from IBD's editorial pages. Each time, we get the same ad-hominim response. The response lacks credibility.

Bullshit. Everytime I've responded directly to points made in IBD editorials you've ignored my responses.

Quote:

I stated that I don't know his intent, and I made that clear a couple of times.

Bullshit. You insinuate that Soros has malicious intentions, but then you try to cover your ass with the caveat that you don't know. It's a weaselly way of doing things. If you were so sure in your lack of confidence about Soros' true intentions you wouldn't be so quick to cast aspersions.

Quote:

Yet, do you buy into the NPR stated reason for firing Williams or do you agree the reason stated was B.S.?

I find NPR's explanation plausible. I don't think it was the result of a vast liberal conspiracy. Replace what Williams said about muslims with any other minority group and the calls for his firing would be more prevalent.

For instance "I'm no bigot, but when I see a young black man walking down the street towards me, I get nervous."

"I'm no bigot, but when I see a person with an NRA sticker on their car, I get nervous."

etc.

Furthermore, many of the same folks who are foaming at the mouth about NPR "censoring" Williams' "free speech" were all too happy when it was Helen Thomas' head on the chopping block even though all of their convoluted defenses of Williams would also have applied equally to her.

Quote:

Heck, even the CEO saying Williams veered away for news analysis and gave opinion, veered away from new analysis and gave her opion when she suggested that William share his feeling with a psychiatrist or his publicist, suggesting he is either mentally imbalanced or in it just for the money. Is that the NPR standard? Didn't think so! And you folks get upset with me for cutting through the B.S. and calling it the way it is.

Of course CEOs and news analysts aren't subject to the same standards. What world do you live in? You aren't calling it the way it is, you're calling it the way you want it to be.

roachboy · 10-25-2010, 06:19 PM

this speaks for itself, i think:

Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things

aceventura3 · 10-26-2010, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

ace, I'm not sure what you mean by your remark.

I'm not apt to engage in a lengthy debate because I've grown kind of fond of the pseudo-pithy manner of TFP participation that I've adopted of late. It's pleasant.

But if you want to clarify what you want me to respond to, then I will probably try.

Williams openly and honestly shared a fear that he holds, in his way he acknowledged that it is irrational - is it your view that it is inappropriate for people to openly discuss these issues in public?

Then depending on your response, what is the best way for people to deal with fears, given a willingness to acknowledge that a fear is inappropriate, wrong, or irrational?

My point is, first I don't care about NPR firing Williams, that is their choice, I just don't like the dishonesty in the reason given - but from a bigger picture point of view many Americans share the concern Williams expressed and that concern is reflected in thing like the NY city mosque controversy, I think we need to address the issue but it seems liberals want to silence or ridicule anyone willing to share their fears. I find that unhelpful, do you agree or disagree?

roachboy · 10-26-2010, 08:03 AM

ace, what the fuck is "muslim garb"?

Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things

since "muslim garb" doesn't refer to anything at all, you're back to defending some imaginary "right" to say stupid things as if being-conservative and saying-stupid-things were synonymous.

and if that's your position, i agree with you.

aceventura3 · 10-26-2010, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Bullshit. Everytime I've responded directly to points made in IBD editorials you've ignored my responses.

What about your response to this one? What did I ignore?

Quote:

Bullshit. You insinuate that Soros has malicious intentions, but then you try to cover your ass with the caveat that you don't know. It's a weaselly way of doing things. If you were so sure in your lack of confidence about Soros' true intentions you wouldn't be so quick to cast aspersions.

How about it being a factual statement. I don't know what his intent is, this is true. I don't, nor did I, hide from my point of view on Sorros - I don't trust him, I would never trust him and I think he does things for his own personal gain. I equated him to inner-city drug dealers and gang thugs - that is my view. What was not clear about that? Is it that I separate my personal views and biases from facts, is that what causes a problem?

Quote:

I find NPR's explanation plausible. I don't think it was the result of a vast liberal conspiracy. Replace what Williams said about muslims with any other minority group and the calls for his firing would be more prevalent.

The facts are not on your side. I am not going to do a search of the things said by NPR journalist worse than what Williams said that did not result in a termination - you can do your own homework.

I laid-out a pattern of liberals over-reacting to "Fox News" and doing things in an irrational manner - when does a series of similar events become a pattern? If you and others don't see it now, it will occur some more - I correctly defined the issue, you just don't see it yet. If I was Obama, or a liberal I would stop and reflect on why there is a fear of Fox News. My answer would be to face them head on, go toe to toe with them, fight, do what Williams was doing, not run and hide, not cry like a toddler about how mean and bad Fox News is.

Quote:

For instance "I'm no bigot, but when I see a young black man walking down the street towards me, I get nervous."

The best answer to that would be to talk about it, confront the fear - you will find that what identifies a person as a threat has nothing to do with skin color. But, given our history and crime statistic and how they are reported I can understand how people can have that fear. The answer is not to ridicule you, not to attempt to silence you, so why do you support NPR's action? I don't get it.

Quote:

"I'm no bigot, but when I see a person with an NRA sticker on their car, I get nervous."

Many NRA members are in the "closet" and are not open about their NRA'ness because of the above kind of fears. You may be surprised by the number of NRA members you interact with everyday.

{Added} I did a Google search out of curiosity. There are about 4 million NRA members and about 8 million homosexual people in the US.

---------- Post added at 04:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:18 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

ace, what the fuck is "muslim garb"?

The fear Williams expressed is irrational. I can not defend his point of view, but I will not ridicule it. Why, do you?

filtherton · 10-26-2010, 08:50 AM

Ace, sometimes I forget that you can't keep track of the points you make, so that when I respond to one of them, you act as if I was responding to a different point.

There's no point in further discussion, you win the internet.

To recap: Soros (whose motivations you remain unsure about) is somehow like a drug dealing thug buying poor folks' goodwill (though you're not sure about this, just a gut feeling) and this is evidenced by his contributions to the Harlem Children's Zone, which he is using in his "War on Fox News" because by buying the goodwill of the families with small children in Harlem, Fox News loses (???). Nobody ever responds to the meat of your IBD parroting, except when they do, in which case you'll pretend you never said that nobody responds to your IBD parroting and shift focus to the current instance of nobody responding to the meat of your IBD parroting even after it was pointed out that nobody responds to the meat of your IBD parroting because you fail to respond to their responses. Finally, clearly, Juan Williams was fired because of George Soros and the mean ol' Fox News haters (or is it FEAR-ers?!!?) that comprise the whole of contemporary liberalism. I think I understand where you're coming from.

ottopilot · 10-26-2010, 10:26 AM

At least there's one comforting outcome from this whole darn mess!
...NPR can now fully focus on the hypocrisy of their white progressive elitism with without any uppity liberal negros speaking outside the approved talking-points.

(thanks George Soros!)

filtherton · 10-26-2010, 10:30 AM

Any way you could summarize that point with an obviously irrelevant chart?

dc_dux · 10-26-2010, 10:41 AM

How about a Glenn Beck chart on the evils of Soros?

YouTube - Glenn Beck EXPOSES Public Enemy -- GEORGE SOROS! :: In Marxist Obama's Circle Of CRIME INC.!!

YouTube - Glenn Beck EXPOSES Public Enemy -- GEORGE SOROS! :: In Marxist Obama's Circle Of CRIME INC.!!

Since we know from otto that liberals don't like Beck's "investigative accuracy and persistence"

roachboy · 10-26-2010, 10:49 AM

a little map of the far right hall of mirrors and this new george soros canard:

Conspiracy: Conservative media link Beck's "spooky dude" Soros to Williams firing | Media Matters for America

filtherton · 10-26-2010, 10:50 AM

But, roach, IBD clearly says that we can't trust media matters.

roachboy · 10-26-2010, 10:53 AM

i know, filtherton.

i'm no doubt fooled by all those direct quotes that seem so much like what these fox people actually said....

mixedmedia · 10-26-2010, 11:18 AM

somehow this conversation seems perfect for the Halloween season.

As a liberal myself, I can't help but be a little titillated by the sheen of maleficent power being projected onto me and those of my ilk.

But as a pragmatic smartass, I can't help but think that it's also stupid and totally irrational.

filtherton · 10-26-2010, 11:34 AM

I heard that Soros created AIDS to make gays, via their suffering, more sympathetic to the liberal media with the ultimate goal of legalizing human on animal marriage. Unfortunately, I seem to have misplaced my evidentiary flow chart.

Cimarron29414 · 10-26-2010, 11:36 AM

I think it's only fair to admit that when I see Japs in Geisha makeup photographing Pearl Harbor, I get a little nervous.

ottopilot · 10-26-2010, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Any way you could summarize that point with an obviously irrelevant chart?

Why?... are you George Soros?

Here you go!

aceventura3 · 10-26-2010, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Ace, sometimes I forget that you can't keep track of the points you make, so that when I respond to one of them, you act as if I was responding to a different point.

There's no point in further discussion, you win the internet.

What?

Quote:

To recap: Soros (whose motivations you remain unsure about) is somehow like a drug dealing thug buying poor folks' goodwill (though you're not sure about this, just a gut feeling) and this is evidenced by his contributions to the Harlem Children's Zone, which he is using in his "War on Fox News" because by buying the goodwill of the families with small children in Harlem, Fox News loses (???). Nobody ever responds to the meat of your IBD parroting, except when they do, in which case you'll pretend you never said that nobody responds to your IBD parroting and shift focus to the current instance of nobody responding to the meat of your IBD parroting even after it was pointed out that nobody responds to the meat of your IBD parroting because you fail to respond to their responses. Finally, clearly, Juan Williams was fired because of George Soros and the mean ol' Fox News haters (or is it FEAR-ers?!!?) that comprise the whole of contemporary liberalism. I think I understand where you're coming from.

Now that you put it that way I must be preeedy dumb.

---------- Post added at 09:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:24 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

But, roach, IBD clearly says that we can't trust media matters.

I will say this about IBD - if you manage any money at all, even a 401(k) and you don't read IBD regularly, I hope that it is you or people like you on the opposite end of all my trades.

---------- Post added at 09:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:28 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

I heard that Soros created AIDS to make gays, via their suffering, more sympathetic to the liberal media with the ultimate goal of legalizing human on animal marriage. Unfortunately, I seem to have misplaced my evidentiary flow chart.

I heard another liberal fired a subordinate in a knee-jerk fashion, in this case blaming a staffer when she could have easily avoided the whole situation.

Quote:

TAMPA, Florida -- Democratic candidate for governor Alex Sink has fired a staffer who broke the rules by trying to coach her during a debate.

Sink said in a statement that she "immediately removed" from her campaign an aide who tried to communicate with her via a cell phone text message shown to her during a break in Monday night's debate. That broke ground rules that both campaigns had agreed to beforehand.

See Also: Fla. governor candidates don't know state's minimum wage
Photo Gallery: Florida governor's debate coverage

Her Republican opponent, Rick Scott, mentioned the gaffe when the CNN debate came out of the commercial break, and his campaign fired out press releases to reporters pointing it out.

CNN reports the aide was Brian May, who signed the rules agreement before Monday's debate.

"I was shocked. you know the rules, you follow the rules," said Scott after a breakfast visit with Pasco County supporters at the start of a week-long bus and plane tour of the state. If an aide had done the same thing for him, he said, "I wouldn't have read the e-mail."

Alex Sink fires staffer Brian May after governor's debate gaffe | Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Sarasota | WTSP.com 10 News

Fire first, protect your but, ask questions later. I wonder if she got a mil or two from Soros, what do you think.

---------- Post added at 09:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

somehow this conversation seems perfect for the Halloween season.

As a liberal myself, I can't help but be a little titillated by the sheen of maleficent power being projected onto me and those of my ilk.

But as a pragmatic smartass, I can't help but think that it's also stupid and totally irrational.

I must say, liberals do have a tendency to avoid responding to simple and direct questions.

---------- Post added at 09:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

I think it's only fair to admit that when I see Japs in Geisha makeup photographing Pearl Harbor, I get a little nervous.

On a serious note if this is possible at this point - during WWII Japanese Americans where interned because of fear - this from a man who said we had nothing to fear but fear itself.

There is a fear of young black males.

There is a fear of NRA types.

There is a fear of Gays.

There is a fear of Muslims.

There is a liberal fear of Fox News.

So, you folks keep making your jokes, keep trying to minimize people or pretend away people with real fears.

mixedmedia · 10-26-2010, 02:43 PM

are you implying that you asked me a simple and direct question? perhaps you might go back and re-read your obviously vague and indirect question.

I'll reiterate my point just because I'm waiting for the oven alarm to go off and have nothing else to do. The liberal movement in this country has no power and no means of attaining legitimate power. We are simply not built into the system. Therefore, we are no threat to you. The 'liberal war' is a fiction created by an entertainment monolith that finds it very profitable to convince you of a liberal war. Therefore you are a sucker, maybe even at this point a stooge. That is the essence of my argument and no amount of pie charts or ominous editorials indicating a forthcoming socialist revolution headed by the venerable (and maleficent) George Soros is going to convince me that your behavior indicates anything other than a particularly poignant SNL skit. Really, you can go have a cocktail. The war ended about 70 years ago.

roachboy · 10-27-2010, 05:04 AM

i think we get it, ace. you, as a far right kinda guy, need to normalize racism because you occupy a political viewpoint from which this might seem reasonable:

Quote:

Tea Party leader: Defeat Ellison because he's Muslim
Founder of Tea Party Nation wants to defeat Keith Ellison because, he suggests, Muslims do not belong in Congres

Via TPM via the Maddow blog: The leader of one of the three biggest Tea Party groups has called for Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., to be defeated this election explicitly because he is Muslim.

The call came in a weekend Web posting not by a fringe member of a Tea Party group, but by Tea Party Nation leader and founder Judson Phillips, a Tennessee attorney. (Tea Party Nation, with over 30,000 online members, is now the third largest Tea Party network, according to an NAACP report.) Phillips asked Tea Party Nation members to support an opponent of Ellison, with this reasoning:

There are a lot of liberals who need to be retired this year, but there are few I can think of more deserving than Keith Ellison. Ellison is one of the most radical members of congress. He has a ZERO rating from the American Conservative Union. He is the only Muslim member of congress. He supports the Counsel for American Islamic Relations, HAMAS and has helped congress send millions of tax dollars to terrorists in Gaza.

(Note: This is actually not accurate. Rep. Andre Carson is also Muslim.)

We're suprised this isn't getting more attention. Unlike in the flap over a racist satire written by Mark Williams of the Tea Party Express, Phillips has not withdrawn the post or apologized. It's hard to imagine that this would not have made more of a splash if Phillips had targeted, say, a Jewish member of Congress for being Jewish or a Mormon member for being Mormon. In any case, we've reached out to Phillips on this, and will update this post if we hear back.

Tea Party leader: Defeat Ellison because he's Muslim - War Room - Salon.com

good luck with that.

mixedmedia · 10-27-2010, 06:09 AM

Fighting a liberal war is an ugly and brutal thing. We just need to understand that.

dogzilla · 10-27-2010, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i think we get it, ace. you, as a far right kinda guy, need to normalize racism because you occupy a political viewpoint from which this might seem reasonable:

Tea Party leader: Defeat Ellison because he's Muslim - War Room - Salon.com

good luck with that.

Is that anything people being told they should vote for Obama because he is black?

Being told not to vote for someone because they are Muslim is ridiculous. But if you're going to fault the Tea Party for things like this, then at least be honest and place the blame on Democrats as well.

roachboy · 10-27-2010, 06:37 AM

dogzilla.

that's yet another post-bakke decision bit of conservative nonsense.

saying stuff like "muslims don't belong in congress...."----that's on you conservatives.
and you are doing this without any prompting.
no mirroring.
no reason, really.
the tea party just thinks this is reasonable.

it isn't.

Cimarron29414 · 10-27-2010, 07:00 AM

For what it's worth, the Tea Party group that I was going to rallies with would have thrown this guy out by his ear. We had no tolerance for this sort of shit. I can only hope there will be a backlash within his group regarding this statement.

roachboy · 10-27-2010, 07:05 AM

yeah, but this is different:

Quote:

The call came in a weekend Web posting not by a fringe member of a Tea Party group, but by Tea Party Nation leader and founder Judson Phillips, a Tennessee attorney

kind of a problem for tpn, i would think.now that it's public.

dogzilla · 10-27-2010, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

dogzilla.

that's yet another post-bakke decision bit of conservative nonsense.

saying stuff like "muslims don't belong in congress...."----that's on you conservatives.
and you are doing this without any prompting.
no mirroring.
no reason, really.
the tea party just thinks this is reasonable.

it isn't.

Really? It took me one google search to find this.

It's OK to vote for Obama because he's black - Barack Obama News - Salon.com

Quote:

I admit it: I'm voting for Barack Obama because he's black. Yes, I'm voting for him because he's qualified, intelligent, charismatic and competent -- and because unlike Hillary Clinton, he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. But if he weren't black, and Hillary had opposed the war, I'd probably vote for her because of her greater experience. In any case, it's a moot point, because if Obama weren't black, he would not be the Democratic front-runner.
I believe that most of Obama's supporters are voting for him for the same reason. Like me, they're drawn to his idealism, his youthful energy, his progressive politics. But it's his blackness that seals the deal.
And that's OK. In fact, it's wonderful.

Salon.com is hardly a conservative news source.

I'm sure if I had the time to search further right now I could find lots more liberal sources taking the same position.

Saying people shouldn't be in Congress because he is Muslim is stupid. So is saying someone should be president because he is black is equally stupid.

Your bias is showing.

10-25-2010, 05:02 AM	#44 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	how interesting, fta. if you think there's a dialogue to be had, initiate one. but there's nothing mythical about the existence of populist conservatism. it's a discourse. it has consistent signifiers and logics. it's pretty well-known and is easy to find. you could find it. anyone can. and if you looked at that discourse, you'd know that more often than not, when an issue is processed through it that processing operates in a cookie-cutter way. that obviously doesn't account for all the ways in which people use the discourse. i would hope no-one is exactly point-for-point an intellectual reproduction of it. but i see no problem with analyzing and manipulating conservative discourse here because the way the statements about the world work, and the ways the logic they enact works, shapes how they're used. i've never claimed to be doing anything different. btw passive-aggressive isn't very conducive to dialogue either. fyi. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 10-25-2010 at 06:12 AM..

10-25-2010, 05:13 AM	#45 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	excellent, roachboy. thanks for posting that. (the Moore letter) Now that everything has stewed a bit, I'm starting to think that Juan Williams knew exactly what he was doing. He upped his media value and Fox News obtained a martyr done wrong by his liberal benefactors. How very sexy, as they say in journalism today. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

10-25-2010, 09:55 AM	#48 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	Ah, yes. The clearly objective IBD has all the answers (at least the ones that fit their narrative). They don't seem to mention Harlem Children's Zone. Soros does make a covenient bogeyman to help rally the troops around the persecuted entity that is Fox News. edit What could have possibly convinced you that that IBD editorial by itself was a meaningful response to anything I've written in this thread? Last edited by filtherton; 10-25-2010 at 01:11 PM..

10-25-2010, 11:22 AM	#49 (permalink)
Tully Mars Living in a Warmer Insanity Super Moderator Location: Yucatan, Mexico	You could easily make the same arguments in reserves by simply replacing the name Soros with Koch or Mellon. __________________ I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

10-25-2010, 11:29 AM	#50 (permalink)
boink Addict Location: Seattle	Yay George Soros ! __________________ when you believe in things that you don't understand, then you suffer. Superstition ain't the way.

10-25-2010, 11:40 AM	#51 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	ace, dear, the rationale for firing williams was pretty clearly articulated in the letter i posted above you. appearing on o-reilly and hannity amounted to a violation of npr's code of conduct for reporters. he had been warned about it repeatedly. it just turned out that this time he said something of such a high and focused level of boneheadedness that they felt compelled to act. you've got no defense of the content of what williams said. in the letter, npr says it was enough that it was controversial. because it was stupid and bigoted. you may live in a "different culture" in which being a bigot isn't controversial. i suppose there's always been such pockets out there. i mean, any racist is normal in some context. that there are such contexts that normalize different forms of bigotry doesn't mean that being a bigot is ok. but it appears that's what you're arguing. before you were defending williams "right" to say stupid things. now you try to defend william's stupid things implying that he's a bigot. and the soros piece from idb is really funny. a series of articles in the legit press appear tracking down the funding networks behind the tea party that show it's largely the same old same old and not some "renegade" astroturf movement and the following monday idb edito is rehearsing stuff we all already know as if it justifies what the right is doing. same as it ever was. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-25-2010, 02:34 PM	#55 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	ace, I'm not sure what you mean by your remark. I'm not apt to engage in a lengthy debate because I've grown kind of fond of the pseudo-pithy manner of TFP participation that I've adopted of late. It's pleasant. But if you want to clarify what you want me to respond to, then I will probably try. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

10-25-2010, 06:19 PM	#57 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	this speaks for itself, i think: Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-26-2010, 08:03 AM	#59 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	ace, what the fuck is "muslim garb"? Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things since "muslim garb" doesn't refer to anything at all, you're back to defending some imaginary "right" to say stupid things as if being-conservative and saying-stupid-things were synonymous. and if that's your position, i agree with you. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-26-2010, 08:50 AM	#61 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	Ace, sometimes I forget that you can't keep track of the points you make, so that when I respond to one of them, you act as if I was responding to a different point. There's no point in further discussion, you win the internet. To recap: Soros (whose motivations you remain unsure about) is somehow like a drug dealing thug buying poor folks' goodwill (though you're not sure about this, just a gut feeling) and this is evidenced by his contributions to the Harlem Children's Zone, which he is using in his "War on Fox News" because by buying the goodwill of the families with small children in Harlem, Fox News loses (???). Nobody ever responds to the meat of your IBD parroting, except when they do, in which case you'll pretend you never said that nobody responds to your IBD parroting and shift focus to the current instance of nobody responding to the meat of your IBD parroting even after it was pointed out that nobody responds to the meat of your IBD parroting because you fail to respond to their responses. Finally, clearly, Juan Williams was fired because of George Soros and the mean ol' Fox News haters (or is it FEAR-ers?!!?) that comprise the whole of contemporary liberalism. I think I understand where you're coming from.

10-26-2010, 10:26 AM	#62 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	At least there's one comforting outcome from this whole darn mess! ...NPR can now fully focus on the hypocrisy of their white progressive elitism with without any uppity liberal negros speaking outside the approved talking-points. (thanks George Soros!) __________________ "It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo

10-26-2010, 10:30 AM	#63 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	Any way you could summarize that point with an obviously irrelevant chart?

10-26-2010, 10:49 AM	#65 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	a little map of the far right hall of mirrors and this new george soros canard: Conspiracy: Conservative media link Beck's "spooky dude" Soros to Williams firing \| Media Matters for America __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-26-2010, 10:50 AM	#66 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	But, roach, IBD clearly says that we can't trust media matters.

10-26-2010, 10:53 AM	#67 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i know, filtherton. i'm no doubt fooled by all those direct quotes that seem so much like what these fox people actually said.... __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-26-2010, 11:18 AM	#68 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	somehow this conversation seems perfect for the Halloween season. As a liberal myself, I can't help but be a little titillated by the sheen of maleficent power being projected onto me and those of my ilk. But as a pragmatic smartass, I can't help but think that it's also stupid and totally irrational. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

10-26-2010, 11:34 AM	#69 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	I heard that Soros created AIDS to make gays, via their suffering, more sympathetic to the liberal media with the ultimate goal of legalizing human on animal marriage. Unfortunately, I seem to have misplaced my evidentiary flow chart.

10-26-2010, 11:36 AM	#70 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	I think it's only fair to admit that when I see Japs in Geisha makeup photographing Pearl Harbor, I get a little nervous. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

10-26-2010, 02:43 PM	#73 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	are you implying that you asked me a simple and direct question? perhaps you might go back and re-read your obviously vague and indirect question. I'll reiterate my point just because I'm waiting for the oven alarm to go off and have nothing else to do. The liberal movement in this country has no power and no means of attaining legitimate power. We are simply not built into the system. Therefore, we are no threat to you. The 'liberal war' is a fiction created by an entertainment monolith that finds it very profitable to convince you of a liberal war. Therefore you are a sucker, maybe even at this point a stooge. That is the essence of my argument and no amount of pie charts or ominous editorials indicating a forthcoming socialist revolution headed by the venerable (and maleficent) George Soros is going to convince me that your behavior indicates anything other than a particularly poignant SNL skit. Really, you can go have a cocktail. The war ended about 70 years ago. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

10-27-2010, 06:09 AM	#75 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	Fighting a liberal war is an ugly and brutal thing. We just need to understand that. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

10-27-2010, 06:37 AM	#77 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	dogzilla. that's yet another post-bakke decision bit of conservative nonsense. saying stuff like "muslims don't belong in congress...."----that's on you conservatives. and you are doing this without any prompting. no mirroring. no reason, really. the tea party just thinks this is reasonable. it isn't. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-27-2010, 07:00 AM	#78 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	For what it's worth, the Tea Party group that I was going to rallies with would have thrown this guy out by his ear. We had no tolerance for this sort of shit. I can only hope there will be a backlash within his group regarding this statement. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."