Conquer Club

jay_a2j wrote:There are people who know what's going on (Glen Beck included)

Snorri1234 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:There are people who know what's going on (Glen Beck included)

Why would anyone include Glen Beck?

Snorri1234 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:There are people who know what's going on (Glen Beck included)

Why would anyone include Glen Beck?

GabonX wrote:
Seriously, this is totally LOL

Biggest LOL since Sean Hannity LOL

pimpdave wrote:Actually, GabonX, let's get serious for a minute...

Were you personally affected by 9/11? Please be honest in your answer.

Because, to be perfectly honest, I seriously cannot hide the rage I feel towards people who try to build their careers on an event they DON'T KNOW A FUCKING THING ABOUT.

Glenn Beck, that sanctimonious pussy, knows NOTHING OF THAT DAY. And yes, I'm a bit drunk right now, and probably shouldn't be posting, but honestly, f*ck that hypocritical waste of egg and sperm.

Let him experience what happened that day, and then see what he has to fucking say, the cunt.

The man deserves to be mocked off the air. He shouldn't be allowed to make a living off the suffering of others. And if he'd like to know what it's like to watch someone's head explode from a piece of falling debris, knowing that it could have just as easily been him had he been 5 feet further out the door, and then to have to carry the weight of that survivor guilt for the rest of his life, I'll gladly tell him. After I break his goddamn nose and beat him to the ground like the coward he is.

pimpdave wrote:

GabonX wrote:
Seriously, this is totally LOL

Biggest LOL since Sean Hannity LOL

Dude, you rule. And you know I sincerely mean that. I think you're my favorite person who takes a consistently opposing viewpoint to my own on this site.

jay_a2j wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:There are people who know what's going on (Glen Beck included)

Why would anyone include Glen Beck?

Gotta give the man his props. He is willing to think for himself not just blindly accept what "they" tell him.

captain.crazy wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

GabonX wrote:
Seriously, this is totally LOL

Biggest LOL since Sean Hannity LOL

Dude, you rule. And you know I sincerely mean that. I think you're my favorite person who takes a consistently opposing viewpoint to my own on this site.

You have a view point? sheesh... who knew. I think Glen Beck is actually emotional about the fact that our country is teetering on the edge of a civil war. I think he really does get choked up when he sees thousands of people come together who actually care that our country is in the toilet, and realize now that Obama is a liar and a thief. Who are you people to suggest that he is a phony, Colbert is a comedian for craps sake!

captain.crazy wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

GabonX wrote:
Seriously, this is totally LOL

Biggest LOL since Sean Hannity LOL

Dude, you rule. And you know I sincerely mean that. I think you're my favorite person who takes a consistently opposing viewpoint to my own on this site.

the fact that our country is teetering on the edge of a civil war.

thegreekdog wrote:Although I do not often agree with Colbert or Stewart, those dudes are very funny and I try to watch as much as possible.

Does anyone else find it disturbing that some people get their news solely from the Daily Show, the Colbert Report, CNBC? Does anyone else find it disturbing that other people get their news solely from Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck (who, by the way, is also pretty funny)? Perhaps some day we can have a discussion of issues without one person saying "Well, Sean Hannity said..." and the opposing person, "Well, Rachel Madow said..." Perhaps if we had a state-run TV news station...

Snorri1234 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Although I do not often agree with Colbert or Stewart, those dudes are very funny and I try to watch as much as possible.

Does anyone else find it disturbing that some people get their news solely from the Daily Show, the Colbert Report, CNBC? Does anyone else find it disturbing that other people get their news solely from Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck (who, by the way, is also pretty funny)? Perhaps some day we can have a discussion of issues without one person saying "Well, Sean Hannity said..." and the opposing person, "Well, Rachel Madow said..." Perhaps if we had a state-run TV news station...

The reason for that is that the "real" news is utter shit. While what Colbert and Stewart do is for comedic effect, they seem to be the ones who ask the questions that everyone has. The large media-coporations have come to believe that "fair news" is the same as "uncritical news". Reporters should question things, be critical of what they hear, not just repeat what they hear.

jbrettlip wrote:Shouldn't a reporter report EXACTLY what they hear? Isn't that what a reporter is. I don't want to know what their opinion on Obama's speech is, I want to hear what he said. Either it is a report or an op-ed piece. That is the problem with the "news" in this country. Everyone thinks their opinion is important enough to be included in their report. Sean Hannity,Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck are not news reporters. Neither are the left's version, Olberman being the only one I can name. Cronkite was a reporter...."That's the way it was" not I,I,I me,me,me....

Snorri1234 wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:Shouldn't a reporter report EXACTLY what they hear? Isn't that what a reporter is. I don't want to know what their opinion on Obama's speech is, I want to hear what he said. Either it is a report or an op-ed piece. That is the problem with the "news" in this country. Everyone thinks their opinion is important enough to be included in their report. Sean Hannity,Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck are not news reporters. Neither are the left's version, Olberman being the only one I can name. Cronkite was a reporter...."That's the way it was" not I,I,I me,me,me....

I am not talking about opinion, I'm talking about asking critical questions. Like "Doesn't what you said directly contradict a previous statement of yours?" or "Why did you say this when it's clear you know it was untrue?

A reporter should report the truth, not just what they hear.

thegreekdog wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:Shouldn't a reporter report EXACTLY what they hear? Isn't that what a reporter is. I don't want to know what their opinion on Obama's speech is, I want to hear what he said. Either it is a report or an op-ed piece. That is the problem with the "news" in this country. Everyone thinks their opinion is important enough to be included in their report. Sean Hannity,Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck are not news reporters. Neither are the left's version, Olberman being the only one I can name. Cronkite was a reporter...."That's the way it was" not I,I,I me,me,me....

I am not talking about opinion, I'm talking about asking critical questions. Like "Doesn't what you said directly contradict a previous statement of yours?" or "Why did you say this when it's clear you know it was untrue?

A reporter should report the truth, not just what they hear.

But what happens when reporters ask critical questions of only one kind of person or ask critical questions of only other reporters? For example, many would argue (myself included) that "reporters" like Colbert and Stewart (yes, I include them), Olbermann, and Matthews only ask critical questions of members or supporters of the Republican Party. Alternatively, many would argue (myself included) would argue that Hannity and Beck only ask critical questions of members or supporters of the Democratic Party. I think the difference between those two groups of "reporters" are that the first group is generally seen as "unbiased" while the second group is generally seen as "biased."

Snorri1234 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

jbrettlip wrote:Shouldn't a reporter report EXACTLY what they hear? Isn't that what a reporter is. I don't want to know what their opinion on Obama's speech is, I want to hear what he said. Either it is a report or an op-ed piece. That is the problem with the "news" in this country. Everyone thinks their opinion is important enough to be included in their report. Sean Hannity,Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck are not news reporters. Neither are the left's version, Olberman being the only one I can name. Cronkite was a reporter...."That's the way it was" not I,I,I me,me,me....

I am not talking about opinion, I'm talking about asking critical questions. Like "Doesn't what you said directly contradict a previous statement of yours?" or "Why did you say this when it's clear you know it was untrue?

A reporter should report the truth, not just what they hear.

But what happens when reporters ask critical questions of only one kind of person or ask critical questions of only other reporters? For example, many would argue (myself included) that "reporters" like Colbert and Stewart (yes, I include them), Olbermann, and Matthews only ask critical questions of members or supporters of the Republican Party. Alternatively, many would argue (myself included) would argue that Hannity and Beck only ask critical questions of members or supporters of the Democratic Party. I think the difference between those two groups of "reporters" are that the first group is generally seen as "unbiased" while the second group is generally seen as "biased."

Oh ofcourse, both ways are bad. (Though I would argue that the difference between Stewart and Hannity is that Hannity doesn't ask honest questions. "Do you hate America?" is not a critical question.)

But this is just a side-effect of the real media not asking the questions. Jon Stewart admits he isn't making real news and only plays for his target-audience, but it's worrying that there are so many people who listen to what he says because the real news is cowardly and weak.


If you get real media to be better, the bias of others is not important.