Proof that Hannity and Beck are not reliable journalists

[_aussieguy55]

I think its funny that O'reilly was asked to speak at a values conference. The details of his court case of harressment seems to indicate he had a thing for phone sex. Its all over on the Huffington post

"When plaintiff responded that she never engaged in phone sex, Defendent BILL O'REILLY professed disbeleif, and told her that the sexual stories he told were all based on his own experiences , such as the massage he received in a cabana in Bali and a short little brown woman asked to see his penis and was amazed . DEfendent BILL O'REILLY the suggested that he tell plaintiff the same sexual stories , which he knew she would just love . Shocked and embarressed,. Plaintiff ANDREA MACKRIS informed Defendent in no uncertain terms that she was neither experienced in nor interested in gaining experience in telephone sex. Defendent expressed disbeleif"

See all on Huffington Post

Another

" so anyway i am rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples real hard, kinda kissing your neck from behind .. and then I take the other hand with the falafel (sic) thing and I'd put it on your pussy but you have to do it really light , just kind of tease business...."

Oh boy and he is married

Jon Stewart - No wonder Republicans are against gay marriage and support traditional marriage, they do it so often.

[_bcspace]

As others have written, there is a distinction between opinion people and reporters. Hannity and Beck are opinion people.

And yet their opinion reports the news more accurately than the mainstream media.

Jon Stewart - No wonder Republicans are against gay marriage and support traditional marriage, they do it so often.

This is just a left-wing smokescreen to remove the spotlight from the wrongness and immorality of their opinions and policies.

[_richardMdBorn]

I think its funny that O'reilly was asked to speak at a values conference. The details of his court case of harressment seems to indicate he had a thing for phone sex. Its all over on the Huffington post

"When plaintiff responded that she never engaged in phone sex, Defendent BILL O'REILLY professed disbeleif, and told her that the sexual stories he told were all based on his own experiences , such as the massage he received in a cabana in Bali and a short little brown woman asked to see his penis and was amazed . DEfendent BILL O'REILLY the suggested that he tell plaintiff the same sexual stories , which he knew she would just love . Shocked and embarressed,. Plaintiff ANDREA MACKRIS informed Defendent in no uncertain terms that she was neither experienced in nor interested in gaining experience in telephone sex. Defendent expressed disbeleif"

See all on Huffington Post

Another

" so anyway i am rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples real hard, kinda kissing your neck from behind .. and then I take the other hand with the falafel (sic) thing and I'd put it on your pussy but you have to do it really light , just kind of tease business...."

Oh boy and he is married

Jon Stewart - No wonder Republicans are against gay marriage and support traditional marriage, they do it so often.

O'Reilly's not a conservative.

Joke: how does Dan Quayle differ from Bill Clinton and Teddy Kennedy.

Answer: he knows that harass is one word.

[_richardMdBorn]

In case anyone thinks the media is unbiased, Mark Steyn is on the case:

Here is a tale of two soundbites. First:

“Slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.”

Second:

“The third lesson and tip actually comes from two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Tse Tung and Mother Teresa. Not often coupled with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is: You’re going to make choices... But here’s the deal: these are your choices; they are no one else’s. In 1947, when Mao Tse Tung was being challenged within his own party on his own plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-Shek and the nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army… They had everything on their side. And people said ‘How can you win..? How can you do this against all of the odds against you?’ And Mao Tse Tung says, ‘You fight your war and I’ll fight mine…’ You don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things… You fight your war, you let them fight theirs. Everybody has their own path.”

The first quotation was attributed to Rush Limbaugh. He never said it. There is no tape of him saying it. There is no transcript of him saying it. After all, if he had done so at any point in the last 20 years, someone would surely have mentioned it at the time.

Yet CNN, MSNBC, ABC, other networks and newspapers all around the country cheerfully repeated the pro-slavery quotation and attributed it, falsely, to Rush Limbaugh. And planting a flat-out lie in his mouth wound up getting Rush bounced from a consortium hoping to buy the St Louis Rams. The NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said the talkshow host was a “divisive” figure, and famously non-divisive figures like the Reverend Al Sharpton and the Reverend Jesse Jackson expressed the hope that, with Mister Divisive out of the picture, the NFL could now “unify”.

The second quotation – hailing Mao – was uttered back in June to an audience of high school students by Anita Dunn, the White House Communications Director. I know she uttered it because I watched the words issuing from her mouth on “The Glenn Beck Show” on Fox News. But don’t worry. Nobody else played it.

So if I understand correctly:

Rush Limbaugh is so “divisive” that to get him fired leftie agitators have to invent racist soundbites to put in his mouth.

But the White House Communications Director is so un-divisive that she can be invited along to recommend Chairman Mao as a role model for America’s young.

From my unscientific survey, US school students are all but entirely unaware of Mao Tse-Tung, and the few that aren’t know him mainly as a T-shirt graphic or “agrarian reformer”. What else did he do? Here, from Jonathan Fenby’s book Modern China, is the great man in a nutshell:

“Mao’s responsibility for the extinction of anywhere from 40 to 70 million lives brands him as a mass killer greater than Hitler or Stalin.”

Hey, that’s pretty impressive when they can’t get your big final-score death toll nailed down to within 30 million. Still, as President Obama’s Communications Director say, he lived his dream, and so can you, although if your dream involves killing, oh, 50-80 million Chinamen [CORRECT] you may have your work cut out. But let’s stick with the Fenby figure: He killed 40-70 million Chinamen. Whoops, can you say “Chinamen” or is that racist? Oh, and sexist. So hard keeping up with the Sensitivity Police in this pansified political culture, isn’t it? But you can kill 40-70 million Chinamen and that’s fine and dandy: You’ll be cited as an inspiration by the White House to an audience of high school students. You can be anything you want to be! Look at Mao: He wanted to be a mass murderer, and he lived his dream! You can too!

The White House now says that Anita Dunn was “joking”. Anyone tempted to buy that spin should look at the tape: If this is her Friars Club routine, she needs to work on her delivery.

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/10/18/commentary/op-eds/doc4adadec66b9a2299505590.txt

There are a fair number of Mao fans in the Obama White House.

[_JohnStuartMill]

If you think that Anita Dunn is an actual Maoist, then you're an absolute moron. There's absolutely nothing in her political past to suggest that she's a revolutionary. The fact that she was on the Obama campaign (and remains in his administration) isn't evidence that there are revolutionaries in the administration; it's evidence against the idea that she's a revolutionary, because a revolutionary wouldn't tolerate using constitutional means to ascend to power.

By definition.

Everyone who's not a hack can see this, which explains why you're having trouble here.

Here's what happened: she tried to make a wry statement, and fumbled the delivery. If you want to take five words to indicate her political ideology more than her lifetime of work, then be my guest. But you should be aware that to do so would make you a dribbling idiot.

[_richardMdBorn]

RMB I wrote that Anita Dunn is a fan of Mao.

JSM, I wrote that

If you think that Anita Dunn is an actual Maoist, then you're an absolute moron. There's absolutely nothing in her political past to suggest that she's a revolutionary. ..

Here's what happened: she tried to make a wry statement, and fumbled the delivery. If you want to take five words to indicate her political ideology more than her lifetime of work, then be my guest. But you should be aware that to do so would make you a dribbling idiot.

The video shows that she called Mao one of here two favorite political philosophers. And it was not a joke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWbX_vsAGd4&feature=fvsr

I note that you changed my words, a fan of Mao, into a Maoist, which is obviously a stronger phrase.

[_aussieguy55]

Richard you say O'Reilly is not a conservative. He spoke at some values conference recently run by the Republicans. He is rude, swears and talks dirty. Wow some values.

[_richardMdBorn]

Richard you say O'Reilly is not a conservative. He spoke at some values conference recently run by the Republicans. He is rude, swears and talks dirty. Wow some values.

So?? Bill Clinton was embraced by feminists yet there is strong evidence that he raped Juanita Broaddrick and abused many other women. Ted Kennedy also abused women. I guess the personal is not political when you're pro Roe v Wade.

[_JohnStuartMill]

RMB I wrote that Anita Dunn is a fan of Mao.

JSM, I wrote that

If you think that Anita Dunn is an actual Maoist, then you're an absolute moron. There's absolutely nothing in her political past to suggest that she's a revolutionary. ..

Here's what happened: she tried to make a wry statement, and fumbled the delivery. If you want to take five words to indicate her political ideology more than her lifetime of work, then be my guest. But you should be aware that to do so would make you a dribbling idiot.

The video shows that she called Mao one of here two favorite political philosophers. And it was not a joke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWbX_vsAGd4&feature=fvsr

I note that you changed my words, a fan of Mao, into a Maoist, which is obviously a stronger phrase.

Well, what does "a fan of Mao" mean? Could such a person find some value in some of Mao's statements while abhorring his atrocities? If so, what would be objectionable about being "a fan of Mao"? Nothing in and of itself, I'd contend.

[_aussieguy55]

A really funny send up on Glen Beck by Joh Stewart

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/0 ... 48129.html

This is one of Jon's best along with the one he did on Fox news.

What an obscene way to earn so much money. Blubbering drama queen.