Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Nothing like a lecture on high and mighty from OCinBuffalo! Next up: DC Tom on humility followed by conner on "seeing both sides of the issue."

Edited by Peace
  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Nothing like a lecture on high and mighty from OCinBuffalo! Next up: DC Tom on humility followed by conner on "seeing both sides of the issue."

Blah, blah, blah.

 

Nah, you're posts aren't indicative of your "I'm better than everybody else" attitude at all. :rolleyes:

 

no, just confirming the fact that a fundamentalist murdered an abortion doctor. no stereotype from me but i admit it exists. and if i was a reporter and objectivity was in my job description and i believed that stereotype, i would think it wrong to publicly admit it. even when objectivity isn't required (like at fox) i'd hold my tongue in the unlikely event that i wanted to keep that job

But, and I know how hard it is for you to see your hypocrisy here, Juan Williams wasn't hired to be a "reporter".

 

He was hired to be an "analyst". Analysts talk about the news, after somebody else reports it. His job is to say what he thinks. :wallbash: And then NPR fires him for doing his job? You are never going to be right about this, time to give it up already.

 

Oh, and I forgot to add in my last:

You are guilty of the same groupthink that you attribute to Fundamentalist Christians. Neither them nor you are morally superior because you decided to join a group.

 

And, if I hear that an abortion doctor was killed the very first thing I think is: Fundamentalist Christians did it. Not because I am prejudiced, but because I am in touch with f'ing reality.

Posted

Blah, blah, blah.

 

Nah, you're posts aren't indicative of your "I'm better than everybody else" attitude at all. :rolleyes:

 

 

But, and I know how hard it is for you to see your hypocrisy here, Juan Williams wasn't hired to be a "reporter".

 

He was hired to be an "analyst". Analysts talk about the news, after somebody else reports it. His job is to say what he thinks. :wallbash: And then NPR fires him for doing his job? You are never going to be right about this, time to give it up already.

 

 

except that his primary job, the one he got fired from, apparently stipulated restraint from such inflammatory rhetoric. npr fired him for not abiding by their standards. if he was required to breach those standards at fox then he should have resolved the conflict by quitting one job or the other.

Posted

except that his primary job, the one he got fired from, apparently stipulated restraint from such inflammatory rhetoric. npr fired him for not abiding by their standards. if he was required to breach those standards at fox then he should have resolved the conflict by quitting one job or the other.

Right, and for the last 10 years since he has been on Fox and working for NPR, he has never said anything inflammatory. :lol:

Your position is laughable. :lol:

 

The truth is: NPR is a biased news organization, and while Juan Williams was repeating DNC talking points on FOX, NPR had no problem, even if those points were inflammatory. 36 hours AFTER he says something that deviates from those talking points, which means somebody clearly got to NPR because they would have fired him immediately otherwise, he gets fired?

 

Liberal Please. :w00t:

Posted

Sorry...maybe I should have written, "Next up: 'On having a sense of humor' by OCinBuffalo'"

Perhaps. I am reading through some of the new health care regs and my blood is boiling right now. "Meaningful Use" is sheer buffoonery.

Posted

It will be interesting to see what teeth a Republican Congress can pull out of that health care legislation. I'm guessing that their battle over that with Obama waiving the veto around is going to get ugly and though I want the whole thing struck down, the Republicans will probably not do themselves good in the process of attacking it.

Posted

Sorry...maybe I should have written, "Next up: 'On having a sense of humor' by OCinBuffalo'"

He is right, you do leave an impression as if you are above the fray. Sorry fella, but you are now a part of this dysfunctional partisan family here we have at PPP.

Posted

He is right, you do leave an impression as if you are above the fray. Sorry fella, but you are now a part of this dysfunctional partisan family here we have at PPP.

 

Setting foot in this cesspool leaves no one above it. You just sink in.

Posted (edited)

Setting foot in this cesspool leaves no one above it. You just sink in.

 

 

Yeah, but theres that brown water at the top and then the murky stuff in the middle.

 

Thats everyone.

 

Then there is the **** at the bottom, so thick it can NEVER be pulled out. Its just a mix of thick, 'industrial-strength' hardened ****, dried puke and used tampons.

 

That's conner.

Edited by RkFast
Posted (edited)

except that his primary job, the one he got fired from, apparently stipulated restraint from such inflammatory rhetoric. npr fired him for not abiding by their standards. if he was required to breach those standards at fox then he should have resolved the conflict by quitting one job or the other.

So you agree that they should of fired Nina Totenberg right?

 

Yeah, but theres that brown water at the top and then the murky stuff in the middle.

 

Thats everyone.

 

Then there is the **** at the bottom, so thick it can NEVER be pulled out. Its just a mix of thick, 'industrial-strength' hardened ****, dried puke and used tampons.

 

That's conner.

:sick::lol:

Edited by Magox
Posted

Then there is the **** at the bottom, so thick it can NEVER be pulled out. Its just a mix of thick, 'industrial-strength' hardened ****, dried puke and used tampons.

 

That's conner. T80.

 

Maybe a little dark for this thread but conner-bashing is getting a bit tired.

Posted

Maybe a little dark for this thread but conner-bashing is getting a bit tired.

It never gets tiring, he's the gift that keeps on giving.

Posted

So you agree that they should of fired Nina Totenberg right?

 

 

 

not at all. she exhibits the same decorum on fox as she does on npr. williams seemed to me to play to his audience thus the coarseness on fox.

Posted

no, just confirming the fact that a fundamentalist murdered an abortion doctor. no stereotype from me but i admit it exists. and if i was a reporter and objectivity was in my job description and i believed that stereotype, i would think it wrong to publicly admit it. even when objectivity isn't required (like at fox) i'd hold my tongue in the unlikely event that i wanted to keep that job

 

Give me a break. Sounds like you've never been around a reporter, because nearly every story is flavored by their personal beliefs. If you don't think so, ask anyone who's been interviewed and then read a story for which that interview took place and see if the two are consistent. You can also take a hint from the way the reporter is asking the question. Only the very good ones won't tip the story by the question. Most are hacks who give away their POV at first breath.

 

NPR is as guilty as anyone, as they are much more endearing to the guests they like vs guests they don't like.

 

Here's a stupid, simple analogy - should Sal Marioana be fired from the Bills beat because in one of his reports he doubts that Aaron Maybin will be an effective football player. It is after all, an opinion that flavors his objective coverage of the football team.

Posted

not at all. she exhibits the same decorum on fox as she does on npr. williams seemed to me to play to his audience thus the coarseness on fox.

Typical.

 

:rolleyes:

 

You libs are a joke, and you prove your hypocrisy everyday. Good luck with that

Posted

Give me a break. Sounds like you've never been around a reporter, because nearly every story is flavored by their personal beliefs. If you don't think so, ask anyone who's been interviewed and then read a story for which that interview took place and see if the two are consistent. You can also take a hint from the way the reporter is asking the question. Only the very good ones won't tip the story by the question. Most are hacks who give away their POV at first breath.

 

NPR is as guilty as anyone, as they are much more endearing to the guests they like vs guests they don't like.

 

Here's a stupid, simple analogy - should Sal Marioana be fired from the Bills beat because in one of his reports he doubts that Aaron Maybin will be an effective football player. It is after all, an opinion that flavors his objective coverage of the football team.

He just needs to be around for one of wawrow's 4 am, "just finished my 10th tequila shot at the Crocodile", screeds.

Posted

He just needs to be around for one of wawrow's 4 am, "just finished my 10th tequila shot at the Crocodile", screeds.

 

The heck with wawrow, another wussy pantywaist who can't handle the rigours of posting on a dumb internet forum.

Posted

Give me a break. Sounds like you've never been around a reporter, because nearly every story is flavored by their personal beliefs. If you don't think so, ask anyone who's been interviewed and then read a story for which that interview took place and see if the two are consistent. You can also take a hint from the way the reporter is asking the question. Only the very good ones won't tip the story by the question. Most are hacks who give away their POV at first breath.

 

NPR is as guilty as anyone, as they are much more endearing to the guests they like vs guests they don't like.

 

Here's a stupid, simple analogy - should Sal Marioana be fired from the Bills beat because in one of his reports he doubts that Aaron Maybin will be an effective football player. It is after all, an opinion that flavors his objective coverage of the football team.

As someone who works with the media, I back this up- most reporters have their opinions show in their work. It is nearly unavoidable. We want reporters to be perfect, but they are as imperfect as we are.

×
×
  • Create New...