Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Sean Hannity vs OWS Organizer

Page 2 of 4 [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 4:10 pm

Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 May 2012, 4:12 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


Your not going to get any enlighenment from watching his show or Fox News if you are looking for such things watch the BBC.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 4:13 pm

Joker wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


Your not going to get any enlighenment from watching his show or Fox News if you are looking for such things watch the BBC.


Enlightenment does not have to mean you learn something and agree with it, it can also mean you are enlightened to what your opponent's thinking is. Fox though, is not about learning, it is about entertainment, just like the Republican Party who pays them to be their mouthpiece


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Burzum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,205

06 May 2012, 4:15 pm

marshall wrote:
And right-wingers expect left wingers to come to a fight with their hands tied behind their back. Sorry, no can do. You dish it, you take it.

Did you miss the point of my post or something? :hmph:

If you don't recall, in our very first encounter you called me nutty without any provocation, so pardon me for taking umbrage with your post.



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 May 2012, 4:17 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Joker wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


Your not going to get any enlighenment from watching his show or Fox News if you are looking for such things watch the BBC.


Enlightenment does not have to mean you learn something and agree with it, it can also mean you are enlightened to what your opponent's thinking is. Fox though, is not about learning, it is about entertainment, just like the Republican Party who pays them to be their mouthpiece


I always get the words confused so I apologize. In my opinon a news station should not be own by a poltical party and should never be opinonated that is why I dislike Fox News.

I always get word confused I often think words have more then one meaning. I persoanlly would like atheists to do the news seeing how they are less likely to be bais regardless of what the issue is. Fox News is a machine that



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 4:20 pm

I think religion or nonreligion should not play a role in how news is delivered, modern news media is a money making entertainment business. In my opinion, the early 21st century news media is all a macrocosm of TMZ. It is doing more harm than it is informing people, at least on some subjects


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


CrazyCatLord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,177

06 May 2012, 4:22 pm

Burzum wrote:
CrazyCatLord wrote:
I don't think that was Schultz' position. Hannity pushed him into the freeloader corner and put those words into his mouth without giving him the opportunity to explain his political point of view.

You are saying he was tricked into claiming that his political ideology is something it is not?


Schultz was bullied into an intimidated and defensive state and not given enough time to properly explain himself in between the ad hominem attacks. The movement that he represents -- which, for the most part, acted very peaceful and orderly -- was mispresented as a horde of violent rioters, looters and rapists. Schultz himself was made into an anarchist and a freeloader, who can't be bothered to look for a job and instead suckles on the welfare teat (when in fact he was laid off and is currently participating in further education to improve his chances on the job market, from what I gathered). By the time Hannity asked questions about his political ideology, in between further personal attacks, Schultz was understandably stressed out. He didn't have a chance to get a complete sentence in, and the viewer never got to know his political ideology.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

06 May 2012, 4:22 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


The statement that cops were somehow infiltrating the OWS movement to discredit it was pretty stupid. The small number of criminal incidents that did happen were blown way out of proportion by the right in the first place so there's no need to come back with conspiracy theories. As for his political views, he didn't really get a chance to clearly explain them. It seems Hannity stated them for him instead, trying to frame him into a corner.



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 May 2012, 4:24 pm

I agree with you their religion should not play a role in the news. I am a strong supporter of keeping my faith out of politics because it will always do more harm then good. Using a religiion to help create laws is unfair to the people of no faith the religious can still keep their faith. Just because their religion no longer plays a role in politiics does not mean that religion would end up being ban.



CrazyCatLord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,177

06 May 2012, 4:28 pm

If you really want to understand where the Occupy Wall Street movement is coming from, I think Florida representative Alan Grayson said it best in a panel debate on Bill Maher's show Real Time:

Quote:
Alan Grayson: "They are complaining about the fact that Wall Street wrecked the economy three years ago and nobody was held responsible for that. Not a single person has been indicted or convicted for destroying twenty percent of our national net worth accumulated over the course of two centuries. They are upset about the fact that Wall Street has iron control over the economic policies of this country, and that one party is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wall Street, and the other party caters to them as well."

P. J. O'Rourke: "Give the man a bongo drum! They've found their spokesman! ..."

Alan Grayson: "If I am the spokesman for all the people who think we should not have 24 million people in this country who can't find a full time job, that we should not have 50 million people in this country who can't see a doctor when they're sick, that we shouldn't have 47 million people in this country who need government help to feed themselves and we shouldn't have 15 million families who owe more on their mortgage than the value of their home, then I'll be that spokesman."



Last edited by CrazyCatLord on 06 May 2012, 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 4:28 pm

marshall wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


The statement that cops were somehow infiltrating the OWS movement to discredit it was pretty stupid. The small number of criminal incidents that did happen were blown way out of proportion by the right in the first place so there's no need to come back with conspiracy theories. As for his political views, he didn't really get a chance to clearly explain them. It seems Hannity stated them for him instead, trying to frame him into a corner.


I agree, though cops infiltrating peaceful protests and inciting violence is not something without precedent. The SQ here in Quebec is well known for this, having been caught red handed, and it has happened elsewhere. I don't think it is as unlikely as some would assume, and I am not one to consider "conspiracy theories" worthy of investigation


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

06 May 2012, 4:32 pm

In America Cops can become quite violent when dealing with protesters.



Burzum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,205

06 May 2012, 5:08 pm

CrazyCatLord wrote:
Schultz was bullied into an intimidated and defensive state and not given enough time to properly explain himself in between the ad hominem attacks. The movement that he represents -- which, for the most part, acted very peaceful and orderly -- was mispresented as a horde of violent rioters, looters and rapists. Schultz himself was made into an anarchist and a freeloader, who can't be bothered to look for a job and instead suckles on the welfare teat (when in fact he was laid off and is currently participating in further education to improve his chances on the job market, from what I gathered). By the time Hannity asked questions about his political ideology, in between further personal attacks, Schultz was understandably stressed out. He didn't have a chance to get a complete sentence in, and the viewer never got to know his political ideology.

I'm not convinced. There were no ad hominem attacks when Hannity was asking about free services, and he was not in any way visibly stressed. He was even making jokes while answering ("Oh god yes, I could use some free dental care"). Someone that was stressed out and pressured into claiming a view that they do not espouse would not have answered with the confidence that he answered with.

No, I think he believes everything he said, and I'm curious why you are trying to defend him in this way.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 5:10 pm

Burzum wrote:
CrazyCatLord wrote:
Schultz was bullied into an intimidated and defensive state and not given enough time to properly explain himself in between the ad hominem attacks. The movement that he represents -- which, for the most part, acted very peaceful and orderly -- was mispresented as a horde of violent rioters, looters and rapists. Schultz himself was made into an anarchist and a freeloader, who can't be bothered to look for a job and instead suckles on the welfare teat (when in fact he was laid off and is currently participating in further education to improve his chances on the job market, from what I gathered). By the time Hannity asked questions about his political ideology, in between further personal attacks, Schultz was understandably stressed out. He didn't have a chance to get a complete sentence in, and the viewer never got to know his political ideology.

I'm not convinced. There were no ad hominem attacks when Hannity was asking about free services, and he was not in any way visibly stressed. He was even making jokes while answering ("Oh god yes, I could use some free dental care"). Someone that was stressed out and pressured into claiming a view that they do not espouse would not have answered with the confidence that he answered with.

No, I think he believes everything he said, and I'm curious why you are trying to defend him in this way.


Schultz was good enough not to let them see him sweat but not good enough to avoid biting on Hannity's line of questioning. His making jokes was his attempt to lighten things, because in case you did not notice, Hannity was treating him like a piece of s**t, which is exactly what Hannity's viewers want. They and Hannity could give two f***s about what Schultz and OWS think. I am glad Schultz maintained his composure


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

06 May 2012, 5:23 pm

Vigilans wrote:
marshall wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


The statement that cops were somehow infiltrating the OWS movement to discredit it was pretty stupid. The small number of criminal incidents that did happen were blown way out of proportion by the right in the first place so there's no need to come back with conspiracy theories. As for his political views, he didn't really get a chance to clearly explain them. It seems Hannity stated them for him instead, trying to frame him into a corner.


I agree, though cops infiltrating peaceful protests and inciting violence is not something without precedent. The SQ here in Quebec is well known for this, having been caught red handed, and it has happened elsewhere. I don't think it is as unlikely as some would assume, and I am not one to consider "conspiracy theories" worthy of investigation


I thought he was talking about incidents within the OWS protests being framed by police. I have no doubt that there were incidents where cops instigated clashes between protesters and police. There also seemed to be a lot of incidents where a single protester acting out of line did something like spit at a cop or throw something and the cops responded by charging in with tear gas and beating people down to arrest the person who disrespected them.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 May 2012, 5:28 pm

marshall wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
marshall wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Burzum wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
The OWS guy should not have bit on Hannity's line of questioning about his personal life. Hannity had no intention of listening to what the guy had to say, he is an entertainer, there to entertain his white trash flock

I'm not defending Hannity, but what do you think that guy had to say?


I would love to have heard it, a credible news organization would have given him the opportunity to elaborate his position. Instead Hannity decided to provide his viewers with the entertainment they desire, not enlightenment. The guy even said, when Hannity was querying him about his employment, that Hannity already checked this on LinkedIn so what is the purpose of that line of questioning


The statement that cops were somehow infiltrating the OWS movement to discredit it was pretty stupid. The small number of criminal incidents that did happen were blown way out of proportion by the right in the first place so there's no need to come back with conspiracy theories. As for his political views, he didn't really get a chance to clearly explain them. It seems Hannity stated them for him instead, trying to frame him into a corner.


I agree, though cops infiltrating peaceful protests and inciting violence is not something without precedent. The SQ here in Quebec is well known for this, having been caught red handed, and it has happened elsewhere. I don't think it is as unlikely as some would assume, and I am not one to consider "conspiracy theories" worthy of investigation


I thought he was talking about incidents within the OWS protests being framed by police. I have no doubt that there were incidents where cops instigated clashes between protesters and police. There also seemed to be a lot of incidents where a single protester acting out of line did something like spit at a cop or throw something and the cops responded by charging in with tear gas and beating people down to arrest the person who disrespected them.


The impression I got from him, besides there being police agents provocateurs, that criminals, drunks and vagrants were released from jails into the area. I don't know anything about that, but I know better than to believe that only the SQ has been responsible for instigating infiltration tactics. :shrug: I think the police were likely ordered to respond with extreme prejudice


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do