Prev: {BS} Hachi, see the fox on Fox
Next: Squeaking noise when starting 2007 Corolla CE manual 5 SPD
From: SMS on 13 Sep 2009 11:33
ByTor wrote:

> So its obvious that the opposition labels him a loon, and he just might
> be, but honestly here, you don't think there is anything he says that
> may have some merit, I mean absolutely nothing?

There might be, but since he's been proven to be a pathological liar
you'll never know when he's saying something with merit.

From the few times I've listened to Hannity, I have to say that it's
extremely rare that he tells the truth on any subject.

I still remember when he showed up in my city for some sort of rally in
support of a public school teacher that was in trouble (and eventually
forced to resign) for introducing his own religious material into the
classroom against the objections of parents, students, the principal,
and the school board. Did Hannity argue that the first amendement should
not prevent teachers from expressing their religious views in the
classroom? Of course not. He teamed up with the discredited "Alliance
Defense Fund" and claimed that the school banned the declaration of
independence.

Of course Hannity might be forgiven for lying because he probably got
his information from Fox news, which repeatedly falsely claimed that the
school had banned the declaration of independence.

Now to be fair, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. are not news
people, they are entertainers. You need to give their utterances and
writings the same credibility as the entertainers on SNL's Weekend
Update, or the pieces on theonion.com. The difference is that probably
everyone watching SNL's Weekend Update, or reading or watching pieces on
theonion.com, understands that it's just entertainment and should not be
taken seriously, while there are probably millions of people watching
and listening to Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, that actually
believe the stuff they say. Pathetic that the level of education and
common sense in the U.S. is so low that people actually believe these
talk show hosts.

You have to learn to look at the source when evaluating the credibility
of information. Anything from the Fox network, Washington Times, New
York Post, Newsmax, or the Wall Street Journal editorial pages, can
safely be assumed to not be factual.
From: ByTor on 13 Sep 2009 11:48
In article <4aad1075$0$1593$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>,
scharf.steven(a)geemail.com says...
>
> ByTor wrote:
>
> > So its obvious that the opposition labels him a loon, and he just might
> > be, but honestly here, you don't think there is anything he says that
> > may have some merit, I mean absolutely nothing?
>
> There might be, but since he's been proven to be a pathological liar
> you'll never know when he's saying something with merit.

This may be true but I've never seen anything that suggests this. I will
repeat, it may be true, but "me" personally have not looked into that
part so I would have to decide for myself by furthur research.

> From the few times I've listened to Hannity, I have to say that it's
> extremely rare that he tells the truth on any subject.

Really? I mean I'm not trying to sound disengenious but you stated only
a "few" times you listened and made that "total" summation? I mean I
don't agree with things Hannity says & sometimes I think he goes
overboard but I have watched him more than just a "few" times.

> I still remember when he showed up in my city for some sort of rally in
> support of a public school teacher that was in trouble (and eventually
> forced to resign) for introducing his own religious material into the
> classroom against the objections of parents, students, the principal,
> and the school board. Did Hannity argue that the first amendement should
> not prevent teachers from expressing their religious views in the
> classroom? Of course not. He teamed up with the discredited "Alliance
> Defense Fund" and claimed that the school banned the declaration of
> independence.

I would have to review this story myself to see what happened first
before I make a comment, I have not read this situation.

> Of course Hannity might be forgiven for lying because he probably got
> his information from Fox news, which repeatedly falsely claimed that the
> school had banned the declaration of independence.

Again, I have to decide for myself by reading up on it.

> Now to be fair, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, etc. are not news
> people, they are entertainers. You need to give their utterances and
> writings the same credibility as the entertainers on SNL's Weekend
> Update, or the pieces on theonion.com. The difference is that probably
> everyone watching SNL's Weekend Update, or reading or watching pieces on
> theonion.com, understands that it's just entertainment and should not be
> taken seriously, while there are probably millions of people watching
> and listening to Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, that actually
> believe the stuff they say. Pathetic that the level of education and
> common sense in the U.S. is so low that people actually believe these
> talk show hosts.

If this is the case, and you may be right, I sure hope that you put the
members of MSNBC up on the same block of scrutiny. While I may not agree
with some of their tactics I still listen for something that makes
sense.

> You have to learn to look at the source when evaluating the credibility
> of information. Anything from the Fox network, Washington Times, New
> York Post, Newsmax, or the Wall Street Journal editorial pages, can
> safely be assumed to not be factual.

So what you are saying is that any source that may be conservative
should so easily be dismissed? Wow!
I don't really read those papers so you may be right but again I would
have to decide for myself.

Personally though, and I don't mean to be insulting but everything you
mentioned here seems to give evidence that you are extremely biased to
conservatives. I mean I even give the democrats the benefit of the doubt
but you dismiss entire netorks of information, I find that not very fair
minded & balanced at all but you are entitled to your opinion.


From: SMS on 13 Sep 2009 14:54
ByTor wrote:
> In article <4aad1075$0$1593$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>,
> scharf.steven(a)geemail.com says...
>> ByTor wrote:
>>
>>> So its obvious that the opposition labels him a loon, and he just might
>>> be, but honestly here, you don't think there is anything he says that
>>> may have some merit, I mean absolutely nothing?
>> There might be, but since he's been proven to be a pathological liar
>> you'll never know when he's saying something with merit.
>
> This may be true but I've never seen anything that suggests this. I will
> repeat, it may be true, but "me" personally have not looked into that
> part so I would have to decide for myself by furthur research.

Well you've touched on the root of the problem. It's not just you, but
several million others that like the basic political philosophy of
Hannity, Palin, O'Reilly, etc (or at least what they purport their
political philosophy to be on their shows) and don't ever bother to
check the facts on anything they say. It's not all that hard. You can go
to factcheck.org and it's easy to find most of the lies of not only
Hannity and other conservatives, but those of liberals as well.
From: ByTor on 13 Sep 2009 15:01
In article <4aad3f88$0$1675$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>,
scharf.steven(a)geemail.com says...
>
> ByTor wrote:
> > In article <4aad1075$0$1593$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>,
> > scharf.steven(a)geemail.com says...
> >> ByTor wrote:
> >>
> >>> So its obvious that the opposition labels him a loon, and he just might
> >>> be, but honestly here, you don't think there is anything he says that
> >>> may have some merit, I mean absolutely nothing?
> >> There might be, but since he's been proven to be a pathological liar
> >> you'll never know when he's saying something with merit.
> >
> > This may be true but I've never seen anything that suggests this. I will
> > repeat, it may be true, but "me" personally have not looked into that
> > part so I would have to decide for myself by furthur research.
>
> Well you've touched on the root of the problem. It's not just you, but
> several million others that like the basic political philosophy of
> Hannity, Palin, O'Reilly, etc (or at least what they purport their
> political philosophy to be on their shows) and don't ever bother to
> check the facts on anything they say. It's not all that hard. You can go
> to factcheck.org and it's easy to find most of the lies of not only
> Hannity and other conservatives, but those of liberals as well.

So because I say I know nothing about this you imply that I'm (and
others)are ignorant in some way? I have not really seen anything that
would qualify him as "proven" to be a "pathological" lier.

I would say that just the mere fact that you cut out the rest of my
responses implies a partisan type argument so honestly I will not take
this conversation any furthur. You appear to be the type I speak of,
brain block in place and will "not" ever "consider" an opposing view or
honest debate.

Thanks for the reply though.
From: SMS on 13 Sep 2009 16:01
ByTor wrote:

> So because I say I know nothing about this you imply that I'm (and
> others)are ignorant in some way?

Yes, that's what I'm implying.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: {BS} Hachi, see the fox on Fox
Next: Squeaking noise when starting 2007 Corolla CE manual 5 SPD