#1 Bill Maher: Conservatives 'made' McVeigh do it03-23-2009, 08:38 PM
Glenn Beck - Bill Maher: Conservatives 'made' McVeigh do it
[Insider] Audio Available:
March 23, 2009 - 11:53 ET
GLENN: So don't think about me when you listen to this audio. Think about what this means to you. Here's Bill Maher.
MAHER: Listening to people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck these days, I cannot figure out whether these right-wingers are more dangerous when they're in power or when they're out of power because when they're out of power, you know, their paranoia goes off the charts. This Glenn Beck guy, I wouldn't even give him the time of day except he's a big star now on Fox and a lot of people believe, and he's talking about FEMA concentration camps.
GLENN: Okay, I just want you to know this isn't accurate at all. I did mention the Internet conspiracy theory of FEMA concentration camps, particularly in relation to a segment in which we are going to debunk Internet conspiracy theories. I said on the air the day -- I snapped. Did anybody hear it? I snapped: "Can we just set the record straight on this. Stop looking at things that are on the Internet." But Bill Maher, isn't he also talking about FEMA concentration camps? Maybe he's just paranoid as well. I'm not really sure. Let's listen in.
MAHER: He says we are headed toward socialism, totalitarianism beyond your wildest imagination but apparently not beyond his wildest.
GLENN: Okay. Apparently I'm incredibly paranoid about being headed toward socialism. I wish you could see the picture of who was on the panel because on the panel, and I kid you not, is a U.S. Senator who is an avowed socialist. Bernie Sanders from Vermont, a socialist, was sitting there on the panel. You know, I don't mean socialist like "I think his policies lean social." I mean he's a card-carrying socialist! And just to show you the solid balance of the panel, you have Bill Maher on the panel, you have Keith Olbermann, you have a guy from the New York Times, somebody described as an actress, an activist sitting next to him, and Bernie Sanders, the avowed socialist. So I believe you could make the argument that the admitted socialist is actually the fifth most liberal on the panel out of five, but I'm not really sure. And saying that I am paranoid for warning that we might go down the road to totalitarianism while sitting with Keith Olbermann is particularly funny and here's why. Because Keith Olbermann is a guy who didn't warn that we might be on the road to something. He's been saying that we were already there for years, and nobody in the media even lifted an eyebrow.
CONTINUEDStand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
03-24-2009, 12:01 AM
Conservatives are more dangerous when they are in power, but they somehow made McVeigh do this horrible stuff while Clinton was in office. Dumbass. I won't even give the second half of what I'm thinking nine times out of ten about him or most will be offended. lol.
03-24-2009, 06:31 AM
The problem is that Bill Maher appears to be insane and that makes all his comments questionable. As proof of this I offer his saying that conservatives are paranoid while at the same time stating that they are just as dangerous out of power as when in power.
MAHER: Listening to people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck these days, I cannot figure out whether these right-wingers are more dangerous when they're in power or when they're out of power because when they're out of power, you know, their paranoia goes off the charts.
Please don't shoot me
03-24-2009, 08:39 AM
Bill Maher is a comedian and not a serious newsman. He's a blowhard, who is sometimes very funny and sometimes just an idiot who smokes too much dope.
On the other hand, Glenn Beck is treated as a serious newsperson, even though he's really just a drama queen who gets paid a lot of money to act out on a network that wants to be considered a legitimate news outlet. By him even responding to this, he lowers himself to the same level as the person he is criticizing, making himself that less legitimate.
03-24-2009, 02:57 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Redondo Beach, CA
I watch Fox as a way to check my thinking by listening to as many perspectives as possible. I have a hard time understanding where Beck is coming from (to put it mildly). My general concern with the Fox news approach post-election, is that some people may lack the critical thinking skills to differentiate between news content and editorial content. (and extreme hypotheticals)
03-24-2009, 03:47 PM
This is one the issues I always have with people who attack Fox news. They all fall into the exact same trap. No one who criticizes FoxNews as biased - these people can almost never name the actual NEWS anchors on the network.Stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand alone.
- Join Date
- May 2008
03-24-2009, 05:24 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Redondo Beach, CA
Their occasional denial of this reminds me of the way Vince McMahon would defend the WWF and say it wasn't staged. There were fans and still are people who believe that.
I watch FNC and accept it for what it is. However, I don't feel I'm informed only reading one source or listening to one opinion.
I've observed over the years, the on-air talent at Fox state their opinion as hard fact more boldly and sometimes brazenly than any other news source. I've often wondered if the "Fair and Balanced" packaging is what empowers them to do so.
I thought Bret Baier was an interesting replacement for Brit Hume--by interesting, I mean, I'm not sure what to make of it. Baier's much more traditional than the other anchors--a 'just the facts' approach. O'Reilly is killing at 8:00, which is good because IMO it's a solid news-based opinion show.
The old school tradition with editorial used to be that an anchor was allowed to give his opinion on a particular news story at the end of the broadcast. He'd usually turn to another camera and tell the viewers that what follows is his own opinion. There's a guy on channel 5 in L.A. that still does that. Very old school.
03-24-2009, 08:46 PMI've observed over the years, the on-air talent at Fox state their opinion as hard fact more boldly and sometimes brazenly than any other news source. I've often wondered if the "Fair and Balanced" packaging is what empowers them to do so.
This is opposed to sneaking opinion in supposed factual pieces, sublty NOT covering issues that reflect well on conservatives and overcovering issues that can be shaped (and are) to put conservatives in a bad light.
With Fox you KNOW when you are getting opinion and when you are getting news. The others??? Not so much.
I can take a Fox viewer and he can at least give me the liberal arguments on issues. You take the average mainstream news viewer and they can spout the liberal talking points inside and out, but have no clue as to what the conservative arguments even are.I long for the days when our President actually liked our country.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|