Dictator Chavez steals second Hilton hotel in Venezuela

You admire him for a simplistic PR stunt?

I've criticized public figures and I dare any of them to come here on clutchfans D & D to challenge any of my assertions!

Heck I will take it a step further and go the FFB route. I dare any public figure I have criticized to meet me at a bar in Houston to publically debate me!

You see how difficult that was..

 

The Italians and Europe were surprised by the Brown Shirts, too. I think it is you who may be surprised that unleashing the pent up hatred of those hurting from 30 years of Reaganomics might not lead to a return of your Eisenhauer Republicanism.

 

.

Wrong as most of you guys were in your unrequited love for Dubya, I can understand why you would want to change your names.

 

(1) As I have oft stated, I am not a proponent of ANY news organization taking a "side." That goes for Fox on one extreme and MSNBC on the other. However, I do like real questions rather than softball questions like whether the President is rooting for the White Sox or the Cubs.

(2) I wouldn't care if they were asking what Republican or Democratic strategists are asking.... as long as the questions are legitimate, probing questions that get at the facts. I don't understand the difference in what they do as opposed to what CNN, MSNBC, ABC etc. do. I don't want some of the facts. I'm greedy. I want them all.

(3) Nothing has changed. I am a champion of ALL opinions being heard. I may not agree, but I value an opposing voice as much as I do a sympathetic one. Whether you or I agree with Beck is irrelevant. What I said was that I admire his defiance in putting in a telephone daring someone from the administration to refute what he is saying. So far, no one in the administration has had the gumption to face him down.

(4) I remain dubious. I know Venezuelans who fled Chavez and the opinions of him that they hold. Although a dozen or so does not constitute an accurate polling, they are young (mostly university students) but certainly not wealthy.

(5) Most of the segments in the video clip were from opinion shows where taking sides is not unlike Chris Matthews taking a side on "Hardball."
Yes, I hate it too when someone gets shouted down. I love Bob Beckel, even though I often disagree with him, because he takes a reasoned stance. O'Reilly and Hannity and Beck all shout down their guests before they can answer and I absolutely hate that.

But, yes, journalists should never "market" a cause. However, I would ask that you condemn the other networks just as vociferously for doing the same thing only from a different viewpoint.

 

Your bar was not the #1 news channel that was called out by the administration for getting facts wrong.

 

The election was really won by Chavez. Gladiator answered this nicely. Glen Beck routinely makes up arguments, which are refuted by other news organizations. The administration doesn't have to do it.

I don't know if you've heard the latest. But here's an example

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/16/beck-thomas-paine/

 

oski definitely wasn't that guy.

 

These are the time that try men's souls.

http://www.ushistory.org/PAINE/

On January 29, 1737, Thomas Paine was born in Thetford, England. His father, a corseter, had grand visions for his son, but by the age of 12, Thomas had failed out of school. The young Paine began apprenticing for his father, but again, he failed. So, now age 19, Paine went to sea. This adventure didn't last too long, and by 1768 he found himself as an excise (tax) officer in England. Thomas didn't exactly excel at the role, getting discharged from his post twice in four years, but as an inkling of what was to come, he published The Case of the Officers of Excise (1772), arguing for a pay raise for officers. In 1774, by happenstance, he met Benjamin Franklin in London, who helped him emigrate to Philadelphia.

His career turned to journalism while in Philadelphia, and suddenly, Thomas Paine became very important. In 1776, he published Common Sense, a strong defense of American Independence from England. He traveled with the Continental Army and wasn't a success as a soldier, but he produced The Crisis (1776-83), which helped inspire the Army. This pamphlet was so popular that as a percentage of the population, it was read by or read to more people than today watch the Super Bowl.

But, instead of continuing to help the Revolutionary cause, he returned to Europe and pursued other ventures, including working on a smokeless candle and an iron bridge. In 1791-92, he wrote The Rights of Man in response to criticism of the French Revolution. This work caused Paine to be labeled an outlaw in England for his anti-monarchist views. He would have been arrested, but he fled for France to join the National Convention.

By 1793, he was imprisoned in France for not endorsing the execution of Louis XVI. During his imprisonment, he wrote and distributed the first part of what was to become his most famous work at the time, the anti-church text, The Age of Reason (1794-96). He was freed in 1794 (narrowly escaping execution) thanks to the efforts of James Monroe, then U.S. Minister to France. Paine remained in France until 1802 when he returned to America on an invitation from Thomas Jefferson. Paine discovered that his contributions to the American Revolution had been all but eradicated due to his religious views. Derided by the public and abandoned by his friends, he died on June 8, 1809 at the age of 72 in New York City.

 

As you note though Glenn Beck's show isn't a news show. Anyway his hotline is ridiculous. If anyone from the Admin. wanted to they could call into his studio already and ask his producer if they could address him.

Were you impressed that GW Bush could've called into Al Franken's show on Air America when Al Franken was criticizing him?

This is a ridiculous stunt with as much meaning as me challenging Obama to debate me on Clutchfans.

 

I understand the history and his biography. That doesn't change the fact that Paine is in favor of wealth redistribution in the form of taxation.

Nor does it change the fact that Beck is using Paine either dishonestly or without actually knowing Paine's true stances on the issues. Either way Beck is an idiot, and he pwns himself. There is no need for the administration to have to refute his charges, because he makes such a clown of himself.

 

Did Al Franken have a show?

Of course, the Beck hotline is a stunt, but it makes a point. If the administration is going to call him out, then they should be prepared to refute his questions and assertions.

 

Perhaps they have better things to do? I mean the previous Admin was very annoyed at Colbert but so should GW Bush have taken Colbert on?

Anyway as you note this Beck's show isn't news, its opinion. What point is there to call in to argue opinion with him?

I will agree with you on one thing. I do think its petty of the Admin. to go after Fox news.

 

If Bush had challenged Colbert's "facts" (remembering that Colbert is a comic who has much more latitude than an opinion peddler like Beck), then, yes, absolutely, the Bush administration should have answered.

And, if they had better things to do, why did they stop doing them to attack Fox News?

 

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=175797&page=3

getting slightly offtopic guys...discussion of the admin v Fox and such go in that other thread.

edit: yeah, I know the irony of me encouraging yall to post in a basso thread....but its ontopic for yalls discussion in the last page or so.

 

Apologies. Back to Hugo.

 

Sorry R2K.

 

good point

 

FWIW, I don't watch ANY of the 24 hour "news" networks. I don't really know if MSNBC is a mouthpiece for the Dems as Faux is for the GOP because I don't watch them. I don't trust either of them because they have stopped being journalists and are now solely in the entertainment business.

Now you are lumping major (ABC) hard news organizations in with the 24 hour networks and implying that they are ALL liberal mouthpieces. This shows how snowed you have been through watching that channel. Just because Faux says it over and over again doesn't make it true. I pretty much agree about MSNBC , the agreement is less ardent about CNN, but if you say that every media outlet EXCEPT Faux is some kind of liberal marketing machine, you have drunk too much of their kool-aid.

Personally, I DO care if the "message of the day" is being driven by a strategist for one of the parties. If I wanted to read the Dem or Rep PR messages, I can go to their websites and read them, I don't need or want there to be a media outlet masquerading as news to deliver their marketing material.

I am not. Anyone who is willing to distort the truth, lie, change their story, fake tears, and do the other things that Beck does is not worth listening to. FWIW, I don't listen to Olbermann, Limbaugh, Maddow, or Hannity either, for many of the same reasons.

The big difference I see between the liberal partisans you decry and the conservative ones you defend is that the conservatives seem to be the ones most willing to distort to make their "points." Again, this is a perception based on the number of lies I have seen highlighted and I just haven't seen anyone point out as many distortions made by Olbermann and Maddow as I have with Beck, Rush, and Hannity.

If they are university students, then they are "wealthy" compared to the majority of Chavez voters, who have historically been marginalized by the elite in Venezuela. As long as Chavez is bringing up the standard of living for his constituents, they will continue to elect him to represent them.

Do you honestly doubt the word of the international organizations that certified Venezuela's elections as having been carried out in a fair manner? If so, are you doing so based on the anecdotal evidence given to you by a dozen youngsters? If so, check your sources.

Did you watch the whole clip? There were a half dozen ex-Faux employees all saying the same thing - the "news" was delivered to them from above in the form of talking points. If you work for Faux, you are expected to push the envelope in an anti-Democrat manner, anything else and you are let go and blackballed.

(I am not defending the people I am about to mention, just making a point)

When was the last time you saw Olbermann, Andersen Cooper, or Maddow shout down a guest?

I don't have any problem condemning "news" organizations that only deliver marketing material for one party. The only organizations that I can rightly accuse of that are Faux and MSNBC, neither of which are on my favorite channels list (in fact, I have watched these channels for a grand total of 0 minutes of my own volition in the past decade).

 

Sorry, I was composing my response when you posted this...

 

The next time Olbermann even has someone with a different world view than himself on his show will be the first.