Keith Olbermann pulled from MSNBC

[Calgaryborn]

So does this article below prove that Stimpy and that census worker are really the "Master Baiters"?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fed..._probe_ne.html

[Stimpy]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

So does this article below prove that Stimpy and that census worker are really the "Master Baiters"?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fed..._probe_ne.html

I honestly didn't know there was an update in that case. Thanks for posting that information. I must say, that is quite the elaborate suicide.

"William E. Sparkman Jr. died of asphyxiation and was found with hands, feet and mouth bound with duct tape, a rope around his neck and the word "FED" written on his chest, investigators concluded."

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

I honestly didn't know there was an update in that case. Thanks for posting that information. I must say, that is quite the elaborate suicide.

"William E. Sparkman Jr. died of asphyxiation and was found with hands, feet and mouth bound with duct tape, a rope around his neck and the word "FED" written on his chest, investigators concluded."

I didn't think you knew there was an update.

The problem is the race card is thrown around way too often. It really is a cop-out. It keeps one from having to consider/debate the substance of a person's positions. Label your adversary a racist or a race baiter and you've immediately changed the subject. No longer are you debating the ideas. Instead the debate becomes a question of your adversary's character.

[Mightyfire89]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

This is great news!

Olbermann is an idiot.

Despite everything that's been said in this thread, I'm going to say this.

I have not the slightest idea who Keith Olbermann is except that his name is Keith Olbermann (which I learned by reading this thread), but the fact that you think he's an idiot is all I need to know that I should probably like this guy.

You give actual rednecks a very bad name. We're not all racist idiots.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I didn't think you knew there was an update.

The problem is the race card is thrown around way too often. It really is a cop-out. It keeps one from having to consider/debate the substance of a person's positions. Label your adversary a racist or a race baiter and you've immediately changed the subject. No longer are you debating the ideas. Instead the debate becomes a question of your adversary's character.

How does you saying this even remotely help your case?

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by HOZ

I have seen these things [ie. race baiting] said about Limbaugh and Beck. SO please prove it.

At least 3 out of 5 mornings I listen to Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh. They're on back to back if you listen to 1430 KYKN on iTunes.

I can say quite confidently that Limbaugh does not *explicitly* race bait. In other words, he will not say "blacks are lazy and are the benefactors of whites paying taxes."

However, if you listen to him for a couple of weeks, you will note that he has sufficient derogatory nicknames and continued insinuations and tie-ins that make his implicit race baiting emotionally (but not verbally) explicit and thematically implicit.

You can hear it in the way that he unnecessarily adds and emphasizes Obama's middle name. You can hear it in the way that he'll complain about social expenditures and how they're burdening white workers, and then immediately follow it up with an anecdote about an african american or hispanic family that is unemployed and using a public safety net. You can hear it in the way that he'll spit out the word "Kenyan" when trying to link in a story about Obama's past. You can sense it in the way that he refers to the planned Islamic community center in NY as the "Hamosque," thereby immediately conflating Hamas and all muslims through their site of worship*.

In the US, cash is king and Limbaugh is an economic success story. However, his wealth is built on being a purveyor of a strong, implicit message of class / race baiting. If I were Limbaugh, I would not be able to sleep at night.


* Ingraham differs from Rush in that she will use her Christian faith as a wedge to marginalize non-Christians. Rush is rather quiet about his own faith, but is comfortable insulting the muslim faith for obvious purposes.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Stimpy

I-580 Shooter

"Williams was pulled over on his way to San Francisco to shoot members the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and Tides, an organization that advocates progressive social change through philanthropy, police said Tuesday."

I-580 Shooter discloses sources of his delusions

He tried to deny any link to the likes of Beck but fails in his own defense.

"When asked if it hadn’t been for Glenn Beck and Fox News, whether he still would have planned violence, Williams said that it was because Fox News didn’t do enough to pursue the political left that he became frustrated and felt like violence was the only answer."

"He cited Alex Jones’ InfoWars.com and PrisonPlanet.com, the conspiracy Web site, AboveTopSecret.com, DavidIcke.com, JerimiahProject.com, ModernHistoryProject.org, DiscoverTheNetworks.org, as well as Glenn Beck’s Web site."

Plane crashes into IRS building

Joe Stack was a tea party member and subscribed to the anti-government rhetoric so entrenched in the language used daily by Beck and Limbaugh.

Militia plots against government

Extreme rhetoric played a part in this group's delusions and desires to start a war against the government.

Census worker killed and hung from tree

This just happens to align with comments made by Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) about the census. Red State's Erick Erickson, who is a pundit on CNN, also stated he would shoot census workers if they approached his property. So what happens? A man outside of Austin does the same.

Bachmann also has made insane comments about re-education camps and slitting of wrists in protest over health care reform. All of this is non-sensical ramblings of someone not in touch with the real world.

There is little doubt that inflammatory rhetoric on the right end of the political and media has spiked greatly in the past couple of years. From Sarah Palin and her reload metaphors to Sharon Angle claiming 2nd Amendment remedies the language has been ramped up. Sady, it is having affect. The NRA maintains a site fanning fear about gun ownership keeping membership in that lobby on the edge of reason. The Southern Poverty Law Center, who track home grown terror and hate activity have indicated right wing extremism and radicalism is at its highest levels since the Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVey and his militia connections. Time magazine recently completed an expose on Secret Militias and the impact they are having and where the inspiration for their paranoia is coming from. The words that come from the mouths of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle and so on have influence and repercussions.

So yes, the likes of Beck and Limbaugh have incited violence and the evidence is there to support this claim. It is getting worse and not better as the rhetoric continues to become more and more inflammatory.

So, swoosh! A third swing and a miss. I think you're out.

Wow, just wow. Where were you in the Truther thread? You linked it all together!

From Sarah Palin to Sharon Angle to the NRA to the Southern Poverty Law Center to Timothy McVey to Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh, back to Sarah Palin, and Sharon Angle and 9/11 was an inside job to Becks' and Limbaugh's fault...who would have thunk it? I seriously got it!

So whose fault is it for Seung-Hui Cho shooting up rich kids in Virginia? Beck's or Limbaugh's?

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

How does you saying this even remotely help your case?

I thought my case was that Glen Beck is not a racist. He is accused of racism by people who don't like his politics and conspiracy theories. They should rather question his politics and conspiracy theories.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

At least 3 out of 5 mornings I listen to Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh. They're on back to back if you listen to 1430 KYKN on iTunes.

I can say quite confidently that Limbaugh does not *explicitly* race bait. In other words, he will not say "blacks are lazy and are the benefactors of whites paying taxes."

However, if you listen to him for a couple of weeks, you will note that he has sufficient derogatory nicknames and continued insinuations and tie-ins that make his implicit race baiting emotionally (but not verbally) explicit and thematically implicit.

You can hear it in the way that he unnecessarily adds and emphasizes Obama's middle name. You can hear it in the way that he'll complain about social expenditures and how they're burdening white workers, and then immediately follow it up with an anecdote about an african american or hispanic family that is unemployed and using a public safety net. You can hear it in the way that he'll spit out the word "Kenyan" when trying to link in a story about Obama's past. You can sense it in the way that he refers to the planned Islamic community center in NY as the "Hamosque," thereby immediately conflating Hamas and all muslims through their site of worship*.

In the US, cash is king and Limbaugh is an economic success story. However, his wealth is built on being a purveyor of a strong, implicit message of class / race baiting. If I were Limbaugh, I would not be able to sleep at night.


* Ingraham differs from Rush in that she will use her Christian faith as a wedge to marginalize non-Christians. Rush is rather quiet about his own faith, but is comfortable insulting the muslim faith for obvious purposes.

Here is a fine example of Rush doing exactly what you are saying. He is not saying it but you know what he is not saying ( If that makes any sense what I mean).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGPmj...layer_embedded

[Stimpy]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Wow, just wow. Where were you in the Truther thread? You linked it all together!

From Sarah Palin to Sharon Angle to the NRA to the Southern Poverty Law Center to Timothy McVey to Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh, back to Sarah Palin, and Sharon Angle and 9/11 was an inside job to Becks' and Limbaugh's fault...who would have thunk it? I seriously got it!

How did I know you were going to have an infantile reaction like this? You asked the question, "when did they incite violence?" I just provided you examples of such violence and the rhetoric that spawned it. 9/11 was never mentioned and none of this subject matter had anything to do with 9/11. You attempting to link the two subjects is nothing more than an attempt at deflecting attention from the real issue at hand and your inability to defend your position.

So whose fault is it for Seung-Hui Cho shooting up rich kids in Virginia? Beck's or Limbaugh's?

Another unrelated topic I see. An individual with a long history of mental illness, who left behind an incoherent manifesto to frame his conflicted state of mind, is much different than anything discussed. There is no linkage between Cho and anything in the mass news media. In fact, studies suggest that his rampage was a result of a combination of fear, over exposure to violence through movies and video games, and a failing mental health services system in Virginia (Miller, 2007; Ferguson, 2007; Elbogen, 2009; Shuchman, 2007). Nothing in this case related to the discussion at hand. Try staying on topic.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I thought my case was that Glen Beck is not a racist. He is accused of racism by people who don't like his politics and conspiracy theories. They should rather question his politics and conspiracy theories.

Half the time his conspiracy theories involve race. . . The other half involves crying. Racism > Crying.

. . . Math never lies.

[HotHotHeat]

Olbermann is back on the air Tuesday. Source is... Anywhere you choose to look really.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Krack Korn

You give actual rednecks a very bad name. We're not all racist idiots.

What in the hell are you talking about?

What have I said that is even remotely racist??

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

In the US, cash is king and Limbaugh is an economic success story. However, his wealth is built on being a purveyor of a strong, implicit message of class / race baiting. If I were Limbaugh, I would not be able to sleep at night.

He laughs himself to sleep at night.

He's made hundreds of millions dollars convincing legions of drooling morons that he is all about good old family values, Christian morality, patriotism and apple pie.

At the same time, it is common knowledge that he is a draft-dodging, drug-addled convicted felon who has been married four times.

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Boy that was one one-sided affair and very poorly done. Defending Al Sharpton the creator of race baiting? That is beyond the pale.

MLK part seems to be a debate on context, not race. Considering that Beck had MLK relatives at his rally I would lean towards Beck's interpretation. Then the guy misquotes the Bible...

After that it was just Bible studies and misquoting Beck and somehow trying to show, that Beck trying to show Obama is a socialist, is race baiting.

Lets pretend that THE YOUNG TURKS commentator didn't take those quotes out of context or twist them....


When have they incited violence?

You're too much HOZ. He wasn't defending Al Sharpton the person, he was defending those specific comments.

95% of MLK's relatives preach social justice. I attended a speech from MLK the third, where he preached exactly that. The guy's a hack living off his father's name but that's another story.

Cenk Uygur gave context for the quotes throughout, and played lengthy portions of Beck's segments.

This actually happened:

Beck: Eugenics are coming to Canada, soon to the USA!
Caller: Really?! I'm on disability, I want to work but I can't.
Beck: Well, they are only considering Euthanasia in Canada right now.
Caller: But isn't Obama leaning that way?
Beck: I don't know but considering Rahm Emmanuel's brother, I would think so.
Caller: *starts crying* But I have a family, I'm a mother.
Beck: Don't worry, there will be a lot of people fighting this a long the way. Don't panic, just be aware.

So here Beck has made up a scenario that doesn't exist, Considering Euthanasia in Canada=Euthanasia in Canada=Euthanasia in the States=Eugenics in the States. Then doesn't even have the decency to go back on it when a lady starts crying over the phone thinking she'll be killed by Obama. Then tells her, there will be a fight. The term "fight" is only a problem because Beck as set it up as a life or death situation for her already.

Inciting violence is too strong a phrase, but the above exchange happened and it's despicable on Beck's part. So far beyond anything Olbermann's done. They are not the same.

See PHDs post about why Olbermann isn't the same as Limbaugh.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

You're too much HOZ. He wasn't defending Al Sharpton the person, he was defending those specific comments.

95% of MLK's relatives preach social justice. I attended a speech from MLK the third, where he preached exactly that. The guy's a hack living off his father's name but that's another story.

Cenk Uygur gave context for the quotes throughout, and played lengthy portions of Beck's segments.

This actually happened:

Beck: Eugenics are coming to Canada, soon to the USA!
Caller: Really?! I'm on disability, I want to work but I can't.
Beck: Well, they are only considering Euthanasia in Canada right now.
Caller: But isn't Obama leaning that way?
Beck: I don't know but considering Rahm Emmanuel's brother, I would think so.
Caller: *starts crying* But I have a family, I'm a mother.
Beck: Don't worry, there will be a lot of people fighting this a long the way. Don't panic, just be aware.

So here Beck has made up a scenario that doesn't exist, Considering Euthanasia in Canada=Euthanasia in Canada=Euthanasia in the States=Eugenics in the States. Then doesn't even have the decency to go back on it when a lady starts crying over the phone thinking she'll be killed by Obama. Then tells her, there will be a fight. The term "fight" is only a problem because Beck as set it up as a life or death situation for her already.

Inciting violence is too strong a phrase, but the above exchange happened and it's despicable on Beck's part. So far beyond anything Olbermann's done. They are not the same.

See PHDs post about why Olbermann isn't the same as Limbaugh.

Ok, fair enough. This sounds more like Stern-like sensationalism rather than racism or violence inciting. I don't listen to these people regularly so I have no true idea...but Stimpy's version of things seems to be a bit extreme.

As well, what I have seen of Olbermann, he is very sexist and likes to degrade women on his show. From what I have read he is universally disliked....even inside MSNBC. Though it looks like he will be back in a day or two. So whatever...

[Stimpy]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Ok, fair enough. This sounds more like Stern-like sensationalism rather than racism or violence inciting.

You're seriously comparing Stern with Beck and Limbaugh? Stern has said some stupid things, enough of them to force his move to XM, but he's never tried to encite violence with his rhetoric. Beck and Limbaugh routinely use divisive rhetoric and suggest "its only a matter of time before something happens" knowing full well the demographic they appeal to. You can try and claim their dog whistle language is harmless but the evidence suggests otherwise.

I don't listen to these people regularly so I have no true idea...

... but you feel inclined to share your inflammatory views on subject matter you admittedly have no idea about. Isn't that is a classic example of baiting?

...but Stimpy's version of things seems to be a bit extreme...

... and does not comply with your narrative. You're not getting off that easy. You start off with making a exaggerated claim that an individual is the creator of race baiting, make statements of false correlations and then close your argument with what you hope will be interpreted as a rhetorical question to diffuse your grossly flawed argument. Your argument was quickly and quite easily dispatched. Your ignorance of a subject is not an excuse to make these bait and run posts.

As well, what I have seen of Olbermann, he is very sexist and likes to degrade women on his show. From what I have read he is universally disliked....even inside MSNBC. Though it looks like he will be back in a day or two. So whatever...

Is this the same Keith Olbermann that went head-to-head with the MSNBC execs to get Rachel Maddow her own show, the one that forced Dan Abrams, the guy who stepped down as the GM of MSNBC to concentrate on his show, to get axed? Sounds like a real sexist pig to me.

The only place that I can find any such claim in regards to Olbermann is from bigjournalism.com which is an Andrew Breitart property. Do you have anything better than information from a site owned and operated by a guy known for distributing lies? This is the Andrew Breitart who fabricated the Shirley Sherrod scandal and then tried to play innocent after the fact. I hope you can provide something more substantial to back up this claim?

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by HOZ

As well, what I have seen of Olbermann, he is very sexist and likes to degrade women on his show. From what I have read he is universally disliked....even inside MSNBC. Though it looks like he will be back in a day or two. So whatever...

This type of paragraph is likely why our discourse will never improve.

Hoz, you really need to learn some appreciation for the English language.

1) "... he is very sexist and likes to degrade women on his show." As you and others have noted, you don't often watch the show yet are confident enough to know he is *very* sexist. Not just sexist, but very much so. The qualifier is key in this context. Are you sure you wish to use it? Also, you know that he "likes" degrading women? He gains personal pleasure from it? Or do you simply feel he did so that one time you watched the show?

2) "From what I have read he is universally disliked" *Universally* disliked. Not just disliked by a few that may have been brave enough to lend anonymous quotes to the article(s) you read. But *universally*. Everyone. Everywhere. There are people still sending admiring letters to Charles Manson in jail, yet Keith Olbermann is beyond the pale and *universally* disliked.

Ugh.

[troutman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_779944.html

Bill Maher discussed Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert's rally last, saying it should have had a point. During a long "New Rule" Maher disputed the idea that the Left is just as much to blame for the level of discourse in this country as the Right.

"The message of the rally, as I heard it, was that if the media stopped giving voice to the crazies on both sides, then maybe we could restore sanity. It was all nonpartisan and urged cooperation with the moderates on the other side forgetting that Obama tried that and found out...there are no moderates on the other side. When Jon announced his rally, he said the national conversation was dominated by people on the Right who believe Obama's a Socialist and people on the Left who believe 9/11's an inside job, but I can't name any Democratic leaders who think 9/11's an inside job. But Republican leaders who think Obama's a Socialist? All of them."

"Keith Olbermann is right when he says he's not the equivalent of Glenn Beck. One reports facts the other one is very close to playing with his poop. And the big mistake of modern media has been this notion of balance for balance's sake. That the Left is just as violent and cruel as the Right...there's a difference between a mad man and a madman,"

[Weiser Wonder]

Thank you, Bill Maher! One of the most critical things that needs to accepted by the moderates and left wingers in the States.