Jaybate, what is your gut telling you with these pipe bombs?
-
JayHawkFanToo said:
I see what the issue is. You are lumping together the news division with the opinion shows. Shepard Smith has always been and still is part of the news group and not the opinion group like Hannity and Carlson are. He is now in the top news time slot which is in the afternoon while the top time slots for opinionix are in the evening. Smith is now so biased against Trump that he has lost credibility and viewership and he is making the news more like opinion which is not what the news division is or should be about, i.e. report the news not make the news.
I never said you were a fan of Fox, actually it is quite the contrary; however you did indicate that you watch it closely but your lack of knowledge of its line up would indicate the opposite and once you start citing numbers it indicates more of a Google search than actual hands on…or perhaps eyes on…experience. Just my observation.
So if I understand you correctly, you’re making a distinction between news (Smith) and opinion (Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham) on Fox, and then saying that the news (Smith) is in fact biased. So, can I infer that the answer to my question is that no, you in fact do not watch Smith? It seems to me that distinguishing him as the “top news time slot” is meaningless/disingenuous, because the top slots PERIOD are in the evening, and you and many other Fox viewers, are not interested in the news (and also in many cases working at the time the news slot is running), and only consume the opinions.
Is that right?
-
Lemon is an asshat.
-
Speaking of Lemon
Now that’s some fair and truthful reporting.
-
@DoubleDD Yep, we were agreeing with Woodrow for calling that crap out. It’s racist and isn’t okay.
-
@Woodrow I think reasonable people, regardless of political beliefs, will not have a problem with Don Lemon taking a permanent hike.
One can only hope that this one trips him up.
-
I mentioned that the first time in a long time I watched CNN was the Hurricane Coverage to laugh how bad it was. I was struck by how disingenuous and disengaged Don Lemon was, trying to force feed people their own stories in order to check off some dramatic checkboxes like “but your pets can’t go with you right! Huh. And you ma’am you’re staying because you’re an EMT and you want to stay to help these dog owners. Huh. Truly you are amazing. Huh.” Quite apparent that he’s full of sh–. So yeah @Woodrow I completely agree. He should be canned not only for being a racist but because he sucks at reporting, at least from what I saw.
-
This is exactly what I am saying. News is part of the day time programming and the evening/night programming is primarily opinion. I watch the cable news networks only occasionally and I get my information from other sources. Ever since Rupert Murdoch’s kid took over Fox, the channel has become considerably less conservative, particularly day time programming. Evening programming is way too profitable to mess with so that portion has stayed conservative although O’Reilly is now gone. Other liberal leaning daytime hosts like Megan Kelly was very successful in her daytime slot but once she moved to the opinion time she was so anti Trump that lost audienc but the MSM networks came calling and she moved on…and got fired…
The Fox that you talk about is the way it was many moons ago but not what it is now, this why a lot of conservatives have quit watching Fox. Google Shepard Smith and you will see the number of stories wandering why he is still with the network and the answer is because it is the new direction of the network. Again, Shepard Smith is to Fox what Wolf Blitzer is to CNN.
-
The following is an excerpt picked up from one the many reports…
Being the paragon of political-correctness and queen of virtue-signaling opportunism, Hillary Clinton sat down with Recode’s Kara Swisher this weekend to answer questions about just how evil and awful conservative opponents have been in the last few months.
The conversation began normally, with Clinton hypocritically toeing the progressive line of identity politics by explaining how each of the groups are different but can be managed by the same liberal movement:
"What’s often called political correctness is politeness,” Clinton said.
“It’s not being rude and insulting to people. It’s respecting the diversity that we have in our society,” she said.
“The Democratic Party is a much more diverse political party, attracting people who are African-American, Latino, LGBT, whatever the reason why people feel more comfortable where they are taken in, where they are included as part of a political movement or party."
“And I don’t think it’s politically correct to say we value that. And I don’t want to go around insulting people. I don’t want to paint with a broad brush every immigrant is this, every African-American is that, every, you know, other person with different religious beliefs or whatever - that’s childish."
Childish, indeed. Insulting, indeed.
Just 30 seconds later, as Swisher asked:
"what do you think of Cory Booker… saying ‘kick them in the shins,’ essentially…” incorrectly recalling Eric Holder’s recent comments.
Which Clinton quickly corrected:
“Well that was Eric Holder…"
Adding, rather extraordinarily,
"Yeah, I know they all look alike,” Clinton joked, triggering howls of laughter from the apparently mind-numbed audience.
Sorry Hillary, we don’t think they look anything alike? Or did u mean all black people?
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/2018-10-29_13-32-00.jpg?itok=FxrZhpr8Finally, we have one question - what would have happened if Trump said it?
-
JayHawkFanToo said:
Just 30 seconds later, as Swisher asked:
"what do you think of Cory Booker… saying ‘kick them in the shins,’ essentially…” incorrectly recalling Eric Holder’s recent comments.
Which Clinton quickly corrected:
“Well that was Eric Holder…"
Adding, rather extraordinarily,
"Yeah, I know they all look alike,” Clinton joked, triggering howls of laughter from the apparently mind-numbed audience.
Sorry Hillary, we don’t think they look anything alike? Or did u mean all black people?
I think you’re missing the point here. She’s joking about the meme that white people can’t tell black people apart. Which is callous, maybe even racist toward white people, but it’s pretty clear she does not in fact think that all black people look alike.
She does have a habit of running her mouth in ways that provide soundbyte fodder for the conservative hit media. Nice work, Hillary!
-
Seriously? That’s what you are going with?
That was a racist statement any way you look at it. Had Trump said it he would be crucified. The liberal double standard never ceases to amaze me.
-
@JayHawkFanToo I did not disagree that it was a stupid, possibly racist statement. Trump would never say something like that, because he doesn’t have a firm enough grasp of current memes that didn’t originate out of his own mouth, so your postulation is too hypothetical.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Regarding Shep Smith, I’m getting the sense that he’s kind of an idiot? Sure, he attacks Trump, but probably poorly? Maybe I’m wrong.
You should try John Oliver. You’d love him.
-
…and no signs of jaybate recently…
-
@Blown I know! Hoping he’s well and comes back fired up for basketball season.
-
approxinfinity said:
@Blown I know! Hoping he’s well and comes back fired up for basketball season.
I’ve given him a hard time, but I do hope he is okay.
-
Apparently you don’t understand irony and sarcasm.
A lot of people have said that various “other” groups should be banned or subjected to more scrutiny because of incidents, be it a Muslim ban, or the “Papers please” thing in Arizona, or police stopping minority males, etc. And in each case, the argument is that this additional scrutiny is not racist, but is based on things like safety and a threat to the public.
But when that additional scrutiny is pointed at a group that is not traditionally marginalized, then there is outcry about reverse racism. Now, I am not saying that you personally have done the former. I cannot remember you ever doing that. But it has been done, and it has been done by others on this very board. I don’t think we need a “white guy” ban, but I also don’t think we need a Muslim ban, or Papers please or to follow young minority males.
But it is funny that a lot of people that are upset about Don Lemon uttering those words also cheered when then Candidate Trump talked about banning Muslims.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal…
-
approxinfinity said:
JayHawkFanToo said:
Just 30 seconds later, as Swisher asked:
"what do you think of Cory Booker… saying ‘kick them in the shins,’ essentially…” incorrectly recalling Eric Holder’s recent comments.
Which Clinton quickly corrected:
“Well that was Eric Holder…"
Adding, rather extraordinarily,
"Yeah, I know they all look alike,” Clinton joked, triggering howls of laughter from the apparently mind-numbed audience.
Sorry Hillary, we don’t think they look anything alike? Or did u mean all black people?
I think you’re missing the point here. She’s joking about the meme that white people can’t tell black people apart. Which is callous, maybe even racist toward white people, but it’s pretty clear she does not in fact think that all black people look alike.
She does have a habit of running her mouth in ways that provide soundbyte fodder for the conservative hit media. Nice work, Hillary!
See @DoubleDD, @JayHawkFanToo is illustrating why the conclusion Candace Owen draws (or the opinion of the special interest groups that pay her) is faulty. Hypersensitivity is not a conservative or liberal thing. It is a symptom of the digital age age.
-
@justanotherfan I was going to try to explain that, but after so many fruitless tries in this thread previously I gave up and chose drinking instead. Lemon’s comment would have been more easily understood had he used a couple simple explanatory words. Instead of saying “most terorist attacks in the US have been committed by white males” he said “white males are terrorists” leading to the misunderstanding that he was talking about all white males. His tying it to the idea of a ban made his point clear to anyone not primed by Hannity to whine about all the blame they think gets tossed their way.
Many people make that mistake of reversing order when talking about subsets of larger groups. I hate imprecise speech. English teachers used to really slam people for not getting this right, but I don’t know if anyone pays attention. They certainly don’t to the “neither…nor” or “not only…but also” rules.
-
@mayjay, I was fortunate to have had English/grammar teachers (and my Mom) who not only taught, but required the use of precise speech. I, too, hate imprecise speech and poor or incorrect grammar. I’m with you all the way on that, my friend!
-
I only care about punctuation when the meaning is uncertain without it. I was an English major two decades ago, but now some grammatically correct syntax feels stuffy. I see you used “I, too,” @bcjayhawk. To me, the commas there feel unnecessary, even if grammatically correct. Who has time for superfluous commas in the 2010s? I’d never pause twice when talking to someone and saying that sentence out loud, so why create the two pauses via commas there? Nothing seems lost without them.
Just my opinion.
-
@approxinfinity The advantages of following rules are twofold. First, the writer doesn’t have to make ad hoc decisions every time–just know and follow the rule. Easy as pie. Second, the writer by not making decisions about when to follow rules can ensure the greatest chance that the intent of the writer in the passage will be understood by the reader provided everyone uses the common rules.
Put together, those considerations mean that you don’t have to figure out all possible misinterpretations by picking and choosing when to be “correct.”
If you can always guarantee proper interpretations of your meaning, good on you! But furthering the notion that everyone can be so perfect is pretty short-sighted.
-
@mayjay In this sentence I would definitely enforce extra commas, so that the natural pauses are evident to the reader.
Second, the writer by not making decisions about when to follow rules can ensure the greatest chance that the intent of the writer in the passage will be understood by the reader provided everyone uses the common rules.
This should read: Second, the writer[,] by not making decisions about when to follow rules[,] can ensure the greatest chance that the intent of the writer [of] the passage will be understood by the reader[,] provided everyone uses the common rules.
Is there a word for someone who cares only how the sentence sounds when spoken aloud? I tried to google potential word candidates but only found sexual fetishes, ex “auralist”. Anyway, I’d be in that group. Sorry I’m trolling you man
I find it fun to nitpick people’s grammar when they bring up a preference for proper grammar. It’s just an obligatory trolling. I hope you guys understand!I think your logic is pretty sound, for what it’s worth
But I intend to be an “auralist” none-the-less.
-
@approxinfinity I definitely added more to that sentence and should have had more commas. Hoist on me own petard! Edit: “in” is the proper word for it is used with the writer’s “intent . . . in” the passage.
As for how sentence meaning can change depending on how it sounds, here is an example (though not of punctuation) of a sentence in a criminal trial transcript:
“I never said she killed him.”
What meaning did you glean? Now, reread it six times, each time particularly stressing a different word.
Punctuation can be played with, too. But more importantly, if you think commas are only to make sentences sound good and can be deleted by personal preference, they certainly can be added willy nilly, too. Remember the rabbit who eats, shoots, and leaves?
-
justanotherfan said:
Apparently you don’t understand irony and sarcasm.
A lot of people have said that various “other” groups should be banned or subjected to more scrutiny because of incidents, be it a Muslim ban, or the “Papers please” thing in Arizona, or police stopping minority males, etc. And in each case, the argument is that this additional scrutiny is not racist, but is based on things like safety and a threat to the public.
But when that additional scrutiny is pointed at a group that is not traditionally marginalized, then there is outcry about reverse racism. Now, I am not saying that you personally have done the former. I cannot remember you ever doing that. But it has been done, and it has been done by others on this very board. I don’t think we need a “white guy” ban, but I also don’t think we need a Muslim ban, or Papers please or to follow young minority males.
But it is funny that a lot of people that are upset about Don Lemon uttering those words also cheered when then Candidate Trump talked about banning Muslims.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal…
OH so you think there should be a white man ban? And you’re not a racist? What do you want? equality or privilege?
-
Reading is hard.
