O’Reilly: My Harassment Machine Is ‘A Legitimate Brand Of Journalism’
O’Reilly: My Harassment Machine Is ‘A Legitimate Brand Of Journalism’
Yesterday, Bill O’Reilly defended his top henchman, producer Jesse Watters, who is supposedly “the subject of far-left angst, because he goes out and talks to the bad guys.” During his conversation with Amanda Carpenter of the Washington Times — who agreed with everything the Fox News host was saying — O’Reilly defended his “ambush journalism” as a “legitimate brand of journalism”:
O’REILLY: Now the far-left websites fear greatly the vicious guy Jesse Watters. And Jesse Watters is now the subject of far-left angst, because he goes out and talks to the bad guys. Tell us about that. [...]
This, of course, a legitimate brand of journalism, has been practiced ever since television news was invented in the ’60’s when the bad guys won’t comment, when they run and hide.
Watch it:
Actual journalists disagree with O’Reilly. While he’s right that man-on-the-street interviews have been around for a long time, Fox has taken them to a whole new level. ThinkProgress recently contacted Columbia Journalism Review editor in chief Mike Hoyt — also a victim of an O’Reilly ambush earlier this year — who said that what O’Reilly does is nothing more than “fake journalism”:
I don’t have a problem with the idea, anyway, of a street interview. I didn’t complain when 60 Minutes was doing it to various politicians and moguls, so I can’t really complain now when Fox shows up at my bus stop. But I do have a problem with how O’Reilly does it — which has nothing to do with an interview, with gathering information, trading points of view, seeing what you think, etc., and everything to do with grabbing whatever out-of-context quote that he can use to make you look stupid. It borrows the form of journalism but it isn’t journalism; it’s fake, like those digital fireplace fires that provide no heat.
Furthermore, O’Reilly isn’t just trying to track down the “bad guys” who “run and hide.” As I have noted, no one at Fox News ever contacted me or anyone else at ThinkProgress before harassing me. Similarly, the New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg also never received a chance to explain himself before being tracked down outside his New York City home. So is O’Reilly interested in journalism and getting at the facts? Or is he interested in intimidation of his perceived opponents?
O’Reilly also claimed that Watters is “as polite as possible” when ambushing people; he just is “[o]ut there having a conversation that anybody would have.” We’re not sure what types of conversations O’Reilly has with his friends…but the people we talk to certainly don’t consider it “polite” to launch ad hominem attacks and smears.
Transcript:
O’REILLY: Now the far-left websites fear greatly the vicious guy Jesse Watters. And Jesse Watters is now the subject of far-left angst, because he goes out and talks to the bad guys. Tell us about that.
CARPENTER: Well, basically, there’s been a site, Crooks and Liars, that compiled a bunch of videos of Jesse Watters ambushing a number of people for your segment. And they called this harassment. They say it is absolutely harassment. And you know, they’re very frightened at the prospect of a Fox News producer coming after them with a camera.
O’REILLY: Yeah.
CARPENTER: And asking them to explain what they write on the Internet or in various newspaper columns.
O’REILLY: It’s interesting because they didn’t say anything — we have been doing this for I guess six or seven years, until the far left websites got involved. Then they got really nervous.
This, of course, a legitimate brand of journalism, has been practiced ever since television news was invented in the ’60’s when the bad guys won’t comment, when they run and hide. We will find them. Now, Jesse is a mean guy. You know that, Amanda. Have you ever met Jesse?
CARPENTER: No, I’ve spoken with him on the phone a few times –
O’REILLY: Yeah, he –
CARPENTER: — but I haven’t been struck by fear quite yet.
O’REILLY: You know, this man, I mean he is a vicious guy, as you can see, when he goes out.
You know, it’s funny, one of the people that he talked to, oh, he yelled at me. And then you see the tape. And there’s Jesse being as polite as possible. Out there having a conversation that anybody would have.
But you know, we don’t expect honesty from these people. Their whole game is deceit. That’s what their game is.
Jesse can bring his camera crew anywhere he wants and ask tough questions too, but what's despicable about his tactics is that he shows up on their private property unannounced or (worse yet) on the private weekend getaways, after stalking them. That's uncool and out of line and that's what's objectionable. If Jesse had called Amanda Terkel and asked for an interview and she met him, then there would have been no problem. But you all decided to "get" her. You claim you reserve this treatment for when "the bad guys won't comment," but you never even gave Amanda Terkel that opportunity.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
O’Reilly, f uck you and the falafel you rode in on.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:11 amWhy do the MSM, Democrats and other media outlets allow Fox & O’Reilly to get away with this?
Why has it taken THIS LONG to where TP needs to call them out NOW???
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:13 amI believe that O’Reilly’s producers have done the research and have found that much of the conservative Fox News and O’Reilly audience base are types who enjoy seeing people picked on and harassed and ranted about, mainly because they are powerless types who would bully others if they had the nerve.
Many Fox News Channel viewers live vicariously through that channel with all it’s flashy graphics and semi-lucid analysis. Doesn’t say much about them as contributing citizens of the US.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:15 amIt looks like it’s time to use this brand of journalism on the fine people at Fox.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:16 amLetterman at least has it right. He called O’Reilly a “goon” to his face. And he is. First he’s critical of a 5-foot-2 woman who is raped and murdered as asking for it because she happened to wear a halter top and was intoxicated. Then he has his goon “journalism” terrorists accost a 5-foot woman two hours from her home to demand an apology without any context. Maybe O’Reilly has something against small women as a result of his encounter with Andrea Mackris?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:17 amWhy do the MSM, Democrats and other media outlets allow Fox & O’Reilly to get away with this?
Why has it taken THIS LONG to where TP needs to call them out NOW???
Because ever since Ken Starr, Democrats have been terrified of Republicans. Ken Starr laid the first blow, then we cowered before Karl Rove for the past 8 years. For some reason, we convinced ourselves that Americans were stupid enough to believe just about anything as long as it was said loud enough and often enough, so we resigned ourselves to almost having to sneak into government positions. We were made to feel bad for being Liberals, and we didn’t have a strong enough voice out there to tell us being Liberal wasn’t just ok, it was right and it was good. It took us a little while, but we’re on the offensive now and we’re making the Conservatives answer for their sins…FINALLY!
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:17 amI am issuing a challenge to Dil Do’Reilly: Please, please, PLEASE come and itnerview me, or send one of your goons. i would love to administer a sever @SSKICKING, live, on national TV.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:18 amSevere @SSKICKING that is.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 amBill O’Reilly defended his top henchman … because he goes out and talks to the bad guys.
– - Uh huh, bad guys. Now there’s a flexible. subjective, hard-to-define criteria.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 amThe only reason that Watters would be even considered “vicious” is the fact that these attacks have not blown up on Fox News. And if they have blown up, we certainly do not know about it, as Fox would just edit that part out.
One of these days, an interviewee is going to snap at Watters or Griff Jenkins, and O’Reilly is going to have to live with the consequences.
After all, here’s the rub; if Amanda Carpenter isn’t scared of Jesse Watters, what makes you think WE would be scared of him?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 amOne more thing: JUDGES ARE OFF LIMITS!
Every judge makes unpopular decisions. They are already under threat from loonies on the right. In most states it’s illegal for them to comment on cases, so if they are ignoring the “media” (and I use that term loosely when I refer to FOX) it’s because the law forbids them.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:20 amO`reilly thinks he`s never wrong,In his warped brain he thinks everything he does is justified. He is a sick person, who hates when he`s called out for his lies and tactics.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:20 amIt seems that O’Reilly’s form ofambush journalism became legitimate when it was used often and exclusively by HOWARD STERN and his incisive reporter, STUTTERING JOHN. Somehow, history seems to repeat itself by journalism whose only intent is to harrass rather than to inform. O’Reilly is a disgrace to legitimate journalism, but what do you expect from FOX NEWS.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:21 amThe last thing Bill’O said, “But you know, we don’t expect honesty from these people. Their whole game is deceit. That’s what their game is.”
That is a prime example of the pot calling the kettle black!
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:22 amPennsylvanianne Says:
Don’t forget Terry Gross (NPR–Fresh Air), also about 5-foot. Faced with a question he didn’t like Bill went apoplectic, stood up yelled down at her and then stormed out of the interview.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:22 amThis, of course, a legitimate brand of journalism, has been practiced ever since television news was invented in the ’60’s when the bad guys won’t comment, when they run and hide.
____________________________________________________________
Um…yeah. O’Reilly’s tactics are a legitimate brand of journalism much in the same way that Photoshop retouching is a legitimate brand of photography. Yes, you wind up with an image. And there are times when retouching is clearly called for and accepted. But when you present a retouched image as reality, it ceases to be legitimate.
Ditto with O’Reilly’s style of “journalism”. When he sends out his stalk-and-ambush goon team to surprise and videotape his victims, portraying them as bad people with something to hide, and then edits the footage to support his twisted agenda, it’s not legitimate.
And he’s even saying “when the bad guys won’t comment, when they run and hide” — pushing the idea that he wants to make people like Amanda look like they’re being evasive or even criminal. In the same paragraph where he claims to be legitimate. That’s chutzpah.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:23 amAMANDA,
You might want to start a NEW THREAD telling Bildo, in no uncertain terms, that no one is blaming Watters . .
INFORM the Clown that we know Watters is just following orders!
Bildo is solely responsible for Watters’ actions!
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:23 amWhat is with Billo’s simpleton speech?
Evil…villain…bad guys…?
What is this? 2nd grade?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:24 amOne wonders how Billo would respond to the same kind of ambush interview?
But, we don’t want to resort to the same tactics.
All we can do is keep exposing the truth so that, eventually, the only people who listen are, (to paraphrase Senator Franken ) “the lying liars and the liars who believe them”.. in other words, the 22%ers
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 amAccording to O’Reilly the “bad guys” are journalists and professors.
Does Colonel Beck know there is a fascist in the house?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 amWe should just start ambushing O’Reilly, his producers and his guests!! Problem solved…as the clown theater keeps rolling merrily along…
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:28 amThis is worth re-posting… O’Reilly ambushed/interviewed in his driveway…
http://www.videosift.com/video/Bill-OReilly-gets-owned-home
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:29 amI think we need to send a camera crew to tail Bill-o 24/7. At his home, his office, wherever he does his shopping. And at every opportunity, stick a microphone in his face and ask him if he’s stopped beating his wife (or similar questions). And the questions should be shouted in a hostile manner, as if Bill can’t be made to answer them any other way.
And when Bill gets tired of this, just explain that it’s a “legitimate” brand of journalism, and television news has been dealing with the “bad guys” like this since the 1960s.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:31 amYesterday, Bill O’Reilly defended his top henchman, producer Jesse Watters, who is supposedly “the subject of far-left angst, because he goes out and talks to the bad guys.”
And therein lies the problem with what Billo is doing. He has decided that someone is the “bad guy”. He is the judge, jury and executioner. And is BS about “because they won’t talk to us” is just that, BS. I almost might say what he is doing is OK (as long as it doesn’t include stalking and/or invading someone’s home turf) if they really did give the person they want to talk to a chance to talk to them first. But they don’t. They invite the person they stalked on their show AFTER they stalk them.
The purpose of what they are doing isn’t to get someone to “talk to them”. The purpose is to startle people and scare people into saying something that Billo can then use against them. It’s the worst kind of “gotcha” journalism there is.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:32 amI wouldn’t even mind the attack journalism if he would just stop screaming. I’m tired of yelling heads on my TV. Can’t stand him or any of his ilk.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:33 amThis is simply an update to the Nixon enemies list, only O’Reilly is using the veneer of a ‘news’ crew to retaliate against his critics.
It is only a matter of time when Watters gets in over his head and confronts someone with an NRA license and no sense of humor, as with this video….
(it’s 6 minutes, but the ending-beginning about 4:30, is worth it.)
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:34 amDoes Billo have a problem with small women, or just women in genral?
I’m 5′10″, and I’d love to find Jesse Watters in my driveway. My German Shepherd/Chow would love to acquaint herself with his ball sack.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:36 amWhy not give billow the clown and people who work at fox the same treatment when they leave work. It would be fun to watch those morans on fox and frinds like ducy and others run and feep it up every day.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:36 amZooey Lepidoptera Says:
What is with Billo’s simpleton speech?
Evil…villain…bad guys…?
What is this? 2nd grade?
Considering the fact that a majority of his audience probably has an IQ in the room temperature range, that’s the only way he can communicate with them.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:39 amA true “bad guy”, a war criminal–Douglas Feith is coddled by O’Reilly.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:39 amThis is how the left often gets pummeled. You have the effeminate wanna-be thug O’Reilly harassing people with no intention of playing fair on one side and on the other you have critics being all polite and talking about “proper” journalism backed up with Columbia people waxing wise on the subject. O’Reilly’s boa is losing no feathers over whether he is practicing proper journalism. His goal is simply to make liberals look furtive and weak, as if they have something to hide. The same must be done to him.
Sometimes you just have to take Cartman’s advice: The only way to fight hate is with more hate.
There is a bar in San Francisco where they read Finnegan’s Wake regularly – or there used to be.
I think someone should stand out in front of O’Reilly’s house reading Andrea Mackris’ complaint 24 hours a day with a bull horn.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:40 amFuxSchnooz will harass even when on defense too:
Homeless Vets attempt to deliver petition to Bill O’reilly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPxJPdGwRYY
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:40 ammissmolly. I don’t like O’Reilly’s stalking. I’ve never like that approach to get an unauthorized interview. He should stop.
But, ThinkProgress approach is sometimes less than legitimate. After this thread:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/27/ups-oreilly/
Susan Rosenberg of UPS felt compelled to respond:
If ThinkProgress continues to be this creative with it’s headlines and interpretations, they won’t have the authority to question anyones journalistic legitimacy. There should be a retraction.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:41 amThey apparently haven’t been harrassing anyone in a state where you can carry a concealed weapon. I can’t wait for someone to claim self-defense and shoot. What happens when the bully-complex clashes with the right to bear arms in defense?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:41 amAMANDA TERKEL IS GOD!
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:43 ammisscoleopteramolly Says:
I think we need to send a camera crew to tail Bill-o 24/7. At his home, his office, wherever he does his shopping. And at every opportunity, stick a microphone in his face and ask him if he’s stopped beating his wife (or similar questions). And the questions should be shouted in a hostile manner, as if Bill can’t be made to answer them any other way.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:31 am
_____________
I fully support this.
I also fully support sending a group of people dressed like clowns and armed with juggling pins and air horns to follow Jesse Watters and his news crew everywhere they go, and plant themselves in the background of every ambush interview they do.
I mean, if it’s legitimate journalism to go ambush people on public streets with antagonizing questions, it’s legitimate clownsmanship to just happen to be in the way.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:43 amhanshiro the antlion Says:
It is only a matter of time when Watters gets in over his head and confronts someone with an NRA license and no sense of humor, as with this video….
Now that’s funny. But I really do think the guy should have shot out all four of their tires before he left.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:43 am“Bill O’Reilly sings” on youtube is the BEST background music for calling O’Reilly sponsors. I say just CANCEL AT&T, Tmobile is much better anyway.
O’Reilly’s 2004 Andrea Mackris Sexual Harassment transcripts set to baroque oratio (word for word) and performed at The University of Washington. Enjoy…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxc8ZY0plM4
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:44 amI DON’T HATE REPUBLICANS AS A GROUP,
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:46 amI HATE THEM INDIVIDUALY.
There’s nothing legitimate about O’Sillyo’s show! I’m in utter shock at his bald face lying. o:
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:47 amLet’s keep the pressure on O’SillyO – TP I salute you and all of my fellow insects!
backup Says:
If ThinkProgress continues to be this creative with it’s headlines and interpretations, they won’t have the authority to question anyones journalistic legitimacy. There should be a retraction.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:41 am
________
No retraction is necessary. The original UPS statement said that they had no plans to continue advertising on O’Reilly’s show. The headline TP used was correct at the time.
The fact that UPS’s spokesperson, possibly in reaction to a negative backlash received from the O’Reilly O’Army, softened this stance doesn’t change what they said in the first place.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:48 amI find little difference between the words ‘discontinued, pulled, paused, rescinded, non pending’, etc etc etc.
The fact is, TP campaign, or not, UPS is not advertising, at this time with O’Reillys ’show’ which is not journalistically honest. In fact FOX sued for the right to mislead.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:50 amA liberal republican is an oxymoron.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:51 amA conservative republican, is just a regulat moron.
backup Says:
If ThinkProgress continues to be this creative with it’s headlines and interpretations, they won’t have the authority to question anyones journalistic legitimacy. There should be a retraction.
Why should there be a retraction? TP reported what UPS said at the time. If they are changing their stance because Fox News scared the pants off them, then that is what is happening today, not back when TP reported it. If they change their stance, I change my carrier, period. I put my money where my mouth is.
So, do you support Billo doing a retraction on his show every time he is shown to be a liar?
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:52 amO’REILLY: This, of course, a legitimate brand of journalism, has been practiced ever since television news was invented in the ’60’s…
As with Gary Hart, this will bite O’Reilly in the @ss. He has as much as declared that it is legitimate to film his movements under the auspices of “pursuing the bad guys.”
Since it is O’Reilly who arbitrarily determines who those ‘bad guys’ are, an opposing ‘news’ crew is just as much at liberty to follow and film O’Reilly; his being a declared public figure…
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 amIn fact FOX sued for the right to mislead.
And won.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 amNews distortion policy, no shit.
Zooey Lepidoptera Says:
I’m 5?10?, and I’d love to find Jesse Watters in my driveway. My German Shepherd/Chow would love to acquaint herself with his ball sack.
Dear lawd, I just squirmed in my office chair.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 amIts like saying a fighter ‘pulled his punch’
The punch is still there its just been drawn back, so I am not really sure what backups point is. Yes, I have read it, its posted to the point of spamming, and continually posting it doesnt make me want to agree with that opinion.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:54 amPapa Bear, himself, lamented that UPS ceased its advertising with The Factor and called it an “evil deed”.
If UPS changed their mind or was “punking” TP in the first place, O’Reilly would breathlessly let us know.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:55 amDRxJapanese Beetle Says:
Dear lawd, I just squirmed in my office chair.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 am
Sorry, DRxJ. That was Jesse Watters specific. :-)
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:56 amDNFP Said: During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.
True. Yet remember how that journalist was castigated for exposing Bush going AWOL from the guard? By FOX standards it wouldnt have mattered, but other media outlets are held to a higher degree of journalism and the journalist resigned.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:57 ambackup Says:
If ThinkProgress continues to be this creative with it’s headlines and interpretations, they won’t have the authority to question anyones journalistic legitimacy. There should be a retraction.
__________
Ya know, b-cup… after the Stewart/Cramer kerfluffle on yer part, when you FINALLY admitted you hadn’t even watched the whole interview after blasting Stewart for over an hour here on a thread, you’re hardly in a valid position to criticize ANYBODY’s journalistic integrity.
It’s simply ASTONISHING to see you here, AGAIN, carrying water for an outfit (Fox) that argued in court they have the right to lie and call it “news” and WON on that basis.
Yer sumpin else, pal.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:57 amI can not support using all of O’Reilly’s attack-journalism tactics against him – only one. O’Reilly’s “interviewers” ask loaded, hyperbolic, misleading questions. I think anyone ambushed by O’Reilly’s goons should give similarly loaded, hyperbolic, redirecting answers – all of which should refer to Bill O’Reilly by name and include a reference to falafel, Mackris, or Keith Olberman. Let O’Reilly try to edit such answers.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:58 amApparently, The FCC’s News distortion policy has created a critical flaw in the concept of the 4th branch of government as granted in the Bill of Rights.
The court agreed with WTVT’s (Fox) argument “that the FCC’s policy against the intentional falsification of the news — which the FCC has called its “news distortion policy” — does not qualify as the required “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102.[...] Because the FCC’s news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower’s statute.”
No wonder Democracy in the good ol’USA is so FUBAR.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:04 pmWhat a career Billdo has had.
As host of ‘Current Affair’, he specialized in gossip & hyped facts.
As host of his radio show, he specialized in gossip & hyped facts.
As host of his TV show, he specialized in gossip & hyped facts.
Hate Radio. TV Terrorism. Wow! What a man you are, Billdo.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:08 pmIf it’s not illegal to distort “the news” (a-la theOnion for example), then Idiocracy is only a few generations from coming to full fruition.
“CARL’S JR-FCUK YOU, I’M EATING”
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:08 pmDNFP Says:
DNFP Says:
___________
Whilst Fox may be pleased w/ itself for finding such a nice little loop hole for themselves in the FCC news Distortion Policy, “facts” and “reality” apparently feel no need to comply w/ the court’s ruling or Rupert Murdoch’s wishes.
Hence the utter mess the conservatives have left this country in after 8 years of trying to “fix the intelligence” to match the message.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:09 pmSeriously, we need to take this to a higher authority.
Contact the FCC.
Tell them to redact or amend the “news distortion policy” to forbid outright lying on a News/media outlet for ANY reason.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 pmI don’t think the answer is going to be stooping to O’Silly’s level. He’s a vile excuse for a human being. A media whore. I do believe that the avenue TP has follwed is a good start. It’s been affective. Let HATE remain a characteristic of the rightwingnutcrazies!
backup: The idea of TP doing a retraction is ludicrous. Your demagogue O’SillyHo should be the one doing a retraction – he’s the liar in this situation. Face reality and stop taking his lies as gospel!
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:14 pm“The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787. ME 6:57
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:19 pmbackup, if TP doesn’t live up to the high standard of integrity you’re used to as a Fox News supporter why do you keep coming here? We can live without you.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:20 pm“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224
“The press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Seymour, 1807.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:21 pmWhat is truly sad, and inherently primal, is the fact that if Keith Olbermann were a foot shorter, O’Reilly would have engaged him long ago and we would be spared all this collateral damage.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:22 pmDNFP Says:
Seriously, we need to take this to a higher authority.
Contact the FCC.
Tell them to redact or amend the “news distortion policy” to forbid outright lying on a News/media outlet for ANY reason.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 pm
_____________
I can’t stand behind this, sorry. The prohibition on prior restraint is one of the fundamental tenets of press freedom in this country, and the FCC absolutely should not be in the position to determine what is true and what is false.
Do you want the FCC under a future Wurzelbacher administration determining that climate science is false? That evolution is false? That Islam is false? That Keynesian economics is false? It’s a possibility if the FCC gets involved in the arena of news content management.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:24 pmIt’s so sad that the term ‘press’ applies to O’Biley’s show.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmIt is entertainment, but has legal precedent from the courts to lie.
The first Amendment is abundantly clear here. Propaganda is protected speech.
It’s a possibility if the FCC gets involved in the arena of news content management.
I’m not asking the FCC to manage content, just the manner in which it’s delivered (i.e. a lie should NEVER be fed as NEWS on a frequency or media channel regulated by a Federal agency.)
That weakness makes the FCC an accomplice to all the falsehoods presently being broadcast, and not held to a higher standard.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:28 pmrepublic. my comments were in response to clips I had seen of the Cramer/Stewart interview, and additionally, Stewart’s initial exposé of CNBC that I had watched. If you’re suggesting that I was pretending that I had watched the whole interview when I didn’t, I’ll go back and repost the applicable posts to clear it up for you.
Here’s one for starters:
Just say the word and we’ll get to the bottom of this.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:30 pmYa just gots to love America. We have programs on a comedy channel that openly claim they are being humorous while providing honest information.
And then you have news programs openly admitting to lying and distortion getting huffy when they get called on it.
And Billo, that brand of journalism has been around for a long time. Can you spell paparazzi? Or maybe just check the color of the streak down your back for the appropriate adjective.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:35 pmcth,
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:38 pmI think the gaping loophole in the policy due to it’s lack of being a “law, rule or regulation” is a travesty in and of itself and reason enough to change the policy’s definition.
A question for the FCC. How come it is illegal for advertisers to make false claims about the products they want to sell via media commercials? You know, that truth in advertising thing?
If a news organization isn’t presenting factual news, they are advertising.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:38 pmIn other words, you can be fired from your media post for not towing a blatant company lie and neither the government nor the courts can do a thing to help you.
Very Orwellian IMO.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:41 pmI don’t recall Man-in-the-street interviewers sticking their feet in people’s doors so they couldn’t get in their cars. What O’Reilly does is stalking, harrassment, & in some cases, a type of assault.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:41 pm***
backup,
obfuscate,
divert,
confuse,
support and promote
the right wing nazi agenda.
:)
a propagandist’s work is never done.
::
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:43 pmBill won’t send Waters to harass Olberman, who can and will call him on it.
Bill Moyers wouldn’t waste much time on his show re: Bill O’Reilly, he’d rather talk about real news.
O’Reilly is a bully and quite possibly a wet-brain.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:47 pmtoasterhead. Not really. Here’s the headline again:
And the impression that posting left was that UPS was going to stop advertising on O’Reilly, because of the campaign. It’s pretty obvious when you consider the 450 some odd posts on the thread:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/27/ups-oreilly/
and the additional response from Rosenberg:
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Backup, ever consider changing your name to onetrack?
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:54 pmThis was the first response to the thread:
It seems that the impression that was created was that the campaign to compel O’Reilly’s sponsors to pull their advertising from his show was working. And that UPS agreed with the view at ThinkProgress.
That was not accurate.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:54 pmIf anyone can find Jesse’s home and email address Im local. I have a video camera and a bunch of questions that I doubt he’d respond to in email.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:55 pmWell, the next step is to inform the advertisers that, since they elect to continue to SPONSOR Oreilly’s show (either explicitly by agreeing with the content, or implicitly by allowing their advertising dollars to support the show — acceptance through negligence), then we will not be using their services or buying their products, and that we shall reccomend that others do the same for the same reason (what’s that word?… oh, yeah… boycott).
I am also of the mind that any sponsors who elect to continue to sponsor the show up until the day it no longer airs have relegated themselves to eternal boycott (from MY family, at least).
This is free-market capitalism, and condemnation of this is condemnation of free-market capitalism.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:56 pmdeebaser Says:
If anyone can find Jesse’s home and email address Im local. I have a video camera and a bunch of questions that I doubt he’d respond to in email.
well, to do it properly, you SHOULD e-mail him the questions first. Should he refuse to respond, then he CLEARLY is a “bad person”, a self-admitted “villan”, and is “hiding something”. Be sure to ask him, “When did you stop molesting pre-pubescent boys?”
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:58 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
This was the first response to the thread:
Wow, between the time I took to register and attempt to post this in the last thread, a new one has been created. In any event, what a big victory for fair-minded people every where. O’Reilly peddles trash and if advertisers choose not to support him, well, that’s America isn’t it? Right Bill-O?
It seems that the impression that was created was that the campaign to compel O’Reilly’s sponsors to pull their advertising from his show was working. And that UPS agreed with the view at ThinkProgress.
That was not accurate.
Logical fallacy — argument by anecdote. You cite ONE person making this assumption, and then apply it to everyone who heard about this. Even the slightly larger sample of posters who took this meaning (and I do mean SLIGHLY), for this anecdotal evidence to bear any weight as an argument, it must be a representative sample of the group you refer to — that group, you infer by your language, is everyone who heard of this issue (not even “just” the TP readers). This is not evidence that the general impression people had was as you claim.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:01 pmyou’re right toaster,
backup is grasping at straws (again)
in order to continue to support murdoch’s
right wing nazi propaganda operation.
***
in the meantime ann coulter rants about obama
ordering gm and ford out of nascar. trouble is, it
was based on an april fools joke by car and driver magazine.
coulter, of course, has not retracted her comments. and backup’s
reaction? nothing. his job is to promote the lies of coulter and the right while
tamping down the truth over here.
:)
**
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:04 pmAnd if you watch the last minute of this Olbermann clip, Keith also got the mistaken impression that UPS agreed with the sentiment at ThinkProgress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/28/olby-ups-oreilly/
He believed that it the campaign against O’Reilly’s ambush tactics caused UPS to pull advertising from O’Reilly. That was not correct. According to Rosenberg:
His credibility has also been compromised
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:05 pmBillo almost sounds like he is claiming muck raker status. Someone should inform him that a muckraker is one who digs in the muck of lies to dig out truth.
It doesn’t apply to those who have to do it daily to get to work.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:07 pmbackup Says:
What about Oreilly himself? Did he not make similar comment?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:08 pmI’m sorry, but why don’t we just turn the tables on Jesse Watters and interview him incessantly, when he’s not prepared to respond? You know, “real” investigative journalism. I think we stand to learn a lot about this man and why he feels this behavior is warranted or even appropriate if we give him a taste of his own medicine.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:10 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Backup, ever consider changing your name to onetrack?
***
LOL, from now on it is!
but on a serious note let’s take
a look at onetrack’s use of repetition
and it’s place in the art of propaganda.
from wikipedia:
Ad nauseam
This argument approach uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach works best when media sources are limited and controlled by the propagator.
Repetition
This type of propaganda deals with a jingle or word that is repeated over and over again, thus getting it stuck in someones head, so they can buy the product. The “Repetition” method has been described previously.
***
if you really want to stick it to
onetrack read the entire article and
see how so much of it applies to him
and his sponsor, fox “news”.
::
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:11 pmFurthermore, backup, do you contend that the content of the post with that headline supported the headline, or did the content of the post clarify with details what the matter was?
If you just read the headlines to get your news, you will be a VERY stupid and misinformed person.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:14 pmI know many of you like backup buy I’m flagging him because I’m tired of him posting the same cr@p over and over. TP can run this site any way they choose. And I have no problem whatsoever with the way they handled this issue in its entirety. I think if backup doesn’t like it he should leave.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:14 pmnote also how onetrack
avoids cagey’s argument regarding “logical fallacy”.
a propagandist must (at all costs) avoid arguments
that reveal his true purpose.
:)
we’ll be hearing onetrack’s “blame the messenger”
gambit shortly i’m sure. let’s watch.
:\
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:18 pmAn option we could consider is just giving trolls a piece of bubble gum. It appears to be true that Republicans and trolls are single minded so chewing and typing will probably cause all kinds of havoc.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:19 pmPoint well-taken, pastcaring #75[I also realize I was redundant in writing "inherently primal"--oops.]
Backup! –O’Reilly admitted UPS bailed and called it an “evil deed!”
What say you?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:19 pmHoodathunktick ,
it appears that the voters of ny hudson valley
(nearly 2/3 republican) have not fallen
for this rnc/onetrack style of propaganda.
*
the trolls have not won. there is still hope.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:23 pmI guess backup really is an O’Reilly
ballwasherwater carrier.He seems to put a lot of effort and twisted logic to defend the scumbag, leading us to believe, no matter how much he claims the opposite, that he approves of his tactics. If not, then why make such a fool of himself defending the scumbag?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:24 pm4. paz3 is on to something.
Ever notice on the school yard that when the bully picks their victim, the rest of the school yard stands around and actually gets a sense of power by identifying with the Bully ?
But I still can’t see how Bill-O’s tactics aren’t going to go far enough to lead to charges of stalking and harassment. and when they do, Bill-O has it all on tape – convenient for the jury.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:25 pmCagey. you make a good point. But, take a look through the responses to the post and tell me that people didn’t get the impression I suggest:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/27/ups-oreilly/
Judging by the responses, many people just read the headline.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:26 pmDoodlebug Shayne Says:
I know many of you like backup buy I’m flagging him because I’m tired of him posting the same cr@p over and over. TP can run this site any way they choose. And I have no problem whatsoever with the way they handled this issue in its entirety. I think if backup doesn’t like it he should leave.
***
his ego won’t let him.
but he might consider changing his name.
he’s done it before (he was “captain mantastic”)
and he was caught. it’s compromised his credibility
ever since.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 pm#79 – deebaser Says:
If anyone can find Jesse’s home and email address Im local. I have a video camera and a bunch of questions that I doubt he’d respond to in email.
I would love to see Watters and O’Reilly get a taste of their own medicine.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 pmjoe, in onetrack’s case we can add ad infinitum to ad nauseum.
Maybe we can call Pepto Bismal and get him on a commercial. His verbal diarrhea seems to qualify.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:29 pmI wonder if any of these O’Reilly apologists would feel comfortable if their daughter or sister interned at the Factor?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:30 pmInfinitely nauseating?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:32 pmjoe. I wasn’t caught, my friend. I was banned, with all my old posts deleted. I immediately acknowledged that I was CaptainMantastic when I started posting as backup.
Nice try, though.
maybe you could edit for TP.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:32 pmbackup Says:
You cite ONE person making this assumption, and then apply it to everyone who heard about this.
Cagey. you make a good point. But, take a look through the responses to the post and tell me that people didn’t get the impression I suggest:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/27/ups-oreilly/
If you just read the headlines to get your news, you will be a VERY stupid and misinformed person.
Judging by the responses, many people just read the headline.
***
you see what i mean about the
concept of repetition in propaganda?
and i might further add that onetrack
puts the “nauseum” in ad nauseum.
from wikipedia:
Ad nauseam is a Latin term used to describe an argument which has been continuing “[to the point of] nausea“.
Usage
As cognitive bias and logical fallacy
“Ad nauseam” arguments are logical fallacies relying on the repetition of a single argument to the exclusion of all else. This tactic employs intentional obfuscation, in which other logic and rationality is intentionally ignored in favour of preconceived (and ultimately subjective) modes of reasoning and rationality.
*
it’s as if they were reading
the crap that onetrack posts here.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:35 pmAnd if you watch the last minute of this O’Reilly clip, O’Reilly must have also gotten the mistaken impression that UPS agreed with the sentiment at ThinkProgress:
You Tube O’Reilly’s Reality Check Filled With Deceit
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:36 pmWHOOPS!!
:[
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 pmnice try onetrack,
we were here when it happened.
we saw it happened.
i’d suggest that you could work for fox “news”
or o’reilly or becky or bush or watters,
but then again
you probably already do.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 pmIf you just read the headlines to get your news, you will be a VERY stupid and misinformed person.
Do I really have to state the obvious here?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:40 pmbackup —
I read the post when it was posted, and read the responses. As I noted, a small sample of posters responded in a manner that indicated that they felt the UPS had either pulled their advertising or were strongly considering to not advertise in the future. However, some of those posters also noted that they understood that it may have just been UPS’ marketing strategy that was not influenced by anything but their dollars.
My point still stands that you are using the fallacy of anecdotal evidence and now sweeping generalizations. Your claim was very broad and not specifying that “some TP posters” read it that way — you explicitly imply that those who heard of this matter (here or elsewhere) were influenced by the headline as it stands without considering anything else.
And it seems that Oreilly did the same and commented on his show. Is he SO incompetent that he took that headline (and not the post) as proof positive that UPS was pulling their ads from his show? Or, is it possible that Oreilly (and/or others at FOX) determined something more than they are willing to share? Oreilly making his threat to UPS on his show (plus whatever unknown communications between FOX and UPS) influenced UPS’ later response.
Either way, this is a PR nightmare for UPS — choosing any side means that they could be losing revenue (because, how will Oreilly’s faithful and believing viewers react to UPS if they DID come out and say that they were in agreement with TP and would be pulling their sponsorship? Would they not themselves choose, and just as rightly so, to avoid patronizing said ex-sponsor?)
One does not retract a headline — one retracts a story. Or do we REALLY NEED to go into an examination of real headlines that are not entirely accurate in describing the content of the article or show?
Why do you have issue with a single headline, yet no issue at all with Oreilly’s mischaracterization (i.e. LIE) about what Ms. Terkel said?
There is a world of difference, and, at least according to the right, Oreilly has a massive audience, thus if he lies or distorts the truth then he is reaching a lot of people with said lie.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:43 pmHoodathunktick Says:
——————————————————————————–
If you just read the headlines to get your news, you will be a VERY stupid and misinformed person.
Do I really have to state the obvious here?
All right! All right! Fine. Point taken….. ;/
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:44 pmbackup Says:
joe. I wasn’t caught, my friend. I was banned, with all my old posts deleted. I immediately acknowledged that I was CaptainMantastic when I started posting as backup.
Yep, you were banned, for making racist comments> I remember because I also flagged you that day for you comments, Cap’n.
Now you are ballwashing for O’Liely.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:44 pmNext victim, go Kanye on Watters.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:47 pmjoe. here’s a couple of postings that might give you some insight into my postings as CaptainMantastic:
Okay, at the time Jeremy had to go back 8 months to find something objectionable. I said that Democrats should get some balls. And I was banned. And most of my posts deleted. (BTW, I still believe that Democrats should have debated on Fox)
joe. do you think we would have to go back 8 months to find something you posted as objectionable?
And this is from missmolley a year ago:
So, you can continue to insinuate that I have dishonestly distanced myself from my postings as CaptainMantastic. And that, I am somehow disingenuous now by comparison to my postings as CaptainMantastic. You can do that, but just like stretching the truth to make a sensational headline, it will only likely backfire.
Nobody here wants to hear me explain how I was banned as CaptainMantastic. So, why not stop trying to use it dishonestly to try to discredit me?
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:48 pmBTW:
CARPENTER: And you know, they’re very frightened at the prospect of a Fox News producer coming after them with a camera.
I say, “Bring it on!!!”
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:50 pmWayne. Do me a favor and repost that exchange.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:50 pmDoodlebug Shayne Says:
I know many of you like backup buy I’m flagging him because I’m tired of him posting the same cr@p over and over. TP can run this site any way they choose. And I have no problem whatsoever with the way they handled this issue in its entirety. I think if backup doesn’t like it he should leave.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I’m with the Doodlebug. backup is an expert at parsing words and obfuscation — and he’s a frickin’ bore.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:59 pmUh, oh… is this derailing into a backup/capnmantastic fest?
I don’t know why you were banned before, and really I don’t give a rat’s testicle. Being as this is a privately owned site, they have that right (just as every other such site has the right) to ban or delete posters as they choose.
Personally, I give the moderators here the benefit of the doubt, and assume that they had their own reasons that they believed were necessary and sufficient cause. I have seen posters stay here who I thought SHOULD have been banned, so you MUST have said or done something that they had a serious issue with, and of course you don’t agree with it because you believed that whatever it was was just fine. Fair enough, but this is THEIR sandbox, not yours (and I am certain that you do understand that).
Hopefully you learned and will not repeat the error here again.
Must go –
play nice.
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:59 pmWayne Says:
backup Says:
joe. I wasn’t caught, my friend. I was banned, with all my old posts deleted. I immediately acknowledged that I was CaptainMantastic when I started posting as backup.
Yep, you were banned, for making racist comments> I remember because I also flagged you that day for you comments, Cap’n.
Now you are ballwashing for O’Liely.
***
the proof is because you were banned.
you just admitted it. you damn yourself
(and your credibility) with your own words.
now you’ve been caught as propagandist (”ballwashing”
in wayne’s words) for o’reilly and fox.
did you really think you’d get away with that too?
***
what color is the sky in you world?
…
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pmjoe cantwell Says:
what color is the sky in you world?
O.k. one more :
heliotrope
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:04 pmbackup Says:
Wayne. Do me a favor and repost that exchange.
Funny one, Cap’n. As you yourself stated your racist posts were deleted when you were banned, as often happens when someone is banned for offensive comments.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:08 pmwhoops
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:09 pmwhat color is the sky in you world?
Depends on if the basement has windows?
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:13 pmCageyCretin Says:
joe cantwell Says:
what color is the sky in you world?
O.k. one more :
heliotrope
***
just one more,
whatever color o’reilly says it is.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 pmAren’t you being more than a little disingenuous to request this after you posted above that all your comments had been deleted? How are we going to take you seriously after this?
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:19 pmwags. ask yourself this. If I was posting racist comments, wouldn’t they have been the evidence that Jeremy would have highlighted to prove my posts were objectionable. But, instead he has to go back 8 months to find where I suggest that Democrats need to get some balls?
Believe what you want. I’m saying that if people here are charging that I have made racist comments, find them and repost them.
Don’t use the idea that my posts are gone as a cop out. The responses to my posts, by other posters, are still there in those threads. I’ve reposted Jeremy’s response to me, although my original posts are gone. It’s doable.
Find them.
That won’t happen. Because they aren’t there. Because, I never made racist comments in the first place.
joe and wayne and anyone else needs to put up, if they want to be taken credibly.
And I have no desire to rehash a banning as CaptainMantastic. But, if you were accused of something you didn’t do (making racist comments) you wouldn’t let it stand either.
Simple. back off the implication that I was banned for racist comments or post some evidence.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:19 pmonetrack says (in perfect lovely Republican fashion) I didn’t do it and I was only kidding. Memory is like me, a figment of your imagination.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:27 pmBackup. (p.s. starting posts in this manner is annoying) I don’t even care why you got banned. I do however, find mild amusement in your rhetorical contortionism.
So, by all means, carry on.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:27 pmonetrack,
they were scrubbed and you know it.
you admitted it. if your banning was unfair why
would you keep coming back here and
ceaselessly posting your propaganda?
and we were witnesses to the very good reasons
for your banning. witnesses, onetrack, they’re
a b|tch, aren’t they? they had them at nuremberg.
the generals, the industrialists, the propagandists
and their lawyers all howled in protests but there were
witnesses and they testified.
now live with that.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:32 pmHere’s another post from a year ago. This was a pretty prescient tactic on my part to refute my banning on the basis of racist comments. Either that, or the charges that I have been banned for racist comments are as legitimate as the UPS headline:
Wouldn’t the racists comments that joe and wayne, suggest peeked some interest in a search back 8 months?
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:38 pmonetrack,
you keep pasting “jeremy”’s remarks
which are vague and having nothing to
do with your banning from a site that
you obsessively keep returning to.
my god man if tp swatted you on the ass
with a fraternity paddle would you respond
by saying, “thank you sir, may i have another?”
just how needy are you? no, you acknowledge your
own guilt by humbly returning to the scene of
your crime. i feel for you son, but guilty is guilty.
*
you know they need good, strong commentators over
at redstate, why don’t you give them a try? practice your
craft on a more receptive audience for awhile.
“”
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:49 pm129. backup Says:
Really, bc, nobody cares.
You’re repetitive (see your UPS ‘campaign’). You’re free to make comments, but don’t keep reposting them if you get no ‘recommends.’ The scroll function works perfectly. If you’re interesting or insightful, people will look for your posts. Start there.
Bring something new to the table and stop defending mediocrity. That includes archived mediocrity….
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:52 pmIt is not up a Republican water carrier to determine what TP should say and how they should say it. Shut up or be flagged backup. Pick one.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:56 pmjoe. On the very same thread that I posted the above comment (defending my banning), you were there. We had a long conversation. And you never mentioned anything about my racist comments. You posted plenty of comments, but not one about my banning on the basis of racist comments.
Here’s the thread. Check it out:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/18/thinkfast-march-18-2008/
It would seem that if I was defending my banning, you might feel compelled to set the record straight about the racist comments. But, not a word about it at the time. Why? Is my banning for racist comments a newfound narrative that satisfies your sensibilities today?
The racist charge is pretty significant. You should probably try to back it up.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:57 pmonetrack, no one here had any part in the decision to ban you other than to ask that something be done about a poster who they felt was violating rules.
If you want to contribute today, feel free. Follow the rules and you don’t get banned. Say intelligent things (pro or con) and you have a forum.
Just like anyone else here.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:16 pm133. backup Says:
Slow learner.
As Carly Simon would say, this thread ain’t about you, backup. Knock it off and think of a post with the stuff of revelation in it.
Hell, I’d settle for clever; self-conscious whining, however, is for republicans.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:21 pmhoodathunk and hanshiro. you’re right. It’s pretty much degenerated to a pissing contest between me and joe.
I’m off my soapbox about the UPS headline. I’ll even concede they could forego the retraction. I just think there is some jeopardy with stretching the truth in the headlines. It happens here sometimes.
Please understand that if someone wants to smear you as a racist, you’ll probably feel compelled to push back.
But, you’re right. I’ll give it up.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:21 pmonetrack,
i see, by your rules if i don’t call you
a racist everyday, in every comment then
if follows that you aren’t. sorry but it doesn’t work
that way. fact: you were banned for
racists comments. you can whine all you want about it
but, like scooter libby, it’s on the record and it
can’t be erased. you can’t make new lies to hide from
old ones. your presences here firmly establishes your guilt.
your continued, obsessive postings here only
reaffirm tp’s decision to ban you.
***
and, if i may digress, in my last comment i gave you a wonderful
suggestion about taking your act to redstate. why have you spurned
my helpful suggestion?
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:22 pm136.backup Says: hoodathunk and hanshiro. you’re right. It’s pretty much degenerated to a pissing contest between me and joe.
Um, backup, there’s no contest, you’re outmatched and outgunned.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:25 pmbackup Says:
hoodathunk and hanshiro. you’re right. It’s pretty much degenerated to a pissing contest between me and joe.
I’m off my soapbox about the UPS headline. I’ll even concede they could forego the retraction. I just think there is some jeopardy with stretching the truth in the headlines. It happens here sometimes.
Please understand that if someone wants to smear you as a racist, you’ll probably feel compelled to push back.
But, you’re right. I’ll give it up.
***
gentlemen,
if you think hell has just frozen over guess again.
he’ll be back. he always comes back.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:25 pmIn an environment where you can say whatever you want and not be expected to prove it; maybe you’re right.
Have a great day.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:31 pmbackup Says:
Um, backup, there’s no contest, you’re outmatched and outgunned.
In an environment where you can say whatever you want and not be expected to prove it; maybe you’re right.
Have a great day.
***
what’d i say?
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:33 pm140. backup Says: In an environment where you can say whatever you want and not be expected to prove it; maybe you’re right.
You’re at a distinct disadvantage, then, when you can’t divine and appreciate concise, inspired brevity or detect the gulf between your observations and Joe’s.
Maybe if you read more….and posted less…..
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:40 pmif it is any consolation, backup, I wasn’t around for any of your alleged racist comments. I’m working off your simplistic, one track support of something that for most rational people is insupportable.
You seem to be able to think until you type.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:43 pmbackup, being out matched and out gunned on this site is always a question of degree. There are many posters who can serve you your butt as a sandwich if you aren’t solid on your posts.
Guess what? They can do it to anyone, myself included. Just as I can do it to you. Peers, little weedhopper. Not someplace to tie your ragged rowboat of old regurgitated ideas.
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:50 pmRebecca Lucile Schaeffer, John Lennon killed by their stalkers
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:53 pmDave Letterman Brad Pitt harassed by their stalkers what make BillO think he is not as guilty as the above mentioned stalkers
jail should await him and his ambush team
Billo would send Jesse after his own family members if it would mean an extra $500 a show.
O’Reilly thinks the word depraved is a construction term.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:10 pmjust saw this. joe. go ahead and post ‘the record’ for everyone to see.
‘It can’t be erased’, but apparently, it also can’t be reproduced.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:33 pmonetrack, your present words and actions speak volumes. Don’t worry about the whispers from your past.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:47 pmhoodathunk. so it’s okay to call someone a racist without any evidence?
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:50 pmMaster Po says, if the foo sh*ts, bear it.
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:00 pmbackup Says:
fact: you were banned for
racists comments. you can whine all you want about it
but, like scooter libby, it’s on the record and it
can’t be erased.
just saw this. joe. go ahead and post ‘the record’ for everyone to see.
‘It can’t be erased’, but apparently, it also can’t be reproduced.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:33 pm
***
***
backup Says:
hoodathunk. so it’s okay to call someone a racist without any evidence?
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:50 pm
***
joe cantwell Says:
backup Says:
hoodathunk and hanshiro. you’re right. It’s pretty much degenerated to a pissing contest between me and joe.
I’m off my soapbox about the UPS headline. I’ll even concede they could forego the retraction. I just think there is some jeopardy with stretching the truth in the headlines. It happens here sometimes.
Please understand that if someone wants to smear you as a racist, you’ll probably feel compelled to push back.
But, you’re right. I’ll give it up.
***
gentlemen,
if you think hell has just frozen over guess again.
he’ll be back. he always comes back.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 3:33 pm
***
onetrack.
predictable as always.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:06 pmonetrack, I have been called many things in my life and the most hurtful was late to supper. In the immortal words of a very wise person:
“Face it, Flounder, you screwed up!”
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:13 pmwell, in the real world, if someone makes an allegation they are usually compelled to prove it.
It would be pretty easy to shut me down, just post the comments. The ‘record’ you’re talking about.
That’s how it happens everywhere else. That’s what people here should insist upon.
I know joe’s objective. He’s dishonest, I don’t find him credible. I’ve seen it many times.
I am curious about you though, hoodathunk. It would seem simple to just turn to joe and compel him to repost the evidence that he says he has, to settle the dispute.
You’re lack of interest signals that you are really interested in the truth. But, more comfortable letting a convenient lie pass for the truth.
Prove me wrong. Insist that joe back his allegations with proof. That’s fair.
Without that, what have you really got?
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:22 pmlet me try this:
Your lack of interest signals that you are really not interested in the truth.
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:23 pmbackup Says:
well, in the real world, if someone makes an allegation they are usually compelled to prove it.
It would be pretty easy to shut me down, just post the comments. The ‘record’ you’re talking about.
That’s how it happens everywhere else. That’s what people here should insist upon.
I know joe’s objective. He’s dishonest, I don’t find him credible. I’ve seen it many times.
I am curious about you though, hoodathunk. It would seem simple to just turn to joe and compel him to repost the evidence that he says he has, to settle the dispute.
You’re lack of interest signals that you are really interested in the truth. But, more comfortable letting a convenient lie pass for the truth.
Prove me wrong. Insist that joe back his allegations with proof. That’s fair.
Without that, what have you really got?
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:22 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
backup Says:
let me try this:
Your lack of interest signals that you are really not interested in the truth.
***
he’ll be back. he always comes back.
***
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:32 pmWell, if you’re going to make false allegations against me, I’ll make the effort to defend myself.
I won’t let evil happen here, joe. Even if it would be more convenient for you.
(Or maybe you could post your proof. The more you obfuscate, the more obvious it is that your claims are a dishonest attempt to discredit someone that disagrees with you.)
People are upset with O’Reilly’s false claims. But, they seem pretty comfortable with yours.
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:52 pmbackup Says:
he’ll be back. he always comes back.
Well, if you’re going to make false allegations against me, I’ll make the effort to defend myself.
Evil happens when good men say nothing.
I won’t let evil happen here, joe. Even if it would be more convenient for you.
(Or maybe you could post your proof. The more you obfuscate, the more obvious it is that your claims are a dishonest attempt to discredit someone that disagrees with you.)
People are upset with O’Reilly’s false claims. But, they seem pretty comfortable with yours.
***
you are deliberately trying to confuse my role here.
i’m on the jury. i’ve witnessed the evidence
and the proof. and i vote guilty.
*
hmmm, “obfuscate”, now where have i heard
that word before?
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:59 pmThat’s cool. So, where’s the evidence?
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:04 pmonetrack, cut and paste here where posters have attacked you for racism on this thread. You have been whining about your previous incarnation while everyone here has been calling you on stupid and off topic comments on this thread.
Get a clue.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:07 pmbackup Says:
That’s cool. So, where’s the evidence?
*
i witnessed it.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:07 pmbackup Says:
That’s cool. So, where’s the evidence?
Ever hear the statement a legend in your own mind?
Stay on topic, bonehead.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:08 pmHoodathunktick Says:
onetrack, cut and paste here where posters have attacked you for racism on this thread. You have been whining about your previous incarnation while everyone here has been calling you on stupid and off topic comments on this thread.
Get a clue.
***
he can’t, hood.
cut and pasting,
hate and conservatism,
these are his only tools.
:\
but do you know what really hurts?
i gave him some wonderful (and heart felt)
advice about honing his craft at redstate
and he completely ignores it. not one word of
thanks. how can one approach such belligerence?
**
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:13 pmHoodathunk, here it is:
There are other’s, but this one is from joe’s post up around #137.
It’s not true. If someone was spreading that about you, I doubt you would just let it stand.
Do us all a favor and join me in compelling joe to produce this proof I know he doesn’t have.
If he can’t prove it, he should stop with the allegations.
If someone is going to imply that I’ve been banned for racist comments, they should have to back that claim up with some proof. It’s reasonable for me to ask for it and reasonable for joe to have to prove it.
Or he can concede he’s just making up stuff up. I can forgive and forget. I’m just not interested in letting a dishonest allegation about me go unanswered.
Come on, joe. Even you’re better than this.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:23 pmbackup Says:
Hoodathunk, here it is:
fact: you were banned for
racists comments.
There are other’s, but this one is from joe’s post up around #137.
It’s not true. If someone was spreading that about you, I doubt you would just let it stand.
Do us all a favor and join me in compelling joe to produce this proof I know he doesn’t have.
If he can’t prove it, he should stop with the allegations.
If someone is going to imply that I’ve been banned for racist comments, they should have to back that claim up with some proof. It’s reasonable for me to ask for it and reasonable for joe to have to prove it.
Or he can concede he’s just making up stuff up. I can forgive and forget. I’m just not interested in letting a dishonest allegation about me go unanswered.
Come on, joe. Even you’re better than this.
***
i’m on the jury, remember?
guilty.
***
you can keep the
appeal going if you like.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:29 pm….
and do you know what’s really hurtful onetrack?
i was the one who tried to help you
and you spurned that help.
:(
if you had a sense of shame
you’d be ashamed.
:|
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:31 pmjoe. let’s not get distracted when we just about have this nailed down. Here’s what you say in (around) post #137:
Okay. you’ve got a fact and it’s on the record and it can’t be erased. So far, I follow.
Now comes the tricky part. Where is this record you’re talking about? It can’t be erased, so where is it? All you have to do is post it.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:36 pmbackup Says:
joe. let’s not get distracted when we just about have this nailed down. Here’s what you say in (around) post #137:
…fact: you were banned for
racists comments. you can whine all you want about it
but, like scooter libby, it’s on the record and it
can’t be erased…
Okay. you’ve got a fact and it’s on the record and it can’t be erased. So far, I follow.
Now comes the tricky part. Where is this record you’re talking about? It can’t be erased, so where is it? All you have to do is post it.
***
eye witness,
i witnessed.
***
capice?
:|
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:39 pmHoodathunk. I cut and pasted joe’s claim that I was banned for racist comments. That’s not true. Wouldn’t you agree that he has an obligation to back up his claim with some evidence?
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:39 pmbackup Says:
cut and paste here where posters have attacked you for racism on this thread.
Hoodathunk. I cut and pasted joe’s claim that I was banned for racist comments. That’s not true. Wouldn’t you agree that he has an obligation to back up his claim with some evidence?
***
onetrack,
perhaps if you used “enhanced interrogation techniques”
on me i might change my vote. you know i wouldn’t put it past you.
:0
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:45 pmbackup Says:
cut and paste here where posters have attacked you for racism on this thread.
Hoodathunk. I cut and pasted joe’s claim that I was banned for racist comments. That’s not true. Wouldn’t you agree that he has an obligation to back up his claim with some evidence?
Master Po says: Wish in one hand and sh*t in the other. Which one fills first?
If you want a priest to forgive your sins, go to church. If you want to converse with people in a rational fashion, give it a rest.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:50 pmand if you want to push it, be glad being stubborn and stupid isn’t reason for banning.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:53 pmbut being off topic is.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:54 pmOkay, joe. We are almost there. I don’t think you witnessed it. Here’s my effort to prove it.
Here is a thread in which we were debating the Reverend Wright and the topic of racism:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/18/thinkfast-march-18-2008/
It was after my banning and that came up in the thread. I defended my time posting before the banning. You commented on that. We also had a lengthy conversation about the Wright issue. Not once in that thread did you mention that I had been banned for racist comments. On a thread where that would have been obviously relevant. You didn’t mention that I had been banned previously due to racist comments, because that never happened. I still don’t know what caused my banning, but it was not because I made racist comments.
The much more recent claims that you ‘witnessed’ me being banned, is a convenient narrative to dishonestly discredit me.
We’re half the way there. I understand when you disagree with me and I’m open to your other criticisms. But, you saying that I was banned for racist comments is untrue, and I cannot let it pass.
Why not back off the comment, so we can all move on?
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 pmbackup Says: Why not back off the comment, so we can all move on?
Physician! Heal thyself!
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:58 pmWhat has Olbermann become? A liberal media commentator, or a Fox News watcher on MSNBC?
Oh and worst person in the world? You mean it’s no logner bin laden?
I’m glad they are not renewing his contract in two years. Hope they find a better replacement.
Oh, by the way, thinkprogress was punked by UPS over teh weekend. Didn’t hear about it? Do your research.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:59 pmbuhbye hstps. Tell your buddies at Troll Central.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:01 pmI guess backup really does think this thread’s about him.
See, this is the kinda irrelevant crap that get’s people scrolling past your irrelevant posts, backup. You get a rep.
Plus, someone may get genuinely pissed off at your inability to let it go and find some program like ‘wayback machine’ and possibly even find, via cache or some such, where they can produce evidence to at least cast doubt on your whole campaign.
It may well be possible to produce deleted posts this way. You really that sure of your ground, here?
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pmHanshiro, poor onetrack was probably put in a sack and tossed off a bridge as a pup. But he isn’t hopeless. He can type a reasonably coherent sentence which puts him light years ahead of the canned trolls.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:07 pmhood,
he’s not listening to you.
because you don’t agree with him.
he’s become a lab rat at the feeder
bar pressing the lever over and over again.
he’s in troll hell and, try as we might,
there’s nothing we can do to help him
***
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:07 pmI would welcome that. I am absolutely sure.
hanshiro. If someone makes an allegation about you, you’re going to defend yourself.
your asking me to let it go. Okay. why isn’t it just as easy to suggest that joe should post his evidence or stop with the allegations.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:07 pmbackup Says: your asking me to let it go. Okay. why isn’t it just as easy to suggest that joe should post his evidence or stop with the allegations.
One, the allegations are only here because you keep bringing them up.
Two, nobody but you gives a rat’s posterior whether you may or may not be a racist. As long as you keep it to yourself.
Three, everyone is tired of your whining.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:12 pmbackup Says:
It may well be possible to produce deleted posts this way. You really that sure of your ground, here?
I would welcome that. I am absolutely sure.
hanshiro. If someone makes an allegation about you, you’re going to defend yourself.
your asking me to let it go. Okay. why isn’t it just as easy to suggest that joe should post his evidence or stop with the allegations.
***
i allege nothing.
i know what i know.
you have a problem with being
banned by tp? take it up with them.
***
you are what you are.
don’t blame me for that.
take a page out of you own neo-con
manifesto and be responsible for yourself.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:15 pm175.hstps Says: What has Olbermann become? A liberal media commentator, or a Fox News watcher on MSNBC?
Nah, just a media commentator, though it does seem that facts have a liberal bias.
Are you auditioning for a job as TP tour guide? Directing folks to what they can find on TP’s own website? You kinda suck at it, so don’t quit your cemetery job.
Oh, and when did Olbermann ever invent out of whole cloth a fictitious publication to pretend a feeble boycott he called for was working?
Never.
When did a boycott by Olbermann result in an uptick in business trade for the “boycotted entity?
Never.
But O’Reilly’s done both of those, to France’s eternal appreciation, btw; not to mention Billy’s lying about his whole imbecilic performance.
You might want to find less laughable heroes, hstps, you’re not making a dent here by erecting an @sshat like O’Reilly as some sort of figure to esteem.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:16 pmThat’s the trouble hoodathunk, I’ve done nothing that warrants the implication of closet racism, but you feel comfortable enabling that implication.
How about not doing that?
And instead requiring someone that charges someone else with racism, to prove it.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:18 pmhanshiro,
don’t be too harsh on hstps.
he may have actually taken this thread
out of onetrack’s hands and put it back
on it’s rails. no small feat!
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:19 pmbackup, were you (or any previous profiles) ever banned by TP?
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:19 pmhans,
i made him own up to that one
on comment #103.
…
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:23 pmbackup, were you (or any previous profiles) ever banned by TP?
Yes. I was banned as CaptainMantastic, but never as backup.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:24 pmonetrack, I have no problem believing you are a racist. Your posts that I have read are narrow minded and indicative of a personality that is willing to be lead. I have not read a single word or thought you have posted that is not a bit of regurgitated bird bile or a self serving whine about your precious little self.
Guess what? I don’t care.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:26 pmbtw,
check out comment #111 from
wayne as well. he was there.
he flagged him.
***
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:27 pmhood,
i cared.
i even tried to help him.
my help was spurned.
that hurt.
*
i wonder if i still care?
:|
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:29 pmjoe, I hear you. But I can only care when there is a scintilla of an expression. Onetrack is one track. And that track is labeled ‘me’.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:31 pmhood,
amen brother, amen.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:38 pmIf ThinkProgress continues to be this creative with it’s headlines and interpretations, they won’t have the authority to question anyones journalistic legitimacy. There should be a retraction.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:47 pmgee, hstps, come up with that one all on your own?
Buhbye.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:58 pm188. backup Says:
backup, were you (or any previous profiles) ever banned by TP?
Yes. I was banned as CaptainMantastic, but never as backup.
Well, not wanting to play referee, but what could you have done that was so disruptive as to trigger a complete ban? (Even ’silence is a Sissy didn’t so that…and he tried his little heart out…)
Add to the fact that you didn’t exactly make many fans by ‘restating’ the egregiousness of the watermelon patch email:
45.backup Says:
The watermelon e-mail was ignorant.
But, part of the reason that we are a nation of cowards on race is this:
The guy comments on race and he loses his job.
The ‘guy’ was a CA mayor and very ’situationally aware.’ Plus, the email was not a ‘comment on race,’despite the tiresome repetition you employed in trying to revise the episode; it was clearly a racist slap. Your attempt to downplay and trivialize this episode through revisionist language has clearly garnered the reference you are on the defense from now.
I can’t say, reading that episode, that I disagree with Joe, frankly. The mission creep towards this “nation of cowards,” tangent was irrelevant and misleading to the thread. In fact, my own comment was no different to what I’ve a stated above:
You see backup? You kept digging and digging…
Are you happy with pushing this issue now?
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:58 pmMaster Po says; Be careful what you ask for, Han is not a careful cook.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:01 pm197. Hoodathunktick Says: Master Po says; Be careful what you ask for, Han is not a careful cook.
But he insisted on ordering off-menu…I just hate that.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:08 pmHan, if he wants the pufferfish in squid ink, well…
Can I have a copy of the video when he bloats up?
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:19 pmhanshiro. joe was a little less than agreeable on that sight:
Show me the racist slurs I was guilty of on the watermelon thread.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:37 pmWhat do you do when people challenge you? Rollover?
Here’s a hypothetical. Let’s say someone like O’Reilly made an allegation about the posters at ThinkProgress that wasn’t true.
Are you advocating that they just let it go?
Or would you insist that the allegation be proved?
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:38 pmAnd if you want to revisit the watermelon thread, let’s get this party started.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/27/watermelon-resign/
There’s plenty there, why not go through every comment and show me the ones you deem racist.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:43 pmTake you time and read through them carefully. I’ll check in later to see what you come up with.
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:44 pm200. backup Says: hanshiro. joe was a little less than agreeable on that sight:
This isn’t about Joe or being agreeable. Your interminable revision of the racist email as some sort of ‘commentary’ points to a trivializing of a racist incident. That in itself, combined with your dedicated attempt in casting a racist episode as a ‘comment’ is suspect, to say the least.
Plus, you haven’t answered why you were banned as mantastic…
April 2nd, 2009 at 8:46 pmI don’t know. I cannot say that they didn’t have a valid reason for banning me. It’s their site, they can do whatever they want. I can say with confidence that it was not for using profanity, or slurs, or insults. And I can definitely say that I was not banned for making racial comments.
I don’t have a problem with TP or their banning me. I love the site.
I do have a problem with someone characterizing me as a racist.
Wouldn’t you?
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:02 pmhans,
i’ve been onetrack’s whipping boy for
so long it’s not even funny. whenever
he wants to get out from under his own
transgressions he starts attacking the messenger (me).
***
you went to the “watermelon” thread. you brought
back crystal clear evidence of onetrack’s comments
that day (and night). his response? ignore it and attack me.
should you examine the watermelon thread a second time
note the extraordinary number of comments onetrack makes
(by far more than anyone else there). note too the tone
of his comments. they are eerily similar to the comments he’s
making again and again here tonight.
he is clinically obsessed.
:|
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:14 pmbackup Says:
Plus, you haven’t answered why you were banned as mantastic…
I don’t know. I cannot say that they didn’t have a valid reason for banning me. It’s their site, they can do whatever they want. I can say with confidence that it was not for using profanity, or slurs, or insults. And I can definitely say that I was not banned for making racial comments.
I don’t have a problem with TP or their banning me. I love the site.
I do have a problem with someone characterizing me as a racist.
Wouldn’t you?
**
you love the site?
explain this, liar.
**
backup Says:
but he might consider changing his name.
he’s done it before (he was “captain mantastic”)
and he was caught. it’s compromised his credibility
ever since.
joe. I wasn’t caught, my friend. I was banned, with all my old posts deleted. I immediately acknowledged that I was CaptainMantastic when I started posting as backup.
Nice try, though.
maybe you could edit for TP.
**
nice thing to say to me
and about the site you
claim you “love”.
:|
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 pm205. backup Says: I do have a problem with someone characterizing me as a racist. Wouldn’t you?
Read #204. Again.
I will say that after reading some of your extremely conservative posts as mantastic, you were pretty much of a right-wing dou(he.
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:27 pmI’m also confused about your banning. You don’t seem to have any problem with it, yet you’ve no idea why they banned you; in fact you state you can’t say they didn’t have a valid reason??!?
None of this makes any sense, and posters invariably know when they’re pushing the envelope.
Yet, you don’t know but are okay with it. Red flags…
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 pmI love the site, but I disagree with the headline exaggerations. The exaggerations that I equate with your exaggerations (that’s a kind way to say lies).
I don’t care if you’re confused about my banning. Doesn’t matter to me. joe’s ’strong’ position on my being banned because I made racial comments has been sufficiently watered down to: he witnessed something that he can’t prove, but wayne was there, honest.
I’m okay with that.
Good crowd. See ya.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 pmjoe’s exaggerations, for clarification.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 pmhan, none of this makes any sense either:
backup Says:
I love the site, but I disagree with the headline exaggerations. The exaggerations that I equate with your exaggerations (that’s a kind way to say lies).
I don’t care if you’re confused about my banning. Doesn’t matter to me. joe’s ’strong’ position on my being banned because I made racial comments has been sufficiently watered down to: he witnessed something that he can’t prove, but wayne was there, honest.
I’m okay with that.
Good crowd. See ya.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
backup Says:
joe’s exaggerations, for clarification.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:40 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
***
past experience has taught
me that onetrack will get goofy
like this when his back is to the
wall and he wants to bail out.
:)
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 pmHere is a line of logic by Mantastic that also raises red flags:
The logic is…well, specious. Trying outright to paint progressives as racist because they post a lopsided chart showing the overwhelming ownership of media by non-minorities is ludicrous.
Also trying to paint progressives as homophobic in a thread about the SCOTUS limiting discrimination claims (Lilly Leadbetter) It was also the 1st post in the thread:
I’ll post any more that I find…
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:36 pmhans,
it makes me as sad to read those comments.
it may be hard to believe but i keep hoping that
some day onetrack just might shed his snake’s skin
and turn in to a decent human being. obama is
president and any thing’s possible. still these are the
things wayne and i witnessed. horrible as they are,
they are true.
good work.
_-_
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:33 amhanshiro. keep up the good work.
The general theme seems to be real equality in the first few examples.
And the then the idea that blacks may be taken for granted by Democrats, if Democrats know their votes are in the bag.
The plantation comment was a little over the top. (I have admitted that I have moderated my views over time). But that isn’t a racist statement, that’s a statement that Democrats are taking blacks for granted. But, good find.
The point about whether Democrats consider Obama black was a reference to this issue:
http://mobyrebuttal.blogspot.com/2007/03/reverend-sharpton-obama-isnt-black.html
And nice try with the homophobia tie, but that’s just pointing out Democrat hypocrisy and there blind eye towards Edwards anti-gay remarks:
If these examples are the worst examples you can come up with, to be honest, I am starting to question why I was banned.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:19 amthank you onetrack,
for a fleeting moment i had
sympathy for your psychosis.
but if you’re proud of your remarks
then perhaps being banned was a
wise decision by tp. you are a sick
racist who refuses any help to heal
his condition. i’m sure you’re proud of
yourself. perhaps you should call yourself
proud but, unfortunately for you, another
sick racist has claimed that name. you asked
for proof and you were finally given it. instead
of asking for forgiveness you became egregiously
arrogant again. i pity you your bigotry. no wonder
you are so joyless.
:)
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 am“blond sagacity, the conservative that liberals love to hate”?
one track have you got sh|t for brains?
your link includes a racist photoshopped picture of obama!
give it up my friend. put away your copy of the turner diaries
and try, try to find the some peace within yourself. the last
thing we need now is another oklahoma city.
:|
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 amjoe. you sound more than a little defensive. you claim you witnessed me being banned for racist comments. you refuse to give any proof (any details, at all), but hanshiro gets an application to retrieve all my past comments as CaptainMantastic.
Thousands of posts over two years, and this is all you come up with? Really?
None of those comments are racist. The plantation comment, which I admit is the most divisive one (and the one hanshiro elected to bold), may be over the top. But, apparently, it doesn’t prohibit you from becoming the Secretary of State:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007854
So, you seem to be claiming that when I make a plantation comment, it’s proof of my racism and psychosis. But, when a Democrat makes a plantation comment, they are qualified to be Secretary of State?
joe. I know you want to believe that I’m racist. But, here’s what happened. you lied about witnessing my banning. hanshiro takes the initiative to check it out and the most divisive comment he can find, is nothing that Hillary Clinton hasn’t already said.
I’ll debate the rest of the comments, if you’d like.
Or we can let it go and move on.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:45 amhanshiro. I’ve got no beef with you. I appreciate you going back and finding the posts.
My posts are often oppositional to the threads. But, they are not racist. I was never banned from this site for racist comments.
I regret the thread got derailed. But, I felt joe’s allegations would eventually have to be addressed.
Peace.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 ambackup Says:
joe. you sound more than a little defensive. you claim you witnessed me being banned for racist comments. you refuse to give any proof (any details, at all), but hanshiro gets an application to retrieve all my past comments as CaptainMantastic.
Thousands of posts over two years, and this is all you come up with? Really?
None of those comments are racist. The plantation comment, which I admit is the most divisive one (and the one hanshiro elected to bold), may be over the top. But, apparently, it doesn’t prohibit you from becoming the Secretary of State:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/ editorial/ feature.html?id=110007854
Sen. Hillary Clinton drew criticism Tuesday for a Martin Luther King Jr. Day speech in which she told a mostly black audience at a Harlem church that Republican leaders have run the House “like a plantation” and the Bush administration will go down as “one of the worst” in U.S. history.
So, you seem to be claiming that when I make a plantation comment, it’s proof of my racism and psychosis. But, when a Democrat makes a plantation comment, they are qualified to be Secretary of State?
joe. I know you want to believe that I’m racist. But, here’s what happened. you lied about witnessing my banning. hanshiro takes the initiative to check it out and the most divisive comment he can find, is nothing that Hillary Clinton hasn’t already said.
I’ll debate the rest of the comments, if you’d like.
Or we can let it go and move on.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:45 am Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
backup Says:
hanshiro. I’ve got no beef with you. I appreciate you going back and finding the posts.
My posts are often oppositional to the threads. But, they are not racist. I was never banned from this site for racist comments.
I regret the thread got derailed. But, I felt joe’s allegations would eventually have to be addressed.
Peace.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am
***
i did not lie you did. and you were caught.
your racist comments as captain mantastic
are here for everyone to see. res ipsa loquitur.
your false equivalency argument and forced teaming with hillary clinton
is culled from the pages of the notoriously slanted wall street journal
editorial pages and authored by shelby steele an extremist, right wing
ideologue. could you be any more obvious?
*
you also have a convenient habit of overlooking important advice
that i feel could help you and protect our society. so i’ll repeat it
again here because i believe so strongly that your racist behavior
is dangerous.
::
joe cantwell Says:
thank you onetrack,
for a fleeting moment i had
sympathy for your psychosis.
but if you’re proud of your remarks
then perhaps being banned was a
wise decision by tp. you are a sick
racist who refuses any help to heal
his condition. i’m sure you’re proud of
yourself. perhaps you should call yourself
proud but, unfortunately for you, another
sick racist has claimed that name. you asked
for proof and you were finally given it. instead
of asking for forgiveness you became egregiously
arrogant again. i pity you your bigotry. no wonder
you are so joyless.
:)
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 am Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
joe cantwell Says:
“blond sagacity, the conservative that liberals love to hate”?
one track have you got sh|t for brains?
your link includes a racist photoshopped picture of obama!
give it up my friend. put away your copy of the turner diaries
and try, try to find the some peace within yourself. the last
thing we need now is another oklahoma city.
:|
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 am
**
peace.
:)
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:27 amjoe. do you think if you post enough material, my responses will get lost up the thread?
I don’t care. The information is there. When you want to dredge up this false narrative that I was banned for racist comments, I’ll just come back here and get it.
You lied about my banning and the most divisive comment you can point to, to ‘prove’ my past racism, is a comment that Hillary Clinton already made.
It’s very weak and you know it. If you feel compelled to throw in a few dozen more lines in the hopes that this post will be overlooked, have at it.
and, when you’re ready to let this go, let me know.
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 ambackup Says:
joe. do you think if you post enough material, my responses will get lost up the thread?
I don’t care. The information is there. When you want to dredge up this false narrative that I was banned for racist comments, I’ll just come back here and get it.
You lied about my banning and the most divisive comment you can point to, to ‘prove’ my past racism, is a comment that Hillary Clinton already made.
It’s very weak and you know it. If you feel compelled to throw in a few dozen more lines in the hopes that this post will be overlooked, have at it.
and, when you’re ready to let this go, let me know.
***
by pulling your strings and pushing your buttons
we’re able to keep you here and prevent you from
doing harm elsewhere.
*
you have to admit you make it pretty easy.
**
peace.
:)
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:47 amonetrack?
onetrack…?
:)
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 am219. backup Says: hanshiro. I’ve got no beef with you. I appreciate you going back and finding the posts.
Firstly, backup, I’m finding your ‘reinterpretation’ of these posts more and more disingenuous. These are some posts I took time to find, they are by no means all of them, nor is there any way to know if there were more, as you well know, because the posts were erased directly because of offensive actions, posts, and/or behavior on your part.
And the then the idea that blacks may be taken for granted by Democrats, if Democrats know their votes are in the bag.
The plantation comment was a little over the top. (I have admitted that I have moderated my views over time). But that isn’t a racist statement, that’s a statement that Democrats are taking blacks for granted.
Those comments were clearly an attempt to not only mis-characterize progressives, but steer the thread away from the main point; high-jack the thread. The idea that, as Glenn Beck so often does, you feel the need to criticize minority owners for not wanting to broadcast white racist Imus or white racist Limbaugh, then your labeling the owners as bigots for not surrendering even more of the lopsided market over to white-centric programming, is staggering ignorance.
The implication that blacks can’t decide for themselves for whom to listen to(as if their radios can’t receive other stations, should they so choose,) or that they automatically vote democrat no matter what is an insulting generalization, notwithstanding the republican party’s blatant and historic disdain of blacks and minorities.
Katrina? hello? ZERO current republican members of congress. Hello?
Secondly, the intentional mis-characterization that the dems were pondering whether Obama was black or white, or that being bi-racial, why didn’t Obama decide to be white instead of black, as you opined here:
This reveals a breathlessly clueless grasp of racial issues, just as is your contention that a racist email somehow constitutes ‘legitimate commentary.’ What it implies to me is quite possibly a racism that is so entrenched, so part of your viewpoint and personality as to be un-obvious to you to the point of your trotting out offensive idea after offensive idea that, apparently elsewhere in your personal life, has been unquestioned and accepted.
Thirdly, you again tried to mis-characterize progressives, this time as homophobic, again via highjack attempt and introducing it twice in a thread that bore little relation to the defense-of-conservatives-by-tu-quoque excuse approach you seemed to favor. Your mission at TP as ‘mantastic’ seemed to be to derail criticism of conservative targets that more than earned it, and create straw-man diversions that exhibited startling ignorance of the issues, black or gay, and lacked any real grasp of contributing factors; preferring instead to paint progressives with poorly reasoned fallacies and generally contribute cover for craven and unconscionable conservative behavior.
And these are only the posts I bothered to unearth…
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:57 amagain excellent work hans,
onetrack has “no beef” with you
because he is hopelessly out of his
league visa vie your facts about his
past behavior as “captain mantastic”.
***
btw, don’t be fooled by his “good work”
or “you make a good point” strokes. these are
the all too common (and boring) tactics he uses
to try and disguise himself as being a
“compassionate conservative”. well we’ve had eight
years of g.w. bush and onetrack’s “compassionate
conservatism” and they’ve given us nothing but
misery, death and destruction. enough is enough.
***
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 amhanshiro. You complain that my posts mischaracterize progressives. Okay. I”m open to that.
But, that wasn’t really the charge. The charge was that I was banned for racist comments. you don’t address that.
If you disagree with me and think some of my past posts mischaracterized democrats or progressives, I think you have a point. I’ve try to become less divisive, but I won’t argue my past posts weren’t.
And if you disagree with my views on racism or my efforts in the watermelon post. Okay. But, that isn’t really the charge.
Out of all the posts you’ve looked at, where are the ones in which you can conclude that I’m racist?
you highlight the plantation comment. But, Hillary Clinton made the similar comment. Is she also a racist?
And more importantly, where are the posts that back up joe’s claim that I was banned for racist comments?
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:16 pmhanshiro. you have to admit, joe makes this allegation that he witnessed my banning, but I don’t recall him at any point providing you any detail to make your search easier. you don’t think that’s strange at all? He didn’t provide any detail, because it never happened.
you suggested you could go back and find my old posts to settle the matter. I agreed. To be fair, the most offensive comment you came up with was the plantation comment that Hillary also made.
If I’m guilty of mischaracterization of the Democrat party with my comment, couldn’t a conservative argue that Hillary Clinton’s comment was a mischaracterization of the House Republicans?
I get labeled a racist, and Clinton gets appointed Secretary of State?
Additionally, joe’s position has softened from ‘there is proof that can’t be erased’, to ‘I witnessed it’ to ‘well, maybe what I’m saying isn’t accurate, but at least we are tying you up to prevent you from doing harm elsewhere’:
At some point, in addition to questioning me, maybe you could encourage joe to provide some answers.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:49 pm226. backup Says: hanshiro. You complain that my posts mischaracterize progressives. Okay. I”m open to that…If you disagree with me and think some of my past posts mischaracterized democrats or progressives, I think you have a point. I’ve try to become less divisive, but I won’t argue my past posts weren’t.
Your being open to your own obvious and poorly supported charges toward progressives is moot. The posts speak for themselves.
But, that wasn’t really the charge. The charge was that I was banned for racist comments. you don’t address that.
I do, several times, but you skip over addressing them, such as the watermelon email revision or the attack on minority ‘bigots’ because they don’t carry either of two racist, white radio ‘personalities.’
And if you disagree with my views on racism or my efforts in the watermelon post. Okay. But, that isn’t really the charge. Out of all the posts you’ve looked at, where are the ones in which you can conclude that I’m racist?
That is additional substance of the charge. Your rhetoric in reference to blacks, minorities, in the posts that were banned but cached, indicate a disregard for black/minority decision-making, discernment and common sense. Your ‘j’accuse’ moment of why Obama doesn’t regard himself as white instead of black, because he’s bi-racial, could well be the most imbecilic example of backward prejudice I’ve long seen here.
You keep asking the question I’ve answered several times as if my rephrasing to clarify will give you an infinite number of loopholes to step through. Either you’re willfully ignorant, which supports my earlier conclusion of your leanings being so entrenched as to be less than evident to you, or you are lying to clear your increasingly apparently tainted record.
And more importantly, where are the posts that back up joe’s claim that I was banned for racist comments?
Let me paste the explanations for you since your strategy is just to ignore replies and keep asking the same ignorant question:
Do you grok this yet? Seemingly you repose the questions you don’t want to confront. Over…and over. That is suspicious and obvious to any intelligent progressive; notwithstanding the undeniable fact that you were banned for reasons you seem curiously unable to explain. That alone brings your credibility into question, a credibility that is not on par with standing members such as Joe.
You don’t acknowledge your own attempt to revise a racist slap as a ‘commentary about race.’ That is at least suspicious and at most absurd. On a thread you reference earlier, you go to great lengths to condemn Rev. Wright’s comments, but not only ignore Joe’s challenge to produce a similar efforts/posts on your behalf regarding white preachers (there being so many more targets to select from there), but evade outright condemnation of Hagee, then go on to support McCain and his racist, conservative following:
Your backing of the republican party, characterizing of blacks as automatonic, default democrats and a demographic who cannot make their own choices but must have radio stations shove Limbaugh and Imus down their throats before they can be regarded as discerning and fair, lest they and the station owners be accused as bigots, is a whopping indicator of bias and racism.
The idiocy of your bi-racial comment puts a nail in it, for me.
Backup, you came on this site, initially, not to learn, but to disrupt and play word games, thereby characterizing progressives as racist, sexist and homophobic if it was at all within your power. Your posts leave this undisputed and present you as completely disingenuous. This game plan bit you in the @ss apparently, now you want to reinterpret what is plainly obvious, ostensibly to attempt a more subtle persuasion towards rejected republican ideology.
Good luck with that for in the end, it is up to the individual to determine for themselves what your words convey. For me, however, after reluctantly revisiting your previous as well as present incarnation, I’m inclined to cut you far less slack because I know what impression I was left with in reviewing, in context, post after post.
I hope for your sake you do your homework thoroughly in future….
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pmhanshiro. I was the one that indicated that most of those posts were deleted.
But, I believed that you had some way to retrieve them. I was on board. Something you are dismissing is Jeremy’s comment from before I got banned.
He went back, like you have, to find objectionable posts of mine. It was before those posts were deleted, because he came up with my comment about Democrats debating on Fox. I’m pretty confident that post has been deleted from the original thread. But, after Jeremy did his search, because he came up with that post.
He had to go back 8 months of my posts to get it. I said that Democrats should get some balls and debate on Fox. Big whoop. Don’t you think that if I was routinely making objectionable racial comments, Jeremy would have stumbled upon them?
This idea that I was banned because of comments that are now deleted is convenient, but doesn’t explain why Jeremy didn’t identify them at the time.
If you gauge credibility by using joe as a standard, after his performance here, I’m not going to convince you.
I applaud your effort, but the information you promised to deliver fell short.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pmJohn Podesta is sounding more like a right winger than a true progressive. Why is he connecting to all the neocons. And why are we waging war in Afghanistan? This is unthinkable and I am getting very tired of this pretense that Think Progress is actually progressive when their actions lead more and more toward eternal war. We need to negotiate cooperation instead of trying to occupy other countries. Get out of there. Stop this war machine. I am tired of paying for this aggressive evil and feel totally betrayed by so-called progressives who are really neo-cons in disguise. We need to take care of our own country and our own people and build up our own military. Stop trying to put us deeper into debt by waging wars in other countries. This is a terrible mistake.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:41 pmbackup Says:
hanshiro. I was the one that indicated that most of those posts were deleted.
But, I believed that you had some way to retrieve them. I was on board. Something you are dismissing is Jeremy’s comment from before I got banned.
He went back, like you have, to find objectionable posts of mine. It was before those posts were deleted, because he came up with my comment about Democrats debating on Fox. I’m pretty confident that post has been deleted from the original thread. But, after Jeremy did his search, because he came up with that post.
He had to go back 8 months of my posts to get it. I said that Democrats should get some balls and debate on Fox. Big whoop. Don’t you think that if I was routinely making objectionable racial comments, Jeremy would have stumbled upon them?
This idea that I was banned because of comments that are now deleted is convenient, but doesn’t explain why Jeremy didn’t identify them at the time.
If you gauge credibility by using joe as a standard, after his performance here, I’m not going to convince you.
I applaud your effort, but the information you promised to deliver fell short.
***
are you still here?
:)
well as long as you are maybe you can
show me the post # where i said:
‘well, maybe what I’m saying isn’t accurate, but at least we are tying you up to prevent you from doing harm elsewhere’:
you put it in quotes and attributed it to me
so it must be around here somewhere -
but, like the wmd in iraq,
it can’t be found. you lied again.
your credibility and honor are
completely gone.
***
shame on you.
:|
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pm***
Governor: ‘12 to 13′ killed at immigration center
Gunman blocks back door, opens fire at offices in Binghamton, N.Y.
more here.
_-_
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:16 pm229. backup Says: This idea that I was banned because of comments that are now deleted is convenient, but doesn’t explain why Jeremy didn’t identify them at the time.
Ducking literally every question I posed, introducing irrelevancies and refusing to acknowledge instances such as the interminable watermelon email revision is making your prevarication more and more striking. I frankly don’t believe a word you say.
If you gauge credibility by using joe as a standard, after his performance here, I’m not going to convince you.
Joe has by far more credibility than you, backup, who came onto this site solely to disrupt and sow misinformation and republican talking points, make asinine comments about bi-racial candidates, minority-owned radio stations and is an avowed McCain supporter….and who was unceremoniously banned for his behavior.
You two aren’t even in the same galaxy.
You, once again, left the inconvenient documentation unaddressed. I can only conclude that your routine mendacity is calculated and that makes you just one more deceitful and dishonest conservative.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:25 pmAfter nearly 6 years, Mail Boxes Etc store franchisees are finally going to get their day in court this month, slated to begin April 13th. UPS has used every delay tactic in the book so that this would never go before a jury. They failed but we still need your help. We need to get national publicity and public opinion on our side. The only way to get UPS’s attention and have them get serious about the damage they caused to 100s of Mom and Pop store owners with their willful destruction of the Mail Boxes Etc. Brand is to raise awareness on what was done to us in 2003 and how they have treated us since. It is wrong for a big corporate giant such as UPS to take advantage of their franchisees who have no way to defend themselves, other than by bringing this lawsuit. We have persevered for 6 years through tough legal decisions and financial hardships but have finally made it this far and will get to be in front of a jury in the coming weeks.
The Platinum Shield Association (PSA) was founded by those Mail Boxes Etc. Franchisees who refused to convert to The UPS Store business model and chose to litgate against UPS and Mail Boxes Etc corporate.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:26 pmIt is interesting to note that it is deemed inappropriate to address someone for an interview whenever they are in public when they viewed as liberal. Why then is it OK to be stalked by paparazzi? Is this not the same side of the coin?
April 7th, 2009 at 1:58 pmLots of animosity Says:
What is interesting is that you are not very bright. Being a liberal of course has nothing to do with it and if you werent a brainwashed moron you would know that. The Paparazzi are not considered legitimate journalists are not TREATED as if they were and are held basically in contempt by virtually everyone. No one SAID it was illegal it is just being criticized. I would be FINE if this kind of ambush journalism were just seen to be on a par with paparazzi
April 8th, 2009 at 7:14 amOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 6:11 amsac ekimi