Van Jones Resigns

[Dynmk]

I have a BS in Journalism and, to be honest, really never wanted to go into the business when I graduated. NY Times made it clear...if your grandparents didn't vote for FDR, then we don't really want you in the building! Gannett News Sources was equally as bad. they were getting ready to hire everyone for mid term elections, and if you were to cover a Democrat, you were to put them on a pedestal, if you covered the Republican, dig him a hole to fall into.
Vinyl, you are WAY OFF BASE when accessing the media as a whole. Fox,, er Faux as you call it, actually goes out of the way to include people from BOTH sides of the aisle when covering major stories. Hannity does it, O'Reilly too. This was how I was trained to do things while in school. Sadly, when I graduated, Fox News didn't exist, and Rush wasn't in all 50 states yet. Therefore, I chose a higher calling in life. I went into the auto repair/sales business. I found the company there better.

 

[B_Enough_for_Me]

Its complete insanity. Accuse FOX of bias but deny that the MSNBC and others are bias when its a fact that these stations completely ignored the Van Jones scandal. Instead, they spend all their time investigating conspiracy theories of orchestrated townhall meetings. Its rediculous. The other day MSNBC showed a clip over and over again where a guy heckled a paralyzed woman in a wheelchair at a townhall meeting who wanted healthcare reform (booo evil conservatives, boooo) but completely ignored the video of an Obama supporter elbowing a guy in the face at a townhall and reporting on the townhall protester GETTING HIS FINGER BITTEN OFF by and obama supporter.

They have also ignored the Czars story. Fox just hit it today.

Otherwise, I couldn't agree more.

Did MSNBC cover the story of the Colorado democrat that tried to frame the Republicans by bashing in the windows at the democrat headquarters in Denver?

 

[D_Martin van Burden]

Vinyl, you are WAY OFF BASE when accessing the media as a whole. Fox,, er Faux as you call it, actually goes out of the way to include people from BOTH sides of the aisle when covering major stories. Hannity does it, O'Reilly too

You didn't happen to see "Outfoxed," did you? It's worth a look, particularly regarding that whole FOX is "fair and balanced" bit.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

I have a BS in Journalism and, to be honest, really never wanted to go into the business when I graduated. NY Times made it clear...if your grandparents didn't vote for FDR, then we don't really want you in the building! Gannett News Sources was equally as bad. they were getting ready to hire everyone for mid term elections, and if you were to cover a Democrat, you were to put them on a pedestal, if you covered the Republican, dig him a hole to fall into.

Vinyl, you are WAY OFF BASE when accessing the media as a whole. Fox,, er Faux as you call it, actually goes out of the way to include people from BOTH sides of the aisle when covering major stories. Hannity does it, O'Reilly too. This was how I was trained to do things while in school. Sadly, when I graduated, Fox News didn't exist, and Rush wasn't in all 50 states yet. Therefore, I chose a higher calling in life. I went into the auto repair/sales business. I found the company there better.

Kinda ironic that you were proud to talk about your BS before you entered into this discussion... were you really referring to your Bachelor's?

You act as if I've never watched Faux News before or ever seen a clip of their so-called news shows on YouTube. You also assume that I have never worked for some of these news organizations in some fashion. There's your mistake right there. The ONLY time Hannity and O'Reilly get someone from "the other side" is when they want to try and publicly badger and humiliate them for their viewing audience. They constantly scream over their guest's words while never letting them explain their positions. And they take their words out of context while they do it. You're bring a very disingenuous argument to the table, disguised as their tired tag line "Fair & Balanced" because we all know that they're not. Chris Matthews from MSNBC has the same tendency to be loud, belligerent and disruptive over his guests as well even when they are on "his side". It's why I have a hard time watching either of these political hacks say ANYTHING.

Now, I wonder how many people are going to ignore the fact that I actually critiqued a voice from the "evil liberal media" and continue to attack me as being a "blind, dirty liberal" such as the OP? That's becoming quite the trend around here as of late... in this continually polarizing Politics forums.

 

[B_Enough_for_Me]

You didn't happen to see "Outfoxed," did you? It's worth a look, particularly regarding that whole FOX is "fair and balanced" bit.

Outfoxed, brought to you by the Center for American Progress and Moveon.org; two leftist hit man groups.

That is the equivalent of a documentary on Obama put out by Rush Limbaugh.

I particularly enjoyed their attack on the 'Fox News Alert.' I'm not sure they had a point other than that Fox has such alerts, and they are evil.

 

[mynameisnobody]

Let's be more honest about it and take away the left/right bias bullshit.

We can easily look at Faux's inability to do ANY kind of long term, investigational stories on the antics of private companies such as the United Health Group, The Lewin Group & FreedomWorks during the whole Health Care Debate.

There seems to be a bit of cognitive inconsistency between these two statements.

Honest is good.

Start any time you feel like it.

 

[mynameisnobody]

I have a BS in Journalism and, to be honest, really never wanted to go into the business when I graduated. NY Times made it clear...if your grandparents didn't vote for FDR, then we don't really want you in the building!

Was that in the days of "Pinch" Sulzberger, or his dad? "Pinch" might as well be running Pravda. I don't remember the Times being quite so bad when its publisher was Sulzberger Sr.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

There seems to be a bit of cognitive inconsistency between these two statements.

Honest is good.

Start any time you feel like it.

Then read the REST of my comment, take everything I said into account and not just break it down to the one line you don't like and chirp the usual garbage, OK? Or did you intentionally omit and not respond to the rest of it just so you can assume your so-called "holier than thou", "you do it too" nonsense?

Here's something from that post that you willingly ignored, which followed immediately after the few lines you sourced: Now, if I really wanted to feed into this pathetic, left vs. right bullshit you're spewing, I can easily blame the lack of coverage of this story on the ignorant "right wing media" who not only didn't point this out, but actually encouraged and egged it on. So really, are you here to try and solve problems or just yell to hear yourself talk like all of the other idiots on both extreme sides of the fence?

Perish the thought... the "liberal" with a more centrist post. Still don't know how to deal with people like that in your binary world, now do you? Now, where's your honesty on the issue?

 

[b.c.]

The following would be a more complete story on Van Jones than the obviously slanted and edited version posted somewhere above:

Van Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And while I personally deplore his more radical comments endorsements and views (Marxist politics, third world communism, et al) some of his other work, (in environmental issues, for example) has earned him praise from several arenas.

Unfortunate it was that the Obama administration, knowing the nature of the beast that it faces (or maybe they don't know) did not foresee Jones as being a potential liability from the start.

The timing of this (and of all the noise over Obama's upcoming address to students) is undoubtedly of no coincidence either, as per this article:

Obama adviser Jones resigns in controversy - White House- msnbc.com

The aim of course is to raise enough doubt and discredit Obama sufficiently enough to erode public opinion and support - on healthcare reform, and everything else this President proposes.

 

[b.c.]

.... You have Fox on the Right and the rest on the left and nothing in the middle. Its sickening.

I'd be inclined to disagree that "we" have nothing in the middle.

That's because to those of your ilk, anything short of "right" is left.But thanks at least for admitting Fox's bias.

We'll continue listening to "everything else" and when we want to hear bullshit too (for a more "balanced view"), we'll tune in FAUX.

 

[Mithra]

You guys remember John Ashcroft? Now that dude was scary. He would have replaced the consiitution with the bible if he could have.

 

[VeeP]

You guys remember John Ashcroft? Now that dude was scary. He would have replaced the consiitution with the bible if he could have.

Ashcroft was nonetheless confirmed by Congress whereas none of Obama's two dozen plus "czars" have been. Evidently the supposedly stringent vetting by the "most transparent administration ever" failed as well.

 

[deleted15807]

That's because to those of your ilk, anything short of "right" is left.

And the definition of 'right' has become 'right off the cliff'. Since that is exactly where 30 years of conservative ideology has left the US....off the cliff.

 

[B_24065]

There seems to be a bit of cognitive inconsistency between these two statements.

Honest is good.

Start any time you feel like it.

Yeah i pointed this out to Vinyl in my last post and he just doesnt have the ability to see it. Intellectual Honesty?..a virtue he doesnt have. Slams me for playing the "media bias bullshit" card then goes right into Fox news. If it wasnt so stunningly sad, it would be funny.

 

[B_24065]

Liberals like Sargon and Vinyl are simple minded. Defend the left and all its positions at all cost no matter what the truth is and if you get cornered and cant get out, yell "RASCISM" and "HOMOPHOBIA" as loud as you can.

 

[B_24065]

Ummmmm... YOU'RE the one trying to spin this into another tired-ass "blame the liberal media" argument. So sorry if you feel the need to beat your chest and act all holier than thou over it because that bullshit won't work with me. You should be the last person trying to criticize me for my actions, when you fucked it up on the very first post.

QUOTE]

Uh, I created the thread so its about whatever the fuck i say its about. And if you read the original post again, its about Van Jones AND the liberal media's ommission of the story until his resignation.

 

[B_New End]

Here we go, this is all you guys do. Instead of engage the topic, you just through jabs at me and make this an issue about the poster. GUYS, VAN JONES RESIGNED. THE MEDIA IS BIASED FOR NOT COVERING THE STORY. GOT ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT?

...pathetic

WTF are you talking about, I knew about Van Jones for a while. He was on a petition saying 9-11 was an inside job... and surprise, surprise, he got slaughtered for it.

It is professional suicide to say what 35% of Americans think.

 

[b.c.]

WTF are you talking about, I knew about Van Jones for a while. He was on a petition saying 9-11 was an inside job... and surprise, surprise, he got slaughtered for it.

It is professional suicide to say what 35% of Americans think.

Well, yes, it's much ado about a lot of old shit that the Republicans have dredged up to get everyone's mind off of healthcare reform...again.

If one looks at the time in which the petition was signed, it was at the height of a growing number of people who at least entertained the possibility of a 9/11 conspiracy, so much so as to cause the government to issue several reports and responses to them [the theories]. See:

9/11 conspiracy theories - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One possible cause for the plausibility of these theories at the time was the revelations that we'd been lied to by the Bush administration (as cited):

"By 2004, conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks began to gain ground in the United States. One explanation for the increase in popularity was that it was not the discovery of any new or more compelling evidence or an improvement of the technical quality of the presentation of the theories, but rather the growing criticism of the Iraq War and the presidency of George W. Bush, who had been reelected in 2004.Revelations of spin doctoring and lying by federal officials, such as the claims about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the belated release of the President's Daily Brief of August 6, 2001 and reports that NORAD had lied to the 9/11 Commission, may have fuelled the conspiracy theories."

Now five years later they want to hang this guy for having signed a petition.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Liberals like Sargon and Vinyl are simple minded. Defend the left and all its positions at all cost no matter what the truth is and if you get cornered and cant get out, yell "RASCISM" and "HOMOPHOBIA" as loud as you can.

Simple minded fools like you can say this as many times as you want, and still nobody except for other simple minded fools will believe you. This isn't Faux News, where you have an audience of 2+ million every night listening to every cry of "reverse racism", Socialism, Fascism, Communism, Government Takeover nonsense and people will just go along with it. Your audience includes people who know how to think for themselves.

And don't worry... I don't use the words "homophobe" or "racist" like the rest of your ilk who use the Constitution or the Bible as some deflective shield to avoid sensitive issues. When you're ready to put away the "libtard", the "conservitard" and all the other bullshit then we can get to some serious discussions. Otherwise, get to steppin'.

 

[cameltoelover]

Read Chomsky.