Jon Stewart's Hilarious (& Disturbing) Glenn Beck Impression

Extremist Left Wing tell lies, too. The only difference is that you think there's a difference.

In my opinion, there is NO DIFFERENCE between the extreme left and the extreme right. Privately, both want the same things, money and power - but publicly, they just tell different lies to get what they want. Extreme right lies are no different than Al Gore's lies. Or Keith Olbermann's lies.

BTW, even if it is a screw up - even if Hannity didn't personally count each and every protester and just took Michelle Backmann's word for it, even if it appears that Hannity had no way of knowing his producers decided at the last minute to include footage from another protest without telling Hannity - it's Hannity's show and he takes the blame and the responsibility.

 

Yes. It is Hannity's responsibility.

He called it a mistake.

Lets see. They had a single video feed of the event. One feed. One new feed.

Somehow some person interrupted the feed. Someone replaced the single feed and found a feed from a different video and replaced the feed with a different one.

The original feed showed a small crowd. The replacement feed showed a large crowd. The replacement feed was 100% inaccurate and false.

Hannity's show is operated by Fox. The replacement feed gave an entirely false representation of the size of the crowd. The visual it created gave credance to Bachman's comments about crowd size. Her statements were way off base.

Hannity is directly responsible. Fox operates his show. They could fire him. Hannity and indirectly Fox recreated a video that falsely supported a totally false claim by Bachman.

Hey, they are all tied together. This wouldn't happen on Hannity, operated by Fox of a crowd supporting Obama.

One guy is responsible. He is tied in with the other two. Its a very very dangerous arrangement in which political lying is supported and encouraged by the three entities described.

Watch out for the extremist Right Wing. One of them lies. The others support it. Its a good thing someone was paying close attention to details.

 

Please post the source of your information or we write it off a more babble from the village idiot.

 

Do you reserve your rancor only for Fox, or do you feel that your standard should be applied to all TV reporters/pundits?

If you think every time a TV pundit/reporter lied or made a mistake, then every time you tune into MSNBC, all you'd see is an empty chair. And CBS News would only be a memory. Certainly Katie Couric would be unemployed.

Right?

 

Corwin: In this instance we all know Hannity is demonstratively and openly political. He supports the Right.

In his place somebody took the existing video of an event and

A). Cut it
B) Subsituted video from a different event.
C) The video from the different event blatently supported a representation by the politician that was blatently false.

That is an unholy arrangement in which a guy who commentates on the news and gives an obvious political slant....somehow allowed a deliberate action to occur which ....

A. Was blatently untrue
B Tried to support a lie that supported that political view.

Big error. Worse than that...a big political lie. Evil politicians do that all the time. Its about a hunger for power that supercedes trying to represent the people. At its worst examples we have Hitler, dictators galore.

Okay Corwin: Here is a different topic for you; one with which you are familiar. Sorry I don't have the source on it, but it supports claims you made elsewhere.

I saw an article (I think it was the NY Times in the last 2 weeks) describing how sh!t @ss GM was run, prior to the money injection from the feds, prior to the bankruptcy etc.

Basically the article established that pre all those things G M's beaurocracy was so unbelievably bad that it f*cked up all decisions, took decisions that should have been made quickly and stretched them out forever between endless groups. Sort of trying to create a "group think" unanimity with regard to every decision.

It ended up taking new models and causing them to run out of money before final development. They would deliver cr@p @ss models continuously.

This went on for decades.

Somehow, it makes me think of soviet style business....where the business actions had nothing to do with the market place. Again it went on for decades.

In that regard its amazing that GM has lasted as long as it has.

2nd part of the article described the govt reaction to the beaurocracy at GM when under Obama the feds got involved. The GM beaurocracy blew them away. (kind of ironic huh? ). They demanded dismantling of the beaurocracy.

Going forward the article interviewed some long term GM engineers who are still there. The guys who are still around did speak to a "better process" now as opposed to when the old style GM beaurocracy ruled.

Hell, I hope it is a better process.

In any case the article confirms or at least has the same flavor on your first hand comments on GM about what a cr@ppy company it has been for such a long time.

OTOH, the description of the process is all tied to the top of the business chain. It has nothing to do with union stuff. This f*cked up business process came from the top down and was uniquely tied to management. (I'm not negating union problems at GM...they just didn't have impact on this aspect)

Now moving along....I support the CONCEPT of the Stimulus. The recession ripped apart the American economy. Its happened in every facet. That has nothing to do with govt or politics. Americans are buying less in every facet. Consequently businesses are selling less.

To me as a business man, the concept is sound and works as follows:

Things are f*cked up. Try and fix it. Pour some money into different parts of the private economy and try and rev it up.

Its hard. Its hard to know what to do. There is no model for fixing an entire economy.

Somehow this reminds me of a personal funny business story.

I was a commercial real estate broker in the Wash, DC area. Mostly I leased office and retail space and sold properties.

A partner and I got business from a medium to large sized service provider. The business had bought a couple of smaller providers. They moved the people from the smaller businesses into their office space. They had all these little spaces to sublet. That is what my partner and I had to do.

Two of the spaces were okay and could be sublet at reasonable prices. One was horrible. The tenant that had been in the space was way overpaying. The building had a great location but was a 2nd class building. Its landlord was a notorious pain in the @ss.

We had to convince the local big shots that the 3rd space was going to be rented out at a cr@ppy rate with a serious loss. We did it by giving the local big shots tours. They recognized value and bought our analysis.

We (my partner and I) and they (the local big shots) still had to convince the corporate big shots that the loss was realistic and the only way to go.

Our tours of realistic space and deals did the trick. The corporate guys reluctantly bought off on the concept of a big loss.

We still had to make a deal....and my partner and I knew it was going to be hard. The space basically sucked.

I was hanging w/some industry buddy of mine and he described a deal as a "slam dunk". Great phrase.

We created a flyer w/ a pic of a basketball player making a great looking slam dunk. We distributed it to the whole commercial brokerage community.

We set it up as a slam dunk deal:

1. Low rent
2. High commission...to the broker representing the tenant
3. We were doing everything. We would do all the work, and free the broker representing the tenant from doing virtually anything at all. In other words...we communicated to our fellow brokers....."sit on your @ss...we will make you money!!!".

I called about 400 brokers. I knew a lot of them well, some not so well, some not at all. I left funny messages everywhere. I'd see them during the work day, at industry functions, etc. I must have bored and entertained people w/ the "stupid" slam dunk deal idea.

It worked. We got 4 brokers who pretty much dropped their tenants off w/ us. They were all small--it was a relatively small space. Because 3 of them wanted it...we actually were able to get a slightly higher rent. The group that took the space were headed up by an incredible pain in the @ss. Their broker had to be so happy my partner and I did everything.

We actually made the market. When commentators (at DP P&R) argue about the market all the time....f*ck that....I worked the market every damn day.

We got a deal done relatively quickly. It took a sh!t load of time during that period. (we did a lot more than what I'm describing).

We kept the local big shots fully informed...and we entertained them w/our efforts. (that sort of lessoned the financial pain).

Getting a subtenant at a serious reduced rate meant they were losing money every month for about 3 years. It still was better than having the space sit empty for the 3 years. It was better by a lot. It was better by a quantum amt.

A couple of years later we made a sizable lease on behalf of the local bigger business.

My point is that when the economy is sh!t...which it is now....you do what you can to "fix" things. You do as well as you can. You are not going to get everything down perfect.

Plugging the holes is better than nothing.

 

Two egregious mistakes within a week or so. Fox again shows a conservative politician with a huge supportive crowd...rather than a true representation of the crowd:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts988

That is beyond suspicious. That is a supposed even handed news organization...not reporting the news...but "inventing news" that isn't close to true.

Its a subtle attempt at scary mind control. Its dangerous.

Twice in a very short period Fox has been caught trying to manipulate appearances and opinions by overstating the popularity of a Right Winger.

Twice they claimed a "mistake". But twice in a row...it was the same mistake: Overstating the crowds and support of a Right Winger.

Fox TV--Looks like a simple extension of the Right Wing political agenda.

What gives Fox?

 

It would be stupid to pump her up as something she isn't. If the crowds aren't really there let her just go away. Why would they as a wing of the republican party want to bring her up as the next big thing if no one wants her to be? They wouldn't get the votes in the end.

Hmmm.... seems kind of strange. Lets see if they continue this charade and become like some of the other media outlets:

Photo fakes

 

Is it just me, or is Earlpearl EXTREMELY long winded. Anyone with that much time on their hands HAS to be a Democrat!

 

Abomination: You are one of those uber extremist Right Wingers that spend every breath attacking the existing administration and supporting the extremists Right Wingers.

Do you have anything to say about Fox News, masquerading as a news station, but Lying twice in 2 weeks in support of extremist Right Wing Pols?

 

There is no truth, only spin. I'd say if you want truth, watch CSPAN, but there you only get to watch our leaders spinning their flavor of the truth in an effort to sell it to each other.

Fox's spin leans right, CNN leans left (but not as far left as Fox leans right). MSNBC is so far off to the left, they've forgotten where the road is, never mind the center of the road.

To call something a "Lie" takes an extra measure of effort. For instance, I was watching Olbermann the other night say 75% support of Americans for health care reform, citing some poll. Any dumb ass can go online and dig up the polls he is quoting from and see that the poll is run by a left wing think tank, and review the questions to see they yield bogus results. That doesn't stop him from quoting the poll on national TV like it is gospel. The average of all the recent polls, most done by pro-health care reform groups comes in around 50% or slightly under. Did he lie? No, but he relies on the stupidity of his audience.

Fox does a better job at delivering their spin because they usually don't step that far over the line. They would have done better to keep Colmes around. In that spirit, CNN remains the leader of propaganda, because people assume they are getting "the truth". Once you are trusted, you can fuck with peoples heads like none other. CNN sticks to old school biased journalism by omitting, or providing little coverage of things that don't deliver a message they agree with. Their straight news commentary panels are almost always skewed as well.

If you were to score news anchors on a scale of 1-10, 1 being a complete communist, and 10 being a complete fascist, here is how I would score them.

4 Christiane Amanpour
4.6 Anderson Cooper
5 John King
5 Chris Wallace
5.1 Bret Baier
5.4 Brit Hume
4.2 Dylan Ratigan
4 David Gregory

Scoring non "Straight news" people, and contributers, is somewhat of a waste of time, but the cast of characters says a lot about the media outlet. I find it amazing how many of MSNBCs anchors and contributors are GLBT. Far over representing the population in an affirmative action sense of the word.

In summary, if you want to bitch about Fox News, or any other media outlet for that matter, your going to have to find another shoulder to cry on, because I honestly don't give a rats ass. The world is how the world is, I just do my best to make sense of it all.

 

Abomination:

Very long winded response. By the way you completely avoided the question and the issue. Typical of the Right Wing. Caught in its own lies the Right Wing changes the subject.

Twice in two short weeks, Fox took a current politcally charged event and substituted live feed with a feed from the past.

Twice someone had to Remove the Current Feed and replace it with a feed from the past.

Twice the replacement feed gave a false, but amazingly similar impression: that the crowds supporting a Right Winger were vastly larger than the truth.

Fox is showing itself not to be a news organization but the video wing of the Right Wing...deceptively presenting a sense of popularity that isn't there.

Its scary. The Right Wing Video Wing is subtlely working to create mind control over the American public.

 

At this rate they will catch up to their competitors in 20 years or so. Someone must be getting nervous.

Why do people give the talk show guys like oreily so much attention? Do any "right wingers" even listen to the guy or does have have just a fake few supports paid by Fauxnews and all the rest of the listeners are the liberal groups who follow every word he says?

 

That would go revenue negative, and at the end of the day, Fox, like every other media outlet, is there to make money.

@Earlpearl:
1) Thanks for spelling my name the way it rightfully should be spelled.
2) I did answer your question. You just didn't like my answer. You are busy mired down in the details of what you consider to be some egregious offense committed by Fox, while such things happen on a daily basis on every other network. Your myopic focus has the effect of blinding you, and instead of opening your eyes, or getting glasses, you are busily trying to get everyone else to focus on what it is you are focused on. Good luck with that.

 

Maybe because the ones who do the fiddling 'behind the scenes' do want to "pump her up" simply because the crowds are not with her.

It's like advertising 'sell the image' of how good this thing is, then the real crowds will follow, and yes some people would support her just because she is popular and on TV, so why wouldn't they vote for her?

No offense but some American's are dumb and can't even point to Iraq on the map (And yes there are dumb people everywhere AU, NZ, UK etc)

 

We can only pray that Beck will one day reveal himself as the greatest satirist of all time

 

I think all her supporters support her because she represents that good old down home thinking that they relate to. The problem is that it's not a very well thought through position.

The rest of us with common sense realize that the last person you want to be in the White House leading our nation is someone who is "just like you". It's an idea that is so absurd that the Republican base struggles and becomes offended while trying to figure out what everyone is pointing and laughing at while the rest of us struggle to understand how they could support such a notion..

The office of the President of the United States should be held by the most exceptional of us. Not the most ordinary. Sure it doesn't make a great motivational poster. But the fact is the old "anyone can be President" idea we all like to believe in has a caveat. Sure anyone who sets their mind to it has the "potential" to be President but that doesn't mean they should be. Mrs. Palin is a case in point.

 

The above sums up my feelings, exactly.

@earlperl, I took the time to read your long-winded response. To call Hannity a "liar" and demand that he resign is taking it to the extreme. Especially since I don't see you apply the same standard to the left or the fables MSNBC tells.

You rant against right-wing extremists, but their methods are no different than the left-wing extremists. Look at Michael Moore - he doesn't even bother to defend the outright lies and manipulations in his movies. Case-in-point are the lawsuits he got hit with because of "Bowling for Columbine" where he just blatantly made stuff up. That's because he knows how to feed the extreme left's need for validation, and their willingness to deliberately not look behind appearances. From that, he makes money by fleecing the sheep.

Now, there's no proof that Sean Hannity intentionally "lied", and that's like @Obamanation wrote, calling him a liar is taking it to the extreme. Calling for his resignation is completely unrealistic and childishly naive, because it's not going to happen, and it's not going to happen because he has RATINGS.

But using McCain/Palin footage and presenting it as the Sarah Palin book signing is another matter. That's a big enough deal it should be a scandal.

You can rant all you want against Fox News, but as long as their advertisers are happy (and they are DELIRIOUSLY happy) and as long as their ratings as so massive they blot out the sun, they can get away with damn near anything, because for the past three months, Fox News has demonstrated as dangerous an understanding of media psychology as Michael Moore does when making movies and Bill Clinton did when he was President.

Yes, the Tea Party "movement" was orchestrated by Fox. But if you point that out, you are anti-middle class. Yes, Sarah Palin is an empty suit propped up by Fox. But if you attack her, you are attacking middle-class mothers.

Yes, Barack Obama is the President of the United States. But if you were against him during the election, you are a racist.

(BTW, my favorite show on Fox is Red Eye. Especially when the camera pulls long and away from the table, and you can see the nice legs of the girl sitting closest to the camera. Great girls on that show!)

I enjoyed your "We created a flyer w/ a pic of a basketball player making a great looking slam dunk" story. I had a similar situation, trying to convince a company they were making a bad strategic product decision in moving in a certain direction that would be lethal for the company. After wasting my breath for three weeks, I finally presented the difference in the two strategies on a single PowerPoint slide that compared the two strategies to Dogs and Cats. This sold it.

Thanks for your information on GM. I'd normally write that I enjoyed reading it, but it was actually painful to read.

GM fits the complete profile of what I like to call a "Country-Club Company". A CCC is where, as far as top management is concerned, the company exists ONLY for the purpose of supporting the lifestyle of top management - who have little or no interest in the company business. Top management will often not show up for work for days or weeks. In a CCC, top management is as terrified of a direct question, and any personal responsibility, as a vampire is terrified of sunlight. So large, ponderous procedures as put into place to "spread the blame" in case something goes wrong with anything. In CCC, financial difficulties are handled in only four ways: 1) bank loan, 2) accounting tricks, 3) layoffs, and 4)selling off pieces of the business. Regardless of how poor business is, they constantly vote themselves massive bonuses - ESPECIALLY when business is bad because they are terrified that they will be found out and shoved out.

 

The self apparent truth of that statement is nauseating. I didnt think it was possible to be more cynical than I already am.

 

right the president is someone that needs to be exceptional.

 

@Obamanation, that's just GM. Now, in my experience, Ford is a terrific company that takes a tremendous amount of pride in creating and selling quality cars. I saw outstanding top management, and unlike GM, Ford's lower- and middle-management are empowered to make significant decisions with a minimum of red tape. They handled problems in a very practical and pragmatic way, too.