Keith Olbermann has the nuts to speak the truth on National Television

[Jeffster]

Olbermann is definitely nuts.

I never liked him on Sportscenter either. He reminded me of those dudes in school that you just wanted to punch.

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

He was doing the same thing in reverse, though. What would have people thought if Republicans, during their quadrennial convention in early September, didn't mention 9/11 or show images from it? God, I am so pissed that this is making me defend Republicans.

Of course he was. And if the people who enjoyed his rant don't recognize that, they're just tools.

Didums has already stated how he thinks 9/11 is a government conspiracy, in another thread. So...yeah...I'm not taking him too seriously.

[pure_mercury]

Originally Posted by Didums

Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

I pointed out a legitimate hypocrisy. I didn't excuse GOP grandstanding, did I? How would that be fallacious?

[Jack Flak]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Does that make him invalid?

No, it makes him NOT A THINKER. I can't get enough of Feelers when they're say, doing other things than propagandizing on TV.

[Didums]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

I pointed out a legitimate hypocrisy. I didn't excuse GOP grandstanding, did I? How would that be fallacious?

Just because he hadn't upheld the values (in the past) that he was arguing against, doesn't mean that what he is arguing is wrong.

Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore X is false.

^ fallacious reasoning

[Enyo]

Originally Posted by Didums

So you'd rather be shovelled bullshit down your throat just because you don't like the guy? Just because he feels the need to do what he thinks is important as a journalist, informing the people of the truth? I'm sorry but this is the kind of action that is needed to counteract the horseshit that is being fed to us from conservative newscasters.

His "truths" are so filled with the bias of his own reviews that he is not a journalist. His show is a liberal concept of the Glenn Beck show: an opinion show, not journalism.

I feel that it is gross misrepresentation to call Olbermann a journalist.

[Didums]

Originally Posted by Enyo

His "truths" are so filled with the bias of his own reviews that he is not a journalist. His show is a liberal concept of the Glenn Beck show: an opinion show, not journalism.

I feel that it is gross misrepresentation to call Olbermann a journalist.

If he had no bias he wouldn't be on national television

[pure_mercury]

Originally Posted by Didums

Just because he hadn't upheld the values (in the past) that he was arguing against, doesn't mean that what he is arguing is wrong.

Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore X is false.

^ fallacious reasoning

Elegantly put, except for one little niggle: I NEVER CONCLUDED THAT X IS FALSE. I never stated that Republicans didn't do what he said they did, or that it was OK.

[Didums]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

Elegantly put, except for one little niggle: I NEVER CONCLUDED THAT X IS FALSE. I never stated that Republicans didn't do what he said they did.

Then why mention the hypocrisy? It has no bearing on the argument. If it is mentioned for any reason it should have inferences, the inference being that the argument is wrong. You clearly don't like Olbermann, but mentioning his hypocrisy only validates your disdain for him, I was expecting you to justify why you don't like him by stating why his is Wrong.

[Enyo]

Originally Posted by Didums

If he had no bias he wouldn't be on national television

I'm not disputing whether he does or does not belong on national television. I am disputing the "journalism" tag.