Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Smack Down! Rachel vs Glenn: Back off!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blockhead confidence wrote:
I don't really care what Beck meant, but he could plausibly argue that what he said meant 'the snowstorm weakens the case for global warming'.


He could plausible argue that's what he meant, but that wouldn't make him any more correct. One would expect an increas in snowfall as a result of global warming, not a decrease.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ontheway



Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RufusW wrote:
ontheway wrote:
Maddow didn't lie - her IQ is so low that intellectual discourse coupled with ironic humor is beyond her ken. She's too stupid to understand the meaning of the words that were spoken ...

Maddow's stupid? From Wikipedia:
Quote:
A graduate of Castro Valley High School in Castro Valley, Maddow earned a degree in public policy from Stanford University in 1994. At graduation she was awarded the John Gardner Fellowship. She was also the recipient of a Rhodes Scholarship and began her postgraduate study in 1995 at Lincoln College, Oxford. In 2001, she completed her Doctor of Philosophy degree (DPhil) in politics from Oxford University. Her doctoral thesis is titled HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons.




Amazing, all those credentials, and she's still stupid.


The facts are these:

Maddow claimed Beck said things that he didn't say.

Beck showed the things he did say and proved Maddow wrong.

Maddow still claimed Beck said things that IN HER OWN VIDEO, HE DID NOT SAY.

Beck proved that Maddow was wrong and called her a liar.

Maddow's final video proves that Beck is actually correct, and she's too stupid to realize that she has made Beck's case for him. And since she was the one making the case, she is obviously too stupid to understand what Beck was saying.

Maddow may have been awarded many degrees, but even mentally retarded individuals have been awarded university degrees.


One can obtain a doctorate and even high grades in many subjects without being highly intelligent and without having an ounce of mathematical or logical aptitude. Maddow is a case that proves the point.




To understand what happened, you may have to watch the video carefully and think about the meaning of the words. If you still don't get it, and need it explained to you, I will attempt to find the time someday to explain, word by word, the obviously stupid commentary and total lack of logic demonstrated by Maddow in her own video.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maddow is articulate (is it racist to call her that?) but I don't see any great mind behind the words.

I'm not a big fan of credentialism. I have a masters in economics and quite frankly I learned complete junk (the great moderation etc). What I learned is taught in virtually every program in the world. If the ideas are wrong then education doesn't mean anything. And we've all known those individuals who are very competent students but incompetent humans.

Hey, Bush went to Harvard and Yale!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have trouble with the argument that Beck and Maddow are relatively the same. One is taken seriously enough by her peers to get invited on real news shows and the other isn't.

I think the trick to watching Rachel is to be able to instantly switch back and forth between when she is being serious and when she's being snarky.

The other day the Daily Beast ( Confused ) put out a list of the 25 most influential liberal media types. Maddow came in at #11. Jon Stewart came in (again) at #1. That Jon Stewart--comedian, the most trusted man on TV, the most influential liberal opinion maker, is worrisome. And he agrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blockhead confidence



Joined: 02 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fox wrote:
Blockhead confidence wrote:
I don't really care what Beck meant, but he could plausibly argue that what he said meant 'the snowstorm weakens the case for global warming'.


He could plausible argue that's what he meant, but that wouldn't make him any more correct. One would expect an increas in snowfall as a result of global warming, not a decrease.


Sure, why not.

My point was that Maddow was employing bad reasoning against what Beck said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jaykimf



Joined: 24 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mises wrote:
Maddow is articulate (is it racist to call her that?) but I don't see any great mind behind the words.

I'm not a big fan of credentialism. I have a masters in economics and quite frankly I learned complete junk (the great moderation etc). What I learned is taught in virtually every program in the world. If the ideas are wrong then education doesn't mean anything. And we've all known those individuals who are very competent students but incompetent humans.

Hey, Bush went to Harvard and Yale!


Virtually every University Economics program in the world is wrong and our own mises of Dave's esl cafe is right. Glad we got that straight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a little factoid about the consequences of being articulate:

"Meet the Press" has benefitted from another Maddow Bump.

The NBC Sunday morning program moderated by David Gregory averaged 4.162 million total viewers for first place. That's the show's highest total viewer delivery since March 22, 2009.

Gregory interviewed Vice President Joe Biden and the roundtable included David Brooks, Rep. Aaron Schock, Harold Ford, and Rachel Maddow.

Maddow's first appearance, in August, brought the show its highest numbers since April. She battled Schock in a particularly memorable clip on this Sunday's episode.

"Meet the Press" beat CBS' "Face the Nation" (3.025 million) by the widest margin since May 17, 2009, and it beat ABC's "This Week" (2.508 million) by the widest margin since December 7, 2008. The 2.508 million total viewers represent ABC's lowest total viewer delivery since August 23, 2009.

"FOX News Sunday" averaged 1.208 million total viewers in its FOX broadcast.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/19/meet-the-press-ratings-bu_n_469613.html

Go, Rachel, go!

I wonder if Chet Huntley ever called David Brinkley 'Lambchop'?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stanley Crouch likes Rachel, too:

Clearly, Maddow is terribly allergic to conservatives.

She is disturbed by what conservatives think, how they assess what is happening to us all out here, and what the wildest or most cynical of them present as facts, which they often see as nothing more than opposing opinions, even if they come from the scientific world.

Her allergy rises to bumps that do not ache or itch as much as they inspire Maddow to what is easily some of the finest commentary available on cable television. She is largely eloquent and in command of the English language on a level one is not accustomed to in television commentary.

Her statements almost always come from the same place - somewhere between the respectable left and those who intellectually live on the left side of the moon, but the depth of her wit is what makes Maddow special. It can slide from the intelligent dig to the devastating sendup.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/02/22/2010-02-22_mad_about_maddow.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International