• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Univision's Jorge Ramos lays waste to Bill O'Reilly, then Sean Hannity

jet57 said:
You couldn't produce so your assertion about Rachel Maddow and what ever his name is, was a failure.

You got shot down. Wanna see it again!?!

View attachment 67199301
Click to expand...

Rachel Maddow isn't known for interviewing people she would disagree very much with.... it happens , but it's pretty rare.....

Hannity and Bill are known for hosting folks from the other side..... that's why they get into more fights on their show than she does.
 
jet57 said:
That's not a Maddow interview on her own show dude. She's on Meet the Press! Lowry is talking past her. Moreover, she keeps correcting Rich Lowry and he tells her she's right!

That's not a Maddow interview with a right-wing guest. So:

View attachment 67199303
Click to expand...

Still talking over and interrupting though....isn't she? Want about 500 Chris mattews video's? I can flood you all night with those.

Stop being a hypocrite...there is a whole world out there past the end of your nose.
 
Thrilla said:
Rachel Maddow isn't known for interviewing people she would disagree very much with.... it happens , but it's pretty rare.....

Hannity and Bill are known for hosting folks from the other side..... that's why they get into more fights on their show than she does.
Click to expand...

Well, here's where Rachel Maddow interviews someone she definitely disagrees with, and watch how she does HER version of interviewing someone from the right-wing. Muuuuch different than the Hannity just did it:




Don't forget to watch the whole thing.
 
shrubnose said:
Hand it to Sean Hannity,even after colleague Bill O"Reilly got schooled last week by Univision anchor Jorge Ramos, he himself invited Ramos on his Fox News program for essentially the same discussion.

Read the article here:http://www.wasgingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/03/24/univisions-jorge

Trump said what he said and O'Reilly and Hannity have both tried to spin it in his favor.
Click to expand...

Jorge Ramos and Univision rock. To date Ramos has been the best debate moderator by far. Fox and everyone on Fox blows.
 
Regarding the "race" of "Latino", there is none. There are Spaniards (Spain) who are white, Indians (indigenous people) who are brown , and mixes between the two. Then there are the portaguese. It's like calling America a "race".

I don't think we can just "hatch" a race because it's convenient.
 
Mr Person said:
This kind of comment kills me. You're simultaneously technically right and technically wrong.



Technically right: "Hispanic" would be the race.
Click to expand...

No Hispanic is not a race either, its an ethnicity.

Pedantically right: you know that when people say "racist", they can mean race/religion/ethnicity. The reason it covers these in colloquial use is that "religionist" sounds dumb and "ethnicithist" sounds like someone had a hairball in the midst of trying to describe an obscure profession. But, true, as far as race-as-human-construct goes, "Mexican" is not a race. At the same time, you know exactly what was expressed - a description of Trump as bigoted in a negative fashion towards Mexicans.
Click to expand...

Thats why educated people would use a word like bigoted. People use racism because they are to stupid to know what a race is or they want to conjure up the negative emotions the word racism brings.

If this seems like a hair-splitting semantic argument, it is because your post was a hair-splitting semantic slam directed at the statement you quoted; namely, of “When you say that Mexican immigrants are criminals or rapists, that is, for many people, a racist remark.”
Click to expand...

It is a partially semantic argument but words do matter and someone who owns a TV should know that.
 
shrubnose said:
I don't watch that much TV but I'll check out Jorge Ramos when I get a chance.
Click to expand...

I don't watch TV either but I have watched the debates. Jorge Ramos was a tough moderator at the Miami debate. No softballs for anyone. See if you can find a Youtube of the Miami Democratic debate.
 
One of my pet peeves is calling Mexicans a race and any alleged discrimination against Mexicans racist. Mexico is a country and Mexicans are the people of that country and comprised of many different races. Jorge Ramos should not be racist and calling Mexicans a race.
 
Mr Person said:
This kind of comment kills me. You're simultaneously technically right and technically wrong.



Technically right: "Hispanic" would be the race.

Pedantically right: you know that when people say "racist", they can mean race/religion/ethnicity. The reason it covers these in colloquial use is that "religionist" sounds dumb and "ethnicithist" sounds like someone had a hairball in the midst of trying to describe an obscure profession. But, true, as far as race-as-human-construct goes, "Mexican" is not a race. At the same time, you know exactly what was expressed - a description of Trump as bigoted in a negative fashion towards Mexicans.

Technically wrong: genetically speaking, there is no "race" classification. There technically is no sub-species of homo sapien such as "race". Genetically speaking there is no such thing. To the extent that some taxonomists have argued for definitions of race-as-subspecies, there is no meaningful agreement.
Click to expand...

Interesting argument but I am not buying it. And it contributes to a lot of unnecessary hostilities when you accuse someone of racism when that person has no way of knowing what "race" he is. Of course, the very subject of race is pseudo science with no consensus as to what the races are, what ethnicities are "white" etc. A Mexican can be any race and can look like anyone. I have a Mexican friend named Wolfgang Reinhardt who looks as one might expect. I guess that we could call it racist if referring to anyone with some noticeable Mesoamerican or Indios qualities but then we get into the game of what percentage makes one a Mesoamerican. If Martin Sheen, half Irish and half Spanish wants to call himself Hispanic or Mexican, fine, but it doesn't really help.
Ramos seems to be wanting to ride the wave of racial injustice, whether warranted or not. Is Ramos a member of La Raza or is he simply trying to ride on the coattail of those predominately Mesoamericans who have faced racial discrimination?
 
shrubnose said:
Hand it to Sean Hannity,even after colleague Bill O"Reilly got schooled last week by Univision anchor Jorge Ramos, he himself invited Ramos on his Fox News program for essentially the same discussion.

Read the article here:http://www.wasgingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/03/24/univisions-jorge

Trump said what he said and O'Reilly and Hannity have both tried to spin it in his favor.
Click to expand...

Talking over somebody for the whole interview without answering the questions asked, does not lay waste to anything.
 
shrubnose said:
Sounds like you're talking about every right-wing commentator to me.

:lol:
Click to expand...

No, it was what Ramos actually did.

Nobody is talking about other people in this thread.
 
i stopped reading at univision, latino propaganda outlet on par with chinese state TV.
 
jet57 said:
I've seen plenty of interviews those to have given. They don't interrupt like that and Rachel hasn't yet spun an interview. If you think I'm wrong on that, then go get an interview where she's spun it out of the guest's control.
Click to expand...

I think you are right about Maddow, but Matthews? Jesus, he bits the heads off of people he disagrees with and doesn't let them get a word in. Hannity and Oreilly aren't much better
 
shrubnose said:
Hand it to Sean Hannity,even after colleague Bill O"Reilly got schooled last week by Univision anchor Jorge Ramos, he himself invited Ramos on his Fox News program for essentially the same discussion.

Read the article here:http://www.wasgingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/03/24/univisions-jorge

Trump said what he said and O'Reilly and Hannity have both tried to spin it in his favor.
Click to expand...

It's interviews like those that make me want to throw my shoe at the screen.
They both insist on talking over each other.
Drives me freaking nuts.
Same crap happens at debates too.

In both cases the problem lies with the moderator(s).
Hannity and O'Reilly and debate moderators need to take control.
Tell them it's going to end if they keep making speeches & talking over each other.
Of course, with O'Reilly the guests are only there to confirm what he had said or get off the screen.
 
Fletch said:
I think you are right about Maddow, but Matthews? Jesus, he bits the heads off of people he disagrees with and doesn't let them get a word in. Hannity and Oreilly aren't much better
Click to expand...

Mathews is a lot more aggressive, but he conducts fair interviews. He just doesn't allow right-wing guests to avoid questions and issues and go on with the agenda THEY want people to hear. The right however, interrupts habitually because Hannity et al are always trying to steer their "opposition" guests in a direction that those people don't want to go. it's pure manipulation: "look, we all know that you brought your talking points"... Just watch Hannity and o'reilly and other Fox interviews. There's one where - Megan Kelly ( I think) was interviewing a Doctorate in theology and insisting that he couldn't have been serious in writing his book on Jesus -because the author was a Muslim! So, the PhD was backed into a corner of defending himself for the entire interview. Maddow and nor Mathews stoop to that level.
 
tres borrachos said:
HAHA you beat me to it. When exactly did "Mexican" become a race?
Click to expand...

Do you really want people to start saying "ethnicithist" instead of "racist", even though "Racist" isn't entirely accurate?

"ethnicithist" sounds like a human having a hairball.... and we know full well what is meant when someone says anti-Mexican prejudice is "racist" anyway, even if it isn't the technically proper term.

I dunno. Saying "Mexican isn't a race!" rates about the same as attacking someone for saying "their" instead of "they're" in an internet debate forum post.





Also note: Bigoted isn't a proper substitute. Bigotry refers to the adamant/irrational rejection of a belief, class, etc. Racism or other "isms" we might use involve a belief specifically that particular races are inherently inferior or superior.
 
jet57 said:
Mathews is a lot more aggressive, but he conducts fair interviews. He just doesn't allow right-wing guests to avoid questions and issues and go on with the agenda THEY want people to hear. The right however, interrupts habitually because Hannity et al are always trying to steer their "opposition" guests in a direction that those people don't want to go. it's pure manipulation: "look, we all know that you brought your talking points"... Just watch Hannity and o'reilly and other Fox interviews. There's one where - Megan Kelly ( I think) was interviewing a Doctorate in theology and insisting that he couldn't have been serious in writing his book on Jesus -because the author was a Muslim! So, the PhD was backed into a corner of defending himself for the entire interview. Maddow and nor Mathews stoop to that level.
Click to expand...

Matthews interrupts just as bad as any host. He also gets his ass handed to him more frequently. A simple youtube session will clear up your fog.
 
Mr Person said:
Do you really want people to start saying "ethnicithist" instead of "racist", even though "Racist" isn't entirely accurate?

"ethnicithist" sounds like a human having a hairball.... and we know full well what is meant when someone says anti-Mexican prejudice is "racist" anyway, even if it isn't the technically proper term.

I dunno. Saying "Mexican isn't a race!" rates about the same as attacking someone for saying "their" instead of "they're" in an internet debate forum post.





Also note: Bigoted isn't a proper substitute. Bigotry refers to the adamant/irrational rejection of a belief, class, etc. Racism or other "isms" we might use involve a belief specifically that particular races are inherently inferior or superior.
Click to expand...

Ethnicist isn't or whatever isn't proper either ... if they were referring to Hispanics or latinos it would be however they were referring to Mexicans. .. proper term i think would be prejudice.
 
jet57 said:
Mathews is a lot more aggressive, but he conducts fair interviews. He just doesn't allow right-wing guests to avoid questions and issues and go on with the agenda THEY want people to hear. The right however, interrupts habitually because Hannity et al are always trying to steer their "opposition" guests in a direction that those people don't want to go. it's pure manipulation: "look, we all know that you brought your talking points"... Just watch Hannity and o'reilly and other Fox interviews. There's one where - Megan Kelly ( I think) was interviewing a Doctorate in theology and insisting that he couldn't have been serious in writing his book on Jesus -because the author was a Muslim! So, the PhD was backed into a corner of defending himself for the entire interview. Maddow and nor Mathews stoop to that level.
Click to expand...

I agree with Chris Matthews being aggressive...he talks over his guest both right and left and seems more interested in promoting himself in the process. O'Reilly does talk over his guest but only when they seem to want to give their agenda talking points and long off subject answers to avoid the questions. The Ramos interview was a prime example of that tactic. The majority of guest on MSNBC are selected to mirror both Maddow and Matthews points of view and some (Hannity) but not so much on FNC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom