English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

Just as "gangsters" commit their "drive-by shootings" without thought of consequence, the media is guilty of "drive-by reporting", where they take pot shots at whatever topic strikes their fancy at that particular moment, without researching for all the facts. Basically the same way that politicians "shoot" at each other during election campaigns.

2006-09-11 09:17:17 · answer #1 · answered by stephen p 4 · 3 0

David S:
Yeah, Hitler was being somewhat prophetic there because it was certain media, including American media, outlets that conjured up his name "out of the void, to associate [it] with incredible hopes on the broad public..."

I guess, however, that since Hitler thought it was bad to defame and slander (the definition of which is making verifiably FALSE accusations), you must think those things are good. Taking the Jewish slur aside the statement, in the context in which it is offered, is not unreasonable - the author and source not withstanding. Media outlets do, in the name of getting 'the scoop' tend to over-simplify more than inform, and denigrate good people and tear down others in the name of political ideology.

Not that I'm a big fan of Limbaugh - he is guilty of this type of behavior himself - but when a news report makes accusations, then declines to run corrections or makes them innocuously, how can this do anything but create FALSE impressions. How can that be a good thing?

2006-09-11 10:24:17 · answer #2 · answered by barb31416 2 · 1 1

He's talking about media taking shots and making accusations without backing up the claims, then moving on without sufficiently correcting things when found in error. Saying Bush made a direct link between 9/11 and Iraq is a good example of that.

2006-09-11 09:12:50 · answer #3 · answered by Will 6 · 4 0

He meant this:

"Thus, in the course of a few weeks it was possible [for the media] to conjure up names out of the void, to associate them with incredible hopes on the part of the broad public, even to give them a popularity which the really great man often does not obtain his whole life long; names which a month before no one had even seen or heard of, while at the same time old and proved figures of political or other public life, though in the best of health, simply died as far as their fellow men were concerned, or were heaped with such vile insults that their names soon threatened to become the symbol of some definite act of infamy or villainy. We must study this vile Jewish technique of emptying garbage pails full of the vilest slanders and defamations from hundreds and hundreds of sources at once, suddenly as if by magic, on the clean garments of honorable men, if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by these scoundrels of the press."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, volume 1, chapter 3.

2006-09-11 09:19:34 · answer #4 · answered by David S 5 · 0 3

He makes up many silly terms like that for the sake of controversey. Ever notice that when he does on the street interviews, the people that they talk to always ramble on about some sort of political rhetoric. They would have you believe that it was just some average person on the street.. but regardless of issues and what someone agrees with, I do not know ANYONE who talks like some of these supposed average folks on the street.

2006-09-11 09:18:55 · answer #5 · answered by Joe K 6 · 0 1

It's known as "double speak." He knows the media is ultimately owned and controlled by capitalist conservatives so he wantss to create the false impression that there is a "liberal" influence in the media, which if it were actually true Bush would have been impeached by now.

"Drive by the media" is double speak (a hidden lie) for suggesting the "liberal" media is anti-American. The media is no more liberal than liberals are automatically anti-American.

2006-09-11 09:15:01 · answer #6 · answered by What I Say 3 · 0 4

The FOOL is referring to himself, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Bill O'Reilly, and Anne Coulter. Birds of a feather. They all love to take cheap shots at people and tar those they don't like with innuendo. Maybe he and Annie will marry?

2006-09-11 09:13:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

he's a hypocrite and isn't worth paying attention to. He spouts off for years about punishing drug addicts and then it turns out he's one himself. Did he ever get any punishment for that? I wonder if I would have gotten the same treatment he did. I'm amazed how often law enforcement folds when a celeb is involved.I think they call it selective law enforcement.

2006-09-11 09:14:18 · answer #8 · answered by John 2 · 1 4

Probably, the fact that they shoot him down quickly every time he opens his "holier than thou mouth".

2006-09-11 09:14:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

Who knows...it's probably the pain medication talking...

2006-09-11 09:14:50 · answer #10 · answered by Sordenhiemer 7 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers