Added: 2 years ago
From: TheYoungTurks
Views: 33,528
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (401)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Ashleigh Banfield is an idiot. Her CNN morning show is proof.

  • So you don't support "waving the flag"... fkg closet muslim... all you are.

  • @blockzilla1000 i hope you never reproduce.

  • @blockzilla1000 So everyone should always blindly follow whatever the government says and never question any of its decisions? Bow your head to Big Brother, peasant. Sheeple like you are in part to blame why America has fallen so low.

  • I UTTERLY agree with Banfield and Cenk. The US presented the Iraq War like it was a triumph and something to celebrate. And all of the major networks from CBS to ABC to NBC to CNN, MSNBC, and so on, looked foolish imitating the immoral and unethical FOX NEWS in becoming complicit in the war by not asking the much needed tough questions at a time when those questions SHOULD have been asked. Those networks and newspapers have no credibility with me. Good job Cenk and Banfield!

  • just saw this lady for the first time. She needs to get off her eyewear fashion statement. -And what is that? No glasses in them. Annoying. Check her out in the nightline abc.

  • because sg egives great head?i am still tingling asheigh

  • what do u think happens during a war?? moron. Once in a while to protect our interests you have to have the guts to get your hands dirty, and guess what. its not perfect, people die. All u liberal morons think that we can fight a war and not offend or kill the enemy.

  • @bozman8686 So in Iraq the Iraqis are the enemy? Or the Afghans in Afghanistan? LOL you must be A Limbaugh ditto-head. But yes, in war one has to get their hands dirty - absolutely! - and what the lady was saying is that the networks weren't showing the dirty parts, just the cool parts that appeal to movie lovers everywhere. I think going into Iraq was the right decision but at the wrong time and under false pretenses; I also think the Taliban war was completely mismanaged until recently (2009)

  • well. He went to msnbc alright. Now he is a shill. If you think these people are good you are mistaken. We've trusted the bastards and witches and look where it got us. Read protocols of zion if you're not to weak to see the truth. Look up , Kosher tax.

    Look up, khazarian conspiracy. Look up speeches by myron fagan, and benjamin freedman. Come on now. Watch these and you'll finally know the truth. For the bombshell watch, mossad caught in van on 9-11 "filled with explosives" gw bridge

  • She's another lieing Zionist Jew.Nothing more.

  • @DaytonaGary Ashleighs not Jewish- I know her from when we went to private school at the same time....she is a racist bully...something you'd think you two would have in common.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • She looks like a Sarah Palin ripoff. haha.

  • @ByakuyaSama05 Ya, too bad she's been on the scene MUCH longer than Sarah Palin, get a clue.

  • She has teeth like a jack o lantern.

  • I would love to give her a cum facial all over her glasses!

  • Did a pan hit her face?

  • Ashley if your reading this...we love you. Get your own Youtube channel and we'll watch.

  • She was a victim of the NWO. I cancelled TV and my Cell phones to keep my money out of the NWO fucks hands. CANCEL YOUR NWO LIES CONNECTIONS NOW.

  • Awesome video :)

  • The problem with this commentary is that this guy has no idea why Ashleigh was demoted. He assumes a link between the speech and the demotion, but offers no substantive support. That's not to say he isn't correct, Only that he doesn't really know. I do wholeheartedly agree with the general priniciple that the quality of journalism these days is dismal.

  • Yo Cenk, you're messing up your chance to go on MSNBC, bro. But, this truly is sickening. I'm out. Boycott of MSNBC starts today.

  • Cenk has principals. He tries to keep it as real as he can even if it would ruin his chances. Cuz thats what good ppl do in the long run. Thats why if MSNBC were a real news organization they will hire him and if they don't, than we know why.

  • I love TYT!! They're doing great job speaking the truth.

    No wonder they're so popular.

  • She's an anchor. She's at the bottom of the river, anchor.

  • Did some investigating on google. Thank god for google ; ) Not sure if their were co conspirators but the big man at the time for msnbc was Neil Shapiro. Not 100% sure but I believe he had something to do with Ashleigh's firing.

  • Good job Cenk. Poor woman was just doing her job. Sadly her job was too be a corporate schill...

    I'm just glad Canadian media seems more fair and balanced. No offense to Americans but it's true so calm down. Sadly I still watch mostly American News stations lol

  • The North American Media has been taken over by psychopaths. End of story.

  • Her speech was only one of numerous issues that contributed to the downfall. Read the NYT article dated May 5, 2003, 'Ashleigh Banfield's Career No Longer Seems to Shine as Bright' - you can do better TYT

  • bill maher got fired too. the dixie chicks were banned from the air waves. i.f. stone was black listed, as were many many many others...

    amazing story, i hope she's doing something, writing, independent working... something, that's a voice we need.

    nice job cenk.

  • Funny that this is NBC we're talking about - ALLEGEDLY the most liberal name in news. Ya know, the same network O'Reilly goes apeshit over on a nightly basis. Says something about the media in general when NBC's accused of being 'too liberal.'

  • @ChildofBrando The sooner you sheeple learn that there is no right and left, only the master who controls them both (money, and those who hold the most), the sooner you can stop squabbling back and forth like morons.

  • Did they pay her during this period though? I mean if they don't let her go, they should at least pay her, right?

  • Ashleigh Banfield. Ultra MILF.

    And that's all I have to say about that.

  • Ouch! I wonder where Keith Olbermann was when Ashleigh needed help... The guy fights against injustice on air - loudly - but something like this happens in his own backyard, and... nothing? Somehow I don't remember any special comments demanding that MSNBC treat Ms. Banfield with respect.

  • probably something he heard from a right leaning source and just assumed was true. about 90% of the people who say this nonsense have never seen moores movies to begin with. like the people who thought moores columbine movie was blaming gun ownership for the school shooting, when he refutes that position in his own movie... lol.

  • @Pelonetillo No, it was something I saw in a Canadian documentary called "Manufacturing Dissent". In fact it was very well documented.

    And I have seen most of Moore's works. Even his TV show. I in fact enjoy them very much. He makes many good points, however most of his documentaries are worthless as they twist the truth too much. Basically I only watch Moore for entertainment purposes only.

  • so you didnt do the research, exactly. you deny the validity of one documentary based on having seen another documentary. lol.

  • No, I never made a documentary about Michael Moore and personally called every source. I also find it sort of silly to expect someone to do so. However, many of the sources are readily available on the net. Nor has anyone debunked the allegations made in the film. Maybe an intelligent and resourceful person like yourself should see the documentary and get to it(sarcasm)? The film makes a strong case indeed.

  • lol, and now youre combating strawmen. who said you made a documentary? is this the only way one can do research? by throwing together a documentary? how intellectually honest of you. i researched the points made in moores film, i didnt just take moores word for everything, as you seem to have with this other movie. lol.

  • Yes, like the premise of Roger and me. Seriously, if he can't be honest about the premise of the film, then his films are truly worthless. They are merely entertainment. And the thing about documentaries is that they are built on journalistic integrity. How much integrity does a man who make blatant lies have in journalism?

    "who said you made a documentary?"

    By your logic it seems I would have to make one in order to refer to it's content.

  • you arent in a position to say hes dishonest when youre simply parroting what you saw in... another documentary. lol. no, not by my logic. people who dont make documentaries research stuff all the time, you should try it sometime.

  • @Pelonetillo Yes, I am stating what is in this documentary. Watch it before you denounce what is in it. And I just told you can easily find out more about what is shown in this documentary by making a couple of google searches, or do I have to personally call the people shown in the film in order to have them verify it?

    Are you able to read? Do you suffer from ADD? What is you malfunction?

  • the problem is youre disregarding the contents of a documentary based on another documentary. dont you see the irony in that? lol. if you had a functioning brain you wouldnt bother asking pointless questions to distract from your shortcomings.

    - you reject one documentary based on another

    - you reject scientific consensus

    - you think bush was a lesser evil

    thats three strikes: youre dumb. no one with any sense would take your views on anything seriously after this display.

  • @Pelonetillo

    "you reject one documentary based on another"

    The fact that someone makes a documentary on the shortcomings of another persons documentaries does not make it an invalid source in stating the shortcomings of said films. MM and his relaxed relationship to the truth have been known for a long time.

    "you reject scientific consensus"

    No. Because there is none.

    "you think bush was a lesser evil"

    Yes. So did many Americans also in 2004. Your point is? Another "scientific consensus"?

  • yes it does, you have two opposing documentaries so you are arbitrarily choosing one over the other. doesnt work.

    yes, there is a scientific consensus, but im not surprised youre ignorant about this, you dont seem too fond of research.

    right, dumb americans. my point is you fit in well with them.

  • "yes it does, you have two opposing documentaries so you are arbitrarily choosing one over the other. doesnt work."

    The key word here is 'arbitrarily'. It was not an arbitrary choice, even if you can not manage to comprehend that. Sorry, but you are stupid.

    "yes, there is a scientific consensus,..."

    No, there is not. Science is about research and proving something without a shadow of a doubt. This has not been done with man made climate change.

    You are too ignorant to spend more time on. GLHF

  • yes, it was arbitrary. you didnt do the research, so it couldnt have been anything but. yes, there is a consensus: about three quarters of scientists with relevant expertise are against you. youre retarded. a few google queries wouldve helped you avoid embarrassment here. oh well.

  • No. An arbitrary choice to reference would have been "Nanook of the North" as it does not even deal with Michael Moore and his "documentaries". "Manufacturing dissent", watch it people!

    Three quarters is not scientific consensus. It is not a stockholders meeting. And any real scientist can only tell you what he thinks is a plausible explanation to climate change. It has not been proven in any way that CO² cause global warming.

    Now, go bore a hole in someone else's head.

  • yes, it was. you can deny till youre blue in the face. but that wont change anything. yes, that is a scientific consensus. you apparently dont know what a consensus is. hint: its not unanimity.

  • Three quarters is not unanimity.

  • thanks for the revelation, squirt:

    "you apparently dont know what a consensus is. hint: its not unanimity."

    "hint: its not unanimity."

    "not unanimity."

  • Yes, so we agree. There is no consensus. Thank you.

  • no. consensus =/= unanimity. get a dictionary instead of making an ass of yourself.

  • Consensus is general agreement. There is no general agreement that man made CO² cause climate change. There is no consensus that reduction in man made CO² will reduce the temperature in any way. However, there is "consensus" to that this hypothesis is likely to have somewhat of an impact. To which extent is not agreed upon. It is not a fact that man made CO² affect temperatures, but rather something they believe to be true. There is dissent to theory this within the scientific community.

  • yes there is. some scientists believe in creation myth, that dissent is of no consequence. you dont think youre an idiot, but it doesnt change the fact that you are. dissent is beside the point: there is a consensus.

  • The creation myth is irrelevant to the point. Learn to read. There is only "consensus" to the likelyhood of the hypothesis being correct. Not that the hypothesis is a fact or the extent of the impact man made CO² actually would have.

    "you dont think youre an idiot, but it doesnt change the fact that you are."

    You talked earlier about ironic statements. Add this one to the list. I am certain psychiatric scholars would come to a consensus about this. Dissent is irrelevant :D

  • you didnt even get the point. dissent is irrelevant. consensus doesnt mean you cant have dissent. youre talking nonsense. thats not an ironic statement because you are an idiot. youve been demonstrating that repeatedly.

  • The point is that you don understand what the "scientific consensus" is about.

    "you are an idiot. youve been demonstrating that repeatedly."

    ditto

  • you dont even know what consensus means. lol. you were confusing it with unanimity just a few posts ago. then you started talking about dissent as if that was relevant. youre over here trying to talk science when you should be focusing on your english. lol. youre like a chicken with its head cut off.

  • "you dont even know what consensus means."

    Sure I do. The whole unanimity thing was possibly a minor misreading of your message on my part. However, considering I know you are a moron who brings nothing of value I just skim read most of your comments and give you a quick reply.

  • no. you were mistaken more than once regarding the same comment. not a misreading, just you displaying your ignorance. you dont know anything apparently. youd better slow down when you reply if you want to stop coming off as a retard.

  • "youd better slow down when you reply if you want to stop coming off as a retard."

    It hardly matters when replying to you ;)

  • because no matter how hard you try youll still sound retarded to me. but you should make an effort for others who happen to read your nonsense.

  • @Pelonetillo When running track one might find that if your track partners are good, ones own speed is good. If the partners are bad, one tend to not try so hard. This is what happened for me with you. You are so retarded I hardly care to make an effort. I guess your debate technique is being so annoying nobody gives a shit.

  • what happened for you was you were exposed as a fool. lol, running track... youre even dumb when it comes to talking trash.

  • No the example was very good. I just though maybe some sort of example would make you understand the situation. At any rate, do you feel this is going somewhere? Not that I mind your mindless bantering and rambling. Howard Stern clips saves me from the boredom I feel writing you right now.

  • no, it was lame. i dont need help understanding anything, especially not from you, lol -- you cant even keep up with the vocab. of course this isnt going anywhere, youre an idiot that apparently loves abuse, and i happen to be a sadist. win-win.

  • "bla bla"

    ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz

  • youve been stupid enough for one day. run along and take a nap.

  • Ouch. Touché!

    What a rapier wit!

  • thats right

  • youve been stupid enough for one day. run along and take a nap.

  • lol, you cant even come up with your own lines. what a dork.

  • @Pelonetillo youre an idiot that apparently loves abuse, and i happen to be a sadist. win-win.

  • that was @mrniceguy4TL, actually.

  • lol, you cant even come up with your own lines. what a dork.

  • mustve been tough for you growin up, what with being dropped on your head as a baby. thats just too bad.

  • td:dr

  • english. im not fluent in retard like you are.

  • @Pelonetillo too dull ; didn't read

  • lol, and you listen. i guess that was retard after all. hahaha.

  • td;dr

  • Just like how scientists haven't reached an agreement for the validity of the theory of evolution...right?

  • We may not fully comprehend evolution yet, but that evolution has occurred is, thanks to good research, documented. Within the scientific community there is not left much doubt to the validity of this theory. Something that is not the case with "man made global warming". Did you know that most of our solar system is currently experiencing warming? Do you think this is due to man made CO² on Earth?

  • you keep talking about the solar system warming up. thats stupid. let me ask you a stupid question too: if someone turns on the heater in your home, and you throw a blanket or two on top of yourself, is the heater the only thing contributing to your warmth? lol.

  • If my blankets were made of CO² they would not contribute to my warmth, no.

  • youre retarded.

  • Your mom is.

  • i'm sick of the flag waving fake patriotic BS. after the london train bombings, they weren't waving flags on their stations.

  • My wife loves Ashleigh! She is smart, funny and honest. Hard to find in most TV "journalists".

  • Its because Americans (in general) are simpleminded and very easily influenced with there eyes. Truth, common sense and actually journalism makes the masses scared and they will in turn, turn off the T.V. stop buying the advertising along with freaking out with arms at hand.

    Well said TYT, couldn't agree more! Hip Hip

  • Can't really tell the difference between MSNBC and FOX at this point.

  • How dare Ashleigh Banfield insinuate there is human suffering with war?  The results are always human misery. Fox ignores that aspect. The reason they paid Ashleigh Banfield for 17 months and gave her nothing to do was they didn't want the kind of coverage she was promoting. They paid to allow her to fade out of people's minds. They don't want the kind of reporting that makes the viewer question the military-industrial complex.

    they are the ones who post the bill while people pay it

  • PBS, BBC, CBC.

  • Ashleigh is gonna bring sexy back to journalism! I always liked her, now I understand why she hasn't done "real" news in several yrs. Now if she can only "Naked News"; and the only thing she wears are those cat eye glasses... WOOF!!!

  • that is an amazingly disgusting thing to focus on. Are you mental?

  • Bush and FOX played a significant part in this countries downfall.

  • Murdoch is the one...

  • thank you!

  • As someone who has seen her show, The reason she got fired was She is a Ditz.

    As for holy writ of Journalism, Don't forget Clinton apologist Joe Conason on the ACORN Videos that are making progressive such as Media Matters out to be complete liars, It's Not Journalism Unless They Report Everything That Happened- It's Propaganda

  • Nice communication skills you've got there sirfith. You're not a ditz by any means.

    Moron.

  • stories like this make people who claim the media is liberal, look like the fuckin retards that they are...

  • Because she's the hottest woman on the planet!!!!!!

  • I see the littley turkey boy has a donation sign up. lol

  • Too bad about Ashleigh I thought she was pretty good. If what you said about her is true it says something about our right to free speech. About your other point though you know "the war", I suppose if the Iraqi's wanted sadam out they would have gotten rid of him. Right?

  • msnbc sucks dick

  • Well she's at ABC but will she be as outspoken/"controversial" as she was at MSNBC

    (the same network Cenk that would curtail Cenk)? It remains to be seen, but I doubt it.

  • Scary and disgusting. Not that I wasn't aware of it before but the reality of another example of what the American people DON'T KNOW, or what is falsely reported, or what is conveniently ommited, leaves me speechless. I watch Ashleigh on TrueTV and she is a professional. What was done to her by MSNBC is nothing short of criminal, or at least it should be. "Take it to the streets, Ms. Banfield."

  • Comment removed

  • It's not easy being Honest

  • I think this gives rise to a new term: Banfield (v.) To come under attack/ have your career ruined by the news media establishment for trying to practice real journalism. As in, "If you speak the truth while employed by a corporate 'news' conglomerate, you will be Banfielded."

    Now go kick some ass Ashleigh, and don't let the Mouse influence you.

  • How shes right?

    I dont think your views are centered in reality and most people outside your unknowing poorly informed circle, dont agree with you.

    Its called human decency you idiot.

    You and people like you are the problem.

  • TYT had the right idea, utilize You Tube. Answer to no one. Power to the fuc*n people.

  • Thank god my country has a tonne of employee laws that protect you against this.

  • Well, ABC isn't exactly a better network.... Didn't they fire Dan Rather for pretty much the same thing that happened to her ?

  • Cenk you should hire her and replace Ana with her. lol

  • Are you kidding me? ana fucking rocks. what they really need is a threesome.

  • lol if Abc just lock her in a closet too

  • Interesting...and how is the way the Iraq war was covered ANY different then the Afghanistan war? What, do mortars lose their devastating effect on Afghan soil? Do the limb stumps that are created by American Ordinance on Afghani kids any less painful? So why isnt Banfield or Cenk complaining about the media black out of the pakistani civs being devastated by drone strikes?

    Please.I love watching people get all teary eyed about the casualties of war only when its not a war waged by their guy.

  • Al Jazeera English is the best news station ever. they aren't under u.s influence so they've questioned them and many other gov't. today i watched their program Fault Lines (amazing program) and at least 3 times the guests said that U.s media fails to cover the fundamental questions of foriegn policy we face. one guest also commented the U.S was a shield for human-rights abusers (the audience applauded to that). YOU WILL NEVER SEE THAT IN U.S MEDIA

  • Good for her and ABC news. Oh, and yes, she is hot!

  • This is not the full story on Ashleigh Banfield. She was heavily critic9zed for partisan reporting. The primary criticism was that she was anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian. These criticisms were well before the Kansas State speech.

  • "The primary criticism was that she was anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian."

    Anybody with an inquisitive mind coupled with a critical thought process will come to the same conclusion, about Israel, Banfield has.

    The problem is, these people get shut down just as fast.

    Try posting something that questions Israels legitimacy on the Huffington post, see what happens.

  • k i understand she wanted to be out reporting but if i understand right she got paid for 17 months do to fuck all and even had an office with a tv for a portion of that time...oh the torture.

  • 17 months of not being in the public eye makes it difficult for her to get another job after 17 months no one remembers her and that affects what jobs she can get thats probably why she ended up on court tv and not a real news job

  • Thats what I'm saying and I totally agree wit Cenk, LET HER DO WHAT YOU HIRED HER TO DO, HER JOB!!~

  • fox news questions the goverment every hour of every day.

  • stfu

  • The ONLY time Faux News questions the government is when a DEMOCRAT is in the White house. If a Republican is president they rush to get on their knees and PUCKER UP!

  • it's not that she questioned the government. they don't have a problem with that. just look at glenn beck. it's that she criticized her own industry: main stream media in the us

  • I love Ashleigh Banfield I'm addicted to court t.v!!!

  • she kinda reminds me of sarah pailin

  • uggghhhh...I can't stand these advertisements...

    ...But I love Ashleigh Banfield.

  • I'm starting to think capitalism and journalism just don't mix.

    If this keeps going, all the stations will be just like Fox and no honest report.

    Fox viewers say it right, all stations are biased, but all to the conservative.

    Liberal media is a right description. Journalism IS liberal.

    There's no such thing as conservative journalism

  • So, where's so called "liberal media"?

  • Actual liberal media? They are swept to the sidelines. Not profitable, because advertisers do not like the truth.

  • These people will be Heroes in the future.

  • Thanks for yet another argument reminding us we are saturated by government media. Yeah, digging up mounds and stopping evil makes news, not that bullets and shrapnel don't care who you are...glad she's back. although my cynicism makes me believe she has had her wings clipped.

  • Go suck your own banana will

  • Shamefully, it doesn't matter what the public thinks. We can bitch about how news isn't honest & how good reporters are corrupted. We have no power.

  • with all due respect to you, you are wrong, we have the power if we want it and all we have to do is stop watching the channels or programmes we don't like and the ratings will do the rest

  • Redshift21: "with all due respect to you, you are wrong.."

    With all due respect to you, you are wrong.

    News channel edit their contents based on rating is no longer considered a journailsm.

  • which is exactly why you should not watch them, my point is that bad channels can't survive without our patronage.

  • Redshift21: "which is exactly why you should ..."

    I'm sorry to say your expectation towards people are little bit too high.

    People don't choose show based on what they should or shouldn't. People choose shows based on what they want to see or don't. It seems to work for entertainment shows.

    Problem here is, the line between entertainment show and news show becoming increasingly unclear.

    It's just human behavior, you have to accept it and make the system around it to work.

  • if what you say is true why are you here ill tell you why to troll :D

  • to tell the truth I'm just an opinionated old git rather than a troll, trolling is a young mans game and I'm not young anymore : (

  • "If we want it".

    The majority clearly does not want it.

  • no...and i bet u love fox...

  • I dislike(despise) Fox, only because they are not news, and intentionally lie and misrepresent the truth for a specific political purpose, resulting in million of American protesting their own self interest like sheep to the slaughter.

    But I wouldn't say they suck, they are very good at what they do. MSNBC on the other hand does sucks ass. CNN started to suck ass ever since the Bush Administration told them to "play ball" or they would let them merge with AOL.

  • What a bunch of garbage. MSNBC should be ashamed of themselves.

  • I am glad u told this story, I was always wondering what happened to her....weird how she suddenly disappeared...cause she really caught my eye, real good journalist.

  • these creeps pull these kind of stunts all the time..if you don't toe the line,then it's your head...so much for truth and honesty in reporting eh?my biggest fear is that now she is back at this station,they will set a trap for her and give that as an excuse to fire her again...(and effectively bugger her career!

  • Sickening.

  • I'd sooo do her. Yes I would.

  • Just more proof that every contract should have a requirement that they actually retail your product or you can at your option take it elsewhere and get out of your contract.

    Without a retailing of your product clause, your contract is actually a pair of handcuffs.

  • All commercial media outlets have an agenda and that agenda is always to support the financial interests of their stockholders and their advertisers. Since most news media was owned by large defense contractors anti war reporting was not allowed.

  • I know that MSNBC is owned by GE, but what about the other networks?

  • well I know that newscorp (fox) ispartially owned by an outfit called kingdom holdings ltd. it's sole shareholder is the saudi royal family.

  • @sburgh49 rupert murdoch owns the controlling share in newscorp-its his baby-the saudis have shares in everything.

  • Banfield is only One Thousand times hotter than Palin!

  • He criticizes all of the networks all the time. They just did a protest outside CNN for biased coverage of healthcare reform...

  • I think he is far less fair on Fox News.

  • you don't watch the young turks very offend do you... they criticize all networks there real journalist the question everything and not zombie shit like your TV networks do...

  • You're right, that's a bit of an overstatement. But even though they're an unprofessional opinion show they are _still_ more balanced than Fox "News".

  • more balanced than FOX?

    quit saying ignorant stuff Marvin

  • You're right I shouldn't say Fox isn't balanced. I should say they're outright liars and con artists.

  • I agree with "young turks very offend".

    Well, you see TYT is only worried about bias and "journalism" when it comes to people or stories that goes against their view of the world. In reality what this guy is doing and what O'Reilly is doing, is not at all different. Just the audience. The fact you are sitting there and make believing he is "questioning everything" just proves to show that Cenk is "fair and balanced".