Information icon.svg Voting is completed for the RationalWiki 2021 Moderator Election and the results are now posted.
Congratulations to the winners!

Talk:The Young Turks

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon media.svg

This Media related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)

Category: insufferable assholes[edit]

Since someone asked, I personally have no problem with removal of the insufferable assholes category. It seems a holdover from a previous edit by BoN's with axes to grind anyway. From my casual watching of the show, I think it's fair to say Cenk is an aggressive cheerleader for the Left, he once was on the wrong side of the Armenian thing, and TYT runs some "entertainment" stories that are groan-worthy. But that shouldn't be the whole article, should it?

I'm not well versed in the Uygur/Sam Harris feud of 2014, but at present, the article offers only confusion rather than insight and analysis. And the unfunny adolescent insults (added by the BoN's) spread all over the article should be removed, and more thoughtful, missional coverage and criticism written. Oh, and if specific criticism has alt-right and conservative origins, it needs to be attributed to that, instead of being stated in RW's voice (as I sadly discovered here).

Also could use an update to cover life after 2014, i.e. TYT's Bernie v. Hillary positions during the 2016 election, commendable Standing Rock activism, anti-Trump, anti-authoritarian stances, etc. Leuders (talk) 17:41, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

That someone was me and yeah, you and I have pretty much the same opinion about both TYT and this article. (Lord Nox (talk) 08:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC))
It was an odd article. More like someone's personal Reddit rant rather than on-mission and readable. I did a needed update. Leuders (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Jimmy Dore "Conspiracy Theorist" smear[edit]

I have removed the part where Jimmy Dore is referred to as a conspiracy theorist. This is a smear perpetrated by a certain Washington Post article. Here's the quick rundown. Jimmy Dore posted this video: which details allegations about murder. However, at the end of the video, he concludes with something along the lines of "Well, that's interesting stuff, but we, unlike the mainstream press, are not believing what this guy says and so we await more evidence to pass judgment." This time stamp is even linked in the first pinned comment on the video to head off allegations that he believes this conspiracy.

Later, a reporter for the Washington Post, David Weigel, smeared Dore in an article claiming that he bought this conspiracy, even though Dore's video claims no such thing. Here is a video from Dore detailing this:

So, in sum, the video linked to by a RW editor which was used to justify even sarcastically calling Dore a conspiracy theorist does not justify it at all, and in fact in the video Dore denies believing in said conspiracy. I will not have RationalWiki be used to unjustifiably smear anyone. The original smear edit is currently the only contribution to this site made by its editor's IP address. It was not made by an established user, so I feel justified in removing it. I would be willing to accept Dore as a conspiracy theorist when he actually professes to subscribe to any conspiracy theories. I will accept him as being snarkily referred to as one when he entertains a conspiracy notion. However, I would need a source for those assertions, and the previously linked video in this article was not a valid source for that. YB indeed! 17:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, calm down. I'm not a big fan of strikethru humor, but it seemed like a harmless snark to me rather than a "smear". Of course we're not saying Dore is an actual conspiracy theorist. People have noticed that he does occasionally make noises like one though [1], and that's what the joke/snark refers to. Leuders (talk) 18:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
I made the edit and I stand by it, if you watched the actual video he said he wants a new investigation, which raises eyebrows, he's even laughing like a fucking maniac when he brings it up, also it's not the only time he's brought it up, :, he's peddled a lot of other conspiracy theories as well, like for example, claiming Hillary Clinton may have Parkinson's disease :, :, the chemical attack in Syria being a false flag :, :, and that Russia didn't help trump win (he usually responds to stories that attack Russia/trump/Julian Assange with ad hominem attacks against the people reporting it, since he has no vaild arguments against them) :, :, :, :, :, :,. Jaydogg1994 (talk)12:57 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Let it not be said that I'm unreasonable. I thought that the Seth Rich video was not an example of him buying conspiracy theories, seeing as how he says he doesn't buy it. However, I said I would be open to examples of him entertaining conspiracy notions, and I believe that the "Hillary has Parkinson's" is a valid example. As such, I would be fine keeping the strikethrough humor with that one as the linked reference. Thank you, other folks, for doing the legwork in rounding up examples for me. I'm lazy. YB indeed! 15:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Suspicion that a politician has an illness isn't a "conspiracy theory." Nor does Dore deny that Russians had anything to do with the election; what he does say about Russia hysteria (which Pussy Riot, btw, agrees with --that it's hysteria) simply is not accurately characterized as a "conspiracy theory." Dore is many things, but conspiracy theorist is not among them. Disagree with his take on the Russia hysteria if you like, but label it correctly. Snark is great, but should be rooted in something the target actually does.--Tea Sagan (talk) 16:30, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
actually it is a conspiracy theory to suggest it, especially when the doctor who started the rumor is a conspiracy theorist, and also, dore's reason for denying that the Russia story is true is because he thinks it's a cia plot to discredit WikiLeaks :, :, :, he also fell for James O'Keefe's bullshit cnn undercover videos :, :, he's a scorned Berniecrat who doesn't care about fighting trump and, what's worse is he actually thinks that the people that are fighting against trump are liars and criminals, it's okay if you're a dore fan, but you gotta accept that he's conspiracy theorist and denialist, take you're fanboy shit elsewhere. Jaydogg1994 (talk)09:11 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Excuse me? How rude you are. Yes, I do watch Dore, and have for a long time, so I'm positioned to know what he actually says, over time, and how he says it. Dore is not a conspiracy theorist, not even if Snopes dubiously applies that word to a single physician -- NOT JIMMY DORE -- regarding speculation about Clinton's health problems. This isn't Illuminati- level crap, and yes, the CIA does do actual evil stuff (what, you think the Intelligence Community is in love with Julian Assagne?!). This isn't the feverishness of Alex Jones; it's documented and known. Is there some reason I, as a Dore watcher who actually knows his work, am not welcome here? You act as if I need to leave and let you just write as you please. Is that the case at this site?
And about the Trump and healthcare -- Dore addressed that last January, in the context of Trump having insisted EVERY American should have healthcare. If Trump had kept that promise, then on that single, discrete issue, Trump would, in fact, have been better than Clinton. (Or do you object to universal healthcare?) But of course he didn't, and Dore has long since covered the fact that Trump didn't mean that shit one bit -- Dore ridicules Trump mercilessly as "Donny Tiny Hands" Hating on Dore is one thing, but it should be done honestly about what the guy actually broadcasts without cherrypicking in time.--Tea Sagan (talk) 12:48, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Also, I don't want to fight over this stuff about TYT supposedly being a "mirror" of RW TV. That's wrong and insulting of smart people and a smart audience. Is there some compromise language you could accpert that acknowledges that some have made that claim, but not having the text support it with no qualification? I watch TYT, and especially Dore, and it just isn't at all like FOX. It just isn't. I require reporters to be careful with facts, and Fox is a goddam joke on that score, while TYT is very careful. It just is.--Tea Sagan (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
he said the chemical attack on Syria was a false flag :, and he thinks that the story about Russia and trump is being made up by the cia to discredit WikiLeaks:, you can't dispute that he's a conspiracy theorist I won't compromise on that at all, the rest of the people on TYT are not like fox news at all I agree with you on that point only. Jaydogg1994 (talk) 13:10, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
The CIA *does" do shit like that. It is literally IN THE BUSINESS of conspiracies. That's not what people mean by "conspiracy theories." It isn't remotely implausible that the intelligence community wnats to "get" Julian Assange give that he's, you know, declared war on them and embarrassed them. If you insist on including the Syria stuff or the CIA stuff I equally insist on inserting text as to why it's not only correct by reasonable. Either that, or it can all be omitted. Your choice. But I do insist on including some of Dore's excellent work on the crazy nonsense the MSM, including Maddow, has been spewing about Russia (talk about conspiracy theories). And btw, Hillary Clinton believes she's been the victim of a "vast right-wing conspiracy." Does that make her a "conspiracy theorist," or does it make her right?--Tea Sagan (talk) 13:19, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Unseemly speculation about a candidate's health is common to campaigns and partisans. Or do you think Team Obama and their supporters were pushing a "conspiracy theory" about John McCain and Alzheimer's?--Tea Sagan (talk) 13:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Obama didn't push the McCain Alzheimer's story, that was a reporter from The Daily Kos who did, It may not be a conspiracy theory to speculate on a candidate's health but it is both slanderous and loathsome. Jaydogg1994 (talk) 09:43 26 July 2017

TYT isn't like Fox[edit]

Here's their host page with bios. These people just can't reasonably be compared with the Fox crew that's so obviously afflicted with intellectual deficits. Cenk is bombastic, but at least he's fact-based. --Tea Sagan (talk) 16:54, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

It is not a "conspiracy theory" (check this very site's discussion of what that means/is)to speculate that a candidate for office is ill and that the campaign crew are trying to keep that under wraps. It's entirely plausible especially if the candidate is exhibiting certain symptoms. It may be wrong, but it isn't a conspiracy theory of the sort this site properly denounced. That term is hurled at Jimmy Dore to associate him with Illuminati cranks and the like and is wrong. He is a very rational man and absolutely does not advocate any conspiracy theories. I've changed it to "unfounded speculation."--Tea Sagan (talk) 12:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

hey tea sagan take you're jimmy dore fanboyism (unless you are jimmy dore which wouldn't surprise me) somewhere else, I already showed you my sources which are statements and videos that he made, does this quote seem rational to you (in response to the seth rich conspiracy theory being promoted by fox news crime analyst Rod Wheeler) "it seems like it (laughs), seems like that guy is telling the truth, so he's not an unnamed investigator he's a named guy we know who he is, we can put his face on the thing, okay" of course he didn't look up the fact that wheeler was not a reliable source of information and had a history of making racist and homophobic remarks, dore seems to have a history of falling for everything that fits his anti Clinton/anti msm agenda (he thinks fox and breitbart are more reliable sources of information), he also advocates the theory that there is a CIA conspiracy against Trump, he called the chemical attack in Syria a false flag : he's a conspiracy theorist end of story.--Jaydogg1994 (talk) 12:58, 25 July 2017

It isn't a "conspiracy theory" to realize the CIA as an institution is opposed to Donald Trump. It's in the business of conspiracies, and doesn't like Trump. As for the Syria stuff, a lot of the original reporting on that did turn out to be false. Dore is properly and deeply skeptical of MSM reporting on much. That makes him smart and knowledgeable, not a "conspiracy theorists."--Tea Sagan (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Repetition does not make a point true; it is not a conspiracy theory to speculate about a candidate's health, and happens rather often, e.g., Obama campaign re: McCain's purported Alzheimer's. I find such tactics gross, and am fine with saying Dore shouldn't have joined in with the others who do that, but it is not a conspiracy theory -- Dore isn't even the physician Snopes claims is a conspiracy theorist in that link you keep mindlessly posting . Snopes does not mention Dore at all. So, you have the burden of explaining SPECIFICALLY why what Dore said fits a reasonable definition of "conspiracy theory," and you must do so in a way that Obama/McCain/Alzheimers doesn't fall into. Or admit they both promoted conspiracy theories (neither did). Up to you.--Tea Sagan (talk) 00:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
I didn't say that he was the physician, I said he cited the physician as a creditable source without researching him first, Like what he did with the Seth Rich rumor where he cited a homophobic and racist fox news crime analyst.--Jaydogg1994 (talk) 00:55, 26 July 2017

Cenk is a JFK conspiracy theorist[edit]

I've heard him talk about the JFK assassination in the past and what he said made me wonder, but I could never quite tell. Then he pretty much confirms it in this video and also of note is that not one of the other three there say anything about it. Do with that information what you will. I just thought I'd point it out. The Adversary (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Uygur and TYT is in fact Russian propaganda.[edit]

Lots of people have studied them for a long time, and they are absolutely transparent once you understand their game and what issues are important to the Russians. The JFK conspiracy theories are a common Russian trope. Note how they spin wild, yet seemingly plausible stories, yet fail to mention simple facts like Lee Harvey Oswald defected to the Soviet Union, married a Russian woman, and was in communication with the Soviet embassy in Mexico, and their intelligence people who specialized in assasinations shortly before he killed JFK. Well beyond that, they all worked hard to irreparably damage Clinton’s reputation among the people they target to influence: American liberals. They are effectively undercover as liberals trying to undetectably weaken liberals from the inside. The evidence is overwhelming on all of them, including a very cozy relationship with Russia Today. Yes, lots of appearances on RT by these phonies up until RT became a more broadly known as propaganda. — Unsigned, by: / talk

If the evidence is indeed plentiful, then would you be so kind as to back your claims up with relevant links? RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:49, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
If they are Russian operatives, their coordination with Moscow must suck, because they are way off message. Maybe get Kushner to set up better back channel comms. Millennium Scallion (talk) 17:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
This is absolutely right, Cenk himself has taken millions in republican and venture capitalist money to fund his "anti-establishment" network. The whole thing is rotten to the core. He makes money off of democratic infighting. Its so blatantly dishonest. — Unsigned, by: / talk
How tho. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 00:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


Try Communist, far-left, anti-american. (talk) 02:08, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

What drugs are you on and where can I get some? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 02:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Technically none of those labels are mutually exclusive with the term progressive. Pumpkin pixel glow.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoTry our pumpkin spice lasagna! 13:17, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
@DuceMoosolini "Anti-American" can be, after all just look at folks like Caleb Maupin and The Grayzone. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)