Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. Steve G No you don't understand. you literally keep repeating yourself even when I have already refuted you both many times. This is why you guys are idiots. Because you just don't get it. "the reporter would be NEUTRAL in reporting both claims," False statement. You're trying to create situation where reporter is forced to choose even though that situation still does not apply. If the fact about the where they nazies or not wasn't known then the reporter just doesn't say that they were nazie. In fact now you're saying that bank owner (eye witness presumable) says that they were nazies. Then reporters duty is to say that "According to eyewitness they were people who belong to the group X" "group X denies the allegory" That is what true reporter would say. Now if they had actual evidence that they were nazies then they wouldn't even go through what witness said or what group X said. " and for the reporter to be a JOURNALIST, he has to determine which of these two claims is more valid and present the truth, " False claim. Journalist doesn't need to seek what is the truth. THAT IS THE JOB OF THE POLICE. Journalists job is just to report the event. Journalist can say that according to person X it was nazies. Their group denies this.
    1
  2. So in the short. Reporter doesn't need to know which one is true in this case. It isn't his job to investigate it like a detective. It's his job to report what happened. And what happened was that person X said that it was nazies, and nazies denied that claim. Nothing in here contradicts their work and they are neutral. Now you two for some idiotic reasons want apply their opinions to this stuff. Which was in fact the very context of this whole talk. Since this youtube channel talks about their opinions about the event and their speculations instead of what has happened.
    1
  3. Steve G I'm sorry how This report isn't true: "Bank Y got robbed by group of people" "Bank manger stated that group was nazi group " "Nazi group denies this claim". Everything in this report is true. And every claim in this report was true. It isn't reporters job to do police's job. you're living in weird world where movie reporters are the ones who solve everything. Now when police finds out what group did that. Then they report what group did it. Simple as that. Speculating over it and wondering which one did it is pointless and damaging if the speculations were wrong. And that is exactly that both liberals and conservatives are doing. They don't care about truth.
    1
  4. Steve G I really don't see what is your issue. Are you saying that you have been arguing with me whole this time without you realizing that you have same position with me? My original point still stands.  Funny that you didn't notice it. Being neutral doesn't mean that you lick each side's asses. It means that you don't give a fuck about either side, and report the situation like it's. To be honest I don't see how the fuck you two came into conclusion that I think that reporters should ignore the facts so that every view point looks equal.
    1
  5. NUTCASE71733 Learn to read for fucksake. You're just throwing straw man arguments in here.
    1
  6. NUTCASE71733 No there is nothing else to that job description. It's just reporting what they have founded out so far. Their job isn't to do cops duty or scientists. Fact checking is part of it but that doesn't mean that they should go and figure out who was the murderer in case X. They wait for someone else to do it. If they don't know who did it then they just report what is known currently. Creationists VS the scientists has nothing to do with the NEWS. It's totally different subject. You're for some fucked up reason viewing reporters as a judges of a debate contest. NEWS shouldn't have any part on debates nor politics. They should just report the results and the events.
    1
  7. NUTCASE71733 Not putting words into your mouth at all. I literally said it's not job of the reporter to solve the cases. "Ok, taking this into consideration, was it wrong for the media to report that Iraq had no WMDs prior to the Iraq war" How is that a  debate or about about political ideology.  Also for your "creationist vs scientists" Please provide even one good news example of any situation.. I can guarantee that you will fail.
    1
  8. I like how leftists speak about tolerance while they can't tolerate Trump. :D
    1
  9. You don't, that is the reality of the world. If peace would be established it doesn't mean that problems won't be solved. Imagine world peace under nasty dictator.
    1
  10. ACtually to be honest... He did avoid the question. It's irrelevant to her question wherever he is expert or not when she is only asking why he is interested in Jesus. He could've answered why he chose to study religion or study Christianity in details. Only thing that is embarrassing for you not  notice him avoiding the question.
    1
  11. the same day as liberals will change their view on war on guns.
    1
  12. +rmeddy1 It would end up with Trump winning the election.
    1
  13. No you don't get how voting works. You are thinking in short term gains instead of long term bigger gain. You are one of the great example of people who lack of understanding over long term planning. Voting for third party may not win these elections. But it will increase their power enough to become more viable in next elections. Beside the point that if all republicans and democrats who don't like hillary or Trump, would vote for third party... I would be pretty sure that the third party nominee would crush them easily.
    1
  14. This news really isn't even news worthy. Really accidents happens.
    1
  15. william santos I know that very well. What I said was a joke.
    1
  16. Edgardo Peregrino Expect film can be manipulated and most filmers are on purpose trying to agitate cops. This is what I have seen so far. All they are doing is intimidating and harassing cops.
    1
  17. kay jay Ever watched those videos on youtube where gun nuts have a gun and keep insulting police just because they were about to give them a ticket?
    1
  18. ***** For what? Are you saying that it's impossible to manipulate film? Oh dear I guess you believe that movies are real.
    1
  19. Edgardo Peregrino Evidence for what? That film manipulating is possible. Or those youtube videos that those people have posted? Anyway you all failed.
    1
  20. ***** Nothing deflected. I asked confirmation of what you want for evidence and for what. You just yelled "evidence" I asked for what. I never claimed that there is epidemic. The fact that you used that word means that you are strawmanning me and most likely with dishonest intention.  Will you admit that I were right if I give link to video?
    1
  21. Rob McCune He has been journalist, also no I'm not authoritarian .
    1
  22. Rob McCune And where have I repeated 3rd party statement? Also with your reasoning everyone has authoritarian mindset.
    1
  23. +Matthew Iverson I like how for democrats it's either shillary who is corrupted as fuck, and Bernie who is socialists who would love to increase power of the corrupted state, guy who praised castro and spends honey moon in soviet russia. Needless to say. America is fuck, someone like Ron Swanson would be only type of a person who should be president.
    1
  24. +0oBlitzoo These aren't telemarketers, these are obviously scammers.
    1
  25. 0oBlitzoo Because there is difference. Otherone is trying to sell you stuff legally, while otherone is simply trying to rip you off.
    1
  26. 0oBlitzoo not really, in otherone you lose your whole account.
    1
  27. 0oBlitzoo 1. Doesn't matter, that is still the difference. 2. Price still doesn't make you have 0 in your account. 3. Shitty salesmen, and no one wants to do that as their job hence they leave early. 4. same as 3. In scam you need to lie. In telemarketing it's against the law, at least in civilized countries.
    1
  28. 0oBlitzoo Not dealing with either is the best. On that we both agree.
    1
  29. You don't seem to understand what melt down means.
    1
  30. +KaiserFailed At least you can laugh at it when Trump is president. :D
    1
  31. Alejandro Reyes I didn't know that? What the fuck he actually praised castro? That tyrant who slaughtered many people? Any sources for this claim?
    1
  32. Rob McCune I really need some sources for all of this. Anyone have link where he speaks about this subject?
    1
  33. Alejandro Reyes I wouldn't call a person as an idiot who's whole strategy during elections is to show middle finger to corrupted media in order to gain more publicity and gain votes of those who already are sick and tired of politics in states.
    1
  34. ***** I don't remember calling bernie dishonest nor sexists.
    1
  35. Alejandro Reyes Well regardless of that, he and bernie are unfortunately only realistic candidates. Though it would be hilarious to see Trump as president since UK wants to ban him. IT also seems that he is only candidate that Russia seems to be willing to deal with.
    1
  36. ***** I find it silly for anyone to believe that person who has spend decades in politics would be honest person. Especially in USA where corruption is on very high level. 
    1
  37. Rob McCune Ugh, I already feel dirty for clicking buzzfeed link. Well at least they provided video of him talking.
    1
  38. Anthony Serocco No you don't. Since wage gap is based on more than simply wage. That is why everyone states that it's a myth. Whole wage gap thing was  based on shitty math.
    1
  39. Actually if you bother to check back ground of products you will know are they gmo or not. However it's safe to assume that every product which isn't named as organic is gmo product. Reason why I avoid organic products. Because I want to have better food.
    1
  40. Technically they are as natural as "organic". Only natural food out there is the wild food, and none of those organic supporters actually eats them. If a ant's nests can be said to be natural then what ever humans create is also natural. But we all know that big companies are just a smartasses in this case. So In my eyes this is nothing more than parody and fucking around those idiotic organic supporters. 
    1
  41. DarthCipient It's funny how you can't see how your comment just proves my point. It's not the guns which cause crime. The fact that you totally can't see it even after your statement proves that you aren't thinking very deep.
    1
  42. ***** Actually many people make that claim. You can even rob people with a kitchen knife. They don't need to buy a gun from black market. Heck you can even make bombs from normal stuff that you can get from a grocery shop.
    1
  43. Both, also immigration is tied to economy.
    1
  44. +DarKool81 I'm atheist too. However I have no idea what that has to do with anything? You can still be stupid or ill informed. "Yet, I defend them as a persecuted minority in the West. Look at your definition again then take a look at yourself." By definition you're a bigot. You have irrational fear toward people who have different opinion than you about Islam. That is why you're intolerant toward such people when you notice them.
    1
  45. Conservatives will have a huge party. Because if he has a ebola it means that progressive people will die more likely than conservatives. Why? Because conservatives are racist, therefore less likely to deal with anyone from africa.
    1
  46. eqsmooth I have looked it's definition, but the moment church of flying spaghetti monster became official religion. The whole idea of religion went out of the window.
    1
  47. Meanwhile governments are doing underhanded secret trade dealings and all you guys and rest of the media are only talking about gun laws... Whole argument is just a distraction from the real pressing issues.
    1
  48. +Iskander ”Izzy” Aminov This, there was only 2 candidates that were the real good choices. Bernie and Trump. Personally I don't like any candidate, but those two are the best shot you guys got.
    1
  49. Well Jesus would torture. Haven't you guys heard anything about place called as hell? He is even more nuts than extremists from any religion.
    1
  50. Nice way of being dishonest and cherry pick stuff. There are cases where guns don't kill either. Fucking idiot...
    1