5 ms·

He really comes off as a sociopath if you check his Twitter, where he calls someone a moron, keeps attacking Elizabeth Warren, and treats Alex Jones/Info Wars a

He really comes off as a sociopath if you check his Twitter, where he calls someone a moron, keeps attacking Elizabeth Warren, and treats Alex Jones/Info Wars as a serious media outlet [0]. Also, it's hilarious that he considers himself the target of a racist conspiracy but goes to great lengths to deny that Trump's and Bannon's racist politics. And this is a guy who is running for senate. [0] https://twitter.com/va_shiva https://twitter.com/va_shiva

elandybarr 9y ago
I have spoken to him at length myself. If you don't think Infowars is a serious news outlet, maybe you haven't watched them? In about 20 years they have had I think 3 retractions, which a propaganda rag like CNN or the Washington Post has to do weekly. I would wish that HN would have more people who care about primary sources - that is what my academic training taught me. Perhaps if you listened to any of Bannon's speeches rather than malicious rumor and hearsay, you would have a different opinion.
- icelancer 9y ago
  >I would wish that HN would have more people who care about primary sources >If you don't think Infowars is a serious news outlet, maybe you haven't watched them Sometimes the comments write themselves.
- moonman272 9y ago
  They don't have retractions because they don't care about accuracy, whereas places like CNN will issue retractions or corrections for anything as simple as a spelling error. Your argument is like saying a football team is the best team in baseball because they've never lost a baseball game.
- mcphage 9y ago
  They had to do one a month or so ago because they were peddling an insane theory involving yogurt.
  - bcg1 9y ago
    And pizzagate http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-apologizes-for-promoting-pizzagate http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/...
- PhasmaFelis 9y ago
  Again, Alex Jones has literally claimed that the world is controlled by Satanists and lizard men from space. It is not to his credit that he hasn't retracted those claims.
aeleos 9y ago
Treating Alex Jones as a serious media outlet is honestly the worst offense here. This guy has stated on multiple occasions in great detail that he believes that the Newtown shooting was faked and everyone was hired actors, that there is some great deep state conspiracy and other fear mongering shit about how the various politicians are the devil and will destroy the world.
- voidz 9y ago
  The thing that bugs me most about your comment is that it introduces fallacious groupthink (argument based on authority I guess) that makes it difficult for anyone with a different opinion to speak out: "if you trust such and so (i.c. Alex Jones), you're a moron a priori." This type of reasoning should be discouraged on HN in the same way that "did you even read"-type comments should be (and are) discouraged, because I think that both stifle civil and open discussion. And both of these things can be said in better, less excluding, and less hostile ways.
  - colejohnson66 9y ago
    This is getting off topic, but Popehat calls this the "Nazi Exception"[0] > Yes, rights are important, and we must offer them generously. But surely we can agree that Nazis don't have rights? [0]: https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-the-nazi-exception/ https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-t...
    - yongjik 9y ago
      Well, in this particular case, it seems "Nazis" do have rights, because Alex Jones is apparently having a profitable business and nobody's throwing him into jail.
  - danaliv 9y ago
    > "if you trust such and so (i.c. Alex Jones), you're a moron a priori." This type of reasoning should be discouraged A fine position on its face in the general case, but let's be real here: if you trust Alex Jones specifically, you really are a moron.

elandybarr 9y ago

I have spoken to him at length myself. If you don't think Infowars is a serious news outlet, maybe you haven't watched them? In about 20 years they have had I think 3 retractions, which a propaganda rag like CNN or the Washington Post has to do weekly. I would wish that HN would have more people who care about primary sources - that is what my academic training taught me. Perhaps if you listened to any of Bannon's speeches rather than malicious rumor and hearsay, you would have a different opinion.

icelancer 9y ago
>I would wish that HN would have more people who care about primary sources >If you don't think Infowars is a serious news outlet, maybe you haven't watched them Sometimes the comments write themselves.
moonman272 9y ago
They don't have retractions because they don't care about accuracy, whereas places like CNN will issue retractions or corrections for anything as simple as a spelling error. Your argument is like saying a football team is the best team in baseball because they've never lost a baseball game.
mcphage 9y ago
They had to do one a month or so ago because they were peddling an insane theory involving yogurt.
- bcg1 9y ago
  And pizzagate http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-apologizes-for-promoting-pizzagate http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/...
PhasmaFelis 9y ago
Again, Alex Jones has literally claimed that the world is controlled by Satanists and lizard men from space. It is not to his credit that he hasn't retracted those claims.

aeleos 9y ago

Treating Alex Jones as a serious media outlet is honestly the worst offense here. This guy has stated on multiple occasions in great detail that he believes that the Newtown shooting was faked and everyone was hired actors, that there is some great deep state conspiracy and other fear mongering shit about how the various politicians are the devil and will destroy the world.

voidz 9y ago
The thing that bugs me most about your comment is that it introduces fallacious groupthink (argument based on authority I guess) that makes it difficult for anyone with a different opinion to speak out: "if you trust such and so (i.c. Alex Jones), you're a moron a priori." This type of reasoning should be discouraged on HN in the same way that "did you even read"-type comments should be (and are) discouraged, because I think that both stifle civil and open discussion. And both of these things can be said in better, less excluding, and less hostile ways.
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  This is getting off topic, but Popehat calls this the "Nazi Exception"[0] > Yes, rights are important, and we must offer them generously. But surely we can agree that Nazis don't have rights? [0]: https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-the-nazi-exception/ https://www.popehat.com/2017/04/18/the-seductive-appeal-of-t...
  - yongjik 9y ago
    Well, in this particular case, it seems "Nazis" do have rights, because Alex Jones is apparently having a profitable business and nobody's throwing him into jail.
- danaliv 9y ago
  > "if you trust such and so (i.c. Alex Jones), you're a moron a priori." This type of reasoning should be discouraged A fine position on its face in the general case, but let's be real here: if you trust Alex Jones specifically, you really are a moron.