> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann.
I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I can't stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest Faux Pas on Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them less and less all the time however.
>> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann.
>I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little >of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I can't >stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest Faux Pas on >Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them less and less >all the time however.
Schultz is a clown ... Obermann has become MSNBC's Bill'O....Maddow was a bright spot, but is fading...Matthews still has the best guests, but seems to have lost his balls....Fox ain't worth watching at all ... when the football season ends I'll just cancel directv and save myself .....
Tara Green wrote: > Fred Exley wrote: >> Tara Green wrote: >>> JoeRaisin wrote: >>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>> Tara Green wrote: >>>>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Rob D. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 4:52 pm, "Rob D." <fr.robert....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am typing this on my MacBook, >>>>>>>>>>>>> under OSX, running a VirtualBox of UNR 9.10.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and oddly enough, sound works on it while running a VB >>>>>>>>>>>> on my >>>>>>>>>>>> MacBook. Go figure.
>>>>>>>>>>> The Lord works in mysterious ways.
>>>>>>>>>> And speaks in tongues....apparently.
>>>>>>>>> Seen one church ya seem em all. Woe is me, I'm a sick puppy. >>>>>>>>> I just saw this scene for the first time and it made me laugh >>>>>>>>> like hell. My mother was right, I /am/ hopeless.
>>>>>>>> Pretty funny what orthodox Muslims do too. Like today, fer >>>>>>>> instance.
>>>>>>> What in the world are you referring to?
>>>>>>>> How come it's fashionable for the politically correct liberal to >>>>>>>> bash Christianity, and at the same time, no matter what, >>>>>>>> studiously ignore the myriad atrocities committed in the name of >>>>>>>> Islam?
>>>>>>> Whats a politically correct liberal? What in the world are you >>>>>>> referring to? Back on the high octane caffeine again?
>>>>>> I watched the Fox coverage of the story earlier, and now I'm >>>>>> watching Rachael Maddow for the MSNBC version. Same story, but so >>>>>> far there isn't the slightest fact in common being reported by the >>>>>> two camps.
>>>>> Thanks for filling me in on what you were talking about. Why you >>>>> chose to jump on a post that was a joke is curious.
>>>>>> The Fox version: A muslim Army officer, not wanting to go to >>>>>> overseas to fight fellow muslims, killed 12 people.
>>>>>> The MSNBC version: There is much confusion about what happened at >>>>>> Fort Hood because the US Army corrected prior incorrect statements >>>>>> that the shooter was killed. Then they brought in Jim >>>>>> McLshitheadsky, who poo-pooed the Army's lack of clarity in >>>>>> handling presenting the facts straight. I kid you not. Not one >>>>>> mention about the shooter's motives, only critisism of the Army. >>>>>> Un-fucking believable.
>>>>>> If you're relying on MSNBC to get the story, you will be >>>>>> thoroughly misled.
>>>>> You're kidding, right? "All propaganda all the time" Fox has >>>>> convicted the guy of being a Muslim and you are ready to join the >>>>> lynching party.
>>>> "Convicted" of being in a religion?
>>>> Uhm... You do know that the guy IS a Muslim, right?
>>> Did you read Exley's lead-in line?
>>> According to Exley, he was an "*Orthodox Muslim*".
>>> Not sure where he's getting his inside info though.
>> Fox interviewed the man's cousin. You might want to tune in to hear >> their reporting of the incident, even if you 'just know' Fox is full >> of shit. If nothing else, the polar opposite manner in the style Fox >> is presenting the story contrasted with how MSNBC is presenting the >> story is fascinating, indeed.
> I'm not interested in comparing whose coverage is more partisan. 'll > leave that to those with partisan agendas to promote. I'd rather hear > decent reporting and good facts coming through....even if those facts > are that the flurry of "information" being broadcast can't be verified > or confirmed by anyone who is investigating.
> For some reason, I just don't think my hearing every rumor the second it > comes out of an anchorperson's mouth does one thing to enhance the > investigation or the furtherance of truth.
> Like I said: I'd rather be patient and wait to hear truth (whatever that > is) than suck on every teat offered by those who are in a rush to > promote their own newshounding abilities.
Very admirable. My point is we'll *never* get it from some sources. Fox nailed it correctly on day one. The Rachel Maddow show will *never* do so. Even today, while CBS and all the mainstream media reported the man was driven by his Islamic faith, MSNBC studiously avoided this salient fact, preferring instead to imply this 'mysterious' shooting was somehow the fault of the Army, or bullying, or stress -anything but the truth. Pure garbage masquerading as journalism.
Tara Green wrote: > JoeRaisin wrote: >> Tara Green wrote: >>> Charlie M. 1958 wrote: >>>> Tara Green wrote:
>>>>> I figured I would hold off on obsessively following the story so >>>>> that I could hear the story after the bozos got all the facts >>>>> straight....like that the gunman WASN'T killed. Just THAT took >>>>> everybody multiple hours to get right.
>>>> My thoughts as well.
>>>> No matter the network, in the race to babble first and most, the >>>> facts are of secondary importance.
>>> Exactly. Those that hang on each breath exhaled by the talking heads >>> as thought their need to know impacts events....
>>> well, I just don;t get it. Those that follow with that impulse tend >>> to trade truth for immediacy.
>>> No thanks.
>> Speaking of watching breaking news -
>> Just got home from work and am seeing that there was anther shooting.
>> "Disgruntled former employee" type deal.
>> Where the hell are we going, and why are we in this hand-basket...
>> Screw it - gonna round up the better half and and take her out to >> dinner and a movie...
>> Thinking maybe "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs."
> Good choice.
> I'm probably going with "Hostel - The Director's Cut"
> Either movie beats the reality on the news these days :-P
We ended up seeing "This Is It".
I highly recommend it.
Good night all around - we haven't been out much this year.
Great steak, great movie, great company...
Feeling much more optimistic today.
Leaving the TV off and going out to clean up some leaves.
Fred Exley wrote: > Tara Green wrote: >> Fred Exley wrote: >>> Tara Green wrote: >>>> JoeRaisin wrote: >>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Tara Green wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Rob D. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 4:52 pm, "Rob D." <fr.robert....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am typing this on my MacBook, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> under OSX, running a VirtualBox of UNR 9.10.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and oddly enough, sound works on it while running a VB >>>>>>>>>>>>> on my >>>>>>>>>>>>> MacBook. Go figure.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Lord works in mysterious ways.
>>>>>>>>>>> And speaks in tongues....apparently.
>>>>>>>>>> Seen one church ya seem em all. Woe is me, I'm a sick puppy. >>>>>>>>>> I just saw this scene for the first time and it made me laugh >>>>>>>>>> like hell. My mother was right, I /am/ hopeless.
>>>>>>>>> Pretty funny what orthodox Muslims do too. Like today, fer >>>>>>>>> instance.
>>>>>>>> What in the world are you referring to?
>>>>>>>>> How come it's fashionable for the politically correct liberal >>>>>>>>> to bash Christianity, and at the same time, no matter what, >>>>>>>>> studiously ignore the myriad atrocities committed in the name >>>>>>>>> of Islam?
>>>>>>>> Whats a politically correct liberal? What in the world are you >>>>>>>> referring to? Back on the high octane caffeine again?
>>>>>>> I watched the Fox coverage of the story earlier, and now I'm >>>>>>> watching Rachael Maddow for the MSNBC version. Same story, but >>>>>>> so far there isn't the slightest fact in common being reported by >>>>>>> the two camps.
>>>>>> Thanks for filling me in on what you were talking about. Why you >>>>>> chose to jump on a post that was a joke is curious.
>>>>>>> The Fox version: A muslim Army officer, not wanting to go to >>>>>>> overseas to fight fellow muslims, killed 12 people.
>>>>>>> The MSNBC version: There is much confusion about what happened at >>>>>>> Fort Hood because the US Army corrected prior incorrect >>>>>>> statements that the shooter was killed. Then they brought in Jim >>>>>>> McLshitheadsky, who poo-pooed the Army's lack of clarity in >>>>>>> handling presenting the facts straight. I kid you not. Not one >>>>>>> mention about the shooter's motives, only critisism of the Army. >>>>>>> Un-fucking believable.
>>>>>>> If you're relying on MSNBC to get the story, you will be >>>>>>> thoroughly misled.
>>>>>> You're kidding, right? "All propaganda all the time" Fox has >>>>>> convicted the guy of being a Muslim and you are ready to join the >>>>>> lynching party.
>>>>> "Convicted" of being in a religion?
>>>>> Uhm... You do know that the guy IS a Muslim, right?
>>>> Did you read Exley's lead-in line?
>>>> According to Exley, he was an "*Orthodox Muslim*".
>>>> Not sure where he's getting his inside info though.
>>> Fox interviewed the man's cousin. You might want to tune in to hear >>> their reporting of the incident, even if you 'just know' Fox is full >>> of shit. If nothing else, the polar opposite manner in the style Fox >>> is presenting the story contrasted with how MSNBC is presenting the >>> story is fascinating, indeed.
>> I'm not interested in comparing whose coverage is more partisan. 'll >> leave that to those with partisan agendas to promote. I'd rather hear >> decent reporting and good facts coming through....even if those facts >> are that the flurry of "information" being broadcast can't be verified >> or confirmed by anyone who is investigating.
>> For some reason, I just don't think my hearing every rumor the second >> it comes out of an anchorperson's mouth does one thing to enhance the >> investigation or the furtherance of truth.
>> Like I said: I'd rather be patient and wait to hear truth (whatever >> that is) than suck on every teat offered by those who are in a rush >> to promote their own newshounding abilities.
> Very admirable. My point is we'll *never* get it from some sources. Fox > nailed it correctly on day one. The Rachel Maddow show will *never* do > so. Even today, while CBS and all the mainstream media reported the man > was driven by his Islamic faith, MSNBC studiously avoided this salient > fact, preferring instead to imply this 'mysterious' shooting was somehow > the fault of the Army, or bullying, or stress -anything but the truth. > Pure garbage masquerading as journalism.
>>>>> Oh my god....if anything, Jon downplayed it! >>>> Agreed. Jon was brilliant. I presume you watched Olbermann go over >>>> the Beck rant and pick it apart:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctXlo1r7AIk&feature=related >>> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann. >> I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little >> of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I can't >> stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest Faux Pas on >> Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them less and less >> all the time however.
A little to theatrical sometimes but stays on topic and treats guests with respect. Knows her material.
> Matthews still has the best guests, but seems to have lost his balls....
If you're lucky, you'll find out what his guests actually think because the fucker asks a question and then keeps interrupting and changing the question while the person is trying go answer. He /is/ a good /Comrade/ though.
> Fox ain't worth watching at all ...
Unless....., you need righteous indignation to keep you going.
> when the football season ends I'll just cancel directv and save > myself .....
You think you can last till the *Super* *Bowl*???? :)
> On Nov 6, 9:19 am, "F.H." <connectut...@verizon.net> wrote: >> JoeRaisin wrote: >> > F.H. wrote: >> >> Fred Exley wrote: >> >>> F.H. wrote: >> >>>> Fred Exley wrote: >> >>>>> F.H. wrote: >> >>>>>> Tara Green wrote: >> >>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >> >>>>>>>> Rob D. wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 4:52 pm, "Rob D." <fr.robert....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> I am typing this on my MacBook, >> >>>>>>>>>> under OSX, running a VirtualBox of UNR 9.10.
>> >>>>>>>>> Oh, and oddly enough, sound works on it while running a VB on >> >>>>>>>>> my >> >>>>>>>>> MacBook. Go figure.
>> >>>>>>>> The Lord works in mysterious ways.
>> >>>>>>> And speaks in tongues....apparently.
>> >>>>>> Seen one church ya seem em all. Woe is me, I'm a sick puppy. I >> >>>>>> just saw this scene for the first time and it made me laugh like >> >>>>>> hell. My mother was right, I /am/ hopeless.
>> >>>>> Pretty funny what orthodox Muslims do too. Like today, fer >> >>>>> instance.
>> >>>> What in the world are you referring to?
>> >>>>> How come it's fashionable for the politically correct liberal to >> >>>>> bash Christianity, and at the same time, no matter what, studiously >> >>>>> ignore the myriad atrocities committed in the name of Islam?
>> >>>> Whats a politically correct liberal? What in the world are you >> >>>> referring to? Back on the high octane caffeine again?
>> >>> I watched the Fox coverage of the story earlier, and now I'm watching >> >>> Rachael Maddow for the MSNBC version. Same story, but so far there >> >>> isn't the slightest fact in common being reported by the two camps.
>> >> Thanks for filling me in on what you were talking about. Why you >> >> chose to jump on a post that was a joke is curious.
>> >>> The Fox version: A muslim Army officer, not wanting to go to overseas >> >>> to fight fellow muslims, killed 12 people.
>> >>> The MSNBC version: There is much confusion about what happened at >> >>> Fort Hood because the US Army corrected prior incorrect statements >> >>> that the shooter was killed. Then they brought in Jim >> >>> McLshitheadsky, who poo-pooed the Army's lack of clarity in handling >> >>> presenting the facts straight. I kid you not. Not one mention about >> >>> the shooter's motives, only critisism of the Army. Un-fucking >> >>> believable.
>> >>> If you're relying on MSNBC to get the story, you will be thoroughly >> >>> misled.
>> >> You're kidding, right? "All propaganda all the time" Fox has >> >> convicted the guy of being a Muslim and you are ready to join the >> >> lynching party.
>> > "Convicted" of being in a religion?
>> > Uhm... You do know that the guy IS a Muslim, right?
>> > What role that played in his decision remains to be seen.
>> That was my point.
>> >> If you ever get busted, you deserve a jury of like minded citizens, >> >> people who get their facts from conservative pundits. "Un-fucking >> >> believable" indeed.
>> > Original reports also said the police officer who stopped him was >> > killed. But now it seems that, though she is seriously hurt, she is >> > alive.
>> >> I purposely avoided *all* the talking heads for the simple reason that >> >> it will be news 24/7 for Gawd knows how long. I did notice the >> >> shooter was a doctor, not a soldier. How did your trusted servants at >> >> Fox conclude that he would be killing *anyone*?
>> > Psychiatrist.
>> Right. Usually addressed as doctor______
> And M.D., as a matter of fact. their specialty could be referred to > as "disease of the mind," the same way an oncologist is a doctor who > deals with cancer, a hematologist specialized in blood, and a > proctologist specializes in Sharx. . .
>>> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann.
>>I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little >>of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I can't >>stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest Faux Pas on >>Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them less and less >>all the time however.
> Schultz is a clown ... Obermann has become MSNBC's Bill'O....Maddow > was a bright spot, but is fading...Matthews still has the best guests, > but seems to have lost his balls....Fox ain't worth watching at all > ... when the football season ends I'll just cancel directv and save > myself .....
Uh, people, there IS A FUCKING WORLD outside of the TV screen, you know.
>>> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann.
>> I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little >> of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I >> can't stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest >> Faux Pas on Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them >> less and less all the time however.
> Everything seems so politically tainted now, I occassionally watch Brian > William or Katie Couric. > It has occurred to me that there really isn't much I can do about what > politicians do or businesses do or what people on newsgroups say or > believe, etc. What I think doesn't really matter, it's just an exercise > once in a while to see if I can still think without falling over.
Heh.
> I am mostly fear driven anyway so its not a good idea to listen to fear > mongers, right? I think the die was cast long ago for me and I don't > seem to have changed much but the way I talk or write sometimes in a > lame attempt to think that I might actually know something. I don't, of > course because the big picture swallowed me up long before I got to > where I am now....watching to see who is going to do something to > (mostly) screw me out of some money or peace of mind.
But not the preachers Gar, /they/ want to /help/ you. <eg>
> I remember a guy in AA who said something that registered for me. I've > lived all of my life with financial insecurity, even during so-called >'good times'. What this guy said was that he realized that money would > not cure his financial insecurity....ironic, of course, but so much said.
I have several friends who are quite wealthy. They seem more fearful than I would have thought. One friend said, "making money was easy, keeping it is what keeps me awake nights."
> Making some kind of good impression on other people also does not relieve > my personal insecurities and fears. I have to learn to live with all that > I've been 'given' and hopefully not make it worse by creating some fictional > Gar.
Fred Exley wrote: > Tara Green wrote: >> Fred Exley wrote: >>> Tara Green wrote: >>>> JoeRaisin wrote: >>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>> Fred Exley wrote: >>>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Tara Green wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> F.H. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Rob D. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 4:52 pm, "Rob D." <fr.robert....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am typing this on my MacBook, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> under OSX, running a VirtualBox of UNR 9.10.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and oddly enough, sound works on it while running a VB >>>>>>>>>>>>> on my >>>>>>>>>>>>> MacBook. Go figure.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Lord works in mysterious ways.
>>>>>>>>>>> And speaks in tongues....apparently.
>>>>>>>>>> Seen one church ya seem em all. Woe is me, I'm a sick puppy. >>>>>>>>>> I just saw this scene for the first time and it made me laugh >>>>>>>>>> like hell. My mother was right, I /am/ hopeless.
>>>>>>>>> Pretty funny what orthodox Muslims do too. Like today, fer >>>>>>>>> instance.
>>>>>>>> What in the world are you referring to?
>>>>>>>>> How come it's fashionable for the politically correct liberal >>>>>>>>> to bash Christianity, and at the same time, no matter what, >>>>>>>>> studiously ignore the myriad atrocities committed in the name >>>>>>>>> of Islam?
>>>>>>>> Whats a politically correct liberal? What in the world are you >>>>>>>> referring to? Back on the high octane caffeine again?
>>>>>>> I watched the Fox coverage of the story earlier, and now I'm >>>>>>> watching Rachael Maddow for the MSNBC version. Same story, but >>>>>>> so far there isn't the slightest fact in common being reported by >>>>>>> the two camps.
>>>>>> Thanks for filling me in on what you were talking about. Why you >>>>>> chose to jump on a post that was a joke is curious.
>>>>>>> The Fox version: A muslim Army officer, not wanting to go to >>>>>>> overseas to fight fellow muslims, killed 12 people.
>>>>>>> The MSNBC version: There is much confusion about what happened at >>>>>>> Fort Hood because the US Army corrected prior incorrect >>>>>>> statements that the shooter was killed. Then they brought in Jim >>>>>>> McLshitheadsky, who poo-pooed the Army's lack of clarity in >>>>>>> handling presenting the facts straight. I kid you not. Not one >>>>>>> mention about the shooter's motives, only critisism of the Army. >>>>>>> Un-fucking believable.
>>>>>>> If you're relying on MSNBC to get the story, you will be >>>>>>> thoroughly misled.
>>>>>> You're kidding, right? "All propaganda all the time" Fox has >>>>>> convicted the guy of being a Muslim and you are ready to join the >>>>>> lynching party.
>>>>> "Convicted" of being in a religion?
>>>>> Uhm... You do know that the guy IS a Muslim, right?
>>>> Did you read Exley's lead-in line?
>>>> According to Exley, he was an "*Orthodox Muslim*".
>>>> Not sure where he's getting his inside info though.
>>> Fox interviewed the man's cousin. You might want to tune in to hear >>> their reporting of the incident, even if you 'just know' Fox is full >>> of shit. If nothing else, the polar opposite manner in the style Fox >>> is presenting the story contrasted with how MSNBC is presenting the >>> story is fascinating, indeed.
>> I'm not interested in comparing whose coverage is more partisan. 'll >> leave that to those with partisan agendas to promote. I'd rather hear >> decent reporting and good facts coming through....even if those facts >> are that the flurry of "information" being broadcast can't be verified >> or confirmed by anyone who is investigating.
>> For some reason, I just don't think my hearing every rumor the second >> it comes out of an anchorperson's mouth does one thing to enhance the >> investigation or the furtherance of truth.
>> Like I said: I'd rather be patient and wait to hear truth (whatever >> that is) than suck on every teat offered by those who are in a rush >> to promote their own newshounding abilities.
> Very admirable. My point is we'll *never* get it from some sources. Fox > nailed it correctly on day one.
As long as you ignore all the facts they got wrong, you mean? After the fact spin being a forte on that channel....
> The Rachel Maddow show will *never* do > so. Even today, while CBS and all the mainstream media reported the man > was driven by his Islamic faith, MSNBC studiously avoided this salient > fact, preferring instead to imply this 'mysterious' shooting was somehow > the fault of the Army, or bullying, or stress -anything but the truth. > Pure garbage masquerading as journalism.
Funny. The authorities don't even KNOW the "truth" of what was behind this attack yet.
Maybe you ought to offer your services (and that of your Fox news) to those doing the investigation. They clearly need that arrow straight bee-line to The Truth you seem to know how to isolate on each channel. Magical....
On Nov 7, 11:03 am, Gary I've lived all of my life with financial insecurity, even during so- called 'good times'.
> What this guy said was that he realized that money would not cure his > financial insecurity....ironic, of course, but so much said.
I've lived in poverty and up to upper middle class most of my life but in sobriety I learned to save. The result is that having enough money provides some emotional security but it mostly provides comfort and being comfortable is ok by me:-) Jim
>>>>>> Oh my god....if anything, Jon downplayed it! >>>>> Agreed. Jon was brilliant. I presume you watched Olbermann go over >>>>> the Beck rant and pick it apart:
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctXlo1r7AIk&feature=related >>>> Nah. I'll check out the link, but I don't really watch Olbermann. >>> I never watch Fox. With MSNBC I watch a little of Olbermann, a little >>> of Maddow and a little of Ed Schultz. Goz won't believe it but I can't >>> stand Chris Matthews either. The only way I know the latest Faux Pas on >>> Fox or Rush is by way of MSNBC. I'm watching all of them less and less >>> all the time however.
Cherry picks all the agree with me guests. Then wastes half a show with pot shots at Billy O & Beck.
>> Maddow was a bright spot, but is fading...
>A little to theatrical sometimes but stays on topic and treats guests >with respect. Knows her material.
I'm 50/50 on her .... she's starting to lean too much.
>> Matthews still has the best guests, but seems to have lost his balls....
>If you're lucky, you'll find out what his guests actually think because >the fucker asks a question and then keeps interrupting and changing the >question while the person is trying go answer. He /is/ a good /Comrade/ >though.
At first he whacked one & all ... now he just does it to the easy ones.
>> Fox ain't worth watching at all ...
>Unless....., you need righteous indignation to keep you going.
>> when the football season ends I'll just cancel directv and save >> myself .....
>You think you can last till the *Super* *Bowl*???? :)
Just to the end of the playoffs ... the Super B is more often than not a dud. Plus, the long wait and BS attached to it makes ya want to just skip it.
>> Tex wrote: >>> Obermann has become MSNBC's Bill'O.... >> Doesn't have people on and then browbeat them. > Cherry picks all the agree with me guests. Then wastes half a show > with pot shots at Billy O & Beck.
Don't forget Rush, he makes worst persons almost every day. I think it was yesterday that Keith gave a total for the number of times Rush has referred to the anus or made anal jokes and suggested Rush has an anal fixation. Rush had said "that if the British Prime Minister keeps "slobbering" over President Barack Obama, he'll "come down with anal poisoning and may die from it."
|
