mimus wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 06:00:47 +0000, Tim Weaver wrote:
>
>> mimus wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:52:18 +0000, Tim Weaver wrote:
>>>
>>>> mimus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:58:55 +0000, Tim Weaver wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> mimus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:23:32 +0000, Tim Weaver wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mimus wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 05:46:52 +0000, Tim Weaver wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> mimus wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Did the venom finally break loose and swamp his brain?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I mean, sinking to being a semi-regular on FauxNews' Bill
>>>>>>>>>>> O'Reilly's show is sinking pretty low.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How do you know this? I thought you had your parental controls
>>>>>>>>>> set to sequester you from such things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, I believe I noted a week or two ago that my box blowed up
>>>>>>>>> and after resetting the only thing I blocked right off the bat
>>>>>>>>> was Nancy Grace, since I've come to the conclusion after CNN's
>>>>>>>>> sitting on the Oil Bubble story that CNN's just as crooked as
>>>>>>>>> FauxNews, and you just have to take what news, skewed however
>>>>>>>>> the particular channel skews whatever news it chooses to present
>>>>>>>>> in whatever way it chooses to present it, you can get, and read
>>>>>>>>> between the lines, like Pravda readers used to do, and,
>>>>>>>>> considering how Russia's going these days, probably have to do
>>>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <takes a deep breath>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OK?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, I do remember the Nancy Grace comment, now that you remind
>>>>>>>> me of it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I still actually haven't sunk low enough to watch Hannity or
>>>>>>>>> O'Reilly, they just get surfed across in search of news, which
>>>>>>>>> now that I think about it actually makes my having seen Miller
>>>>>>>>> on O'Reilly twice over the last couple of weeks even more
>>>>>>>>> startling . . . .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (And I might add that with friends as stupid as Lou Dobbs,
>>>>>>>>> populism doesn't need any enemies.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You know Colmes is leaving the show.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How would anyone be able to tell the difference?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True. It's pretty much been Hannity's show for the last few years,
>>>>>> anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's just going to be called "Hannity". This, BTW, is one show
>>>>>>>> on Fox I DO NOT watch. Watching Sean Hannity argue with a guest
>>>>>>>> by interrupting said guest three words into an answer after
>>>>>>>> having asked a question of them is no fun.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> O'Reilly does it, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You see that occasionally on the other channels, but it's really a
>>>>>>> FauxNews specialty, especially on their "name" shows, inviting
>>>>>>> "guests" onto the shows so that the "host" can interrupt and
>>>>>>> refute their opinions . . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O'Reilly is independent and is a news commentator. He argues his
>>>>>> points left or right. Hannity is hard right (not conservative) and
>>>>>> defends republicans and promotes their agenda no matter what.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It just sucks. I put Hannity just a bit left of Ann Coulter.
>>>>>>>> Move a little further left and there's Laura Ingraham. Keep
>>>>>>>> going and then you're somewhere near the center.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Continue and you end up with dumb-*** bastages like
>>>>>>>> left-wing-freak-a-zoid Al Franken.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Coulter shouldn't be on the list, which should be restricted to
>>>>>>> non-transsexual mammals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a bit harsh.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But Franken could spot the whole group you mentioned plus
>>>>>>> O'Reilly, Hume and Rush a cumulative ten IQ points each and still
>>>>>>> beat 'em all in simultaneous chess-matches.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same with morals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, you're just getting ridiculous. Franken is a hater and just
>>>>>> takes the opposite position and attacks anything on the right.
>>>>>
>>>>> He uses a few more facts . . . .
>>>>>
>>>>> Not to mention fact-checkers (see TeamFranken), wot plainly is a
>>>>> reely cushy gig on FauxNews, assuming they even have one.
>>>>
>>>> If you say so.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you ever _read_ _Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot_ or _Lying
>>>>>>> Lies and the Lying Liars that Tell Them_?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Parts of it (yes, in context). Right on par with Michael Moore in
>>>>>> the propaganda department.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now you're just being harsh: Michael Moore and Our President both
>>>>> believe that a smirk is an argument (Moore also plainly thinks a
>>>>> video-collage, especially with a rock-'n'-roll accompaniment, is
>>>>> one, too).
>>>>>
>>>>> But I'm reasonably sure Moore's a mammal, anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Grudgingly, I'll have to agree with you on this point.
>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, what _is_ the deal with Hume? didn't he used to work for a
>>>>>>> respectable network? as it is, he sounds and looks good for a
>>>>>>> news-anchor, but the guy gives every impression of being one of
>>>>>>> the proudest accomplishments of the short-bus crowd: Did he have a
>>>>>>> stroke or does he have some neurological syndrome? I'm serious.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's your beef with Brit? He just presents the political news
>>>>>> right down the middle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, _right_ (or Right): The ****** qualified for FauxNews by being a
>>>>> contributor to (IIRC) _National Review_ . . . :
>>>>>
>>>>> He's about as centrist as Olberman and Maddow.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care what you believe his politics to be, I'm talking about
>>>> how he presents the news and discusses it. He plays pretty fair.
>>>>
>>>>>> You'll have to give me some examples of how Hume is a bad guy.
>>>>>> He's out as of next week, anyway. Retiring. But, will sub and be
>>>>>> on a panel here and there for a while, yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> He doesn't seem . . . painfully . . . slow . . . and . . . slow . .
>>>>> . on . . . the . . . up- . . . take . . . to . . . you?
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>>> It's quite plain to me.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps.
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's just Pre-Retirement Syndrome.
>>>>
>>>> You or him?
>>>>
>>>>>>>> But, you know... All sorts, all opinions, all ****. My guy is
>>>>>>>> still Ron Paul. Heil Paul!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've just down-graded you from A to B+.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And stuck you on the Watch List (quicker monitoring turn-around
>>>>>>> for up- or down-grades).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's my grade, now?
>>>>>
>>>>> B and sinking. Comparing Franken to Moore is a serious
>>>>> misrepresentation of who likes facts-- especially when you can stuff
>>>>> 'em right up Limbaugh etc.-- and who can and often does slide right
>>>>> by without 'em.
>>>>
>>>> There's the second time you've mentioned Rush. I don't care for
>>>> Limbaugh. He's **** near Coulter. He calls himself a Conservative,
>>>> not a Republican. Not true. He fiercely defends ~almost~ everything
>>>> the right has to say and does.
>>>>
>>>>> BTW, have you noticed (I did tonight) that Hannity etc. are starting
>>>>> to shriek about how Obama's gonna be a (I guess) "regulationist"?
>>>>
>>>> I don't watch Hannity. Didn't I mention that? Argument Tee-Vee.
>>>> No, thank you. Much of the chatter as of late is the questioning of
>>>> weather Caroline Kennedy is qualified for the Senate. I'm guessing
>>>> Governor David (I Can't See Nuthin'!!!) Paterson will grant her the
>>>> appointment.
>>>>
>>>> (was that mean?)
>>>>
>>>>> Ain't no money in them ever learning anything, I guess.
>>>>
>>>> Only in how to play the game.
>>>>
>>>>> Even from national and global economic disasters.
>>>>
>>>> Let's see who has what percentage of the money in seven to ten years.
>>>> Those will be the people who understand.
>>>
>>> "Seven to ten years"? what about right now?
>>
>> In seven to ten years the people with the money will be the people who
>> understand and probably had a hand in the lovely economic state we
>> enjoy, today.
>>
>>>> This is sounding very much like a political debate. I thought I
>>>> didn't discuss politics or religion. I must have missed my memo.
>>>
>>> Yep. Take it to us.politics. They's some reel nahce peepul thayer.
>>
>> I read some of the stuff there and some other political groups a couple
>> of years or so back. The pub groups are full of trash talking dems and
>> the dem groups are full of trash talking pubs.
>>
>> And then there's a.f.rush-limbaugh. Yep, some good readin' in there.
>> Pflfflblblttt!!!111!
>
> DITTO
>
> us.politics is sort of a political "smoldering crater", with very very
> few actual mono-posts.
I prefer reading the wise words of Dr. Daniel Joseph Min from
alt.conspiracy. I think that's what he called/calls himself. Very prolific
and somewhat interesting.
--
Tim Weaver
I know you believe you understand what you think I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not
what I meant.