(01-20-2009 07:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 07:33 PM)Tripster Wrote:  They are all trying to be Fox News and that is super funny since they hate them with a passion.
What causes all the others to fail where Fox succeeds, is simply the way Fox presents it's points of view ....
These other "News Outlets" just don't get it - - merely spewing hate is not the same thing as Fox News does - - at least Fox uses a bit of style in their method. These other guys go off all mental, inside rambling diatribes, that fall off the edge way before they make a coherent point.
They never learn and they won't give their Pundits the room to move where the pundit knows is the best direction to go at the time.
They try and fail miserably and for those who will scream it out: "I don't care that CNN is kicking butt on the Coronation of Christ Coverage, that is a Lame Effort anyway - - where is CNN's Story after today" ????

Am I the only one who thinks Sean Hannity is dumb? Obviously, he's not stupid, as I'm sure is obvious from his bank account. But I'm just not impressed with his commentary.

I've never really gotten into listening to him, and I think it's that he's just not that bright. I didn't think Alan Colmes was the sharpest tool in the shed either. I think the format was a great idea, but I don't know how many times I'd watch and one of them would say something that the other should just pounce on, and it went right over their head. I think the format would be great with two really sharp co-hosts.

If there is anyone at Fox News that could be labeled a ”RNC Shrill”, its Hannity. 90% of the time what he discusses on his radio show is the same stuff that I get from the RNC in my email box each morning.

(01-20-2009 08:24 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 07:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Sean Hannity is dumb? Obviously, he's not stupid, as I'm sure is obvious from his bank account. But I'm just not impressed with his commentary.

If there is anyone at Fox News that could be labeled a ”RNC Shrill”, its Hannity. 90% of the time what he discusses on his radio show is the same stuff that I get from the RNC in my email box each morning.

To be honest here, I liked Alan way more than I did Hannity .... I know I go off in my post, but freggin crabs man !!!!! Hannity just will not STFU !!!!!

I realize his passion, yet he dilutes it with all the rhetoric and in your face BS he feels he must use to substantiate his points.

Now against some of his guest, this is a needed strategy, but to use it almost 90% of the time is fairly tiring to listen too.

Alan always balanced the show out even though he was extremely quiet compared to Hannity.

.

Hannity tows the party line no matter what. Alan was more rational. They should have replaced him with Kirsten Powers. Not only is she easy on the eyes, but she provides a liberal point of view which gives the show credibility which is somethng you'll never accuse CBS or CNN of.

Um, when in the hell did Hannity ever portray himself as objective? You know, like that ******* Matthews?

Fox News revolutionized the news. They clearly had the better presentaion earlier on. They shook things up and the other two have been playing catch up. I watch Public Broadcasting or C Span now when I want real news. BBC isn't bad either.

Fox News has been VERY objective and unbiased. Hell, they're making ME sick the way they're fawning over a guy that has yet to do anything.

Was this 24 hour coverage happening when Bush was elected? If so, I damn sure don't remember it.

Rebel,

I thought that too. Every darn channel except NBC in my market. It's like Obamapalooza. He's coming off great though. It's a new day in America Reb.

(01-20-2009 10:38 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Rebel,

I thought that too. Every darn channel except NBC in my market. It's like Obamapalooza. He's coming off great though. It's a new day in America Reb.

Lemme ask you something. Lemme ask ALL you liberals something. Would you be reveling in jubilation if the new president was Michael Steele? Herman Cain? Both black? Would it STILL be a historic event for you? I don't see color. It's not historic for me. All I see is another money-grabbing liberal taking the oath of office. Now, if Steele or Cain were taking the oath? I'd be all over this board hootin' and hollerin' like a crazed teen at the end of the NC after my team won. Not because they're black, but because both of them are true conservatives. Mr. Cain being somewhat of a libertarian in the sense of Thomas Sowell.

You guys won. Enjoy it. .....but the **** he's promised, well, sorry, there's a reason presidents age probably 3 times as fast as everyone else.

I hope that 13% do the as I hope he does....go away.

I've wondered what the Bush presidency would of been liked if he didn't have Cheney. Another thing I've wondered is Iraq. Would Republican's still hold all threee branches of govt. if we planned it better or better yet kept Saddam bottled. I think that in itself broke the Elephant. The botching up of Saddam's hanging wasn't our finest moment either. I've never seen in my lifetime the decimation of the Big Red Machine. In Ohio they controlled darn near EVERY branch of govt. I literally think every one of them. The state house, senate, governor, and all the other stuff. I think the hold one state wide office now. I think it all goes back to Iraq. That was the lynchpin that broke.

No,, The reason I'm happy is I think the days of anything goes is over. We finally get some fiscal responsibility back. I promise you our debt won't quadruple. Jesus, that admiistration was a nightmare.

(01-20-2009 11:05 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've wondered what the Bush presidency would of been liked if he didn't have Cheney. Another thing I've wondered is Iraq. Would Republican's still hold all threee branches of govt. if we planned it better or better yet kept Saddam bottled. I think that in itself broke the Elephant. The botching up of Saddam's hanging wasn't our finest moment either. I've never seen in my lifetime the decimation of the Big Red Machine. In Ohio they controlled darn near EVERY branch of govt. I literally think every one of them. The state house, senate, governor, and all the other stuff. I think the hold one state wide office now. I think it all goes back to Iraq. That was the lynchpin that broke.

That's because you're a f'n kook conspiracy theorist who thinks Cheney has been in charge for the past 8 years.

Do you believe the towers were imploded by charges placed by the CIA/Military as well?

ALOT of Bush's problems can be placed at the feet of Cheney and Rummy. According to an article I read in Time or The Atlantic. Cheney filtered everything that went before the president. Early on he steered policy that way. f'n kook. I thought we were friends man.

(01-20-2009 11:08 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  No,, The reason I'm happy is I think the days of anything goes is over. We finally get some fiscal responsibility back. I promise you our debt won't quadruple. Jesus, that admiistration was a nightmare.

Lets hope you are right...but...I submit that the days of anything that the red gang favored as big government may not be any worse than the things the the blue gang may favor in regard to the theft of our wages.

I would love to hold you to your promise and I agree this admin. was a nightmare...but...unfortunately... We have absolute zero input as to what will happen. You and I are simply slaves on a very large plantation. Our masters have total control of us. Today was a shining example of how the masters remain in control. By giving the slaves reason to feel empowered and hopeful....control is much easier than bringing out the whip. Still...We will be robbed from the fruits of our labor and there is no where to run...no where to hide from these awful people that seek to control our lives.

I hold the same hope as you and I will try to remain as optimistic as I can...but...history is against us gaining true liberty in our lifetimes.

(01-20-2009 11:14 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  ALOT of Bush's problems can be placed at the feet of Cheney and Rummy. According to an article I read in Time or The Atlantic. Cheney filtered everything that went before the president. Early on he steered policy that way. f'n kook. I thought we were friends man.

Time? The Atlantic?

Well, that's it then. I read in the Enquirer that Obama was actually an alien, so it must be true.

Please Mach, don't bring up partisan f'n rags to defend your assertion. It's unbecoming. Oh, Time's not partisan? 13 times. 13 f'n times. In a YEAR.

Time = The Enquirer

come on man

(01-21-2009 08:15 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Time = The Enquirer

come on man

You're telling me that a magazine that had Obama on it's cover for 13 f'n months in a year is supposed to be unbiased?

(01-20-2009 10:38 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Rebel,

I thought that too. Every darn channel except NBC in my market. It's like Obamapalooza.

How many people were taken to DC Hospitals because they slipped and fell and broke bones in the "spooge" and mess along the Parade Route created by 500,000 or so "Multiple O-Gasms" when Obama walked by??

People think this guy is Jesus Christ or something.

Now you know what it was like to be at Nuremberg back in 1936....

(01-20-2009 11:05 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've wondered what the Bush presidency would of been liked if he didn't have Cheney.

Bush's only purpose was to be a stand in puppet for unelectable PNAC cronies like Cheney.

I hope that if we ever see him again it is behind bars. Probably for shooting another one of his "friends" in the face.

(01-21-2009 09:13 AM)Artifice Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 11:05 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I've wondered what the Bush presidency would of been liked if he didn't have Cheney.

Bush's only purpose was to be a stand in puppet for unelectable PNAC cronies like Cheney.

I hope that if we ever see him again it is behind bars. Probably for shooting another one of his "friends" in the face.