(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.

Quote:Artifice Wrote:
(Yesterday 11:05 PM)

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:  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.

Artificial and RockyMtSpotteFeverTick are still high from Tossing Shoes at the White House.

Dude I swear you are the Uber-Doomass Peanut Section Leader of your Local "We Are Ignorant, Yet Proud Liberals" club.

You are nothing but a Recorder that spits out MSM/MSP Talking Points in ever Post you offer.

You are so original that you pay some one to take dumps for you and then you marvel that your Tummy Hurts ....

You are Diseased Sputum Fodder in its worst form ......

.

(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.

I actually like O'Reilly. He's more liberal than me on some issues and more conservative on others, and he can certainly be a bit of an a**hole, but I still enjoy watching/listening. And the women he brings on regularly to discuss issues are certainly very, er, talented.

Hannity is GOP preacher.

The republican's in our office always laugh because Hannity doesn't allow his guests that don't share his view to talk. He asks them a question and as soon as they start answering he talks over them and answers his own question.

Rush isn't the greatest quick thinker on the air either, but if you give him a couple minutes he will make a good argument. He certainly is better at political commentary than Hannity. So is Bill Cunningham, a guy who Hannity has on his show fairly often (Cincinnati/700WLW afternoon host).

Boortz trumps both of those chumps, and he IS a quick thinker. Probably the wittiest on the air.

(01-20-2009 02:32 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 12:58 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 12:53 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  A little callous. Wheelchair as a metaphor.

It was inappropriate since he's supposed to be a reporter.

However, I thought of the metaphor myself. It does fit to some extent.

Matthews is an analyst not a reporter.

He couldn't analyze his navel.

He should go hunting with Dick Cheney ! ! ! I hear Mr. Cheney IS a GOOD SHOT ! ! !

(01-20-2009 04:34 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 04:24 PM)Tripster Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 12:58 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  It was inappropriate since he's supposed to be a reporter.

"Supposed" being the Key Word here.

If you didn't have time for a shower before the Chris Matthews Show, just sit close to him and by the time the interview is finished, you will be well swathed.

Pundit yes .... Reporter, not in a million years ....

.

NBC is now 100% pro democrat, no objectivity. They replace a class act like Tim Russert with a total dip wad like David Gregory. They also have a smug fool as Political analyst in Chuck "The Toad" Todd.

Um, you seem to forget Joe Scarborough. You know, the guy with the dead body in his office.

(01-21-2009 08:37 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(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?

THere are only 12 months in a year.

(01-20-2009 09:34 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  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.

Hannity does not tow the party line. He is for sale. Notice how many times he advertises for GM and Ruth Chris. He supported Guillani who was pro choice

(01-21-2009 02:13 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(01-21-2009 08:37 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(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?

THere are only 12 months in a year.

I meant times.

(01-21-2009 02:13 PM)RobertN Wrote:  THere are only 12 months in a year.

Oh NO NO NO little man !!!!!

There are "52 Weeks In a Year" .....

Do the math tater head and see if this comes out to "Exactly 12 Months" ....

.

Last I checked 365/7 /= 52....

(01-22-2009 08:37 AM)mlb Wrote:  Last I checked 365/7 /= 52....

So we just throw in a "LEAP YEAR" every 4th year because we just need another day to PARTY ???

OK .. have it your way .... Obama will make all your pains go away, anyway.

And just for fun and exercise, "if you are Paid every real two weeks and not just on the 1st and the 15th of the month" .... you strangely get "26 Checks" instead of 24 Checks" per year ????? !!!!!!!!

You know that old 'Thorn in Your Side' - - "24 Checks / 2 = 12 Months" and the ever ambiguous "26 Real Weeks Checks / 2 = 13 Months" ....

WOW and gag me with a spoon dude !!!!!!!

We need the Amazing Randy on on this one !!!!!!

But then I guess Obama'Magic is really working .....

(and please, I understand how the math works .. LOL)

.

I was just pointing out that you ripped on him for math, when yours was just the same... and I have never said anything about Obama fixing all of the issues we have as a country. I rip on both sides equally.

I think he was ripping on Robert (which is to easy, by the way) for ripping on Rebel for an honest typo.