SuperJerk

The elitist board. Enter at your own risk.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090503/ap_on_re_us/us_obit_kemp Jack Kemp was the epitome of everything I once believed in politically. I voted for him for VP in 1996, and I really think people with his since of honor and decency are an endangered species in politics.

(This is both my contribution to the topic and my reaction to the above.)

I am wondering what part of that criteria would explain why you guys would want to keep Xavier Cromartie out. I said before that elitism isn't always a bad thing, because there's situations where being selective is warranted, but the picking and choosing that I've seen, coupled with comments made by people who post over there, is leading me to believe no real criteria for exclusion has been except juvenile whims of a bunch of guys who are abusing the tiny amount of power they've somehow acquired.

Let's be fair, here...I think I was the first one to throw the "elitist" term around. That might be a misnomer, though, considering there's not real definition of "elite" that the other board's membership (based on who isn't posting here anymore) might fit into. Maybe the rationale that very few are being discriminated against might be easier to swallow if some objective criteria for exclusion was established. Just unpopularity is a shitty criteria. For instance, MikeSC broke every rule TSM had, but when he was finally banned, so many people were pissed to see him kicked off, The Pit grew an instant brigade of members. He was an asshole to everyone at every opportunity, but there was a group of people he was popular with. Based on the subjective criteria mentioned already, he might very well be the kind of poster you guys are looking for.

The whole thing only lasted 5 episodes, didn't it? I remember really liking it until the cop-out ending.

Supposedly there are 3 alternate post-credit endings which will be shown at different theaters.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30508968/ This doesn't have as much impact as if one of the conservatives retiring, since you'll basically just be replacing one liberal-tilting justice with another, but it will be interesting to see who the president picks to replace him.

Tom DeLay was on Hardball today defending how the Republicans handled this fiasco. Reminded me of all the good time we had in this thread. *sigh*

That was fun. Some of you guys were fucking eerily accurate.

I was assuming the reason you linked to the Politico column was because you agreed with it. His point seemed to be more partisan spin than objective media criticism. Sorry if I was being unfair.

Um...that study YOU JUST CITED says that Obama's positive coverage is 42%. Sure, it is higher than Bush or Clinton got, but 42% isn't an overall positive number. Since it is higher than Bush, it must be a liberal media conspiracy, though, right?

Maybe they are in production order?

I'm so stealing using that.

That article was stupid. It's just one guy whining about how Obama gets better coverage than Bush (and there were plenty of fluff pieces about Bush the first year he was in office). The only way you can say the media only gives Obama favorable coverage is you are being selective about which outlets you are looking at.

Basically, Specter was politically dead in the Republican Party, what with his "liberal" (i.e. moderate and mainstream) ideas about habeas corpus, immigration, the economic stimulus, consumer protection laws, and a woman's right to choose. Specter is hardly representative of any larger trends, since this is an isolated occurrence, and a far larger number of Democrats defected to the GOP in 1995. However, it does underline the continuing ideological shift within the Republican Party, which does not seem to have any room for moderates. The Republican Party is far from being an endangered species, but continues to shift into a regional, ideological party that shuns anything that even remotely looks like pragmatic policy or using the power of the federal government to try to make people's lives better. Jingoistic foreign policy, unrealistic tax cuts, and morality governed by unimpeachable state governments are its new mission. Anyone who stands in their way is a socialist or wants the terrorists to win. With President Obama's approval ratings hovering in the 60-70 range, and the public overwhelmingly WANTING government activism, the Republican propaganda from 2006 that "we lost because we weren't conservative enough" has brain-washed the party into buying a ticket aboard a sinking ship.

Of course he's trying to save his seat. But why is his seat in more danger from Republican primary voters than from Democratic ones? Because the Republican Party has become too ideologically dogmatic to retain moderates.

You could just stop bitching and actually register. You make it sound like some murky, lawless cabal that the media isn't allowed to enter. Isn't this the thread where someone is trying to prove his worthiness to get into an internet message board? And I wouldn't call what I'm doing "bitching." Its more along the lines of "making fun of a really absurd situation."

Olbermann's philosophy seems to be "go to war with Fox by becoming just like them." In the last 3 years, his show has gone from an irreverent breath of fresh air that tries to balance out the right-wing dominance of cable news on a network that tried to be fair, to standard-bearer for liberal propaganda on a channel that is increasingly become known for an overall bias.

I find seven of those chicks not-quite-creepy-looking enough to keep me from fucking.

All of the defenses of the new board require us to take the members' word for what's going on over there. The board is only viewable to members.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/nyregion/28plane.html "Get off my plane!"

I don't really view the new board's elitism and the legitimacy of the grievances people have over the Leena fiasco to be the same issue. Whether or not they were right to get mad that Leena was placed in charge of the board has nothing to do with whether or not the other TSm should have an exclusive membership.

I'm going to pause from kissing the president's BUTT for a few minutes to ridicule the Republicans. Who's with me? http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/26/budget/index.html The OFFICIAL Republican Road to Recovery Not so much a budget as is it a campaign document that doesn't make any sense. This is what you call a "graphic organizer," except it really doesn't organize anything, just connects one unrelated thing to the next with a few lines. But look, a chart! With numbers! Laugh with me at the accuracy of Republican deficits.