Jobber of the Week

How dare he draw conclusions of his own in an opinion book!

But will they get you laid by all the college girls? No, because they're all being turned liberal by their communist professors. Meanwhile, over on channel 360 (you know what News), John Kasich (the stand-in blowhard when O'Reilly is too busy or otherwise occupied to do his usual deal) is whining because more people are interested in Paris Hilton than President Bush. Well, boo hoo. Then some guy comes on and just totally took a crap on Kasich and his "why don't anyone care about news & politics anymore" pity party. Told him that he's the problem with America. Hah.

Guess which campaign letter is making the news? http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=4025147

I'll agree, but we're talking about the validity of Franken's claims, so it does matter in this one insignificant circumstance. The press kept giving the guy hell for it, I'll say.

He never said. He refused to say he had never done it. We don't know one way or the other, but he still won't say he never did it. He did say that he passes the same standard used by his cabnet members, which is that he hasn't used drugs in the past seven years. I'm sure if you asked Al Franken if he was a child molester, he'd firmly say no. Why won't Bush say the same thing about his drug use? Does he have something to hide?

This sounds incredibly stupid, but then again, it is the Sun.

Well, as for what I've read... Stupid White Men: Funny at first, but the guy is downright wrong and somewhat scary in his predictions of doom regarding other issues (like racism, where appearantly all the black people are going to revolt pretty soon. Whaaa?) Lies And The Lying Liars: Better factually researched than the other books. I read this one more for humor than for the political commentary though. O'Reilly Factor: Not so much a written version of his raving as it is him telling you why he thinks you should live your life like he does. This wouldn't be so bad if I didn't know the guy was so arrogant. No-Spin Zone: This is where we take a turn for the worse. When he could even open the book without talking about the Clintons I figured it was going to set a theme of a written version of his show. I was right. Michael Savage (forget which book, it was from the library): Almost like transcripts of his radio show. I can imagine he actually had someone with a typewriter in his studio writing down his ranting so that it could be edited into book format. Haven't tried Coulter, Limbaugh, or Moore's new book because I find myself reading more history/military stuff than the pundits.

Oh man, you sound like O'Reilly himself. Perhaps, you didn't pay attention to the time in the election where Bush admitted to his "youthful indescretions" that led to all the cokehead jokes running into the election.

Have you ever read the book? His book has a lot more facts behind the claims he's made. If you want a guy to just blindly shill the Democratic way, Michael Moore is just down the street.

And that fits exactly what I said. Less than a month.

Oh, I know Clinton and Gray Davis are king of the contribution, but they've also been some of the oiliest snakes we've had in a long time in that field.

Franken: Aug 27th OReilly: Sep 19th

Exactly, and that's stupid. Just because I put a web page up on a server does not mean I'm a news source or part of the press. And this is from a guy who used to have a column on WorldNetDaily, so god knows HE should know about partisan internet "media."

Hillary's came out in June, so I can understand that. Franken's book came out less than a month before O'Reilly. 2-3 weeks max.

O'Reilly's vendetta against the internet appeared when someone either misquoted him or said something he didn't like. His rant amounted to "Why, there should be someone who's job is to check all web pages for accuracy before they go online!" I never knew he was taking it this far.

On that same line, honor is a trait directly associated with conservatism, and no Republican has ever broken campaign-finance law. Ever.

Well then, you seem to have The Complete Archive Of Bush Speeches at your disposal, so tell me, how many hours was it he said that Iraq could launch WMD after Saddam gave the signal? I admit to taking the liberties of exxageration, but I wasn't intentionally lying.

Rumsfeld repeatedly made statements insinuating that he could find the WMD himself if the Iraqi government wasn't playing their inspectors shell games.

He was pretty much one of the original terrorists, as we know them today. Still, chalk one up for friendly relations.

Hah. Gadhafi is every big a piece of shit as Saddam is.

Do not let anyone fool you as to why we went to war. Do not let anyone fool you with rape rooms. Do not let anyone confuse you with "Ah-HA! We got a BAD GUY! This is why we invade countries!" We invaded because: 1. Saddam and the Iraqi government had ties to Osama bin-Laden and Al Qaeda. The people who attacked us. 2. The Bush Administration was telling us that we were under imminent attack and weapons could be launched any second. They couldn't tell us about them, they couldn't tell the U.N. about them, we had to go and stop them from killing us all. Yes, Saddam is a bad guy. Yes, I think he should be put to death. Do I think the right thing is going to happen, in a country where the democracy that's going to try him does not even exist yet? I hope so, but I'm not assured of it.

I can't sit and post the letter because I don't have it, but among saying that Democrats will "say anything" to defeat the President, claims they're using conspiracy theories, etc. It also quoted Clark and said "Wesley Clark, who was off in Europe when Saddam was captured" as though he was vacationing out there or something (he was testifying against Milosivec.) Regarding Soros, the latest article I can find from him from Google about how much he's spent is here, which says he's spent a tad over $15 million.

Mort Kondracke of Fox has distorted this story. She did not say this on his show. She said it backstage in the makeup room. She did not say it to a nationwide audience. Mort got wind of this and reported it on the air. If you think Albright really believes this, let's wait until she says publically. Kondracke says that it couldn't have been a joke because SHE DIDN'T SMILE when she said it. Yeah, whatever.

Saw a campaign letter today from the GOP complaining about this. LOL. Citing that Clark and Dean's sites have pages for foreigners that link to "liberal causes." Some of the hysterical phrases like "these liberals and their anti-war allies." SHOCK! If you don't like war, you aren't American! Then it went on about them encouraging money from overseas. Well that makes the shit hit the fan. After all, these people might not look like us or speak our language. It also said Soros is spending $400 million, even though he's spent $15mil. Bush is hoping to raise $200 million for a primary where he has no opponents. And all this because Clark's campaign got some money from Canadians or something. If I gave some money to a Canadian political group, do you think it would be a blow to their democracy? If not, do you think it would be to ours if it went the other way around?

Indeed.