11-05-2010, 02:51 PM | #1 | |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
Femmesensual Transguy Preferred Pronoun?:
He, Him, His Relationship Status:
Dating Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rio Vista, CA
Posts: 1,225
Thanks: 3,949
Thanked 3,221 Times in 757 Posts
Rep Power: 21474852 |
Keith Olbermann Suspended Indefinitely After Political Contributions
Quote:
What do you all think? |
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to atomiczombie For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 03:16 PM | #2 | |
Pink Confection
How Do You Identify?:
Femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She, Her, Ma'am Relationship Status:
Dating Myself Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nashville
Posts: 4,266
Thanks: 17,195
Thanked 11,383 Times in 2,840 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 |
Quote:
I am a very liberal Democrat, but I agree that if the pundits are going to call themselves Journalists they don't need to be contributing to campaigns. I sincerely have felt recently Keith (whom I LOVE) and Rachel have gone a bit too far and seem like a Liberal version of Fox...leaving important details out of stories and making fun of things best left to comedians, and stiring things up even worse than they already are. I think MSNBC is trying to distance itself from this perception. I hope it works and he is back soon, just reeled in a smidge.
__________________
|
|
11-05-2010, 03:24 PM | #3 | |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
Happy Preferred Pronoun?:
she Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: planet Earth
Posts: 682
Thanks: 1,679
Thanked 1,597 Times in 433 Posts
Rep Power: 5678216 |
Quote:
__________________
Happiness......it's a choice!! |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LipstickLola For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 03:29 PM | #4 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
Satan in a Sunday Hat Preferred Pronoun?:
Maow Relationship Status:
Married Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Chemical Valley
Posts: 4,086
Thanks: 3,312
Thanked 8,742 Times in 2,566 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 |
Quote:
Exactly. Now, I love the hell out of Rachel Maddow. I think she's smart. I think she makes sense. I trust her (mostly). If I ran into her on the street I'd ask her to sign my cleavage or my copy of Catch 22 or my travel mug. Or all three. HOWEVER. Her delivery makes me feel icky sometimes. Too smug. Too much like making fun of the people that she doesn't agree with. Of course she's right, but sometimes she just seems like she's being a bit of an asshole about being right. Why try to beat the Fox-types at their own game? Their game SUCKS and I hate to see smart people with opinions that I respect playing that game. (Mind you, I play that game. That's MY delivery much of the time - but I'm not on television. Nothing I ever say or do will be witnessed by more than a couple dozen people. She has a responsibility to reign in the neener-neener that I don't have.)
__________________
bête noire \bet-NWAHR\, noun: One that is particularly disliked or that is to be avoided.
|
|
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to betenoire For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 03:40 PM | #5 | |
Power Femme
How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,848 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851 |
Quote:
Ultimately, I don't want MSNBC to be FOX News Left. I want MSNBC to be the standard by which American television journalism is judged. FOX is unabashedly partisan (and all the statements by its supporters that it is fair and balanced mean just this side of nothing, saying something is so does not change the objective reality at all) and what I want is for MSNBC to be reality-based news. That means that if an on-air personality is speculating, they will SAY that they are speculating. What that means is that if a liberal guest says something not supported by the facts, they are called out for it as quickly as a conservative guest would be. The same goes for politicians whether they are on the air or their actions or words are being reported on. Part of what I love about Rachel Maddow (and which I wish Keith Olbermann would take a lesson from) is that she is very concerned about the facts and getting it right. As most of you know, I have a serious monkey on my back about this kind of thing because I believe--and every day I see more evidence of this--that we (and by this I mean liberals/progressives/the American Left) have theorized ourselves into a corner. By that I mean that we have helped create a culture where it no longer matters if a claim is actually true in any kind of empirically verifiable sense. Ms Maddow is shining light on something that those of us who grew disenchanted with this ideology have been saying for a while: this idea that whatever you believe to be true is alright and deserving of respect has real, serious, political implications. I am glad that Mr. Olbermann suspended the 'Worst Person in the World' segment. It had outlived its utility (however much it might have had) and made him seem histrionic. When Mr. Olbermann returns, I hope that he recommits himself to being more like his hero, Edward R. Murrow, and less like his nemesis, Bill O'Reilly. We have enough loud voices who play fast and loose with the truth, we need more journalists and on-air personalities who, when some representative of power says that global warming isn't happening, or that cutting taxes reduces the deficit or any of a number of other nonsensical statements, asks the obvious follow up question: "okay, you believe this. But is that belief based in fact?" Cheers Aj
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett) |
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to dreadgeek For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 03:53 PM | #6 | |
Power Femme
How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,848 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851 |
Quote:
IF someone insists that the Sun orbits the Earth and it is then pointed out to them that, in fact, the Earth orbits the Sun and they then go on to continue to insist that the opposite is true that person *deserves* to be shown a fool. It's long past time, our challenges both as a nation and as a species are altogether too serious for us to continue to play this game that if you espouse something that is demonstrably wrong, you deserve to have your ideas taken as seriously and given as much weight as someone who advocates something that is demonstrably correct. And yes, it IS possible to get to a close-enough approximation to correct and incorrect for it to be workable--at least provisionally until such time as better data comes along. If you are a liberal, I ask you this: over the course of the last, say, decade precisely HOW much good has been done in giving 'respect' to demonstrably, obviously false beliefs. Imagine, just for a moment, how different things would be if the news media had done due diligence and actually followed up on the claims that Iraq was involved in 9/11 and/or had an active nuclear weapons program. Imagine how different things would be if, instead of 'respecting' that some people might believe that Iraq was involved with 9/11 kept hammering home that not only was there no evidence for any such involvement but that such involvement would mean that two groups that wanted to destroy one another (Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government) had got into bed with one another to attack America. Imagine how different things would have been if news organizations, instead of breathlessly accepting the Bush administration's lie that Iraq had tried to buy nuclear weapons material from Nigeria, actually did the research. The information was out there. (It took me about three hours, using ONLY open sources, to get enough information that I had very serious doubts about those WMD claims. Keeping in mind that at this point it had been the best part of two decades since I had done ANY kind of intelligence analysis and had no access to classified documents or officials. Is there anyone here who believes that the NYT or WaPo or CNN couldn't do a better job than little old me who was trained to do analysis against the Soviet Union?) The overwhelming consensus of climate scientists is that global climate change is happening and the predictions based upon the models that exist are, in fact, starting to be observed. But you would NEVER know that from reading your local paper or listening to the American media. We can't afford to continue to be 'nice' and 'respectful' of obviously false beliefs because Nature is not being 'respectful' of climate-change deniers. The ice sheets are melting regardless of whether or not anyone in the Republican party believes that they are or not. Cheers Aj
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett) |
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dreadgeek For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 04:22 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
Satan in a Sunday Hat Preferred Pronoun?:
Maow Relationship Status:
Married Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Chemical Valley
Posts: 4,086
Thanks: 3,312
Thanked 8,742 Times in 2,566 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 |
Aj, I don't disagree with you and I certainly don't think that whackadoodies who say outlandish things like "If global warming is real why is it snowing today?" deserve respect.
And, you know. I'm probably pretty delusional. Intellectually I DO GET that no amount of laying out facts and figures and pie charts is going to convince people who are making false and outrageous claims that their claims are, you know, false and outrageous. I do get that. But on some level I feel like being snotty and poking fun isn't going to help our case. If someone is making fun of me I tune them out. But then, I guess the method of delivery isn't going to matter to the whackadoodies. Be it pie charts, rants, or taking the piss out - they're not listening.
__________________
bête noire \bet-NWAHR\, noun: One that is particularly disliked or that is to be avoided.
|
11-05-2010, 04:24 PM | #8 |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
queer stone femme Relationship Status:
Happily married to MisterMeanor, the man of my dreams Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 703
Thanks: 165
Thanked 1,851 Times in 511 Posts
Rep Power: 2698179 |
I didn't see this thread before I posted in the breaking news thread, so, at the risk of repeating myself, I'm going to repeat myself.
I'm quite fine with Olbermann's suspension. The news will hopefully start a conversation about the difference between MSNBC and Faux, between ethical and slimy. If I had a spare fifty bucks, I'd bet it on him having intentionally created this situation. I find the discussion about Olbermann going over the top to be quite amusing. The over the top guy on MSNBC is Ed Schultz. He's a dear and he's passionate, but he's the one who strays toword the left wing version of the loony right media. Keith is downright sedate next to Ed. And I find Rachel's neener-neener to be quite endearing; she's just so damn cute about it.
__________________
|
11-05-2010, 04:30 PM | #9 |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
Happy Preferred Pronoun?:
she Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: planet Earth
Posts: 682
Thanks: 1,679
Thanked 1,597 Times in 433 Posts
Rep Power: 5678216 |
I believe that delivery is everything. If news organizations are going to denigrate the facts, in order to "appeal" to a wider, non-thinking audience, then I will simply choose another source for information. The snarky, belittling comments are not necessary, IMO, to deliver the news for an audience of people who want facts and unbiased information. MSNBC seems to be wanting a piece of the Fox pie of late, it is not working, they know it, they've set out to change it!
__________________
Happiness......it's a choice!! |
11-05-2010, 04:42 PM | #10 | |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
queer stone femme Relationship Status:
Happily married to MisterMeanor, the man of my dreams Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 703
Thanks: 165
Thanked 1,851 Times in 511 Posts
Rep Power: 2698179 |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MsDemeanor For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 05:03 PM | #11 | |
Power Femme
How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,848 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851 |
Quote:
Global climate change makes for a fantastic example in how the two sides are dealing with fundamentally different ways of having an argument. In the circles of climate-scientists there is no serious doubt that climate change is occurring and that the primary contributing factor is human activity. There are discussions about how good the models are and in what direction they are in disagreement with reality (i.e. will reality be worse than or better than the models predict and how much different). There are other discussions about the speed at which we'll see changes and what factors contribute what strength. There are lots of discussions about what can be done to ameliorate things. There's functionally no discussion of whether or not it IS happening. We are in uncharted territory and there are a LOT of variables. This should all be taken into account but NONE of the above should be taken to mean that we should do nothing or that there is serious doubt as to whether or not it is occurring. If you listen to climate-change deniers, however, you would have a very different perspective on things. If ALL you did was listen to climate-change deniers you could be forgiven for believing that climate-change is a fringe science, out of the mainstream of thought in climate science. It would be understandable for you to believe that because Earth has been warmer in the past that this means that Earth being warmer in the future is no big deal. Earth has also been colder in the past. We were, long before anything as complex as us showed up, very near to a snowball Earth. Does that mean that if it got as cold on Earth now as it was, 650 million years ago, it would be no big deal? Not hardly. The last time Earth had a serious snowball epoch, was just before the appearance of multi-cellular life. But "the Earth was warmer in the past' fits on a bumper-sticker. The above paragraph does not. Some climate-change deniers, confusing climate (long-term, average patterns) with weather (short-term localized events), say with each snow "if global warming is happening, why was it cold today" or some other nonsense. That makes a great soundbite. Which is easier to grasp "Those stupid scientists and their enviro-whacko allies (remember when they said that the Earth was going to freeze, ha ha) think that mankind is heating up the Earth. But the Earth was warmer in the past and anyway, it snowed today. Warm snow, right!" or "given the current models, we expect that if temperatures raise P degree Celsius we should expect to see a sea-level rise of N feet"? There was a time when that kind of lunacy would be confined to the margins, as it should be. However, we no longer live in that kind of information landscape. We live in a landscape where if enough people on the Internet believe it, it becomes true--in the sense that people begin to act on that belief. The American Right has capitalized on this and the American Left has yet to figure out how to counter it. The media has also not figured out how to deal with it. What I think you see happening, though, is that media figures are getting increasingly frustrated by the cheeky games. Real reporters actually care about getting the story out there and getting the story right. It's in their occupational DNA. Constantly being faced with interviewees who spin untruths without consequence has got to get old. Cheers Aj
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett) |
|
11-05-2010, 05:13 PM | #12 | |
Power Femme
How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,848 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851 |
Quote:
I understand what you are saying but that doesn't change the fact that we have one political party that has become completely unmoored from reality. Climate change IS happening. Evolution DID happen. Minority home buyers did NOT bring down the financial system. Barack Obama WAS born in Hawaii and Hawaii WAS at the time of his birth, part of the United States. If you are currently $10 trillion in the hole, reducing tax revenues by $750 billion does not mean that you are suddenly only $9.25 trillion in the hole. Yet one party espouses ALL of those things. They pay no penalty for espousing things that are demonstrably untrue. There are no negative consequences--at least not for them and not immediately--for espousing things that are untrue. Yet these very untruths have *real* policy consequences and thus have an actual impact on our society. How do you do what you are saying should be done in order to keep your viewing loyalty while ALSO recognizing that one's job as a journalistic outfit is to get actual information out there?
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett) |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dreadgeek For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 05:24 PM | #13 |
Infamous Member
How Do You Identify?:
Human Preferred Pronoun?:
He Relationship Status:
Very Married Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Where I want to be
Posts: 8,155
Thanks: 47,491
Thanked 29,299 Times in 6,640 Posts
Rep Power: 21474859 |
I miss Cronkite. Keith isn't even trying to hide his bias, neither is Maddow for that matter, not a one of them are unbiased. The days of the pure news for the sake of information based on facts and not obedient to any party are long gone.
That said, I can figure out Maddow, and her humor is quite contagious, I don't get my news strictly from MSNBC. The point of MSNBC as I've seen it, is as a news magazine, not unbiased not always exactly truthful. More than faux news but less than BBC or NPR. So is he a private citizen contributing to a party and specific candidates on his dime, or do we hold him above the rest of the "journalists" who get to give and still pontificate? MSNBC has a policy in place, he violated that policy, he is suspended for that violation. Should he loose his job? Not if he learned he is to follow policy his employers set out. Or he can go to talk radio and have his say and paycheck too.
__________________
"Many proposals have been made to us to adopt your laws, your religion, your manners and your customs. We would be better pleased with beholding the good effects of these doctrines in your own practices, than with hearing you talk about them".
~Old Tassel, Chief of the Tsalagi (Cherokee) |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Corkey For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 05:26 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
Satan in a Sunday Hat Preferred Pronoun?:
Maow Relationship Status:
Married Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Chemical Valley
Posts: 4,086
Thanks: 3,312
Thanked 8,742 Times in 2,566 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 |
Quote:
However. And this is speaking as someone who is not an American...sometimes I feel like the internet is screwing up the whole world. Specifically what I see here at home are a bunch of formerly sane people who have had their eyes and ears so frequently attacked via the internet by the vocal and stupid minority FROM THE US that, like you said, they are starting to believe the hype. I hate to use the phrase "un-Canadian" because I know it makes me sound exactly like the type of person who I think is an asshat...but I admit that there are some attitudes, behaviours, and beliefs that I feel are un-Canadian. And because of increased access to What The Vocal Minority of Jackasses From The US are doing and saying - it's changing Canadians. Our Conservative party which was once mostly just fiscally conservative is now overrun with a bunch of scary SOCIAL conservatives - that's un-Canadian. Ditto with those Tea Party freakadoodles. Would they have been able to so effectively manipulate formerly sane people in the US if it weren't for the internet? I doubt it. Boy oh boy am I ever off-topic.
__________________
bête noire \bet-NWAHR\, noun: One that is particularly disliked or that is to be avoided.
|
|
11-05-2010, 05:44 PM | #15 | |
Power Femme
How Do You Identify?:
Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She Relationship Status:
Married to a wonderful horse girl Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,848 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474851 |
Quote:
I remember the very end of Cronkite's tenure with CBS. I still remember Frank Reynolds at ABC, when Max Robinson looked like he was going to be the first black anchor of a major American nightly news broadcast and when missing 60 Minutes meant you missed the most important hour of news for the week. I miss that media environment. It wasn't perfect. It did manage to be informative and it seemed to delight in NOT toadying up to power overly much. Cheers Aj Cheers Aj
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community. "People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett) |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to dreadgeek For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 05:48 PM | #16 | |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
Happy Preferred Pronoun?:
she Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: planet Earth
Posts: 682
Thanks: 1,679
Thanked 1,597 Times in 433 Posts
Rep Power: 5678216 |
Quote:
Also? I'm not really sure your question can be answered, but I am not a journalist, just an average person, of average intelligence who wants to know, the "real scoop" when I get my information. That said, I do not necessarily need to be entertained, shocked, (obviously real news is shocking enough) or talked down to. The news *should* be just that, the news, like the olden days, it was even rather boring as I recall. To keep my loyalty? be real, be sincere, be dogmatic when necessary and not shy away from the unpopular. There's a vast difference between being a bully and just plain hard-nosed when it comes to getting to the nitty gritty.
__________________
Happiness......it's a choice!! |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to LipstickLola For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 06:36 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
How Do You Identify?:
Satan in a Sunday Hat Preferred Pronoun?:
Maow Relationship Status:
Married Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Chemical Valley
Posts: 4,086
Thanks: 3,312
Thanked 8,742 Times in 2,566 Posts
Rep Power: 21474855 |
Quote:
I grew up getting my news from the CTV and CBC (and once I was old enough to actually -care- about the news I started getting it from the BBC). Lloyd Robertson, specifically, is where my news comes from (He's with CTV). I like that I cannot tell just by watching him on the television what he THINKS. I have no idea what political party he supports in Canada. None. (Although, I suppose I could google it if I really cared to know) He's a journalist. He delivers facts - with a straight face. I remember 15 years ago (you know, when I became old enough to actually care about the news) my friends and I all thought that CNN was a giant fiasco. We laughed at it. We didn't trust it. It didn't seem SERIOUS or NEUTRAL enough for us. I hadn't even heard of FOX news at that time (I think it was brand new? It started in the late-90s I think?) and I don't think if you had told me at 18 that there was a news network less trustworthy than CNN that I would have believed you. Little did we know, right? So, yeah. Long post made short - I guess my issue with Maddow is that I -wish- she would be a journalist instead of a political commentator.
__________________
bête noire \bet-NWAHR\, noun: One that is particularly disliked or that is to be avoided.
|
|
11-05-2010, 07:10 PM | #18 |
The Planet's Technical Bubba
How Do You Identify?:
FTM Preferred Pronoun?:
He/Him/Geek Relationship Status:
Married to my forever! Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 5,440
Thanks: 2,929
Thanked 10,743 Times in 3,176 Posts
Rep Power: 21474856 |
I dunno. I can understand the feeling that a commentator is going overboard but this isn't what that is. He is suspended indefinitely for doing something as simple as making a donation to 3 separate candidates, never publicizing those donations or promoting those individuals -- on a TV station that is unabashiedly left/pro-Democrat. The stickler is that he didn't tell his manager. So for this he is just shy of being fired? Really?
Olbermann did things that few, even Rachel, don't do. He started and promoted the heck out of the free health clinics that were run all over the country, particularly in New Orleans. He's not afraid of being human, correcting mistakes nor from shying away from debate with facts (he does actually list facts against those he may challenge). All I can think is that Phil Griffin is this...
__________________
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Linus For This Useful Post: |
11-05-2010, 08:56 PM | #19 |
Member
How Do You Identify?:
Femme Preferred Pronoun?:
She, Her, Woman Relationship Status:
Single Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Between Athens and Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 1,236
Thanks: 3,849
Thanked 1,765 Times in 734 Posts
Rep Power: 323365 |
Linus, I agree. What is amzing is the petition wanting Keith to have full restitution, it is getting 20,000 to 30,000 signatures an hour. Now that is an impact!!!
__________________
|
11-05-2010, 09:29 PM | #20 | |
Infamous Member
How Do You Identify?:
Woman Preferred Pronoun?:
HER - SHE Relationship Status:
Relating Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: CA & AZ I'm a Snowbird
Posts: 5,408
Thanks: 11,826
Thanked 10,830 Times in 3,200 Posts
Rep Power: 21474856 |
Quote:
Even when I watch Rachael, Ed, Chris, and yes, Keith I usually only do for about 10 minutes. Not good for my BP or keeping balance in the steady-state that I need in order to think things through. Of course, MSNBC programs align more with my personal politics, but there are times I just see and hear Limbaugh, Beck, and O'Reilly styles of show-personship and it turns me off. I miss the media environment you speak of, too. Then, again, I miss newspapers and the old-time FM radio format. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to AtLast For This Useful Post: |
|
|