SilverNRed

I love all the spelling errors. Shows how completely flustered you must be at this point. Yeah, I found two examples in two minutes. I could find more but, like I said, it turns into a full time job after a while. Also like I said, the goal in Iraq isn't to make it safe for American Senators to walk down the street. The terrorists aren't stupid. They find out a high profile American is in town and they'll definitely try to kill him. Even the "real media" (BTW: ) admits there's progress from time to time, they just don't cover it with the gusto that they dedicate to, say, a car bomb. The terrorists (again, not stupid) also understand this. They know they can't win militarily. They just have to win the news cycle. And they have. Area 54? Is that three blocks down from Area 51? There's no conspiracy here. Our media is hopelessly incompetent and the majority of reporters are liberals. Yeah, what a "conspiracy." TERI SHIAVO! SEAN HANNITY!!!! FLIGHTSUIT!! GOAT STORY!!!! Thank you for ending your reply with thoughts so relevant to this conversation. What you couldn't throw in a few more soundbytes?

AAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRR

60 years ago this weekend, Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in baseball. MLB honors Jackie Robinson George F. Will Heart

Oh, that's easy. Because I'm confident I can get the information I want and see past whatever spin or slant our fine reporters may want to insert. The same way you're not confident that anyone could ever watch Fox News without becoming completely brainwashed and just meeting someone who likes O'Reilly because he thinks he's fair makes you hysterical. First off, who is "us"? You and the imaginary other people on this board who respect you? "Us".... Alright, and here's some stuff from the past couple weeks I found charming: New York Times finds Iraq War vet who wasn't in Iraq TIME magazine reporter completely misrepresents military training A couple years ago I might have started threads about these but it was becoming a full-time job so I just let it go. Here's the Super Bowl thread. I still really like this article. The New York Times actually hired this lunatic and printed this article. Most people wouldn't connect Super Bowl commercials and the Iraq War but the NYT found the one guy who did and gave him a forum. Classic. This article was practically a late Christmas present. And this is still pretty much my favorite thing ever: Not only is that somehow fodder for a rant, you actually made that the grand finale of a rant. Millions of people watch and listen to O'Reilly every week and running into just one of them wrecks your whole day.

What the hell kind of lyrics were you writing to your friend?? Lyrics were never really Linkin Park's strong point and I doubt they ever will be. They're just a really good pop-metal band. Their songs are catchy and the lyrics get the job done. I still remember when I heard their first album in 2001-ish and I was surprised by how well done it was from start to finish. I like that they understand what they do well and seem to concentrate on that. NIN *was* great for a while. Broken, The Downward Spiral, and The Fragile were all spectacular. Their last two albums, With Teeth and now Year Zero, aren't all that great to me if only because the material isn't as strong or fresh. And it's just kind of weird that Trent Reznor is in his mid 30s now and is still depressed about everything. I actually don't even think Reznor is that depressed, I just think he can't figure out a way to write something different that works with his music. I think I remember Bono mentioning something that it was really easy to write negative or depressing songs, but very hard to write something positive that people won't call cheesy or bad. That probably factors in. Oh, and Brand New is incredible.

Because I watch the news and I read the paper. Who am I supposed to believe -- my eyes and ears or a study by this group I've never heard of cited by some ridiculous website that you have access to? The whole study is "There's no liberal media because President Bush is on TV a lot and he's Republican." Genius.

Credible results like: Partisan sources were 3 to 1 Republicans to Democrats in 2001? Yep, nothing to be skeptical about there.

Yeah, sorry I read the website you posted.

Too late, I've already been convinced that religion makes you more violent.

Just for fun, I decided to type in "Olbermann" into the search for the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) website. And here's what I got: Link FAIR was founded by Donahue's old producer who was upset that the bosses wanted people who might actually disagree with the host? For that matter, has Olbermann ever interviewed anyone who didn't agree with him? So somehow an article with Olbermann's name in the title comes to the conclusion that MSNBC has no one-hour programs hosted by liberals. Great website. I needed that.

Actually, I never said "I trust Dick Cheney." I said he was probably more trustworthy than reporters. Which is really saying that I really, really don't trust reporters. I'm sorry your reading comprehension is so incredibly poor that you never understood that. Or worse, maybe you did understand that but just think you can automatically win an argument by saying "You trust Dick Cheney!" over and over in different threads. Not sure which is more pathetic.

She's a lesbian, BTW.

IT WAS A HAT!!!

1. Right, because every conservative is defined by the Teri Shiavo thing. 2. It's equally funny if you're so upset that you met someone who liked O'Reilly because he thought he was fair. Gasp! The horror! 3. Rush Limbaugh makes up his own opinions and people listen if they agree. And if he's so important to what conservatives must think, then how come you're the only one on this message board who is always talking about what he said?

Right, exactly, only liberals are in touch with reality. I'm honestly still super amused that you made the fact that you met someone who liked Bill O'Reilly the grand finale of your rant. Like that's so awful and/or incredible that you had to mention it here. How much pain, tension, and anxiety does it really cause you just knowing that O'Reilly exists and some people like him? And since when is Rush Limbaugh considered a reporter? He's a talk show host.

It was a hat, you dumbass! And stop trying to make my precious childhood memories into something bad.

Oh Jesus! Are you all right? I can't even imagine the level of trauma you must have experienced from having someone in real life tell you -- to your face -- that they like Bill O'Reilly. Have you been able to eat anything since? Can you keep anything down? Have you been able to go back to work yet? Have you been able to sleep? To be fair, I'm the one who hates the entire press. You're the guy who thinks they are great, just as long as they're liberally biased. Anything with a conservative slant must be ruining our entire country, even if it's one cable channel. (And I do find it funny that you probably listen to more "Rush Limbo" in any one week than I have in my entire life.)

We aren't nappy enough.

Second.

I've been a fan since 1993, when my uncle took me to my first major league game at the Big A. Back then it was still a mega-stadium that was also home to the Rams. I still have my California Angels hat that he bought me from that game and since we bought it big, it still fits. Unfortunately, I got on board just in time for 1995 to happen.

Angels fever......catch it! What can I say? I watch their games and I love their logo. There's just something about the red A with the silver halo on top.....

Yes! Thank you for telling me what I'm doing even though I used my last post to explain what I was saying and it was something different from all this. Are there climate patterns? Yes. Do I think we're at the point where we can accurately predict what will happen? No. And what the hell are the creationists doing in your post?

I don't know who Jason Cole is but from the looks of his picture, he's John Elway's gay, retarded cousin.

My point is that they didn't find that temperature follows a nice, neat sine curve but they sort of acted like they did anyway. Scientists don't know enough to predict the long term weather patterns on our planet. Saying that, instead of the alarmist guesses we get, would be logical. It's not hindsight reasoning, it's reasoning based on results. Based on Vladimir Guerrero's career statistics, I can predict what he'll do this season with some success. But even those predictions aren't always successful when you factor in injuries or how the batters protecting him in the lineup will hit or if he just slumps. Even the best baseball experts are wrong most of the time even with all the statistics and scouting reports they have at their disposal. And that's just baseball. Scientists are trying to understand how thousands of years' worth of weather patterns can predict Earth's temperature in the next 10 years. That is several orders of magnitude more difficult and complicated than, say, baseball but we're supposed to freak out and jump to conclusions when they think they understand something? When they've failed consistantly in the past? When we know that more outlandish results can result in more funding? No thanks. My point is I don't need to listen to the crazy alarmists who need a reason to talk to Newsweek. The only appropriate climate headline right now is "We Don't Understand this Crap Yet."

Go grab a Vicodin, Karen.