Crap Throwing Monkey
-
Posts
9,499 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Crap Throwing Monkey
-
-
-
What !@#$ing retard owns 30+ hamsters as pets???
-
FoxSnooze was all over this story during lunch like stink on a skunk. Asking penetrating questions like "Don't the Amish need better security at their schools?" (yeah, I'm sure they're going to run out and install metal detectors and security guards at each and every of their one-room schoolhouses now) and "What did the Amish think of how they were portrayed in the movie "Witness"?" (uhhh...the Amish don't go to movies) and "Is this a copycat crime inspired by our coverage of the Colorado shooting?" (nor do they watch TV, idiot).
The best, though, had to be "As you can see, it's a lovely, beautiful day out for a shooting..."
-
-
So far, most of his stats are in the lower half or lower third of the league.
But then, that includes sacks, interceptions, and fumbles. So while he's not having spectacular days chucking the ball, he is protecting the ball better than half the league. And I can live with that; it works for Roethlesberger and the Steelers.
-
-
I went into this season with the goal of Buffalo showing me they can be a playoff contender in 2007. What this team has shown me is that on any given Sunday they can play with anybody in 2006. Are we a legit playoff contender yet? NO. But with this many rookies and young player we will get better as the season goes on. For the time being I bet our Bills watched tonight's game and didn’t say oh crap. I bet they said this is a chance to earn respect. Here are a couple reasons why I think Buffalo has more then a chance at hanging with Chicago.
1. Dick Jauron- We know Chicago much better then Chicago knows us. Jauron coached for the Bears, and faced the Bears as the Lions defensive coordinator. So not only does he know the Bears inside and out, but he most likely circled this date in his head as his return to Chicago. He will do everything to get the Bills ready to play, and he has the knowledge to do so.
2. Seattle- You don't completely route the defending NFC champion without really getting up for the game. No team in football can match that type of intensity week in and week out during the regular season. Undefeated Seattle on Sunday night football or Buffalo at 1pm on Sunday? Big chance at Chicago having an emotional let down.
3. JP Losman- This Bears team can really bring interior pressure. Losman has the leg speed few QB's do to roll outside that pressure. We can create time in the passing game that other teams can't. The extra time could lead to more down field plays.
4. Rex Grossman- Great start by a QB who looks to be coming into his own. He still doesn't have more then a year worth of starts. Peyton Manning throws interceptions, so will Rex Grossman. I hope our DB's noted how many floaters he threw tonight.
5. Special Teams- Wash at FG kicking, but Hester dropped 2 punts today. He's dangerous, but if he drops one against us we will be all over it. I'll also take BM over any punter in football.
Wasn't "kzoomike" once synonymous with "ignorant" here?
Personally...I don't think the Bills have a snowball's chance in hell against the Bears in Chicago. The Bills are average this season (which is a big step up from the previous five...but still...) Chicago's freakin' scary...they have that "Yeah, we're going to the Superbowl, try and stop us bitches" look that the Bills had in '90, the 'Skins in 91, Dallas in '92...
-
-
Well, let's get this over and become a police state then. It's the only way the government can keep us safe, and it's for our own good. The Bill of Rights and Constitution are just peices of paper. Our forefathers didn't want us to be free anyway, they just wanted us to be "safe."
Please sir, may I have another?
If I call you an idiot, will you move the post to the consumer forum and delete it?
-
Depends on the type of media you're looking at. The traditional press media has more liberals then conservatives working for it, while radio is just the opposite. TV has both.
TV has more liberals than conservatives, I think. It's less uneven since FoxSnooze started, but it's still uneven.
But my point still stands: liberal outlets will reinforce their unintentional liberal bias by preferentially hiring liberals. Conservative outlets will do the same with conservatives (you'll never see an honest liberal counterpoint on Fox. Never.) When everyone has the same inherent bias, it's extraordinarily easy to say "There's no bias...everyone I know thinks just the same as me." Which is how you get editorial bull sh-- like the NYT or FoxSnooze.
Yeah, they're going to sensationalize a lot. Hell, in a tragedy like Katrina, I'd argue that its human nature to at least partially sensationalize what happened.So the media has the same failings as "human nature"...but you trust the media more than you would most people? News flash: most people couldn't get their facts of yesterday's breakfast correct, never mind the intricacies of the administration's North Korea and Iran WMD policies.
There is also, though, an element of reporting that is not all sensationalized. Typically you see this in non-visual news sources rather then "video clip" news sources.No, typically they sensationalize. Tomorrow's the Monday after a relatively slow news weekend; I guarantee that tomorrow's NYT will have some sensationalized (defined as: a soft news intended less to inform than to inflame) story on the front page (probably centered on the page, but below the fold. Even odds the front page picture accompanies the story). I'd put money on it if the wife would let me.
As for the armor example, I didn't actually see it like that. My remembrance of the event was that it was a concern of some of the soldiers, that were addressed by Rumsfeld and co during and after a question and answer setting.In fact, after doing a bit of searching, I found the NYT article that I read about the situation.
But that's exactly what I'm talking about!!!
The soldiers in question were from transport companies, driving unarmored vehicles not meant for combat. It's not a deficiency in equipment when unarmored vehicles don't have armor. The story - which was the precise one I was thinking about when I mentioned the "issue" - is written to mislead the reader into thinking something that's patently incorrect by omitting necessary information: namely, that unarmored vehicles are, in fact, unarmored by definition. So suddenly, the normal course of events becomes a "scandal".And whose fault would that be? Any elected official is supposed to represent the interests of the electorate. The media doesn't even have that much of a call to responsibility. Which is something the administration has so much as told the media: "You weren't elected, you don't represent the American people, we do."
And from everything I've heard from everyone who works in this administration (I'm a government contractor, so it's more than a few people), the administration actually does act with the best interests of the electorate in mind. It's just that: 1) their definition of "the electorate" seems to exclude anyone outside their religious base, and 2) they're morons, so their idea of the public's best interest is totally whacked anyway.
-
I'm sure the administration would like nothing more than to completely ignore the media. I'm also sure they realize that if they did, the media would make up even more sh-- than they already do.
And they do make up sh--. Routinely. Though it's not because of a "liberal bias" (the media does have a liberal bias...but it's an unconscious one, because jobs in the media attract liberals, so there's no real counterpoint acting as a check within the industry.) It's because there's a fundamental sales aspect to their jobs, which ultimately leads them to sensationalize everything. Thus, they end up reporting half a story (the sensational half - the Superdome in NO, for example, rather than the massive effort to move relief over a shattered infrastructure), or no story at all (the most recent news in the Abramoff scandal - that Abramoff sent hundreds of emails to the White House, but the WH didn't respond to any of them), or just making stories up so they have something to sensationalize (e.g. "Unarmored vehicles in Iraq don't have armor. How dare they not equip unarmored vehicles with armor! And non-combat troops aren't equipped for combat!")
That's the administration's salient point in dealing with the media: the media represents their own interests, and not the interests of the American public. (Ever notice how many "scandals" break close to book publishing dates for reporters? Woodward has a new one coming out soon; expect to hear the "Rumsfeld should resign" crowd to get louder...and before an election, too. I'm sure that's just a coincidence, and has nothing to do with sales and marketing.
) And they're right. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. -
-
Actually, as I've said before, this administration's policy is not to talk to the media...at least, not as an equal partner in the governing of the country, as the media's usually assumed they are (i.e. the "Fourth Estate").
That's a policy I support in principle, though not as practiced.
-
-
I'm more concerned that their headlines don't match their articles.
They've still got a ways to go before they reach Fox News' "Our headlines don't match reality" editorial standard.
And for hell's sake, they're comparing the Washington Times to the NYT. That's like saying "My sh-- smells better than yours." It's still sh--.
-
Try living in DC. It's almost time for our quarterly machine-gunning of the Capitol building again...
And yes, it matters. Try discerning a true threat from a non-threat in a perceived high-risk environment. Like DC. Or airports.
-
If you were bringing a bag of stuff in on the tour, on which you had written "Bush is an idiot", you might actually establish a similar context.
And get detained for questioning.
-
-
I, for one, would like to thank Mike Mularkey for finally bringing immense football joy into my life...
-
-
-
-
-
From Lenny P Today
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
He drafted good and bad players. Just like nearly every other GM in the league. The draft is, believe it or not, rather a crap shoot. I think a better judgement of him would be: what did he do in free agency?