Not fair; not balanced and just plain sick

Sheldonrs • Feb 12, 2009 9:51 am
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0210093foxnews1.html
glatt • Feb 12, 2009 9:59 am
Wow. That really is sick. Reading the description of the kiddie porn in that affidavit turned my stomach.

He had a record of a child porn conviction in his past. It's interesting that Fox hired him.
TheMercenary • Feb 12, 2009 10:03 am
Pretty amazing. It just goes to show that not everyone does their homework on who they hire. Looks like the FBI will be taking care of this issue for FOX. I am just glad the guy got busted.

Why is this in Politics?
Sheldonrs • Feb 12, 2009 10:36 am
TheMercenary;533634 wrote:
...Why is this in Politics?


Mostly I put this in Politics to piss off Fox news fans. :-)
TheMercenary • Feb 12, 2009 10:49 am
Sheldonrs;533649 wrote:
Mostly I put this in Politics to piss off Fox news fans. :-)


:lol2:
SteveDallas • Feb 12, 2009 10:56 am
I would have thought that went without saying.
TheMercenary • Feb 12, 2009 11:03 am
I guess I never really thought about it. I only watch one show on FOX.
Clodfobble • Feb 12, 2009 5:51 pm
I'm trying to feel better by telling myself that with one conviction already on the books, he'll probably be doing significant jail time for this one.
Urbane Guerrilla • Feb 12, 2009 9:48 pm
Sheldon, dear, you couldn't piss me off, not that way. I have a pretty good sampling of the kind of alleged thinking the Fox-haters typically indulge in.

Ever consider how much of a man in full you'd be if you abandoned identity politics? "Politically correct" is a tyranny of un-think, you know. "Politically correct" is how you survive in a dictatorship -- but that's not so good either, is it?
Beestie • Feb 12, 2009 10:40 pm
Urbane Guerrilla;533881 wrote:
Ever consider how much of a man in full you'd be if ...


WtF is that supposed to mean? He doesn't have to prove anything to anybody.
Sheldonrs • Feb 12, 2009 10:53 pm
Beestie;533904 wrote:
WtF is that supposed to mean? He doesn't have to prove anything to anybody.


Not true. Most guys don't just take my word for it when I tell them how good i am at sucking dick. ;)

And UG, I never have subscribe in identity politics. I just go with the ones that don't tell me I'm going to hell for who and what i am.
The ones who don't tell me I have less rights than others.

And I don't follow the Limbaughs of the world that are very good at telling people how to live their lives as zealot conservatives out of one side of their mouths while popping Oxy Contin bought in a parking lot for them by their maids under their orders and then getting away with it scott free.
classicman • Feb 12, 2009 10:58 pm
from beyond the arc - - - :swish: - - - and the crowd ROARS
Beestie • Feb 12, 2009 10:58 pm
You can include O'Reilly in that group.

I actually used to listen to both of them back in the late 90s. I guess it was around 2002 or so that I just quit listening to anybody from either side.

I'm so much better off without people telling me how upset I am supposed to be about something they are upset about.
xoxoxoBruce • Feb 13, 2009 1:39 am
But, but, maybe Bruns was doing an undercover investigation on child porn for Fox.:rolleyes:
Urbane Guerrilla • Feb 13, 2009 9:44 pm
Beestie;533904 wrote:
WtF is that supposed to mean? He doesn't have to prove anything to anybody.


What that is supposed to mean is that it is better to be a man than to be a sheep -- and socialistoid policymaking of the kind we're seeing requires a population of sheep. This requirement is simply inhuman, and those making it should be neutralized, cut off from power forever, because they haven't the necessary character to limit it. You must have power kept limited if you want a republic, and right now the Democratic-controlled Executive and Legislative branches are running hog-wild.

The best we can hope for from this package is a nasty run of inflation. It goes downhill from there.

While Sheldon has done something here to set forth his interests as he conceives them, the lack of independence his favored party throws at him and all of us isn't going to do us good. Such a price seems wildly too high to me.
TheMercenary • Feb 13, 2009 9:54 pm
Beestie;533912 wrote:
You can include O'Reilly in that group.


How do you figure a commentator of the news is thrown in that group? Did you see his interviews wth Hillary Clinton? How about Obama? I thought he was quite respectful and was fair to both of them when they were running against each other. And to their credit they had the balls to come on his show.
Beestie • Feb 13, 2009 10:51 pm
TheMercenary;534292 wrote:
How do you figure a commentator of the news is thrown in that group?
I was referring to Sheldonrs remark about TV personalities who are so sanctimonious and judgemental but lead private lives that are as bad or worse as what they make a reputation out of repudiating.