Comments Posted By michael reynolds
Displaying 351 To 360 Of 839 Comments
'THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING HERE'
ABC will stack the deck. They always stack the deck. And they’re offering the fact that they’ll be the ones stacking the deck up as if it should make us happy.
Yeah, I miss the good old days when Karl Rove would handpick all of Mr. Bush's questioners. That was much more fair.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 16:26
Jackson:
You don't have an answer because you can't think of one. I mean, it's a simple question, right? Why is this categorically different?
You can't come up with anything because you bought the outrage without thinking it through. Outrage first, thought process later. So when challenged you double down on bluster and outrage and you still have no answer.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 15:30
. . .and then one will have apples and apples instead of apples and cranberries.
I see. So you don't draw the line at pimping for a given White House. Nor do you draw the line at the location for the pimping. You draw the line at townhalls.
Yes, I can see where that's a core conservative principle.
Save us the ineffectual insults and explain exactly why it's all right for a network to air an unedited Bush townhall filled with Bush-vetted participants chosen solely for their placidity and GOP credentials from some other location, but it's an outrage to air a townhall with a more broad-based, less partisan audience from the White House.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 14:01
I don’t have to “explain” anything, Michael, since you couldn’t provide that example. Just change where I wrote “usually” intellectually honest to “infrequently.”
In other words, no: you can't explain why this is fundamentally different.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 13:56
Jackson:
So let's get straight on this: your only objection is the venue? If so then Fox has done hundreds of fawning interviews from the White House.
Or is it that there's something magically evil about holding a town hall sort of event at the WH, as opposed to the aforementioned fawning interviews. If so, explain why the first is okay and the second is armageddon.
Setting aside the inevitable hysteria, ABC wants to talk about health care, and it wants a ratings boost by being able to say, "from the White House."
Explain to me why that's a change from Fox which has operated openly as an arm of the GOP, up to and including direct quoting of WH-issued talking points.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 13:27
Yay, fresh manufactured outrage! Mmmm, smells lemony.
The Bush White House had its own full-time network: Fox News. Still does.
Protests from the Right? Gosh, I don't recall any. As with so many things conservatives only discover principle when it's convenient to their politics.
As for why they're broadcasting from the White House? I believe that would be: ratings. In other words, business. Profit. Money. The profit motive which, as we know, is the only sacred motive.
So we have here a business chasing profit while following in the footsteps of Fox News. So, refresh me: what's the conservative objection?
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 16.06.2009 @ 12:13
MY TOP TEN FAVORITE MOVIE FIGHT SCENES OF ALL TIME
Alex's gang in Clockwork Orange.
Bourne as mentioned above.
Dread Pirate Roberts vs. The Spaniard in Princess Bride. "I'm not left-handed either."
Me vs. my wife on the vital topic of, "why is the back seat of the car so messy?"
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 15.06.2009 @ 15:11
DID AHMADINEJAD ACTUALLY WIN THE ELECTION?
I think someone is trying to steal the election. Either it's Ahmadinejad or it's Moussavi.
I think both men know the real numbers, whatever they may be. Moussavi is too plugged-in not to have a pretty good idea of whether he won. So if he continues disputing it's because he's consciously trying to steal the election.
But my money would be on Ahmadinejad as the more likely fraud.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 15.06.2009 @ 08:59
I think Kahamenei's probably too smart an old bird to pull something this ham-fisted. This has the look and taste and feel of crude manipulation by crude people. I'll bet a box of cigars it's the Revolutionary Guard.
I wonder if the Iranian military will tolerate this. This just moved Iran a big step closer to Israeli or American jets flying over Teheran, and that's not something professional military would want to see.
By the way, Nate Silver has become indispensable, hasn't he?
Yes, Nate is THE goto guy on technical stuff like this. And his polling analysis is scary good.
If it was the Rev Guards, that means that Khamenei is not in control - not good. He changed the leadership of the Guards two years ago for no apparent reason although in that Byzantine cuckoo land, no apparent reason is probably good enough.
It could be another faction also, don't forget. Khamenei has been reported as sickly so it could be this election was a bid for the future by one of the other factions. And don't believe anything Rafsanjani says. He may be with the "reformers" on this fraud charge but he is perfectly capable of carrying off a fraud like this using his own power sources.
ed.
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 13.06.2009 @ 17:22
media = median. WTF? Twice I misspelled it?
Comment Posted By michael reynolds On 12.06.2009 @ 11:02
