« This Weekend on the Radio | Main | Rosie's Exit »

April 23, 2007


Mark Simons

I watched your rather strange performance on Bill OReilly's show on George Soros and laughed out loud. The fact that Bill selected you and the Phil Kent - two idealogues - to provide "objective" opinions on the evils of George Soros is...funny as hell. I'm hardly surprised that I'm the first person to comment on your blog...I'm probably the only visitor...but I thought I'd at least share my disdain for your....commentary (?) and encourage you to look into a new line of work. Perhaps janitorial work?

Mark Simons

Forgot to mention...at least you're good looking! Many people will trade integrity for a little "hots"...just not me.

Karen Sing

It was great to see you on Fox News last evening. The topic was very important. I hope you join the Fox News group permanently. You do a great job at sharing "facts" and putting them into perspective. Your talents are wasted and unappreciated on MSNBC.

Jennie Kurono

It's great to see Monica Crowley on FoxNews. I hope she is made a permanent member of the FoxNews crew where ratings are above MSNBC. Great job on talking about the George Soros Radical Left strong-arming to undermine America. I look forward to more information. Go O'Reilly on that issue.


I watched your rather strange performance on Bill OReilly's show on George Soros and laughed out loud. The fact that Bill selected you and the Phil Kent - two idealogues - to provide "objective" opinions on the evils of George Soros is...funny as hell. I'm hardly surprised that I'm the first person to comment on your blog...I'm probably the only visitor...but I thought I'd at least share my disdain for your....commentary (?) and encourage you to look into a new line of work. Perhaps janitorial work?

Posted by: Mark Simons | April 24, 2007 at 12:34 AM

Forgot to mention...at least you're good looking! Many people will trade integrity for a little "hots"...just not me.

Posted by: Mark Simons | April 24, 2007 at 12:35 AM


Mark Simons,

Fortunately or unfortunately, I don't watch TV, except when I'm "on the road." So I can only go by your "account," which says nothing, but says it smarmily.

You seem to consider yourself intelligent. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) That being the case, why didn't you use your, uh, "smarts" to show us how Monica's view of George Soros is wrong? This is an open forum. Even a "non-ideologue" (like you perhaps?) is free to demonstrate how much more knowing and perceptive you are than "ideologue" Monica. Hey, why didn't you seize the moment? Why, instead, did you hide behind a trite bag of half-wit pejoratives, telling us about your feelings, like"disdain" and Monica's "rather strange performance"? You had a chance to criticize Monica with integrity (which presumably you, but not she, has.) So why did you settle for a nasty, pimply put-down? Why didn't you say something? Didn't teacher explain how cheesy bloviating can get delusional?

Suggestion: next time you want to rant about "integrity" by telling us about your feelings, save it for DU or KosKiddies. They'll appreciate it. Look, I don't want to be too harsh. You did, after all, demonstrate some elementary ability, eg. recognizing Monica's looks. You might have some other abilities too. Who knows? Next time, see if you can reveal them. Give it a try.


Dear Monica,

Your performance on the No-Spin Zone was exceptionally strong. It was cogent, revealing, and cut right to the heart of the Soros matter. Best of all, it was so very nice to see you back on the Fox News Channel.

Let's hope this is the first of many more opportune cameos, for which you appear, to share further analysis. High on my wish list is having FOX offer you a time slot, so you could dump that other channel. I don't know, Monica ... but waking up and finding you are on MSNBC must have been a bit like finding oneself in Tiajuana after a big night out and not knowing how you got there. Just my impression. -- Wishing you the best. SAM

Mark Simons

Ms. Kurono - Ok. I'll take your bait. First, no, I don't consider myself to be exceptionally intelligent vs. the average person...only relative to Bill O. Sorry, couldn't resist. Sadly, Bill O is smart - he just uses his smarts dishonestly in my opinion.

But to your main point. How are Monica's views of George Soros wrong? Well...it's always hard to "prove" unsubstantiated attacks charactern are wrong but I'll highlight a few of her comments that I thought were disengenous at best. First, she said that George Soros has given money to Media Matters for America. Even if that were somehow a bad thing - which it would't be - he hasn't. He also hasn't give money to any other organization that has given money to Media Matters - at least not in any significant way. Media Matters is well enough funded without Mr. Soros. One of the biggest supports is Peter Lewis, CEO of Progressive Insurance.

Monica went on to say that Mr. Soros was somehow trying to "obfuscate transparency" to "smart right wing politicians and pundits" without actually saying how he has done so. Not one example. Just a blanket statement. Is that journalism? Clearly not. Is it punditry? I suppose...but that's not even good punditry. More like making unsubstantiated claims with no basis for support.

The real irony is that Bill O and folks like Monica wouldn't even waste the air time on George Soros and Media Matters if Media Matters activities weren't hitting home in some way. I read Media Matters semi-regularly and I cannot find ONE SINGLE example of "character assasination" of Bill OReilly. If you can find onem, please point it out to us. I would really like to see just one example.

The other blundering idot added a few other deep insights on Mr. Soros including referring to him as "Dr. Evil" (really!) and saying that he "hates the country." I mean...come on...

Mark Simons

TYPO ALERT: first sentence in second paragraph should have been "to smear right wing politicians and pundits", not "smart..." Obviously a mistake. Apologies.


Mr Simons ... Regarding your first point, I think you state what is obvious to most of us already. But, you might take more care to dispense with some of the poison which is characteristically spewed by those on your side so unceremoniously these days. Unless you are the CPA for Media Matters, you will have to provide a better defense than to simply call Miss Crowley and Mr. O'Reilly liars by making a blanket denial that Soros money isn't filtering through the organizations which are highlighted. It would not work in court and guess what, its not going to work on this site either.

If you cannot find where Media Matters has denigrated Bill O'Reilly, then clearly you are not looking hard enough because Bill is not a liar. But let us go to their more general MO, since this appears to be the issue in contention, not Bill O'Reilly specifically. Case in point, in refutation of the claim that Media Matters isn't launching attacks against the right wing, is their current campaign against Rush Limbaugh. You read the website, but I do not waste my time there except to have reviewed this recent matter... so you know that its going on right now. Either you have a vested interest in denying these facts or you just prefer to wear those blinders you so casually sport, like a pair of full coverage Raybans. In either case, it is no doubt a profit-less pursuit to argue what is plain as day to anyone with one eye left in their head. Media Matters is on the attack and it is very well funded.

Regarding the matter of the Soros money trail, the same procedures to which both O'Reilly and Crowley are apparently referring are used by law enforcement all the time when making a representation of the flow of funds within dubious enterprises. Only, this one is political and so far, legal. Nevertheless, it has gone on while avoiding scrutiny, until now. Of course, when the kind of money that Soros has made available to funnel into these other organizations is brought into the light of day, most people who have respect for the idea of "undue political influence in a democracy" naturally call into question such goings on. But, evidently you are not one of them. Besides Mr. Lewis, where did you propose their money is coming from, church bake sales and bazaars? -- Internet smear appears to be the method used to achieve their political objectives. Apparently, that is okay with you since you employ it yourself. You can review your body of work posted to this very site, if you need more evidence. I think its obvious where the Left is coming from in this country and no matter how you all wrap what you are selling in the American flag, it still wreaks of this same vile political innuendo and stale vomit that should have been left back in the 1960s, along with Flower Power, Love beads, and Nehru jackets. Have a nice day. -- SAM






Monica's appearance on The O'Reilly Factor:

Mark Simons

So...you couldn't find a single example of Media Matters "smear" tactics? I'm waiting. I quickly scanned the links you added and didn't see any smear. Just direct quotes or audio/video - almost always IN CONTEXT - from media figures or publications.

If publishing direct quotes or audio/video of someone like Rush Limbaugh is "smear" then perhaps Mr. Limbaugh ought to re-think what he said in the first place. Just a thought.

PS. Here's a quick link on funding for Media Matters. I don't see any "evil doers" on this list. Do you?


Sorry-- I couldn't get past the first two minutes of Billo. Let me get this straight: you're going after billionaire George Soros for "buying media outlets"...and you're doing it on Fox News Channel, which is owned by...Rupes.

MMMmmmkay. I'm supposed to take this seriously?

Sorry, Monica, for not making it that far. I'm sure you were great.


Simons ... If you call those comments "in context," then one wonders how tangential and schizophrenic a discourse would have to stray for you to label it "out of context." But I suppose a person would need to understand a discussion in the first place to know if something is in context or not. Well, there is always HOPE, but I won't hold my breath. -- They were smear jobs, pure and simple. You hear what you want to hear.

SOURCE WATCH - a project of the Center for Media and Democracy which is the brainchild of John Stauber, notorious Far-Left activist kook and fruitburger? HE is your reference?? - Spare me.

That would be like asking Hannibal Lecter to give you a reference for Charles Manson. What else did you think he would say? -- Yeah, you have a case alright. The question is though, a case of what exactly. -- SAM

[ A quick sidebar to Justin -- you say Monica did not get that far? How far did you get by the way? You're over here throwing your barbs at her success on a website that she probably barely has time to read. Have you any idea how smart and accomplished her children are going to be someday? My Lord, you would probably be lucky just to shake her hand. By all evidence, she goes out of her way to do the right thing, say the right thing, and defend principles that would mean more to you, if only you still had the smidgeon of class you were born with. Give the woman some credit already. By age 21, she was consorting with presidents and that would never have been the case had she not possessed a soul which inspired the will to higher truth, which is recognized by people who appreciate character. The truth is that if she were not head and shoulders above you, there would not exist this compulsion that you needed to bring her down. Its a very sad thing to realize. And I do wish a better day for you. -- SAM ]

Mark Simons

So Justin...you have yet to show me a specific example of what you consider a Media Matters smear. I'm open to changing my mind if just one person could show me one example.

Mark Simons

Well, four days later I guess I proved my point. Not a single person can point out a specific example of Media Matters "smearing" of TV pundits or politicians. I'm guessing that's because when you actually read their comments you realized that, while they're clearly making a point, they do not embellish. They quote people directly and provide context.

Mark Simons

Eight days later. Still not a single specific example of Media Matters smear... Patiently waiting....


Mr Simons ... It appears that no amount of evidence would be sufficient in your case. Like an old scratched LP record that continues to skip at the same spot in its groove, you continue to deny the thing that is obvious to every other person who is willing to give an honest appraisal of Media Matters. Its hard not to notice how, during your play of this broken recording, you conveniently avoid addressing each issue. You have defended nothing and proven even less. I guess that is because you cannot answer except to run your single inaccurate and ineffective talking point. Simply pathetic. ... Tell me, when you go to court, do you just say to the judge "I didn't do it, Your Honor! --The defense rests."? .. because that is all you have done here. Let's hope Media Matters does not ever have to depend on your "logic" to help excuse their behavior.

One week later, here is the FINAL tally:

Monica Crowley 1 ----- Mark Simons 0

Better luck next time. Please come back when you actually have something to say. I am sure we will all be waiting with bated breath and hanging on your every utterance. -- SAM

Mark Simons

Honest to god...I'll DONATE $1000 to any cause that you choose if you can point to one example of "smear" by Media Matters. I have the money. I will follow-up. I'm not a complete zealot so if you can provide a reasonable example I'll make the donation. Show me.


Conservatives are hurt by the liberal barbs hurled at them, when that has been their modus operandi since the birth of the Contract With America.
We are hurting the feelings of the poor little things and they are imploring us to stop.
Well, of course we won't, so get used to it losers.
You will be in the political and cultural dunce corner for years to come—the corner you have painted yourselves into. Yes, you will be pilloried and stoned with barbs and insults and you fully and duly deserve every single one of them. You have been posing as patriots and Christians long enough—causing wars and meddling in peoples personal lives.
So sit back and endure it my right winged friends. You are about to reap what you have sown.


I have been pondering Mark's suggestion that Monica find a new line of work.
I think she should become an actress. There is one particular role that would fit her like pantyhose—Nurse Ratched in "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest"
As described in E/notes "A sexless, rigid caricature of a nurse," (or journalist), "Nurse Ratched has a pretty, delicate face that belies her cruelty.
Manipulative to the core, the only thing that really matters to her is a desire to control everything around her."


Hey Simons ... Again, the examples were already given. You don't interpret their meaning the way the rest of us see them, because you look at the World from this flawed, eccentric angle that you choose. No problem. Keep your $1000. You may need it for those carbon offsets you will be having to purchase in the future. Now, be a good little liberal and go plant a tree for The Earth Goddess. -- SAM

Well JOL ..... What can anybody say about the Hate-filled rant you just delivered? Maybe you should try psychological counselling. As much as you desire to stick all the conservative brethren in some Gulag, I'm afraid we are just going to be a permanent fixture in your political landscape for some time to come. So, go ahead and rant, but don't be such a Troll that you have to displace your attraction to Monica into some "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" scenario. Yeah, we know you have a thing for her. But, you have to tie your conclusions about Life to Reality, not to this made-up hellish fantasy you have about Conservative women, in general. You're mixing up Apples and Oranges. Its the radical Left-wing, emasculating, Women's Lib types who you need to be directing your vast Anger toward, not Monica. She's just trying to free your mind from the past brainwashing you got hampered with back in the 60s and 70s. Don't blame HER, pal. She's the angel who is trying to save you. -- In any case, a good psychiatrist is probably your best bet at this point. -- Good luck, SAM


If you really want to learn something, you might consider delving into your own anima projection. An "angel", no less?
Monica is going to save me? Wow, I can't wait. Is it going to happen before Armaggedon or after? My, I must get myself prepared with the proper oils.



No JOL .. I doubt she will be successful saving you. Some cases are just
too tough and they have to go back to the factory. Now, you brought up the
end of the World, not me. Frankly, I do not see all that much worth saving
over at your end, but you know these angels have a way about them that
defies reason sometimes. -- So, if Monica wants to save you, that is her

Look, I suppose you cut class the day they discussed figurative vs. literal, so
I won't spoil your cookie cutter ideas about my anima, animus, or animation.
I will just leave you with one last thought:

Its never too late to start over. I would suggest you and Simons dissolve
the compartmentalized schizoid dilemma that is causing this dual-identity,
alter-ego situation ... and become one person again. Your IP is giving you
away, That is, unless you two routinely use the same computer. Heh heh.


Mark Simons

Sam - you said: Hey Simons ... Again, the examples were already given.

Where have thgey "already (been) given"? Point to one. Please?


What's the matter, Simons .. you all burned out from tag-teaming people
with your alter-ego, JOL? Back to being the same ol' One Trick Pony?

Your tedious point is hopeless and devoid of any truth, as is obvious to
everyone except yourself. ..... and you are boring us now. Bye ...

You're finished. Ended. Lost. Done. Polished off. Terminated .....10-4?

Better luck next time. Over and Out. -- SAM

Mark Simons

Well...I'm not "JOL" but if that makes you feel better, that's ok.

I'm still waiting for one single example of Media Matters "smearing" somebody but I won't hold my breath. Meanwhile, the $1000 bet still stands if someone can point to a good example. Common! Shouldn't be that hard! "Smear" should be pretty cut and dry, right!


Do tell sir, how on earth do you live with yourself? You float one lie
after another. You come here and your ONLY purpose is to smear
Dr. Crowley, attack conservatives, and run your shill routine for
Media Matters, AS IF anybody reading this site would take you
seriously. And when you encounter opposition, you simply invent
a new alias, just like the disingenuous phony baloney you are deep
inside. If you even had an extra $1000 to blow on a silly losing bet
like that, after feeding all your other useless addictions, it would
probably be a miracle. -- Our advice would be to get help soon,
because you are about as disconnected from reality as any of the
most severely wigged out, angry trolls we have witnessed in all
our years on the internet. You have no point except to dump this
twisted propaganda and a distorted view that anyone with half an
ounce of mental fairness would know was untrue just by visiting
the Media Matters site.

Your contempt of Monica comes out in every post you make
and is more than a little ridiculous, as you seem to think that
a person of her dignified status and class would ever give a
no-account loser like yourself one second thought. You flatter
yourself with these low level pronouncements, as if they really
made sense to anyone but your own narcissistic worldview. We
feel very sorry for you, as anyone with even a tad of true heart
would know that you have become completely lost in your life
and are badly in need of guidance. Its become very hard for
us to return the hate you are trying to foment here, due to the
empathy one feels for a person in your sorry state. And so we
will just leave you with well wishes for your eventual recovery.
Please try to get counselling before its too late. -- SAM

Mark Simons

Wow, you are really full of yourself aren't you Sam? I must be a much lesser man than you because I'm not able to devine the meaning (or lack thereof) in your life based only on your pompous writing style. Who am I to judge you? Maybe you were raised to think you're superior even when you're not? Regardless, I fall to my knees in wonder at your ability to know all about me from my few postings here. Wow!

End sarcasm...

I re-read my postings and, while I made a few silly comments (at least you're good looking...) that weren't particularly constructive, I don't see contempt for Monica anywhere. I certainly don't feel any hate toward her or anyone else for that matter. I leave hate to others.

What I did express is my distaste for idealogues going onto the Bill O show and making unfounded accusations about George Soros and Media Matters without any back-up. All I have tried to do since then is to entice just ONE reader of this blog to point to ONE specific eample of Media Matters "smearing" somebody. I find it ironic and a bit sad that the only response I get is attacks on my personal character instead of answering my qusetion with something...oh, I dunno...factual?


Simons .. The truth hurts, huh? It seems you have no problem
telling a lie whenever you feel it supports your case and that is
all you have been doing since you began blogging on this site.
... One need not be either some deep discerning seer of the
Collective Mind or have a doctorate in the social sciences to
read your motives, your purpose, or your mistaken assumptions
about life. You wear all of these right on your sleeve and stick
them in people's face everytime you open your mouth or type on
your keyboard, apparently.

Now look, don't blame conservatives simply because the rest
of us make you feel so inferior. Maybe that is your problem with
Monica, by the way. She is so above you and so beyond you,
that you somehow feel compelled to dethrone her off the
pedestal you put her on, in your mind. Its hard to say exactly
what drives such a fragile point of view. Its something you
will no doubt need to tease apart on your own. But don't come
here and misrepresent your tone to this writer. It is completely
unbelievable that you think ANYONE would buy your claim to
have no desire to smear Monica, when in your first commentary
you suggest that this sincere and scholarly person, who has
earned a coveted doctorate from one of our nation's most
prestigious Ivy League universities, would do better to become
a practicing janitor. And in YOUR world that isn't a smear(?). No,
of course not. This would explain your view on Media Matters,
incidentally, but certainly does not excuse it.

Friend, let me tell you .. there isn't too much about you that isn't
flashing a Big Neon Sign, like right there in that last observation.
Folks like you are a running caricature in the political landscape
of the last 30 years or more, and are not too hard to spot, since
you make yourselves known by the stammering invective you
preach at every blessed opportunity. One need not consider it to
be some grand feat of intelligence to spot your weak number in
this life. It is just par for course in this challenging, empty-headed
dilemma that those of your intellectually vacant persuasion have
chosen to foist on caring folks all over this great land of ours.
So, does it rile us or cause us any grief to be thought of as better
than the rest of you dishonest lot? Heck, no. But you should simply
get use to feeling like your life is lived in the same sewer as where
you drew your invective style, because it is.

And, one last thing. ...... You really should look into getting that
counselling you so desperately need. Maybe if you did, you would
not be seeking this constant, gratuitous source of therapy from
conservatives on the internet. The truth is, people just like Monica
love and care about you. They want to see you get well and get
happy, in spite of your current self-loathing. They know how you
feel because all of us have been where you are at, one time or
another, but were lucky enough not to get stuck there. You can
overcome your self-deception, if you are just willing to allow the
Truth to make a home in you. Let the healing begin. -- SAM

Mark Simons

Sam...you really need to get over yourself.

By the way, the only reason I keep coming back is to see if anyone can point to an example of Media Matters smearing someone. All you do is attack me personally but you don't address my question.

Oh, I know. You're above responding to a question from someone who is so clearly beneath the lofty heights that you have raised yourself and the sacred Monica. Let's beatify her now!

By the way...I suppose I need therapy as much as the next guy but certainly not from you. Now, please go and have a deep conversation with someone who can handle your obnosious flowery way of communicating...maybe like your mother who you undoubtedly still live with despite your middle age.

Mark Simons

By the way, I went to a "2nd tier" Ivy League school myself (Cornell) and I can tell you that they're all over-rated. I've met as many fundamentally dumb people who went to Haaavaad or Yale as I have who went to Mississippi State or Bowling Green. Some who went to Ivy League schools may want you to think that they're better than the rest of the unwashed masses but they aren't.


Well, Mr Simons ... You certainly bring a high credit to Cornell, don't you?
Hey, sorry you took the comments so harshly. They were meant with the
absolute best of intentions and aimed at your transcendence, we assure
you. And your question WAS answered, but apparently a Cornell education
has not provided you with the tools to discern this state of affairs, and that
is highly unfortunate. You probably should not have majored in Gym. That
was not wise. -- ("obnosious"? -an artifact of more specialized knowledge,
no doubt.)

You are too easy, Simons. -- When you cannot respond with wit, you go
for the mother jokes. Is that how they teach you at Cornell or is that just
a New York thing? ... Pathetic. You Libs have no sense of humor when
it comes to defending your vacuous statements. No doubt you will be
wielding the 'Nappy head' remarks before long.

Try not to think of these comments as personal attacks. They are only
a deconstruction of your faulty wiring and are for your ultimate benefit.
You will only know this in hindsight, but just let it sink in and you will
be a better person for it. It might take years in your case, but we have
loads of time. Meanwhile, it is fair to say that your smear artistry has
been duly corrected.

Now you say we should raise Monica to the level of sainthood? Let
us think about that one. You might have something there. She certainly
brings a smile and a blessing to every honest heart, and that is a fact.
If only that included yourself. -- You really must do something about
that self-loathing, though. Its just eating you up inside and that is
what is most obvious about you. Such a bitter man.

And consider this ... if you are not looking for additional therapy, why
do you keep making 'appointments' with conservative doctors?

You need to tone down the bitterness and delete the self-deception,
for they do not allow you to see just how long your nose has grown
in the total scheme of things. Be well, old friend -- SAM

Mark Simons

Your equivocating is somewhat humorous but mostly just evasive. You refuse to address my main point - that slams against Media Matters are disengenous - because you can't find an example of MM "smearing" to support your argument. It's the oldest trick in the book - don't answer the question, change the subject.


No, SIMONS (if that really is your name) .... the oldest trick in the
book is you PRETENDING not to receive your answer. The problem
you are having is you do not agree that the examples provided are
good enough evidence of the SMEAR practices which typify the
behavior of Media Matters. --- Its never been any big surprise to
us that someone like you would try to DENY what this FAR LEFT
organization does is NOT simply Mudslinging. You do it yourself, so
why would anyone expect you to have a problem with THEM doing it?
Yet, its clear that 99% of fair observers would say that Media Matters
is in the business of doing HIT PIECES. So, we can only conclude
that you are simply here to run interference for them, or maybe you
work for them. Either way, you are either too silly, or too dense to
recognize the truth when its staring you right in the face.

As far as, changing the subject goes ... we responded to what you
brought up. Its too bad you have a problem with admitting you are
having difficulty with this debate. You have not addressed any of
the evidence, or observations on your behavior, comments on your
likely motivations for denial, or pretty much dealing with anything
that is relevant to proving your argument. You provide no examples
of Media Matters' supposed "good work" or anything to support your
claim. Just DENY DENY DENY and then attempt the most pathetic
example of MISDIRECTION in recent memory. Apparently, you aspire
to be some sort of political Houdini, but unfortunately you have neither
the mental prowess, nor the skill, to weave even the shakiest of
arguments to make your case.

Your specious style leaves one wondering if you even attended
Westchester Community College, much less Cornell University. The
truth is that you have so devolved this discussion into The Realm of
the Pitifully Absurd, that you now cause us to feel sorry for making such
Swiss cheese of you. Without any way to defend yourself, you appear to
be a bit like the poor kid whose parents discover he is developmentally
disabled. You have no practical way to help your cause and that just
plain sad.

Have a good weekend. -- SAM

Mark Simons

So...in other words...you're still not willing or able to point to an example of Media Matters smearing, right? This is absolutely too funny. Classic right-wing approach to "debate." Notice I didn't say Republican because I know many Republicans who are actually capable of rational debate.

Instead you attack me, question my "mental prowess" (interesting word choice...prowess)and, sugest I'm "developmentally disabled" and continue to ignore my question. Ok, let's say I'm pitifully cluless and developmentally disabled. For my simple mind, please repeat/point to/link to an example of Media Matters smearing someone because I'm obviously not bright enough to see the examples you've already provided. Do so and I'll quietly go away and re-enroll in Cornell to get the education you think I don't have. Please take me up on this.


SIMONS says, ".. I'm obviously not bright enough to see the examples you've already provided. "

Yep, that about sums it up. Thank you.

Mark Simons

Or perhaps you're not quite bright enough to recognize tongue in cheek?

Still waiting for one example. $1000 to your favorite charity if you prove me wrong.


Tongue in Cheek? ... You wish!

Too bad you are not smart enough to know that the description
of yourself was accurate.

A fish in water thinks all the world is wet. Perhaps you should
dry off, realize that you have already been proven wrong, and in
front of those who laugh at your foolishness. The only one left
who does not know, is YOU.

Now shove off, Dim. --- Take your 1000 and buy a few more
heart-to-hearts with your local therapist. Your blather is boring to
all the rest of us who refuse to help rationalize the punk, liberal
slanders that you find so precious.

Mark Simons

I'm still waiting for you to get over your overblown sense of self worth and actually put up or shut up. All I'm asking is for you to point to one specific link of Media Matters smearing someone. Just one link. You can do that, can't you? Or perhaps you can't and would rather continue spouting your flowery nonsense about my weaknesses instead of addressing the real issue. My guess is you'll stick with changing the subject.

Mark Simons

I thought so. Sam has quietly gone away as he should. Did anyone really think he's be able to point to even ONE example of Media Matters "smearing" someone? I certainly didn't but it's the most popular canard (fancy word for Sam) of the rediculous right.

As they say in the ghetto...'nuf said. Hey, us Ivy League guys know all about the ghetto. It's the area in Ithica just below the main campus where the bars are.


Not to change the subject, but Mr Simons will you please go buy
yourself a good laxative? -- Guy, you are definitely full of something
but its not called "Truth" and your nose is growing very long these

By the way, if you HAD really gone to Cornell, you would know by
heart that the town is spelled "Ithaca." But an amateur troll like
yourself could not even stage a good lie correctly. You get an "F"
on your collegiate deceit. You are almost "rediculous" since your
spelling is so sophomoric and that might be the only thing even
remotely collegiate about you.

Now, go back to editing your writings over at Media Matters. There
are probably some really good Whoppers you forgot to embellish
on today. Don't forget your pact with Satan! -- Remember, practice
makes perfect.

Wendy UK

what kind of freak is this bloke called simons? he doesn't like monica so you know he's just a problem child. maybe a good swift kick in the bum would do. hahahahaha

Mark Simon

Insults are easy. Pointing me to one specific example of Media Matters for America "smearing" somebody seems to be hard. All I have asked is for one example b/c some conservatives, Monica and Bill O seem to think that's what they do. I'm prepared to be convinced. Just show me an example. The Web site is at www.medimatters.org. Please find one example of a smear.

Rush is Right

There was a Simon named Mark

whose gig it seems was to Park,

his azz on a Blog

and call it his Job

to spin Left, for love of the Dark.

Mark Simons

There once was a blog called the "memo"
that is frequented by those who are shallow
They're afraid of the truth
which they consider uncouth
so they attack those who speak it on the "memo"

Hey, the meter on the last phrase may be off but at least it rhymes. ;)

Rush is Right

There was a ball player named Simon

who needed a lesson in Rhymin'.

He'd question a Smear,

even when it was Clear

to most everyone else on the Diamond.

Mark Simons

LOL! Hey, at least you have a sense of humor!

Still waiting for one example of Media Matters smearing somebody...

Rush is Right

There was a Spin Doctor named Mark

whose nature was close to a Shark.

He wasted his Youth

by spinning the Truth

into Lies he'd invent on a Lark.

Mark Simons

There once was a poet named Rush

who seems to be smart at first blush

but his avoidance of truth

requires a good sleuth

to point point out the facts he would flush

Ok, rhyming with Rush is hard but I did it. Still waiting for you to provove the error of my ways. It should be easy, right? Just go to www.mediamatters.org and find a link that you consider to be a smear. Easy...right?

Rush is Right

There once was a Simony Dude

who never considered it Crude

to pretend he could Rhyme,

but in spite of his Crime,

he'd wax on and defer to the Lewd


There once was a Simons called "Dude"

who liked to show people his 'Tude.

He'd feign the capture of Truth

and thought it was Couth

to give vacant response in the Nude.

better cover that bum, dude... your brains are showing!
hee-hee, this is fun

The comments to this entry are closed.