« The Man Behind the Curtain | Main | Imus in the Morning »

February 21, 2008

Comments

J. Pierpont Finch

About a month ago, I responded to a mail solicitation for subscribing to the NY Times. With glee, I put the following message in their post paid envelope:

QUOTE

Attention: Pinchy Salzburger, Chairman & Head Fool

Dropped subscribing to your paper when it buried the Elian Gonzalez kidnapping by the ATM story and photo on page B16 to cover for your then President Clinton. Let’s see – how much money lost in subscription revenue is that from 1997 forward to today? I had been brought up reading and accepting the paper as “the paper of record” since 1941.

I was glad I dropped reading your paper when I learned how you withheld the story about Vice President Al Gore taking Chinese campaign contributions in exchange for arranging for the leaking of our missile aiming technology secrets to China. I laughed when I heard that your reporter, Jason Blair, was fired for making up his stories. I was furious when you supported and spread Dan Rather’s unsubstantiated claims about George W. Bush’s reserve service in the National Guard in an attempt to throw the election to your party of your choice, the Democrats. I was furious when I read that your paper revealed classified information which jeopardized our troops overseas and revealed the identities of CIA operatives. I laughed again when I heard your company blame steadily decreasing NY Times circulation on the internet when I know that the above reasons surely must be more of an explanation for the decline.

The tricks your paper uses to obfuscate “the news that’s fit to print” are increasingly familiar to readers and the increasing legion of former readers. Amongst the long pathetic list are: Misleading headlines, burying reports that don’t fit your agenda in the back pages of the paper, liberal interjection of editorial opinion into what should be objective reports, use of complex sentence construction and vocabulary to discourage readers from reading an entire article, publishing uncorroborated reports to fit the paper’s agenda and later publishing “oops, I’m sorry” corrections in parts of the paper likely not to be read, sitting on reports that don’t fit the paper’s agenda……

YOU SEE, ONCE YOU LOOSE YOUR REPUTATION FOR INTEGRETY AND OBJECTIVITY, IT’S GONE FOR GOOD!

HERE’S A PROMISE:
----------------
SO LONG AS I TAKE ANOTHER EARTH ON THIS EARTH, I WILL NEVER PAY FOR (BUY) A NEW YORK TIMES!

UNQUOTE

I tell this to as many people who are willing to listen because from my viewpoint the NY Times only seams to get worse with time. Their attemped smear of John McCain's good name is just another example of their dirty tricks. Their reward because they just don'tget it, hopefully, will be a further decline in circulation and the need to sell of some more assets. In case you haven't noticed, their stock has performed miserably in recent years due to their declining circulation and mismanagement by Mr. Pinchy.

J. Pierpont Finch

This NY Times stuff is such distracting nonsence in my opinion.

NONE OF THE CANDIDATES ARE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICS OF THE REAL CHALLENGES FACING OUR COUNTRY AND THEIR PROPOSED SOLUTIONS FOR THESE CHALLENGES.

- According to long-time oil baron, Boon Pickens on CNBC this morning, OUR OIL CONSUMPTION RESULTS IN ONE-HALF TRILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR SENT OVERSEAS TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES (Many who are enemies or potential enemies). Those monies agreggated had been used to buy our treasury debt securities (ie. Treasury Bills, Notes, and Bonds), but are increasingly being used to buy up or loan to American businesses (ie. most recently Citibank desparately in need of capital due to defaulting Sub-prime mortgage loans on their books that won't be collected). ANY FOOL CAN PROJECT THE OUTCOME OF THIS SITUATION UNCHANGED OUT INTO THE FUTURE. IT MEANS our businesses will be increasingly owned by foreign nations, some our enemies - we will be slaves in our own country eventually!

- The SOCIAL SECURITY FINANCIAL IMBALANCE needs to be addressed. Each years tax collections cover the benefits of less and less benefits paid to retirees collecting social security benefits. President Bush at least had the guts to propose having a portion of collected social security taxes placed in private accounts and invested in a diversified way similar to the way pension funds invest in stocks and bonds, but the partisan demogogues in congress torpedoed this idea and we're still left with the elephant problem nobody wants to talk about.

- The MEDICARE PROGRAM FINANCIAL IMBALANCE where health care costs are rising each year faster than premiums collected that are used to pay such benefits. President Bush proposed capping class action awards, but the partisan demogogues in congress whose campaigns are funded by the trial lawyers blocked this idea because in means less fee income to the lawyers (God forbid).

- With the baby boom generation retiring in the near term, who will do the work to produce the goods and service the increasing numbers of retired non workers will consume as they live longer lives due to medical advances never contemplated? Will we grant amnesty to the 20 million illegal aliens already here? If they refuse to assimilate and learn our language and culture, will we become a polyglot nation of gibberish where nobody communicates and resentments build up and explode in violence? Specifically how will these challenges be addressed?

THESE ARE THE THREE BIG ROCKS OUR COUNTRY NEEDS TO FACE SOON or OUR ECONOMY and OUR PEOPLE WILL FACE TERRIBLE ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES.

THE empty suits and skirts in the PARTISAN MAINSTREAM MEDIA, including the NY TIMES, REFUSE TO ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS! The presidential election and primaries are just a horse race to them.

FK

So among your complaints about the New York Times are that their vocabulary is too advanced, their placement of stories (I'm not sure how the answer to this is not reading the ENTIRE paper), and -- not that they don't correct their mistakes -- but that you don't like WHERE they place their corrections.

If you feel that way, you can continue to read the Daily News and New York Post, with their 1st grade vocabulary and obvious rightwing interpretation of stories. And do those papers ever correct their mistakes? I don't know because I'm always so distracted by the celebrity gossip that takes up so much of their available print space.

J. Pierpont Finch

And by the way, as if the above challenges are not enough, THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE AHEAD to stopping the insane spreading to ISLAMO-FASCIST IMPERIALISM AND TERROR from destroying our way of life. This is like a cancer spreading all over the world and it must be stopped before the insanity sweeps us all back to the 7th century.

FK

The biggest challenge to fighting terrorism is not becoming terrorists ourselves. That is Israel's greatest failing. They became what they hated the most.

We are following Israel's lead with our unjustified invasion of Iraq. We are occupiers, and McCain may be right that we may be there for another hundred years.

J. Pierpont Finch

Here are some of the important points Bonne Pickens made earlier today on CNBC:

Although he was originally against ethanol, Pickens now favors an increase in ethanol production, saying, "I'd rather have ethanol, and recirculate the money in the country, than to have it go out the back door on us."

"I think oil is going to back off," he said. "The weakest quarter is the second quarter. We'll drop $10 or $15 a barrel in the second quarter. I think we'll be back above $100 in the second half of the year."

Natural gas prices are too high and they can be expected to drop, according to Pickens, who is shorting both oil and gas.

Natural gas will become a "serious transportation fuel," Pickens predicted, adding: "We've got to get coal cleaned up and we've got too get natural gas into the transportation mix."

The U.S. should increase its use of solar and wind to meet the expected rise in electricity demand, locating those alternative energy sources in the Great Plains and "middle of the country," Pickens urged.

Barack Obama says the U.S. "should do bio diesel," said Pickens, "but that won't solve any problems."
He also said about Obama: "He talks about change. I haven't seen yet what he's going to change."

A windfall profit tax on U.S. oil companies would be "ridiculous," Pickens charged, saying: "You've got to keep the money in the industry."

NO MATTER WHO WINS THE WHITE HOUSE, IMMENSE CHALLENGES FACE OUR COUNTRY that won't go away by empty suit politicians making empty proposals that don't produce outcomes that solve the problems. Needed now are honest proposals of solutions that add up to solutions, not empty talk and distracting meaningless observations.

J. Pierpont Finch

Hey FREDK, If you only had a brain, eh?

Yeah, Bush lied and people died and we need to put Iraq back together again the way it was before we took it over and killed 600,000 people. We are the bad guys in the world - everything wrong in the world is the fault of U.S. policy. Israel should not fight back to save their country - they should just let the missles fly in and the bombs destroy their country and they should be passive and not respond at all. And after 9-11, we should have done the same and just be passive and acccept out punishment for all the bad things we have done in the past. ONLY A TOTAL IDIOT OR SOMEONE WHOSE THINKING IS TERRIBLY CLOUDED BY HAVING INGESTED ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME WOULD BELIEVE THIS!

FK

Finch --

You use the Bush-like strategy of setting up a strawman so you can knock it down. Good job.

I didn't say any of those things. Of course Israel has a right to defend itself, and so do we. We are not responsible for all the terrible things in this world, but we are responsible for the state of Iraq right now.

The problem is that you run the risk of becoming what you hate the most when you act without reason, without evidence, and without justification. We were NOT attacked by Iraq on 9/11. And yet, at the Moron in Chief's request, we attacked it. We are the oppressors in Iraq, and I am not comfortable with us playing that role.

You react the same way I see all conservatives react when I raise these questions. It's like you all have the same rancid personality. And you all regurgitate the same talking points. How about actually reading what I write before calling me an idiot and suggesting I do drugs.

You are a piece of work.

Ree

James Carville, Commented on future canidates having to pass a purity test way back in 1998. The Purity Test, not just for Democrats anymore.

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=n9802241c

FK

But Republicans like the purity test when it was imposed on Bill Clinton. Now that it's being imposed on McCain and Larry Craig and others, it's not so cool?

J. Pierpont Finch

Hey FREDK, After attacking me personally, attacking Bush personally, and attacking conservatives personally; the big challenges remain unsolved. You need to do some introspective thinking about just what your candidates of choice would have power over if the big challenges of our time remain unfaced in a serious manner.

Look in the mirror, FREDK and you will see (if you are honest with yourself - something too much to expect I'm sure) that YOU and YOUR ILK ARE IN FACT the piece of work, FREDK!

FK

You are something else, Finch. Really.

This is what you say to me (in capital letters) after misrepresenting what I said: "ONLY A TOTAL IDIOT OR SOMEONE WHOSE THINKING IS TERRIBLY CLOUDED BY HAVING INGESTED ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME WOULD BELIEVE THIS!"

Then you accuse ME of attacking YOU personally? Are you related to Karl Rove by any chance?

Don't worry about Bush. Nothing I say has any effect on him or his continued idiocy.

Despite my feelings about them, conservatives continue, although they should feel foolish.

Your line about how I need to do some introspective thinking is, um, incomprehensible. Have you been taking writing lessons from Gringoman?

I'm not sure who you think my "ilk" is. Is Jack my "ilk"? (Hey, Captain Jack, are you and I "ilk"?)

Anyway, at your invitation, I've thought about it honestly with myself (not too much to expect), and I've concluded once again that you are a piece of work.

gringoman

J. Pierpont Finch:

Do you know how unkind you've been to our resident Ivy League leftie? It's not the block letters that really offend Fredk2929. That gives him another chance to tell us about hairy "right-wingers." Or in F-speak: 'You conservatives, you right-wingers,' as if, from Mount Sinai, after receiving the divine go-ahead, he's now addressing the idolaters far below him.

No, J. Pierpont, how you really cut him was by your link to the brilliant Dr. Lyle Rossiter's THE LIBERAL MIND. Have you noticed how it affects him, this book which he vows not to look at? He's not only demanded that it not be mentioned. It is also a "bore," and to mention it again reveals "monomania." (In other words, don't you dare mention a penetrating work that may find him out. It's really unkind, unfair, especially from someone of Dr. Rossiter's professional standing. Cruel, no?)

That, in my opinion, was your unkindest link of all. J. Pierpont, did you mean to be this cruel to this anti-Monica jihadi? I'm sure he has socially redeeming value, aside from his big bag of progressive platitudes. Sooner or later he might even surprise someone here with a sample of his "insight" etc.

J. Pierpont, he even knows that Georgie made some mistakes in the war that Dems supported. No, his bulging bag of plats won't let him admit that most everyone agreed that Saddam had WMD, and that even if you accept the minority view that Saddam did not have WMD, the fact remains that everyone knew that Saddam had nuke ambitions and was it better to wait until he realized those ambitions? Of course, that's a question for Iran today too, and isn't very convenient for the bulging bag of lefty plats.

But still, J. Pierpont, this is a living breathing homo sapien (reputedly with an advanced degree in something he can't name for security reasons.)

Does he deserve such treatment? Have you given up all hope for him?

gringoman

J. Pierpont Finch:

Do you know how unkind you've been to our resident Ivy League leftie? It's not the block letters that really offend Fredk2929. That gives him another chance to tell us about hairy "right-wingers." Or in F-speak: 'You conservatives, you right-wingers,' as if, from Mount Sinai, after receiving the divine go-ahead, he's now addressing the idolaters far below him.

No, J. Pierpont, how you really cut him was by your link to the brilliant Dr. Lyle Rossiter's THE LIBERAL MIND. Have you noticed how it affects him, this book which he vows not to look at? He's not only demanded that it not be mentioned. It is also a "bore," and to mention it again reveals "monomania." (In other words, don't you dare mention a penetrating work that may find him out. It's really unkind, unfair, especially from someone of Dr. Rossiter's professional standing. Cruel, no?)

That, in my opinion, was your unkindest link of all. J. Pierpont, did you mean to be this cruel to this anti-Monica jihadi? I'm sure he has socially redeeming value, aside from his big bag of progressive platitudes. Sooner or later he might even surprise someone here with a sample of his "insight" etc.

J. Pierpont, he even knows that Georgie made some mistakes in the war that Dems supported. No, his bulging bag of plats won't let him admit that most everyone agreed that Saddam had WMD, and that even if you accept the minority view that Saddam did not have WMD, the fact remains that everyone knew that Saddam had nuke ambitions and was it better to wait until he realized those ambitions? Of course, that's a question for Iran today too, and isn't very convenient for the bulging bag of lefty plats.

But still, J. Pierpont, this is a living breathing homo sapien (reputedly with an advanced degree in something he can't name for security reasons.)

Does he deserve such treatment? Have you given up all hope for him?

gringoman

J. Pierpont Finch:

Do you know how unkind you've been to our resident Ivy League leftie? It's not the block letters that really offend Fredk2929. That gives him another chance to tell us about hairy "right-wingers." Or in F-speak: 'You conservatives, you right-wingers,' as if, from Mount Sinai, after receiving the divine go-ahead, he's now addressing the idolaters far below him.

No, J. Pierpont, how you really cut him was by your link to the brilliant Dr. Lyle Rossiter's THE LIBERAL MIND. Have you noticed how it affects him, this book which he vows not to look at? He's not only demanded that it not be mentioned. It is also a "bore," and to mention it again reveals "monomania." (In other words, don't you dare mention a penetrating work that may find him out. It's really unkind, unfair, especially from someone of Dr. Rossiter's professional standing. Cruel, no?)

That, in my opinion, was your unkindest link of all. J. Pierpont, did you mean to be this cruel to this anti-Monica jihadi? I'm sure he has socially redeeming value, aside from his big bag of progressive platitudes. Sooner or later he might even surprise someone here with a sample of his "insight" etc.

J. Pierpont, he even knows that Georgie made some mistakes in the war that Dems supported. No, his bulging bag of plats won't let him admit that most everyone agreed that Saddam had WMD, and that even if you accept the minority view that Saddam did not have WMD, the fact remains that everyone knew that Saddam had nuke ambitions and was it better to wait until he realized those ambitions? Of course, that's a question for Iran today too, and isn't very convenient for the bulging bag of lefty plats.

But still, J. Pierpont, this is a living breathing homo sapien (reputedly with an advanced degree in something he can't name for security reasons.)

Does he deserve such treatment? Have you given up all hope for him?

FK

Gringoman --

Lots of people knew Hussein did not have WMDs. A certain Han Blix comes to mind. But what does he matter? It was only his job to determine if Hussein had them, right?

Posting your dialogue three times doesn't make it any better.

You continue to go on and on about this Rossiter book. I've never heard of this Rossiter before, but, if he writes a book classifying an entire group of people as crazy based on their political views, I'm not going to buy him as a leading psychologist or whatever he is.

Since you get to keep repeating yourself about your favorite book, can I mention a few of mine?

Craig Unger, "The Fall of the House of Bush"
Craig Unger, "House of Bush, House of Saud"
Robert Draper, "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush"
Justin A. Frank, "Bush on the Couch"
Ron Suskind, "The Price of Loyalty"
Richard Clarke, "Against All Enemies"
Valerie Plame Wilson, "Fair Game"
Joseph Wilson, "The Politics of Truth"
John Dean, "Worse Than Watergate"

You are funny, Gringoman. I don't mention what kind of degree I have because I remember how Jack was treated on this blog when people found out who he was. It's you and your "ilk" (as someone else put it) that I can't trust.

I've already explained why I mentioned my degree, but I'll repeat it. Someone suggested that Bush was qualified to be president because of his Yale degree, so I responded that I had an Ivy League degree, too --does that make me qualified to be president? Obviously not. Some people do get into those institutions based on family connections . . . like maybe the Moron in Chief?

Now why don't you come over here and give me a big wet kiss like you want to so badly, Gringoman?

"The Ant"


FK

Oh, I forgot another good one:

Hans Blix, "Disarming Iraq"

Maybe when you take a break from Ann Coulter and this Rossiter fellow, you can take a gander at some of the fine books on my list.

Or might that cause you to spontaneously combust?

FK

You know what, Gringoman? You need to read more than just political books, so I'm recommending another one:

John Steinbeck, "The Grapes of Wrath"

The way people derisively spoke about "Okies" sounds not unlike the way you all speak about illegal immigrants on this blog.

FK

OK, OK, stop begging. Here's another political book:

Robert Scheer, "Playing President: My Close encounters with Nixon, Carter, Bush i, Reagan, and Clinton - and How they did not prepare me for George W. Bush"

FK

I haven't read this one, but apparently your president finds it mesmerizing:

Siegfried Engelmann & Elaine C. Bruner, "The Pet Goat"

Allah Schmallah

This is for u, Fred "on Special" K:

Clinton LIED and many Serbians died. In fact we helped the enemy steal half their country. Great work by the liEberals! u liEberals always have this tendency to make up "bumper stickers" and then running with them as if they were truth.

See also under: algore. bono. I gotta stop here or the list will get too long.

Allah Schmallah

Actually.. I think that Fred Special K is a moslem.. the way he sexualizes those he disagrees with. I've noticed a pattern where moslems do this when they are on the losing end of an argument.

There is a way to google specific loctions where searches originate.

Guess what Kingdom has the World Record for searches like "animal sex" "goat sex" and "donkey sex".

Hint: It's the birthplace of the so-called 'profet' of the Cult of Death.

FK

I suggested that Gringoman had a crush on me and he should give me a kiss. Is that what you are referring to? That's your basis that I resort to sexualization? You should read all the things Gringoman and his "ilk" have said about me.

But I can try to hold off on those kind of insults, but sometimes it's really hard not to try to go as far as possible to piss off someone like Gringoman, who apparently has a big old crush on Dr. Rossiter (oops! I did it again!).

Now exactly what lies did Clinton tell to get us into Bosnia? As I recall, Clinton told the truth before we went in there.

Bush told lies upon lies upon lies and now we are in a worthless war that, according to McCain, we may be in for another hundred years. So you are up s***'s creek if you are trying to compare Clinton and Bush in that regard. "George W. Bush" is synonymous with "total and complete failure".

Again, I propose that you rightwingers read some books other than that Rossiter thing Gringoman is obsessed with. Then come back and try to converse intelligently.

Allah Schmallah

Fred Special K.. u r indeed a moslem! u have doen the sexual or "you must be obsessed with me" shtick in previous threads.

And u use the same tack as the isamos.. they always tell us to read the KKKorAnMPF.. as a way of both deflecting criticism as well as dawa.

u can't FOOL me K. And I ain't reading ur liEberal tractates no matter how much u harangue.

I - unlike u - don't need liEbberal "authors' TELLING ME HOW TO THINK.

FK

I can't fool you, Allah Schmallah. You were right all along. I'm a Muslim. And we've got Obama with us. We are going to take over your country and turn it into a Holy Theocracy!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!

You are doomed, Christian!!!!

Allah Schmallah

I'm not a Christian u idiot. I am an agnostic and I choose to remain that way until convinced otherwise.

allaa-baallaaa is the LAST thing that would do the trick.

The comments to this entry are closed.