RACK Colbert!!!

bbqjones · Post by **bbqjones** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:53 pm

colbert is funny

oreilley is a douchebag*

*hannity as well.

funny is apparently very subjective.

ive had my picture framed with karl rove.

*democrats too

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:21 pm

Colbert, who is EASILY the most annoying and unfunny motherfucker on TV, PERIOD. End of discussion.

RACK you for not watching much TV

battery chucka' one · Post by **battery chucka' one** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:33 pm

420 wrote:The common denominator here is...

Republicans have no sense of humor, and they either live in Orange County, or they're poor white trash from the Midwest or some other rural community around the country.

I'd like to thank...

bco and fat paula for the laughs!

They've given all of us many laughs at their own expense without actually knowing it.

You still refuse to give any reason other than your ad hominem attacks.

1. I'm not a republican.

2. I believe that bias in media is incredibly unforgivable.

3. Give me reasons for why you hate Bill O'Reilly. When I say REASONS, I mean more than that you don't like his tie. REASONS, you half wit.

Thanks, in advance.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:39 pm

battery chucka' one wrote:
2. I believe that bias in media is incredibly unforgivable.

And yet for some reason you think that O'Reilly is somehow more "legitimate" than anybody else.

I believe that this kind of tunnel vision and stupidity is incredibly pathetic.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:52 pm

I've never heard of Colbert, and haven't watched those Fox News shows in a few years. Why bother to get worked up on issues when politicians will be crooks no matter what?

No matter what the corrupt in power say, I'll still show up at the polling booth and vote the way I want.

Hence, not needing to watch those news shows nor listen to politico radio.

battery chucka' one · Post by **battery chucka' one** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:18 pm

Atomic Punk wrote:I've never heard of Colbert, and haven't watched those Fox News shows in a few years. Why bother to get worked up on issues when politicians will be crooks no matter what?

No matter what the corrupt in power say, I'll still show up at the polling booth and vote the way I want.

Hence, not needing to watch those news shows nor listen to politico radio.

True, politicians are corrupt, without fail. But the question is, which one will lie to you the least? That's the one I'm voting for. As per media, I'll follow the one that least seems like they're endorsing one politician or other. I don't watch the Fox News shows. I don't watch Colbert. I DO listen casually to talk radio. I DO research all candidates before voting. I have a feeling (from interacting with them) that many of Colbert's viewers don't. Very sad, actually.

battery chucka' one · Post by **battery chucka' one** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:20 pm

Mikey wrote:
battery chucka' one wrote:
2. I believe that bias in media is incredibly unforgivable.

And yet for some reason you think that O'Reilly is somehow more "legitimate" than anybody else.

I believe that this kind of tunnel vision and stupidity is incredibly pathetic.

Biology says that you have a brain as you're currently, presumably, alive. Why don't you start letting your posts back up science? TIA

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:27 pm

battery chucka' one wrote: True, politicians are corrupt, without fail. But the question is, which one will lie to you the least? That's the one I'm voting for. As per media, I'll follow the one that least seems like they're endorsing one politician or other. I don't watch the Fox News shows. I don't watch Colbert. I DO listen casually to talk radio. I DO research all candidates before voting. I have a feeling (from interacting with them) that many of Colbert's viewers don't. Very sad, actually.

Good question. I didn't even know Steve Cintani (sp?) was beheaded awhile back. I remember him being held captive.

Over the last few election cycles, I've only voted for who I want. If I have no idea who they are then I'll leave that area on the ballot blank. I could vote GOP when in doubt, but why? All measures or propositions get a no vote unless they are needed... which means almost none.

They are only interested in self-empowerment and couldn't give a shit about anybody but themselves.

battery chucka' one · Post by **battery chucka' one** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:39 pm

Atomic Punk wrote:
battery chucka' one wrote: True, politicians are corrupt, without fail. But the question is, which one will lie to you the least? That's the one I'm voting for. As per media, I'll follow the one that least seems like they're endorsing one politician or other. I don't watch the Fox News shows. I don't watch Colbert. I DO listen casually to talk radio. I DO research all candidates before voting. I have a feeling (from interacting with them) that many of Colbert's viewers don't. Very sad, actually.
Good question. I didn't even know Steve Cintani (sp?) was beheaded awhile back. I remember him being held captive.

Over the last few election cycles, I've only voted for who I want. If I have no idea who they are then I'll leave that area on the ballot blank. I could vote GOP when in doubt, but why? All measures or propositions get a no vote unless they are needed... which means almost none.

They are only interested in self-empowerment and couldn't give a shit about anybody but themselves.

Excellent points. I want the candidate in whose policies will 1) ensure my freedoms and 2) stay out of my way. If there's terrorists (and there are), take them out before they try to take me out. That's what my tax dollars pay for. After that, go away and do your washington stuff while I do whatever I do. Many a GOP candidate hasn't gotten my vote because they forgot what I wanted from them (howdy Chuck Hagel...two years bro....keep dreaming about the oval office because it ain't gonna happen). After all is said and done, we need to think for ourselves. I think that's beyond Colbert and his viewers. Look at this thread. They can't even accept that there are people who think he's not funny and pointless.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:37 am

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:My liberal friends find Colbert and Stewart hysterical, my conservative friends have referred to them as anything from "not that funny" to "loathsome." Going by that sampling, it's obvious that the political biases of the viewer are pretty much the litmus test on judging those shows. Big surprise.

I'm a conservative, and I find Stewart to be sharp, interesting, and entertaining.

Colbert is none of the above.

But bbq is right, funnay is subjective.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:40 am

You're not worried that John Stewart is corrupting our nation's young by sneakily indoctrinating them to his nefarious liberal agenda under cover of the claim that he's "not serious"?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:49 am

Not really.

The 'youth' will be stupid whether John Stewart is helping them along or not.

battery chucka' one · Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:49 am

Mikey wrote:You're not worried that John Stewart is corrupting our nation's young by sneakily indoctrinating them to his nefarious liberal agenda under cover of the claim that he's "not serious"?

Who the heck is saying he's corrupting anybody? He's a commentator who hides from criticism by saying that he's not serious. Why doesn't he allow himself to be criticized? Why can't his position be one that is under the same scrutiny as that of O'Reilly? What are you (and he) afraid of? Do you have something against intelligent debate and free discussion of diverging points of view? Please, lemme know, little sister.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:37 am

R-Jack wrote:caffene free Diet Coke.....................

What's the point?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:53 am

battery chucka' one wrote:Who the heck is saying he's corrupting anybody? He's a commentator who hides from criticism by saying that he's not serious. Why doesn't he allow himself to be criticized? Why can't his position be one that is under the same scrutiny as that of O'Reilly? What are you (and he) afraid of? Do you have something against intelligent debate and free discussion of diverging points of view? Please, lemme know, little sister.

Why are you such a flaming douche?

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:17 am

battery chucka' one wrote:
Mikey wrote:You're not worried that John Stewart is corrupting our nation's young by sneakily indoctrinating them to his nefarious liberal agenda under cover of the claim that he's "not serious"?
Who the heck is saying he's corrupting anybody? He's a commentator who hides from criticism by saying that he's not serious. Why doesn't he allow himself to be criticized? Why can't his position be one that is under the same scrutiny as that of O'Reilly? What are you (and he) afraid of? Do you have something against intelligent debate and free discussion of diverging points of view? Please, lemme know, little sister.

He's keeping somebody from criticizing him?
What, have you been visited by the Daily Show Secret Police or something?

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:08 pm

The people who hate Colbert make me laugh. "Not with" kind of laugh.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:05 pm

KC Paul 3.0 wrote:RACK that....and RACK B. O'Reilly for lighting up that faggot Colbert, who is EASILY the most annoying and unfunny motherfucker on TV, PERIOD. End of discussion.

why don't you go bite a rail and wait for the next amtrak train to roll through town, you fat piece of shit. a closed casket funeral for you would be a fucking blessing.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:48 am

SS, that's very good news to hear. Tells you how much I follow the news these days.