Television

Quote of the Day

|

"There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; our ability to do our work here in Congress, and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV).

Perhaps the Citizens United hating hysterics at MSNBC will now start to see how easy it is for politicians to jump from banning critical campaign ads to openly pining for the ability to censor any and all of their critics, and with the same bullshit justifications—improving poltical discourse and restoring faith in government.

Perhaps. But probably not.

NEXT: Electronic Surveillance: Good and Bad Sides

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Call it the “It isn’t fascism if we ban both ends of the spectrum” act of 2010

    1. Or the more universal South Park axiom:

      “Isn’t that fascism.”
      “No, because we don’t call it fascism.”

      (Sexual Harassment Panda episode)

      1. Thursday, and you’ve fucked my weekend up yet again.

        1. Just wait until the Friday cock punch.

        2. Maybe Snookums should stop reading Mr. Balko’s shocking propaganda if Snookums can’t handle it?

          1. Direct Quotes = Propaganda

            Thanks for the insight, retard!

            1. Accompanied by his own comments. You’re welcome, Trig.

              1. Don’t mention it, Corky.

  2. Wait a minuite – aren’t both of those CABLE channells? How does the FCC have jurisdiction over CABLE!

    1. It doesn’t.

      Yet.

    2. They’ve talked often about trying to get authority over cable because it’s so widespread, and it’s unfair to regulate broadcasters who are competing with unregulated cable.

      Sort of like how you have to pay universal service fees on your cell phone now, because it’s “unfair” to put landline companies at a competitive disadvantage.

      1. I think it was current corpse Ted Stevens who wanted over-the-air broadcast decency standards to apply to cable shows, so there was an attempt by government to chip away at stuff where it should have no jurisdiction…

        And that was just one thing. There are plenty of censorious fuckers on both Teams who would love to have the power to regulate all broadcast content, including the internet.

    3. It can’t. Not under the sole justification for any FCC regulation, scarcity.

      In fact, as a content regulator, there no longer is any constitutional justification for the FCC. There never really was, but at least there was an argument forty years ago.

      1. What we need are for some people to join Justice Thomas’s concurrence in Fox v. FCC:

        Red Lion and Pacifica were unconvincing when they were issued, and the passage of time has only increased doubt regarding their continued validity….
        Second, even if this Court’s disfavored treatment of broadcasters under the First Amendment could have been justified at the time of Red Lion and Pacifica, dramatic technological advances have eviscerated the factual assumptions underlying those decisions.

        1. Best of a bad bunch, no doubt about it. Too bad he’s not that way on everything, though he seems to be getting better.

          We need a better process for stopping unconstitutional laws. Accepting the old justification for FCC content regulation authority, it’s clear that that justification ended back in the late 80s. Certainly it is ENTIRELY NONEXISTENT today.

          1. Justice Thomas is one of the most frighteningly consistent logical thinkers I’ve ever seen as a judge. He will follow a formal argument wherever it leads him, damn any sort of practical considerations or stare decisis at all.

            If he decides that a right exists and is in the Constitution, then it’s absolute. But if he judges that it does not, then he does not care if it leads him to approving of laws he denounces, from the “uncommonly silly” laws that “would vote to repeal” because “[p]Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources,” (Lawrence v. Texas), or allowing schools to strip-search girls because, hey, children have never had rights at school.

            He ignores practical considerations when discussing the law to an extent that it disturbs even Scalia.

            1. or allowing schools to strip-search girls because, hey, children have never had rights at school.

              That sounds like a bow to stare decisis, rather than to the text of the Constitution.

            2. He ignores practical considerations when discussing the law

              So he is a libertarian after all! *Rimshot*

      2. Oh, and do note that Fox v. FCC isn’t dead– the SCOTUS sent it back to the Second Circuit to think about it from a First Amendment point of view, instead of just an administrative law issue. The Second Circuit threw out the policy from that perspective. The FCC wants to appeal, but Justice Thomas has already indicated his willingness to strike down the policy on 1st Amendment grounds. (Stevens indicated in a footnote that he would switch to pro-censorship on the basis of the gov’t having the power, but he’s gone)

        1. Gone but not forgiven.

  3. Give a liberal a deal where MSNBC goes off the air along with Fox, and they’d take it every time.

    They don’t really need MSNBC. What they really want is to stop Fox from inflicting its false consciousness upon the minds of the great unwashed.

    1. I love how most non-liberals think MSNBC is the liberal network despite only having liberals on for only 3 hours a day of original programming(plus the re-runs which are on in the middle of the night in the East). How many hours a day does JoeScar get(I don’t know since I rarely ever watch MSNBC)?

      1. I think three. 8-11 or 9-12 in the morning. But they have far more liberals than “3 hours a day of original programming.”

        I tried watching Ed Shultz for the first time in a while yesterday and it was gagtastic, and not the way SugarFree likes it.

      2. The amount of airtime given to liberal hosts is irrelevant. MSNBC is owned by GE, so as long as a big government agenda is being pushed, it doesn’t matter to Jeff Immelt whether it’s pigtail lightbulbs, windmills, or bombs. GE is an equal opportunity rent-seeker.

      3. The amount of airtime given to liberal hosts is irrelevant. MSNBC is owned by GE, so as long as a big government agenda is being pushed, it doesn’t matter whether it’s pigtail lightbulbs, windmills, or bombs. Jeff Immelt is an equal opportunity rent seeker.

        P.S. Fuck your stupid spam filter, Reason.

        1. Now under TSA guidelines, reason SPAM FILTER will begin groping your “junk” before every posting.

        2. That’s how you get by that filter, dave b.

      4. 6-10 PM is four hours. Four hours of evening prime time. And those are just the openly blatant liberals. Much of what passes for “objective journalism” on MSNBC (and other networks) is slanted in some direction (often but not always liberal).

        1. It starts at 4 P.M., actually, with the deplorable Dylan Ratigan, takes another left with Chris Matthews at 5, goes full-retard at 6 with Ed Schultz, repeats Matthews again and then hits the mother (Jones) load with separated-at-the-brain trannies Olbermann and Maddow. If you’re still sentient after all that, you’re rewarded with Washington/Hollywood self-admitted socialist operative Lawrence O’Donnell. If you still haven’t committed suicide, you get repeats of Olbermann and Maddow! Himmler never died. He’s the programming chief at MSNBC.

          1. My favorite part Bully: “…separated-at-the-brain trannies Olbermann and Maddow.”

            Is it just me, or does Maddow have a bigger schlong than Ron Jeremy?

            1. That’s why she has to lean forward.

          2. Kudos on your description of the leftitude on MSNBC – I nearly choked on the brownie I was eating when I read it.

    2. Jeeze, seems to me there was a recent piece in here which explained that the media is neither liberally nor conservatively biased. It is biased for the status quo and serves the interests of the governing class. Liberal media/conservative media – it is all a smoke screen and a distraction in which all issues are framed in such a way that fundamental assumptions are not questioned. It’s all part of the dialectic. To pretend that there is really any difference between Beck and Ed or between Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews is just stupid. Anybody who does not realize all of these people are at cocktail parties patting each other on the back is just an idiot.

      1. There is political bias, there is “establishment” bias, and there is bias to get ratings, regardless of the truth, propriety, or justice.

        1. That is Fox’s bias, ratings and money. They would go apeshit liberal if that was what it took to get ratings. As it is, they have cornered the market on “right wing news” and are making a fortune. Every time a liberal drones on about Fox News being biased, Rupert Murdoch lights another cigar with a hundred. They have perfected the brand of being “Team Red’s news service”. It was absolutely brilliant.

          1. As it is, they have cornered the market on “right wing news”

            They didn’t “corner” the market. They created it.

          2. As it is, they have cornered the market on “right wing news”

            So they are the highest rated news channel and the republicans just took the house…

            Why do we call the the “right Wing” news channel?

            It would appear to me they are the “centrist wing” news channel.

          3. agree 100%
            Of course, Fox is the network of cognitive dissonance,illogic, and inconsistency (but aren’t they all???)- big supporter of standard southern republican (not libertarian)views on their finance and “news” programming regarding God, war, anybody prosecuted is guilty except bankers, and low taxes, yet more sex and crudeity (nttiawwt)than any other network (married with children, family guy, et al).
            The only question I have is, is Fox’s portrayals of american families meant as a “dress like whores, but have a heart of gold” or is it, “man, I can’t believe these yahoos believe takeing their daughters to church wearing their cheerleader outfits with thong underwear is OK???”

            1. married with children, family guy, et al

              We are talking about Fox News not the Fox channel.

              That aside the Simpsons has perhaps the most traditionally conservative portraits of an American Family on any show on any channel….the second most conservative portrait would be King of the Hill….which also airs on Fox.

              1. They also have Family Guy and American Dad…

      2. To pretend that there is really any difference between Beck and Ed or between Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews is just stupid

        Not only is it “stupid,” but if we believe it we’re “idiots.” You’re right, “me.” Fox’s Andrew Napolitano has exactly the same political philosophy as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. No difference at all. Nothing to see here. Move along.

        1. Anybody that flipped between FNC and MSNBC on election night knows that there’s a huge difference between the two. Lots of liberal voices on FNC that night while as best I could tell Larry O’Donnell was the ‘balance’ on MSNBC’s night of coverage. Really. I think once or twice he said something along the lines of ‘Dems are no better at this particular thing either’. When MSNBC interviewed Republicans it was hilarious. It was like 7th Grade homeroom with a substitute teacher – lots of off camera giggling and cat calls by MSNBC’s ‘hosts’ as the Republican would speak. Until ‘the tingle sign’ with Rep Bachman on, upon where Matthews lashed out at the offense. Matthews will never live that down.

          It was the best night of television evah!

  4. to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government

    Yep, I’m sure he’d like for the American people to keep falling for the same old con games.

    1. So… political discourse is great so long as it restores faith in government.

      Something about that smells fishy.

  5. It would be a big favor to political discourse

    And, as a purely coincidental effect, a monstrous favor to incumbents.

  6. There’s a little bug inside of me

    I’ll be happy to remove it. I assume it’s located in your brainpan?

    1. Quick, call the TSA screeners…they’re good at ferreting out little things in hard to reach places./..

      1. Why am I not around when the fun starts?

  7. “There’s a little bug inside of me”

    Quit squirming, Senator. I’ll get it out!

  8. Like Obama, this jackass thinks Americans’ skepticism of government is a result of poor messaging and not because people just don’t like a lot of government policies. And he is delusional enough to admit that he fantasizes about using the state’s monopoly on violence to silence his critics. Sickening.

    1. You are wrong. You do realize Jay Rockefeller is from the famous family, right? Yes, he is a descendant of the famous robber baron. He was perfectly fine with Bush’s expansion of the surveillance state. As with most of DC, they are out of touch. Do you think Rockefeller has to worry about getting his junk felt up? Of course not.

      1. You must be new here.

      2. FRESH FISH FRESH FISH FRESH FISH FRESH FISH

  9. No. X would say that Y is mostly responsible for the overheated partisan rhetoric, and that X is just trying to keep up. X would heartily agree to the forced dissolution of Y, because then X could return to reporting in a fair and even-handed manner.

  10. Rockefeller? Isn’t he the guy who gave his inherited fortune to the U.S. Treasury and now lives a Mother Teresa-like sparse life in an old coal mining shack? Oh, sorry, that’s just what he wants the rest of us to do.

    1. Awesome!

    2. I believe he’s also the congress critter who recently said we’d all be safer if the internet had never been created.

  11. Isn’t he the guy who gave his inherited fortune to the U.S. Treasury and now lives a Mother Teresa-like sparse life in an old coal mining shack?

    That’s the guy. Just as Kindly old Grandpa Buffett, no longer satisfied with whining about how low his tax rate is, has become so overwhelmed with remorse over his pillaging of society that he has decided to send the Treasury a check for five billion dollars each year. Just to make up for his plundering youth.

    1. Rockefeller is much worse than Buffett. Buffett at least once did something productive and made his money. Rockefeller is just an idiot great grandson. He has never plundered anything in his life or done anything productive. If his name were Schneckengruber, you would never have heard of him. Since he had his wealth and position given to him, he doesn’t understand why people who worked for theirs are so angry about the prospect of the government taking it from him.

      1. and make everyone else suffer for it.

      2. It reminds me of that scene in The Aviator where Howard Hughes chastised the Hepburn family for being a bunch of aspiring socialists living off the fortunes of past generations (and lucrative acting jobs). At least, Hughes got him some ass before he pulled out of that nuthouse. Too bad he exchanged it for loads of 13 year old jailbait and permenant bottle-pissing insanity.

        1. If you paid me all the money in the world, I would not have f*cked katie hepburn, even with your dick.
          Man, that women was a bag of bones, and obnoxious – I truly cannot understand how she was a star. It must be that is was so early in moving pictures that people would watch ANYTHING in motion.

          1. You’ve got a point dan. With this in consideration, I now think it is highly likely that Hughes’ brain had left the station somewhere around the time he stuck his divining rod in Catherine’s bitchy hide.

          2. Wow, harsh. She was “box office poison” for part of her early film career, but she did fine after once she got some good comedy material (The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby, Holiday, etc.).

            Looks-wise, granted, you’d never have noticed her if she were in the same room as Hedy Lamarr or Garbo or numerous others, but I think she was pretty hot back in the day (though perhaps not for all tastes).

      3. here’s a flameworthy threadjack 🙂 –

        “Idiot great grandson…” – perhaps the greatest justification for the dreaded death tax.

        Eat it bitches!!!!! LOL. Come get me!!!!

  12. Ah that stubborn ‘authoritarian bug’ – it’s a hard one to ferret out and crush. May need to feed the old tree of liberty with a its carcass.

  13. Ask me sometime why I no longer vote for anybody who is a Republican or a Democrat.

    1. Oh oh! I know! Is it because their messaging needs to be adjusted?

    2. It’s not because of our policies; it’s certainly not because of me or anything I have done. It’s simply because I have not done a good enough job of explaining to you the reasons why you really should support me.

      1. And not because the president drove me into a ditch.

    3. Because you enjoy being ignored by those looking for votes, and then after the election you enjoy complaining about being ignored by those who got elected?

      1. And on the other hand, Tulpa enjoys being pandered to by those looking for votes, and then after the election he enjoys being ignored by those who got elected.

  14. So, the way to improve political discourse is to not have any?

    You’d think somebody this rich would be able to afford to buy a dictionary, to look up what the word “discourse” means.

    1. He meant to say “monologue”.

      1. A monologue broadcast on our telescreens.

    2. 10 bucks this fuckface would be the first one trumpeting the mandated destruction of websites on the order of Reason.com as well.

  15. The only thing “the Citizens United hating hysterics at MSNBC” will see is that they’ve been lumped in with Fox, and that will be the focus of their indignation.

    1. But Rachel Maddow said since MSNBC suspended Keith Olbermann for a few days, that PROVES they are totally non-partisan.

      1. Same as CBS.

  16. I’ve even given that little bug a name, Wen Jiabao.

    1. That is my bug’s name. Small world.

  17. look up what the word “discourse” means.

    In the Dictionary of American Politics, it means, “I talk; you obey.”

  18. Faith in government? Is that like faith in a omnipotent being that lives in outer space and is responsible for the creation of the universe and life on this planet?

    Or, faith in a debt based currency that is administered by the same bankers that it is supposed to protect us from?

    Or, faith in a government that knows what’s best for us, and proves it by banning Happy Meals and alcoholic energy drinks instead of inspecting imported fish from China (if they could even do that properly).

    Ahh, too many to list.

    1. Or faith in grope happy government agents to not molest our junk as they tweeze our pubes in front hundreds of fellow gropees?

      Or faith in a Military-industrial complex designed to perpetuate itself first, have sex with whores second, and protect the people who fund its operation at a distant 1,532nd?

      1. Hey! Hey! Hey! Protect our retirements comes second. Whores third.

    2. Its faith in the goodness, common sense, and decency of our fellow man – our leaders bravely increasing benefits to the old, while decreasing taxes, something only the brave and wise would do…
      …OW…OW godd*mn it – I laughed so hard that I ruptured a testicle. Man, if only I was merely skeptical instead of jadedly cynical…

  19. is this the Rockefeller who founded/funded the TriLateral Commission? wait, that was his brother David, yes? Of course he wants us all to have faith in government, only he means one government as in One World Order; the only good media is media you can control. (I get this stuff from my father, a TriLateral Commission conspiracy theorist from day one)

    1. oops, David is his uncle – hard to keep them all straight —

      1. Sounds like there’s been a lot of inbreeding.

  20. Translation: I’m tired of having my actions examined and judged. I should be above that type of thing.

  21. Now under TSA guidelines, the reason spam filter will grope your “junk” before every posting.

    1. But it now does it dressed as a woman. So you won’t be so uncomfortable.

      1. I’m almost ready to start telling TSA agents pre-hand job that I’m openly gay, and if I get excited during their pat down they should take it as a compliment.

        1. Good idea.

          1. if there are no hot TSA chicks around, it’s off to the xray machine*
          2. otherwise, you’re gay, and don’t feel comfortable getting patted down by a guy**

          In the second case, you have to be sure to make good eye contact and drop some creepy Hannibal Lechter-style comment as you’re walking away from the grope-session.

          * likelihood of this outcome: 99.99%
          ** swap genders, orientation, as necessary

        2. Wear a kilt, True Scotsman style. That’s my plan.

          If they’re going to touch my balls, they’re going to touch those bitches. I want my pubes to graze their wrist.

          Anything to make them as uncomfortable and embarrassed as I am. If I have to suffer their security practices, they do too.

          Fuck the TSA.

  22. Tell me again how Democrats are better on civil liberties than Republicans?

    1. But… but… ABORTION!

      1. AND … OLD PEOPLE DIEING IN THE STREETZ!!!!!!!!!

    2. Well, duh! You’re obviously a bible-thumping, gun-clinging, Bush-loving, war-mongering, racist, homophobic, right-wing bigot asshole!

  23. “have some faith in their government”

    Well, Jay, how about you folks in D.C. start doing your jobs within Constitutional and ethical guidelines, THEN we’ll talk about trusting you…

    1. ARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  24. the Citizens United-hating hysterics at MSNBC

    Free speech is so vexing! But it allows Keith Olbermann to say really stupid things and to end his weeknightly rant with this politico-economic-challenged gem: “15 days since the Republicans took control of Congress. Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?”

    Note to Keith:
    A) Republicans haven’t “taken control” of anything. Not Congress (which is a bicameral legislature consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives) and not even the House, yet. Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are still in charge and will remain in charge until next year. And the Democrats will retain their majority in the Senate.

    B) Politicians such as Mr. Boehner don’t actually create jobs. They create make-work opportunities and bureaucracies and debt and taxes.

    C) Might I suggest (starting next year): “Mr. Boehner, where are the make-work opportunities and bureaucracies and debt and taxes?”

    1. Let’s not forget that the Republicans haven’t even taken control of the House yet, and won’t until the new Congress is seated in January.

      1. But they will! Please God make the pain go away! Can’t Obama just take over? Republicans don’t have rights, anyway.

      2. That’s what I meant by “Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are still in charge and will remain in charge until next year.” Next year being January.

    2. Wait…when did he stop ending with the whole Iraq war thing? Is he just pretending it’s over now?

      1. He was hoping that you wouldn’t notice.

      2. Like the rest of the “peace-loving” fuckers out there, Olbermann gave up on the war when his annointed god got his finger on the button. It has never surprised me that most of the very people screaming about the wars, have conveniently silenced themselves now that their domestic agenda can be enacted. Luckily enough of us crazy bastards on the margins can hold their feet to the proverbial fire until another war-happy, shellshocked, braindead fucker is given the job. At least we can say we never were wrong…

        In the end, for them, it really had nothing to do with peace in the first place. Just power.

    3. 15 days since the Republicans took control of Congress. Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?

      Are you kidding? He actually said that? And he wasn’t making some sarcastic point about how we haven’t given Obama enough time, or something?

  25. Here’s how far off he is: If Bill Gates were to go apeshit insane while reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and decided that America needs Nazism, it would be perfectly legal and there would be nothing the government could do about it if he launched the Nazi News Network (N?).

    1. As someone who reveres the 1st with an almost religious fervor, I’d say it’s spot on.

  26. Note to non-liberals

    The Daily Show and Colbert Report are much more popular among liberals than MSNBC in my experience. But that may not be representative because I’m tragically hip.

    1. MSNMC has terrible ratings. I don’t think they are popular with anyone. It is almost like they are some rightwing front operation set up to discredit the mainstream media. I think Rachel Maddow gets some love from liberals. But, Olberman and crazy Ed Shultz don’t really much of a following anywhere that I can see.

      1. They’re sufficiently popular with enough people to keep them on the air. That’s kind of how ratings work. MSNBC has fired lots of failed personalities who did not perform to their admittedly diminished standards.

        1. They have. But Olberman gets destroyed in the ratings by O’Reilly. NBC loses money on the network. I think their plan was to try to be the “Team Blue News Service” and fill the same but opposite niche Fox News does by being “Team Red’s News Service”. And they have kind of done that. But the ratings you get for being “Team Blue’s News Service” are pretty shitty compared to what Fox gets for being the opposite.

          1. “But the ratings you get for being “Team Blue’s News Service” are pretty shitty compared to what Fox gets for being the opposite.”

            Well I’ll be damned!

          2. Doesn’t MSNBC still beat CNN in prime time though?

            1. I believe they do yes. But they still are lousy and get killed by Fox.

          3. Probably all due to demographics. The young liberals are all out getting, or trying to get, action at bars – they are not watching TV. The old liberals are all stoned…so stoned that they are probably watching Fox, and saying “dude, that blonde guy with the crewcut who is always crying MAKES sense…dude! Whoa, what happened to the guacamole???”

      2. My parents watch MSNBC every night starting with Ed and ending with Rachel. Thanks to their TV viewing habits, our political conservations usually end with them screaming DNC talking points at me.

        1. I usually don’t advocate violence, but I’m pretty sure you have adequate justification for killing your parents.

          1. Thanksgiving would definitely be more pleasant. At least I wouldn’t have to hear about how it’s MY fault that country is going to hell because Richard Burr got re-elected due to my vote for Mike Beitler instead of Elaine Marshall.

        2. Yeah, neko, that’s why I steer my MSNBC-watching parents toward their own hypocrisy by pointing out how more feasible the execution of the current liberal agenda would be without all the wars, worthless/destructive agencies, direct government involvement in many of the disasters in the last 50 years, etc etc. I usually hear cricket chirps or denunciations of Bush, the latter of which I usually agree with them on.

          1. According to my parents, Obama TOTALLY wants to end the wars but if he tried then “tea-baggers” might come to Washington with angry signs. At least, that was their excuse for why Obama signed Mitt Romney’s health care plan into law.

            1. You’ve got to love the logical acrobatics required to draw that conclusion from that premise. Sadly, this type of “thinking” drives people on both craptacular sides of the spectrum off the collective cliffs of their own wet dreams. Sometimes emotion (pity, fear, PMS—no offense) buries logic like so many butch sex slaves in Rachel Maddow’s back yard.

      3. The daily Show gets 1.45 to 1.6 million viewers nightly.

        In comparison Rush has 12 million daily listeners

        Beck has 3 million nightly viewers

        Olbermann has about 1.2 million viewers nightly

      4. It was another commenter on a different thread (I think it was John) who observed that MSNBC is what liberals think FOX is.

      5. Academics in the Arts.

        That is their audience.

    2. And Fox is popular with old people more than anything else. I say that because all of the commercials on there, at least in the mornings when I see it, are for old people products. The commercials run on a TV show usually gives a pretty good idea who is watching. And if the commercials are any indication, few people under the age of 60 watch Fox.

      1. That because old farts are the only ones home at that time of day watching TV.

        Watch the ads on The Price is Right, for example.

    3. The only reason I’ll tune in to The Daily Show is for Lewis Black’s occasional segments.

      Does that mean I only have a smattering of tragical hipness?

      1. The best thing about Lewis Black was that he got work for Greg Giraldo.

        1. I don’t care what anyone says, Lewis Black is fucking hilarious. Especially the part where he states that he is an avowed socialist. I don’t care about that, though, because he is just so damn funny. I loved his bit about the bible – Jews and Old Testament versus Christians and New Testament – and about evolution: “FOSSIL!”

          1. There is nothing worse than a republican or a democrat, except when these pricks “work together”.

    4. So what’s that say about liberals when they get most of their political news and analysis from COMEDIANS! Then again, mayble the can’t tell the difference in the comedic styles of Comedy Central and MSNBC.

      1. NEO-CONs cannot do humor. Azz Cheese!

        hehheh

  27. This Rockefeller is pretty cool:

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb…..11-17.html

  28. The gas bag doesn’t even try to justify it for reasons of of public good; it’s all about making his job easier:
    “It would be a big favor to political discourse; our ability to do our work here in Congress, and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government”
    He also ought to get a clue about ‘faith in the government’; it’s not lacking because of TV shows.

  29. “There’s a little bug inside of me”

    Well then, by golly, we’ll just keep drilling holes until we find it!

    1. “There’s a little bug inside of me”

      There once was an old lady who swallowed a spider the wiggled and jiggled inside her.
      She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
      Oh my i do not know why she swallowed a fly.
      I guess she will die.

  30. Let me get this straight: Rockefeller believes that FNC and MSNBC are the reasons why so many Americans are losing faith in their government?

    Good grief, the man sounds even more detached from reality than Pelosi and Obama.

  31. It would be a huge favor to the American people if Rockefeller was caught dying while stuck dangling from a horse cock. No one with his accursed last name would be able to buy a Senate seat after that.

  32. I wonder what Comcast will do with MSNBC? It’s not exactly the jewel in the NBC crown, after all.

    1. Hire Brit Hume and improve it’s ratings? Ha ha ha ha just kidding!

      1. I expect some changes. Comcast is not GE.

  33. Isn’t this the same Rockefeller that chaired the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and stated to that committee that Saddam Hussein presents an “imminent threat”?

    That war wasn’t made up in Texas as Ted Kennedy said, it was made up in Senator Rockefeller’s leadership in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.