marccooper.comAbout MarcContactMarc's Video Blogs

BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION

BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION, Paging the Chilean miner rescue teams. They need you in Washington D.C, PROSCAR coupon. PROSCAR dose, this week to help extricate NPR from the hole it continues to dig itself into over banning its employees from attending --or even watching from the sidelines-- the upcoming Stewart-Colbert rallies on the mall.

NPR's official Church Lady ombudsman, PROSCAR pictures, Where can i buy cheapest PROSCAR online, Alicia Shepard engages in some truly sophistic mumblings about the controversial ban, mostly lamenting how the ban was poorly handled PR-wise, is PROSCAR safe, PROSCAR online cod, while defending its substance.  Reading through this sludge reminds me of my college days, forty years ago, about PROSCAR, Where can i order PROSCAR without prescription, when I would have to peruse the ideological tracts of small Marxist-Leninist cults.  Ahhh, but such is the nature of orthodoxy, order PROSCAR from mexican pharmacy, Buying PROSCAR online over the counter, no. After all, PROSCAR from canadian pharmacy, Order PROSCAR from United States pharmacy, IT IS WRITTEN.

Well, "Nothing is written!" as Peter O'Toole exclaims  to Omar Sharif in Lawrence of Arabia, BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION. Except for Ms, PROSCAR use. Cheap PROSCAR no rx, Shepard. Everything is already pre-determined by The Code, PROSCAR natural, PROSCAR trusted pharmacy reviews, the holy script (presumably guarded by that elite class of orange-clad primates in The Planet of The Apes). And, as was the case with those hairy, PROSCAR without prescription, PROSCAR maximum dosage, cinematic keepers of the truth,  it is her exalted duty to interpret the secret books for us chimps, PROSCAR dosage, Where can i find PROSCAR online, much the same way priests and other charlatans interpret the Word of God for their own flocks of Sheeple.

The real problem, herbal PROSCAR, PROSCAR pics, you see, is the "dark side" of the Internet as Shepard puts it, purchase PROSCAR online no prescription. BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION, All us pajama-clad bloggers just ganged up and raped poor old NPR, without fully understanding what is written in Paragrah 9, Section 347, Book Three of the Revered Ethical Code of the Church of Latter Day Journalists.  The net did  a "lousy job," she says in interpreting the latest decree from the infallible NPR managers,  unlike the stellar work done, say, by the "legitimate"  New York Times in its once-in-a-lifetime reporting on Curveball during the stampede to the catastrophic war in Iraq. Discount PROSCAR, Thank heavens no lousy bloggers stuck their nose under the tent on that one. One can only imagine the quagmire we would have been tossed into, PROSCAR images. PROSCAR over the counter, Jeff Jarvis, who happens to be an old newspaper guy, PROSCAR price, Online buying PROSCAR hcl, a Web pioneer and a  leading J-School innovator, rips Shepard to shreds in this fine piece, buy PROSCAR online no prescription. PROSCAR forum, He also notes with barely concealed glee that Shepard is on her way out. Hopefully, NPR's new ombuds will be someone who actually understands the Web and how it is changing everything.  Of course,  ten years from now it won't matter because there will be no more "appointment radio" and that will be that, BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION. I suspect by then NPR will fully get how the Web works.

Earlier in the day, Jarvis had written a good piece on his own blog detailing exactly where NPR has missed the boat.  Even if you sanctify the illusion of "impartiality," why would you encourage your reporters to be ignorant and non-observant of major societal events. Better to be engaged than to be celibate.

Well, don't get lathered up. BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION, it's all just a simple PR problem that could have been avoided with a more cleverly written press release.  Something more important than truth and passion. Shepard concludes that NPR's absurd policy of political abstinence is just fine. The flacks just should  have had written the public memo in a better way.

Jarvis encourages NPR staff to actively protest the ban by making their voices heard on blogs and social media. Don't hold your breath. I think more of their spare time is taken up attending those voice classes where you learn to speak like you are constantly pumped full of Thorazine and your heart rate never rises above 55.

Ms. Shepard: The best response to you is: Epuur' Si Mouve..

Similar posts: ANSIETEN FOR SALE. BUY RISPERDAL NO PRESCRIPTION. BUY ENALAPRIL NO PRESCRIPTION. Order ELDEPRYL online overnight delivery no prescription. GENERIC PROVIGIL pics. Herbal PROVERA.
Trackbacks from: BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION. BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION. BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION. PROSCAR treatment. PROSCAR brand name. Purchase PROSCAR.

79 Responses to “BUY PROSCAR NO PRESCRIPTION”

  1. timotheus Says:

    I suspect neither Ms Shepard or anyone else at NPR would even have noticed if half their staff had chosen to go down and gawk at Glen Beck’s obscene imitation of MLK at the Lincoln Memorial. While alert to the danger of being attacked by Fox for being too liberal, they could have safely winked at hanging around the margins of any kind of racist Tea Party nonsense and later have palmed it off as legitimate journalistic curiosity. Another shining example of how the faux objectivity meme actually covers slavish pandering to power.

  2. AC Says:

    As mentioned in first thread on NPR debacle, I called and spoke with Ms Shepherd…she asked for my email so she could send me link to her blog and the further amplification of NPR’s “rules”.

    I replied with a pithy email inside of which I declared her to be “intellectually malleable”. She replied-via email-that she was offended-that I didn’t know her. Au contraire, I replied:

    “I read your blog. The lame excuse for agreeing that a staff member might be tainted or taint NPR by attending ANYTHING is a very sure indication of if not intellectual malleability then most certainly a psychological maladay.

    How do you account for the fact that a Johann Hari who is considered quite the fair haired boy journalist and gets ink in the respected publications that he does is not bound by any such atavistic and archetypically American reactionary clap trap?

    {Hari was a guest speaker/protester/provocateur at anti pope rally in London}

    You claim NPR’s demands are some sort of standard in journalism. Clearly they are not.

    They are, however, right in keeping with the reactionary-corporate stranglehold that chokes and has choked American media since the country got going. And this country has a very nasty history of killing off media that doesn’t serve corporate interests.

    Ethics in journalism is about not lying or deliberate misrepresentation. It is not about a story being debased by a point of view. Or preventing an employee from associating or assembling…

    NPR’s crazy rules are a clear violation of the First Amendment. There is no arguing that fact. There is no upholding any journalistic ethics with such rules. They are corporate directives and come from the same contaminated well as did the chimera that drove HUAC.

    They are indefensible. ”
    ________________________________________________________

    Marc: I should mention I didn’t rat you out. In my phone conversation with her I said the issue came to my attention through the blog of a journalism chair. I quoted her some of the text. She was aghast. Said: I am sorry they are teaching journalism!
    She claimed to be a journalist for 30 years and a former (or maybe concurrently) Georgetown journalism instructor. She wanted to know WHO (like the Catepillar) wrote that blog! And to let her know by email! Of course, I ignored the request.

    She is a dipso.

  3. AC Says:

    PS: anyone care to comment on the fact this “code” only came into being in 2004?

    When Air America (I was in England still at the time) was on the case over the election fraud and I believe NPR was also digging in– (though can’t be sure)

    I would suspect that as a result of all the outrage and avalanche of reports coming out that somehow this “code” was meant to dampen NPR’s ability to produce commentary that might rock the boat.

  4. reg Says:

    Somehow the notion that attributing Marc’s blog posts to the NPR ombudsman would be “ratting him out” strikes me as funny. My guess is that Marc would have appreciated the quote not only being attributed but read with an air of disdain. And that it be noted his first name ends in “c.”

  5. AC Says:

    Just a reflexive reaction to not tell her. Especially, when she went off on her holier than thou/patronizing gibber about how sorry she was he was teaching journalism. By posting it here I figure Marc can take her on directly if he so chooses.

    I am about finished reading First Amendment Felon. I was in full twitch at the time of the conversation. Too synchronous. The book gives a hair raising compression of the HUAC years. So her asking me for attribution just pissed me off :)

  6. AC Says:

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/06/30/shepard

    Well…Missy Alicia is quite the creepy little person. Seems this latest stumble is quite in keeping with her usual behavior.

    Clearly NPR is taking its cues from some Rumsfeldian-Chenian ghoul.

  7. Marc Cooper Says:

    I don’t think I will be applying time soon for a job at NPR. My voice is way too screechy.

  8. AC Says:

    …”Don’t hold your breath. I think more of their spare time is taken up attending those voice classes where you learn to speak like you are constantly pumped full of Thorazine and your heart rate never rises above 55.”

    Thats why I never have been able to listen to NPR or most any alternative radio unless its music. If I want the feeling of a drill boring in my brain I’ll go to the dentist.

  9. Pokey Says:

    Are we living in France or Canada where free speech is only allowed as long as it does not offend someone. Did NPR also preclude their staff from attending or discussing Glen Beck’s rally as well?

    Would anyone even considered having or attending this rally if it hadn’t been for Glen Beck’s rally that seemed to offend the left.

    NPR is considered the left’s favorite mouthpiece by nearly every objective standard, but a comedy channel rally is hardly something to fuss about. Perhaps NPR has just lost their collective minds.

  10. Randy Paul Says:

    NPR is considered the left’s favorite mouthpiece by nearly every objective standard,

    Actually, that’s pretty much a rightwing talking point, not an objective standard.

  11. reg Says:

    The notion that NPR is “left” is pretty bizarre. It’s news programming is the essence of moderate, middle-of-the-road reporting. I guess it’s reputation for doing stories relatively in-depth compared to most broadcast news, and the existence of a far-right loony toons TeeVee propaganda machine as “balancing” “the other side” tars it with the Leftist brush.

  12. pablo Says:

    So when they announce “All Things Considered” they are being, at best, aspirational. There are some things which cannot be considered.

    Or perhaps, when they announce “All Things Considered” they mean that, given the constraints they subject themselves to with political oversight and corporate funding, they are doing a pretty fair job, ITHO.

    BTW, all things considered… hats off to AC who phoned the ambudsperson to begin with; there is no doubt now that NPR will cover the “defining moment of a generation (maybe)”.
    Otherwise it would be like going to Gettysburg with the wrong address… and we can all ponder what happens if history happens and there is nobody around to record it.

    AC took some heat here.. needlessly. The NPR rep took her call and conveyed the messege upstairs. Since the event of no substance there can’t be any harm in coverage or allowing the employees stop to buy ice-cream.

  13. reg Says:

    Totally off-topic, but I just want to say that Marc’s daughter – Ms. Vargas-Cooper – has been kicking ass on her Madmen blog…if you haven’t checked it out this season, do so in the wake of the (wierd) finale. Not the usual, tired, “I-could-have-written-this” day-after-last-night’s-episode crap you can consume on Slate, etc.

  14. jim hitchcock Says:

    I find it a bit telling that Ms. Shepard didn’t simply google some of the text AC quoted her, which would have led her straight to this blog.

    Reg, the season finale was weird, but in my first season of watching the show (thanks to Natasha and Marc), I’ve been knocked out.

    So how many months till the 4th season of Breaking Bad premieres? :)

  15. reg Says:

    Jon Stewart on his rally: “It’s so genius, it almost doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.”

  16. pablo Says:

    “It’s so genius, it almost doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.”

    ——–

    Especially when the speech given at the (maybe) defining moment for a generation seguays into the speculation as to wether the silver-tongued witch from Delaware poses a greater danger to America than Momma Grizzly because of her slick talk-show timing..
    That seems to be what is passing for serious journo over at the Atlantic, being offered for liberal consumption in a feeble attempt to demonize in order to get out the vote.

    I’m certain that this will be soon become the grist for TV’s Quartet in the race to the bottom. The premise requires that the bauble head suspend disbelief on several levels in order for the invideous comparison between O’Donnell and Palin with a modicum of seriousness fitting of a fool locked in apprasial.

    It presupposes an O’Donnell electoral victory…. and then what? Vote with the party? Bolt the party?
    And this weighed against Palin… who isn’t running… or put another way, is running early… for President!

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/10/why-christine-odonnell-could-be-more-dangerous-than-sarah-palin/64542/

    The comic and not the Atlantic are spot on. the Atlantic must have the genius of the fool

  17. AC Says:

    I actually strapped myself in and watched the ODonnell-whats his name debate.

    Despite her regurgitating memorized-coached gibber to many she would have seem en forme…though her opponent was clearly informed, educated, articulate he came off as an asshole. He also thought the that the choice of the”mosque” was “inconvenient”– an expedient asshole. He also came off as bitchy and snappish and when CO would disgorge a load of her coached gibber that was so out there he would go all sotto voce to the moderators roll eyes, sigh, and go “so much to say”. It was like sooooooooooooooo embarrassing and he really got caught out as to his character. Lets just say he didn’t make the best use of coming across as masculine but acted more like he was in a bitch slap contest.

    I suspect he lost a lot of votes he would have had given his performance.

    She, like Palin, had the same Svengalis orchestrating her delivery and these crafters are brilliant.

    Oh well….

  18. reg Says:

    But, of course in the piece Pablo cites as evidence of his intellectual superiority to James Fallows, Fallows is openly skeptical that Palin will run for President. The point isn’t about O’Donnell winning an election, it’s about the power of blissful ignorance versus telling notes of insecurity in a politician’s image. The literalist in Pablo trips him up and makes his “analysis” an exercise in the utter foolishness of note even minimally getting a writer’s point.

  19. AC Says:

    reg, reg, reg,

    I havent read the Atlantic piece…but the title alone is enough to make one sigh.

    Its the constant waste of ink and time. O’D et al–as said before–is a symptom…a manifestation. These talking head fuckers refuse to hammer home the reality that big corporate money is what fuels these people. Without the money and the professional strategists they would evaporate into thin air. THAT is the story. And the other part of that story is that an Atlantic bozo or whomever what give ink to the viable alternative candidates that are mowed down by the Dems even if they try to become a legit candidate.

    Again: WIKI MICHAEL ARTH. The guy who tried to make a play for Florida gov.

    The story is that the Dem machine squashes any candidate with a truly democratic platform. And people like you and Randy and Dan and everyone else get the vapors at the idea that someone might vote for a candidate who actually stands for something because it would throwing away the vote and allowing Fric instead of Frac to win.

    I do believe this is the point Pablo is trying to make.

    mein gott. i am now an interpreter between parallel universes. Just call me Bluescout.

  20. AC Says:

    oops…should be “won’t” give ink not “what”.

  21. AC Says:

    PS reg:

    if you haven’t already, read First Amendment Felon. I know you probably are familiar with every landmark battle cited in the book. But read it anyway because it reads like a horror story. It is one and one that continues. HUAC didn’t go away its now morphed into the Patriot Act and the Tea Party candidates are its agents.

    Its baaaaaa aaaaackkkkkkk. Not writing about the broader context of these Devil’s advocates is the issue and shameful.

    That weird 1934 Business Plot doesn’t seem so far fetched now. Its being hatched again only it no longer needs an armed insurrection to triumph.

  22. AC Says:

    Actually, the Buisness Plot has, in fact, succeeded.

  23. AC Says:

    ok i read the Atlantic blurb. That was the dumbest excuse to put ink I have ever read. This guy gets paid for that shit?

  24. reg Says:

    Yeah, AC. James Fallows is an idiot (and doesn’t understand O’Donnell as a “symptom” despite the fact that was his only poiing) and you’re consistently cogent. Along with Pablo.

    Excuse me while I roll on the floor and laugh…

  25. reg Says:

    “only point” – jeeeeze

  26. Randy Paul Says:

    I havent read the Atlantic piece…but the title alone is enough to make one sigh.

    Shorter Anna: You can, in fact, judge a book by its cover . . .

  27. AC Says:

    reg, Fallows piece was just so much gibber that has been repeated endlessly since these little pod girls hatched. ITS BOOOOORRRRRR INGGGGG

    How do you reckon he was making the point she is a “symptom”?

    He was just trying to score some hackneyed points and collect a paycheck.

    c’mon reg. what are you defending here?

  28. Dan O Says:

    I havent read the Atlantic piece…but the title alone is enough to make one sigh.

    The prideful declaration of ignorance by the uselessly uninformed.

    Who could make a comment like that and not feel like a shitheel? Nevermind, I know who.

  29. AC Says:

    Uh …Dan the only shit heel here is you who can’t perceive the difference between seeing Palin or ODonnell as irrelevant clowns but relevant as props and agents of a powerful agency.

    and my perception of the article based on its title was correct.

    another useless distraction. I amplified that point above.

    I wonder if I can get a court order against you for cyber stalking…

  30. AC Says:

    Fallows does not make the distinction. only says O’D more of a threat because of her talk show slicks.

    Wrong. O’D is running with the whirlwind let loosed by the response to Palin’s RNC speech which was crafted FOR HER to test the waters…

    O’D/Angle et al are all being prepped by the Rove and Right strategy machine– and financed.

    The Right has long had an organizational strategy that has left the Left and Dems in the dust.

  31. AC Says:

    http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/10/tea-party-mark-meckler-herbalife

    love the smell of synchronicity in the afternoon…

  32. AC Says:

    Go to page 3 and start here:

    …”Meckler came under fire earlier this year when news broke that, in 2007, UniqueLeads had spun off another company called Opt-In Movement, in conjunction with a DC-based GOP consultant David All, to create a list-generation firm that catered to political campaigns. “…

  33. pablo Says:

    reg Says:

    October 19th, 2010 at 7:48 am
    But, of course in the piece Pablo cites as evidence of his intellectual superiority to James Fallows, Fallows is openly skeptical that Palin will run for President
    ———————–

    Reg flatters… and Fallows plays the fool if he feels that Palin is not running for President. So it must be genius, it almost doesn’t make sense whatsoever.

    Just two weeks back on that nameless network.. the party nabobs noted that Alaska’s Senate candidate aroused the ire in an otherwise laconic Todd Palin ( who prefers to stand with his hands clasped at the groin) because the Palin-picked Senate hopeful had twice publicly equivocated as to whether Palin is qualified to be the Prez… offered as evidence that Palin is running.
    Coupled with the more obvious intent seen in the strategic endorsements by Palin to a blend of Tea-Party and Republicans should give pause to even the feeble-minded of Fallows facetious and openly skeptical fulmanation the face of a literary lion like an intellectual Pablo… fellow Pablo fighting Fallows from the nitpicking from a jealous and angry obsessor who is bent on destroying poetry
    for the sake
    of having
    someone
    else
    to blame.

    Fallows offers a forced card from the deck.

    Okay then… let us go then, you and I, roll up our sleeves and begin to to appraise the two patients etherized upon the table:

    Gentlemen, the question for your pondered consideration is who among the two, O’Donnell or Palin, pose a greater threat to America?

  34. reg Says:

    Pablo, The Green Commenting Machin,e obviously poses the greatest (poetic) threat to Amerikkka! Palin and O’Donnell are no match…

  35. AC Says:

    reg, you are out of order. Now you are red baiting.

    why don’t you actually explain your rabid OTT attacks on Pablo.

    they are getting nuttier and nuttier as Dan’s stalking me.

    Seriously, reg. your language conjures someone frothing at the mouth. enraged that someone would contradict your perceptions and perspective of what the progressive response should be.

    reminds me of the crazy internecine warfare i have read about between all the factions in the US commie party.

    If progressive don’t start agreeing on what the FACTS are…not to mention causal relationships between actions and results then we truly are fucked.

    there is enough historical/documented evidence about how this country is ruled and what have been the effective responses.

    Somebody is in a rut here…

  36. reg Says:

    OMFG – I’m red-baiting? Are you really that stupid ? I’m pointing out that Pablo is nuts. He’s so obsessed that he actually walked a rather inconsequential blog post over here and began a half-assed, completely off-topic rant – one that made absolutely no sense except in his mental interiors – stalking as it were. Pablo is the nuttiest character I’ve encountered here since Woody. Pablo loses it every time he tries to make a “serious” point – so he reverts to cryptic readings of innocuous stuff, in order to create the web of DNC/MSNBC/Liberal/Reg tyranny that he imagines is keeping his ideological predelictions from having the impact they deserve. A nutcase IMHO.

  37. reg Says:

    Also Anna, I think you’re pretty much a wack job your own self.

  38. pablo Says:

    Uh-oh…Reg seems to be getting angry again.

    When one sees people like James Fallows doing the election-time pander fandango over at the Atlantic then it’s really desperation time for the Dems.

    The article is a classic piece of ideo self referential gibberish which succeeds in its unguent purpose of being re-printed in the lib blogosphere under the rubric of ‘Republican perfidy’.

    It is so nutty on so many levels.
    The readers of lib blogs are not voting for tea-baggers… and where is mention of South Carolina’s Al Green as a danger or a threat?… oh, one need not worry because there is a big “D” after Mr Green’s name.

    But over-arching the whole issue of “the dangers posed” is the failure of see the fear-mongering being ginned up by the Center-Right for their own purposes.
    The witch isn’t winning and Fallows is laughably “openly skeptical” that Palin is running.

    It is a nutty as this…. I ask you, which poses a greater danger to America, malaria or dysentary?

  39. reg Says:

    Pablo – I’m not angry. I’m laughing at you. Get it through your pretty little head. The only thing I forgot in my prior comment was to include Comedy Central in the DNC conspiracy that’s keeping you down.

  40. reg Says:

    Pablo: “where is mention of South Carolina’s Al Green as a danger or a threat?… oh, one need not worry because there is a big ‘D’ after Mr Green’s name.”

    You are correct, sir. MSNBC, in close coordination with the DNC and the Comedy Channel has coined Greene’s campaign slogan: “Alvin Greene – still better than Jim DeMint”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/lawrence-odonnell-alvin-greene-interview-video/

  41. reg Says:

    Remember when David Axelrod went on television after the SC primary and dismissed Greene as an incompetent fluke, but was immediately upbraided by MSNBC and went on Rachel Maddow’s show the next day and recanted? Thankfully, we are all now in lockstep.

    Or was that Karl Rove, re: C. O’Donnell? I keep mixing this stuff up. Which makes me terribly angry…

  42. pablo Says:

    Here comes your 19th nervous meltdown.. (insert Bill Wyman bass guitar slide here)…

    You might want to consider not watching that stuff… one runs the risk of taking it too literally and ends up believing it as true..

    Look, par example, at that curious debate in NY the other night… one gets the Crazy Carl and Your Rent Is Too High sideshow…. but for thinking people (when they are not otherwise angry) are listening to the clear frontrunner and next Gov. of NY.
    What does Andrew say?
    He sounded like Sarko on steroids… that is THE story for Dems… but the stuff that matters to (ahem) progressives should be the policy…and given the parade of characters up on the dais, the chance for a progressive to BE progressive is right in front of us.
    But alas…

  43. AC Says:

    reg, reg, reg,

    your harrangues can be summed up to mean no one can get elected (except a Right wing wacho Republican) unless they get the blessing of the Democratic machine even tho there are a gaggle of right wing fucks dressed in Dem clothing who one presumes that if you lived in their state you would have voted for them as opposed to a “real” Republican. I am wondering who you would vote for in the Kentucky derby between Rand Paul and Jack Conway. I suppose if their were a third party candidate– a bona fide progressive you would still feel obligated to vote for a bag of shit like Conway.

    btw…CNN crushed O’Donnell in just a few minutes last night in the guise of a “fair” report in a far more succinct fashion than the hysterical, gibber Maddow was doing last night–repeating each point twice like she is want to do…and they showed what jerks both Conway and Paul are. Conway hoisted himself on his own pitard by agreeing to come on the show.

    The point is reg: if this year’s electoral circus isn’t enough to convince you that the only way out of the mess is to support candidates who demonstrate a real grasp of the issues and a platform that at least can be a blue print for constructive action then people like you with your knee jerk appeasement ism are going to be in the way of progress.

    If that point of view makes me a wacko then I must be in some very good company considering those who know we are witnessing the death throes of an old regime. You are one of those who persists on clinging to it.

  44. AC Says:

    PS note the image Marc has put up for this thread. Reminds me of the old cowboy saying that goes:

    If you want to get out of a hole…stop digging.

    reg, let go of the shovel.

  45. AC Says:

    btw: you guys noting what is happening in England? The Tories are ransacking the joint. They’ve come in like the Vandals.

    Just got a report from friend who works for council in Brighton and says its a bloodbath.

  46. pablo Says:

    your harrangues can be summed up to mean no one can get elected (except a Right wing wacho Republican) unless they get the blessing of the Democratic machine even tho there are a gaggle of right wing fucks dressed in Dem clothing who one presumes that if you lived in their state you would have voted for them as opposed to a “real” Republican.
    ——————–

    Seems as if the regulars have heated up the TV dinners… and will probably return after hearing who got the last word..

    Anna, you nailed it… it isn’t a party; it’s a religion.

  47. Jim R Says:

    Hope this comment is not out of place with the topic…what was it now?

    NPR is a partially funded Public Broadcasting Service. It, especially, needs to at least ‘try’ to appear non-partisan. But everyone realizes it is stocked with liberals, especially NPR itself, so they are naturally extra sensitive to their ‘public’ seeing a cadre of their paid closet activists showing up at a clearly liberal political rally, a rally “to restore sanity” btw to give the clear inference the 300,000 members of their ‘public’ in the previous one were insane, but not to report on the rally (NPR reporters are not being barred from officially covering the rally), instead to come out of the closets, bump elbows, and have a rocking good political protest with their brethren.

    Praise the lord and pass the placards. Of course NPR is horrified at the prospect they may be drug out of the big closet themselves….the one with the glass door btw. And I can see leftist and liberals are horrified NPR is horrified at the prospect of ‘restoring sanity’ to the much larger majority of the ‘public’ that is clearly insane.

  48. reg Says:

    Stop me before I kill progress…

    I’m so fucking ANGRY!

  49. Jim R Says:

    I agree with Marc. We should all be for sanity, and openly, even if we the minority ‘public’.

    That’s the way it has always been, and the very reason big governments, led by smart sane and giving ‘public servants’, are needed to manage the madness of a free and incompetent people, f–king up their lives and the lives of others by just being stupid.

  50. Jim R Says:

    …..and voting against their own interests.

  51. Randy Paul Says:

    But everyone realizes it is stocked with liberals

    Proof?

  52. AC Says:

    John Stewart was on Larry King last night…didn’t catch beginning but this “rally” is no more that a big satirical comedy concert.

    According to Alicia, going to a Lewis Black concert would not fall under the rules of the commandant….

  53. AC Says:

    recap:

    http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/jon-stewart-says-sanity-rally-will-not-be-political/

  54. pablo Says:

    reg Says:

    October 20th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
    Stop me before I kill progress…

    I’m so fucking ANGRY!

    ———————————

    See?!!
    Dinner in front of the TV must have ended at 8:00pm… so who got the last word?

  55. jim hitchcock Says:

    >…didn’t catch beginning but this “rally” is no more that a big satirical comedy concert.<

    Uh, duh?

  56. Jim R Says:

    Well Jon, if it’s not political why dub it a rally “to restore sanity”? Why wouldn’t your dub it a rally “to restore humor and laughter” at the political process itself?

    This would have accomplished two things. It would not have made your rally so easy to associate it as a political response to Beck’s rally “to restore honor”, and it would in fact have been a great opportunity to lighten folks up a bit in the inevitable divisiveness of a political season.

    Yes Jon, 75 to 85 percent of people are reasonable, but they are also not stupid. You made your intent quite clear by naming your rally in the beginning. Now you expect 75 to 85 percent of reasonable people to buy your backpedaling, under the heat of NPR’s response etc, that it is not political.

    And I believe you expect the people will believe it too, because being the liberal you are, you really don’t believe 75 to 85 of people are reasonable. You believe they are 75 to 85 percent stupid. How else can a reasonable person explain how your rally “to restore sanity” is going to get 75 to 85 percent less people to get up off their fat, dumb and lazy asses and travel to DC to listen to you?

    You blew a great opportunity to in fact be the comedian you describe yourself as, and lighten up the people, while having some fun with all the ‘rallies’ going own, including Beck’s. Instead, you could not bring yourself to drop your political bias and entertain the people instead. You nailed its intent by its title in the beginning.

    How dumb….and stupid, was that Jon!

  57. Randy Paul Says:

    And I believe you expect the people will believe it too, because being the liberal you are, you really don’t believe 75 to 85 of people are reasonable. You believe they are 75 to 85 percent stupid.

    In your case, if the shoe fits . . .

  58. Jim R Says:

    You deserve some credit Jon. It wasn’t as dumb and stupid as your sidekick testifying in DC. Let’s hope you at least get ‘some’ laughs.

    Earth to entertainers…..No one gives a shit about your personal political positions and opinions. Shut up and sing.

  59. AC Says:

    Jim R: are you really that obtuse? (rehetorical question)

    Irony has died a thousand more deaths since giving Kissinger the peace prize.

  60. reg Says:

    Pablo: “Who got the last word?” The gold standard when you’ve got nothing rational or interesting to say.

  61. Jim R Says:

    All your comments are rhetorical Anna…..aren’t they?

    Maybe I’m just being obtuse again.

  62. reg Says:

    NPR proved it’s left-wing bias once again by firing a “journalist” who admitted he wets his pants when he sees people who look like Muslims in the airport. Very unfair…

    If NPR really wanted to play this even-handed, they would have fired Juan Williams for participating in the partisan political rally known as FOX News, not for the simple admission he needs Depends when he’s flying on planes with dusky women in head scarves or men sporting dark beards. At this point in his career, that comment on Bill O’Reilly’s show is no more a shocking badge of “douchebagism” than him simply stating: “Hi, I’m Juan Williams.”

    Okay, now it’s time to heat up my TeeVee Breakfast, which I will eat while I sit in front of the darkened screen waiting for The Ed Show in six hours. Pablo, no doubt, is having croissants and espresso, while reading Proust. Which makes me angry. But at least I’ve got the last word – until Pablo posts again. Believe me, those are golden moments in an unbelievably bleak life, bolstered only by my religious faith in the Gospel of Ben Nelson and The Last Testament of Blanche Lincoln.

  63. pablo Says:

    reg Says:

    October 21st, 2010 at 8:54 am
    Pablo: “Who got the last word?”
    ———————

    I didn’t see it… and cannot believe you didn’t… but here it is just in case:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/#38865210

    The Party apparatchick wants you to be a born leverpuller, Ringo.

    A roadmap for life; to enjoy with Swanson’s and Claret.
    Turn that frown upside-down.

    Cheers

  64. Randy Paul Says:

    Pablo, no doubt, is having croissants and espresso, while reading Proust.

    Smoking Gauloises as well . . .

  65. pablo Says:

    Pablo, no doubt, is having croissants and espresso, while reading Proust. Which makes me angry.
    ———————-

    Just tapping boiled-egg with a silver spoon (http://www.fotosearch.com/bigcomp.asp?path=UNP/UNP140/u16507331.jpg).. along with some grapefruit… and am on page 6 of this mornings La Jornada Jalisco while reviewing some emails which came in last night from China.

    I was reading a fantastic translation of The Greek Poets (Peter Constantine, Rachel Hadas) earlier this morning, just out from Norton.. Get this:
    Philetas of Cos (340 BCE)- “Past fifty and cloyed at last”.
    Puts things in proper perspective, yes?

  66. reg Says:

    “I didn’t see it… and cannot believe you didn’t…”

    I have no idea whether I saw it because I don’t know what it is. If it was on MSNBC last night, I didn’t see it. We burnt the TeeVee dinners and had to go to McDonalds. Came home and spent the evening online, poring over Blanche Lincoln’s website. Increasingly I find that it’s more spiritually satisfying to pray directly to the saints, rather than seeking the intercession of televangelists.

  67. pablo Says:

    Smoking Gauloises as well . . .

    Blondes

  68. Pokey Says:

    “NPR proved it’s left-wing bias once again by firing a “journalist” who admitted he wets his pants when he sees people who look like Muslims in the airport. Very unfair…”

    AGREE COMPLETELY – “Political correctness is the handmaiden of terrorism”

  69. jim hitchcock Says:

    >We burnt the TeeVee dinners…<

    Good idea to remove the tinfoil covering when cooking in the microwave :)

  70. AC Says:

    for anyone trying to loose weight go over to Mother Jones and read Mac McClelland’s piece on Haiti.

  71. AC Says:

    reg, so you still didn’t say who’d you vote for between Conway, Paul and a sane candidate should there be one…

  72. reg Says:

    What a stupid question…

  73. pablo Says:

    jim hitchcock Says:

    October 21st, 2010 at 11:21 am
    >We burnt the TeeVee dinners…<

    Good idea to remove the tinfoil covering when cooking in the microwave
    ———————

    If the corkscrew isn't mislaid then all is not lost… about two hours until 'Ed'; a good Pauillac should suffice until then.

  74. Juansito Williams el Segundo Says:

    “who admitted he wets his pants when he sees people who look like Muslims in the airport”

    And it would be interesting to know Juan Williams’s reactions to white folks expressing the same sentiments about blacks when encountering them in supermarkets, country clubs, airplanes, restaurants, etc.

    Honey, careful, there are black people here. They must be thugs and rapists, since they have hooded sweatshirts and black skin. The statistics support it, you know…

    Also, those recent Mexican immigrants are wearing shabby clothes, so there’s a strong possibility they’re going to rob us…”

  75. Juansito Williams el Segundo Says:

    On that note, I would have paid good money to hear Bill O’Reilly respond to Juan Williams thusly:

    Juan, that’s an excellent point. I’m no racist or anything, but I have to admit I get that same nervous feeling when I see your people walk past me when I’m at an ATM. Or waiting for a cab. Nice parallel–that really helps us put things into perspective.

  76. Pokey Says:

    “Now that I no longer work for NPR let me give you my opinion. This is an outrageous violation of journalistic standards and ethics by management that has no use for a diversity of opinion, ideas or a diversity of staff (I was the only black male on the air). This is evidence of one-party rule and one sided thinking at NPR that leads to enforced ideology, speech and writing. It leads to people, especially journalists, being sent to the gulag for raising the wrong questions and displaying independence of thought.”

    — Well said Juan —

    It is about time that we cut off all TAXPAYER funding to this Nutty Network.

  77. pablo Says:

    Back to that NY gubernatorial debate. I think the real Republican running is the front-runner. I don’t live in NY, but why support a Dem running on a slash medicare platform? … especially in such hard times.
    For a progressive to support Andrew simply because of crazy Carl isn’t the answer…

    http://www.thelmagazine.com/TheMeasure/archives/2010/10/18/who-is-howie-hawkins-and-why-is-he-debating-paladino-and-cuomo-tonight

    Unconditional support of Party has led the Democrats to a center-right corporate coalition drifting ever rightward and has driven Republicans over a cliff…. Cuomo will win hands-down but as a Progressive it would be good to leave the door open for choice… just in case Cuomo does all the things he promised in the debate.

  78. AC Says:

    reg, not a stupid question given your point of view…

    how about in FLorida:

    Rick Scott who literally looks like a worm and is one. Alex Sink the Dem “moderate” who worked for Bank of America or Michael Arth who the Dems bull dozed when he tried to run as one and he is the candidate who has a clue.

  79. Randy Paul Says:

    It is about time that we cut off all TAXPAYER funding to this Nutty Network.

    This coming from the guy who volunteered the information that he donated money to Christine O’Donnell.