QDPSTEVE: Well, yes, you’ve seen my mug. Now the question is would u recognize it under the hoodie and shades??

Action’s on you.

BTW, Ive been playing mostly at Hollywood Park since I hit a big jackpot there two months ago. Have gone to Commerce once this year and got creamed at the $40 table. About 5 rebuys until I got the message: you can’t bluff total donkeys. And you can’t outplay them either. They’re too dumb and crazy to even think of the hand their opponent might have. Bottom pair with a 6 kicker is always enough for them to make any size call on the river!

I’ve found the one thing the Big Time Donkeys all have in common at the low stakes table: they’ll call just about any pre-flop raise with any two suited cards. 9-3s in the small blind ? No problem calling a $20 raise from AK on the button. Arghhh.

Oooooh, that’s a major distinction. I see. Content left, content right, lack of content, too much content, not enough rainsbows in the content…. Why, my simply saying that the problem was with the content must have been very confusing to you.

Now, let’s discuss my problem with your brains…I mean, lack of brains.

He is the Republican Base.

Good Luck, GOP! Enjoy your swirling down the drain of history.

Then one might be liberated from the tyranny of trying to assemble all those IKEA shelving units.

Woody with dog looking up at him and this is what the dog hears:

bblahblahblahPRAVDAblahblahblahblahblahPRAVDAblahblahblahINEVERREADANYTHINGBUT SUPMERMANCOMICSblahblahblahblahSOCIALISMblahbalhblahblahPRAVDA.

Dog keels over and dies from boredom.

Josh Marshall’s TPM is … a digital newsite that combines the best of blogging with comprehensive aggregation of news, op-ed analysis and investigative journalism…

Yep, for a lot of purposes — separating signal from noise, being a harbinger of where stories are going — I respect TPM more than any MSM source. And getting back to Marc’s vlog, it turned out that, during the pre-war Iraq media campaign, you were better off to go to Juan Cole’s site and ignore the media biggies, who proved to be totally suckered, for reasons Marc elucidated. Reading the NYT, in fact, proved to be a detriment to understanding.

…respect the nuance of Shirkey’s article in that it made it clear that high-end, gold-plated news operations that have a national and/or global reach will probably emerge…

Absolutely. Perhaps that nuance will make the pill easier to swallow?

The mainstream and corporate media can (and likely always will) play some people for suckers but most of us regular folk trust a blogger over any in the Wash Press Corps or those connected to conventional media outlets.

Sure these citizen soldiers have to learn what and who to believe, they have to learn by being burned but if they can be honest about what they are doing they will keep an audience.

I liked “Dissonance” – considering it is all so new – I think it’s great. It beats the pants off of Corn and Pinkerton trying to revive “Crossfire” on the internet!

Thanks

I’ll let others judge which was the “lie and half truth.”

Obviously either you can’t read or you can’t comprehend what you read.

My point about Celeste was completely correct. We both object to the papers over the same reason — content, even though the direction of the content may be different for each of us.

Here’s the link to Celeste’s post on why she cancelled her LA Times sub:

http://witnessla.com/media/2009/admin/breaking-up-with-the-la-times/

Then, to make matters worse, you protest too much.

You’re an idiot, but your worst sin is the steady stream of racism and homphobia. Culturally and ideologically you’re a Dead Man Walking.

A couple of weeks ago, rosedog made an issue of cancelling her LA Times subscription for the same reason that people in my area have cancelled their subscriptions–we don’t like the content–not because the internet is cheap and easy. Cheap and easy is what you want in a date–not what you want for quality information.

The only difference with papers between today and the past is that we now have alternative sources of news, courtesy of the internet (and talk radio)–not that we’re tired of picking up a newspaper because the internet is easier, which it isn’t, or that I care about killing trees.

Plus, with the internet, you can’t pick up the TV section to see what’s on, you can’t leave the internet crossword puzzle on the table to casually fill out throughout the day, and you can’t quickly scan it for box scores.

If we once again had two separate city papers with different ideological views, the only paper that would be suffering would be the one that ignored competition and continued to try to cram nonsense down our throats. Newspaper publishers thought that they had a monopoly and ignored the competition available through other sources, and now are reaping the consequences of their short-sightedness and haughtiness.

Now, to limit a free media that has been presenting “the other side,” the next step for those who can’t stand other views will be to demand a return to the “fariness doctrine” in an attempt to kill talk radio and insist on controls over bloggers and other internet content. That’s more dangerous than papers that people don’t want going out of business.

Further, there is much talk about giving newspapers bailouts to continue their left-wing blathering? What’s wrong? Isn’t taxpayer money for PBS enough?

Publishers need to open their eyes and adapt to the the root problem, content, rather than the competition’s means of delivery.

In areas related to business, you’re clueless. In areas of courtesy, you’re blind. In areas related to reason, you’re overmatched.

It makes no sense for me to fight with someone like you who is uneducated and malicious and who tries to cover his inferiority complex with personal attacks on others.

Don’t embarrasss yourself any further and don’t bore everyone with your problems.

And, class? You have no room to discuss class.

Drop it.

Classy as usual.