I have increasingly grown more certain we all live on different planets - the left live on their own utopian planetoid while the conservatives live on Airstrip One, so detached from reality they ascribe to Plato's utopia, and the two utopian states ne'er meet.
Recently, someone either went to work for Fox News with the intention of being a mole, or did not. They were either unaware that Fox news was for Conservatives as MSNBC is for liberals, or they were utopian in their naivete as to what the network was about. I assume if this is the case they missed the last ten years coverage. Apparently the network's sensitivities were too right-wing for this poor soul and he had to sell what he had found out while employed by Fox, and his chosen outlet - Gawker.com.
The secrets of Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity (both pompous and egotistical) will be revealed (that they are pompous and egotistical) ... of wait, everyone knew that already, except perhaps Hannity and O'Reilly and an odd handful of followers. I suppose the Mole will have more to tell us than about the eccentricities of Hannity and O'Reilly. Perhaps we can compare those oddities to everything we have learned about Keith Olbermann and his erratic and demanding behavior at MSNBC / Current TV.
The Mole does not reveal much and to be honest, cannot reveal anything - we already know the station is to Conservatives what MSNBC is to liberals and what CNN is to the Left. So, move on. We already know that O'Reilly and Hannity are pompous and arrogant. The Mole casts the audience of Fox as "mostly septuagenarian." And that means what? That a bunch of old people send in racist comments? That old people are inherently racist? The Mole explains how so many comments are racist - they mention the president is black or Muslim. Clearly racist.
A network that catered to an old and technophobic audience that was "ostentatiously friendly treatment he routinely gives Republican candidates" - how painful that experience must have been for such a civilized soul as the Mole who will immediately upon being fired by Fox, sell whatever he thinks he knows about a couple pompous and arrogant pontificators to gawker.com. The shame of it all that someone so touched by civility and reason had to stoop to working for such a racist entity as Fox News. He should have applied to work at MSNBC where his sentiments would have been shared with the likes of Madow and Olberman.
I would like to strangle the person who forced him to work at Fox, for all the pain they caused him - emotional distress, suffering, and anguish. Imagine all the holidays he spent drinking, trying to forget where he worked. It couldn't have been any worse working for a tyrant like Saddam, except that some American network anchors sucked their way in to interview him and coddled and fawned over him much as the Right fawns over Conservatives.
In any case, the Mole is compelled to let us know just how hypocritical those on the Right are using two examples (in one column):
1) Romney is discussing horse riding and dressage. Not only the act of riding horses but pronouncing dressage correctly places him squarely in the elite class in America and not among the average GOPer who is more concerned with such things as black presidents and subscribing to conspiracy theories.
Riding horses versus golf. The Right attack Obama for playing golf - as elitist, versus Romney and horses and not only his love of horseback riding but the fact he can pronounce dressage correctly, which proves he truly is an elitist.
2) Teleprompters: Sean Hannity uses teleprompters yet he attacks the president for using teleprompters. The Mole would argue that "the ongoing right-wing obsession with Obama's teleprompter remains a mystery" to him, for he doesn't understand why the Right attack Obama over the use of teleprompters when Obama doesn't "use one any more often than any of his predecessors, or any more often than the men who want to replace him. to speak to six graders and everyone and everything else."
How hypocritical of the Right and the Mole feels a need, a passion, to express his feeling and his opinion on the subject. He has particular insight into the subject and just has to tell us all about it. I am not sure if that is the same attitude O'Reilly and Hannity have, but probably very close.
Here is the answer Mr. Mole -
Obama does use the teleprompter more than Reagan did. He uses it more than Bush did, and probably slightly more than Clinton. Reagan used 5x7 cards. W. Bush clearly didn't, for he misspoke and had he followed or used a teleprompter as regularly or obsessively as Obama, he would have been nearly as eloquent. We have heard Obama speak when he had no teleprompter and he stutters and rambles, digresses, and even makes up words. Obama uses the teleprompter like a phone solicitor uses the canned speech prepared for him. Bush used it to remind him of points or ideas. Bush used it whenever he felt like it. He didn't need it in his opinion because he spoke from the heart and expressed his values when he did speak - even if it came out all muttered. Obama has no underlying value to speak to, instead he relies upon words to convey a message he does not understand and uses the teleprompter as a crutch. Even Clinton didn't do that - he spoke extemporaneously.
The Left just don't understand this. Hannity using it because his job is to speak to a screen every night. Obama's job is not to speak to a screen, but to the people. Hannity entertains and needs, like Maher and Stewart, words written for him. Obama is supposed to be above that - speaking to us, expressing his values and ideas for a future he envisions, not what is pasted on a teleprompter.
There is a difference.
The same with horse riding. Reagan rode horses. No one said he was an elitist. He could pronounce dressage correctly, and in fact could probably have corrected Romney on horses and or added to what Romney mentioned to Hannity. No one claimed Reagan was an elitist did they ? Oh wait, they did. Reagan, the guy from Dixon Community College was an elitist. John Kerry, the guy from Harvard or Yale or the Ketchup fortune, he isn't an elitist, he's one of us. I understand.
The Mole wasn't comparing Kerry or Reagan, he was commenting on how the right-wing attacked Obama as an elitist for playing golf and Romney and his horseback riding really was elitist. Mr. Mole - once again, different utopian realities in play:
NO ONE has attacked Obama as an elitist for playing golf. They criticize Obama for playing golf in almost four years, more often than GW Bush did in eight years. THAT is the point Mr. Mole. While we were at war, while Americans were dying in a desert far away, GW was playing golf. The Left had given up on linking golf to the elite when JFK played and when Clinton took up the habit and was busy playing golf as often as he fiddled in the White House with his interns and others.
There is a difference Mr. Mole. Real differences.
Which is why I believe we live in separate realities.
left
Recently, someone either went to work for Fox News with the intention of being a mole, or did not. They were either unaware that Fox news was for Conservatives as MSNBC is for liberals, or they were utopian in their naivete as to what the network was about. I assume if this is the case they missed the last ten years coverage. Apparently the network's sensitivities were too right-wing for this poor soul and he had to sell what he had found out while employed by Fox, and his chosen outlet - Gawker.com.
The secrets of Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity (both pompous and egotistical) will be revealed (that they are pompous and egotistical) ... of wait, everyone knew that already, except perhaps Hannity and O'Reilly and an odd handful of followers. I suppose the Mole will have more to tell us than about the eccentricities of Hannity and O'Reilly. Perhaps we can compare those oddities to everything we have learned about Keith Olbermann and his erratic and demanding behavior at MSNBC / Current TV.
The Mole does not reveal much and to be honest, cannot reveal anything - we already know the station is to Conservatives what MSNBC is to liberals and what CNN is to the Left. So, move on. We already know that O'Reilly and Hannity are pompous and arrogant. The Mole casts the audience of Fox as "mostly septuagenarian." And that means what? That a bunch of old people send in racist comments? That old people are inherently racist? The Mole explains how so many comments are racist - they mention the president is black or Muslim. Clearly racist.
A network that catered to an old and technophobic audience that was "ostentatiously friendly treatment he routinely gives Republican candidates" - how painful that experience must have been for such a civilized soul as the Mole who will immediately upon being fired by Fox, sell whatever he thinks he knows about a couple pompous and arrogant pontificators to gawker.com. The shame of it all that someone so touched by civility and reason had to stoop to working for such a racist entity as Fox News. He should have applied to work at MSNBC where his sentiments would have been shared with the likes of Madow and Olberman.
I would like to strangle the person who forced him to work at Fox, for all the pain they caused him - emotional distress, suffering, and anguish. Imagine all the holidays he spent drinking, trying to forget where he worked. It couldn't have been any worse working for a tyrant like Saddam, except that some American network anchors sucked their way in to interview him and coddled and fawned over him much as the Right fawns over Conservatives.
In any case, the Mole is compelled to let us know just how hypocritical those on the Right are using two examples (in one column):
1) Romney is discussing horse riding and dressage. Not only the act of riding horses but pronouncing dressage correctly places him squarely in the elite class in America and not among the average GOPer who is more concerned with such things as black presidents and subscribing to conspiracy theories.
Riding horses versus golf. The Right attack Obama for playing golf - as elitist, versus Romney and horses and not only his love of horseback riding but the fact he can pronounce dressage correctly, which proves he truly is an elitist.
2) Teleprompters: Sean Hannity uses teleprompters yet he attacks the president for using teleprompters. The Mole would argue that "the ongoing right-wing obsession with Obama's teleprompter remains a mystery" to him, for he doesn't understand why the Right attack Obama over the use of teleprompters when Obama doesn't "use one any more often than any of his predecessors, or any more often than the men who want to replace him. to speak to six graders and everyone and everything else."
How hypocritical of the Right and the Mole feels a need, a passion, to express his feeling and his opinion on the subject. He has particular insight into the subject and just has to tell us all about it. I am not sure if that is the same attitude O'Reilly and Hannity have, but probably very close.
Here is the answer Mr. Mole -
Obama does use the teleprompter more than Reagan did. He uses it more than Bush did, and probably slightly more than Clinton. Reagan used 5x7 cards. W. Bush clearly didn't, for he misspoke and had he followed or used a teleprompter as regularly or obsessively as Obama, he would have been nearly as eloquent. We have heard Obama speak when he had no teleprompter and he stutters and rambles, digresses, and even makes up words. Obama uses the teleprompter like a phone solicitor uses the canned speech prepared for him. Bush used it to remind him of points or ideas. Bush used it whenever he felt like it. He didn't need it in his opinion because he spoke from the heart and expressed his values when he did speak - even if it came out all muttered. Obama has no underlying value to speak to, instead he relies upon words to convey a message he does not understand and uses the teleprompter as a crutch. Even Clinton didn't do that - he spoke extemporaneously.
The Left just don't understand this. Hannity using it because his job is to speak to a screen every night. Obama's job is not to speak to a screen, but to the people. Hannity entertains and needs, like Maher and Stewart, words written for him. Obama is supposed to be above that - speaking to us, expressing his values and ideas for a future he envisions, not what is pasted on a teleprompter.
There is a difference.
The same with horse riding. Reagan rode horses. No one said he was an elitist. He could pronounce dressage correctly, and in fact could probably have corrected Romney on horses and or added to what Romney mentioned to Hannity. No one claimed Reagan was an elitist did they ? Oh wait, they did. Reagan, the guy from Dixon Community College was an elitist. John Kerry, the guy from Harvard or Yale or the Ketchup fortune, he isn't an elitist, he's one of us. I understand.
The Mole wasn't comparing Kerry or Reagan, he was commenting on how the right-wing attacked Obama as an elitist for playing golf and Romney and his horseback riding really was elitist. Mr. Mole - once again, different utopian realities in play:
NO ONE has attacked Obama as an elitist for playing golf. They criticize Obama for playing golf in almost four years, more often than GW Bush did in eight years. THAT is the point Mr. Mole. While we were at war, while Americans were dying in a desert far away, GW was playing golf. The Left had given up on linking golf to the elite when JFK played and when Clinton took up the habit and was busy playing golf as often as he fiddled in the White House with his interns and others.
There is a difference Mr. Mole. Real differences.
Which is why I believe we live in separate realities.
left
Posts
