On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:20:15 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

So you admit these debate "moderators" are biased?

On 11/2/15 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:20:15 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

So you admit these debate "moderators" are biased?


Uh, no.

My response was clear. The Dem wannabe's do not need Fox or its audience
to be nominated or elected. There is nothing to be gained by the Dems
"debating" on Fox, so why waste the time?

The Repugnants, apparently, think they need exposure to networks other
than Fox. I don't know why. Their ship of fools seems intent on sinking
itself. I can't wait for Rubio to be questioned closely about his fairy
tale life. That'll leave who, Cruz?

Delicious.

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 12:14:13 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:20:15 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

So you admit these debate "moderators" are biased?


Uh, no.

My response was clear. The Dem wannabe's do not need Fox or its audience
to be nominated or elected. There is nothing to be gained by the Dems
"debating" on Fox, so why waste the time?

The Repugnants, apparently, think they need exposure to networks other
than Fox. I don't know why. Their ship of fools seems intent on sinking
itself. I can't wait for Rubio to be questioned closely about his fairy
tale life. That'll leave who, Cruz?

Delicious.

Just the fact that you admit networks can be biased makes my point.
We really need the fairness doctrine back.

You would change your mind if the Kochs decided to buy NBC and Time
Warner.

On 11/2/15 12:28 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 12:14:13 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:20:15 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

So you admit these debate "moderators" are biased?


Uh, no.

My response was clear. The Dem wannabe's do not need Fox or its audience
to be nominated or elected. There is nothing to be gained by the Dems
"debating" on Fox, so why waste the time?

The Repugnants, apparently, think they need exposure to networks other
than Fox. I don't know why. Their ship of fools seems intent on sinking
itself. I can't wait for Rubio to be questioned closely about his fairy
tale life. That'll leave who, Cruz?

Delicious.

Just the fact that you admit networks can be biased makes my point.
We really need the fairness doctrine back.

You would change your mind if the Kochs decided to buy NBC and Time
Warner.


As I have stated previously, you would have been a lot of fun in college
debates.

I made no such admission. You are attempting to extrapolate that. Once
again, the Dems *do not need* Fox or its audience.

If memory serves, NBC is owned by Comcast. Comcast is one of my least
favorite corporationist companies.

I wouldn't argue against the return of the fairness doctrine or the
elimination of "big money" and "secret PACs" from the political process.

On 11/2/2015 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:20:15 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.

So you admit these debate "moderators" are biased?



There was a long lasting discussion about the media on "Morning Joe"
this morning.

Joe pointed out that other than Fox, the majority, if not all, of both
cable TV and broadcast network TV talk shows are hosted by people of the
liberal persuasion. The result is it's almost impossible to select
a debate moderator who can truly claim to be non-partisan. I think the
debates thus far, especially the CNBC one, clearly demonstrates that.

Here's another quick example of news manipulation by the liberal media:

Chris Christie was called out the other day for yapping away on his cell
phone in the "quiet car" of the train. Virtually all the media outlets
made hay with this insinuating that he is nothing but a big mouthed,
arrogant bully type.

Turns out, the reported accounts weren't exactly accurate. Christie
boarded late, didn't realize he was in the "quiet car" and, when it
was brought to his attention, he quickly left the car.
He was polite and apologetic of his mistake.

On 11/2/2015 11:20 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/2/15 11:15 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:15:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

Reality Sucks
Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a
problem with the truth.

It is true that CNBC, which is supposed to be a business channel, did
not ask that many economic questions.
It is also true that none of these press conferences can be called
debates because there is very little actual interchange between the
candidates.

I asked before and didn't really get an answer from you. Are the
democrats going to let Fox moderate one of their debates?
Your brain fart was along the lines of "if the GOP can't deal with
NBC, how will they deal with Putin". I could say the same thing about
the Democrats and Mygan Kelly or Hannity


Why should the Dems bother with Fox or its audience? There's nothing to
gain.


Rachael Maddow is going to host a Democrat only candidate "forum" on her
show.

This should really be interesting.

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:38:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


Rachael Maddow is going to host a Democrat only candidate "forum" on her
show.

This should really be interesting.


Two hours of "so tell me Hillary, how did you get to be so wonderful"

On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 2:09:27 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:38:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


Rachael Maddow is going to host a Democrat only candidate "forum" on her
show.

This should really be interesting.


Two hours of "so tell me Hillary, how did you get to be so wonderful"

And what difference does it make? The only people that would watch that show are closed-minded liberals who would only consider a liberal candidate anyway. Most politically-minded folks are like rabid sports fans when it comes to politics... they've chosen their "team" (D or R), and root for them incessantly mo matter how bad they are. We have a prime example right here in this NG, in cased no one has noticed.

On 11/2/15 2:09 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:38:09 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


Rachael Maddow is going to host a Democrat only candidate "forum" on her
show.

This should really be interesting.


Two hours of "so tell me Hillary, how did you get to be so wonderful"


Maddow is a policy wonk. She won't be imitating Steve Douchebag of Fox
News.