Monday, June 16, 2008
What colour is the sky in your world?
Dear David "The Axis of Eeeeeeeeevillll" Frum: Does being wrong about absolutely everything you’ve ever written, said or intimated in the last seven years ever get tiring? I’m just wondering.
Yours in perpetually-amused superiority,
LuLu
P.S. I have an idea. Why don't you try and come up with some catchy name for CC-HQ?
After all, we're three of the most feared bloggers in teh blogosphere ... at least as far as Big Daddy and the slavering fuckwits in the CPoC are concerned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
SAoeaking of wrong all the time, why not participate in responding to Kathy Shaidle's challenge?
Er, "Speaking"
Per Frum:
I use survey data a lot in my own writing and research.
Bwahahahaha...
You so fucking do not, you evil propagandist.
The comments underneath the article by the GWB and neo-con supporters are even more priceless than the article itself.
(BTW, why newspapers allow reader comments is beyond me. They add nothing to the article itself and just confirm that the wingnut brigade is bigger and even more stupid than we fear.)
I don't know if the wingnut brigade is necessarily bigger than we think. Stupid, certainly. Generally louder. I think it's just that the wingnut brigade is more compelled to post comments on newspaper sites than the sane people. Sames goes for talk radio. They're probably the same people.
It all just makes 'em look bigger.
They are not bigger. But they are more stupid.
They always try to shout down anyone else, often by sneering at them for being unemployed and stalking blogs/comment sites. Yet they always have some excuse why they themselves are there...
You should remember, these people are never wrong.
It's just that the universe, the spiteful bastard, has the temerity to go its own way despite what the True Believers say.
But don't worry. Some day God will make a mistake, they'll kick him to the curb and the people who should rule, will.
"BTW, why newspapers allow reader comments is beyond me. They add nothing to the article itself and just confirm that the wingnut brigade is bigger and even more stupid than we fear."
Speaking of that: I'm seriously thinking of taking up with the CBC the issue of comments on its site. I've yet to see how that fulfills its mandate to "inform, educate and entertain." I'm particularly dismayed that the CBC is using, as the result of an automated process, the comments to "higlight" particular stories. Private media can function this way if it wants, but not public media. What is popular is quite often *not* in the public interest.
As for the wingnut brigade being larger than we fear...part of that is simply a trend in public discourse that has always existed; people confuse being given the opportunity to comment on something as an invitation to make a value judgement, usually negative, as that implies critical thinking, although it rarely is.
Post a Comment