Al Franken on Jay Leno a second ago:

Al: Everybody supports the troops, I'm about to go on my third U.S.O. tour.

Jay: That's a common misconception that you can't criticize the government but still support the troops.

Al: Yeah, my wife hates it. She doesn't want me to go. She says, 'You don't see Bill O'Reily going over to Iraq,' and I say, 'Honey, now that's not fair... because he has no talent.'



Zing!

Al Franken for President








...of Fox News Corporation.

Not true. O'Reilly apparently writes porn novels on the side.

Another fine Socialist.

He has the funnest radio progam

Because he is an Idot

Al Franken is a joke at this point.

Him and O'Reilly are exactly the same.. they're both lunatics who like to yell a lot. What's really sad is that their mutual hatred for each other has made BOTH of them into essentialy characatures of themselves.

Have you ever seen that show, "The Amazing Race"?

I think it would be the most funny thing EVER to have Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken on that show as a team. It'd be like "The Odd Couple" on acid.

I dunno. I listen to Thom Hartman.

my x-husband went to school with Al Franken -

nuff said

Yes - they should have to navigate through Iraq, leave out of Bagdad airport for Afganistan and take a "detour" though either the Mountains or the Caves.

LOL I can just hear it now. (Edited to add that Al Franken's wife should have to sit next to an Iranian spy on the plane to Afganistan).

There are huge differences between the two.

- Al Franken is a unique individual with a high IQ, Orielly is a dumbass "everyman."
- Franken has artistic talent and acting ability, Orielly cant even read the news without telegraphing his opinions (that's actually why they gave him the opinion show)
- Franken is hilariously funny whereas O'Rielly is a humourless curmudgeon.

I have also never found Franken to be wrong on the facts, whereas O'Rielly has been caught just "making stuff up" several times.

Try listening to Franken without the political bias.. and I think you'll find that he's exactly the same as O'Reilly.

He wasn't always.. but he is now. As I said, their utter hatred for each other has really screwed up both of them. Seriously... Franken has essentially dedicated a large portion of his life to attacking O'Reilly.

If you spend that much effort to attack an idiot, it makes you an idiot.

I've listened to Franken a lot on Air America... and he's really a joke. He does the EXACT same things as O'Reilly. In the rare occurence that he has someone on that he disagrees with, he shouts over them about how they're wrong. It's the same kind of nonsense tactics that O'Reilly uses.

I'll certainly admit that Franken's funny.. but the sad thing now is that I'm laughing at what he's become, rather than what he's doing. It's just sad to see someone totally destroy themselves through such hatred.

But hey, I totally realize that there are going to be people who like him because he spews out that crap... Just like there are people who love O'Reilly for it.

Sometimes people just like to hear what they want to hear, rather than being forced to actually think.

Oy. I almost regret posting a funny comment I saw on the idiot box last night. Almost, but if we can somehow work Nazis into this thread then everything will balance out

Nazis make any move cool.

Raiders of the lost Ark --> Has Nazis --> Cool
Temple of doom --> No Nazis --> Not cool
Holy Grail --> Has Nazis again --> Cool

No shit. That's because they knew how to dress. Man, if that crap wouldn't get me shot I'd dress like that.

1. The Rocketeer.-->Nazis-->Cool!
   
2. American History X. -->Poser Nazis)-->Cool!
   
3. Force 10 from Navarone -->Nazis-->Quietly steps out of the thread.
   

Frankly, my reaction to this thread is: O'Rly?

No owl? For shame.

Sorry Roland, but I think I should try to cut off any possibility of a debate between us here.

I just this minute finished reading that (now closed) religion thread and I must say the illogic of your position and the sheer number of times you restated the same nonsensical point of view was quite astounding to me.

Nothing personal here, (and I don't use "ignore" or the AR button on folks), but I dont see how we could ever have a meaningfull conversation on any topic given the "read" I get on you from that thread. I have absolutely no respect for your arguments or your ability to read and understand other peoples arguments.

To me you seem delusional (in the same sense as Taco characterised you as such on the religion thread). Again I must emphasize this is nothing personal and not an "attack" on you personally but on your ability to debate. I feel that that is the best (most accurate) word for your beliefs as expressed through your postings on that thread in the sense that you put forward an illogical ("magical thinking", point of view and tried to argue it even though the logical flaws in it were pointed out several times.

At the very least, on that particular thread you showed a very strong bias against points of view other than your own and worse, presented such bias as "fact." (I think I see similar currents in this post as well.) Obviously I am not above reproach myself, even concerning this specific behaviour, but I have no real desire to engage in such emotionaly based "arguments" and I do actively attempt to avoid them.

I'm curious.. which points did you consider nonsense?

I'm actually quite interested in hearing opinions different than my own, so that I can improve my thought process.

As there were multiple threads on religion, I'm not sure which specific one you're talking about. Are you referring to the semantic discussion of the terms atheism and agnosticism, or the notion that you cannot prove that God does not exist?

Ya know guys, I think we are going about this all wrong.....

I retract my above statement


Hillary & Franken in 08

Think about it

LOL, now that is comedy!

Well all of the above but the last one stands out as a particualrly nonsensical statement and engendered the most eyebrow raising on my part. Those arguments have all been made over and over again and the positions others threw back at you (esp. the "invisible dragon in my garage", are the standard rebuttals to your position on that. Word for word almost.

The fact that you stated this nonsensical position, recieved the standard rebuttal arguments (always considered sufficient to prove the nonsensical position faulty for pretty much any student in Philosophy 101), and then discounted them I found kind of amazing. It shows that you are unaware of the history of these kinds of debates or that such an idea has not been roundly discredited before.

Also the fact that Chip kept giving you the standard answers (out of dictionaries in some cases) on the actual meaning of the term Aetheist, and that in reply you stated that this was "just what he believed" (or words to that effect), and thought that your personal definition was better???

In both cases you always your responses in terms that made them seem like they were facts instead of just your opinions when they were not IMO.

...of Fox News Corporation.

Just cuz I know how difficult it is for you conservative "idots" to perceive things in the proper context.