Luckily, I’ve got dogs so I’m well-stocked with lint rollers.

I AM A TRROOOOOLLLLLLLL!!!!!

All Nicky/Mr. Victor/Vulture contributes is a squeaky noise and a little amusement at its absurdity. Then we squish it and have to clean up the mess.

Yeah, how’d you do with them baby sockpuppet twins the other day? It seemed like the slightest ridicule sent them packing but I never checked in again.

Keltoi Says:

This Nicky is a Troll in Progressive clothing. He is an insult to us real Trolls.

Keltoi, I don’t often agree with you, but I respect your commitment to your trolldom. I’m not surprised that you sound insulted by the poor performance of the sockpuppet “Nicky”.

And, truth be told, you’re not a troll. You’re a contrarian on a lot of issues, but you do contribute. (However, don’t let that stop you from embracing your inner troll. It seems to be working.)

All Nicky/Mr. Victor/Vulture contributes is a squeaky noise and a little amusement at its absurdity. Then we squish it and have to clean up the mess.

Just when I thought I could not respect and admire you more, Noble Adversary….

Good God.

This Nicky is a Troll in Progressive clothing. He is an insult to us real Trolls.

Who could say something like this and mean it? I mean, anyone not part of the Chinese government?

“Global Warming is real, that is why it is so hot outside.”

Christ wept. Get out of the sun.

June 13th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
______

I’m going to side with Alejandro on this one. Media organizations should not face government requirements to provide fair coverage of issues. Who becomes the authority who gets to decide what “fair coverage” is, and where the actual poles of opposition lie on any issue? Most political issues are extremely complex, with a wide variety of people expressing a wide variety of opinions on the issues and sub-issues – how many does a story need to cover in order to be “fair?”

And are both sides supposed to be given equal weight in media coverage? What if 2,000 experts support an issue and only 20 oppose it, how is it fair to give those 20 opposers the same weight as the 2,000 supporters?

Now, I’m not saying news sources shouldn’t strive to be as objective and unbiased as possible, but the enforcers of that standard need to be we the consumers, not the government.

The fairness doctrine will require people like Drooodge to include the opposing viewpoint to all his news stories.

I realize you could say this will interfere with Capitalistic endeavors, “ratings”. Profit comes first over the general welfare of society, right?

The proper term is “Global Climate Change“. It may be due to warming, but the consequences are far more varied. “Warming” conjures up thoughts of 120′ Summer days. But then we get news reports of “Snow in June” in Denver, and the Global “Warming” deniers go into hysterics, when the bizarre weather is in fact the result of the “Global Climate Change” they seek to deny.

Now we have another threat, and it has lots of “proof”, where’s the preemtive strike on climate change?

You Republicans were willing to go on gut feelings alone, with inadequate evidence, in order to be extra safe and ensure our American way of life, by taking out Saddam.

Climate Change could be as bad, or worse for National Security than unproven threats from other countries.

Let me count the ways in which this was mangled:

1) taxed exempted should be tax exempted
2) whey they erase none offensive post should be, well, if I could figure out what it was trying to say, I might be able to offer a correction.
3) they just don’t agree with might be better rendered without the word just added, since it doesn’t work as an adjective in the context.

I can’t really put my finger on which historical troll this reminds me of….hmmmm…….

The fairness doctrine would not silence anyone, but require them to include both sides of the news stories.

Because, of course, there are only two sides to any news story.

Deaths called consequence of global warming…

Not consistent with this:

The evidence for the consequences of global warming is appearing with alarming frequency. This morning’s headlines are filled with tales of deadly weather: “At least four people were killed and about 40 injured when a tornado tore through a Boy Scout camp in western Iowa on Wednesday night”;

Isn’t this article saying that the deaths of the Boy Scouts are a consequence of global warming?

June 13th, 2008 at 11:47 am
______

Are you suggesting that an organization should not have the right to decide what content is appropriate for placement on its own web site?

Interesting. So now you people are against free speech and private property. What are you going to propose next, book burnings?

So, please take time to blow it out your ass if you don’t like it here.

Your post makes no sense son.

June 13th, 2008 at 11:19 am
_____

No, there’s also a profit motive. The Conservative Politicking Industry is intimately connected with the Agribusiness Industry, the Shipping Industry, the Extractive Industry, the Fossil Fuel Industry, and many other industries whose bottom lines depend on denying the science of climate change.