Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: ra on November 23, 2004, 11:22:45 AM

Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: ra on November 23, 2004, 11:22:45 AM: Rather going away. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=276466&page=1)
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Flit on November 23, 2004, 11:39:32 AM: good riddence
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: AWMac on November 23, 2004, 12:15:15 PM: Can he take that Dumbarse Geraldo with him?

:D
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Bodhi on November 23, 2004, 01:07:48 PM: good riddance of the liar....

maybe a charge of attempted election fraud would be a nice parting gift...
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: AWMac on November 23, 2004, 01:29:34 PM: (http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/23/rather.anchor.ap/story.rather.jpg)

But....But...But....I belong here......

:rofl
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: lazs2 on November 23, 2004, 01:39:42 PM: 10 to 1 that if kerrie had won he woulda stayed.

lazs
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: rpm on November 23, 2004, 01:51:05 PM: What? No outrage that Brokaw and Koppel are retiring, too?:rolleyes:
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Holden McGroin on November 23, 2004, 02:08:03 PM: I'm outraged that Brokaw and Koppel are retiring!

There ya go RPM.
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: rpm on November 23, 2004, 02:17:35 PM: Thanks Holden.:)
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: beet1e on November 23, 2004, 02:24:57 PM: Quote
Originally posted by Flit
good riddence
Why don't you like him?

The anchorpersons I remember when I lived there were Dan Rather, Fahey Flynn, Ted Koppel, Sam Donaldson, Linda Yu, Connie Chung - hehe, always remember the Kathleen Gingrich debacle. :lol A lot of those anchorpersons still seem to be around.
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Ripsnort on November 23, 2004, 02:43:40 PM: Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
Why don't you like him?

The anchorpersons I remember when I lived there were Dan Rather, Fahey Flynn, Ted Koppel, Sam Donaldson, Linda Yu, Connie Chung - hehe, always remember the Kathleen Gingrich debacle. :lol A lot of those anchorpersons still seem to be around.

Because they didn't report the news...they slanted the wording, raised an eyebrow at the right time, basically pulled a Goebells in the name of their own political party. Most news anchors today on the major networks are guilty of it. Thus, my philosophy of "Get as much news from as many sources available, sort through all the crap, and make the decision yourself of what is reported correctly, and what isn't."
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: lazs2 on November 23, 2004, 03:38:16 PM: beetle... all of those anchors and talking heads you named are one of the reasons I quit watching the news at all.... they all had the same liberal bias and could be trusted only in that they would taint whatever story came across their desk.... sometimes as blatantly as Blather did.

Now... I watch when something big is happening... war, election... 9/11 but we have fox news. Fox is about as biased as the liberal news shows but to the conservative side.

It is now possible to get "fair and balanced" by simply switching back and forth between fox and one of the other liberal stations and..... after discarding the top 10% of blatant agenda crap.... pick a middle ground between the two.

that is fox's contribution.... all those old talking heads contributed nothing but the continuance of the status quo.

lazs
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: rpm on November 23, 2004, 03:38:37 PM: Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Because they didn't report the news...they slanted the wording, raised an eyebrow at the right time, basically pulled a Goebells in the name of their own political party. Most news anchors today on the major networks are guilty of it. Thus, my philosophy of "Get as much news from as many sources available, sort through all the crap, and make the decision yourself of what is reported correctly, and what isn't."

In other words, they did'nt have the opinion you wanted. Watch Fox, read Drudge and Newsmax for the correct opinion and proper eyebrow raising.
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Vulcan on November 23, 2004, 03:39:41 PM: The BBC still gives pretty flat delivery.
Title: Re: buh bye Dan
Post by: CAVY on November 23, 2004, 04:00:10 PM: Quote
Originally posted by ra
Rather going away. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=276466&page=1)

Take it easy ya liberal piece of S**T
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: lazs2 on November 23, 2004, 04:11:05 PM: The BBC had an entirely erronious piece on crime in great briton according to beetle. I was completely tainted and the actual home office figures seem to bear out beetle.... If they are wrong and sensationalizing about that then how many other things are they agendizing?

lazs
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Holden McGroin on November 23, 2004, 05:53:56 PM: Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
Why don't you like him?

The anchorpersons I remember when I lived there were Dan Rather, Fahey Flynn, Ted Koppel, Sam Donaldson, Linda Yu, Connie Chung - hehe, always remember the Kathleen Gingrich debacle. :lol A lot of those anchorpersons still seem to be around.

Ted Baxter was better than all those...

(http://www.apfs-tv.com/apfs_presents/tbrent_wjmtv/baxter.jpg)
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: LePaul on November 23, 2004, 05:59:26 PM: Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Because they didn't report the news...they slanted the wording, raised an eyebrow at the right time, basically pulled a Goebells in the name of their own political party. Most news anchors today on the major networks are guilty of it. Thus, my philosophy of "Get as much news from as many sources available, sort through all the crap, and make the decision yourself of what is reported correctly, and what isn't."

Good example was mentioned today on the Howie Carr show. When Clinton was running for re-election in 1996, a 5.5% Unemployment rate was good for the country. In 2004, with Bush running for re-election, a 5.5% Unemployment issue was a big issue for Dan & Co.

He got caught over and over again, their credibility and ratings (News Wise) are in the tank. Better to run CSI re-runs at 6:30

:p
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: CAVY on November 23, 2004, 06:30:00 PM: Quote
Originally posted by LePaul
Good example was mentioned today on the Howie Carr show. When Clinton was running for re-election in 1996, a 5.5% Unemployment rate was good for the country. In 2004, with Bush running for re-election, a 5.5% Unemployment issue was a big issue for Dan & Co.

He got caught over and over again, their credibility and ratings (News Wise) are in the tank. Better to run CSI re-runs at 6:30

:p

:aok :aok :aok :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

beutiful!!!!
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Ripsnort on November 23, 2004, 06:55:19 PM: Quote
Originally posted by rpm
In other words, they did'nt have the opinion you wanted. Watch Fox, read Drudge and Newsmax for the correct opinion and proper eyebrow raising.

Quote
Originally posted by LePaul
Good example was mentioned today on the Howie Carr show. When Clinton was running for re-election in 1996, a 5.5% Unemployment rate was good for the country. In 2004, with Bush running for re-election, a 5.5% Unemployment issue was a big issue for Dan & Co.

He got caught over and over again, their credibility and ratings (News Wise) are in the tank. Better to run CSI re-runs at 6:30

:p

I;ve given Mr.RPM many many examples of liberal bias over the years, Lepaul, but when you have sand in your ears, you don't hear a damned thing. :lol
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: rpm on November 23, 2004, 09:55:51 PM: Yeah, I take hate radio entertainment hosts seriously. Was this guy on Oxycontin, too?
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: 1K3 on November 23, 2004, 10:33:15 PM: Quote
Originally posted by Flit
good riddence

LOL! He just got promoted! He'll still run CBS news, but you will not see him on TV

:lol
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: JBA on November 23, 2004, 10:38:12 PM: All 6 of his viewers will miss him.
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: Gunslinger on November 24, 2004, 12:42:11 AM: Quote
Originally posted by rpm
Yeah, I take hate radio entertainment hosts seriously. Was this guy on Oxycontin, too?

Would it matter what anyone was on when facts are facts?
Title: buh bye Dan
Post by: EN4CER on November 24, 2004, 10:59:04 AM: Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Because they didn't report the news...they slanted the wording, raised an eyebrow at the right time, basically pulled a Goebells in the name of their own political party. Most news anchors today on the major networks are guilty of it. Thus, my philosophy of "Get as much news from as many sources available, sort through all the crap, and make the decision yourself of what is reported correctly, and what isn't."

Well said Rip! :aok

Rather's going out on a real high note too - too lazy to check his sources and facts - Time for the GOLDEN BOOT :lol