Oh no. The SS speech police at Media Matters and the Militant Homos are after Dan Abrams and Tucker Carlson. How long will Keith have to ignore this? Maybe Carlson will get shit canned and he can go after him. Digger Dan is implicated though. Maybe Abrams and Carlson will go on Keith's show with hat in hand and apologize. Can you image in O'Reilly had said that he slammed some homo's head into a bathroom stall? Keith would be a defcon 5 calling for O'Reilly's head.

Come on Keith, there is a queer in the bathroom. Get your pillow case full of door knobs. It's time to play smear the queer.

Yeah Keith! Lets get em. Smear the queer. Will make him squeel like a pig. Weeee. Weeee.

Why do all Republican men like molesting small boys and having sex with strangers in the public men's room?

Olbermann #1 last night....

> Olbermann #1 last night....

Based on Olby's unpublished numbers, inflated with DVR users, in a new, made-up demo (in other words, he LOST in the demo has has previously claimed is the "key" demo, and lost WILDLY in total viewers).

No doubt the loons will grab at this latest bit of spin from the discredited baseball collector as gospel, but the clear-headed readers here at least will know better.

> Maybe Carlson will get shit canned and he can go after him.

Yeah, just like with Imus Olby can say how he offended he was by Carlson and how he worked behind the scenes against him, but couldn't say anything publicly blah blah blah.

Heartland spewed: "Why do all Republican men like molesting small boys and having sex with strangers in the public men's room?"

Funny, you just described the Democratic AGENDA. Gay marriage and NAMBLA, anyone?

Fox Noise and the "moral" whitetrash are getting set up to be beat like a bad piece of meat again in '08. Of course, since most conservatives seem to be closet members of the Log Cabin Republicans they may enjoy that! The best thing for another Democratic sweep is Fox Noise and the knuckle draggers who watch it!

Democratic Agenda? Mark Foley is the one chasing young boys! Larry Craig is the one trying to mount men in public restrooms. You are entilted to your own opinons merkle but not your own facts! Face it - Republicans are hypocrites, unfortunately, they are criminal hypocrites who have very strange homosexual fetishes...

"Why do all Republican men like molesting small boys and having sex with strangers in the public men's room?"

Why do all Dem men rape or harass women or kill women their sleeping with by drowning them in "car accidents",drug overdose or just having them vanish?

mlong - believe that case was decided 30 years ago (no admission of guilt there) - just like your hero Craig's was - of course, he got caught... 'er "red handed" so to speak!

mlong - believe that case was decided 30 years ago (no admission of guilt there) - just like your hero Craig's was - of course, he got caught... 'er "red handed" so to speak!

Keith can't win with the standard rating
So he'll do a little creating
Keith's viewers? No trace
Yet he's in first place?
Another case of Keith bloviating

I guess somebody can't tell sarcasm..but in their world they honestly believe that all Republicans just have to be like Craig then ignore the perverts in their party..

By the way dose anybody remember Mel Reynolds who got caught sleeping with an underage girl and was pardon by Bill Clinton?

And lets don't forget Bubba himself even though his defenders like to say it was only about a BJ... Clinton sexual harassed a woman and was giving a free pass by the Left who claim to be the big champions of "women�s rights".....talk about hypocrites....the only thing that protects Dems from being held to the same standards as Republicans is the MSM who shield them from these things and they have shown it real well this week by using the Craig story to avoid talking about Hillary's latest adventure involving funny money from a questionable source......Isn't funny how the MSM sat on the Craig story and only brought in the open when news of Hillary's money problem crept up?

Talk about non-barkers. What about the 3 out of 4 "Not Guilties" in the terrorist detainee "pyramid" fiasco.

Source is important "Bigs". O'Reilly was also on vacation. IF and that's a big IF and WHEN and that's when as in ain't never going to happen, that Olby manages to beat O'Reilly in a head-to-head competition, then you can post that Olby was "number one" not based on some number you have pulled from your ass or hallucinated on your latest acid trip.

Heres another story KO doesn't want to talk about..

The Dem DA who tried to frame the Duke players of rape to appeal to Black voters was found in contempt....

From newsobserver.com...

"Former District Attorney Mike Nifong will spend a night in jail after being found guilty of criminal contempt by Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III.

Smith ordered Nifong to report to the Durham County jail at 9 a.m. next Friday. He will stay there until 9 a.m. the following day.

The judge could have sentenced Nifong with a $500 fine or up to 30 days in jail.

After a two-day hearing, Smith found that Nifong lied in court when the former prosecutor assured the judge in September 2006 that he had provided the lawyers of three Duke lacrosse players charged with rape with everything he had learned from DNA tests performed by an independent lab."

So whats worse cruising for consensual Gay sex in a bathroom or trying to frame people for rape just to win an election?

Where did this rumor come from that Olby was #1 last night?

Where did this rumor come from that Olby was #1 last night?

In what? The 18-20 year olds who shack up with Keith "key' demo? Or the blue-eyed blondes between the ages of 10-12 who might one day grow up to shack up with Keith "key" demo? Did they add up his 2 shows together?

mlong,

It's not the crime, it's the doer. If a leftist dingbat, in the name of the cause, does anything wrong it's OK. For example, Dan Rather can choose to believe that screwball in Texas claiming that W was AWOL 35 years ago. It doesn't really matter if the story is true or not. It's for the cause.

Don't forget former NJ governer Jim McGreevey. He has admited to sucking off some guy in a bathroom while his wife was giving birth to their kid. McGreevey is now teaching ethics at a university. Were he a Republican he probably wouldn't have gotten that gig!

I believe it came from my butt says the Talking Ass.

Don't forget former NJ governer Jim McGreevey. He has admited to sucking off some guy in a bathroom while his wife was giving birth to their kid. McGreevey is now teaching ethics at a university. Were he a Republican he probably wouldn't have gotten that gig!

Posted by: Rico at September 1, 2007 12:22 AM

This has been wiped from the spolbyloons hardrive, along with the disgraced Nifong (d) scandal. Their partisan goggles are focused on Craig (R).

If Herr Goebbelsmann says he is number 1, who are you to question him?

So Keith is against censorship? That's funny because lots of people are being censored on Keith's "Newshole" all the time. Mr. Free Speech has a real problem with comments that don't involve gushing adulation.

How would you know what the comments were about Clucker when they aren't allowed to be posted at all? You're just pulling out "facts" from your ass just Olby does out of his fat ass.

You're not answering the question Clucker. How would you know what isn't allowed to be posted on the Newshole, how would you know what the banned comments say unless you were either screening them or pulling what you claim to be the posts out of your ass? It's like everything else you say here-bullshit and lies.

You're not answering the question Clucker. How would you know what isn't allowed to be posted on the Newshole, how would you know what the banned comments say unless you were either screening them or pulling what you claim to be the posts out of your ass? It's like everything else you say here-bullshit and lies.

You're not answering the question Clucker. How would you know what isn't allowed to be posted on the Newshole, how would you know what the banned comments say unless you were either screening them or pulling what you claim to be the posts out of your ass? It's like everything else you say here-bullshit and lies.

Can't win with live ratings.

Can't win with live + dvr.

Can't win with live + dvr + vcr + dvd + abc + xyz + lsd.

Hey Keith 'Inside Cable News' is on assignment, everybody else is on vacation.

Oh really? HELL! We'll just make our own numbers up.

Rico

So the former New Jersey 'Lov Gov' Jim McGreevey was sucking on some guy's rod while his wife was having a baby.

Well, some guys pass out and smoke cigars when they have kids.

And some guys pole smoke when they have kids.

It's New Jersey, a zombie Democrat State.

Perhaps Clucker would like to explain the hate-filled posts on the various democratic websites at the moment wishing Tony Snow a speedy death.

And don't forget about Sandy "Burglar" or "Burgler" (depending on your wit or lack thereof on the date written). Putting sensitive documents in his underwear on his sensitive areas. Can you imagine what Larry Craig (R) would do if he could get his hands on those doucments?

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 10:26 AM

Well, why do you forget, then? Forget Sandy Berger, that is?

When you're not joking about Craig, when talking about him, you're generally using the topic for suggesting that he is emblematic of the most "corrupt" ..... insert other hyperbole.....political party...etc etc.

However, there was an Administration that stored in the WH hundreds of FBI files on friends and enemies, alike, where lost files suddenly appeared in private quarters.... where Clinton's best friend took Lewinsky to file a false affidavit.... where Clinton had his secretary come in on a Saturday in order to " refresh her memory" in a false memory before she testified to a jury.... where various women claimed to have been threatened by operatives.... where.... where the office of Vince Foster was stripped of documents before being sealed after his suicide.... where there are Asian campaign donors fleeing the country upon subpoena...where there are was Ron Brown and his corporate cronies flying to the newly bombed Bosnia....the Buddhist temple... Marc Rich pardon....etc..etc...

With THAT history, and with your willingness to point out govt corruption.... as we have seen you do repeatedly here..... why don't YOU find , a recent event like this worhwhile to remember? Sandy Berger got a call from Clnton, before his testimony to the 9/11 committee, and his subsequent behavior was to secrete documents out of the National Archive and destroy some of them. That's worth a stick in your moral gears, is it not?

Perhaps the only difference between the most 'corrupt administration and party in history" and the Clinton Administration IS ----9/11. That event and its aftermath (if you don't count accusations of corruption and collusion among Republicans in Democratic precincts.... and on one particular side of justices on the Supreme Court.....) is where most of the accusations of corruption seem to stem.

I think back to Carter WH's Vernon Jordan writing that Clinton corrupted every aspect of his office and that the pettiness of the corruption was more emblematic of his time rather than the scope of his personal corruption.

There's a valid point there, but I'm not given to rhetoric like that. To his credit Vernon uses it where and when he sees it, no matter the party involved.

You could take a page from that book.

You're not answering the question Clucker. How would you know what isn't allowed to be posted on the Newshole, how would you know what the banned comments say unless you were either screening them or pulling what you claim to be the posts out of your ass? It's like everything else you say here-bullshit and lies.

Posted by: at September 1, 2007 11:28 AM

You mean, I'm not the only one that thinks that? The last part, that is. Shocker.....

Total unmitigated bullshit !
For someone to have an imagination like this, shows where their sick mind dwells.

These are the type of lies the Olbermann Watch is known for !
Thank you mlong for your contribution in demonstrating what this site is all about.

Posted by: Why don't you think at September 1, 2007 1:25 PM

It happened back in June, know it all.

What A Wonderful World This Would Be.

And no, wack-jobs! The first twenty eight would 'HAVE TO BE IN PLACE'. Before day 29 would happen.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/30-day-plan.html

To my free thinking friends, even if by some miracle, the first 27 days happened, no way would the fringe left ever let day 28 happen.

Isn't it funny how hard core right wingers ( like Cecelia) continues to keep bringing up stories of the Clinton years whenever another GOP married family man gets shoved out of the closet.

It's such a knee jerk reaction to harken back to the republicans favorite whipping boy, Bill Clinton, instead of discussing the actual current news event.

She is following in the footsteps of all the right wing blogs and the Faux News dummies.
Marching to the beat, saluting to their right wing flag.

Posted by: Why don't you think at September 1, 2007 1:33 PM

When someone uses rhetoric that the Bush Administration is the most corrupt in history and that the Republican Party is the most corrupt in the nation, why wouldn't I bring up the most recent Democratic Administration or a recent incident of similar behavior (Berger's) emblematic of that Administration? It was a statement that made a historical appeal.

That's not at all similar to your bringing up Iraq and troop supplies when you are countered on your assertion that Republicans are vunerable to hypocrisy charges in a way that doesn't hold true for Democrats, Einstein.

Isn't it funny how hard core right wingers ( like Cecelia) continues to keep bringing up stories of the Clinton years whenever another GOP married family man gets shoved out of the closet.

It's such a knee jerk reaction to harken back to the republicans favorite whipping boy, Bill Clinton, instead of discussing the actual current news event.

She is following in the footsteps of all the right wing blogs and the Faux News dummies.
Marching to the beat, saluting to their right wing flag.

Posted by: Why don't you think at September 1, 2007 1:33 PM

When someone uses rhetoric that the Bush Administration is the most corrupt in history and that the Republican Party is the most corrupt in the nation, why wouldn't I bring up the most recent Democratic Administration or a recent incident of similar behavior (Berger's) emblematic of that Administration? It was a statement that made a historical appeal.

That's not at all similar to your bringing up Iraq and troop supplies when you are countered on your assertion that Republicans are vunerable to sexual hypocrisy charges in a way that doesn't hold true for Democrats, Einstein.

"It's such a knee jerk reaction to harken back to the republicans favorite whipping boy, Bill Clinton"

We bring up Bubba because it shows the double standards that KO and the rest of the MSM uses when it reports on scandals involving Republicans compared to Dems..
Bubba assaults and harasses women and it's no big deal,Hillary sends her people to remove files from Vince Fosters office after he kills himself before police can get there..no big deal,the Clintons and their cronies attempted to destroy the lives of the fired Travel office staff to cover up the underhanded way Bubba got rid of them to make room for his Hollywood Buddy and female "Cousin"to take over...no big deal,the refusal of Hillary to turn over those files claiming they where "lost" only to have them "turn up" on a table somewhere long after any harm they could cause had past..no big deal...The Mark Rich Pardon which came after his wife gave the Clintons a lot of money ...no big deal and all the funny money problems the Clintons have including the latest one with Norman Hsu’s possible straw campaign donations as we seen this week KO and the rest of the MSM view is it's no big deal so they'll spend all week talking about Craig in the bathroom so they don't have to talk about the sleazy ways the Clintons get money..whether it's from some criminal Strawman or from a so called "Newsman" who hands them a check on air before a "softball" interview.

Anyone notice Olby on the latest edition of "The Soup" or are we too busy bullshitting each other to notice?

"think back to Carter WH's Vernon Jordan writing that Clinton corrupted every aspect of his office and that the pettiness of the corruption was more emblematic of his time rather than the scope of his personal corruption."

Posted by: Cecelia at September 1, 2007 12:22 PM

I meant Carter's Chief of Staff Hamilton Jordan, not Bill's BFF, Vernon Jordan.

No, mlong, the performance artist known as "Why" really doesn't see a distinction between bringing up Clinton when the charge is presidential corruption of historical proportions and in bringing up the Iraq War when the subject is hypocrisy via sexual peccadilloes.

$44 million is a big price to pay for a soiled dress and proof on consensual sex with an adult woman. All other charges were dropped, by Ken Starr no less.

Kinda weird How Starr's current firm is now pouring money into Clinton's presidential campaign.

Maybe they're prepping for new business in '08. :)

Sept. 3rd and 4th will be a documentary on the Imus Ranch working with terminally ill children on RFDTV. The evil man that he is...Spolbyloons, he was doing this long before he was fired. Unwad your panties.

$44 million is a big price to pay for a soiled dress and proof on consensual sex with an adult woman. All other charges were dropped, by Ken Starr no less.

Kinda weird How Starr's current firm is now pouring money into Clinton's presidential campaign.
Posted by: at September 1, 2007 3:11 PM

No, all charges of obstruction were referred to the House Managers with an opinion that were impeachable offensives.

The thing about Starr's law firm is only "weird" if you've operated under the cartoon planet assumptions that law firms and attorneys are unable to honestly broker a case if they have specific political alliances.

Also, it's not unheard of for any business to contribute money to the presidential campaigns of anyone they think will win the primary-- often simultaneously to BOTH parties.

So, you don't think Starr was a GOP Hatchetman?
What's your favorite part about living on Cartoon Planet?

"No, all charges of obstruction were referred to the House Managers with an opinion that were impeachable offensives."

And the only one deemed to have enough evidence was the lying about the affair, all others were dropped. I'm not suggesting there wasn't evidence to be found, or perhpas it was destroyed, but that was the final analysis.

So, you don't think Starr was a GOP Hatchetman?
What's your favorite part about living on Cartoon Planet?

Posted by: at September 1, 2007 3:51 PM

You tell me, Space Ghost.... :D

And the only one deemed to have enough evidence was the lying about the affair, all others were dropped. I'm not suggesting there wasn't evidence to be found, or perhpas it was destroyed, but that was the final analysis.

Posted by: at September 1, 2007 3:54 PM

The final analysis is that contrary to your (or some other anonyloon's statement) the final charges were not dropped by Ken Starr, were referred.

They led to impeachment of Clinton (and later the suspension of Clinton's law license), the internment of Clinton heir-apparent and then Arkansas governor, Jim Guy Tucker, Clinton WH Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Webster Hubbell, and Clinton former business partner Jim McDougal.

They led to impeachment of Clinton (and later the suspension of Clinton's law license), the internment of Clinton heir-apparent and then Arkansas governor, Jim Guy Tucker, Clinton WH Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Webster Hubbell, and Clinton former business partner Jim McDougal.
Posted by: Cecelia at September 1, 2007 4:18 PM

Rather, the investigation led to more than a "soiled dress and proof on consensual sex with an adult woman".

It led to all the above.

I have identified at least nine (9) names you post or have posted under, and I recognize many, many anonymous posts as yours.

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 4:59 PM

Dream on, philby/clucker/rudy. You've identified nothing and never will. I will donate $1000 to OW if you can prove I made the post--

Posted by: at September 1, 2007 11:28 AM

I will donate another $1000 to OW if you can prove the other 9 names you are lying about, above. Hell, I'll donate the money to a cause of your choice if you can prove it, how bout that, liar? Get busy, Inspector Gadget! Maybe you can "turn your office loose" on OW. LOL!

Everyone.
A friend of mine has an Anti-Think Progress site.
Please visit so we develope and alternative to Think Progress.

http://djkonservo.wordpress.com/

How many nukes can you gt for 24m?

SOUTH Korea paid Afghanistan's Taliban more than $US20 million ($24.56m) to release 19 missionaries they were holding hostage, a senior insurgent leader said today, vowing to use the funds to buy arms and mount suicide attacks.

"We got more than $US20 million from them (the Seoul government), the commander said on condition of anonymity.

"With it we will purchase arms, get our communication network renewed and buy vehicles for carrying out more suicide attacks."

The commander is on the 10-man leadership council of the Islamist Taliban movement, which is led by the elusive Mullah Mohammad Omar.

Frankly, I think Clinton is regarded a bit too highly. But who is to blame? Cecelia and a band of like-minded and like-tempered mean-spirited and hypocritical ideologues, seething with envy.

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 5:09 PM

I have absolutely no animus against President Clinton, so you're barking up the wrong tree here, Capon. There was NAFTA and GATT, which I support and his post-Dick Morris turn to right accomplished welfare reform being the foremost. I would have drawn the line at the Defense of Marriage Act, not that I'm for gay marriage (I prefer gay civil unions), but perhaps that was the best way to go about that.

He was impeached and paid the price for what he did. My thinking at the time was that the vote should have been to remove him from office, and then the Senate should have reinstated him.

However, I do believe he should have RESIGNED after the Lewinsky matter and had he not been protected from doing so by his sycophants, we'd most likely be in Gore's second term right now.

So much for schedenfreude, Capon...

My biggest quarrel with Clinton is over his belief that terrorism is a matter for the courts. But according to what HRC has expressly stated when challenged at the debates, she's moved beyond that, as well.

I won't vote for Hillary, unless Ron Paul is nominated.... but I have no overwhelming qualms about her as president. Far from it. Based on what she's done so far, she'll trifle with your side of the aisle far more than with mine. Like her husband, she'll do the right(wing) thing in the end and still have you guys battling for her honor...

That's a talent afforded the Clintons by having followers who hate their own opposition more than they love their ideals.

I will donate another $1000 to OW if you can prove the other 9 names you are lying about, above. Hell, I'll donate the money to a cause of your choice if you can prove it, how bout that, liar? Get busy, Inspector Gadget! Maybe you can "turn your office loose" on OW. LOL!

Posted by: royal king at September 1, 2007 6:00 PM

crickets........philby-all talk, no action.

Despite the fact that has proven to be far more effective than the Invasion and o-going and endless Occupation of a nation that did not attack us? Interesting.

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 8:39 PM

Fondling interns and watching basketball in the Oval Office while OBL was planning 9/11 is considered "far more effective" by Philby. It all makes sense, now.......

Splobyloon Debating Tactics- Smear and Run

I have identified at least nine (9) names you post or have posted under, and I recognize many, many anonymous posts as yours.

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 4:59 PM

I will donate another $1000 to OW if you can prove the other 9 names you are lying about, above. Hell, I'll donate the money to a cause of your choice if you can prove it, how bout that, liar? Get busy, Inspector Gadget! Maybe you can "turn your office loose" on OW. LOL!

Posted by: royal king at September 1, 2007 6:00 PM

I am not about to respond to your challenge, Pea Brain.

Posted by: Clucker at September 2, 2007 12:01 AM

This is for mike. He still thinks philby and rudy weren't the same "person." His wife has banned him from the home pc so he won't see this till he's back in his cubicle on monday. Enjoy!

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. Do you really think we don't know your IP address? Do you really believe that you can hide the fact that you and Mrs PHilby have the same IP address? Hmm? And then there's the elusive "M Schultz" as well. And Clucker and Jennifer.

Hope you enjoyed your little role-playing game.

Posted by: johnny dollar at March 30, 2007 5:06 PM

ope you enjoyed your little role-playing game.

Posted by: johnny dollar at March 30, 2007 5:06 PM
Posted by: at September 2, 2007 2:21 AM

Chilling isn't it. What is it with the Stephen Glass mindset? Why does anyone want to make what they hate even more unpalatable?

To go back and reread the stuff about sweet Muslims vs mean Baptists, and the lunches with former Democrats who had changed to Republicans during the Civil Rights Era.....to feel the contempt that must lie behind dreaming up a poor "Rudy Ramirez" character and to clinch that with Rudy's nemesis, the superior and liberal " Mrs. Philby.... to then read yesterday's backhanded slam on Johnny's integrity...

Mercy.... lock your doors at night, folks. There really are some nuts out there.

"This is for mike. He still thinks philby and rudy weren't the same "person."

Anon 2:21, tell me WHAT exactly was the context for this post? And WHY would you post such an outright lie like that completely out of the blue?

Yes, Johnny did make that post back in March, and I do remember it well. Johnny was obviously only one of two who would have had that information. SO why would someone assume that I didn't accept it?

I remember equally as well Johnny's steadfast refusal to clear up the controversy when Jeff kept falsy accusing ME of posting under different names almost hourly, ..... even though I specifically asked him to do so more than once.

And Cecelia, why would you respond to this obvious provocation in such a positive? manner?

Me? I personally felt the philby/rudy dichotomy was a very clever and useful ploy. Both characters so perfectly fit the stereotypes constantly being leveled by both extremes against the other side, especially the 'rudy' character.

There are still a few 'rudy' characters on this board that very much fit the same stereotype, and as far as I know, these folks are 'real' posters. No, they don't express themselves in quite the same manner, and their english skills are a little better. More than one of them substitutes profanity and stereotypical name calling rants in place of rudy's more comical run-on sentences, but the close - minded false perception of the thoughts, motives, and social status of those they regard as the 'enemy' is still there.

From my perspective, the 'rudys' of the world are constantly being fed this BS daily by nationally prominent right wing political commentors, and many of them obviously do swallow it whole and without question.

In fact, the remainder of Anon 2:21's post is yet another example of someone using unprovable and false stereotypes as a subsitute for making actual arguments.

Cecelia has no moral allegiance to anything but "her side".
Right or wrong has no bearing on this Good Christian.
The Craig scandal is a great example !
She and Cee are cut from the same cloth.
A republican scandal means it's non stop talking about....DEMOCRATS!

And if you don't swallow whole, her diversion tactics, you're "afraid" to respond and you incur her wrath.
Take away her propensity for finding courage at the bottom of a bottle, all that's left is a pretentious twit !
Posted by: Why don't you think at September 2, 2007 10:11 AM

Let's see....you're deflecting my criticism (surprise!) of a guy who takes on various identities in order to address folks, who are giving him the benefit of doubt that his experience and frame of mind, are what he portrays and confesses them to be...... and then you say that *I* have no moral allegiance to anything but my "side"? You know---the one I share with Rudy Ramirez.

Why would I respond the way that I did, Mike? Because until I saw Johnny's post, I had thought that the Clucker role-playing thing was conjecture. Just the routine speculation thing. I may have seen Johnny's post in the past because I did know that Rudy and Philby,had the been the same person, (but then it could have been via RK) but I didn't pick up on the Clucker part as a Johnny verified thing.

Grammie, made a statement the other that piqued my curiousity and I went back in the archives and started reading the Philby/Ramirez roles that you find so ingenious.

Great! Perhaps I can work one up using O'Lielly's example....

I mean you're so open to that sort of thing.... why it's merely the truth! That's how those dittoheads think! Why not show it in all it's glory....and.then some... Why there's Laura Bush here to show us the truth of the matter....isn't there?... I mean these freaks have their nerve making this hate site in the first place...

Doesn't take much to fall into the act.

When I said the other day that RK was Clucker's prop, I had no idea what an understatement that was. Mos the world is likely to be his prop and the rest of it his audience.

You be that for him, sweety. I'm sure that as long as it stays clear who are the good guys and who are the bad guys, you'll stay a Clucker' & Co. fan. Just like with Olbermann.

why, go back and read the whole post. I gave clucker/philby/rudy/jennifer 2 opportunities to prove me wrong. She is the one with the "foot in mouth disease." Think and read before you get all frothy and start bangin' on your keyboard.

why, the original post included 2 offers. "Another" meant the second of the two. Ask clucker, maybe she can further oblige you since she was the one that "chickened out."

Keep me out of it, please. I don't understand anything Pea Brain says or does, and I prefer to keep it that [wa].sic If I [understod]sic I might not respect and admire him/her/it/them as much as I do.

Posted by: Clucker at September 2, 2007 9:01 PM

I'm sure clucker would like the fact she was called on her lies and unable to back them up to go away in the same fashion that Craig would like his recent fiasco to go away. Can't say I blame her. Later on, when time permits, I will re post cluckers embarrassment in it's entirety.

Cecelia...Regarding my question to you this morning, I noticed that you immediately brought Clucker into the equation. The anon original provocation to me never mentioned Clucker, it simply stated a lie (that I supposedly still think rudy and Mrs. Philby were not the same person).

What does any of this have to do with Clucker?

Yes, I have read Jeff's many assertions that philby is Clucker, but Jeff has no credibility in such matters. Never forget that he falsely fingered me using other names.... not once, but hundreds of times....but it was a lie every single time he did it. I think you know that. It has amazed me how Jeff has received no real condemnation for doing this from anybody on his 'side'. It was as if everyone just regarded it as a 'yuk, yuk' kind of thing.

So is Clucker the formar philby? I personally have no idea....and I would have to hear the answer from someone other than Jeff.

Is that something YOU can confirm?

I have identified at least nine (9) names you post or have posted under, and I recognize many, many anonymous posts as yours.

Posted by: Clucker at September 1, 2007 4:59 PM

1. Dream on, philby/clucker/rudy. You've identified nothing and never will. I will donate $1000 to OW if you can prove I made the post--

Posted by: at September 1, 2007 11:28 AM

2. I will donate "another" $1000 to OW if you can prove the other 9 names you are lying about, above. Hell, I'll donate the money to a cause of your choice if you can prove it, how bout that, liar? Get busy, Inspector Gadget! Maybe you can "turn your office loose" on OW. LOL!

Posted by: royal king at September 1, 2007 6:00 PM

So is Clucker the [formar]sic philby? I personally have no idea....and I would have to hear the answer from someone other than Jeff.

Is that something YOU can confirm?

Posted by: Mike at September 2, 2007 9:43 PM

Has she denied being one and the same? Nope. Did she deny making pro chavez posts? Nope. I rest my case. Don't mean to burst your bubble, mike. I'm right.

I've said six times, now. As soon as you deny making the pro chavez posts, I will be glad to post them. All you have to do is say "I, clucker/philby didn't make any pro chavez posts." I know you think you are clever, however, you are anything but. You are venom wrapped with human skin. I use the term "human" very loosely.

Thanks, coward! Back to huffpo and dk for you.

Jeff: "has she denied being one and the same"?.....Absence of denial is never proof of guilt.

Jeff: "Did she deny making pro Chavez posts?".....Absence of denial is never proof of guilt.

Jeff: "Did she deny making pro Chavez posts?.....Denial of ANY accusations made by you simply gives you unearned credibility.

Jeff: "Did she deny making pro Chavez posts?".....We've already seen the flimsy criteria you use to define being "pro' something,

Jeff: "I rest my case?".....A very flimsy case indeed, but typical of you.

Jeff: "Don't mean to burst your bubble mike?".....What "bubble are you referring to Jaff?

Jeff: "I'm right".....Now THAT would be highly unusual!

Jeff: "I'm right".....Actually, I never said you were wrong, I just said you haven't proven anything, and I doubt if you can.

Jeff: "I've said six time now".....We know.....you talk too much!

Jeff: "As soon as you deny making the pro Chavez posts, I will be glad to post them."......Why should he bother to deny ANYTHING you have claimed? It's up to you to "prove" your stupid assertions. Your "proof" usually turns out to be nuance to reasonable people.

Jeff: "All you have to do is say "I Clucker didn't make any pro Chavez posts".....Why should he or anyone else care what you post?

Jeff: "You think you are clever, however you are anything but".....THIS statement coming the poster boy most known for being anything but 'clever'.

Jeff: "You are venom wrapped with human skin"......And so are you, but his 'venom' is far more effective and 'clever' than yours.

Jeff: "I use the term "human" very loosely.".....Yes we know Jeff! You use every term upu use "very loosely".

Jeff: "Thanks, coward".....Back to huffpo and dk for you.".....Your standard retort when you don't actually have a retort, which is most of the time.

Jeff: "Thanks, coward".....Why didn't you just call him "patsy'?

Then what are you doing commenting here anon?
Oh,, wait, I'm anon. I'm freaking out! : ~

RK, I very seriously doubt that the serial liar Capon Fauntleroy Clucker knows how many names HE posted under much less anyone else. I have no doubt that he is also a CHICKEN BLOGGER extraordinaire.

As Cecelia pointed out he lives for "... the stage, the play, the roles, the audience...here he can drive the world.... here they can be what he wishes....what they truly are, if only they and not just he knew it....."

He lives by and through what he perceives as his masterful behind the scene role as the MANIPULATOR AND PUPPETEER.

I really think the Bard said it best centuries before Capon Fauntleroy Clucker was even born:

“....a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Death to Capon Fauntleroy Clucker is disdain and a cold shoulder to his fancied direction of events and blatant display of his phony superiority.

In other words, ignore the FLUCKER.:)

Grammie

Note to Janet: A true measure of character is whom you choose to associate with...or to defend.

I find it most unfortunate and revealing that you have personally chosen to associate with and defend a proven serial liar and provocator,

Cecelia: "But I didn't pick up on the Clucker part as a Johnny verified thing."

Where exactly did Johnny verify THAT?

Cecelia: "But I didn't pick up on the Clucker part as a Johnny verified thing."

Where exactly did Johnny verify THAT?
"
Posted by: Mike at September 3, 2007 5:06 AM

That's certainly how I interpret this:

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. Do you really think we don't know your IP address? Do you really believe that you can hide the fact that you and Mrs PHilby have the same IP address? Hmm? And then there's the elusive "M Schultz" as well. And Clucker and Jennifer.

Hope you enjoyed your little role-playing game."

Looking at the posts from M. Schulz, Philby, (and Ramirez by default), yeah, it's the Performance Artist Currently Known As Clucker.

Along with your reasoning that Clucker is doing no more than displaying what your icky opponents are truly like, I know you're telling yourself that your willful defense for such an act is not really disingenuous. Oh, we see your gears clicking ... THEY defend Royal King.

Well, consider, Mike, that I often defend the superfluous AAP. Consider that neither he nor the loathsome O'Liely, nor the mental midget Why, come anywhere close to garnering from conservatives here, the attention and sheer over-wrought opprobrium that you and Clucker lavish on RK.

THAT fact is not incidental to the reality that both you and Clucker (in the sort of snobbery you no doubt would insist is part and parcel with Republicanism) wish to portray RK's plain support for traditionalism and conservatism as unsophisticated and....well...uncouth. He's the raw material that you more easily twist into the cartoon "RRWer". He's the prop for your "I care!" soliloquies. Not that he completely satisfies, for that there's still the need for creativity....

Consider too, Mike, that unlike you and Clucker, RK and the other folks on my "side" aren't spending the majority of our time here posturing with those liberals we consider to be leftwing "straight men"/props. When we comment we're talking to each other or taking to those folks YOU feel to be the best and the brightest on the board-- yourselves...

However, MIke you right in one sense, it is effective for you to keep telling yourself that you can justify what you wish because...well... THEY suck.... The charades you find so amusing have certainly succeeded in doing a bit of damage to this little ole "hate site". For me at least. I've had a real education about the value of online communication. I'm not ashamed to say that I've appreciated this place very much. At risk of being idiotically serious ( I truly do ask your forbearance with this), women value the internet because here, just as men live daily in the real world, how our hair looks on any given day is not of any importance.

Congratulations. Strut around, high-five, mock conservatives by doing scenes from the movie Deliverance... whatevah....

You've argued this site is superfluous, but you weren't taking any chances.... you've championed actions in an effort designed to make sure of it.

In other words, ignore the FLUCKER.:)

Grammie

Posted by: Janet Hawkins at September 3, 2007 4:43 AM

Intellectualism AND commonsense. Chubby Hubby was a lucky guy!

Thanks, Janet!

How librul of you !

Kind of reminds me of a friend's mother I used to know.
She was a stone cold racist, but "deflected" her racism by saying," How can I be racist, I danced with a black man once."

Cecilia likes to think of herself as Eliza Doolittle, but instead is more Eliza Knew Little.

Posted by: Why don't you think at September 3, 2007 10:55 AM

My doing that is not "librul" at all as far as I can judge by what's said on this place.

If I were castigating AAP for offering not much more than "BUSHWIPES!!" to this board and suggesting that he is emblematic of most on his side, and giving little speeches about what a group of low-class uneducated folks he comprises because he has no compassion about.... low-class uneducated folks... THAT would be liberal and "librul"...

t's apparent by your own definition that don't have the slightest idea what a liberal is.
A liberal, to you, is only a punching bag in your shiny house made of glass.

A liberal is a convenient scapegoat where you can pawn off the republican failures and embarrassments.

The funny part is that you think that you have an open mind are fair and can measure both sides of every issue.

Think again.

Moral relativism is your game !

Even though we may not see how shitty you look or that your hair or makeup may not be done, your partisanship and mean spiritedness elicits a window into your soul.
Posted by: Why don't you think at September 3, 2007 11:26 AM

Actually, that's one of the few blanket statements I've ever made about liberals and it was merely in reply to your blanket statement implying that liberals are more compassionate.

But you've never let the facts or tenor of an argument, as well as any history here, stop you from such screeds before. Why stop now...

I want to add about the multiple personality disorders we see here.... Johnny has done parody here to great effect in the past. He has mimicked Olbermann's show and Olbermann himself, while letting everyone know its parody from Johnny rather than being an impostor.

The Artist Currently Known As Clucker, is smart and creative and could do that to great effect here...in the same manner.

You don't expect Oralman to report those not guiltys do you? It's why he doesn't report good economic news or the decrease in deaths in Iraq. Those facts don't fit in with his agenda.

I find it most unfortunate and revealing that you have personally chosen to associate with and defend a proven serial liar and [provocator]sic,

Posted by: Mike at September 3, 2007 4:51 AM

mike, your desperation is showing, again. Claiming I am a serial liar is a lie in itself. Are you still crying because I thought clucker was you at one time? It's blatantly obvious you aren't the same. philby is much more articulate than you, yet, you aren't as hateful as she is. I was simply speculating at the time, I never said I was positive, simply speculating. You act like people were fatally injured in the process, get over it. I was wrong, you aren't philby, happy now?

Cecelia, you are right in your post above, as you usually are. Using a different name and letting it be known and "hiding" behind a different name are entirely different. The latter lacks respect to others and one's self. Just so everybody knows, I know mike will crow big time about this, I added the "clucker and jennifer" to the last part of johny's post. I am positive, though, they are one and the same as philby/clucker/rudy.

The average age of Keith's audience is only a few (less than 5) years younger than O'Reilly's. Olbermann's demo numbers are actually dropping and he too seems to be attracting an older audience, not more younger viewers. Now Keith dates teenagers but they don't actually watch his show.

clucker, if I was wrong, I would apologise, I'm not wrong. It kills you, me being right! Me and my little pea brain...........

P.S. You can continue to call me a racist all you want, if it makes you feel better. I don't care. Your desperation shows.

That might be true if the Republican in question had been caught having sex with a child. He wasn't. But leave it to the Olbyloons to try and change the facts of a story. What someone does sexually is their own business when it's a Democrat but the world's business when it's a Republican. Double standard much dears?

Little men, liars and cowards fade quickly. Au Revoir, Pea Brain. Would that we barely knew you.

Posted by: Clucker at September 3, 2007 1:05 PM
Post a comment

I have no reason to apologise, philby. You, on the other hand have posted outright lies about me. Have you apologised? Like, "I hate out troops" and "not enough of them have died." Remember those lies, holier than thou, philby/clucker? What about those 9 names you said I as using? Find them, yet? Funny how mike hasn't said squat about that. The king of the cacklers! Looks like your candy glass houses aren't so sturdy, are they?

I also didn't see him dwell on the recent problems in the stock market as they were happening either.
Was he pro-stock market then, because he didn't report the historical problems ad nauseum?

Posted by: John at September 3, 2007 1:33 PM

Oralmann may not have "dwelled" on it, but, he definately gave time in his comedy show to mention and blame Bush when the market was down. Not a peep when it was breaking records on a daily basis.

Cecelia, you are right in your post above, as you usually are. Using a different name and letting it be known and "hiding" behind a different name are entirely different. The latter lacks respect to others and one's self. Just so everybody knows, I know mike will crow big time about this, I added the "clucker and jennifer" to the last part of johny's post. I am positive, though, they are one and the same as philby/clucker/rudy.

Posted by: royal king at September 3, 2007 11:59 AM

RK, you WERE wrong to do that. I think you do ow everyone an apology.

After going back and reading the old Philby, M. Schultz stuff I really don't have any doubt that you're right as to Clucker being all three personalities, but there is no proof so it's no fair to act as though it's written in stone.

We're back to conjecture again. However, I think overall Grammie had some excellent advice.

Mike,

Sorry. I was mistaken about what Johnny had said.

he policies I favor are ones that help people( unlike your own)
But you are right about something. I'm not compassionate to fools that I find at this site.

My generalization ( where there is a lot of thruth)about both parties goes like this:

"Republicans have no heart. Democrats have no spine."

This is my main problem with Democrats and one symptom you won't find with this poster, as you have seen.

Posted by: Why don't you think at September 3, 2007 11:47 AM

WDYT, I have no doubt you either missed or ignored the whole debate on unintended consequences when it comes to entitlement programs. However, there are some thoughts and opinions on what does and what does not ultimately serve to alleviate poverty and ignorance and the people who hold opinions counter to the one you hold aren't all monsters.

Just like those Democrats who you think are so spineless are just more alot more measured and certainly a lot more decent than you.

Of course that's not saying much, I'm sure fire ants are too.

And, the Republican National Convention is in Minneapolis next summer. If I were the MSP Airport Authority, I'd turn the restroom into a toll toilet. Can you imagine the revenue?

Posted by: Clucker at September 3, 2007 2:12 PM

Well, if HRC or Silky Pony become the next president, maybe you can rally one of them to sign a Defense Of Restroom Act.

It could both protect "the children" AND keep you unmolested in your stall/office....

Hey--WDYT--Just "love" the poetry you wrote to honor your pretend-boyfriend's favorite drug over there at DU. Why do you never honor us with one of your efforts here? Does the dial-up you have take too long to post? Can't keep your connection? Is it some sort of power issue there in Cleveland or something?

I have no reason to apologise, philby. You, on the other hand have posted outright lies about me. Have you apologised? Like, "I hate out troops" and "not enough of them have died." Remember those lies, holier than thou, philby/clucker? What about those 9 names you said I as using? Find them, yet? Funny how mike hasn't said squat about that. The king of the cacklers! Looks like your candy glass houses aren't so sturdy, are they?

Posted by: royal king at September 3, 2007 1:27 PM

I will apologise to J$ for adding words to his post. Even though I am right about the names, it was wrong to put words in J$'s mouth. Although, it is common practice for several of the olbyloons who have no shame, it is not common practice for me. I find it very sad that philby and mike have made serious and false accusations about me and how I feel about our troops and no one has said a thing, let alone requested apologies from them on a much more serious infraction. Apparently, being wrong about someones identity under which they post is MUCH more serious to some and they know who they are. The ones that continue to whine about it.

I have no reason to apologise, philby. You, on the other hand have posted outright lies about me. Have you apologised? Like, "I hate out troops" and "not enough of them have died." Remember those lies, holier than thou, philby/clucker? What about those 9 names you said I as using? Find them, yet? Funny how mike hasn't said squat about that. The king of the cacklers! Looks like your candy glass houses aren't so sturdy, are they?

Posted by: royal king at September 3, 2007 1:27 PM

I will apologise to J$ for adding words to his post. Even though I am right about the names, it was wrong to put words in J$'s mouth. Although, it is common practice for several of the olbyloons who have no shame, it is not common practice for me. I find it very sad that philby and mike have made serious and false accusations about me and how I feel about our troops and no one has said a thing, let alone requested apologies from them on a much more serious infraction. Apparently, being wrong about someones identity under which they post is MUCH more serious to some and they know who they are. The ones that continue to whine about it.

Mike, if I might ask for your indulgence, don't crow about this. I don't expect you will, anyway, but I think Pea Brain has caused quite enough trouble about all of this. Personally, I would simply prefer to move on and forget about him and what he has done.

Posted by: Clucker at September 3, 2007 4:36 PM

Clucker/philby, you brought this on yourself, typical spineless liberal, blame someone else for what you did. I'm sure you would like to move on, you should be and probably are quite embarrassed.

The great thing about Olbermann's fan base is that they are so easy to identify when let loose on other websites. Their unique writing style and what they think passes for wit and humor always reveals them. And if that doesn't work, their IP address is also a dead-giveaway.

We have far more important issues with which we all need to be dealing, and we really don't need this to be any more of a diversion than it has already been made.

Posted by: Clucker/philby/rudy/jennifer at September 3, 2007 4:36 PM

This brought to us by the queen of diversion. Click on any thread, she is the first to post something completely off topic. A most recent example is on the "Mike Jones" thread. She posted some spew about "basra" out of the blue. Hypocrite? Indeed.

An Olbyloon change the subject? Who would have thunk???

(09-02) 04:00 PDT Washington -- House Democrats are making headway on their goals of slashing pork-barrel spending in half and disclosing more information about spending on lawmakers' pet projects, known as earmarks.

But while spending on earmarks may be trimmed and more closely scrutinized this year, top Democrats like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi aren't exactly suffering.

The San Francisco Democrat raked in almost $100 million in earmarks in the spending bills passed this year, according to an analysis by Taxpayers for Common Sense, which tracks congressional spending. That means Pelosi is getting more than 1 percent of all earmarks doled out to the House's 435 members.

Pelosi's top deputies are doing just as well - or better. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., brought in $85.5 million. Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., the House Appropriations Committee chairman, got $96 million. And Pelosi's close ally, Rep. Jack Murtha, D-Pa., who oversees defense spending, rang up $186 million for pet projects.

A shady Chinese megadonor to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign has close ties to an aerospace mogul accused of placing his business interests before national security by sharing missile secrets with Beijing during the Clinton administration.

Before his forced resignation last week, Norman Yuan Yuen Hsu sat on the board of trustees of the liberal New School university in New York with former Loral Corp. head Bernard L. Schwartz, who was allowed to transfer restricted satellite and missile technology to a People's Liberation Army front after contributing a record amount of cash to President Clinton's 1996 campaign.

7:06 PM Olby hater wisdom on display!

"The great thing about Olbermann's fan base is that they are so easy to identify when let loose on other web sites."......and who lets them 'loose'?

"Their unique writing style"......So they all write with the same style, huh?

"and what they think passes for wit and humor always reveals them."......I guess this means you alone have a lock on exactly what passes for "wit and humor"?

"And if that doesn't work,"......but didn't you just say their writing style, wit, and humor "always" reveals them?

"their IP address is always a dead givaway".....and how would you get information such as that?

Yep, Mike's hittin' the sauce, again.

"I've said six times, now. As soon as you deny making the pro chavez posts, I will be glad to post them. All you have to do is say "I, clucker/philby didn't make any pro chavez posts."

Viva Chavez!!

Mike's feeling a bit paranoid again I see. It's all a conspiracy Mike, didn't you know that? Go to your favorite liberal websites, it's always a conspiracy, everything is a conspiracy. And what's not a conspiracy you can just blame on Bush.

It's sort of like the claim that they aren't Chavez/Castro supporters. I can point you all to various threads at various liberal loon websites that are all currently praising Mr. Chavez--El Presidente for Life. Yet they deny he's a dictator and think he's simply wonderful. Why? He buys into their BS conspiracy theories and he bashes Bush. I'm just surprised they haven't tried to get him to run for president here in the U.S.

More Brandonspeak:

"Mike's feeliong a bit paranoid again I see"....Aad where did you dig THAT ridiculous conclusion up from? I was just making fun of your convoluted logic.

"It's all a conspiracy Mike, didn't you know that?"......Uh NO, Brandon, I didn't know that. Thanks for clueing us in to the fact that you are a conspiratist.

"Go to your favorite liberal liberal websites,".....That won't be easy since I don't have any favorite liberal websites.

"It's always a conspiracy, everything is a conspiracy"......A redundant sentence since you've already entlightened us that you are a conpiracy theory believer above.

"And what's not a conspiracy you can just blame on Bush.".....No, I'd rather blame Bush on the many things he HAS actually screwed up. I don't need to invent anything else.

"It's sort of like the claim that they aren't Chavez/Castro supporters.".....Exactly WHO is "they" Brandon?

"I can point you all the various threads at various liberal loon websites that are currently praising Mr. Chavez--El Presidente for life.".....And I can point you to various loony website thread praising virtually anybody you can think of. The internet is chock full of loony individual opinions, both on the left and on the right. Everyone has an asshole, and everyone has an opinion.

"Yet they deny he's a dictator and think he's simply wonderful. Why.".....Well dang Brandon, ya got me bro! Why don't you aske "them" instead of me, as soon as you figure out who "they" is?

"He buys into their BS conspiracy theories and he bashes Bush.".....Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then....even YOU Brandon!

"I'm just surprised they haven't tried to get him to run for president here in the U.S.".....Well, for one thing, the laws would have to be changed first, and I'm sure some of them there nuts probably have.

Now, that we've discussed all of that Brandon, what in the hell did ANY of that have to do with my post, Keith Olbermann, the check he gave to Clinton, OR this thread?

^....if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there...

Love Mike's paranoid rants. He just becomes more unhinged with each passing day doesn't he?

Can't debate Brandon? ..... Just repeat your 'my opponents are just "Paranoid and unhinged" loons' rationalization and move on, Mr Muddy thinker?

Debating involves using facts, not ones opinion, Mike. Try it, sometime.

"Debating involves using facts, not ones opinion, Mike. Try it, sometime."

How totally wrong you are anon. True debate involves stating learned opinion based on a preponderance of 'facts' gleaned from many years of real perspective and analysis.

By the way anon 1:53, are you aware that you routinely misuse commas the very same way a well known troll poster does who claims he never posts as an anon?

Being debunked a called on your hypocrisies time and time again by a "troll" can't be good!

Actually, I love it when clueless trolls like Jeff claim they have 'debunked' me, because that in itself is always a near certain indicator that I was right.

Have you ever noticed that anyone with average intelligence or higher never use stupid words like 'debunk'?

On second thought, I'm sure you haven't Jeff.