you are right. But on average, you dont think the left leaners tend to be more prone to that? lol. that is funny. Who knows, maybe in 100 years people will say, "thank god for GW, after him people actually came together for once" well you lumped me into a particular group a long time ago...its easy the easy way out. So no matter what i do or say you will think of me as a republican, despite many liberal views and despite me not voting for bush, despite me not even liking the 2 party system, etc. I dont need to apologize for anyone, however bush will be gone soon and there will still be problems. So, given that, i'd rather stick to the problems. We are where we are and sunk costs should never come into play when making forward looking decisions.
you are right. But on average, you dont think the left leaners tend to be more prone to that? lol. that is funny. Who knows, maybe in 100 years people will say, "thank god for GW, after him people actually came together for once" well you lumped me into a particular group a long time ago...its easy the easy way out. So no matter what i do or say you will think of me as a republican, despite many liberal views and despite me not voting for bush, despite me not even liking the 2 party system, etc. I dont need to apologize for anyone, however bush will be gone soon and there will still be problems. So, given that, i'd rather stick to the problems. We are where we are and sunk costs should never come into play when making forward looking decisions.
You created this for yourself by excusing corruption and incompetence with things like 'the other side does it too'. If the other side does it, call them out on it too. But if you excuse it, it makes you appear to be pro-corruption and pro-incompetence. Sunk costs ARE important when they affect future decisions. For example, if you create and accept a culture of corruption, you're sure to get more of it.
Disclaimer: I haven't read the thread, and I only watched the beginning of the clip. Keith Olbermann = Bill O'Reilly. No really, they are the same character. If you can't see that, you are blinded by your partisanship.
I don't think so. Its just that there is more Bush bashing these days than angry rightwing rhetoric largely because Bush is alienating so many people. Also if not for people like Rush and other rightwing media figures who pioneered attack talk radio you wouldn't have people like Olberman taking as negative stances from the other side.
You appear to be the one blinded. Olbermann no doubt leans to a side in his commentaries. That much is very true. Unlike Bill, he doesn't flat out lie, blame murder victims for their murder, insult American veterans of WWII, etc. He also puts the story above a personal political objective. If you can't see that, you haven't watched enough Bill, or Keith. Keith is also far more literate, and a much better writer.
the one thing that bill beats out keith on is literature and fiction writing - it takes a real christian conservative to write about grown men smoking crack and having sex w/ 15 year olds! you think oberman can write gems like these...
"So anyway I'd be rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples really hard, kinda' kissing your neck from behind...and then I would take the other hand with the falafel thing and I'd just put it on your p***y but you'd have to do it really light, just kind of a tease business..." --as quoted in a sexual harassment suit filed against him by a Fox News producer, 2004 He's a dirty pervoid who sexually harasses women!
the really creepy thing is that this is very similar to a passage from his erotic novel "those who tresspass". at least he is plagiarizing himself!
