Rick Reuben wrote: The fact is, Russert's work *is* the focus of the tributes being thrown at him in the commercial media. I've heard the guy called 'a fearless unrelenting bulldog' about ten times. I don't see what is wrong with contrary opinions. Let both sides be heard, and let the chips fall where they may.

No one is saying that the guy can't be criticized.

"Good Riddance" is not a contrary opinion. (and yeah. I know, you didn't say it, but that is what we're talking about, not the constructive "he's too soft on his guests, etc...). It's a mean spirited, trollic statement.

And furthermore, no one has said that saying shit like "Good Riddance" should be band- but recognize that shit like that is going to be criticized. Do you not want us to speak our minds about this?

all i gotta say about this subject -- russert's death -- is that one obit i read described him as a "bluff rumple magnet". What???

so of course i must ask...

would you see a band called bluff rumple magnet?
or maybe more fittingly --
would you buy an album called bluff rumple magnet?

zombie tim russert and the bluff rumple magnet

world of pee wrote:all i gotta say about this subject -- russert's death -- is that one obit i read described him as a "bluff rumple magnet". What???

so of course i must ask...

would you see a band called bluff rumple magnet?
or maybe more fittingly --
would you buy an album called bluff rumple magnet?

zombie tim russert and the bluff rumple magnet

are you sure you're not confusing that with something you read in the anagrams of your name thread?

I will desecrate R. Kelly's grave by not peeing on it.

Rick Reuben wrote:
If they want things to change, change them. Call for active moderation. I'm all for it. Get rid of all the off topic posts, get rid of all the personal attacks. I certainly don't need personal attacks to make any of my arguments. I have the facts. If the free for all is ever ended, that works completely to my advantage, because my threads will be able to proceed without nonsense interruptions. But for my adversaries, they'll need to step up their games if they can't use nonsense like fake quotes and personal attacks and off topic bullshit against me- it would probably be the last you'd see of a few of them, if their playtoys were taken away. Or if that's too much work, ban me, and have a narrower range of discussion here.

Fuck, sorry. I didn't mean to imply that I thought there should be any formal moderators (unless it's Mr. Russert. ). If I've failed at making position clear, here it is.
Saying something is horseshit =/= demanding someone stop saying something. If I said that I think REO Speedwagon sucks, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't listen to them. It just means I think you have shitty taste in music.

The great thing about forums like this is complete ease of ignoring people that bother you. Sure occasionally (like in this thread), I wind up in a conversation with them. But it's few and far between. And it sure beats a loud obnoxious cock in a bar that you can't ignore.

Rick Reuben wrote:

Tom wrote: I didn't mean to imply that I thought there should be any formal moderators

Oh. I think there should be. Trolling should be moderated, so should off topic posts and personal attacks. It's the only solution, because too many people insist that they are unable to ignore those they don't want to read, and then they blame the other person whenever they feel like whining about something. ( I don't get that, since I successfully ignore everyone I don't want to read and it doesn't seem difficult. ) It would be great if everyone could complain to a moderator rather than dragging down the threads with their noise.

This is a discussion of Tim Russert. You are totally off topic. Please self-moderate. You are dragging down this thread with your noise.

You play rough, man! This will teach Rick the lesson we want him to learn. Thanks.

jimmy spako wrote:they were eulogizing him on air america the night of his death & talking about his close relationship with his son & how he was always so excited to take him along to the (bush) white house when there was some kind of event where old baseball stars were assembled as guests. that stuck out for me, told me alot. how somebody can be a powerful guy who is still a boy, & a decent one at that, at heart, & whose love of those kind of things & sharing them with his son could probably kinda over-ride the grown man in him who was complicit in alot of things that i have major issues with, things that i can not simply dismiss.

Do you think Russert would have gained access to those Hallmark moments at the White House if he wasn't a partisan Beltway insider?

bassness wrote:

jimmy spako wrote:they were eulogizing him on air america the night of his death & talking about his close relationship with his son & how he was always so excited to take him along to the (bush) white house when there was some kind of event where old baseball stars were assembled as guests. that stuck out for me, told me alot. how somebody can be a powerful guy who is still a boy, & a decent one at that, at heart, & whose love of those kind of things & sharing them with his son could probably kinda over-ride the grown man in him who was complicit in alot of things that i have major issues with, things that i can not simply dismiss.

Do you think Russert would have gained access to those Hallmark moments at the White House if he wasn't a partisan Beltway insider?

Absolutely not.

The White House Press Corps are the rarefied elite in the world of journalism, and the protocols of their job are very rigidly defined. If a trusted White House reporter were to suddenly start acting like a maverick and go around offending the administration by asking the "wrong" kinds of questions or following the "wrong" stories, that reporter will end up getting fired, or transfered by his bosses to another detail.

The major news outlets tend to be extremely conservative in their coverage of Presidential matters. Serious political confrontations could cause the White House press office to limit or curtail their access. Another issue could be damage to their public credibility, if they were to promote a sensational story which the other competing news companies refuse to touch, then have that story die for lack of evidence.

Rick Reuben wrote:

ubercat wrote:I worked directly with Jessie Ventura, on his radio show, and I'm willing to bet that half way through his term even he wasn't interested in talking politics off-air.

He was interested in talking politics on the air, and MSNBC fought him. It's all in his new book.

I can't wait to read that thing.

MSNBC got him under contract then refused to play. He knows better then to sign a contract like that. We were a union station and he had a contract with the station that didn't involve the union. He was a AFTRA/SAG member...

The whole story sounds mishigas.