Letterman degrades Emma Watson
Sarahh B
showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
and her crotch. The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
Emma look stunned, embarrassed, even couldn't speak of a long time,
looking off stage for help.
But Letterman had this look on his face like gotcha bitch. He looked
angry not even trying to make light of it.
That kind of exposing a girls body should be saved for Megan Fox or
other older Hollywood bimbos.
First it was the 14 year old Palin girl now sweet Emma.
CliffB
Dave's got..........issues. Did you notice how by the end of the
interview Watson was pushed back in the far side of her chair, as far
away from the old letch as she could get. She was pretty composed
though and had a few good comebacks (at least I was wearing
underthings, or something like that). However, she was probably not
thrilled with him. \\
The only thing he's got going for him at this point is the expectation
that he may come up with more played Palin insults to get some
attention. He is still trotting out 'I can see Alaska" joke
variations. How original Dave! Kind of sad this is what it's come to
for him.
CliffB
Btw, I bet his more and more played and spent Palin routines are
fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Imaginary Friend
wrote:
>What is wrong with Letterman? He ambushed Emma Watson on his show by
>showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
>and her crotch. The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
Really? I never knew it stormed inside the building. I'll pay closer
attention tonight.
calvin
> Btw, I bet his more and more played and spent Palin routines are
> fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
> shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
> went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
> should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
> effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Where were the feminists when Letterman thought it was cute
to say that a teenage girl (whether 14 or 18) was 'knocked up'
by a third baseman at a baseball game?
Answer: The same place they always hide when the object
of derision is a Republican or, in the case of Chelsea, when
the Clintons were opposing their chosen candidate.
Bluuuue Rajah
@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net:
It's just his way of showing how much she turns him on. Remember when
boys were six, and they thought that pushing a girl down in a snowbank
was "flirting." Well, Dave's entering his second childhood.
nick
> On Jul 9, 6:06 pm, CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Btw, I bet his more and more played and spent Palin routines are
> > fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
> > shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
> > went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
> > should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
> > effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
>
> Where were the feminists when Letterman thought it was cute
> to say that a teenage girl (whether 14 or 18) was 'knocked up'
> by a third baseman at a baseball game?
>
http://www.now.org/issues/media/hall-of-shame/index.php/television/letterman-palin-daughter
trotsky
> On Jul 9, 6:06 pm, CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Btw, I bet his more and more played and spent Palin routines are
>> fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
>> shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
>> went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
>> should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
>> effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
>
> Where were the feminists when Letterman thought it was cute
> to say that a teenage girl (whether 14 or 18) was 'knocked up'
> by a third baseman at a baseball game?
Would it have been better if it was an outfielder?
Or Prince Fielder?
trotsky
I don't understand why they don't have an image of a burning bra on
their site.
calvin
Thanks; and of course Limbaugh was wrong if he said that,
but the Chelsea incident I was referring to was when David
Schuster (who has a snarl worse than Cheney's) said that
Chelsea was being 'pimped out' by the Clintons to campaign
for Hillary.
calvin
> calvin wrote:
> > Where were the feminists when Letterman thought it was cute
> > to say that a teenage girl (whether 14 or 18) was 'knocked up'
> > by a third baseman at a baseball game?
>
> Would it have been better if it was an outfielder?
More from your fountain of juvenile humor.
Rich
I hate talk shows aimed at the general public. They are the dullest
things on Earth, nearly. But I did catch a couple minutes of that
one. Letterman is a boor. The girl seemed like a perfectly decent
human, yet couldn't get a word in edgewise because old pervert
Letterman would not shut his denture-laced trap.
Kayla W
off to expose her breasts.
The look on Lettermans face and his body movements were scarey. It
almost seemed like he wanted to sexually degrade her.
Dakota Fanning or Miley Cyrus would probably of been better targets.
Emma seems like a nice refined girl.
Volfie999
Actually, I didn't think she was embarrassed. And she fired off a
good one-liner about it. She's over 18; she can show her knickers all
she wants. Dave's over 150. He's been on television for nearly 30
years; he can show whatever photo for a laugh he wants.
SoCally
> Dave's got..........issues.
I think when he finally got married it screwed with his head.
Terry Lomax
Why did "sweet Emma" choose to wear a dress with a slit in the middle
all the way up to her waist? Isn't she hyping the new Harry Potter as
more of a teen film than a kiddie film? Perhaps she chose a
provocative outfit to get more young dudes to see the film.
I don't watch Letterman (or listen to morning radio replays of his
highly-overated, almost-never-funny "Top 10" garbage), but am aware
he's a perv (and his regular viewers probably are too). Once while
channel surfing he showed footage of Britney on courthouse steps in a
short skirt; TMZ blurred the same image but Letterman showed it
unblurred. He also had the hots for Drew Berrymore and did a slow-mo
replay of her bouncing her ta-tas.
The Palin joke was justified and his handling of Joaquin Phoenix
seemed appropriate.
CliffB
On second thought, I believe it may have been that young Panatierre
girl dressed something like a hooker who, by the end of the interview
was pushing against the far edge of the chair, looking somewhat
skeeved out by her encounter with old prickly Dave.
CliffB
still, the point stands: he was his usual sexist, lecherous, crabby
and clammy self in the Watson interview. Tonight he's got the lead of
the Harry Potter series; Radcliffe will likely get different
treatment.
Donz5
You realize, of course, that the guest coordinates with the show what
photos will be shown. In fact, it's the guests who often bring the
photos with them to the show. You know that, yes?
Just a viewer
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, you have no interest in talk shows, YET you just happened to see
this one, and just happened to find a newsgroup where you could offer
a comment on it. Who do you think you're bullshitting, Chester?
CliffB
I guess it must be so. Why would I know such arcana? I did not bring
up the topic, but I concurred with the skeezy aspects of Dave's
presentation and its attendant sexualizing of the youngish female
guest. So, did she bring and ask for that photo and topic of her
underparts to be dwelt on by old Dave? You would know if that's the
case, yes? of course.....
Actually, I do wonder, if they pre-coordinate and all, did they give
the girl her punchline too, or was that improvised?
Donz5
Yes, I do, actually. Let's just say that she was not caught by
surprise. The outrage noted here is based on nothing approaching
reality.
It reminds me of the moment around 14 years ago when Paul Shaffer
snatched a trumpet from a guest performer, resulting in online insults
hurled at Paul at such an outrageous act. One of the show's audio
mixers chimed in with "It was funny during rehearsal," which
effectively shut the humorless idiots up.
CliffB
I for one am not outraged. Merely noting an aura or atmosphere of
chauvinism that jibes with and was made explicitly notable by Dave's
oddly obsessive, abiding and consistently degrading treatment of
Palin. All the meanness and perversity has for some reason been
unleashed in Dave by the lady. It's a sad derangement for the old guy,
and is leaking over to these ever younger and more distant starlets
whom he tends to objectify in an aggressive, even unseemly manner at
times. But for now, it's clear that Dave's #1 muse for working out in
public his psycho-sexual issues, existential repressions and
conflicted attitudes toward women, is none other than Alaska's Hottie
Governor and blazing Conservative icon Sarah Palin.
>
> It reminds me of the moment around 14 years ago when Paul Shaffer
> snatched a trumpet from a guest performer, resulting in online insults
> hurled at Paul at such an outrageous act. One of the show's audio
> mixers chimed in with "It was funny during rehearsal," which
> effectively shut the humorless idiots up.
>
>
>
> > Actually, I do wonder, if they pre-coordinate and all, did they give
> > the girl her punchline too, or was that improvised?
If you are indeed in the know, perhaps you can answer the above
question.
Bluuuue Rajah
3d0a90...@g7g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
>> Dave's got..........issues.
>
> I think when he finally got married it screwed with his head.
It took him 62 years to finally get married, and this is how he tried to
look for an affair. At this rate, his will have found his second wife by
the time Indonesians are walking on Mars.
Bluuuue Rajah
3251.bay.webtv.net:
That's the way Dave likes 'em. These are his seduction moves.
Bluuuue Rajah
news:da27b6e2-8866-443d...@c2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com:
The next time she came on his show, a few years later, he asked her to
do it again. She blushed. :)
Bluuuue Rajah
Bluuuue Rajah
news:9muc555b0500cc0rg...@4ax.com:
No, the photo was clearly taken outside. After she said "At least I'm
wearing panties," which played right into Dave's hands, her reply was "I'm
still learning." She doesn't know that by the time she's figured out how
to handle her youth, she'll be forty, with no looks any more. Then she'll
have to start learning all over again.
Alls Quiet
> Thanks; and of course Limbaugh was wrong if he said that,
> but the Chelsea incident I was referring to was when David
> Schuster (who has a snarl worse than Cheney's) said that
> Chelsea was being 'pimped out' by the Clintons to campaign
> for Hillary.
Chelsea was a favorite butt of the Wayans brothers on In Living Color.
I stopped watching because of it.
SFTV_troy
On Jul 10, 4:53 am, Bluuuue Rajah <Bluuuuue@Rajah.> wrote:
> trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote innews:csv5m.180685$DP1.82097@attbi_s22:
> > I don't understand why they don't have an image of a burning bra on
> > their site.
>
> Is it 1960 again already?
Bras are bad. They make the internal ligaments atrophe and cause
sagging. It's similar to what happens when your leg's in a cast.
They should only be worn for formal occassions, similar to when a
man's t-shirt is worn.
Donz5
Clear, I guess, only to those pre-disposed to buying such
psychobabble.
Tom
And you earned your PhD in psychology from which accredited
university?
Tom
Imaginary Friend
wrote:
No, he's sniffing up a 3 way.
R H Draney
>
>On Jul 10, 2:48=A0am, CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>> On Jul 10, 12:37=A0am, Donz5 <do...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> > You realize, of course, that the guest coordinates with the show what
>> > photos will be shown. In fact, it's the guests who often bring the
>> > photos with them to the show. You know that, yes?
>>
>> I guess it must be so. Why would I know such arcana? I did not bring
>> up the topic, but I concurred with the skeezy aspects of Dave's
>> presentation and its attendant sexualizing of the youngish female
>> guest. So, did she bring and ask for that photo and topic of her
>> underparts to be dwelt on by old Dave? You would know if that's the
>> case, yes? of course.....
>
>Yes, I do, actually. Let's just say that she was not caught by
>surprise. The outrage noted here is based on nothing approaching
>reality.
>
>It reminds me of the moment around 14 years ago when Paul Shaffer
>snatched a trumpet from a guest performer, resulting in online insults
>hurled at Paul at such an outrageous act. One of the show's audio
>mixers chimed in with "It was funny during rehearsal," which
>effectively shut the humorless idiots up.
>
>>
>> Actually, I do wonder, if they pre-coordinate and all, did they give
>> the girl her punchline too, or was that improvised?
I suppose there are things they don't coordinate...she seemed more than a little
nervous that they were going to show a fake clip "from the movie" like they did
the last time she was on....r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
Bill Steele
<cb22b468-925d-42b2...@q11g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 9, 5:27�pm, Sarah...@webtv.net (Sarahh B) wrote:
> >
> > > What is wrong with Letterman? �He ambushed Emma Watson on his show by
> > > showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
> > > and her crotch. �The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
> >
> > > Emma look stunned, embarrassed, even couldn't speak of a long time,
> > > looking off stage for �help.
> > > But Letterman had this look on his face like gotcha bitch. �He looked
> > > angry not even trying to make light of it. �
> >
> > > That kind of exposing a girls body should be saved for Megan Fox or
> > > other older Hollywood bimbos.
> >
> > > First it was the 14 year old Palin girl now sweet Emma.
> >
> > Dave's got..........issues. Did you notice how by the end of the
> > interview Watson was pushed back in the far side of her chair, as far
> > away from the old letch as she could get. She was pretty composed
> > though and had a few good comebacks (at least I was wearing
> > underthings, or something like that). However, she was probably not
> > thrilled with him. \\
> >
> > The only thing he's got going for him at this point is the expectation
> > that he may come up with more played Palin insults to get some
> > attention. He is still trotting out 'I can see Alaska" joke
> > variations. How original Dave! Kind of sad this is what it's come to
> > for him.
I guess we see what we want to see. If you don't like Dave (and if so
why were you watching?), you could see the above. What I saw was a
rather badly-managed interview, where Dave didn't really have much to
work with, and Watson didn't have the skills to turn the conversation to
something more interesting. Blame whoever did the pre-interview and
wrote stuff on the blue cards.
Bill Steele
<e713f0a2-8dae-409f...@h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
> I for one am not outraged. Merely noting an aura or atmosphere of
> chauvinism that jibes with and was made explicitly notable by Dave's
> oddly obsessive, abiding and consistently degrading treatment of
> Palin. All the meanness and perversity has for some reason been
> unleashed in Dave by the lady. It's a sad derangement for the old guy,
> and is leaking over to these ever younger and more distant starlets
> whom he tends to objectify in an aggressive, even unseemly manner at
> times. But for now, it's clear that Dave's #1 muse for working out in
> public his psycho-sexual issues, existential repressions and
> conflicted attitudes toward women, is none other than Alaska's Hottie
> Governor and blazing Conservative icon Sarah Palin.
Dave is a comedian. The fact that Palin is a blazing conservative icon
is hilarious, and Dave takes advantage of it.
Next you'll be telling us that Wall Street investors have deep-seated
psycho-sexual reasons for buying a stock that's going up, and carpenters
choose wood with uniform grain because of their existential repressions
and conflicted attitudes toward women.
CliffB
Doesn't take a PHD to see that Dave is working out his 'issues' in
public every night at 11:35. But hell, that's basic Comedy 101. It's
just gotten a little out of hand in Dave's prickly dotage.
CliffB
> In article
> <e713f0a2-8dae-409f-b33d-979f64cd2...@h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
> > I for one am not outraged. Merely noting an aura or atmosphere of
> > chauvinism that jibes with and was made explicitly notable by Dave's
> > oddly obsessive, abiding and consistently degrading treatment of
> > Palin. All the meanness and perversity has for some reason been
> > unleashed in Dave by the lady. It's a sad derangement for the old guy,
> > and is leaking over to these ever younger and more distant starlets
> > whom he tends to objectify in an aggressive, even unseemly manner at
> > times. But for now, it's clear that Dave's #1 muse for working out in
> > public his psycho-sexual issues, existential repressions and
> > conflicted attitudes toward women, is none other than Alaska's Hottie
> > Governor and blazing Conservative icon Sarah Palin.
>
> Dave is a comedian. The fact that Palin is a blazing conservative icon
> is hilarious, and Dave takes advantage of it.
In fact it's all he's got in his trick bag at this late stage in his
career. Sad how he keeps going back to the by now played punch lines
day after day, week after week. He's out of ideas and is grasping on
to Palin as hard as he can. Still yet to see joke One at Obama's
expense. The Dave has no guts to take on one of his own. And why
change, he's getting so much personal and "professional"mileage out of
attacking Palin. It has helped save his ratings in the short term, and
he knows it. Plus, his sexism gets a workout and the old guy probably
feels a little remnant of his lost virility every time he takes a shot
at her. He really can't help himself at this point.
CliffB
If you don't know the answer, just say so please. Don't continue to
ignore it. You are the consummate inside source, so of course you
would likely know. So, what's the answer: a fed line, or her own
comeback? Here's a bonus question: how often are lines fed to the
guests during the pre-show "coordination"? I really am curious about
that aspect.
Thank in advance.
calvin
> He is still trotting out 'I can see Alaska" joke
Which was unfair to begin with, and Olberman used
it again just the other night. What Palin said was,
"You can see Russia [meaning Siberia] from Alaska",
which is true. It was Saturday Night Live that changed
it to, "I can see Russia from my house", and the SNL
distortion (lie) stuck in the public consciousness.
David Johnston
wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 5:27�pm, Sarah...@webtv.net (Sarahh B) wrote:
>>
>> > What is wrong with Letterman? �He ambushed Emma Watson on his show by
>> > showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
>> > and her crotch. �The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
>>
It's been a long time since I watched Letterman, but as I recall,
trying to embarass his guests was always his thing.
Unique
Fair has nothing to do with it.
Taking someone's words out of context or modifying them for comic effect
are two of the many ways that jokes are constructed.
In politics, these kinds of "distortions" of what someone said are
standard practice. It's typical of newsgroup debates as well.
--
DVDs for sale: http://unique-dvd.com
165 Banned Cartoons, The Unknown War, Amerika,
Space, Lon Chaney, George Washington 1 & 2,
Rich Man Poor Man 1 & 2, Beatles Music Videos,
and many more...
David Johnston
<cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>On Jul 9, 6:06�pm, CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Btw, I bet his more and more played and spent Palin routines are
>> fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
>> shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
>> went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
>> should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
>> effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
>
>Where were the feminists when Letterman thought it was cute
>to say that a teenage girl (whether 14 or 18) was 'knocked up'
>by a third baseman at a baseball game?
Complaining about it, actually. That's what got Letterman on their
radar.
calvin
>
> > Which was unfair to begin with, and Olberman[n] used
> > it again just the other night. What Palin said was,
> > "You can see Russia [meaning Siberia] from Alaska",
> > which is true. It was Saturday Night Live that changed
> > it to, "I can see Russia from my house", and the SNL
> > distortion (lie) stuck in the public consciousness.
>
> Fair has nothing to do with it.
> Taking someone's words out of context or modifying them for comic effect
> are two of the many ways that jokes are constructed.
> In politics, these kinds of "distortions" of what someone said are
> standard practice. It's typical of newsgroup debates as well.
That may be a good defense for SNL, but not
for Olbermann, who uses it to snicker at Palin as if she
actually said it.
Donz5
You're welcome in advance. I realize that no matter what the answer,
based on your history, you'll try to spin it into yet another mind-
numbing screed, based on nothing but your over-politicized imagination.
moviePig
Olbermann's viewers, who are relatively humor-savvy, seem likely to
hear the SNL quote as the telling barb it intended to be ...i.e., not
as verbatim. Moreover, anyone smart who somehow thought it *was*
verbatim would assume Palin intended the hyperbole herself. (And,
anyone dumb would assume she *can* see Russia...)
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Shruggy
Tina Fey is probably a lesbian, she fucked Palin so hard, she knocked her
right out of the white house.
trotsky
Actually, calvin, if you want to delve into the realm of facts, which
you clearly don't, the *context* of Palin's remark about Russia was from
the perspective of her qualified to comment on national defense because
of her close proximity to a country that is our ally. The remark was
incredibly stupid on multiple levels.
sirblob2
> > On Jul 9, 5:27 pm, Sarah...@webtv.net (Sarahh B) wrote:
>
> > > What is wrong with Letterman? He ambushed Emma Watson on his show by
> > > showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
> > > and her crotch. The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
>
> > > looking off stage for help.
> > > But Letterman had this look on his face like gotcha bitch. He looked
> > > angry not even trying to make light of it.
>
> > > That kind of exposing a girls body should be saved for Megan Fox or
> > > other older Hollywood bimbos.
>
> > > First it was the 14 year old Palin girl now sweet Emma.
>
> > Dave's got..........issues. Did you notice how by the end of the
> > interview Watson was pushed back in the far side of her chair, as far
> > away from the old letch as she could get. She was pretty composed
> > though and had a few good comebacks (at least I was wearing
> > underthings, or something like that). However, she was probably not
> > thrilled with him. \\
>
> > The only thing he's got going for him at this point is the expectation
> > that he may come up with more played Palin insults to get some
> > attention. He is still trotting out 'I can see Alaska" joke
> > variations. How original Dave! Kind of sad this is what it's come to
> > for him.
>
> fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
> shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
> went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
> should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
> effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
generic articles on the lookout for letterman are as poor as his
routine these days, and its cuz of sarah palin's republicans, of all
oddballish things, whose snl sketches were pretty hilarious compared
to the rubbish that will ferrell factory usually does. so what happens
on the interview, not much and it's pretty crap, but the ppl
interested in this are into politics not comedy, we'd be on the latter
with palin running for presidency, which she will be cuz someone more
idiotic will be needed to put george bush in the right, you just wait
for the republican candidates in the 2030s, mark my words.
sirblob2
oh wow what a comeback. calvin, do a hara kiri on half a dozen dogs if
this turns out to be true, otherwise i wont respect you
sirblob2
yup
Donz5
This has been making the rounds today:
"In television interviews she was out of her depth in a shallow pool.
She was limited in her ability to explain and defend her positions,
and sometimes in knowing them. She couldn't say what she read because
she didn't read anything. She was utterly unconcerned by all this and
seemed in fact rather proud of it: It was evidence of her
authenticity. She experienced criticism as both partisan and cruel
because she could see no truth in any of it. She wasn't thoughtful
enough to know she wasn't thoughtful enough. Her presentation up to
the end has been scattered, illogical, manipulative and self-
referential to the point of self-reverence. 'I'm not wired that way,'
'I'm not a quitter,' 'I'm standing up for our values.' I'm, I'm, I'm."
Written by your rabid librul flame-thrower Peggy Noonan.
Bluuuue Rajah
news:ddef5b3d-9c65-4563...@t33g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Sally
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's a brilliant column you found there, written by Peggy Noonan for
The Wall Street Journal. I read the whole essay, not just the above
excerpt. Excellent.
Sally
Laninna
> SoCally <foaa...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:69369137-c680-44df-ae10-
> 3d0a90002...@g7g2000prg.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> Dave's got..........issues.
>
> > I think when he finally got married it screwed with his head.
>
> It took him 62 years to finally get married, and this is how he tried to
> the time Indonesians are walking on Mars.
His current wife is his second wife. He's been married before.
calvin
> That's a brilliant column you found there, written by Peggy Noonan for
> The Wall Street Journal. I read the whole essay, not just the above
> excerpt. Excellent.
The accepted conclusion that Palin doesn't read anything proves
that all of you Palin haters are lying scum.
Podkayne Fries
>
> Bras are bad. They make the internal ligaments atrophe and cause
> sagging. It's similar to what happens when your leg's in a cast.
>Theyy should only be worn for formal occassions, similar to when a
> man's t-shirt is worn.
You've never actually been up close and personal with a woman's breasts,
have you, Troy?
--
"You know what I do when I feel really down?
I get up, I get dressed. I go out and I do something
really vile to someone." - Diana Trent, WAITING FOR GOD
Kris Baker
news:1r77mtqnh1ari$.6rzwf291pl64$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 04:52:07 -0700 (PDT), SFTV_troy wrote:
>
>>
>> Bras are bad. They make the internal ligaments atrophe and cause
>> sagging. It's similar to what happens when your leg's in a cast.
>>Theyy should only be worn for formal occassions, similar to when a
>> man's t-shirt is worn.
>
> You've never actually been up close and personal with a woman's breasts,
> have you, Troy?
You're talking to someone who believes a t-shirt is worn only
on "formal occasions"......
This Troy girl is as clever as the johns trolls in other groups.
CliffB
Wrong. If she came up with it herself, bravo then. If she was fed the
line, that would be informative to know in the Letterman show
newsgroup, as far as the workings of the show. No crime in having
canned bits like that, although less impressive than a truly
improvised one liner. I can imagine the answer though, since you
adamantly refuse to divulge it. It was all devised and written by the
Letterman folks and she signed on. Jokes about her panties. Most of
the writers are men I suppose, judging by the chauvinist tone of much
of the humor. For a know-it-all, you aren't being very helpful!
CliffB
Not really. It merely implied that she has a different sense of the
Colossus by nature of her State's proximity and in fact also a unique
historical relationship to Russia. (The Palin-crazed and caricaturing
popular media just distorted and ran with it, as they are wont to do)
Geopolitically Alaska was indeed a godsend and coup for the US to
acquire. In fact, Obama just made a rather awkward and inartful slap
at Russia the other day for selling it to the USA so cheaply. It came
off as kind of an insult to the Russians. Nice diplomatic tact, rookie!
Donz5
Take it up with Peggy Noonan.
Donz5
Get used to disappointment.
CliffB
nah, your continued, defensive, dogged refusal to "enlighten", right
on the heels of touting your in-the-know credentials, is pretty
humorous and entertaining in its own right. You just can't bear to
admit how canned the humor is on the show I guess. We'll just have to
make the logical assumption by your avoidance of the question. Thanks!
Donz5
You've made quite a few assumptions, all of it grossly inaccurate.
You're welcome!
william hubbard
> What is wrong with Letterman? He ambushed Emma Watson on his show by
> showing a close up pic of her dress opening and showing all her thigh
> and her crotch. The dress blew open in a thunder storm.
>
> Emma look stunned, embarrassed, even couldn't speak of a long time,
> looking off stage for help.
> But Letterman had this look on his face like gotcha bitch. He looked
> angry not even trying to make light of it.
>
> That kind of exposing a girls body should be saved for Megan Fox or
> other older Hollywood bimbos.
>
> First it was the 14 year old Palin girl now sweet Emma.
Letterman will go the way of rosie o'donnel..
CliffB
hey, I'm just busting on you a little, no biggie. Thanks though for
your non-answer answer. You couldn't have been any clearer!
Rich
> On Jul 9, 8:54 pm, Rich <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 9, 6:06 pm, CliffB <fl...@gosympatico.ca> wrote:
> > > > interview Watson was pushed back in the far side of her chair, as far
> > > > away from the old letch as she could get. She was pretty composed
> > > > though and had a few good comebacks (at least I was wearing
> > > > underthings, or something like that). However, she was probably not
> > > > thrilled with him. \\
>
> > > > The only thing he's got going for him at this point is the expectation
> > > > that he may come up with more played Palin insults to get some
> > > > attention. He is still trotting out 'I can see Alaska" joke
> > > > variations. How original Dave! Kind of sad this is what it's come to
> > > > for him.
>
> > > fetching him lesser and lesser ratings bumps, now that the cynical
> > > shock and novelty effect are wearing off. I believe the week before he
> > > went on vacation Conan was back on top in most categories. maybe Dave
> > > should go back to stupid human things that float trick, his old no-
> > > effort standbys. Yeah, that's the ticket.
>
> > things on Earth, nearly. But I did catch a couple minutes of that
> > one. Letterman is a boor. The girl seemed like a perfectly decent
> > human, yet couldn't get a word in edgewise because old pervert
> > Letterman would not shut his denture-laced trap.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> this one, and just happened to find a newsgroup where you could offer
> a comment on it. Who do you think you're bullshitting, Chester?
Channel surfing
Sally
Wait. I've never been called lying scum before. Look, I never said
Sarah P. doesn't read anything. I'm sure she pounces on FIELD AND
STREAM the minute it reaches her mailbox. I have great respect for
successful fisherpersons. It takes skill. I'd like to know how many
fish she's been catching. Let Katie Couric report on that!
Sally
R H Draney
>
>Wait. I've never been called lying scum before. Look, I never said
>Sarah P. doesn't read anything. I'm sure she pounces on FIELD AND
>STREAM the minute it reaches her mailbox. I have great respect for
>successful fisherpersons. It takes skill. I'd like to know how many
>fish she's been catching. Let Katie Couric report on that!
I'd like to watch her skin and gut one of those moose she's always shooting....
And if she did it while Katie Couric watched, well, that's sweeps material!...r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
Beth W
Miley?
trotsky
I really would like to know what you're getting at, calvin. Do you
expect her to launch a presidential bid? Do you expect her community
college experiences to compare favorably to Obama's law degree? Don't
you feel that the vast majority of Americans feel they've already had
eight years of "stupid is as stupid does" with Bush?
Don't worry, I don't expect an answer.
trotsky
Bullshit surfing is more like.
calvin
> calvin wrote:
> > On Jul 10, 6:54 pm, Sally <SallyDr...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> That's a brilliant column you found there, written by Peggy Noonan for
> >> The Wall Street Journal. I read the whole essay, not just the above
> >> excerpt. Excellent.
>
> > The accepted conclusion that Palin doesn't read anything proves
> > that all of you Palin haters are lying scum.
>
> I really would like to know what you're getting at, calvin. Do you
I don't expect or want her to do anything politically,
now that she has quit her job as governor. That ends
my interest in her in that context. But she is still a
good person who is being lied about by the likes of you
and the lowest of the low: others in this thread, and
media dregs like Olberman and Schuster. It's your
behavior, not hers, that I'm talking about, and your
(plural) behavior sucks. Sadly, that has to include Noonan
now.
trotsky
> On Jul 11, 8:10 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> calvin wrote:
>>> On Jul 10, 6:54 pm, Sally <SallyDr...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> That's a brilliant column you found there, written by Peggy Noonan for
>>>> The Wall Street Journal. I read the whole essay, not just the above
>>>> excerpt. Excellent.
>>> The accepted conclusion that Palin doesn't read anything proves
>>> that all of you Palin haters are lying scum.
>> I really would like to know what you're getting at, calvin. Do you
>> expect her to launch a presidential bid? ...
>
> I don't expect or want her to do anything politically,
> now that she has quit her job as governor. That ends
> my interest in her in that context. But she is still a
> good person
You're drinking the Kool Aid by the gallon now, calvin. a) you have
transmogrified the criticism of her being stupid to "she's a good
person" and b) I would like you to cite a single example of anything
she's done in her professional life (or private life in the case of her
bastard grandkid) that could be called "good". You don't even have to
provide multiple examples, just a single example. There are none.
calvin
Post something that doesn't include the words 'Kool Aid'
and I might consider responding. When you accuse
someone of not thinking for himself, then why do you
care what he thinks?
Sally
>
> - Show quoted text -
When you call people "lying scum" I don't see how you can get offended
when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
hatefulness.
Sally
polar
In defense of Olbermann - on July 7 when all the
other news shows/channels were talking only about
Michael Jackson and nothing else, Olbermann's
Countdown was about anything except Jackson, he
wasn't even mentioned throughout the entire show.
And for that, on a day when any news about Jackson
made me want to toss my cookies, I am grateful.
trotsky
No, sorry, you didn't pass the test.
When you accuse
> someone of not thinking for himself, then why do you
> care what he thinks?
Because if you're not going to think for yourself I should tell you what
to think.
calvin
> When you call people "lying scum" I don't see how you can get offended
> when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
> sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
> debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
> hatefulness.
I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
anything. She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
does anybody else, but she answered the question, which
was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
on you.
Kris Baker
news:12e3b459-bdaf-41c0...@f30g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
-------------------------------------
Why couldn't she name *any* of the items that were put before her?
Partisan bitch = anyone who exposes a Republican's ineptitude.
Kris
calvin
> "calvin" <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> On Jul 11, 3:09 pm, Sally <SallyDr...@aol.com> wrote:
> > When you call people "lying scum" I don't see how you can get offended
> > when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
> > sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
> > debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
> > hatefulness.
>
> I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
> around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
> anything. She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
> Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
> She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
> does anybody else, but she answered the question, which
> was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
> wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
> answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
> on you.
>
Not couldn't, wouldn't. If she had wanted to lie she could
have just rattled off a few things like the New York Times
and Newsweek magazine.
> > Partisan bitch = anyone who exposes a Republican's ineptitude.
No, someone who tries to expose her political enemies, but
not her political friends. If you think Couric is non-partisan
then you don't know a thing about her. It was an adversarial
interview, and Palin didn't play along with her, which is good.
AZ Nomad
>I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
>around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
>anything. She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
>Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
If she reads, then she doesn't understand nor retain anything.
Her ignorance is pretty damning.
moviePig
> On Jul 11, 3:09 pm, Sally <SallyDr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > When you call people "lying scum" I don't see how you can get offended
> > when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
> > sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
> > debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
> > hatefulness.
>
> I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
> around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
> anything.
Indeed, that assumption's almost as absurd as your putting it atop
your list of hate-crimes.
> She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
> Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
And that's equally absurd, on its very face.
> She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
> does anybody else, but she answered the question, which
> was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
> wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
> answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
> on you.
Given that Palin's well-known presumed major weakness was 'foreign
policy', the "right thing" for her to say she'd read was anything
whatsoever that remotely bore on that domain. And she knew that. Her
glib answer didn't "trip", but merely confirmed that her cupboard was
bare...
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Audie Murphy's Ghost
<12e3b459-bdaf-41c0...@f30g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> On Jul 11, 3:09�pm, Sally <SallyDr...@aol.com> wrote:
> > When you call people "lying scum" I don't see how you can get offended
> > when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
> > sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
> > debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
> > hatefulness.
>
> I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
> around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
> anything.
It's not an assumption. She could not name a single publication. Not
even Reader's Digest on the pot. Nothing.
> She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
> Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
The "incredible (sic) partisan bitch" was doing her job -- in this
case, exposing a fool. It was kinda like what I'm doing now, but for a
lot less money.
> She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
> does anybody else, but she answered the question,
No, she didn't. Not even once.
> which
> was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
> wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
> answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
> on you.
She gave no answer, everyone with a brain knows it, and judgments were
made. Palin's an atrocity, but a worse atrocity was committed when the
Republicans put her on the ticket as v.p. This is the same party that
gave us Quayle, so it apparently has no conscience about doing this
sort of thing.
trotsky
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200907070009
Hell, Tom Cruise could handle the truth better than you.
calvin
> On Jul 11, 6:40 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> > She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
> > Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
>
> And that's equally absurd, on its very face.
>
> > She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
> > does anybody else, but she answered the question, which
> > was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
> > wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
> > answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
> > on you.
If you had put your comment *after* I said she didn't
say she read it cover to cover, instead of before it,
then I could at least respect your answer.
It's not at all absurd to think that the Governor found
several papers and periodicals on her desk every day,
and one or two others at home. Any normal person in
her position would have devoted some time to picking
up an thumbing through each one, and reading what
looked interesting or useful. She claimed no more than
that, and there's no justification for assuming any less
than that.
moviePig
> On Jul 11, 7:25 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 11, 6:40 pm, calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> > > She told that incredible partisan bitch Katie
> > > Couric that she reads everything that is put before her.
>
> > And that's equally absurd, on its very face.
>
> > > She didn't say she read it all cover to cover, and neither
> > > does anybody else, but she answered the question, which
> > > was designed to trip her into saying that she read the
> > > wrong things or didn't read the right things. She gave an
> > > answer that Couric didn't want. Bravo to her, and shame
> > > on you.
>
> If you had put your comment *after* I said she didn't
> say she read it cover to cover, instead of before it,
> then I could at least respect your answer.
Well, since you insist, it'd be absurdly meaningless to say, "I read
it but not cover-to-cover."
> It's not at all absurd to think that the Governor found
> several papers and periodicals on her desk every day,
> and one or two others at home. Any normal person in
> her position would have devoted some time to picking
> up an thumbing through each one, and reading what
> looked interesting or useful. She claimed no more than
> that, and there's no justification for assuming any less
> than that.
You're right, she didn't claim anything ...despite a 24-kt golden
opportunity to do so. In particular, she didn't claim expertise
above, say, the average voter's... most of whom don't claim fitness
for national office...
Kris Baker
----------------------
You really believe that refusing to answer questions is a good
thing, and that clamming up to an adversary is even better?
On your way, little man. On your way. I'm sure .000000031%
of all political candidates will take YOUR advice.
Seriously, I wish you were right. It'd make the next elections
so much more fun.
Kris
calvin
She answered the question in the first way that
occurred to her that would avoid having to sort
out 'right' and 'wrong' answers for Katie Couric land.
That's my assumption.
You and the others have your character-assassinating
assumptions, that suit you better.
calvin
> On your way, little man. On your way.
That you resort to such as this only exposes yourself.
calvin
wrote:
> > This is the same party that
> > gave us Quayle, so it apparently has no conscience about doing this
> > sort of thing.
>
Yes, winning is quite credible.
calvin
> when they mildly imply that you drink Kool-Aid. You're awfully
> sensitive, you know? I prefer Gatorade, my own self. There is a way to
> debate an issue with wit, you know, rather than with your kind of
> hatefulness.
I'm sorry I called you that. Hearing this assumption
that Palin doesn't read anything brought out again
caused me to lose my temper and lash out.
sirblob2
>
> I can hardly think of anything more hateful that passing
> around the assumption that Sarah Palin does not read
> anything.
i like coconuts.
Adam H. Kerman
>i like coconuts.
Why a duck?
Olsen
---------------------
That's not Palin's explanation. She says she was annoyed by being asked what
she read "up there in Alaska." She said, "You know, questions about, 'What
do you read up there in Alaska?' To me, that was kind of a little bit
annoying because I'm like, 'What do you mean what do I read in Alaska. I
read the same things that you guys read in New York and there in L. A. and
in Washington State. Who do you mean what do I read up there?'"
In other words she lied about the question to try to justify her inept
answer. Didn't it occur to her that the Gov. of Alaska should probably say
that first she reads the Anchorage paper?
calvin
> That's not Palin's explanation. She says she was annoyed by being asked what
> she read "up there in Alaska." She said, "You know, questions about, 'What
> do you read up there in Alaska?' To me, that was kind of a little bit
> annoying because I'm like, 'What do you mean what do I read in Alaska. I
> read the same things that you guys read in New York and there in L. A. and
> in Washington State. Who do you mean what do I read up there?'"
>
> In other words she lied about the question to try to justify her inept
> answer. Didn't it occur to her that the Gov. of Alaska should probably say
> that first she reads the Anchorage paper?
She didn't lie about anything. Where do you think you see a lie?
Charlie
Audie and Snotsky are the internet cops/bullies...didn't you know
that? Both are so used to having sand kicked in their faces so now
they can hide behind their keyboards and act all tough and big. Both
trying not to allow the internet do to them what high school did.
Charlie
With Palin resigning and hopefully avoiding the contentious media,
liberal democrats and the lackluster leader we know as obama need a
new story to divert attention away from the horrible job he is doing.
trotsky
...thus spake the anonyshit.