My God Stephen
My God Stephen with politicos this stupid we’ll never retire.
(Stephen Colbert & Jon Stewart)
picture: dunno source, via our lolcat builder. lol caption:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Downloading | crap… I knew I left the water on before I left. Next »
» 60 Comments
-
Recent Comments
charro on SCIENCE Maxwell Supreme Soci… on TIANANMEN SQUARE charro on TIANANMEN SQUARE Maxwell Supreme Soci… on Vladurday: My name? charro on Who is that homeless dude… Captain Wow the Amba… on Vladurday: My name? charro on Vladurday: My name? Maxwell Supreme Soci… on Who is that homeless dude… Tired of Rando's ann… on Who is that homeless dude… charro on Who is that homeless dude… 
Cheezburger Network Blog
This never even hit the voting page before getting on the front page. What the hell mods?
was on the voting page WEEKS ago, even had a duplicate
Is that why when it showed up here on the front page it had zero votes?
FYI. When posts are moved from voting to the homepage, the vote count is reset.
So all homepage votes start at 0.
Ah, ok. Still lame that this pops up after it was on the vote page weeks ago when there are much more current things available to choose from.
It probably goes on a list to be moderated before they put it on the first page.
What is this shot from? I’d like to watch it.
If I remember correctly, this is from the 2007 Emmy’s award ceremony. They were actually quite funny, especially when they “awarded” one of the Emmy’s to Carell because someone else didn’t show to receive it.
Then, of course, Colbert and Steward had to go and jump up and down like maniacs with him.
Ah, good times.
From the Emmy’s, I believe.
Hmmm…. I wonder if this LOL is getting cause and effect mixes up. Way too many people get their news from Comedy Central.
That’s because the “respectable” news outlets are a joke unto themselves. What Monica did for Bill, the entire press corps did for George until it became obvious that the majority of the public was no longer quite as willing to be on the receiving end of that particular snowballing.
And yet, they still do it… not to mention all the slack they cut St. BBQ McCain (journalists should NEVER be in a position to know or offer a politician their favorite kind of donuts and coffee just the way they like it…)
Gee…. to take a very recent example, they’ve featured Obama’s surrogate, WEslley Clark, bashing McCain’s service record … then portray Obama as a saint ‘cuz he says that said surrogate is Not Playing Nice.
Or let’s go back a week or so, when they soft-pedalled Obama’s breaking of a long-standing campaign pledge to use the public funding system.
when you can come at me with facts and reality and not carefully cropped, spun psychbabble talking points, then feel free to reply to my posts. Until then, I dub thee Crotchwafflemus the Third
Heh. I gave two examples. Apparently you can’t deal with them, since all you did was spew canned jargon in response.
No, what you did was regurgitate rightwing talking points and tried to claim them as “facts” and “examples”.
To wit: http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/attacking_mccains_military_rec.php
… which proves… what? My point was that teh press is allowing Obama to send out his surrogates to attack… and then distance himself from their commenst.
You link does nothing to refute that point.
BTW, it’s amusing that your source of opinion is CJR, hardly a neutral sources,
funny… most everything I read praises CJR for non-partisanship… but I guess you’re partisan if you don’t simply tow the Republican/Conservative line…
That would be because most everything you read is left-wing propaganda.
No, all you did was regurgitate rightwing talking points as “facts” and “examples”. Had you done any kind of fact checking or independent researching of your own, you’d realize:
Wesley Clark “had questioned the relevance of McCain’s combat experience as a qualification to be president of the United States. This is a distinction that you’d expect any reasonably intelligent nine-year old to be able to grasp.” (Columbia Journalism Review)
bwavo [clappity clappity]
Um, Obama distanced himself from Clark’s comments today. I guess you didn’t get the memo.
I note again, I give examples and you give rhetoric. I head what Clark said with my own ears; you spimply accepted CJR’s **evaluation** of those words as your own. Big difference!
I personally don’t agree with Obama distancing himself from the remarks, since there was nothing there to have to distance himself from. Clark spoke his mind, DIDN’T besmirch McCain’s service, but called St. BBQ’s campaign on one of their major talking points. And I’m pretty sure he did that on his own, not under “super-secret orders” from the Obama campaign.
And you know what, Clark is right!!! Getting a plane shot out from under you A. Doesn’t automatically make you a hero
B. Doesn’t mean you’re qualified to be President.
And for those of you bashing Obama because one of his people pointed this out, take a look at McCain’s toady saying a terrorist attack against the U.S. would be good for McCain.
I notice you didn’t even try to refute the soft-pedaling coverage of Obama.
Newsbusters dot org.
Actually, Mouthpiece, I had to be AFK and wanted to get what I had typed up. With regards to Obama? That’s just politically savvy- he knows how large his funding base is, acknowledges that his campaign funding is what campaign finance reform is actually SUPPOSED to be about (large numbers of small funding donors), and he won’t kneecap himself by having false campaign equivalency when Republicans have SO MANY well funded 527s and PACs that will throw up all kinds of unregulated smear ads during the election campaign. Go to go again, may post more later.
Um… yes, you’ve repeated the party line nicely .. problem with said party line is this : nothing has changed regarding finance reform since Obama started swearing up-and-down that he would use the public financing system.
Well, other than him realizing that he can raise Lots of Money.
Please name these mythical 527s that have sprung into existence in the last couple of months.
Really. Name them.
Yeah, I’m *so* heartbroken that they are not managing to get off the ground this election cycle, like they did in 2004… Evidently, T. Boone and the boys decided they have better things to spend their money on, so far. But Obama joining McCain in public financing, when the financing of his campaign is FAR closer to the intent of McCain-Feingold, would be like the proverbial frog trusting the scorpion.
If Obama is so politically savvy, why did he say he would take public gunding in the first place — then change his mind?
You can spin this as much as you like, but it’s another promise thrown under the bus for the sake of political expediency.
Obama’s word can’t be trusted on anything, yet the media give him a free pass on all his flip-flops.
Oh, yes, and your savior Republican, John McCain, has NEVER changed his mind on anything. /sarcasm
Off-shore oil drilling, waterboarding, you name it, he’s flip-flopped on it.
Ring wing hypocrites.
“Ring wing”?
“public gunding”?
everyone makes typos, you know what Danon ment
Yes, cause Brent
BozoBozell is a BASTION of bipartisan fairness…Yes, the media are overwhelmingly biased in favour of liberals. That’s the only reason Obama has a chance.
Oh God. How many times have I heard THIS one from conservatives?
Evidence please? I’ve heard this over and over for years, but I’ve never seen actual evidence that “the media” is so overwhelmingly liberal.
What do you expect from the conservatives? More generalizations
without any evidence.
There’s plenty of evidence if you actually look for it.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
Quote:
While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper’s news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.
These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.
“I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican,” said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study’s lead author. “But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are.”
Sorry, but you’re living in a parallel universe if you imagine that the media was *ever* pro-Bush.
Thus pronounces Crotchwafflemus!
From Sept. 11 until sometime about a year after the Iraq war started, all the media could talk about was how great Shock and Awe was going to be. They came up with cool graphics that explained how Bunker Busters worked and basically acted as cheerleaders for the war. It wasn’t until it was painfully obvious how full of suck and fail Bush’s plans in Iraq were that some of the braver networks started to change their tune.
Most of them are still kowtowing to Bush and the GOP because they’re afraid to actually come out and say what’s on most people’s minds and be viewed as partisan.
They get more outraged over the latest Britney scandal than they do over civil rights violations, lies spoon-fed to them to promote an agenda, cronyism, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
Just because they don’t dawn a GWB banner, sprout some pom-poms and praise the lawd for giving us Dubya, doesn’t mean they’re not doing a great disservice to the public by doing all kinds of favors for him.
Sorry, but that simply isn’t true. I was paying close attention to the media at the time – actually watching and actually reading…. and still do. The idea that the media are acting as “cheerleaders for war” is absurd. Feel free to give a current example if you disagree.
Heck, I’ll give you a counter-example : the media has grown increasingly silent on Iraq as the surge has increasingly paid off. Notice how you only saw news about the “political benchmarks” BEFORE they stared being met?
9 out of 10 journalists vote Democrat. That’s all you need to know about media bias.
But their editorial and corporate bosses who actually control the news cycles and what stories get addressed vote overwhelmingly Republican…
Rupert Murdoch has come out in support of Obama, while Ted Turner is an out-and-out leftie.
But it isn’t the owners who make the “news”. It’s the journalists and editors, who set the agenda and are overwhelmingly liberal.
For examples of media bias, see newsbusters dot org.
http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/Rupert_Murdoch.php
…. OK … show any study that shows that news executives skew “right”.
So…. 9 out of 10 journalists vote using common sense. (c’mon EP, you gotta admit that’s funny!)
Lol I don’t watch U.S. news, but goddamn, Australian news is going down the same track – Britney has made commercial news more often than Darfour has o_O
Insanity! When I was a kid, the only celebrity to ever be on the news was when Princess Diana died.
Yes, the media WAS pro-shrub, for NOT pointing out all this stupid shit he’d done. How much was his alleged drug use and military “service” covered up?
I’m all for political debate, but it seems like every other person who posts on this site can’t just take something for being amusing. People are to freakin’ uptight.
*too
I agree. Instead of just a funny caption blog, it’s become political debates! left vs right on every paaaage~
I want to say something about heat and “punditkitchens”, but it’d be unduly mean… But it is sort of a nature of the beast kind of thing for this to turn into debates, since it’s at the “one toe in mouth” tipping point to begin with….
Thus Proclaimeth Captain Obvious!!!!
You are so totally wrong fillerbunny. You have given no facts to support your claim that a website featuring political pictures should ever lower itself to also have political debates.
Most likely this is due to the lack of anything funny in most of the captions. Many don’t even relate to the picture. I’d probably stop coming here completely, but, it is linked from the 4 other “lol” sites that usually do have funny content. What strikes me as odd is that while it seems that the majority of the posters are right wing the majority of the pictures making it to the front page are left wing. I don’t know if it is due to lefties not posting while still voting, a biased mod, or sneaky proxy voting, but, it annoys me to no end.
That would be the ‘radical opinion bias’. People who feel strongly about stuff tend to post more. That is even more true for stuff they disagree with. The silent majority votes but does not take the time to write posts – and to be honest, the Reps have been tragically funny for the last 8 years, where as the Dems were only tragic.
Anyway, I would not say that the majority of posters is right wing… there seem to be a few that create a lot of noise.
As to the political debate/being serious issue, be happy that there seems to be one last refuge where conservatives and the rest of the population still talk to each other (or at least talk at each other). We live in our homogenous neighborhoods, have our segregates pastimes and TV shows and without anybody dissenting it is hard to have an informed opinion.
Next time you make an LOL use the ADVANCED builder!
theres “call outs”
Wow. Fillerbunny put that link on there because it’s exactly what you just said. Nice.