TxHoops

  Dan Rather was a bit more editorial than most would like but I enjoyed his career.  I also don't mind O'Reilly.  I disagree with a lot of what he says but he is entertaining.  And I also agree with him at times.  I would also agree with the last 4 sentences of your post.  As to why Fox has a such a large viewership, I am sure you already know the answer to that.  They are the only game in town, so to speak, for what they do. 

Of course, it is all within the rules.  And of course there is no limit.  That is why I am encouraging him!

  Don't listen to that mess, Smitty.  You have at least 15 threads to start before sundown!  I am sure Stevie will even give you several "courtesy" replies!

Oh, to answer your questions, of course I was joking about blocking Fox News.  They wouldn't watch it anyone and probably won't when they find it interesting.  But then again, they might.  I encourage them to think for themselves.  As for my channel of preference, I watch several but if I had to pick one, it would be CNN. 

See, therein lies the problem.  A lot of folks believe that all networks except Fox are biased and liberal based.  There are plenty of conservative viewpoints, they just also offer ones you can't stand to hear.  I understand that and it is your right to use your remote as you see fit.  But to think everything that is not ultra conservative is inherently "liberal" is incorrect in MY opinion.  To each his own, I guess.

^ That profile pic is awesome :lol:

All very true.

I don't know why you are wasting time with me though.  You have websites to pour over so you can start another 10-15 threads today over our President.  Not to mention "TTT"ing the ones that are so lame no one responds.  Now get with it...QUICKLY!!!!

  Busted?  LOL!!!  That is funny. Because it was you who was either clearly oblivious of the point to which you responded, or blatantly ignored it.    I was just letting you know what that sound is buzzing over the top of your head.  As for facts tend to bore me, I don't know who stated that but it was probably you, or your alter ego Bubba.  Either way, I would advise not to listen too closely.  It is the voice of an obsessed, and possibly senile, fool.

As usual, the point being made flies over your head before you even see it. At least you are consistent ;)

So the Reagan years the GOPers love to tout were due to the Democratic congress? Ok, got it 😀

I have a new nominee for dumbest thing I have read on this board...

^ Agreed @ OU will be their toughest test. I would kind of be shocked if they lost any of the others.

Not sure how Hillary will do. But if Bill could run again, the final numbers would look like Reagan vs. Mondale.

And there would likely be a spike in women voting (some who might not otherwise vote) due to a strong female candidate. Yada yada yada. The next election will be decided the way they all are. Not by race or gender - by who gets the most indie votes.

mat, having seen your work, you MUST go to Franklin BBQ if you are in Austin.  Get there early and wait.  No one does it quite like Aaron Franklin.  I am telling you it is the mecca for true barbeque aficionados. 

^^^ Dang!  If you're selling, I'm buying!!!

  I can see why.  Compared to the two I mentioned, they are rocket scientists.

I have seen it a few times.  I believe it is an ABC show.  It is a show that focuses on women's opinions on current issues, so it isn't surprising it would be of little interest to the radical right.  Obviously, they prefer women with little brain power who they can attempt to program, like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann...

I think if he resists the urge to jump in the sack with the radical right (as did the past two nominees), he will be a formidable candidate who could win the election.  As I have said before though, the problem is these guys get wrapped up in winning the primary and it's hard to do without that support (can't win the game if you aren't ultimately in it).  Time will tell if he gets "teabagged," as it were.   Now some on this board will tell you that the Presidency was lost the last two times because the GOP did not put a truly conservative candidate in the race.  To those I would say, you're right!  Please nominate Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio.  Plus, you will assuredly get that Hispanic vote, you know....

I don't know, it was pretty entertaining to listed to Elisabeth Hasselbeck when she was on the show.  Stevenash, do you think the producers intentionally put someone functioning just above "brain dead' to represent the conservative position on the show?  Were you supportive of her hiring at Fox News?  At least I read she was on Fox News now.  I cannot confirm that personally because my wife and I used the parental block on that channel a long time ago, lest our children were to stumble upon it and lose their ability to think independently...

  I don't know about that but you are too kind, ma'am.  I will say that appearances may be deceiving due to who I am debating.  Smitty uses the term "thugocracy" with respect to our President and truly has no clue why that might be offensive to some.  Then again, when your life is so consumed by hatred toward someone that you spend every waking hour starting thread after thread on a local message board, how could you be in touch with reality??   

  And he was the best president of yours or my lifetime.  We are talking about William Jefferson Clinton, aren't we?

I wouldn't be shocked if Baylor ran the table.

By "stuff," I was speaking of the leafy variety..