Today’s Talkers’ Scandals Are Reminiscent of the 1980’s Televangelist Sleazefest
Oh, the mendacity: Another day, another new controversy about a rightwing talk show host. This time it’s Jay Severin III, a former GOP operative who worked on the presidential campaigns of George I and Pat Buchanan, among others, and who hosts a radio show in Boston that is (was?) set to go national.
Severin has been exposed for lying about his achievements, including claiming several times on the record that he had won a Pulitzer Prize. He has also been the target recently of allegations of behavior unbecoming of a married man and father that cast a new light on statements he made in the 1990’s about the moral fitness of others.
The revelations of extreme resume padding came on the same day that Infinity Broadcasting announced they had signed a deal with Severin to host a nationally syndicated talk show. Oops!
Severin’s Troubles
According to Media Matters, Severin – whose real name is Jimmy Severino – operated a political consulting firm, Severin Aviles Associates, whose clients included George H.W. Bush’s 1980 presidential campaign and his political action committee (Fund for America’s Future); Pat Buchanan’s 1996 presidential campaign; the Republican National Committee; and the Reagan White House.
He caused a stir in April 2004, when, on the air, he said about Moslems: “You think we should befriend them; I think we should kill them.” (He later said he meant that only extremists should be killed.) He also had a brief, ill-fated run sitting in as the conservative pundit who provided balance on conservative Tucker Carlson’s MSNBC show, “The Situation.”
(And it may come as a surprise to his fans in Boston that Severin doesn’t broadcast from Boston, but rather from a studio close to his home in Sag Harbor, N.Y.)
Severin brought his current woes onto himself last Friday, Sept. 16, 2005, when he claimed to have won the Pulitzer Prize. That claim brought scrutiny from a reporter, Scot Lehigh at the Boston Globe.
First, here’s what Severin said on the air:
”But since journalism began, and up until the time at least that I took my master’s degree at Boston University — and may I add without being obnoxious, up till and including the time that I received a Pulitzer Prize for my columns for excellence in online journalism from the Columbia School of Journalism, the highest possible award for writing on the Web — right up to and including that in 1998, you still had to practice journalism to be a journalist.”
So Scot Lehigh called the Pulitzer’s world headquarters, and guess what?
”We looked at the records and there is no record of him winning a Pulitzer Prize,” says Sig Gissler, administrator of the Pulitzers. Nor is there a Pulitzer for excellence in online journalism.
Wait! There’s more:
Interesting, a Google search turns up two mentions of Severin winning a Pulitzer for online journalism. They come in student newspaper articles covering a November 2003 appearance at Boston College. ”Currently, Severin is a featured columnist on MSNBC.com, for which he has won the Pulitzer Prize for online journalism,” The Heights reported. Severin ”was the first recipient of Columbia University’s Pulitzer Prize for online journalism,” the Observer wrote. Both accounts also call him a graduate of Harvard Law School. He is not, Harvard says.
There’s also a hint of seamier goings-on in Severin’s past. Although he was reportedly fired from the Tucker Carlson show on MSNBC earlier this year, he told a New York newspaper that he quit because he didn’t like the commute from Sag Harbor to the channel’s studios in Secaucus, N.J. However, an insider at MSNBC said that the suggestion that Severin left voluntarily is a “complete absolute lie”:
In fact, he’s been banned from the network: “You won’t see him on MSNBC again,” the source says. (And based on Severin’s actions in Secaucus, “we were shocked to read in Page Six that he has a wife and daughter,” the insider adds…)
This from the man who famously said:
On whether a woman in a sexual harassment test case video had said “no”: “That’s not the big ‘no.’ And our job as guys is to convert a succession of ‘nos’ into one ‘yes.’ And to try and be as persuasive as possible in making that happen. The fact is my job, my right, my duty as a guy is to persuade girls to say yes.” [NBC’s Dateline, 10/24/97]
Which brings us to our first introduction to Jay Severin. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he was one of a horde of rightwing pundits who appeared daily on MSNBC to excoriate President Clinton’s morality.
Oh, the hypocrisy!
This is just disgusting………how is it that these morally bankrupt slimeballs continue to set the political agenda for your country? What will it take for the “real” moral majority to stand up and take control. Please America I know at heart most of your citizens are sensible,loving, friendly people. You are being horribly represented by these hate mongering, hypocrites doctoring the resumes and cheating on their wives and children.
Stu from Australia
Religion is really the opium of the people – and these pushers are just as bad as those “others” in the same trade & the people addicted to this mallarky ! – it’s astounding!Please Read the Dalai Lama who offers us a route out of this madness & manipulation of the feebleminded and back to the path of spirituality,truth & wisdom.
Please keep in mind one important fact about the moronic, evil, and pathetically low-brow talk radio.
The Right-Wing hacks do not put Themselves on the radio.
Managers do.
If management were better people, broadcasters would be too.
This story is a bunch of fluff to try and destroy Jay Severin. Bill O’Reilly is a bore. Tucker Carlson is a pompous boring asshole. His show is so boring and he thinks he’s so important. There are other stupid shows that are intolerable to watch because they insult my intelligence by trying to get me to believe their ineffective spiels and insulting their guests. They are puppets for the phonies in the Bush administration.
This article writes that Jay Severin had conduct unbecoming of a married man!! OMG with all that GWBush has done to this country with his phoney axis of evil, and demolishing the WTC and blaming it on others, obliterating the constitution, mass murder even in our own country (NYC and NOLA). . . The article tries to sway Jay’s devoted listeners and polute his name to the masses. It’s a joke. Jay’s listeners won’t be swayed. The writer or creators of this smear article insult all American’s intelligence with their fluff. Do they really think that we are all so gullible and stupid? Apparently so, but they are wrong. What’s going on with our government and our country is the beginnings of a revolution. Jay Severin pulls no punches. He’s very intelligent, he does not lie to the American people. Bostonians are a tough crowd and Jay has given them straight talk and they love him. I love his show and I’m trying to get reception since I moved. The censored news and personalities devoted to Bush who report the news, don’t want straight talk to the American people. They want to carry on the Bush censorship charade. Jay Severin is almost mainstream but the liars who wrote this article want to squash him like a bug. If Jay said he won a pulitzer prize, then, he must have said it in sarcasm. Jay is a lawyer which is more qualifications than alot of the censored news flunkees who just spin whatever they are told to. Geraldo Rivera is a lawyer and every effort was made to ruin his career by flunkees who were afraid he would be more sucessful. This is the case with this article trying to smear Jay. Don’t even tell me that Jay lies to his audience. His audience is not dim and that’s why he calls us the best and brightest. He honors his audience with truth and respect. We don’t care if he doesn’t broadcast out of Boston every time. But the article is wrong saying he doesn’t broadcast out of Boston. Jay takes his show LIVE! to local spots way outside of Boston as well as Boston. He goes out and spends the evening with the people. Don’t tell me I didn’t see him at Ken’s Steak House in Framingham, MA!
We love Jay. From blue-collar workers on up, we all get into Jay’s honest take on the censorship news of the day. We love you Jay! We will do what we can to get Jay national and maybe Sirius Radio, because I for one, can’t live without his broadcast. JAY WILL PREVAIL!! Sore losers should step aside. The American public is sick and tired of this crap being dolled out to us by censored news network personalities. The sooner they are gone, the better. Step aside boys, it’s time for the men to take over. The American people are tired of being lied to. I do not rely on TV for news..it’s just a disgusting insult to digest their crap. We need Jay, so get outa the way!!!
My commentary can be shared but I doubt the authors of this article will ever let that happen. You lie to the people, you have a revolution on your hands. There is no way the people are going to sit back and watch our finest or our poorest be outright murdered by the administration and all the followers under him. He has desecrated this country and is attacking the people, the military members, the veterans, and putting the screws to the not yet veterans. I’ve said enough. The government doesn’t like people to tell the truth and enlighten the masses. With The Patriot Act, they can get rid of people by locking them up. If not then, outright kill people they don’t like. Our forefathers and all the soldiers are turning in their graves. They have all died in vain because this administration destroyed everything that they worked for. This is not going to continue. Americans are strong and are not going to go down without a fight. It boggles the mind that our own leader is destroying us. Leave Jay alone. There is no scandal and you know it. There are bigger fish to fry.
Kelly. stand by your man if you want to but get the truth by hearing both sides and facts are facts. Find me proof Jay went to Harvard and he got Pulitzer Prize on journalism?????? I myself find him a dirty old man.
Kinda smart Mr. Severin (oops I mean Kelly). Trying to discredit writers of this article by taking postions Jay would never admit to on the air… “OMG with all that GWBush has done to this country with his phoney axis of evil, and demolishing the WTC and blaming it on others, obliterating the constitution, mass murder even in our own country (NYC and NOLA)…” Jay would never admit to those positions. If you’re smart enough to connect the dots, and conclude the above about Mr. Bush and his cabal, you’re smart enough to figure out the flawed ideology of Mr. Severin. Its not that complicated, Its called “White Supremacy”, and its not just about black vs. white here in the U.S. Its about Afro-Brazilians being subjugated by Euro-Brazilians, Same dynamic throughout all of “Latin” America. The Indigenous “Red” Indian population is caught in the middle, being forced to choose sides, or just face being written into non-existance. Its about Aryans subjugating Dravidians in India. Its about European self-styled Jews invading ancient African lands, which have been ruled by Arabs since they invaded, in the mid-to-late 600’s AD, and murdered the native African population into oblivion – stealing black history and culture in the process. Semi = half, semite = half white/ half black, i.e raped african women (duh). And when Arabs aren’t busy begging to be accepted as full fledged “whites” they are orchestrating the continual theft of black history, culture and lives, i.e. Sudan. I do not even need to go into New Zealand or Austrailia. Using projection to your advantage Jay? tssk tsk, your nose is growing
kelly…
there’s always room for one more head in the sandbox of life. don’t open your eyes…you’ll get kitty litter in them, and that can smart.
kelly, severin is a LIAR, got it? HE’S A LIAR…what part of that is so difficult to grasp? he’s built a career around mendacity…you’d think these morons wouldn’t lie about something so easily sourced, but alas, the right wingnuts don’t care about truth. by the time they’re outed and exposed, they move on to the next lie or smear tactic…
severin will surviver, because unfortunately, intellectual honesty is not an imprortant trait when people like you are involved…it’s the same reason 40% of the public still believe bush is honest. partisan myopia…
To: Jon (the author of this piece)
Carolyn Kay at http://www.makethemaccountable.com (forgive me if you’ve already heard of her) sends out an e-mail newsletter every couple of days. In her newsletter she posts stories and op-ed pieces from various sources. Most of which, at the very least, are left of center. I am a subscriber to her newsletter. I am also a Conservative Republican
Carolyn and I have been back and forth a couple of times on the Air America scandal (being dubbed Air Enron by bloggers). Since all the details and hard facts about the scandal, involving $875,000 of taxpayer funds being diverted from a NY nonprofit to AAR, have been released… Carolyn is nowhere to be found. She will not respond to my e-mails and refuses to post anything in her newsletter regarding the scandal. Which is understandable. She has, just as I have, an agenda. So I’m ok with her refusal to even admit that there is a possibility that AAR is involved in a scandal that would make WorldCom execs squirm in their jail cells. Well, I was ok with it…
In today’s newsletter she posted a link to your piece about Jay Severin. In this piece you make some of the most outlandish assertions and flat out lies I’ve ever heard. I am not an apologist for Jay Severin. I honestly know nothing of the man. My concern isn’t with whatever scandal he may or may not be involved in. My concern (or rather disgust) is with your usage of the story as a catalyst for what you call “mendacity” amongst Conservative talkers. Your piece on Jay Severin, in my personal opinion, is the ultimate case of the pot calling the kettle black.
The first thing you point out about Severin is that he has padded his resume with lies about receiving a Pulitzer. Fair enough. I have no rebuttal for that accusation. Like I said, I know nothing of the man. The second thing you suggest is that he is somehow involved in ” behavior unbecoming of a married man and father.” Like I said before, I’m no fan of Severin. But the irony of a Clinton apologist accusing a Conservative of “behavior unbecoming of a married man” is staggering to say the least.
Later in your piece you propose the idea that the ill fate of televangelists in the ’80’s will become that of present day Conservative talk show hosts. This assertion is flatly absurd. Neither you or I have a crystal ball that can see the future of talk radio. All we can do is make predictions based on past events and current, fact-based, trends. However, it would seem your political ideologies are hindering your ability to recognize anything factual. One such fact is that talk radio is the fastest growing radio format in America, in terms of listenership. This is due in large part to FM radios’ insistence on playing the same seven songs over and over while drowning their listeners in an oozing cesspool of some of the most obnoxious commercials known to man. I respect that radio is reliant on advertisers to remain profitable… but it’s out of control. And since Conservatives dominate the airwaves, they stand to ultimately reap the benefits of higher talk radio ratings with larger pocketbooks and further succession of their agenda.
In the same paragraph you claim that televangelists and right-wing talkers share the same general audience. I agree with that to a point. But then you suggest that those same audiences are made up of ” Americans who lack the skills or intelligence to think for themselves.” A claim that has been debunked time and time again. It’s a circular discussion. The typical talk radio listener has a higher education than those who listen strictly to stations with a musical format. And those who listen to talk radio are considered to be “smarter” because they do so. Your outrageous assertion should be filed under “Attempts By The Left To Further Distance Themselves From Main Stream America.”
Again, in the same paragraph, you asseverate that the “rightwing talker’s leadership is dominated by scandal-prone hypocrites who… are beset with human foibles and failures just like everyone else.” That’s interesting. Especially considering Al Franken has been caught lying about having any knowledge of the sleazy transaction involving the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club and Air America. Al Franken… you know, the same guy who has made millions selling books titled Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them and The Truth With Jokes. Does he get a pass? How come he wasn’t named in your list of corrupt talk radio hosts?
In the next paragraph you accuse various right-wing talkers of spouting seemingly disesteemed ideologies. If outrageous speech on the air is to be considered morally or legally wrong, then perhaps we should encourage the government to consider locking Randi Rhodes and Rachel Maddow away for life without the chance of parol.
Later you cite a decline in Limbaugh’s and O’Reilly’s ratings as proof that the Republican’s “message machines appears to be diminishing.” It appears you spoke too soon. About 5 hours after you posted your piece, the latest Arbitron ratings were released. http://www.radioandrecords.com Most conservative talk stations are showing a slow, but incontestable, ratings climb after their post election slump. Yet there is not one single Air Enron affiliate that can boast an increase in their ratings.
You toss out some truly amazing damnations in your ensuing rant about “cynical and corrupt conservatives.” I’d be more than happy to discuss those at a later time. For now I’d like to stay on the subject of talk radio.
Next you claim that liberal talk radio outlets such as Air America are shining the light of truth on Conservative talkers (I’ve already pointed out just how truthful Air Enron really is). Yet, judging by their ratings, that light would appear to be so dim that only a few can actually see it. And the “reality-based” blogosphere… I thought we dominated that too?!?!??!
Nick
Kelly,
We spend more on advertising, marketing, special interests and spin than we do on health care, the environment and basic education.
What, within such statistics, could that possibly mean for someone in your position (and the remaining 40% of this country who still believe BushCo has or ever will be an honorable entity)?
To start with, the sole object of advertising, marketing, special interests and spin is to usurp any form of independent thinking on your part that could be called “reason”. Second, in order for those components of intellectual manipulation to be most effective, they must use those who can deliver their spun honey without you even knowing what you’re “buying”.
Severin, Hannity, O’Reilly, Hume, Rove, (Karen) Hughes and downstream b.s. sociopaths like Scotty McClellan all fall into this group who choose fear (or repetition disguised as “truth”) as the best lever to your outrage and therefore, hold the keys to your ideological programming.
Respectfully, I doubt you think about these things as you are still buying the line, but I strongly suggest you ask yourself. . .
“Why do I so easily relate to these types (within your stated preference and in this case, Severin) and what nuance can I draw from such loyalties if in fact they are lying (and they are)?”
Kelly, you’re probably a nice person, but you have an obligation to not only yourself, but to the future of this country. As soon as you admit to yourself that the sole goal of those people for whom you have so much admiration and undying loyalty is simply to make money off of your easily gained consensus, as well as to bolster the lurid psychological component which has extreme liars and frauds like Severin, G.W. Bush, (FEMA’s) Michael Brown (also lied blatantly on his resume) attempting what they attempt.
My suggestion to you . . . Do the work! It’s not that difficult, but you do have to release your patterns of gullibility you have shown on this post.
Severin has lied repeatedly on the air and regarding his credentials . . . and the GOP will never (beneath the veneer) give a damn about you or what’s actually best for the people of this country, unless you are running big business. Step back and take a good long look and then take another one.
You’re backing a stable of losing horses ridden by crooked jockeys.
The crime is not just the host – its the corporations who are putting this crap out on the airwaves.
It is clear that they will accept sleeze that supports right wing agenda while getting the vapors over the idea of disclosing the things like the true deaths caused by the Bush family.
But I”m sure there’s more that will come out on this guy if we put a little work into it.
He’s pretty interesting in the way he does fake enunciation in his speech to come across as some kind of ‘authority’. Maybe he is trying to hide his origins. It’s like Dr Laura that way – sort of like the person who holds a cup of tea with the little finger held out.
He also said that he would give money (like the arabs who support terrorists) so someone who would kill Hillary Clinton.
On the sex stuff, he seems to be trying to overcome something. He does a little sex thrill thing when women call, and, like our friend howard stern, takes a little too much interest in young women to be really healthy for an older man.
You Libs are unbelievably predictable. As I scroll through all the postings above, I find the same Liberal talking points I hear every single day. I’ve taken the liberty of summarizing all the Liberal talking points you are supposed to (and most of you did) use when debating anything with a Conservative:
1) Blame George Bush
2) Play the race card
3) Accuse the Neo-Cons of mind control
4) Blame big business and corporations
5) Claim we don’t spend enough money on the environment
6) Claim we don’t spend enough money on education
7) Don’t forget to mention the poor people
8) Remind the Neo-Cons that we really won both elections
9) Somehow relate items 1-8 to whatever you’re talking about…regardless of how absurd it may seem
10) Should any of these talking points fail, you should revert to using the ever effective “Bush lied, kids died.”
Honestly you guys, it’s despicable. Try taking off your tin foil hats and actually participating in a point-by-point discussion. Then maybe you’ll get somewhere in your arguments.
whatever nick…does it even dawn on you that you are using the same talking points that the rest of the tinfoil hat right wingnuts employ? do you bush apologists EVER go off message? “must save Dear Leader from the evil liberals, blah freakin’ blah”. my how i do so love watching you whiners defend the indefensible. severin is a LIAR….bush is a LIAR, hell, he’s a pathological liar. why is it beyond your ability to admit that?
“you’re doing a good job brownie…” sheesh…
First of all WT… us Neo-Cons are not the ones known for wearing tin-foil hats. We’re not the ones known for being conspiracy theorists (Iraq war for oil, 9-11 was on purpose to start a war with profitable defense contracts, levees in NOLA were blown up on purpose to kill the blacks, etc. etc.).
Second, and I mentioned this a couple of posts ago, the irony of a Clinton apologist calling anybody a liar is staggering. I truly feel sorry for you if you actually believe that any politician tells the truth even half of the time. I could care less about any of the lies that any politician has ever told. I care much more about the party he is affiliated with and what that party’s agenda is.
And no… we don’t ever go off message. That’s because our message is focused and defensible. In a point-by-point, LINEAR, COMMON SENSE, NON-EMOTIONAL debate, we prevail virtually every time.
As far as admitting Bush is a liar goes… I don’t have to, nor do I want to. I have an agenda. And at least I can admit that. Once again… I ask you to participate in a point-by-point argument, and you came back with the usual “Bush is a liar” epithets. Which, by the way, are quickly becoming the most lame-duck epithets. He’s going to be our president for the next 39 months… like it or not.
I’ll refrain from pointing out all the lies of the Democratic Party (and boy is there a lot of them), if you refrain from using the same old conspiracy theories.
screw you nick…what points do you want to discuss. how about the neo-con willingness to sacrifice upwards of 30,000 american lives to jumpstart a war in the middle east? you see, i’ve actually read the PNAC policy statement. have you? if you have, how do you square ANY of that crap w/ reality. and as for your “conspiracy theories”? kiss my ass and show me where i posted ONE damned thing about “conspiricies”. you have a prob w/ word comprehension, eh? talk about obfuscation?
BTW, i’m no clinton apologist, so that dog won’t hunt. YOU, on the other hand, ARE a bush apologist. not even willing to broach the topic of bush’s serial lying?? WTF?
yep…you have an agenda alright. check your email moron, i’m sure karl rove has something for you to post…more talking points, and more marching orders, you stepford whore.
get after it. you want to debate a “point”, try posting one for a change. you got nuttin’….
You posted a lot of crap in that last post so bear with me… it may take me a couple of posts to respond…
~tapping fingers~ yeah, right…a lot of crap..got it.
the entire neo-con (PNAC) agenda is couched in propoganda/lying. their stated purpose disavows truth as even relavent, so it’s no surprise that you don’t care to address bush’s serial lying. the ends justify the means, right? torture is okay as long as it’s them, not us, right? see how this works, little nicky?
why do i get the feeling you haven’t actually read the PNAC mission statement?
and yes, severin is still a cretin and a LIAR, you’re still an apologist for him, bush, and the neo-cons, and you’ve been as they say “served”…
reading is FUN_damental….you should try it
I’m not sure where you get that 30,000 number from. Perhaps you could explain in your next post.
No, I have not read PNAC’s policy statement. But I have it hear in front of me (It’s actually called the Statement of Principals) and I promise to read it. I fail to see what PNAC has anything to do with our discussion though. They’re one of a million 501(c)(3)’s. I’m sure they’ve donated quite a bit of money to BushCo (just as moveon.org has donated quite a bit of money to the Dems). I’m not avoiding the topic. I’m simply saying that I don’t know enough about PNAC to come to their defense.
Now, about my conspiracy theories statement. That was meant, solely, to set you straight on your little tin-foil hat issue. You said:
“does it even dawn on you that you are using the same talking points that the rest of the tinfoil hat right wingnuts employ?”
And you were wrong. The tin-foil hat wearing citizens (they think the government and/or aliens can read and/or control their thoughts and that the tin-foil will protect them, get it?) of this country align themselves heavily with the Democratic Party. When was the last time you heard a conspiracy theory coming out of a Cons mouth? I never accused you of stating any conspiracy theories (if you read my post closely, you’ll see that for yourself). Obfuscation huh?
You say you’re not a Clinton apologist. And since I don’t know you, I have no choice but to believe you. But I do have to wonder if you’ve ever uttered the words “Clinton balanced the budget” (that’s a topic I’d love to discuss) or any one of the other attempts by the left to lionize, and somehow create a legacy for, their hero.
And you’re absolutely right about me being a Bush apologist. I’m also, dare I say, a party loyalist. I would vote for a murdering, pillaging, drug using, felon of a Republican before I voted for even the nicest, most pristine Democrat. Why? Because party trumps person. It’s an irrefutable fact. I’d be more than happy to discuss that too. I’ve delved into the “Bush is a liar” discussion several times with other libs. And it’s the exact same argument over and over again. They always bring all of these speculations and, here we go again, conspiracy theories to the table. How the hell am I supposed to refute speculation? But if you want to discuss it, just let me know.
I’m just going to ignore your stepford whore comment in the interest of moving this whole thing along. Name-calling doesn’t do a whole lot for your arguments.
You say “get after it… try posting one for a change.” I thought I had. In my original post (which was simply a copy and paste of the e-mail I sent to Jon the author of this piece) I made several points. And then, in my ensuing post, I made another point. How many points would you like me to make? I was simply trying to say that in the arena of ideas, Cons repeatedly put a smack-down on the Libs. So… bring the noise. Pick a topic any topic.
There now…that didn’t take as long as I thought. You’re shot…
FUN-demental huh? THEN TRY READING MY ORIGINAL POST!!!!!! If you do, then you’ll find that I care as much about Severin and his scandals, as you care about Al Franken and his shenanigans! Or would you like to discuss those too?
ouch…yep you sure made your point.
>>>No, I have not read PNAC’s policy statement. But I have it hear in front of me (It’s actually called the Statement of Principals) and I promise to read it. I fail to see what PNAC has anything to do with our discussion though>>And you’re absolutely right about me being a Bush apologist. I’m also, dare I say, a party loyalist. I would vote for a murdering, pillaging, drug using, felon of a Republican before I voted for even the nicest, most pristine Democrat.
okay nick…
for some reason, my entire response didn’t get posted. hmmm…
i can’t believe i’m debating a self professed neo-con, who can’t articulate their policies. i nailed it…you have no real clue who they are…
but let’s really get down to it…
>>>>And you’re absolutely right about me being a Bush apologist. I’m also, dare I say, a party loyalist. I would vote for a murdering, pillaging, drug using, felon of a Republican before I voted for even the nicest, most pristine Democrat.
Is that it? Is that all I get from you? One of my quotes? WTF is that?
You say ouch like you quoting me was some kind of burn.
If that’s what you call getting “after it,” then we’ll never get anywhere. I hope I’m writing this as you author another (and hopefully more intelligable) post.
I beleive you also took my quote out of context (a favorite past time of liberals). You forgot to throw on the following two sentences:
“Why? Because party trumps person. It’s an irrefutable fact.”
Oh please WT. I could school you on your party’s policies… Imagine what I could with my party’s policies.
That’s twice you’ve quoted me. Is that what you want to discuss? My quote?
Did you not like what I said? Here’s another one for ya… There’s no such thing as a “Moderate.”
I’m still wating…
How much time must pass before we declare another victory for me?
Todays final score is
Nick: 5
WTMoore: 0
You are all douche bags. Jay Severin, the author of the article, all how posted (which includes me, before you get any ideas), are all douche bags.
yep nick…you’re a real winner. any asshole who would openly state he would support a drug addicted murdering GOP candidate over an unnamed pristine Dem is just not worth my time to engage. you referred to yourself as a neo-con, and you didn’t even know what they stand for. in other words, a perfect clueless bush supporter….a stepford idiot…
taking your hand and scattering the game pieces does not make you a winner. it just proves you’re socially retarded. does your mother know you’re using her computer?
I have listen to Jay for 4 1/2 years and I have learned a lot, its fun, entertaining and I feel I am part of a larger community. I also feel that ideas are shared from both sides, yes Jay has his view and he stresses it. But its communication everywhere else it’s all one persons view they don’t let you call in at all.
I didn’t listen last Friday but I did forgive Clinton for all of his mistakes and I am working through forgiving Bush for his. Hay we are talking about radio, have you gone to another channel lately they make everything up and its all about Sex.
I miss Jay and Pray that he comes back.
From an independent, who has voted democrat because of environmental reasons.