4 Comments Add your own

• 1. smell a rat  |  August 8th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

  Thanks for pretending to be disinterested in John Edwards. News hypocrisy is at an all time high. Why bother paying for something that skews one way.

• 2. Pat Cunningham  |  August 8th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

  Hey, lighten up, smelly. I just got home and just put up a post on the Edwards scandal. I don’t know what you’re trying to say with this line: “Why bother paying for something that skews one way.” What’s that about?

• 3. smell a rat  |  August 8th, 2008 at 4:48 pm

  That’s not the way you treated it when the story surfaced. It’s easy to do news when all you have to do is report press releases from John Edwards. You’re a phony newsman.

• 4. Pat Cunningham  |  August 8th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

  Two things, Smelly: 1) I’m not a newsman; I’m a blogger, an opinionist. You apparently don’t know the difference. 2) When the Edwards story first surfaced, all we had to go on was what had been reported in the National Enquirer, a sleazy supermarket tabloid widely known for its irresponsible journalism and for paying huge penalties in lawsuits. You may consider that publication respectable and reliable, but most people don’t. That’s why the mainstream media also don’t report on certain other Enquirer stories, like those about George W. Bush’s recent booze binges and wild fights with his wife Laura and rumors that they’re headed for divorce. Do you want to see that stuff in the mainstream media? I don’t, no matter how much I dislike Bush. Face it, smelly. You’re a hypocrite, and you know nothing about the news business. But, hey, thanks for sharing your brilliant opinions.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed