johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Far right winger Chris Baker of KTRH (Keep The Rightwingers Here) in Houston Texas, was slapped around on MSNBC this afternoon and stormed off the set when confronted by a radio talk show host Bernie Ward, a liberal talk show host from California. The issue concerned the press revealing another secret spying activity by the Bush Administration. It was a sight to see! In fact see Crooks and Liars to see it!California 1. Texas Zero.Chris Baker is the bully of the White Wingers of KTRH. When he is confronted with facts and can't shout down his guest, he is easily brought to his knees. Baker lost it. When backed into a corner, he resorted to his trademark "I'm trying to have a dialogue" whine which he uses when he is losing an argument. He was completely out of control and resorted to calling names, personal attacks, and then disconnected his headset and stormed off the stage.He did KTRH real proud. What a White Wing Wadio Whining Wacko. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 the video was...enlightening...or not chris baker got to shine, though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Chris Baker is a carpetbagging tool. But what's a White Winger? Is that like a Black Blinger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Responsible Reporting", that's the word that rang in my ear. New York Times has every right to publish the report, but at what cost ? There were top officials from BOTH sides of the aisle, asking them to please not publish this report, and explained to them very clearly as to WHY. NYT blatantly disregarded, so now we'll see what the backlash is, and how potential terrorists will change up their money moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Responsible Reporting", that's the word that rang in my ear. New York Times has every right to publish the report, but at what cost ? There were top officials from BOTH sides of the aisle, asking them to please not publish this report, and explained to them very clearly as to WHY. NYT blatantly disregarded, so now we'll see what the backlash is, and how potential terrorists will change up their money moving.Who cares? That is another topic. This one is about Baker getting his ass handed to him and stomping off the stage. Real class. Real ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heights2Bastrop Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 TJones, how dare you try to take the focus over this earth shattering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1fd Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 See http://bayareahouston.blogspot.com/2006/06...-gone-wild.html for a link to the video.Ugh. ____ing bloghoppers. Could we link directly to the relevant material in the future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 TJones, how dare you try to take the focus over this earth shattering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Ugh. ____ing bloghoppers. Could we link directly to the relevant material in the future? well, it is his blog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1fd Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 well, it is his blog Fine then. He's advertising, this thread should be deleted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 I don't think it's considered good form to self-link. In the future please reference the original material.Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 Fine then. He's advertising, this thread should be deleted.Oh quit whining. Here:http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/0...talk-show-host/Nothing like pissing on a fire of funniness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeebus Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Yeah moderators, quite whining. This is John Coby's thread and he can do anything he damn well pleases! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 Yeah moderators, quite whining. This is John Coby's thread and he can do anything he damn well pleases! Hey! What he said! I'm trying to have a dialogue here! A funny one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 (edited) Yeah moderators, quite whining. This is John Coby's thread and he can do anything he damn well pleases! Yeah, please moderators, let the 50-year old fart gloat a little bit. Probably the most action he has seen in years. Have fun john. Edited June 27, 2006 by TJones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 TREASON - This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance. The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. I will leave it up to you to see if what the NYT did is treason. Of course you'll first have to go after the government leaker from the Bush administration before you can shoot the messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmancuso Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 i'm a leftie but i can't say that talk host from SF "pwned" chris baker. the other guy's whole intent was to start a fight and came out of the gate swinging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 Yeah, please moderators, let the 50-year old fart gloat a little bit. Probably the most action he has seen in years. Have fun john. Believe me I am having fun with Baker getting his ass handed to him and Rush Limbaugh, the conservative Chrisitan, having a permament woody. It is pretty funny stuff. i'm a leftie but i can't say that talk host from SF "pwned" chris baker. the other guy's whole intent was to start a fight and came out of the gate swinging. It is exactly what Baker does, but this time it was against him. So what did he do? He cut and ran like the chickenhawk he is, like a little girl who got their barbie stolen from them. Sorry, but Baker is an ass. I am am enjoying the c*ap outa watching him get his own medicine. And then he just got up and surrendered. I bet MSNBC wont invite him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 i'm a leftie but i can't say that talk host from SF "pwned" chris baker. the other guy's whole intent was to start a fight and came out of the gate swinging.Actually, it looked to me that Bernie exposed the flaw in Chris Baker's thinking, and Chris didn't want to admit it. Baker said that the gov't said it was for national security, and that was good enough for him. The obvious next question is, "so you want the gov't telling newspapers what to write?"What's Baker going to say at that point? No one, including conservatives, wants that to happen. Baker was stuck...so he walked off. It's a good example of supporting the person instead of the ideology. Baker's support of the CURRENT government ran headlong into his mistrust of government in general.Fun to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 Actually, it looked to me that Bernie exposed the flaw in Chris Baker's thinking, and Chris didn't want to admit it. Baker said that the gov't said it was for national security, and that was good enough for him. The obvious next question is, "so you want the gov't telling newspapers what to write?"What's Baker going to say at that point? No one, including conservatives, wants that to happen. Baker was stuck...so he walked off. It's a good example of supporting the person instead of the ideology. Baker's support of the CURRENT government ran headlong into his mistrust of government in general.Fun to watch.And what do we expect out of Chris. His lips have been firmly attached to W's ass since he got into office. W could crap and Chris would say it was shaving cream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................Ok, NEXT ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncoby Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................Ok, NEXT !Geez. Tough crowd. I like the "he ran off the stage like a chearleader who just found out she forgot her bloomer" comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Geez. Tough crowd. I like the "he ran off the stage like a chearleader who just found out she forgot her bloomer" comment. Agreed, that was funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heights2Bastrop Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 and running off the stage like a high school chearleader who realized she forgot her bloomersI hear that. Most Librals affect me the same way. Nmainguy, I would argue that the NYT did indeed give aid to the enemy by their revelations, both past and present. However, I agree about the leaker(s), and the government should do all that can to find out who he is, give him a fair trial, then shoot him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 "Hey, at least I only have one chin."Funny, he drops that bomb and then starts to cry about I am trying to have a civil dialogue before he prances off the set. Uh, yeah. Listen douche bag, what you are used to is a caller screened radio call-in show with a monologue format. You should probably stick to that genre.Another Houston rocket scientist for all of us to be proud of.The NY Times had every right to run with that story. Last time I checked, we had freedom of the press in this country. The real issue should be why they didn't run it when it first broke and why they felt the need to consult with the executive branch to begin with. Also, are we officially at war again? What happened to Mission Accomplished? Did we then go back and go through the proper channels to declare a war on the Axis of Evil?Or, do we just trump out the "we are at war" when it is convenient or when we need to trample some more of our United States Constitution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heights2Bastrop Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 The NY Times had every right to run with that story. Last time I checked, we had freedom of the press in this country.Last time I checked, this counrty voted to approve the Bush Administration. I don't recall anyone electing the New York Times to decide national policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 (edited) The NY Times had every right to run with that story. Last time I checked, we had freedom of the press in this country. The real issue should be why they didn't run it when it first broke and why they felt the need to consult with the executive branch to begin with. You are right Kinkaid, the problem lies as to WHY run the story right now ? Alot of high level officials on both sides of the aisle asked NYT to PLEASE not run this story just yet, that it was vital to find out exactly where these Al-Queda and Taliban ties were getting money and moving money to and from. NYT said, screw you guys, we need to sell some papers. Good job NYT, your stock dropped, your stock has been downgraded, and alot of shareholders are pissed that you keep doing crap like this. Yes, there is some P.O.S. mole in the Bush Admin. that keeps leaking. Funny how you guys aren't upset about this leak, but you got your panties all in a wad over Plame. If you listen closely, you can hear that "flip-flop". Kinkaid, think about this. What the NYT did is like you trying to go out and catch your husband or boyfriend cheating on you. While you are sitting at the restaurant a few tables away trying to see what is going on with his "business dinner", someone comes up behind you and goes ," HEY, HEY MISTER, YOUR WIFE IS SITTING OVER HERE TRYING TO SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING WITH THAT GOOD LOOKIN WOMAN YOUR HAVING DINNER WITH ! YOUR WIFE'S SISTER TOLD ME THAT SHE WAS COMING OVER HERE TO WATCH YOU ! would that be ok, or just really cruddy of that person after you had pleaded with him not to give your position up, and tell your husband you were there, after all, the whistleblower has every right to rat you out doesn't he ? Edited June 28, 2006 by TJones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 The Times bore the brunt of their attacks, although the LA Times and the Wall Street Journal also published reports the same day.So will the far-right wingers go after the WSJ as well or will their firey and rightious rath be aimed only at the godless NYT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 (edited) So will the far-right wingers go after the WSJ as well or will their firey and rightious rath be aimed only at the godless NYT? Where do you think WSJ and LA got their stories ? HELLO ! Edited June 28, 2006 by TJones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Kinkaid, think about this. What the NYT did is like you trying to go out and catch your husband or boyfriend cheating on you. While you are sitting at the restaurant a few tables away trying to see what is going on with his "business dinner", someone comes up behind you and goes ," HEY, HEY MISTER, YOUR WIFE IS SITTING OVER HERE TRYING TO SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING WITH THAT GOOD LOOKIN WOMAN YOUR HAVING DINNER WITH ! YOUR WIFE'S SISTER TOLD ME THAT SHE WAS COMING OVER HERE TO WATCH YOU ! would that be ok, or just really cruddy of that person after you had pleaded with him not to give your position up, and tell your husband you were there, after all, the whistleblower has every right to rat you out doesn't he ? Umm....that would be in the entertainment section. I don't read that part of the paper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.