That was totally classy.

Self *promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Saturday, May 23rd, 2009 11:15pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter demon_ix.

"Mr. Hannity, you sir, are unnecessary."

Um, that's what we all have been trying to say all along!!!

*promote this finale to the Hannity-is-a-hypocrite saga.

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Sunday, May 24th, 2009 4:18pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter demon_ix.

So, someone promises us something, and follows up with his word. Hannity is to cowardly to put his money were his mouth is. This mancow guy, lasted seven seconds. Still, better to throw in the extra three grand....its all going to charity!

Nice nice...

Straight and to the point, with a sprinkle of ziiiiing!

If Hannity was standing atop his ratings and Olberman was standing on his, Hannity wouldn't be able to hear Olbyloon's quacking even through a megaphone.

Give away more than 10K, cause Obamarx will just seize it anyway. Sucka!

>> ^quantumushroom:
If Hannity was standing atop his ratings and Olberman was standing on his, Hannity wouldn't be able to hear Olbyloon's quacking even through a megaphone.


And your source for that would be?

A verifiable source, or the dark reaches of your ass, as usual?

According to this site Hannity is ahead, but it's hardly a mountainous lead.

So basically, QM, you just lied again, and you don't give a shit, because lying is your second nature.

>> ^demon_ix:
promote this finale to the Hannity-is-a-hypocrite saga.


I don't think that will end until Hannity himself stops being one.


That is a very solid gesture by Olbermann. Maybe next time one of the talking point spewing douche bags on the right will think before putting their foot in their mouth.. again.

^Is that true QM? I'd like to see some hard evidence that points to the ratings of each of these shows. Regardless, having higher ratings isn't a qualification for being correct or honest.
Reason trump ftw.

if you counted all his internet viewers, I am sure Olbermann would have much higher ratings.

Aside from QM all the republicans I know, don't know how to use computers.

Uh - that link rather clearly proves that Olberman has less than half of Hannity's ratings. I fail to see how that in any way is a repudiation of QM's point that Hannity is handily spanking both Olberman, Maddow, and pretty much every other Neo-lib propoganda platform. And Homlz - you definitely DON'T want to include internet, radio, or 'other'... It is not very pretty for the Neo-lib sides. Conservative shows are merely crushing liberal ones on TV, but on the Internet/Radio it is absolute butchery. The only place neo-libs get more traction are places that have no value, like this thread...

What is it about talk radio that's so attractive to conservatives?

I just can't get into having my anger gland stroked for hours at a time by someone who loves to hear their own shouting voice. I guess that's why I stopped going to church.

[quote]What is it about talk radio that's so attractive to conservatives?[/quote]

I would imagine the same thing that attracts neo-libs to shows like Olberman, Maddow, Maher, and others of their ilk. People congregate around those who are expressing view that are similar to their own views. People are generally willing to dance when a piper starts playing their favorite tune...

I listened to Rush a few times in the 2000 election cycle and his show is nothing like what is billed by the typical left-wing blogger. He was funny, generally insightful, and sometimes quite brilliant. I would expect that for conservatives, it is very much a matter of enjoying the act of listening to someone that shares your thoughts/feelings on a topic and who is able to do it in an entertaining fashion.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Uh - that link rather clearly proves that Olberman has less than half of Hannity's ratings. I fail to see how that in any way is a repudiation of QM's point that Hannity is handily spanking both Olberman, Maddow, and pretty much every other Neo-lib propoganda platform. And Homlz - you definitely DON'T want to include internet, radio, or 'other'... It is not very pretty for the Neo-lib sides. Conservative shows are merely crushing liberal ones on TV, but on the Internet/Radio it is absolute butchery. The only place neo-libs get more traction are places that have no value, like this thread...


I know you get hissy when somebody knocks on your boyfriend, Winny, but that link shows that Hannity only has a narrow lead over Olberman and in the 35-64 demographic, they are nearly tied.

You're a pretty disgusting person, too, and I'm really tired of you referring to everybody on the left as "neo-libs" as if that were a balance to the self-named Neocons.

As with the Neocons, you and QM excel in avarice, dishonesty, and simple mean-spiritedness.

The mess we have now is all due to you and people like you.

None of it was caused by a liberal agenda. None of it.

The ratings do tell us one thing: more ignorant, conservative shitheads watch TV and listen to the radio than anyone else. Way to go, fuckwits!

I know you get hissy when somebody knocks on your boyfriend

Insult Hannity all you like. I've never watched his shows, so I have no opinion of him. I just don't like it when stats are twisted to suit a bias. Hannity has over 2X Olberman's audience on an average day, 1.8X as many adults 25-54, and 1.57X adults 35-64. In any measure of media viewership he's beating Olberman by a wide margin and he is doing it from a lower-rated time slot.

The correct comparison should Olberman to O'Rielly (same slot). O'Rielly has 2X Olberman's audience even in the 35-64 demo. For Hannity, the proper comparison is Maddow, who he is thumping with 2.17X as many viewers in the 35-64 demographic. Regardless, representing Olberman as being "nearly tied" with Hannity is ludicrous. Even cherry-picking your demographic, Hannity has 348,000 more viewers.

"disgusting person, avarice, dishonesty, mean-spiritedness, 'the mess' is all due to you"

I'm fascinated by your conclusions, though I'm not certain as to what facts they are based on. Logic pieces like these are what make discussions with neo-libs so entertaining.

Kudos to you, Olbermann. Hannity, go fuck yourself.

Winstonfield_QuantummushroomPacker, I think rougy was suggesting that your boyfriend is QM. That's the way I read it anyway.

I'm actually of the opinion that you're the same troll with 2 accounts (at least.)

neo-libs

I'm actually of the opinion that you're the same troll with 2 accounts (at least.)

A troll is one who deliberately causes strife for attention or to incense. I argue to correct errors or to advocate what I feel to be a 'more correct' position. In this thread I've merely disproved the factually erroneous claim that Olberman is 'almost even' with Hannity in ratings. I've done so by pointing out basic facts in the very data cited by the ones making the false argument. I typically find that neo-libs prefer to not to be called out when they are inaccurate, but in no measure does that make me a 'troll'.

And heaven forfend that I be accused of being QM. I've noted that QM stoops to using profanities and sometimes gets incensed. I am not so mercurial or coarse. I consider such things to be the refuge of the intellectually defeated. Once a man is exhausted of logic with which to pursue an issue, they desperately puke out the filth of their true characters. It is a vain, sad attempt to remain engaged in a debate they have already lost by substituting reason with volume.

When you're literally a fountain of sparkling, pure intellect (such as myself) who operates from a position of superior reasoning, there is no need to dip into such cesspools. I allow others to dredge the noisome pond of ranting profanity with their mental slop buckets.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by choggie.