first!

Curse you The other scott!! ;-)

For the speech, it was 16 words, and one piece of evidence about the uranium that looks to be suspect.

For the NYT, it's been 16 years (give or take a few decades, and hundreds upon hundreds of inaccuracies based on plagarized stories, falsified reporting, political bias, and outright lies (not that those last 2 are mutually exclusive).

Frod,

Curse ME because you are too slow to be first? What next, demand an investigation, government subsidies, what?

I'm on the line with my lawyer right now. We are discsussing a lawsuit to collect damages for pain and suffering because of your curse, Frod.

BTW, my lawyer is a Democrat, and does not support capping of damages. Have a great weekend, Frod, but start saving your money. We'll see you in court. (Nothing personal, just business. You must understand...)

Frod???

If congress were to investigate the NY Times, and cover the last 107 years it would keep them busy, and out of our pockets for the next 382 years, 286 days, 5 hours, 23 minutes, and 42 seconds.

Just an estimate of course, but probably not to far off if we put the waxman types in charge of the investigation.

Prefect! You Scotts are a riot.

Pooke...that's PERFECT, not PREFECT.

Then again...
1 : any of various high officials or magistrates of differing functions and ranks in ancient Rome
2 : a chief officer or chief magistrate

As if we don't have enough "officials"...

Would an investigation of the NY Times be an excuse for political junkets to all the places that the Times has reported from or on? (Or at least the ones with 5 star resorts.) If so, double the estimated time of the investigation.

Investigating the overly-flattering stories and biased reports about Bill Clinton (who used to be a President) alone would last into the next century. My plan? Divide it up between the 329 Democratic presidential hopefuls.

Oh, how I love the sound of 'EX-President Clinton'. Scuzzbag.

Ken,

No, you must take next step and not even use the phrse you did. It is now "Bill Clinton (who used to be a President)". Saying that ex- thing still lends some credibility and almost dictates honor.

Did Jihad Unspun hire one of the headline-writers at CBS?

"Congressmen are revered by the citizenry for their unshakeable integrity."

NOT NOT NOT

Reginald...which part do you disagree with? :-)

Bah, I was gonna post but the Times is hardly a worthy oppopnent. I'd rather have someone more intellibigentified....

like Frenchy

Looks like the NYT could STILL use some help in truth-detecting.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,91816,00.html

Darn ... TOS, you beat me to it again I was just about to post that same link!

Censoring my sausage humor, allowing guys named Scott to post first, and posting humorous links before me ... that's it, I'm convinced that ScrappleFace is biased against short hairy footed humanoids ... I want affirmative action ... quotas requiring a certain percentage of the first posts for Hobbits!

TOS - 'Nothing personal, just business. You must understand'

It's Frodo, not Fredo! And I refuse to go fishing with you.

It is really a strange day when the "Weekly World News" has more journalistic integrity than the "New York Times".

I remember once an editor of the Times, commented that supermarket tabloid stories are made up for the trailer trash of America.

Yeah, "write"! [Grammatical error intended].

Long live ìBatboyî!

Personally, I blame the Moose.

I trust The National Enquirer more than I trust The New York Times.

Quoted from a joke E-mail I got:
Newspapers (remember, these are generalizations!)
1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the
country.

2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the
country.

3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they should
run the country.

4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the
country but don't really understand the Washington Post. They do,
however, like their smog statistics shown in pie charts.

5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind
running the country, if they could spare the time, and if they
didn't have to leave LA to do it.

6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to
run the country and they did a far superior job of it, thank you very
much.

7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too
sure who's running the country, and don't really care as long as
they can get a seat on the train.

8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who are
running the country either, as long as they do something really
scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.

9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by the people who
aren't sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it; but
whoever it is, they oppose all that they stand for. There are
occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority
feministic atheist dwarfs, who also happen to be illegal aliens
from ANY country or galaxy, and as long as they are Democrats.

10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another
country, but need the baseball scores.

11. The National Enquirer is read by people trapped in line at
the grocery store.

And Scrappleface is read by conservatives with a sense of humor, and liberals who like to have hissy-fits.

Speaking of which...

Please Note: ScrappleFace readers are intelligent enough to express themselves without obscenities. ScrappleFace endeavors to be suitable for all ages. If an obscene interloper posts here, please report the incident to the blogmaster who will delete the comment. (Include the name, date and time of the comment.) So please take that extra moment to think of a civil synonym

SRG: Yep, that sounds about right. I'd say more like seizures though - not hissy fits.

OLPP: wow - think you said that loudly enough? You forgot that we also take food from children's mouths, dump old ladies in the street by cutting social insecurity, etc. etc. This is a joke, of course, like your post - ROTFLSHIASMP (Rolling On The Floor Laughing So Hard I'm Almost Soiling My Pants)

My sincere apologies:

YOU PEOPLE TAKE FOOD FROM BABIES MOUTHS AND MAKE PEOPLE COMMIT ABORTIONS IN BACK ALLIES WITH RUSTY RAZOR BLADES GENOCIDE ON WOMEN NO COATHANGERS FILTHY RICH REPUBLICANS YOU ARE EVIL YOU ARE SICK THROW OLD PEOPLE FROM WHEELCHAIRS RAID SOCIAL SECURITY TO FUND TAX CUTS FOR BILLIONAIRE CIGARETTE MANUFACTURERS STICK CANCER STICKS IN 7 YEAR OLD MOUTHS NO WAR IN IRAQ NO WAR IN AFGANISTAN PEACEKEEPING MISSION IN RWANDA BUT ITS TOO LATE YOU GREEDY EVIL PEOPLE ETC.

(oh, and FREE MUMIA!)

ps: Thanks for the compliment.

I can't believe I left this off:

BUSH IS WORSE THAN HITLER GUANTANIMO BAY IS WORSE THAN DACHAU MCDONALDS IS WORSE THAN AUSCHWITZ STARBUCKS IS WORSE THAN TREBLINKA SADDAM WAS A BAD MAN BUT AT LEAST HE WAS ELECTED WHY AREN'T WE THREATENING TO ATTACK NORTH KOREA WHY ARE WE THREATENING TO ATTACK NORTH KOREA MUMIA FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004

<insanity> You forgot arsenic, global warming, warmongering, hate, shrillness, conservative bias in CNN, etc. </insanity>

You're just about ready to go and do some baiting at www.democraticunderground.com... ;>) If you do, post the logs here. Should be pretty funny to see. I'm not good enough at spewing bile to try it. Haven't had enough practice.

That's right. My enemies are way too shrill. Whatever happened to civilized discourse anyway?

BTW: I did do some posting on Indymedia, but nobody realized I was being sarcastic. Sigh.

WOW! I just checked out indymedia.org. They have got to be the most liberal (past extremist) website I have ever seen. I hope I never see a site like that again. Here's a verbatim quote:

***WARNING: BLATANT LEFTISM BELOW! WEAR EYE PROTECTION AND CLOSE OFFICE DOOR!***

"First Casualty of War Returns to Haunt Bush Crusaders

The man who said "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam.." may be a religious extremist bent on revisiting the Crusades, but George W. Bush and his neo-conservative handlers are far from invulnerable. Finally, the mainstream corporate media is waking up to what independent journalists have been saying all along:The Bush regime is out of control and their rightwing agenda is a threat to the nation.
The Whitehouse's global crusade appears to have turned into Bush's vietnam as the occupation of Iraq turns into a quagmire and the regime's lies [1], [2] to justify the invasion return to haunt them. Neo-conservatives in the U.S. Senate may have squelched an independent investigation into the regime's deceptions for now, but the tide appears to have turned against the Whitehouse crusaders. It's said there are 76 patriotic reasons to impeach Bush/Cheney. Perhaps the the gate is open. "

Akchgth. Think they slanted that enough? I can see why they didn't notice that you were being sarcastic. They have no grasp on reality at all.