• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mike Gallagher is a jerk

Iamme

Philosopher
I
Joined
Aug 5, 2003
Messages
6,215
Many of you may be familiar with this conservative radio talk show host who is on in the mornings, on AM radio. What a blathering idiot. I don't know if the guy is for real, or if he piles on in order to get people like me lathered up....er, foaming at the mouth.

This mornings main topic is Jessica Lynch. He said that Jessica, along with practically every known celeb woman somehow poses nude or topless, and their pictures somehow get into the wrong hands. (Even Princess Di!) Anyway, somehow, Larry Flint got ahold of some photos of Jessica 'covorting' topless with 2 soldiers while on base in Texas.

So Mike goes on to say that Larry has no morals whatsoever. Yet...(get ready)...he THEN says that Larry decides NOT to run the pictures of Jessica in his 'slimey magazine' (Penthouse), out of respect for Jessica. Hmmmmm. No morals Mike?....you blathering d***head? Then why the hell didn't he decide to run the pictures?!!!!

Everyday, there is something Mike spouts off about that just gets under my skin.

Do you care to share anything about him? Oh, ya...I forgot. He is now a paid featured guest on the Fox News Network....and plays up to the likes of his 'pal' Shawn Hannity (Who brags that he is the 2nd? most popular/listened to talk show host in the country....after Rush Limbaugh, I presume?)
 
Larry Flynt's magazine is Hustler, not Penthouse.
 
I've met him a few times. And while we never had a heart-to-heart, nor debated issues, my purely non-scientific, don't-quote-me guess is that his public persona is more or less an act.
 
Limbaugh, Hannity, Mike Reagan, Gallagher, O'Reilly -- they all sound like blowhards to me. I think they were all beaten by schoolmates for a fair portion of their teenage years, and have found blathering over the airwaves and being able to cut-off dissenting opinions gives them a real hard happy.

Quit listening to 'em.
 
So Mike goes on to say that Larry has no morals whatsoever. Yet...(get ready)...he THEN says that Larry decides NOT to run the pictures of Jessica in his 'slimey magazine' (Penthouse), out of respect for Jessica. Hmmmmm. No morals Mike?....you blathering d***head? Then why the hell didn't he decide to run the pictures?!!!!

I am not defending Gallagher here (I don't know him), but seeing Flynt's actions as some act of gallantry or morality is naive. If he really WAS gallant, he WOULDN'T ANNOUCE that he has these pictures, not announce it and then claim he won't publish them.

It seems to me that Flynt's decision to announce he has the pictures and won't publish them is political: on the one hand, he wants to annoy Bush and conservatives in general by pricking the baloon of self-congratulation over Lynch's rescue by noting that she is what used to be called a "loose woman".

On the other, he doesn't want to actually publish the photos because he is afraid that readers (although "lookers" is probably a better term) of his magazine will be pissed off at him "slandering a hero" and his sales will suffer, or perhaps he's afraid of potential lawsuits in front of an unsympathetic jury.

Frankly, I think this is a tempest in a teapot. I don't think Lynch is either a whore or a saint, and, between you and me, it's none of our business.
 
Re: Re: Mike Gallagher is a jerk

Skeptic said:
So Mike goes on to say that Larry has no morals whatsoever. Yet...(get ready)...he THEN says that Larry decides NOT to run the pictures of Jessica in his 'slimey magazine' (Penthouse), out of respect for Jessica. Hmmmmm. No morals Mike?....you blathering d***head? Then why the hell didn't he decide to run the pictures?!!!!

I am not defending Gallagher here (I don't know him), but seeing Flynt's actions as some act of gallantry or morality is naive. If he really WAS gallant, he WOULDN'T ANNOUCE that he has these pictures, not announce it and then claim he won't publish them.

It seems to me that Flynt's decision to announce he has the pictures and won't publish them is political: on the one hand, he wants to annoy Bush and conservatives in general by pricking the baloon of self-congratulation over Lynch's rescue by noting that she is what used to be called a "loose woman".

On the other, he doesn't want to actually publish the photos because he is afraid that readers (although "lookers" is probably a better term) of his magazine will be pissed off at him "slandering a hero" and his sales will suffer, or perhaps he's afraid of potential lawsuits in front of an unsympathetic jury.

Frankly, I think this is a tempest in a teapot. I don't think Lynch is either a whore or a saint, and, between you and me, it's none of our business.
Click to expand...

Well said.

this has nothing to do with skeptics post, but I am sick and tired of all of these characters, whether you are talking about o'reilly or franken, etc. It seems to me that people on thel liberal side bash the conservative ones, and vice versa. Why can't we hate them all equally.
 
Why not just look at Franken, O'Reilly et al as entertainers - nothing more? Their job is to titillate their demographic, not to educate or inform.
 
crackmonkey said:
Why not just look at Franken, O'Reilly et al as entertainers - nothing more? Their job is to titillate their demographic, not to educate or inform.
Click to expand...

Good point, I retract my hatred statement and amend it to veiw ALL as entertainers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom