You know I looked it up because of this post, and it reduced my respect for Jon Stewart a bit. Sounded like an apologist for religion.
Get back in the line, please.
Pandering to people’s desire to feel self-righteous fury at THE OTHER [sup]TM[/sup] counts as a form of titillation, AFAIAC.
Would that necessarily be a bad thing, given the context of the interview (I haven’t seen it, but ISTM that asking an author probing questions and making him defend his thesis is more productive than just congratulating him on how good he sticks it to the people you both disagree with)?
Sounded to me like his personal beliefs aren’t as agnostic as is usual for ‘left wingers’. But that’s my opinion.
Fox & Friends again. Makes me wonder if they’re actually a broadcast version of The Onion and nobody noticed.
Same way this one did.
:dubious: Well, they are now.
That probably accounts for the viewers they do have.
Pulchritude? what?
Is that a fancy word for cleavage?
Yes. Yes, it is. (But see “callypigian.”)
Liar ! It’s just a 10 dollar word for “hot”.
Callypigian does more specifically refer to packing junk in the trunk though.
ETA : I love, positively love, that Wiktionary provides “bootylicious” as a synonym for callypigian. Greeks be gangsta, yo.
Booty aside,
Joe Muto was an assistant producer for Bill O’Reilly. When pitching stories they would try to generate outrage. Because that was the key to ratings. They assumed that their audience was pretty gullible. And all of the production staff was in on the joke: Muto didn’t know how much of the audience was. O’Reilly himself studied the daily Nielsen report very closely.
So that’s the keyword at Fox News: outrage.
They don’t seem to understand (or maybe they do?) that, outside their locked-in base of aging white guys who yell at their televisions, they only ever generate rage at Fox News.
You should see it. The ‘probing’ questions he asks are about how science doesn’t know how abiogenesis happened, life after death, how science can be just as bad as religion, how religion can do some good. Shitty stuff. The pity is, Dawkins doesn’t do a great job answering him, it doesn’t seem like he was expecting so much defence of religion, because the book he had come in to promote was an autobiography. ETA: So yeah, in the context of the interview, this stuff was even worse
I have no idea what is usual or not for left wingers(I’m not from the US), but yeah it certainly seemed like he personally is religious, although not stupid with it.
I have always maintained that pulchritude is one of those words that sounds exactly like the opposite of what it means. Reading it always gives me this sense of rot and disease.
I’m very sorry, Ms. Jones, but you have a severe head-to-toe case of somatic pulchritude. I can only treat it through traumatic invasive coition.
If more money were to be made pandering to liberals instead of conservatives, how long do you think it would take Fox to do a complete transformation?
Oh no, not another breathalyzer!
No, no, different procedure. Please sign this release . . .