On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 20:27:18 GMT, 4033 Dead <zeppp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:14:20 -0400, Reggie <Reggie501@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>Just look at their choices. See if you agree. We don't. The Brits must
>>have a totally different definition of "Liberal" - and have no clue as
>>to who is influential in the US and who is irrelevant. They list Joe
>>Lieberman and Chris Matthews as 'liberals' - for starters - and need
>>some real help in correcting their political acumen of life across the
>>pond. You can ad your own 'most influential' liberal or conservative to
>>their list. Go for it.
>>
>>http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/latest-news-at-a-glance/political-glance
>>
>>UK - Telegraph article:
>>
>>The 50 most influential US political pundits
>>Monday, 28 April 2008 14:48
>>
>>With the internet revolution and the growing popularity of cable
>>television, the multitude of voices can seem be bewildering and,
>>occasionally, deafening.
>>
>>The Daily Telegraph today unveils its list of the 50 most influential
>>political pundits to help readers sort through whose opinions matter.
>>These are the people who make voters sit up and take notice. They are
>>the ones who political candidates and campaigns are constantly seeking
>>to woo and influence. They include television presenters, newspaper
>>columnists, bloggers and talking heads.
>>
>>More...
>>
>Krugman 48, behind JC Watts? Somebody has to be kidding.
>
<ROTFLMAO> It's not like anybody with half a brain pays any
attention to krugman.
I wonder how much higher O'Reilly will score above Olberman.. I say
at least twelve places...
|
