Oh, why not?
/

Jon Stewart once again shows that he's doing more news reporting than real news networks - this isn't the first time either.

No wonder the news readers at the big three networks have declining audiences.

Hannity - who's surprised? Now, if they pulled this crap in their newscasts, that would be shocking.

In defense of Fox News. Upper left hand corner of the screen?

It says "EARLIER".

/

re: #4 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

In defense of Fox News. Upper left hand corner of the screen?

It says "EARLIER".

/

Now, that is funny.

Lame, lame, lame.

re: #4 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

In defense of Fox News. Upper left hand corner of the screen?

It says "EARLIER".

/

Don't let that get in the way of a good story. Killgore will not be happy.

What you mean Fox lies habitually? NO, they are fair and balanced, they would never do something that smacked of fauxtography...

Fox creates the meme and then it broadcasts people talking about the meme they created.

SOME say... yeah that would be the guy on the show before you saying that!

Fox is a cancer.

HA!
I was just watching that on Media Matters.

20,000 to 40,000 people says crazy Michelle...

re: #4 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

In defense of Fox News. Upper left hand corner of the screen?

It says "EARLIER".

/

Yes, and everyone would assume that earlier meant earlier that day.

That is the very definition of an equivocation.

re: #8 ludwigvanquixote

What you mean Fox lies habitually? NO, they are fair and balanced, they would never do something that smacked of fauxtography...

Fox creates the meme and then it broadcasts people talking about the meme they created.

SOME say... yeah that would be the guy on the show before you saying that!

Fox is a cancer.

So, is Hannity a newscaster?

Who cares.

Fox News is an easy target.

On the other hand, two weeks ago Stewart had on a Jewish, pro-Palestinian activist arguing for a one state solution, and a Palestinian activist spewing nonsense about the Jewish state.

They got a fair hearing from him.

re: #4 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Sorry I missed your sarc tag...

re: #8 ludwigvanquixote

What you mean Fox lies habitually?
...
Fox is a cancer.

Careful with that eliminationist rhetoric there, you're sounding like Beck.

re: #14 Guanxi88
Jon Stewart ' busts ' Fox?
Wow... that makes him more effective a weapon than the WH.
Anita Dunn surrendered in that scrap. ///

"Someone asked me if I wanted to see a picture of them when they were younger. I said, 'Isn't every picture of everybody ever taken of when they were younger?'"
-Mitch Hedberg

re: #9 webevintage

HA!
I was just watching that on Media Matters.

20,000 to 40,000 people says crazy Michelle...

Hey there was someone HERE claiming there was 100000!

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

re: #11 Guanxi88

So, is Hannity a newscaster?

So Hannity, Beck et all are presented as the news. I really don't care for the prevarication that they are not presented as such. The actual Fox News team, which is not on nearly as much as teh pundits, picks up the pundit "stories" and goes with them.

It is actually a cycle of crap. The Pundit says something crazy and their news arm reports on how many people think the crazy thing might be true, reports on the furor over the crazy thing they made up and then as a kicker insinuates it might be true.

To claim that Fox is anything other than a large propaganda tabloid would be foolish. There is about as much actual news in them as there was in Pravda.

That is to say, that even Pravda would report the "news" after a fashion.

re: #13 ludwigvanquixote

Sorry I missed your sarc tag...

It's all good... if figured you'd catch it eventually.

re: #16 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

RIP Mitch Hedberg

re: #8 ludwigvanquixote

NO, they are fair and balanced, they would never do something that smacked of fauxtography...

Fox may have done this thing - and it certainly looks like, in the context of an OPINION and COMMENTARY piece on an OPINION and COMMENTARY program, this is what happened. Good news, though, is it didn't cost me anything, wasn't done with my money, and wasn't intended to create an image that would be used to press for legislation the intent and effect of which will be to nationalize a substantial sector of our economy. Hannity's little stunt cost me exactly $0.00 and did not infringe on any of my freedoms.

Now, I grant you, the source is the NYpost, and so it's probably deemed unreliable, but:
[Link: www.nypost.com...]

WASHINGTON -- President Obama yesterday rolled out the red carpet -- and handed out doctors' white coats as well, just so nobody missed his hard-sell health-care message.

In a heavy-handed attempt at reviving support for health-care reform, the White House orchestrated a massive photo op to buttress its claim that front-line physicians support Obama.

Read more: [Link: www.nypost.com...]

re: #18 ludwigvanquixote
They're clearly presented as opinion. Same as Olbermann and Maddow.
They comment on the news, they don't create it... although the nets with ratings far below theirs often try to turn them into the news. Usually, it backfires.

re: #18 ludwigvanquixote

So Hannity, Beck et all are presented as the news. I really don't care for the prevarication that they are not presented as such. The actual Fox News team, which is not on nearly as much as teh pundits, picks up the pundit "stories" and goes with them.

It is actually a cycle of crap. The Pundit says something crazy and their news arm reports on how many people think the crazy thing might be true, reports on the furor over the crazy thing they made up and then as a kicker insinuates it might be true.

To claim that Fox is anything other than a large propaganda tabloid would be foolish. There is about as much actual news in them as there was in Pravda.

That is to say, that even Pravda would report the "news" after a fashion.

I seem to recall hearing quite a bit about many topics unrelated to the overall EVIL of Fox network's manipulation of the poor, weak mind of the American people on that network. Perhaps you've had the occasion to observe that they do, in fact, report on the news, in between bursts of outrage over their general evil and deceptive ways?

re: #23 Guanxi88
Only the other news organizations actually believe that Fox is a news organization.///
And they said so, when they refused to participate in the short-lived and spectacularly unsuccessful boycott attempted by the WH, spearheaded by Anita Dunn.

re: #24 tradewind

Only the other news organizations actually believe that Fox is a news organization.///
And they said so, when they refused to participate in the short-lived and spectacularly unsuccessful boycott attempted by the WH, spearheaded by Anita Dunn.

No doubt, they were fooled by the cunning ways of the Network of Evil.

re: #4 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

In defense of Fox News. Upper left hand corner of the screen?

It says "EARLIER".

/

Usually that just means it is not live, not that it came from a completely different event than the one they are talking about. When we were watching the Bachman party live and talking about it here it looked like maybe 200-300 people at the capitol steps. For them to show that much bigger crowd from months ago is completely unethical and disingenuous.

re: #26 ausador

Usually that just means it is not live, not that it came from a completely different event than the one they are talking about. When we were watching the Bachman party live and talking about it here it looked like maybe 200-300 people at the capitol steps. For them to show that much bigger crowd from months ago is completely unethical and disingenuous.

And, in the context of an opinion program like Hannity's, not surprising at all.

re: #25 Guanxi88
Well, as previously said, Anita's Dunn.
They'll have to regroup before they can make another run at 'em.

re: #20 RogueOne

I had a ticket to see him two days before he died. Was a no show. I forgave him two days later...

re: #26 ausador

Usually that just means it is not live, not that it came from a completely different event than the one they are talking about. When we were watching the Bachman party live and talking about it here it looked like maybe 200-300 people at the capitol steps. For them to show that much bigger crowd from months ago is completely unethical and disingenuous.

Please go back, note my "sarc tag" and come back and apologize.

re: #26 ausador
Oh, you mean the way that during those town hall meetings only the signs that were over-the-top were shown? Or the way they attempted to portray an African American gun-toter as ... invisible (read assumed Caucasian)? Or the way that CNN shows bombing footage that's the same recycled stuff every time there is a renewed assault on an area in the ME? Or the way that only Palestinian teenagers with a few rocks make it into the news coverage of attacks on Israel?
None of them are perfect.

re: #31 tradewind

Oh, you mean the way that during those town hall meetings only the signs that were over-the-top were shown? Or the way they attempted to portray an African American gun-toter as ... invisible (read assumed Caucasian)? Or the way that CNN shows bombing footage that's the same recycled stuff every time there is a renewed assault on an area in the ME? Or the way that only Palestinian teenagers with a few rocks make it into the news coverage of attacks on Israel?
None of them are perfect.

No, but it's clear that Fox is clearly the worst of the lot, a grave threat to the Republic, and almost certainly responsible for all of our current and future troubles.

I listened to Hannity a lot before the 2008 election. I was already going a bit tired of his repetitiveness just before election day and I think the last day I listened to him was the day after the election. When I heard his intro guy say "The radicals have taken over the White House!" was the moment I realized it was all show and no sincerity. That intro was still being played last time I checked, too.

re: #33 bosforus

I am of course referring to his radio show.

re: #33 bosforus

I listened to Hannity a lot before the 2008 election. I was already going a bit tired of his repetitiveness just before election day and I think the last day I listened to him was the day after the election. When I heard his intro guy say "The radicals have taken over the White House!" was the moment I realized it was all show and no sincerity. That intro was still being played last time I checked, too.

re: #34 bosforus

I am of course referring to his radio show.

His radio program bores me to tears, and the idiot calls Pat Buchanan a "great American" everytime he's on the program. "Great American" my ass. Pat would've been called a "good German" from about 1939 to 1945.

re: #35 Guanxi88

I'm not sure how I tolerated it for so long. He seems either unable or unwilling to move past certain subjects. Wonder if he still rants about Jeremiah Wright every ten minutes.

New name for Fox: "Tragicomedy Central"

re: #36 bosforus

I'm not sure how I tolerated it for so long. He seems either unable or unwilling to move past certain subjects. Wonder if he still rants about Jeremiah Wright every ten minutes.

Everytime someone calls who is a liberal, he tries to put them in a box. It is very annoying. And positively uneducating. I cant' listen to him any more.

re: #9 webevintage

HA!
I was just watching that on Media Matters.

20,000 to 40,000 people says crazy Michelle...

Last week I saw some Freeper, without tongue in cheek, claim 300K.

re: #28 tradewind

Well, as previously said, Anita's Dunn.
They'll have to regroup before they can make another run at 'em.

I was wondering if the Anita Dunn story being just an interim appointment was some BS being spun by the WH, but she actually was an interim appointment who was just going to be there for a few months. The stores below are from Aug. of this year.
Aug-Nov...a few months.

[Link: abcnews.go.com...]

"She will start Monday, the White House adviser said, and will probably serve for three months or less. "
[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

re: #24 tradewind

Only the other news organizations actually believe that Fox is a news organization.///
And they said so, when they refused to participate in the short-lived and spectacularly unsuccessful boycott attempted by the WH, spearheaded by Anita Dunn.

Anita Dunn was an interim place holder, she was always going back to her regular job, she is a partner with her name on the door after all. There was no boycott of Fox by the WH, that was another Fox story that turned out to be completely untrue. Still that doesn't stop them from proclaiming victory against the WH, I still can't decide if it is funny or just sad.

They know they can get away with it, so they will. Few of their regular viewers watch "Comedy Central", so it will at best filter back from them from collegues family members.

And by then it will be old news, they will have moved on to the next outrage.

During the "siege" of the house of the relatives who were sheltering Elian Gonzalez from being taken by federal authorities and sent back to Cuba, the various networks showed footage of the house. In each network's footage you could see that there was a Cuban flag flying before the house. The other networks, but not Fox, edited out the American flag that was also flying before the house, by carefully framing the shot so as to not include that flag. Once in a while, on those other networks, you could catch that flag's image, reflected in the window facing the street. The camera angle would be promptly shifted, as if someone had noticed and was embarrassed.

Fox isn't alone in manipulating its coverage to fit its political message.

re: #41 ausador

Anita Dunn was an interim place holder, she was always going back to her regular job, she is a partner with her name on the door after all. There was no boycott of Fox by the WH, that was another Fox story that turned out to be completely untrue. Still that doesn't stop them from proclaiming victory against the WH, I still can't decide if it is funny or just sad.

So, Rahm Emanuel's comment on CNN sunday that Fox News wasn't a real news network, and shouldn't be permitted to lead the other networks around, was made up.

Did that crafty Fox News team hack the CNN blog and post this story:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – A week after White House Communications Director Anita Dunn said Fox News operates like a wing of the Republican Party, President Obama’s Chief of Staff provided another window into the administration’s thinking on the cable news outlet.

“It’s not so much a conflict with Fox News,“ Emanuel said Sunday during CNN’s State of the Union, “I suppose the way to look at it and the way the president looks at it and we look at is: it’s not a news organization so much as it has a perspective. And that’s a different take.”

...
In an interviewed that aired last Sunday on CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” White House Communications Director Anita Dunn slammed the cable news outlet. “The reality of it is that Fox often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party,” Dunn told CNN’s Howard Kurtz.

“They’re widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party – take [the GOP’s] talking points, put ’em on the air, take [the GOP’s] opposition research, put ’em on the air,” Dunn also said.

And Dunn also shed some light on the president’s decision to forego recent opportunities to be interviewed by Fox News and instead sit for interviews with a number of the cable outlet’s competitors including CNN.

“When he goes on Fox, he understands that he’s not really going on it as a news network, at this point. He’s going to debate the opposition. And that’s fine. He never minds doing that,” Dunn said.

Dunn’s remarks last Sunday only provided more fuel for the already tense relationship between the White House and Fox News. Late last week Dunn traded barbs with Fox News anchor Glenn Beck, who moved to that network last year after a stint with CNN sister network Headline News.

Amazing the way Fox could persuade CNN to go along with the patently false "meme"

re: #21 Guanxi88

Fox may have done this thing - and it certainly looks like, in the context of an OPINION and COMMENTARY piece on an OPINION and COMMENTARY program, this is what happened. Good news, though, is it didn't cost me anything, wasn't done with my money, and wasn't intended to create an image that would be used to press for legislation the intent and effect of which will be to nationalize a substantial sector of our economy. Hannity's little stunt cost me exactly $0.00 and did not infringe on any of my freedoms.

Now, I grant you, the source is the NYpost, and so it's probably deemed unreliable, but:
[Link: www.nypost.com...]

WASHINGTON -- President Obama yesterday rolled out the red carpet -- and handed out doctors' white coats as well, just so nobody missed his hard-sell health-care message.

In a heavy-handed attempt at reviving support for health-care reform, the White House orchestrated a massive photo op to buttress its claim that front-line physicians support Obama.

Read more: [Link: www.nypost.com...]

so they handed out white coats to doctors who forgot to bring their own white coats for a photo op?

re: #45 boyo

so they handed out white coats to doctors who forgot to bring their own white coats for a photo op?

Yes, and it's an obvious attempt, using MY MONEY to generate an imag the purpose of which is to creat eht impression that medical professionals in general stand in unified support of BHO et al's desire to take MY MONEY and my insurance choice away. Fox didn't use MY MONEY to pull this stunt.

If you're not wearing a lab coat in your infomercial how will I know if I can trust you?
/

re: #46 Guanxi88

Yes, and it's an obvious attempt, using MY MONEY to generate an imag the purpose of which is to creat eht impression that medical professionals in general stand in unified support of BHO et al's desire to take MY MONEY and my insurance choice away. Fox didn't use MY MONEY to pull this stunt.

understood,the point is that the doctors who forgot to bring their own white coats as they were asked to do where given ones,and these doctors did support the presidents message..

dont all photo ops cost us money?

re: #48 boyo

understood,the point is that the doctors who forgot to bring their own white coats as they were asked to do where given ones,and these doctors did support the presidents message..

dont all photo ops cost us money?

Yes, but this was an obvious and transparent attempt to "make the news" to the liking of the White House, whihc, in this case, extended to the uniforming of the participants. That they had a stock of such things on hand and ready to go shows they were prepared for a level of image manipulation not seen since the Obama campaign itself.

Fox news is a propoganda tool of the conservative right.
They don't even try to hide it anymore.

re: #50 irish rose

Fox news is a propoganda tool of the conservative right.
They don't even try to hide it anymore.

No, but they do a great job of throwing a fit when they get treated as such.

Who cares? When is Hannity going to show the Carrie Prejean sex video?

re: #49 Guanxi88

Yes, but this was an obvious and transparent attempt to "make the news" to the liking of the White House, whihc, in this case, extended to the uniforming of the participants. That they had a stock of such things on hand and ready to go shows they were prepared for a level of image manipulation not seen since the Obama campaign itself.

we can find examples of levels of image manipulation all day,all tax payer funded and it all sucks,Im with you on that.

I love it when Stewart does that!

re: #52 borgcube

Who cares? When is Hannity going to show the Carrie Prejean sex video?

To wuote carrie "That wasn't a 'sex video', there was nobody else with me at the time."

Nowadays it doesn't qualify as a "sex" video without at least three participants and two money shots.

re: #49 Guanxi88

Yes, but this was an obvious and transparent attempt to "make the news" to the liking of the White House, whihc, in this case, extended to the uniforming of the participants. That they had a stock of such things on hand and ready to go shows they were prepared for a level of image manipulation not seen since the Obama campaign itself.

It was a hell of a lot cheaper than the "Mission Accomplished" photo op on the aircraft carrier.

Business as usual.

re: #56 Soundboard Fez

It was a hell of a lot cheaper than the "Mission Accomplished" photo op on the aircraft carrier.

Business as usual.

no Im sure a bunch of white coats is a level of image manipulating not seen since the Obama campaign itself

Hannity, Catholic.

Big lie on TV

*massive, thick lugie*

I am so fucking tired of this shit.

So fucking tired.

Hannity & Fox got caught. Anyone trying to fob this off by pointing to something Obama might have done has already as much admitted it. Pretty lousy & transparent tu quoque.

In one of the clips, there's a guy holding a sign that says 'STOP LYING TO US' - a message to Fox News?

/

Turn off your TV.

It is called the "Jon Stewart" method of news reporting.

Is this really better or worse than claiming at one point in the Iraq war that the Iraqi military was not able to stand on its own feet? He said there was only 1 listed Iraqi unit able to operate without American assistance. Insert puchline and a number of jokes at the U.S. military's expense here. Then a subsequent look at a press release offers up a note that it was American policy to have an advisor with each unit to help establish professionalism among the Iraqi military units, something that was badly needed after the dictatorial Saddam regime to curb abuses.

Happy Veteran's Day Stewart.

He is every bit the slimy, ethically challenged entertainer as Rush Limbaugh or Hannity, just on the other side. For some people that makes it ok.

Rush, opined concerning total indifference at about 1210 CDST...deflation or lack attention can be just as disconcerting as inflation or splicing of bogus videos...

Today on his daily rant to a “supposed 20 million dittoheads” and one progressive, liberal, me; El Rushbo proclaimed total incredulity as to why the “White House” hadn’t taken the time of day, to address his multitude of disparaging comments, during his interview, on FOX News, Sunday last...?

Bein’ a total geezer Rush; the only thing I can say is...

There is nothing more humiliating than an actor, without an audience; or a narcissistic, self serving, gender, political and racist bigot, ignored...!

By the “White House”...
But not me...!

Make that punchline.

re: #63 Cog

It is called the "Jon Stewart" method of news reporting.

Is this really better or worse than claiming at one point in the Iraq war that the Iraqi military was not able to stand on its own feet? He said there was only 1 listed Iraqi unit able to operate without American assistance. Insert puchline and a number of jokes at the U.S. military's expense here. Then a subsequent look at a press release offers up a note that it was American policy to have an advisor with each unit to help establish professionalism among the Iraqi military units, something that was badly needed after the dictatorial Saddam regime to curb abuses.

Happy Veteran's Day Stewart.

He is every bit the slimy, ethically challenged entertainer as Rush Limbaugh or Hannity, just on the other side. For some people that makes it ok.

do you have a link to the episode in which this happens ?

" He said there was only 1 listed Iraqi unit able to operate without American assistance. Insert puchline and a number of jokes at the U.S. military's expense here. Then a subsequent look at a press release offers up a note that it was American policy to have an advisor with each unit to help establish professionalism among the Iraqi military units, something that was badly needed after the dictatorial Saddam regime to curb abuses. "

re: #57 boyo

no Im sure a bunch of white coats is a level of image manipulating not seen since the Obama campaign itself

Are you suggesting the aircraft carrier landing happened after the Obama campaign. See "since" means that the event referenced happened before the event in question.

re: #63 Cog

Cog... “It is called the "Jon Stewart" method of news reporting.”

Lighten’ up, Cog...

Jon is an entertainer, a political commentator and an historical comedian in the same venue as Mark Twain.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin and Beck actually take themselves seriously...They actually think they're right!

Do yeh get my drift...?

re: #67 Guanxi88

Are you suggesting the aircraft carrier landing happened after the Obama campaign. See "since" means that the event referenced happened before the event in question.

sorry Guanxi88 I read what you wrote wrong

"That they had a stock of such things on hand and ready to go shows they were prepared for a level of image manipulation not seen since the Obama campaign itself."

It's hilarious to see people defend an intentional misrepresentation by Fox News. It's called a lie. Excusing it by calling it an opinion is dishonest at best.

No, I would not expect a headline show on a news channel to pass off pictures from a much larger event as coverage of a different event.

Busted. It's kinda unfortunate the lengths one has to go to find out about a story these days. Even then you have to make judgement calls about every sentence anyone says. Does anyone actually wonder why people don't keep up on the news?

re: #21 Guanxi88

Fox may have done this thing - and it certainly looks like, in the context of an OPINION and COMMENTARY piece on an OPINION and COMMENTARY program, this is what happened.

But when you are supporting your opinions and commentary with lies and deception it shouldn't be on a "news" channel. When they run their 30-second spots promoting FOX NEWS: WE REPORT, YOU DECIDE they don't use images of Bret Baier or Chris Wallace - they use the fool's brigade of the evening hours.

re: #63 Cog

In his defense, Jon Stewart is a comedian first, doing a comedy show, on a channel called Comedy Central. If the truth gets in the way of a good punchline, ehhh, he'll go for the punchline. That's what comedians are known to do.

The "rage" against Stewart may be because he was declared the "Most Trusted Name in News". It's an outrageous claim, but wasn't done by him or his staff; it came from an online Times Magazine poll (which, goes without saying, is at best unreliable). Even Stewart, during one interview, said he felt like the "None of the above" selection in the poll.

re: #72 Cineaste

But when you are supporting your opinions and commentary with lies and deception it shouldn't be on a "news" channel. When they run their 30-second spots promoting FOX NEWS: WE REPORT, YOU DECIDE they don't use images of Bret Baier or Chris Wallace - they use the fool's brigade of the evening hours.

Which Jon Stewart even took aim at recently. =P

Heh good catch by The Daily Show there. I find it funny that the same kind of Hannity-Bachmann right wingers are the same types who say liberals are lazy and never work yet they want to pump up the size of protests for causes they agree with.

Hannity did the same thing when Michael Moore was on the show a few weeks back. They went to some abandoned hospital in Cuba and attempted to pass it off as a hospital that was currently in use by splicing in a few shots that were (I thought) pretty clearly NOT from the same hospital.

FOX News is horrible.

Fox News? People still watch that? Why not just drink large amounts of cough syrup and read some tea leaves?

But don't you all see? Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh et al are all COMEDIANS! You think they want you to take them seriously, but that isn't the case at all - why, they're just fond of telling jokes!

I know that I find myself laughing with unbridled enthusiasm when I watch Hannity. I'm sure that must be the intention.

re: #73 andres

Exactly...!
That really pisses the "winger yakkers" off...!

73 andres Wed, Nov 11, 2009
The "rage" against Stewart may be because he was declared the "Most Trusted Name in News". It's an outrageous claim, but wasn't done by him or his staff; it came from an online Times Magazine poll (which, goes without saying, is at best unreliable). Even Stewart, during one interview, said he felt like the "None of the above" selection in the poll.

That’s the total beauty of Stewart's response...the declaration...”MTNiN” outrageous perhaps...but it cuts realists, wingers and daily yakkers to the quick...!

Personally I much prefer thirty minutes of Stewart to three hours...and hours...and hours of Limbaugh,Hannity, Levin anytime, anywhere, any day...but, nevertheless “that’s just me”...!

Really, really, olde geezer sends...!

re: #3 Guanxi88

Hannity - who's surprised? Now, if they pulled this crap in their newscasts, that would be shocking.

You forgot the /sarc tag on that one.

re: #7 Guanxi88

Don't let that get in the way of a good story. Killgore will not be happy.

Are you really defending that as a legitimate excuse for cutting the two rallies together?
Earlier? Two months earlier!
Come on, it is video plagiarism, plain and simple.

re: #41 ausador

Anita Dunn was an interim place holder, she was always going back to her regular job, she is a partner with her name on the door after all. There was no boycott of Fox by the WH, that was another Fox story that turned out to be completely untrue. Still that doesn't stop them from proclaiming victory against the WH, I still can't decide if it is funny or just sad.

Don't let that get in the way of a good story. KillgoreGuanx88 will not be happy.

Don't let that get in the way of a good story. KillgoreTradewind will not be happy.
Fixed it for you guys.

re: #15 tradewind

Anita Dunn was never in as a long termer.