Somehow, this makes Jessica Alba even sexier.
After Alba told a Fox reporter that O’Reilly was ‘kind of an a-hole;’ he retaliated by calling her a ‘pinhead’ for telling a reporter to ‘be Sweden about it,’ assuming she meant Switzerland.
‘I want to clear some things up that have been bothering me lately,’ Alba blogged on MySpace Celebrity. ‘Last week, Mr. Bill O’Reilly and some really classy sites (i.e.TMZ) insinuated I was dumb by claiming Sweden was a neutral country. I appreciate the fact that he is a news anchor and that gossip sites are inundated with intelligent reporting, but seriously people… it’s so sad to me that you think the only neutral country during WWII was Switzerland.’
Although Switzerland is more frequently cited as an example of neutrality, Sweden did indeed follow a policy of neutrality during World War II. History point to Alba.
I wonder how long it took Alba (or more likely, an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia, then breathe a sigh of relief that Sweden turns out to have been neutral too?
And Oliver, no matter how fervently you and Jessica both love, worship and adore Obama, she will never, EVER let you touch her or see her naked (other than in a movie).
Get a girlfriend.
@Dave in SoCal: Only the same amount of time it would have taken O’Reilly (or an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia.
Golly, how did Jessica know what Bill O’Reilly said on his show when she NEVER watches his show?
Good picture, though.
It also turns out that Bill O’Reilly, like all right wing blowhards, is still an asshole. Huh.
Her? She’s ugly!
Dennis:
TMZ, like she said.
Fox News sucked up to Gary Sinese for an hour “documentary” but attacks any progressive celebrity
I saw your initial coverage when she described OReilly so accurately. I was just shocked at the delay in covering Alba’s response to sad and loser big media ignorance, demonstrating her superior mastery of reality.
But… very nice coverage of her geopolitical chops today. Very informative pic. Thanks.
@Dave in SoCal: Only the same amount of time it would have taken O’Reilly (or an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia.
Game. Set. Match.
Her? She’s ugly!
Hey! Clark! You wanna get banned?
Exit question #1: When Bill O’Reilly mentions Ms. Alba’s response on his show and asks if she’d care to appear on The Factor to discuss WWII neutral countries with him, will she accept or decline?
Exit question #2: Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?
“Her? She’s ugly!”
Blasphemer! Her intelligent response to the Big Head only makes her hotter and I didn’t think that was possible.
Exit question #1: When Bill O’Reilly mentions Ms. Alba’s response on his show and asks if she’d care to appear on The Factor to discuss WWII neutral countries with him, will she accept or decline?
Why would she accept? So he can cut her mic and scream at her about how gosh durn smart he is?
Exit question #2: Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?
Why are you so sure she didn’t know it? I can think of a few answers, and none of them speak terribly well of you.
Dave in SoCal says: “I wonder how long it took Alba (or more likely, an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia, then breathe a sigh of relief that Sweden turns out to have been neutral too?”
So you making fun of her for being right. What does that make Billy?
Dennis says: “Exit question #1: When Bill O’Reilly mentions Ms. Alba’s response on his show and asks if she’d care to appear on The Factor to discuss WWII neutral countries with him, will she accept or decline?”
Bill O’Reilly invited Jessica Alba on for a real debate is about as likely as Jessica Alba showing Oliver her naked body. (Sorry, O-Dub.)
“Exit question #2: Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?”
I knew Sweden was neutral. Sweden is more neutral than Switzerland. Switzerland did business with the Nazis taken stolen Jewish gold.
Fuck the Swiss.
Exit question #1: When Bill O’Reilly mentions Ms. Alba’s response on his show and asks if she’d care to appear on The Factor to discuss WWII neutral countries with him, will she accept or decline?
Who gives a fuck?
Exit question #2: Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?
Who gives a fuck?
Here’s a better question:
Who can name all of the “tenets of the Laffer Curve” and not sound Sarah Palin stupid in the process?
Dave in SoCal: I wonder how long it took Alba (or more likely, an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia
limulus: Only the same amount of time it would have taken O’Reilly (or an assistant) to go and check Wikipedia.
The point being, Alba is the one that actuallychecked.
Dennis says: Exit question #1: When Bill O’Reilly mentions Ms. Alba’s response on his show and asks if she’d care to appear on The Factor to discuss WWII neutral countries with him, will she accept or decline?
Alternate question #1: If Ms. Alba’s response is to asks if he’d care to appear in a forum where he can’t cut her mike and scream at her, will he accept or decline?
Here’s the thing, she said Sweden because, wow, she already knew it. She could of course also said Ireland or Spain, but Swedish neutrality is as well known about as Swiss neutrality. Even Catch 22 mentions it.
Exit question #2: Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?
Whatever Alba knew or didn’t know, Bill O’Reilly didn’t know it, didn’t check it and went on air with it.
Classic conservative “reporting”.
Yes, a citizen asking a journalist to be objective like Sweden is damn sexy!
Gee, once again O’Reilly boosts the career of someone he hates by providing lots of publicity and being such a jerk that everyone will automatically like his opponent.
If Ms. Alba is as smart as she has shown herself to be so far
she will continue to insult Mr. O’Reilly in public.
See: Franken, Al, and the millions of dollars in book sales that resulted from his calling O’Reilly a liar to his face. You can’t lose money by calling O’Reilly an asshole. It’s physically impossible.
You can’t lose money by calling O’Reilly an asshole.
Nor can you be wrong. It’s a two-fer.
She was wrong.
Even though she lucked out and Sweden is neutral, the expression is still “be Switzerland.”
That’s what she meant to say, but she accidentally lucked out and said the name of a country who is also neutral.
And by the way, that reporter was trying to remain impartial and she was trying to get him to reveal an opinion. Telling him to “be Sweden” when that’s what he was doing in the first place just proves you don’t know what you’re talking about in the first place.
C.S.Strowbridge, ummm Sweden did business with Germany during WWII too. They sold Germany metal for their panzers.
But nice try.
Switzerland is synonymous with neutrality, and the expression is “be Switzerland.”
Honestly, who here thinks she really meant Sweden? I know you hate o’Reilly, but come on! And why are the lefties trying to contextualize this dispute around WWII? Oh, I know…that’s the only way you can make this bullshit work.
Well played Ms. Alba. Now, please allow me to teach you more history in the comfort of a cheap motel room for a wekend while your baby daddy takes care of your child.
It’s only a matter of time before calling O’Reilly an asshole loses its market value.
Supply and demand.
Court says: “C.S.Strowbridge, ummm Sweden did business with Germany during WWII too. They sold Germany metal for their panzers.
But nice try.
Switzerland is synonymous with neutrality, and the expression is ‘be Switzerland.’”
Switzerland took stolen Jewish gold.
That’s a huge difference than maintaining a trading relationship with a country at war.
By the way, Sweden also traded with Britain during WWII, but nice try.
As been pointed out, it’s immaterial whether Alba knew Sweden was neutral. The sad fact is that before makin fun of Alba, one intern or something could’ve checked Wikipedia before making fun of her so they didn’t look like idiots but ya’ know, that would’ve put some cold water on O’Reilly’s boner.
Jesse Ewiak: “As been pointed out, it’s immaterial whether Alba knew Sweden was neutral. The sad fact is that before makin fun of Alba, one intern or something could’ve checked Wikipedia before making fun of her so they didn’t look like idiots but ya’ know, that would’ve put some cold water on O’Reilly’s boner.”
It’s the “Make sure you are correct before you call someone a fucking ‘tard.” principle.
It’s the “Make sure you are correct before you call someone a fucking ‘tard.” principle.
That’s a very good principle, C.S. Unfortunately it’s one that’s rarely adhered to or enforced here.
I argued that in a similar vein if you are going to call someone an A-hole you should be at least willing or brave enough to declare why you’re saying that. People here think otherwise. IOKOIYAD, apparently.
That’s what she meant to say, but she accidentally lucked out and said the name of a country who is also neutral.
And how does CatB know this? She just does! That’s how!
Honestly, who here thinks she really meant Sweden?
How many really give a fuck one way or the other?
“I argued that in a similar vein if you are going to call someone an A-hole you should be at least willing or brave enough to declare why you’re saying that.”
I’m very careful with The A Word. I reserve it, almost exclusively, for people who mention “several of the tenets of the Laffer Curve,” then refuse to name them. Those dudes are assholes of the highest order.
I’m very careful with The A Word. I reserve it, almost exclusively, for people who mention “several of the tenets of the Laffer Curve,” then refuse to name them.
-The Inimitable and Strangely Deluded Mr. Ed
Dude, you need a 12 Step Program to quit me. Seriously.
I have worked in finance my whole career, longer than many posters here have been alive; majored in it under- and post-graduate. I talk and read about economics every day. I work with people that have grossed over a million bucks in commission in a single day, and the point I was making was that it is rare to hear anyone talk about the Laffer curve. If I ever brought it up in the course of a day they would look at me like, ‘Hey, I don’t give a shit about the f’ing Laffer curve, WTF are you asking me about that for?’ Many of them couldn’t even spell it correctly. My point to OW’s rejoinder, was that people don’t go into my business because of anything to do with the Laffer curve. Those same guys did very well in the Clinton years before Bush’s tax cuts, but what they will discuss freely is the demotivating effects then of having a very good year and knowing a big chunk of their marginal income was going to the government.
I don’t answer your bizarre request for anything to do with the Laffer curve because it is completely off topic and well in the past, but mainly because you and I aren’t paying for bandwidth here and it’s rude to consume it on the stupid shit you love wallowing in on someone else’s dime.
Grow up, Mister ed. Just because you’re losing doesn’t mean you’ve lost.
“but what they will discuss freely is the demotivating effects then of having a very good year and knowing a big chunk of their marginal income was going to the government.”
Yea because that 4.6% totally stopped growth in this country.
Not Quite Enlightened Liberal-
Didn’t say that. Just said they would openly discuss be demotivated at a certain point. We’d still do our jobs, just not with the same enthusiasm, or in our parlance, not put up with the same amount of bullshit from customers if we didn’t want to. If you’ve ever been in that situation, trust me, the feeling is that you’re being punished for a job well done. It makes it difficult to listen to blowhards like our Vice President who say it’s patriotic to bend over like that when, until the year he decided to run for President, was giving less than $400 a year average in charitable donations on $300K a year in income.
The picture helps out a lot, too.
I don’t answer your bizarre request for anything to do with the Laffer curve because it is completely off topic and well in the past
Nice try, Sparky, but I think the reason you won’t address the “several of the tenets of the Laffer Curve” (or which ones a fellow should agree with) is because we both know they don’t exist. Or rather, you suspect they don’t; by the context of what you wrote, it’s obvious you don’t really know. You’re the one who brought “them” up not so long ago, and I’ve been asking you about them ever since because I think you’re a right wing boob and would like to read some more Sarah Palin-esque nonsense. You want me to stop asking? Then answer the simple question. You’re the one who brought it up, not me.
Here are some suggested answers:
1. “I admit I made a mistake. It was a lousy blog comment ferfuck’s sake. Sue me.”
2. ” . . . where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the Laffer Curve tenets do is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh — it’s got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing, but 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation. The Laffer Curve tenets are a part of that. Also.”
3. Continue to ignore the question and pretend you know about the subject.
I suggest #1.
Anyone else think that Ms. Alba’s left eye looks weird in this shot? Just me?
You’re a psycho, ed. My sentence stands as to what I meant. If I made any ‘mistake’, it was to use the word ‘tenet’ to mean any part of, any aspect of, or principle of, the Laffer curve. The actual ‘tenets’ of the Laffer curve had next to nothing to do with my comment, so I am baffled as to why you persist in discussing it since it was off-topic and impertinent four days ago when first made, and much more so with each subsequent day. Your need to talk about it is borderline psychotic, especially as you feel it serves a purpose. It doesn’t.
Seek help, my friend. If I can do anything, let me know. I know people who can help you.
Thanks to the miracle of The Google, it’s possible to quickly identify what Dennis originally wrote:
So what are the “several tenets of the Laffer Curve”? Which of them do agree with?
Based on what you wrote, these are simple and obvious questions. Edify us, please. I have already suggested some answers for you, but you’re the expert.
If Ms. Alba is as smart as she has shown herself to be so far she will continue to insult Mr. O’Reilly in public.
Because there’s nothing that garners support than picking on a 90 pound girl.
Dennis: “I argued that in a similar vein if you are going to call someone an A-hole you should be at least willing or brave enough to declare why you’re saying that. People here think otherwise. IOKOIYAD, apparently.”
It’s different, actually. She likely choose not to be specific because it was the wrong time and place. She was on the red carpet, if I recall correctly, not a political forum.
Dennis says: “You’re a psycho, ed. … Seek help, my friend. If I can do anything, let me know. I know people who can help you.”
Shorter Dennis: “How dare you ask me to back up a claim! Anyone expecting me to do so must be mentally deranged!”
Shorter Dennis: “How dare you ask me to back up a claim! Anyone expecting me to do so must be mentally deranged!”
-C.S. Strowbridge
No, anyone bizarrely stalking me for six days now on something I’ve already clarified but who would never be satisfied no matter what I say must be mentally deranged. And Mister ed unfortunately is.
Feel free to imitate him, though.
something I’ve already clarified
Where? When?
Nice try, Sparky, but you’re sounding like a George Bush Junior and/or Sarah Palin what with coughing up pseudo-technical phrases (e.g., “several of the tenets of the Laffer Curve”) and your insistence that you got it right or clarified it when you hadn’t (e.g., “we found the weapons of mass destruction”). As with Rush Limbaugh, you are an ideal representative of the modern Republican party. Kudos to you.
Here’s what it’s sounding like:
Who really believes Ms. Alba knew that or even got her information from Wikipedia and not from someone who emailed her that about Sweden?
I do, but unlike you, I don’t believe women are mindless drones unable of intelligent thought.
“No, anyone bizarrely stalking me for six days now on something I’ve already clarified but who would never be satisfied no matter what I say must be mentally deranged. And Mister ed unfortunately is.”
Dennis, you haven’t said anything satisfying, which is why he is not satisfied.
This feels like the Jay Caruso “Per 100,000″ debate. He admitted an error, but he refused to say what that error was, or what the correct response was.
Dennis, you haven’t said anything satisfying, which is why he is not satisfied.
C.S. Lewis
He’s not looking for satisfaction. Not even an endless flame war satisfies him; it only feeds him. My only mistake was to respond to him the first time. Please ask yourself, what makes him crave satisfaction for an answer from me that even if I didn’t know what he was asking that I could easily Google. No matter what I say, it would not satisfy him. He’s only looking for continuation of an argument because he hasn’t made a very good one to this point. I’ve admitted being amused at his flailing, but I think one week now is well past the expiration date.
———————-
I do, but unlike you, I don’t believe women are mindless drones unable of intelligent thought. -Zython
Now 3 stalkers. Sheesh, Zyla, because I think one woman is a mindless drone unable of intelligent thought (now two), it doesn’t mean I think all women are that way.
“He’s not looking for satisfaction.”
How the hell would you know? You haven’t even tried.
“No matter what I say, it would not satisfy him.”
Explain the Laffer Curve in your own words. Use a real world example
Saying nothing and then claiming nothing you say will satisfy him is not exactly intellectually honest.
I am intellectually honest, CS. I’m being honest with you when I tell you (and ed) that my knowledge and interpretation of Laffer curve economic theory had exactly 0% to do with the argument I was making to OW one week ago about what kids think about it when making a decision to go in to business. Mister ed’s, and I assume yours too, intention is to quiz me on the Laffer curve in an obvious attempt to draw me in so that you can pick at me, and I refuse to play that game. Not out of fear, but because it is a waste of time, and I don’t like playing games, especially when being drawn in to other people’s games. Other people who are not intellectually honest in their intentions. Your post above in another thread at 7:54 in the ‘Another Thing’ thread displays and proves your intellectual dishonesty:
“This is why I insult them. It’s as productive as using logical against them, and it’s more fun”.
You’re trying to toy with me because you derive pleasure from it. So is Mister ed. That’s sad, and it’s more than a bit psychotic. Life is too short, C.S. The short-term pleasurable rush it gives you is not worth the long-term damage it does to your soul.
History repeats itself:
“Can you name the general who is in charge of Pakistan?”
“What newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?”
“Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?”
“You mentioned ’several tenets of the Laffer Curve.’ What are they?”
There’s little doubt what else you’re doing to amuse yourself, Mister ed.
Little doubt as to what else you’re doing to amuse yourself, Mister ed.
Tell you what, you donate $25 to Oliver for the bandwidth you’ve sucked off him on this useless banter and I’ll give him permission to release my email address to you and I’ll tell you everything you want to know about the fucking Laffer curve.
Dennis: “I am intellectually honest, CS. I’m being honest with you when I tell you (and ed) that my knowledge and interpretation of Laffer curve economic theory had exactly 0% to do with the argument I was making to OW one week ago about what kids think about it when making a decision to go in to business.”
Not true, for two points.
1.) In your argument with OW, you defended the use of the Laffer Curve. However, if you don’t know what it is, that defense is rather weak.
2.) It goes to credibility, which is about 90% of every debate here.
“Mister ed’s, and I assume yours too, intention is to quiz me on the Laffer curve in an obvious attempt to draw me in so that you can pick at me, and I refuse to play that game.”
We can’t pick on you if you can answer the question. I’ve already given you a way to answer the question that will be satisfying to me. And if you can satisfy me, then you can tell Ed to go fuck himself, because I clearly have the reputation for being the least reasonable Left-Wing debater here.
Me: “This is why I insult them. It’s as productive as using logical against them, and it’s more fun.”
Dennis: “You’re trying to toy with me because you derive pleasure from it. So is Mister ed. That’s sad, and it’s more than a bit psychotic. Life is too short, C.S. The short-term pleasurable rush it gives you is not worth the long-term damage it does to your soul.”
Two points…
1.) Since you are unwilling to answer a simple question, why should I do more that insult you? If you showed you were willing to debate honestly, I would be as well.
2.) I don’t have to worry about long-term damage to my soul, because I don’t have one. Neither do you, by the way. The only damage I’m doing to myself is trying to meet work-related deadlines.
Tell you what, you donate $25 to Oliver for the bandwidth you’ve sucked off him on this useless banter and I’ll give him permission to release my email address to you and I’ll tell you everything you want to know about the fucking Laffer curve.
I’m not fallin for that one! How ’bout I donate half ($12.50) now and you tell me how many tenets of the Laffer Curve there are. Then I’ll give the other half and you can tell me what they are and which ones you agree with.
Or you could just point me to where you already answered these questions, as you wrote that you had, because me and C.S. and Google can’t seem to find that anywhere on the Internets. Thanks in advance.
1.) In your argument with OW, you defended the use of the Laffer Curve. However, if you don’t know what it is, that defense is rather weak.
That’s where you are wrong, C.S. I defended anyone deciding to enter the business force who agreed with any parts (tenets, I said, probably not the best word) of the Laffer curve, that that was no less noble than someone who had instead gone to work with a left-wing attack site like Think Progress. And furher that what they agreed with or didn’t agree with, had no bearing on that decision. That’s why I saw no need then, or now, or at any point along the way to appease ed by going in to the details of the Laffer curve. I see no need, and it has nothing to do with credibility. You two both called me all sorts of names on that and subsequent threads which I can handle, but believe me, whether I credibility with you or him is not a priority with me right now. Especially when it comes to irrelevant minutae that ed bizarrely keeps begging for as if it gives him some sort of upper hand.
We can’t pick on you if you can answer the question. I’ve already given you a way to answer the question that will be satisfying to me.
See, again you are wrong. I wasted a lot of time, seriously fucked up way the fuck too much time, because you and ed egged me on to post links pointing to Think Progress fuck-ups. I relcutantly gathered 15 or so links, put them in html and provided commentary. OW’s system didn’t take it…gone. Did it again. Gone. Told Mister ed I had sent it, he called me a liar, then OW came saying he’d post it. Ed’s response? “Oh goody, more Sarah Palin-like nonsense to mock”.
So, C.S., once-bitten twice shy. That is an honest answer. I can forgive you as to your honesty if you didn’t recall him saying that but it’s unlikely you didn’t read that response when he wrote it.
The only damage I’m doing to myself is trying to meet work-related deadlines.
Me too. Time is money to me. This ends. And I don’t need to satisfy you or ed for the privilege of telling him to fuck off.
Dennis: “Tell you what, you donate $25 to Oliver for the bandwidth you’ve sucked off him…”
$25! Good lord, if you think that’s how much we’ve cost him, you need to renegotiate whatever deal you have for internet hosting.
“So, C.S., once-bitten twice shy. That is an honest answer.”
Fair enough.
Although as a warning, the Laffer Curve is so often abused by people that it is a pet peeve of mine. Likely due to the fact that the Laffer Curve is something that I was taught in University, and anyone can learn what it means in literally 60 seconds.
It’s like reading the word, ‘alot.’ It drives me nuts.