On Jon Stewart's Ongoing Vendetta Against CNN

Tyler Durden's picture




 

That CNN's news coverage has been nothing but comedy-(and cringe-)worthy for the past several years, should not be news to anyone by now: perhaps there is no better testament to a society in which a network that breaks news based on fake twitter rumors is still held in high regard. However, in the spirit of reverse psychology memes, does the fact that Jon Stewart is now constantly poking fun at CNN's "news-slaughter", mean that it may be, paradoxically, time to start taking CNN - "the most busted name in news" seriously again? (... that's obviously rhetorical).

When CNN reports via satellite uplink from the same parking lot, funny things happen:

0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:01 | 3553593 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

Good 'ol politically correct CNN... A place, [by outstanding virtue of it's efforts in practicing political correctness & decorum], you know you can always count on to find the TRUTH...

~~~

It's getting better all the time folks!

[Now excuse me ~ I'm going to go check out those neato Ford, Maytag, & Finish Diswashing detergent ads]...

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:15 | 3553601 knukles
knukles's picture

And don't forget at the outset of Gulf War 1, Charles Jacko, "Reporting live from whatever" which it turns out was a blue screen (as shown on YouTube) in a NYC studio where they were all stoned and giggling about awaiting the pizza delivery.
Or Geraldo Rivera with a pistol on his hip "reporting live from" when later it turns out he was half way across the country....

Fucking grade school incompetence level propaganda

 

Edit:  CNN is to News as CNBS is to Fiancial Reporting.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:37 | 3553669 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Anybody who hasn't disconnected their cable tv or satellite tv service by now is part of the problem. STOP SUPPORTING THIS WORTHLESS SHIT.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:41 | 3553679 Rustysilver
Rustysilver's picture

Buckaroo B,

Four years and counting.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:20 | 3553756 Midas
Midas's picture

I can't top you years-wise, but to get my internet connection working the cable guy had to pipe in some free cable TV with it.  He thought I would be happy, but when I told him I didn't have a TV and wasn't getting one, he seemed depressed.  He probably doesn't encounter disdain for the TV much in his line of work.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:59 | 3553818 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Nothing inherently wrong with having a cable TV, lots of things I enjoy watching.

The Official Government Propaganda Network AKK CNN is interesting to watch from time to time, it's basically an alternate reality 24 hr 'news' service with plenty of lurid nonesense and superficial garbage thrown in for good measure.

The fact that it is apparenlty considered legitimate mainstream news is very revealing about how people think & what the latest / greatest .gov propaganda is from both sides of the aisle.  

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:36 | 3553887 Spider
Spider's picture

FOX, CNN, CNBC, all of them are corporate controlled government microphones.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 16:16 | 3553930 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

Actually, there's plenty of good, quality info to be had there (not in CNN, etc., obviously), as long as you can find it... obviously, you can look it up online instead, too.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:26 | 3554319 knukles
knukles's picture

Tune in from time to time to find out exactly what the vague fear based "program" du jour that they want you to hear so when you go elsewhere, it gains some additional perspective...

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:17 | 3554325 akak
akak's picture

 

Nothing inherently wrong with having a cable TV, lots of things I enjoy watching.

Why does this statement, coming from you, utterly not surprise me?

Mon, 05/13/2013 - 01:01 | 3555281 Freddie
Freddie's picture

You have no clue.  Yoru cable and satellite TV bill is divided up among ALL the channels.  Even if you do not watch CNN or MSNBC - you are still financially supporting them.  F Tv and F Hollywood.

Tue, 05/14/2013 - 06:15 | 3559532 thisandthat
thisandthat's picture

You don't need to pay anyone to have satellite tv - get a receiver and you'll have hundreds, if not thousands of free channels to choose from: http://www.lyngsat.com/freetv/

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 21:17 | 3554762 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Similar situation happened to me a long time ago. Hooking up cable for the modem and basic was required. He told the other guy "we need to get this guy some sports channels" I said "please don't." Then then proceeded to ask if I was going to make improvements to the house and what I would need. Woe is me in that CNBC was part of basic, but looking back the brightside was after they left, one of the first things I was able to download was WB7's masterpeice "Zerohedgeville" christmas edition.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:56 | 3553807 PacOps
PacOps's picture

I left the states in '66 for SEAsia (job related - IBM). 12 years later came back but had weened myself off of all TV by then and have never owned a TV set or had a TV cable hookup since '66.

Plugged into CIS/CompuServe when I returned and never looked back.

I have no commercials or advertising jingles spontaneously running in my head. 

Once in Irian Jaya a base camp manager was wearing an "Archie Bunker for president" tee shirt. I seriously asked him who Archie Bunker was. He said "You've been over here too long". Never did find out who he was till years later .. and I did not care.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:44 | 3553898 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

1984 was it for me. ('66, though, is a looong time, I gotta say. Hey, did you know the Beatles broke up? And the Rolling Stones are old?)

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 19:57 | 3554545 PacOps
PacOps's picture

Eventually - non-essential trivia that had no impact on my life, work or any of my decision making processes.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 16:28 | 3554112 Wjunk
Wjunk's picture

Good on you. Same thing for us - 3 years to Germany in '88. Came back, had cable for the olympics and shut it off. Been gone ever since. TV isn't even digital converted. Watching TV takes too long to figure out what's going on these days anyways.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 22:23 | 3554947 palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

Two going on three years for me.

Watching the Daily Show, of which, together with Colbert, I was a regular viewer years ago now, the thing that really, creepily stands out is the laugh track.

You could be making a tasteless joke about the most recent carnage in a derivative fashion but with sly hipster delivery and a laugh track...well that's comedy gold that washes away the personal responsibility of accountability because, well that reality has been dealt with...next order of business...wait I gotta take a crap.

I would love to win the lottery some day because I swear, in the last two weeks on the job, (yes I would provide formal legal notice to minimize recourse on a new potentially well funded respondent) I would nevertheless indulge in equipping myself with some small speakers and a laugh track to embellish those awkward moments on the elevator when talking about the weather isn't enough and global political issues require a full dissection.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:09 | 3553838 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Six here.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:42 | 3553682 economics9698
economics9698's picture

Zionist picking on a Zionist network, amusing. 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 12:55 | 3553711 fourchan
fourchan's picture

stewart and maher fulfill their life's dreams and both suck off obama in three way.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:03 | 3553721 freewolf7
freewolf7's picture

"Jon, we like you. You bring in some good numbers. Look, you can have your little show, but here's what you can do. And here's what you can't do. You have a good life. Enjoy it. Think of your kid. You okay? No, we're fine. We would never do anything to hurt you or your family, but just ease up a bit. How's the new house working out? Nice neighborhood, right? Okay, thanks for coming in. You're a funny guy."

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:09 | 3553737 Canaduh
Canaduh's picture

ZH is a shell of what it was 2 or 3 years ago. Instead of a contrarian economic blog, it is now a conspiracy theory circle jerk. Rational discussion left here long ago.

Shouldn't ZH be worried about more pressing matters, like whether Bigfoot helped Lee Harvey Oswald bury the Rothschilds gold under Stonehenge??

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 13:51 | 3553804 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

That doesn't change the fact that those two stupid bitches were being paid to pretend they were "remote reporting" when they were within a weak infielder's throw of each other.

Stupid made-up bullshit is stupid made-up bullshit no matter how many ad hominems you choose to sling. If you think rational discussion has left the room you can look in a mirror to determine why.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:01 | 3553816 Canaduh
Canaduh's picture

They didn't even try to hide the fact they were close to each other, that you think it is some conspiracy speaks to your delusional mindset. Nancy Grace has her own crew, she has her own show on HLN, setting up 2 remotes from seperate, yet affiliated networks close to each other is not nefarious in any way.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:07 | 3553832 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Canaduh - you're right about zh and conspiracy theories generally. But CNN is garbage and a conduit for .gov propaganda. If you pay attention to the 'coverage' on CNN you'll quickly discover that their go to 'experts' 90% of the time are either government spokespeople or partisan think-tanks. 

Debate consists of short bursts of left-right talking points with very rare fealty paid to facts. But even then, it's more revealing what they don't cover than what they do - most interestingly surrounding foreign & domestic military policy. 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 16:02 | 3554059 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Conspiracy theory you say? Should we just continue to listen to clueless dumbfucks spewing MSM propaganda?

I've given you plenty of facts, figures and credible sources on the gold and silver story and you reject them all. Why is that?

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 16:34 | 3554127 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

I've given you plenty of facts, figures and credible sources on the gold and silver story and you reject them all. Why is that?

I don't know if I've 'rejected them all.' 

Looking ahead, gold has decent chance of taking a slide today, what will the phys shortage explanation have to say about this? 

Even if your thesis were correct, there's no tangible benefit vs. what I've been saying over the same time period, in fact not only no benefit but there's been substantial loss. Since I've been arguing with people on here about it gold has moved from ~1800 to ~1350. During that time period none of the gold 'pundits' have advocated selling, opposite is true - they've stepped up their calls to buy on every dip. 

So who's clueless?

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:22 | 3554207 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

LOL. Are you watching what is going in the physical gold market James? It has gone into a crisis sitiuation reeking of desperation holding the COMEX and GLD paper ponzi in place. The fraud and disconnect is taking place all around you, yet you refuse to acknowledge it.

Are you actually going to sit there and tell me differently when ZH and others have covered this to topic to death?

 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:46 | 3554239 akak
akak's picture

Since JamesCole cannot even bring himself to deny the WGC propaganda that half of the world's demand for gold consists of nothing but a shallow and transient desire for shiny baubles, rather than consisting of the actual investment demand that the majority of worldwide gold jewelry truly represents, don't expect any honesty from him on any other aspect of the gold market either.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:53 | 3554250 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Since JamesCole cannot even bring himself to deny the WGC propaganda that half of the world's demand for gold consists of nothing but a shallow and transient desire for shiny baubles

It's funny you have such a continuing obsession with a moot point that you simply misinterpret. 

LOL. Are you watching what is going in the physical gold market James? It has gone into a crisis sitiuation reeking of desperation holding the COMEX and GLD paper ponzi in place. The fraud and disconnect is taking place all around you, yet you refuse to acknowledge it.

I've never denied the fraud. My interest is in price not in what might happen under a succession of unlikely scenarios. The gold market is very much misunderstood by most people on here. 

I've also never complained about people holding gold as a multi-generational investment or an investment at all. Again, I'm interested in the price movements and in particular in my comments try to throw some facts to contrast the hyperbolic rants about buying gold at any time at any price.

Right now we've been in a highly predictable bear market for a while so paying high premiums to get in doesn't / hasn't made any sense. 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:00 | 3554261 akak
akak's picture

 

Since JamesCole cannot even bring himself to deny the WGC propaganda that half of the world's demand for gold consists of nothing but a shallow and transient desire for shiny baubles


It's funny you have such a continuing obsession with a moot point that you simply misinterpret.

James, you only continue to prove your dishonest and disingenuous anti-gold biases by refusing to ever directly address this point.  It is simply impossible for you to admit that you were and are wrong and/or openly lying on this matter.

As for any supposed '"misinterpretation" on my part regarding world gold investment demand, which includes most gold jewelry demand, I eagerly await your attempts to teach me in just exactly what way I am in error.

Face it, James: you've been outed as an anti-gold troll.  That is your problem, not mine.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:10 | 3554301 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

James, you only continue to prove your dishonest and disingenuous anti-gold biases by refusing to ever directly address this point.  It is simply impossible for you to admit that you were and are wrong and/or openly lying on this matter.

 

We went over this ad nauseam and you never understood it. Jewellery demand can be considered an investment, but it's a very specific type of investment. 

http://www.247bull.com/wp-content/uploads/Gold-demand-by-category-tonnes...

This chart pretty obviously demonstrates the difference between the investment category fluctuations vs. spot price and why it's important to look at them differently. 

 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:22 | 3554334 akak
akak's picture

No, James, you lying son of a bitch, I DID understand the issue, it is YOU who refused, and continues to refuse, to acknowledge the truth and the facts of the matter. 

That graph is pure bullshit, because one can NOT separate out "investment demand" from "jewelry demand" in such a shallow and facile manner --- the two have very significant overlap, with the large majority of what is shown as "jewelry demand" properly belonging in the "investment demand" category.

You keep trying to feed us shit, and seem to find it surprising when we spit it out.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 18:43 | 3554374 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

That graph is pure bullshit, because one can NOT separate out "investment demand" from "jewelry demand" in such a shallow and facile manner --- the two have very significant overlap, with the large majority of what is shown as "jewelry demand" properly belonging in the "investment demand" category.

With the graph being "pure bullshit" and representing things in a "shallow & facile manner" it's interesting they note a strong correlation between their category of investment demand and London PM spot price. Note to mention a trend of falling jewellery demand corresponding with a uptick in spot price. 

In any case, beyond your obsession with not separating gold demand into categories like this it is STANDARD INDUSTRY PRACTICE. So call up any gold company and complain to them that they're evaluating the market incorrectly and that you akak - God of PM knowledge - know better than everyone in the industry. 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 19:08 | 3554430 akak
akak's picture

James, you really are a piece of work.

Nice evasion of the fundamental issue once again.  You are laughably incapable of addressing the meaningful issues, invariably preferring to resort to appeals to authority, tradition and conformity.

Notice that I never said that ALL gold jewelry demand was equal to investment demand, but it is certainly true that MUCH of it (at least half, and probably more than that) absolutely is indeed investment demand, merely being bought and held in the form of jewelry.

And yes, James, anyone, ANYONE, I don't care how widespread the practice is, who would speciously attempt to make such an arbitrary, erroneous and misleading distinction as "investment demand" vs. "Jewelry demand" is either wrong and/or purposely obfuscating the facts. 

By your idiotic 'logic', ALL gold coins should be similarly taken out of "investment demand" and listed separately as "collectibles".  But I never hear anyone argue that, because it would be ridiculous and dishonest --- yet that would be exactly analogous to your artificial and disingenuous separation of investment demand from ALL gold jewelry. 

It is NOT the physical form of the gold that makes gold an investment, it is the intentions and motivations behind the purchase of that gold that truly matter.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 19:25 | 3554471 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Notice that I never said that ALL gold jewelry demand was equal to investment demand, but it is certainly true that MUCH of it (at least half, and probably more than that) absolutely is indeed investment demand, merely being bought and held in the form of jewelry.

I don't get what you're on about... No one is suggesting that jewellery demand is not an investment, simply separating the market of those who buy jewellery from those who buy other forms of gold.

It's just a way to better understand the market. Those who are buying jewellery in India are different than people buying bars in NY, often buying at different times and for different reasons.

No on is making the claim that somehow jewellery is an illegitimate or unimportant segment of gold buying demand, but that seems to be what you're interpreting. 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 20:18 | 3554591 nufio
nufio's picture

Had to login to comment on this. People buying jewellery in india are mostly buying it for investment. The Indian government has restrictions on non-jewellery gold one can own to prevent a lot of capital being tied up in gold. Its not like most people actually wear their gold jewellery. Most of it is usually stashed in bank lockers.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 20:38 | 3554653 akak
akak's picture

James, once again you are simply a liar.

I don't get what you're on about... No one is suggesting that jewellery demand is not an investment, simply separating the market of those who buy jewellery from those who buy other forms of gold.

Bullshit --- that is EXACTLY what those who separate out gold jewelry (broadly defined) from gold investment demand are doing, trying to minimize the real overall level of investment demand for gold by suggesting that all gold jewelry is merely frippery and baubles.

Again, why don't your dishonest anti-gold, pro-bankster WGC shills try to separate out "coin demand" from overall investment demand and call it "collectables demand"?  It would follow the exact same (dis)logic.

It's just a way to better understand the market.

No, again, it is a way to obfuscate the situation by attempting to minimize and falsely misrepresent the true levels of investment demand for gold.  It is the same disingenuous and specious tactic that used to be continually employed by that execrable anti-gold bankster shill Jon Nadler. 

No on is making the claim that somehow jewellery is an illegitimate or unimportant segment of gold buying demand

By falsely misrepresenting the true level of investment demand for gold, yes, that is exactly the claim that the inherently anti-gold forces and shills are making --- and so are you.

 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 21:28 | 3554800 ljag
ljag's picture

You still don't get it! There is no fixing stupid. Tell me what "price" is fair for all your gold when the dollar collapses? That is what I thought!

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:39 | 3554229 Rustysilver
Rustysilver's picture

James_cole,

Please tell me where I can buy gold at $1350. I am in CT.

Mon, 05/13/2013 - 04:57 | 3555437 chindit13
chindit13's picture

I believe he was giving a range over the past few months, rather than saying $1350 is the price today.

For size, incidentally, paper = phyzz.  I don't know why there is so much confusion over that, or why people think COMEX should represent small lot purchases from a LCS who has overhead and inventory costs to cover.

As I have written elsewhere, I just visited some non-US large PM dealers.  The bid-ask spread (most make a two way market) was the same spread as front month COMEX, adjusted to spot.  For example, as I write this gold is 1433-1434.  I can buy all I want at that offer of 1434, not the "$2000" that Jim Willie tried to pass.

That there is a coin shortage in the US is not the same as saying there is a PM shortage.  Bars will be melted, and coins minted to meet the demand.  Even the US Mint is starting to catch up.  Premiums will fall as minting procedes, and as LCSs begin to get their inventory cost down.

Don't believe the promoters who are trying to sell you something any more than you would unquestioningly trust a used car dealer.

Mon, 05/13/2013 - 01:10 | 3555288 chindit13
chindit13's picture

Personally, I think it is a conspiracy that Grace woman is still alive.  I think she's been around for years, because I remember her a long time ago, full of "righteous indignation" about one of the endless Crimes of the Century that form the backbone of modern TV journalism.  I remember predicting that if she kept up that level of outrage for long, her head would explode.  The fact that she is still on TV with an intact snarling pumpkin atop her shoulders suggests to me that human cloning is a lot further along than any of us thought.  It couldn't possibly be the same woman today.  Gotta be at least the 10th iteration.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:00 | 3553821 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Have you been paying attention to what has happend in the last few years? Did you know that Hank Paulson was going to roll tanks on the streets if TARP was not approved? Ten Million dollars worth of bailout for every person in the USA? Did you know that his replacement was the head of the NY Fed, yet a person in his leadership positions thought he should take a chance on doing his personal taxes with software he bought at Walmart. Failed. But was confirmed to be in charge of the nation's IRS anyway? Did you pay attention when a primary dealer for the Fed (MF global) could not account for billions of dollars in comingled and lost client funds, but there was no ramifications for anyone other some kid in the server room?

Zerohedge is far more signifigant as a "contrarian economic blog" now than it was back then analysing complex re-hypothications and derivatives, all the while the london whale was fixing global LIBOR rates based on favorite bottles of champagne.

 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:09 | 3553840 Canaduh
Canaduh's picture

Oh, Hank Paulson has command of the military??

Everyone knows TurboTimmy was head of the NY Fed, nothing earth shattering there bub.

I have no problem with scrutinizing MF Global, that is one case where obviously something shady went down.

My problem is how this site is turning into Infowhores2. Some posts on ZH may be relevent, but the quality of commenters is the shits, most just repeating the talking points that conform to their paranoid world views.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 14:31 | 3553878 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Hank paulson is a cabinet level official, he did command the secret service and the enforment arm of the IRS. Martial law due to a banking crisis would, infact, have been implemented on his reccomendation. You think some four star general is going make that call? You think health and human services was going to do it? You think congress critters who havent had the guts in the last 60 years to declare war on tin pot dictators, were going to declare war on the most powerful nation on the planet? You probably don't understand how that works potentially being from canada.

Turbo timmay thought it was okay for a person of his importance to the stability of the economy (See above paragraph) to not have a fellow professional review his taxes. What is worse is that the senate did not think it was a big deal. There are civilians in prison for far less mistakes.

MF global was a HUGE deal. AS far as the commentators, yes some of them are not very good.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 15:23 | 3553904 Canaduh
Canaduh's picture

Martial law due to a banking crisis would, infact, have been implemented on his reccomendation.

Except that's not what you wrote.

Did you know that Hank Paulson was going to roll tanks on the streets if TARP was not approved?

Also, there is no proof Hank Paulson ever said that, but facts don't seem to be your forte. He told some congressmen that the issue was very, very serious, and they extrapolated that to mean they were planning on Martial Law, in true partisan fashion.

Please provide a link where a a congressman or senator explicitly said Hank Paulson threatened Martial Law (not, 'I heard other congressmen say this'). There is a reason hearsay is not admissable in court. (Note that Sen. Inhofe and Rep. Sherman never actually heard Paulson say Martial Law)

 In fact, the congressman (Sherman) usually used as the source of the 'Martial Law' threats, had this to say- 

 “I have no reason to think that any of the leaders in Congress who were involved in negotiating with the Bush Administration regarding the bailout bill ever mentioned the possibility of martial law – again, that was just an example of extreme and deliberately hyperbolic comments being passed around by members not directly involved in the negotiations.”

Actually, being from Canada allows me to remain unbiased towards either side of the American political spectrum, and just deal with the facts.

You think some four star general is going make that call? You think health and human services was going to do it? You think congress critters who havent had the guts in the last 60 years to declare war on tin pot dictators, were going to declare war on the most powerful nation on the planet? You probably don't understand how that works potentially being from canada.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but 'the call' would be made by the President, or the Governor of a State, if the situation was limited to that State. But you obviously know more than me, due to your geographical location.

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 16:18 | 3554091 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Bullshit. There is a clip of Sherman saying that very thing. They were all told how to vote and were obviously threatened against opposing it. How else do you explain the 99% of all calls made by the public to their Congressional members who were dead set against the bill?

You version of events is vastly different from what I remember going down.

 

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:07 | 3554180 Canaduh
Canaduh's picture

Because the Dems were doing the same thing the Repubs are doing now, exaggerating and using hyperbole to make the President look bad.

If you actually listen to what he says in the clip, he says that other congressmen say there was a mention of Martial Law from Paulson/Executive branch. None of the congressmen who supposedly were directly informed of Martial Law came forward, BECAUSE THERE WERE NONE. If you read his quote I provided, he admitted later that it was all hearsay meant to make Bush look bad.

How else do you explain the 99% of all calls made by the public to their Congressional members who were dead set against the bill?

Because websites like this took the mention of Martial Law by Mr. Sherman and ran with it, without investigating who actually said what to whom

Sun, 05/12/2013 - 17:40 | 3554231 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

How does that change anything on the vote? Are you saying Sherman is lying about it?

And you didnt answer the second question at all. Nice try at throwing ZH and Tyler under the bus there instead.   

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!