ROFL...Now please change it back. FOX business news: Fairly unbalanced.

Hey now, the Toronto Globe and Mail is a decent newspaper, it's quite cheap and excellent for absorbing piss in my rabbit's cage.

I had thought that FBN meant Fox Bullshit Network, but then I remembered that that already existed as Fox Newsiness.

G.I. Joe was always an international force to fight the forces of Cobra Commander.

Transformers weren't American either, not that I think about it. And Starblazers was international too! Those Japanese are trying to take over, one cartoon at a time.

actually, i think (I really should know) that the term gi joe existed long before the toy. the idea was that the GIs were always called Joe when the name wasn't know. - kinda like John Doe. Especially abroad, in Asia and Germany the hookers (sigh) would call the Army and Navy men by the name Joe - Hey Joe (not the hendrix tune)

So since GI Joe was already the nickname for a GI, it made sense for the toy. That said, it was always an international force. (too lazy to wikipedia)

forget it: G.I. Joe is a line of military-themed dolls and later action figures produced by the toy company Hasbro.

The name G.I. Joe was created by David Breger when he was asked to do a comic strip for United States military magazines during World War II. Breger came up with the title "G.I. Joe" from the term "G.I." His strip debuted June 17, 1942 in the military's YANK magazine and Stars and Stripes newspaper.

and about the international force: The basic premise of the 1985 series based on the figures is "good vs. evil". G.I. Joe is a highly capable branch of America's military whose purpose is to defend the world against enemy attack. Their main adversary is the COBRA Organization, a ruthless terrorist organization determined to rule the world.

Now wait a minute... the new criteria for being a "world's worst person" now include merely making a mistake about Keith Oberman's on-air schedule? Has it really become Keith against the world? As much as I liked most of his commentaries up until about 6 months ago (when his ego took over), I'm inclined to go with "the world" on this one. Maybe your logo has got the best of you?

the new criteria for being a "world's worst person" now include merely making a mistake about Keith Oberman's on-air schedule?

In case you hadn't noticed, Redstate.com did not "merely mak[e] a mistake about Keith Oberman's[sic] schedule", they based part of their review of CNBC's coverage on what they imagined Keith had said when he wasn't there! In other words, Redstate.com attributed statements to K.O. that he couldn't have made because K.O. wasn't there when he was supposed to have made them!

In other words, Redstate.com attributed statements to K.O. that he couldn't have made because K.O. wasn't there when he was supposed to have made them!

This should have been obvious to anyone with half a brain. Red Valley is either extremely ignorant or disingenuous, or perhaps both.

What statements did they attribute to Olbermann?

I don't think you are either ignorant or disingenuous for getting that wrong - you heard what you wanted to hear.

article in question

Well, I'm both extremely ignorant and disingenuous even on the best of days, but my point about Keith isn't about what was said on Red State--I've read the blog entry and it simply strikes me as typically inflammatory partisan rhetoric with a Coulterian slant, third string at best--but that he would use the segment World's Worst Person to settle what really seems to me to be a private issue. So a poorly-written conservative blog contains a lie about Keith--a lie that isn't even the main point of the story--does that qualify it for a World's Worst Person? Weren't there perhaps a couple of worse people that day that escaped Keith's attention?

What statements did they attribute to Olbermann?

Here's what they said:

MSNBC should register as a lobbying organization, based on the performance of Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann after the debate

Keith Olbermann's performance? He wasn't even there to "perform"!

Jo Ann,

You and Tim referred to 'statements' when clearly there were none attributed to Olbermann. You can dance around your error or you can own up to it. Everyone (that includes Redstate.com, Tim, Jo Ann and me) makes these kind of mistakes so it's stupid to make someone 'the worst person in the world' because of it. It's childish. Not Jr. High kind of childish - more like Kindergarten.

Syngas, if they're referring to Olbermann's "performance", what do you think they're referring to? They're referring to statements he made that made him seem to be a "lobbying organization".

You're just playing dumb... or...

No JoAnn,

I'm clearly the Worst Person in the World! Now would you please pass the red Play-doh? My cabin needs a chimney ;-)

Why do I bother to attempt to have a rational discussion with Syngas?

Try as you might, you really can't have a rational discussion when the topic is the totally irrational Keith Olbermann.

An interesting opinion piece on the whole G.I. Joe thing:

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/10849526.html

Well, who cares. G.I. Joe is just a toy, right? He was never real. Right?

On Nov. 15, 2003, an 85-year-old retired Marine Corps colonel died of congestive heart failure at his home in La Quinta, Calif., southeast of Palm Springs. He was a combat veteran of World War II. His name was Mitchell Paige.

It was interesting, but I don't know how much I believe it. I mean, I really have a hard time believing the guy isn't some crazy loon when he writes sentences like this.

"If this one ship did not stop 14 Japanese ships right then and there, America might lose the war. ..." At midnight precisely, facing those impossible odds, the battleship Washington opened up with her 16-inch guns. If you're reading this in English, you should be able to figure out how she did.)"

Also, I can't help but laugh a bit at the irony that a fanatic right wing website would call itself "Red State"!

Thank you, one and all, for your interest in my commentary on RedState. It just came to my attention (by my being directed here) that I had been designated the Bronze Medallion winner in the Worst Person in the World sweepstakes. I was up against tough, professional competitors, and I couldn't have done it without the support of all you little people out there. (Glenn Beck and Roger Ailes must be jealous as heck. Doesn't anybody here want to take a few shots at the Gold and Silver Medal winners?)

To set the record straight, I'm just a blogger on RedState, sort of like you are here. I have no official connection to the site; no more than I do with this one. I don't speak FOR RedState; I write ON RedState.

My comments were written a few days after the "debate." From memory, not from a tape I had handy to review.

As the more acute observers will notice (the title might give a clue), the comments were a tongue-in-cheek look at the whole thing. I paraphrased liberally (pardon the pun), but I didn't intentionally misrepresent anything. I even complimented the "Presidential" presences of Senators Biden and Dodd. Does THAT make me part of the "lunatic fringe?"

Some of you have noted that I didn't actually quote K.O. about anything, nor did I assert that he was on the post-debate spin-cycle show, although it was an easy conclusion to jump to. I simply dismissed him. As I remember it now, I must have seen him on his OWN show after the debate, which is why his name came up. I was certainly NOT dreaming about him. I stand by my previous opinion of him and his abilities. He couldn't even get my name right.

Why did he pick my words to take issue with? Who knows? Must have been a slow day. Personally, I think he was just envious of my Column Headline. So much more catchy and understated than "The Worst Person in the World!"

For a more complete response from this "third-string" (believe me, that's a compliment) writer, I invite you to read my poorly-written inflammatory partisan rhetoric for today.