What? I've been included in with Micheal Moore! Never! he's fat! And stupid... 
Posted on 02/15/2006 12:06:49 AM PST by Mobile Vulgus
Richard Roeper -- A Bush Basher Who's Annoyed With me
On Feb 14th, Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Richard Roeper, wrote one of his columns about the fact that Chicago White Sox Manager, Ozzie Guillen, did not accompany the team on their visit to the White House.
He used this occasion not solely to write in support of the ball player, but as a vehicle to attack George W. Bush, saying in part: “…I just couldn't shake hands and smile with President Bush”.
I have little interest in Roeper’s column here, however, as it is prosaic in its Bush bashing. Roeper is a Hollyweird wannbe after all. No, what this column is interested in is the thankfully short correspondence that Mr. Roeper and I had over his column.
After reading his bashing attempt, meant to ingratiate him with the Hollyweird set no doubt, I dashed off my own little missive to let Mr. Roeper know of my displeasure -- taking advantage of the same freedom Mr. Roeper indulges in for a living I might add; opining. Here is my initial message:
Feb 14, 2006 1:03 PMOK. The Hitler reference was absurd, I have to admit. Passion got the better of me. But the rest I stand by, with apologies for the Adolfism.Mr. Roeper,
You know, I listed to you on the radio for years as fill in host here and there (on Chicago radio). I have watched you with Mr. Ebert and considered your "reviews" since you got on the show. I never read many of your columns (in the Sun Times), but I did read them occasionally.
I always felt you were a little too much an “anti-male”. Too “fey” if you will. A pseudo intellectual who fancied himself a Midwestern version of Jerry Seinfeld. I feel your reviews are overreaching and you fancy yourself somehow a reviewer for the ages (That ridiculous Curious George review is a fine example of that — Don’t you even KNOW what movies can be FOR??). But, all that is as it may. And, at this point I have come to expect that you think far more of yourself than you deserve to.
I have to say, though, that you have now crossed the line. Your disrespect for the president of the United States is palpable and quite disgusting. You and your ilk are dangerous to this country, appeasers and terror supporters all.
I could barely stand you before. Now that is complete. Welcome to the club with Michael Moore, Hitler, and so many more.
Mr. Ebert will still get my patronage with his column (though I disagree with his politics as well). But you will not.
Yours, Warner Todd Huston Chicago, ILL
Here is what Mr. Roeper replied with
Feb 14, 2006 2:44PM your name is warner todd huston, and you're calling ME fey? now that's funny. i didn't get past that line, but thanks for your comments. best, richard roeperWow. It must have been too tiring for him to employ proper grammar, much less formulate a a cogent and adult response...
Go see the rest at link!
What? I've been included in with Micheal Moore! Never! he's fat! And stupid...
Sounds like Richard is a real Dick.
So, what's with the Hitler reference? The author can't make his point without sinking to the left's own tactics?
Roeper has always been very mean spirited. I was baffled when Roger Ebert made Roeper his partner after Gene Siskel died.
Quit standing around waiting for someone to tell you what to do and think.
Now what, do we boy-cott CWS games?
No the trip to the White House conflicted with a family trip to the Dominican Republic where Ozzy is from. His statement when asked was that his family comes first.
I thought it was funny that the author of the e-mail had the audacity to comment on Roemer's gramatical foibles, given the moat in his own writing.
The Hitler reference was apologized for in the piece. What more do you want? Blood?
No, I want a new set of eyeballs :) I missed the apology!
I think it's funny you comment on grammar and then spell ROEPER'S name wrong yourself!!
And, I don't think the emailer makes his living from words like Roeper does!
You obviously were not listening to Rush today, as he has now instituted a "dick hunting license." Based on the experience of the MSM frenzy in attacking Dick Cheney he has said that, like duck hunters, dick hunters must now get a license before they can attack. This would qualify as an activity that requires one of those licenses.
Please mail me your $125, plus a $7 fine.
Reoper is a liar. Your reference to him being 'fey' is at the beginning of your letter.
Your name is at the end.
Roeper's statement that he didn't read past the 'fey' comment is a lie. Period. He read the whole letter.
And what's up with the lack of capital letters in his repsonse?
Is that supposed to be cool among his ilk to show how...oh so jaded they are that they deign not to lift a pinky to press the SHIFT key?
What a tool.
I think knowing what the word "fey" means is fey in and of itself!
|
|
Do radios have spell checkers? |
.
Yeah, I think you are right on that one!
I missed that part, but as a practicing heterosexual, I wouldn't want a dick-hunting license anyway. Besides, where I live, that type of dick is considered a varmint, and no license is necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
