[Clint N. Suhks]

Challenging the judges' credibility where none ever existed says more about the challenger than the judges.

Oh that's some cute word Aikido, when proof is found it's the challenger whose credibility is in question?

Perfect example of the kind of character it takes to look the other way, thanks for the demonstration.

[Jrabbit]

Oh my goodness....you really are upset, aren’t you? Bless your heart, AI is just a TV show. Just a little bit of fluff during the week to escape from real life stress. Perhaps you need to relax a wee bit. Join us for the fun of the show.....it really is fun! :-)

[new cruelty]

...when proof is found...

Why is proof is needed? You yourself said "the judges biases have been there all along, anyone can see that". I agree with you. The difference is that I'm not up in arms about it. It's just a tv show meant to entertain me. For me, there is need to challenge the judges' credibility when they never had any. To do so is absurd. You obviously feel much, much more emotional about the entire thing. Betrayed maybe. Perhaps this was a world shattering event for you. I don't know. Whatever it is, I imagine you'll work it out.

At any rate, Fox will likely make lemonade out of this.

[cajungirl]

Nobody questions your credibility. It is your maturity we question, or I do. And you rather rigid naive expectations of what a show like this is supposed to be.

You seem determined to be angry, disappointed and morally superior to everyone here.

[AmusedBystander]

Why would the judges "rig" the show when they determine who the top 24 are from the beginning. The pool they provide are culled from many thousands down to a few "lucky" ones that the judges want to get through for whatever reason. The judges then root for their favorites until the end but the callers determine the ultimate popularity of the winner. As Simon often says, it's a popularity contest and not a singing contest.

Taylor Hicks being the prime example. Simon dissed him at every opportunity yet he won.