lol
No. Not really.
I don't kid about these kinds of thing. No bond is broken over a horse, as you dryly suggest. However, a bond is broken over the callously sarcastic and obviously ignorant treatment by Michael of the death of a horse.
Now, I'm going to try to explain how I feel in this computer room here that is very cold and I am a slow and lousy typist. But, I really want you to understand what I have to say if I'm going to again try to explain it.
Firstly, did you see my post # 105? If not, check it out.
Here goes:
FR is a great site, but one of the bad characteristics of it is the intractability and the thin skin of folks on threads like Rush's, Hannity's, and now this one (to a lesser degree). It is truly amazing how the people on these specific talkshow host threads cannot deal graciously with the slightest criticism of their "hero".
If you have read my post # 105 you will see much of what Michael did.
Over the years, I had come to highly respect the KNOWLEDGE about various subjects that Michael had accumulated over the years. It was a great part of his "charm". So, for him to come across yesterday so ignorantly (literally) concerning the injuries over the past months of Barbaro was totally disgusting and very surprising and very disappointing.
Not only did he not even know how to pronounce Barbaro's name (no big deal), but he scoffed at the seriousness of the injuries. He even went so far as to deride the decision to put the horse down, and to wonder why horses often have to be put down when they break their legs. He acted like he had no idea of the science of matter.
He questioned the motives of the owners, owners who have been totally honorable and GOOD throughout these long painful months. The efforts by the medical team to try to save this great animal were heroic and beyond excellent.
If Michael is going to speak about a subject as heart-wwrenching and serious as this, mock the injuries that he obviously knew NOTHING about, he should have done his homework or have the decency to shut his mouth.
More than anything Michael came off as just another loud loutish slug who feels he has to make fun of a tragedy. To me it was the worst behavior I ever heard from a talkshow host who I had respected. It was very disappointing to hear Michael talk like he did after liking him so much over the years because of his warm feelings for his own dog and other animals.
I do not respect him now, not at all.
For a man of his great intelligence to do what he did just illustrated a very ugly side of his character.
If his people should read this thread, or if he gets the drift on how UGLY he spoke yesterday on the subject of Barbaro, then he comes back on the show this evening and apologized to his audience, that would be a step in the right direction.
But for now, he's just another sarcastic, caustic, and cruel loser like so many other smart-mouths in the media and all over our jaded and crass society.
Cynical, ego-driven, know-it-all, moody, aging, raging, nostalgic, .....you can go on and on.
I'm not gonna ridicule you're anger over Mike's comments, or your affection for the horse (I didn't hear the whole show, but got the gist of it) but for me Mike was really talking about the owners. (rightly or wrongly) It sounded like Mike was speculating over what he saw as rich fatcats making money (one way or the other) off this animal.
Mike's cynicism and general disdain for "richies" combined with your heart-felt affection for this story seems to have hit a big nerve with you.
Mike has a big mouth, so for me it's no big deal for someone to vent like you have, if you feel the need.
BTW, I too cannot stand Sharapova's screaming; there otta be a law....