# CSX/Hedge Fund Brouhaha



## WhoozOn1st (Jun 5, 2008)

The charlatan Lou Dobbs will be talking about the impending proxy battle on his CNN soapbox.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Jun 10, 2008)

The pseudo-populist Lou Dobbs will renew his CSX rant today at 7 p.m. EDT (CNN), this time including the NY Times in his delusional ravings.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Jun 10, 2008)

Big Lou has his Depends is a bunch over this: CSX Grasping at Straws to End Battle

Dobbs doesn't take kindly to criticism of any stripe, and has a long history of being downright abusive with on-air guests who challenge his dogmatic pronouncements. Maybe he should try hooking up with notorious dope fiend Rush Limbaugh.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 10, 2008)

On this one I could almost agree with Dobbs. While the "national security" angle seems a little overblown, particularly coming from soneone on CNN, as I regard that bunch in general as not having a clue in that area, the concern for takeover by an outfit who seems to be of the take the money and run mentality should be very real. Plus the name of the outfit "children's investment fund" is off putting. Its pretentiousness just screams, "we are sleaze."


----------



## jackal (Jun 10, 2008)

George Harris said:


> Plus the name of the outfit "children's investment fund" is off putting. Its pretentiousness just screams, "we are sleaze."


Thank you. I thought I was alone in thinking that.

And even the capitalization of their name is strange and pretentious--they call themselves "TCI" (missing the F), which stands for "The Children's Investment Fund" (with a capital The). Even that rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Jun 10, 2008)

Did anybody actually view the segment? First there was a rerun of last Thursday's report by Kitty Pilgrim (with some nice CSX video footage). Then a Dobbs diatribe, again overblowing the national security angle. Then he got around to excoriating the NY Times reporter who criticized the Dobbs demagogic circus. Abusive as usual, and thoroughly intolerant of even mildly different views, Dobbs demeaned the whole issue of CSX/TCI - which I think is legitimate and important, no matter one's opinion - by twisting the subject into a jingoistic froth about wearing an American flag lapel pin. Deplorable.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 16, 2008)

WhoozOn1st999 said:


> Did anybody actually view the segment?


Saw it yesterday. You seem to be over reacting. He actually sounded quite coherent. Usually I don't watch the guy. Anybody in disagreement with the New York Times can't be all wrong. I consider the NYT only a small step above the North Korean Central News agency for accuracy.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 17, 2008)

The New York Times is almost always accurate. Skimmy, and written unknowledgably sometimes, but accurate.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 17, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> The New York Times is almost always accurate. Skimmy, and written unknowledgably sometimes, but accurate.


The NYT appears to be one of those things that people either swear by or swear at. No notiicble number in the middle ground. You have a right ot your viewpoint, and it may even be correct when it comes to events that occur within 50 miles of Manhattan Island. Otherwise, I tend to regard it as a fairly fact free source of near propoganda on most issues. There is little I have seen on the occasions when I do look at something in it that would make me see any need to change an opinion I have held since first becoming acquainted with it as a teen in the late 1950's.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jun 18, 2008)

It doesn't seem that way to me, especially in comparison to several heaps of cellulose-based garbage that have the gall to represent themselves as local newspapers as put out by Gannett. But... I don't think we'll reach a common ground on this one.


----------



## George Harris (Jun 18, 2008)

Guess we will have to agree to disagree. I won't lose much sleep over it and trust you won't, either.


----------

