Everyone has an agenda.... Both parties suck!
DeleteMedia.com
Feed List
Created With Quick Blogcast
DELETEMEDIA.com
Oreilly's Stalker strikes again!!!
This guy reminds me of the ex girlfriend that won't go away.... How would you have liked to dated this guy??? NO, YOU CAN'T BREAK UP WITH ME!!! I'M KEITH OOBERMANNN!!!! I'm not a big Bill O'reilly guy but Ooberman's fascination with him is like really scary.... He devotes 1/2 his show to him... Anyways...
Leave it up to famous Terrorist Sympathizer, Keith-Allah Olbermann for this beauty... Maybe Keith is at least to the point where he now BELIEVES in Terrorism... From the Friday January 11 Countdown (that no one watched!):
KEITH OLBERMANN: But our winner, Senator Fred Thompson. Asked about the supposed confrontation between Iranian speed boats and three U.S. warships in the Gulf of Hormuz, Thompson, who last year said we couldn't count on the "Soviet Union" to help us with Iran in the future, pulled another whopper. Quote [imitating Thompson's voice]: "I think one more step, and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing." As the crowd cheered and Thompson gave that look he used in The Hunt for Red October when he wanted to seem tough, somebody at the debate probably realized that it's terrorists and suicide bombers who have believed the crap about the 72 virgins, not the guys in the Iranian navy. Too bad the somebody wasn't Fred Thompson. With every week that goes by, the odds seem to grow that one night he's going to stop in the middle of a speech or a debate and suddenly shout at his supporters [imitating Thompson's voice]: "Ha ha, I'm not really running. Smile, you're on Candid Camera." Senator Fred 'Paying Attention is Overrated' Thompson, today's "Worst Person in the World"!
Like I said, this may actually be an improvement because at least our famous "terrorist sympathizer" may actually believe terrorists do actually exist...
What's a Conservative to do???
I'm so disgusted by this election process so far and we only have 11 months to go.... uhh..... Most of what disgusts me is on my side of the aisle and how people I have admired for years are completely tailoring the truth on conservatism to fit their candidate.... Let me say something that Rush, Noonan, Hannity, Beck, Will and others (all my heroes) won't say....
None of these GOP candidates is THE Conservative!!!! Not on everything anyway.... So if you here these pundits say "X" is the conservative of the race, they are being dishonest... OK? Enough of the freakin spin! The person I think I have admired the most in my life is Rush Limbaugh and he has so disappointed me.... Not because he is not a Huckabee guy, it's because of his being dishonest and I have never said that about Rush. Out of all of these guys, I think Mike Huckabee is the best candidate... Is he a Reagan Conservative? No! But who is.... But what Rush did was so disappointing that it literally made me sad.
Rush did not say a damn word when the most liberal Republican in the GOP, Rudy Guilianni was 30 points up in the national polls.... Not a word.... But all of a sudden in December, a southern Baptist minister with a message and no money, catches fire and then it's time to destroy him. So Rush injects him self into the Huckabee debate (reluctantly he says), because some low level Huckabee staffer with no name, made some comments about Rush. So Rush jumps into the debate by acting like he was dragged into it and spends the next several weeks bashing Huckabee. But I think what disappointed me most about this incident was that Huckabee reached out to Rush in an email to clear up the understanding.
And Rush did not have the decency as a gentleman to respond to the Governor's email... That saddens me greatly...
That is not who Rush is... But he dislikes Huckabee so much that he would not even respond. Mike Huckabee is running for the President of the United States and reaches out to you and you don't have the courtesy to respond? How arrogant... I bet if that was Hillary Clinton he would have responded. He's responds to people like Katie Couric by email but not Mike Huckabee. I have never been disappointed in Rush like I was from that. Hey Rush, would your Mom and Dad approve of that behavior... That is just simple manners Rush. I know what parents would say if I did something like that... Shame on you!
You don't have to like Mike Huckabee or vote for Mike Huckabee but show some damn respect and I think Rush owes Governor Huckabee an apology. So this election has told me a lot about people like Rush, Will, Noonan and others. As I said, they did not say a damn word when Rudy was up 30 points and for the record I like Rudy a lot! But don't tell me he is more Conservative than Mike Huckabee... Maybe fiscally and that's a strech...
Let's say for the sake of argument that Huckabee is more moderate/liberal on taxes and illegal immigration. I don't think that is necessarily the case but just to get over those issues, fine... Ok, Huckabee is a liberal on taxes and immigration. For this Conservative (me), the 2nd Amendment and Life trump taxes... I think illegal immigration is more than important than taxes as well but to remove that issue off the table, Rudy oversaw the largest sanctuary city in the nation so we know that he no more conservative on this issue than Huckabee and the only difference between Huckabee and Rudy is that Huckabee is at least honest about his immigration policy whether you agree with it or not. Like I give Rudy credit for at least being honest he's Pro-choice.
So take these two important issues: Life and Gun Rights
No one in this race is more Pro Life than Huckabee, period... Not even Fred Thompson... And I love the talking points now that even Rush is using, Hannity has been saying it awhile that the only area that the President has any say on Abortion is with Supreme Court Justices... BS!!! Remember stem cell research??? Remember military funded abortion on military bases? Should I go on? And to quote Rush during the Terry Schiavo debacle, "you have nothing if you don't have life!" But he forgets that argument now...
No one is more Pro 2nd Amendment than Huckabee, period... Huckabee's wife knows more about a shotgun than Rudy or Romney combined... Huckabee is one of the few governors in this country if ANY who has a Conceal Carry Gun permit... The NRA loves him... As he said, the 2nd Amendment is just as important as the 1st amendment and you don't have the 1st without the 2nd. But people like Romney and Rudy think the 2nd Amendment is for hunting, which is a similar view from the Democrats. Huckabee understands what the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is and it's not for hunting. It's when your governement becomes so tyrannical, that you take up arms and take your country back. Do you think Romney or Rudy would say that??? So what does all of this mean?
In means that in the order of Conservatism according to people like Rush, that Taxes trump Life and the 2nd Amendment! It's that simple.... That's why people like Rush, Noonan, Will, the Club for Growth (which I USED to be a member) and other elites are telling the rest of us who the Conservative is in order of priority... These same Wise Men gave us George W. Bush and his LBJ super sized spending... Sure he gave us tax cuts, that are about to expire... But...
What good are tax cuts if your President increases spending to no end???? Will someone please answer that?
Truth be told, I am not passionate or crazy about any of these guys... I wish I could mold them all together and have one candidate that can communicate. People talk about Fred Thompson who I like, but can't say 2 words without clearing his throat! No thanks, we've had 8 years of someone who can't coherently put 4 words together. The Wise Men gave us this guy... George W. Bush, I love you but you broke my heart.... So these same powers are now telling us who the REAL conservative is this time... I don't like John McCain but would he have been as bad as Bush? Really... I don't like McCain at all but the establishment kept him out in 2000 and you have to ask yourself, would he have been worse than W??? Sure you would probably not get tax cuts but would you get this out of control spending? Who knows... But don't you dare tell us that you were right then and you're right now!
I'm still waiting for an apology on the 2000 election of this guy....
The main guy at the GAO has been screaming for people to hear him about our economic situation. Forget that the $ is worth almost nothing or that oil is at a $100 a barrel. The GAO is saying that when you add all three books that the Government keeps, yes 3 books! Each American family is saddled with $400,000 worth of government debt! Yes, $400,000!!! Glenn Beck has been on top of this! (when he is not having butt surgery) This nation is going bankrupt and the establishment, people I have loved for years like Rush make excuses for people like W and call Huckabee a liberal???? Give me a break... I have never been pessimistic about our country as I am right now... We have reached a point of return in our country and no candidates are talking about, none...
Just don't tell me that your guy is the conservative... We have seen what your Conservatism gets us... He's in Israel right now trying to convince the Jews to give up more land to the terrorists...
None of these GOP candidates is THE Conservative!!!! Not on everything anyway.... So if you here these pundits say "X" is the conservative of the race, they are being dishonest... OK? Enough of the freakin spin! The person I think I have admired the most in my life is Rush Limbaugh and he has so disappointed me.... Not because he is not a Huckabee guy, it's because of his being dishonest and I have never said that about Rush. Out of all of these guys, I think Mike Huckabee is the best candidate... Is he a Reagan Conservative? No! But who is.... But what Rush did was so disappointing that it literally made me sad.
Rush did not say a damn word when the most liberal Republican in the GOP, Rudy Guilianni was 30 points up in the national polls.... Not a word.... But all of a sudden in December, a southern Baptist minister with a message and no money, catches fire and then it's time to destroy him. So Rush injects him self into the Huckabee debate (reluctantly he says), because some low level Huckabee staffer with no name, made some comments about Rush. So Rush jumps into the debate by acting like he was dragged into it and spends the next several weeks bashing Huckabee. But I think what disappointed me most about this incident was that Huckabee reached out to Rush in an email to clear up the understanding.
And Rush did not have the decency as a gentleman to respond to the Governor's email... That saddens me greatly...
That is not who Rush is... But he dislikes Huckabee so much that he would not even respond. Mike Huckabee is running for the President of the United States and reaches out to you and you don't have the courtesy to respond? How arrogant... I bet if that was Hillary Clinton he would have responded. He's responds to people like Katie Couric by email but not Mike Huckabee. I have never been disappointed in Rush like I was from that. Hey Rush, would your Mom and Dad approve of that behavior... That is just simple manners Rush. I know what parents would say if I did something like that... Shame on you!
You don't have to like Mike Huckabee or vote for Mike Huckabee but show some damn respect and I think Rush owes Governor Huckabee an apology. So this election has told me a lot about people like Rush, Will, Noonan and others. As I said, they did not say a damn word when Rudy was up 30 points and for the record I like Rudy a lot! But don't tell me he is more Conservative than Mike Huckabee... Maybe fiscally and that's a strech...
Let's say for the sake of argument that Huckabee is more moderate/liberal on taxes and illegal immigration. I don't think that is necessarily the case but just to get over those issues, fine... Ok, Huckabee is a liberal on taxes and immigration. For this Conservative (me), the 2nd Amendment and Life trump taxes... I think illegal immigration is more than important than taxes as well but to remove that issue off the table, Rudy oversaw the largest sanctuary city in the nation so we know that he no more conservative on this issue than Huckabee and the only difference between Huckabee and Rudy is that Huckabee is at least honest about his immigration policy whether you agree with it or not. Like I give Rudy credit for at least being honest he's Pro-choice.
So take these two important issues: Life and Gun Rights
No one in this race is more Pro Life than Huckabee, period... Not even Fred Thompson... And I love the talking points now that even Rush is using, Hannity has been saying it awhile that the only area that the President has any say on Abortion is with Supreme Court Justices... BS!!! Remember stem cell research??? Remember military funded abortion on military bases? Should I go on? And to quote Rush during the Terry Schiavo debacle, "you have nothing if you don't have life!" But he forgets that argument now...
No one is more Pro 2nd Amendment than Huckabee, period... Huckabee's wife knows more about a shotgun than Rudy or Romney combined... Huckabee is one of the few governors in this country if ANY who has a Conceal Carry Gun permit... The NRA loves him... As he said, the 2nd Amendment is just as important as the 1st amendment and you don't have the 1st without the 2nd. But people like Romney and Rudy think the 2nd Amendment is for hunting, which is a similar view from the Democrats. Huckabee understands what the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is and it's not for hunting. It's when your governement becomes so tyrannical, that you take up arms and take your country back. Do you think Romney or Rudy would say that??? So what does all of this mean?
In means that in the order of Conservatism according to people like Rush, that Taxes trump Life and the 2nd Amendment! It's that simple.... That's why people like Rush, Noonan, Will, the Club for Growth (which I USED to be a member) and other elites are telling the rest of us who the Conservative is in order of priority... These same Wise Men gave us George W. Bush and his LBJ super sized spending... Sure he gave us tax cuts, that are about to expire... But...
What good are tax cuts if your President increases spending to no end???? Will someone please answer that?
Truth be told, I am not passionate or crazy about any of these guys... I wish I could mold them all together and have one candidate that can communicate. People talk about Fred Thompson who I like, but can't say 2 words without clearing his throat! No thanks, we've had 8 years of someone who can't coherently put 4 words together. The Wise Men gave us this guy... George W. Bush, I love you but you broke my heart.... So these same powers are now telling us who the REAL conservative is this time... I don't like John McCain but would he have been as bad as Bush? Really... I don't like McCain at all but the establishment kept him out in 2000 and you have to ask yourself, would he have been worse than W??? Sure you would probably not get tax cuts but would you get this out of control spending? Who knows... But don't you dare tell us that you were right then and you're right now!
I'm still waiting for an apology on the 2000 election of this guy....
The main guy at the GAO has been screaming for people to hear him about our economic situation. Forget that the $ is worth almost nothing or that oil is at a $100 a barrel. The GAO is saying that when you add all three books that the Government keeps, yes 3 books! Each American family is saddled with $400,000 worth of government debt! Yes, $400,000!!! Glenn Beck has been on top of this! (when he is not having butt surgery) This nation is going bankrupt and the establishment, people I have loved for years like Rush make excuses for people like W and call Huckabee a liberal???? Give me a break... I have never been pessimistic about our country as I am right now... We have reached a point of return in our country and no candidates are talking about, none...
Just don't tell me that your guy is the conservative... We have seen what your Conservatism gets us... He's in Israel right now trying to convince the Jews to give up more land to the terrorists...
Later Fred!
I had to post this because months ago, I had a Fred Thompson logo on this site. Well, the great white hope was a complete dud! He was great when he was not in the race and once he opened his mouth (when not following a script) it was just a big thud!
Fred, we love you baby! Go back to filling in for Paul Harvey and enjoy your grand kids, I mean your kids! You look older than John McCain and I'm not sure how that happened because that guy is older than dirt. Also, keep your wife in the shadows! She looks like she is a real B$*#H! Sorry dude! Go back to Law & Order...
Thanks for the Memories!
Oh and yeah by the way!
Fred, we love you baby! Go back to filling in for Paul Harvey and enjoy your grand kids, I mean your kids! You look older than John McCain and I'm not sure how that happened because that guy is older than dirt. Also, keep your wife in the shadows! She looks like she is a real B$*#H! Sorry dude! Go back to Law & Order...
Thanks for the Memories!
Oh and yeah by the way!
Bad Science or just Bad Journalism?
I have been to busy in recent weeks to update this blog but when I see a story this damn stupid, it prompts me to sit down and type! Sometimes I wonder how stupid of a society, scientists and journalists think we are especially after I read a story like this. Maybe it is stories like this is why I get a little skeptical of the Global Warming hysteria crowd because these same scientists can't get a three day forecast right but they can tell you what the weather was 8 million years ago... Read this dumb ass story and then my take!
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Lost Forest in Africa Yields New Species
By Charles Q. Choi, Special to LiveScience
posted: 07 August 2007 03:32 pm ET
In a once-lost forest in Africa, six animal species new to science have been discovered, members of a two-month expedition now reveal, including a bat, a rodent, two shrews and two frogs.
"If we can find six new species in such a short period, it makes you wonder what else is out there," said Wildlife Conservation Society researcher Andrew Plumptre.
The bat appears to be a kind of horseshoe bat (genus Rhinolophus), known for the large horseshoe-shaped "nose leaves" used for directing their ultrasound.
These new species were discovered in an expedition from January and March 2007 into woods just west of Lake Tanganyika, which have been off limits to scientists for more than 50 years. The area is a remote corner of the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, which has been gripped by unrest and war for decades.
Spirits linked with this area include Kabogo, said to occasionally manifest itself as a ghostly boat on Lake Tanganyika at night said to guarantee good fishing if seen, as well as Misotshi, who has taboos against the killing of chimpanzees and the destruction of the forest. For this reason, local chiefs suggested naming the area the Misotshi-Kabogo Forest, the researchers said.
The scientists found that nearly 386 square miles (1,000 square kilometers) of forest, almost the size of all of Hong Kong, remained intact. The woods stretched from the shores of Lake Tanganyika up to elevations of 8,940 feet (2,725 meters) above sea level, or roughly seven times the height of the Empire State Building.
These woods have been isolated from much of the Congo rainforest, the second largest rainforest in the world, for at least 10,000 years, which explains why they held new species, said Wildlife Conservation Society researcher Deo Kujirakwinja. They proved extraordinarily rich, providing a home to chimpanzees, elephants, leopards, monkeys, birds, reptiles, frogs and other amphibians, hogs, jackals, mongooses, porcupines, and antelopes known as bongos.
The expedition collected additional material that may also yield a number of new plant species. Local botanists were unable to identify some 10 percent of the collected plants. Plumptre, Kujirakwinja and their colleagues will send these samples to specialists in the near future to assess their novelty.
The Wildlife Conservation Society notes that chiefs and elders at local villages are supportive of transforming the region into a protected park. Currently, human impacts on these forests are relatively low, with gold mining on a minor level being the most substantial threat.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Excruciating!!!
How the hell do you lose a forest? It's not like losing your car keys or your kids... A forest is stationary, how do you lose it? Especially when it is the size of Hong Kong with elevations up to 7 times the Empire State Building!!! I could see if the new species found were lost but the forest?
The simple fact is, it is not "once-lost" reference means "never found!" Who are these clowns Lewis and Clark? They spend two months in a god forsaken place and they have to write this story the way they do as not to admit they don't know everything! But instead of saying we humans do not know all, they say they find a "once lost" forest and 6 new species which include bat, a rodent, two shrews and two frogs. I wonder if these rodents know they were in a "lost forest?"
Webster's defines the word "lost" as:
to cease to have or to fail to keep in one's possession.
As the story reads, this area had been isolated from "much of the Congo rainforest for at least 10,000 years!" Ok, why was it isolated? Was it bad? They did not even know it was their, how do you know it was isolated for 10,000 years?
Webster's again defines the word "isolate" as: to place apart or alone, to separate.
Webster's again defines the word "isolate" as: to place apart or alone, to separate.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A FOREST!!! IT NEVER MOVED!!! This is not journalism.... They just make this crap up... Why did this story not read that these scientists stumbled upon an area not yet discovered where they have found some new species! That makes sense... But no, they can't act like they did not know it was their so that is where the "once lost" term comes from! Damn fools...
And I know some people are saying, it's just a figure of speech, it's just a term. This is not only journalism this is science. Do the history books say that the US was lost before Christopher Columbus discovered it? NO, it was undiscovered territory. To use the words "once-lost" means it was found previously. Well, tell me how a forest ever went away or was isolated.
They do touch on why these brainiacs were unable to get into this area for decades, primarily because of the wars in the region. Ironically, this blogger was in that neighboring area to the east, Rwanda in 1994 during their civil war and genocide. I found it funny that the locals their, the chiefs and elders was not aware this area was "lost!" This is just an extreme example of what has
happened to basic science and reporting on that science. And we who question your brilliant analysis on Global Warming when you still don't know how asprin works, we are called Holocaust Deniers.
Don't be sheep people... Wake the hell up!
Racial discrimination tied to breast cancer risk
This is not a misprint... This is an actual Reuters headline.... This story was so bad, that Reuters did not even assign anyone as an author to it. What the hell does this say about Reuters or Yahoo for posting this as a Headline on their news page.
Don't forget: Reuters was the "fair and balanced" news organization that was caught doctoring photos of the Middle East with Photoshop. Remember this gem:
I am posting the whole story because you have to read this to see how absurd it is. I will now mark Howard University as a place not to send my kids to college. This tops the "smoking causes global warming" headline last year by far.
Racial discrimination tied to breast cancer risk
Reuters
Author Unknown
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Black women who feel they've been victims of racial discrimination are more likely than their peers to develop breast cancer, a large study suggests.
The study, which followed 59,000 African-American women for six years, found that those who reported more incidents of racial discrimination had a higher risk of breast cancer.
The relationship was stronger among women younger than 50, researchers found. This finding is particularly interesting, they note, in light of the fact that, unlike the case with older women, breast cancer is more common among young black women than young white women.
It's possible that racial discrimination plays some role, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Teletia R. Taylor of Howard University in Washington, D.C.
They report their findings in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
Past studies have suggested that over time, perceived racial discrimination can take a toll on a person's health. A possible explanation is that unjust treatment serves as a source of chronic stress, which itself has been linked to poorer physical health.
In the current study, women were asked how often they faced "everyday" discrimination, like receiving poorer service than other people at stores, or feeling that people are "afraid" of them or act superior to them.
They were also asked whether they'd ever been treated unjustly on the job, in trying to get housing, or by the police -- all considered examples of "major" discrimination.
Overall, Taylor's team found, women who said they frequently ran up against everyday types of discrimination had a higher risk of developing breast cancer. The same pattern was seen with major discrimination; women who reported on-the-job discrimination, for example, had a 32 percent higher risk of breast cancer than women who reported no such prejudice.
Women who said they'd faced discrimination on the job, in housing and from the police were 48 percent more likely to develop the disease than those who reported no incidents of major discrimination.
More studies, according to Taylor's team, are needed to confirm these findings, and to uncover the reasons for the connection between racism and breast cancer.
SOURCE: American Journal of Epidemiology, July 1, 2007.
This picture actually makes more sense than this study!
Suuueeeey!!!
That's what Chris Matthews thinks about anyone who is not a northeast elitist liberal...
First of all, I have to point out that like Tim Russert, George Stephanopoulos, Bill Moyers, etc, you're suppose to ignore the fact that Chris Matthews worked on a Democrat campaign in his previous life. He is NO WAY tilted left... Forget politics... What about just flat out blatant "elitism" that was on pure parade front and center yesterday. Perhaps it was because he saw the latest ratings and like most elitists that think we are just too stupid to understand their points. I mean even Keith Olbermann is beating Matthews and all he does is review Oreilly's show every night. How sad is that.... For whatever reason, he showed his "very white" ass on his show yesterday.
I don't really care that he tried to blindside Ann Coulter with John Edward's wife calling in (more on that later) or his just disgusting vile tone during the entire interview. What really stood out to me was the way he treated Ann's supporters in the crowd! Yes, he did say the words "Deliverance" when referring to the kids standing behind Ms. Coulter. Were they missing teeth like some elite Brits
or did they dress in clothes from Wal Mart? No... They looked exactly like the people behind him that were all liberal, Ann's supporters were "inbreeders" because they were supporting her views. The only difference between crowds was that some of them were carrying "Obama 08" or "Chris Dodd for President" signs.
At one point he even snapped after one of Ms. Coulter's brilliant comments that made Matthews look like a fat schoolyard bully that got his pants pulled down. He snapped at this maybe 18 girl that was standing behind Ms. Coulter and said "you can clap all day!" oooooohhhh... He kept saying during the interview when the crowd would pipe up, "oh my god!" (I did not think you liberals believed in God...)
Anyway, as far as the ambush with Ms. Edwards. This was completely planned. John Edwards campaign in floundering like a Chris Matthews out of water, so Edwards has his dying wife call into Matthews show to complain to Ms. Coulter. Perhaps you remember when Ms. Coulter caught all hell for targeting the "jersey girls" (9/11 widows). The point was clearly made by Ms. Coulter how liberals put up "victims" so to sqaush debate and free speech. Wow, did she "nail" that with the phone call from Ms. Edwards. I have the deepest sympathy for Mrs. Edwards probably more than her husband. Because if my wife was dying, the last thing I would do is run for President and take up my wife's final moments on a campaign trail. We're human beings first, right? Anyway, so not only does Ms. Coulter get challenged by a woman dying of cancer, she also has to debate the fact that the Edward's has exploited the death of their son from years prior! Even Ms. Coulter seemed restrained. I was waiting her to invoke the name of Bob Shrumm, John Kerry's campaign manager who wrote this sickening story in his book about the Edward's exploitation of their dead son that even gave him the creeps.
So are we surprised today that in an e-mail to supporters, Edwards’ wife described why she called in to MSNBC’s “Hardball” Tuesday. The e-mail is coupled with an appeal for campaign donations. The exact wording is:
“Please give what you can right now to help raise the dialogue and show that Ann Coulter-style politics will never carry the day.” Mrs. Edwards wrote. It is the second time in as many quarters that the Edwards campaign is using Coulter for a fundraising appeal.
How sick is that? I wish I was Mrs. Edwards parents, husband or somebody close to her that could tell her to "go play with your kids." Give those kids a memory besides your feud with Ann Coulter. What are you doing? There is something very disturbing about that family. Don't forget that John Edwards won millions by telling dumb juries that he was speaking for dead babies with cerebal palsey. Ohhhh... These people are creepy.
So anyway, back to Matthews- I would also call this guy a sexist but he only treats conservative women like trash. Do you remember when he chided Michelle Malkin and threw her off his show?
As I am seated at the table with Matthews, who I am meeting for the first time, he cracks a joke–and not in a well-meaning way–about how I look. “Are you sure you are old enough to be on the show? What are you? 28?” I grit my teeth. He badgers me again with the same question. I politely answer his question and supply my age. You can read her whole experience here:
Then after the "victim ambush," Matthews gets all hung up on Ms. Coulter referring to Hillary's legs as "chubby." He asked Msl Coulter about it several times. How many times has Matthews had Al Franken on his show? I don't recall this "chubby" comment sensitivity when Franken wrote a book titled "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot!"
Chris, like Dennis Miller would say: "we can see through this guy like used Neutrogena." You're a northeast elitist liberal snob who sees the rest of us as morons. But at least us simpletons from Deliverance understand the difference between Al Qaeda in Iraq and Al Qaeda on 9/11. That one just stumps the hell out of you don't it Chris!
Suuuueeeeyyyyyyy!!!
White Guilt...
They struggle, above all else, to dissociate themselves from the past sins they are stigmatized with. When they behave in ways that invoke the memory of those sins, they must labor to prove that they have not relapsed into their group’s former sinfulness... Shelby Steele -"White Guilt"
There are few things I find more pathetic than someone who has so much guilt for being white, that they not only "over compensate" for their race but go completely overboard. Take Mr. Bill Dedman from MSNBC, who obviously has way too much time on his hands because he has emailed me at least a half dozen times, (wonder if his boss knows) all because I criticized his missing the headline on the story about journalists giving $ to politicians. I was initially complimentary towards the story itself:
My original email: I appreciate your investigation but it took Drudge to post the real headline from your story "Reporters give to Dems, 9/1 over Republicans." You save that little tidbit for the third paragraph? "lean to the left?" Come on...
But since Dedman's work is completely infallible and above criticism, he has spent the last day correcting me and a blog that is hosted for free by Go Daddy.com! I know, top of the line, look out Matt Drudge! We have been accused by Dedman for making racist assumption and inaccuracies in his reporting, none of which had anything to do with my initial criticism. Well, since I'm a fair guy, I am going to expand on Dedman's work because we would hate to get it wrong. The truth is welcomed here.
According to Dedman, it is a racist assumption (see below comments) to point out that whites as a demographic make more money than blacks, so in turn get more loans than blacks. Or that there is more banks in white neighborhoods than black neighborhoods. He is right, I don't remember seeing as many banks on the south side of Chicago as I did in the burbs or downtown. Wow, I could have won a Pulitzer?
Bottom line, we will not overcome racism in this country until journalists like Bill Dedman can see people for anything but their color. Who is it that always reports "first black" this or "first black" that? Unfortunately you don't win Pulitzers by reporting on the advancements we have made in race relations over the last 40 years, oh no... You win Pulitzers by tearing this country down and pitting black against white. You people live, breathe and piss race Mr. Dedman. It's your kind of world view and obsession with race that immediately convicted three white (assumed rich) kids from Duke for raping a poor black girl. And you accuse me of making racial assumptions?
These articles are off your own website, in case you want to accuse us of getting anything else wrong...
-
Fulton's Michael Lomax: "If I can't get a loan, what black person can?"
- A tale of two neighborhoods, one black and one white
- How study of home loans in metro Atlanta was carried out
- Ranking banks on black vs. white loans
- Ranking lenders on black, working-class loans
- Southside treated like banks' stepchild?
- Selling lettuce, he built $3 million firm, but can't get business loan
- Poor may be left behind by bank deregulation
- Activists picket residence of HUD secretary
- Where blacks bank
- Small-business lending
- A test that few banks fail -- in federal eyes
- Poor may be left behind by bank deregulation
- Despite "good citizen" image, Trust Company finds itself in a battle
- The 12 factors in a CRA examination
- City Council calls meeting to review lending patterns
Months of work, but lending pool still bone-dry
- Self-help the aim of non-profit housing corporations
- "Anybody can sit out there and mouth off -- he gets things done"
- City Hall clout could sweeten home-loan pot
- Where to report discrimination
- Public deposits: Where governments put public money
- Black legislators seek to probe loan pattern with state bank chief
- Lomax house reassessed; taxes up $520
- State bank chief urges lending law
- Loan disclosures touch nerve among blacks, bankers
- Atlanta NAACP calls for boycott, federal probe of banks
- U.S. "looking into" banks' practices
- Black clergy consider boycott of banks over lending practices
- Banks plan to lend $65 million at low interest
- Black leaders, bankers break bread over vows of improved lending
- Blacks call banks' loan programs "step in right direction"
- Some families with very little in savings may be able to buy home
- Black boycott forestalled by loan plan
- Loan programs are drawing lot of interest
- Fair Lending panel identifies goals, begins planning for public hearing
- Banks open Saturday for low-interest loans
- Ministers, activists demand long-term action from banks
- Banking chief reverses stand calling for fair-lending laws
- Bankers take eye-opening Southside tour
- Black appraisers shut out by hiring rule of major lenders
- Detroit banks following Atlanta lead in new loans
- Reports of biased lending unfair, black bankers told
- Banks to offer $20 million in low-interest home loans
- Black clergy push plan to leave white banks
- ACORN fights merger plan by Bank South
- Blacks start move to support minority banks
- Bank South announces plan to reverse inequities on Southside
- 1st American changes service on Southside
- Bank South's $5 million promise appeases ACORN
- Federal study finds bias in lending across nation
- Atlanta among 20 worst cities in loan inequities
- Bank bill OK'd after 16 hours of debate
- Feds: Banks reject more black loans
- Federal bank regulators respond to "The Color of Money"
- Banks' business brisk in new home loans, but regulators wary
- Comparing the loan pools
- Special loans are open to all homebuyers
- Bank's plan to close branch In West End draws criticism
- Bank officials reconsider closing West End branch
- Suit accuses bank of foreclosure fraud
- Bank South calls lawsuit alleging fraud "groundless, frivolous"
- Lone banker takes heat at a hearing on loans
- Bank sticks by plan to shut branch
- Citicorp skips over real estate agents in black areas
- Sound of demolition is music to Cabbagetown ears
- Blacks invited into Citicorp loan program
- Black agents file suit alleging Realtors' rule biased against blacks
- Bank "adopts" neighborhood in new program for Southside
- Blacks turned down for home loans from S&Ls twice as often as whites
- Racial lending gap less in South than Midwest
- Congressman urges federal probe of racial lending gap
- Arrington's fair-lending report is late
- Lending panel issues report, urges reforms
- Mortgage workshop draws 550 potential homebuyers
- First Union to facilitate minority business loans
- Atlanta banks surprised to be focus of U.S. redlining probe
- Home loan program gets "mixed" review
- Home loan pool: wish come true for some blacks
- Senators give a lecture to U.S. bank regulators on bias in home loans
You should be ashamed of yourself...
And all of this just because you could not handle a little criticism...
And all of this just because you could not handle a little criticism...
What Media Bias?
I know, we're paranoid right? I had an interesting exchange this morning with a journalist that I have questioned before. Bill Dedman from MSNBC, who wrote an article entitled:
Bill Dedman
Bill Dedman
Journalists dole out cash to politicians (quietly) (Headline)
News organizations diverge on handling of political activism by staff (Sub-Headline)
Ok... No big deal right? Well, I may or may have not likely read an article like that (especially on MSNBC) until I saw this headline on the Drudge Report:
"THE GREAT DIVIDE: REPORTERS GIVE DEMS MONEY OVER REPUBLICANS 9 TO 1!"
9 to 1! Are we surprised? No... But that's not the point
Same story... Now you tell me, which is more newsworthy because maybe I'm missing something. So I go to the story and read the article. It's by the above mentioned Bill Dedman. It starts out like this:
*BOSTON - A CNN reporter gave $500 to John Kerry's campaign the same month he was embedded with the U.S. Army in Iraq. An assistant managing editor at Forbes magazine not only sent $2,000 to Republicans, but also volunteers as a director of an ExxonMobil-funded group that questions global warming. A junior editor at Dow Jones Newswires gave $1,036 to the liberal group MoveOn.org and keeps a blog listing "people I don't like," starting with George Bush, Pat Robertson, the Christian Coalition, the NRA and corporate America ("these are the people who are really in charge").
Whether you sample your news feed from ABC or CBS (or, yes, even NBC and MSNBC), whether you prefer Fox News Channel or National Public Radio, The Wall Street Journal or The New Yorker, some of the journalists feeding you are also feeding cash to politicians, parties or political action committees.
MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
WOW!!! So even in an article that clearly, clearly shows a HUGE media bias, the above mentioned Bill Dedman has to (for balance) mention George Bush, Pat Robertson, the Christian Coalition, NRA, Corporate America, Fox News, Wall Street Journal, I think you get the point! I think the only parties he left out was Wal Mart and Big Tobacco... In the meantime missing the entire headline that Drudge found!
This little side note in the 3rd paragraph "newsrooms leaned to the left!" Leaned? How about fell completely over left? So I email him. I was surprised to see that my comments got under his skin. I mean he is an award winning Pulitzer prize journalist formally with the Atlanta-Urinal Constipation. The exchange goes like this:
Subject: Nice Headline Bill
I appreciate your investigation but it took Drudge to post the real headline from your story "Reporters give to Dems, 9/1 over Republicans." You save that little tidbit for the third paragraph? "lean to the left?" Come on...
DELETE MEDIA
Re: Nice Headline Bill
Thanks for your note.
I don't think you, or Drudge, or anyone had trouble finding that fact all the way down in the third paragraph. C'mon.
The liberal-conservative point is the main point you took from it. It's not the main point I took from it, but it is important, and it's prominent. If you didn't see all the stories, here are the links:f
Bill
Bill Dedman
investigative reporter
Links to my articles: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14897510/
So my response:
Re: Nice Headline Bill
Actually I would not have read the story with the headline you had. I guess if you would have covered the JFK assassination in Dallas, your headline would have been Oswald's immigration status or the weather... Ironically, you guys just make the media bias argument for us, even when you are reporting on it.
DELETE MEDIA
Hit a nerve...
Re: Nice Headline Bill
Look, we've done an honest day's work here -- telling you just what you want to know.
And you have a gripe about it. It looks churlish to me.
Bill
Bill Dedman
investigative reporter
Links to my articles: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14897510/
Re: Nice Headline Bill
touchy, touchy... churlish? wow... so anyone who does not agree with your headline is churlish.. I forgot, you elites are above criticism... DELETE MEDIA
He can't let it go....
Re: Nice Headline Bill
I'm just saying that your criticism is not valid. We brought you news of
interest. Isn't that what you expect a free press to do?
Bill
Bill Dedman
investigative reporter
Links to my articles: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14897510/
Re: Nice Headline Bill
As I said in my initial email, I appreciated your investigation. However since this is a free country as you say, I
have the right to say you missed the headline. See what you forget is, freedom works both ways sir. It's not just
for the press... Thank GOD! DELETE MEDIA
So after this exchange, I google this guy just to see how fair and balanced he is as a Pulitzer winner. Come to find out, he won his Pulitzer for reporting that their are more banks in richer white neighborhoods in Atlanta than in poorer black inner city neighborhoods! Wow! Really? The segment was called "The Color of Money" (original)
Other award winning pieces:
Boston Globe: Did a series on criticizing Firefighters for letting people die because they are too slow to get to fires especially in guess what? Yes, black communities...
New York Times: The Police and their brutal policy of Racial Profling...
MSNBC: Torture at Gitmo - I love this one. It was two years before the photos emerged from Abu Ghraib, the Pentagon cops said, when they began arguing that coercive or abusive interrogations would not serve war-fighting or justice.
******
Yeah? Ask George Tenet if they worked... Totally contradicts your report. Get the picture. This America Hater who thinks the USA is a racist, torturous society that has raped and oppressed the world. And he of the "free press" could not handle the slightest of criticism because folks as with all of these "elites," you can't question them. You don't get Pulitzers for investigative journalism for good stories about our country. No, these bastards pat themselves on the back and high five each other when they take turns helping the enemy or when they wipe their ass with "old glory," then hide behind her when you question them or their patriotism.
Run Fred Run!!!
This Country needs Fred Thompson!
Time to put a Conservative back in the White House!
Give to Fred's Campaign Now!
Another Great NBC moment...
Those flag wavers at NBC who love to show their patriotism, remember this
honey with the fake glasses that is now doing spiffs for Animal Planet or
something: Happy Anniversary Ashleigh! 4 years ago you gave this
lovely speech that either caused your demise or just showed your bitter ass!
April 25, 2003: NBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield slammed her colleagues in television news over coverage of the war in Iraq, saying the realities of the conflict never reached American viewers.
Banfield, in a speech at Kansas State University, lashed out at "cable news operators who wrap themselves in the American flag and go after a certain target demographic."
The dig was a veiled swipe at Fox News Channel, whose war coverage included a patriotic tinge. Canadian-born Banfield hosted "MSNBC Investigates" on the No. 3 cable news network, MSNBC. While MSNBC's ratings improved during the war, the network still came up short in the ratings game behind No. 1 Fox and CNN.