I guess these guys need more instruction from the Left on the fact they are victims, they are oppressed, and they need to be offended by anything anyone says that fails to include the admission that they are in fact the morally superior culture.
After all - look how far black America has gotten by adapting that attitude! Well, maybe not, but....
Anyway - perhaps American Muslims are reaching their own breaking point with the American Left as well:
Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, took issue with those who wrap themselves in feel-good sensitivity, while denying the fact that the majority of terrorists are Muslim.
Indeed, the threat is real enough even for Fatah, a liberal Muslim, who looks at women in burkas with skepticism. “I am scared when I see women in burkas, how do I know what is behind that?” Fatah said, noting that many Muslims share his concerns.
“We are victims of these guys. A number of suicide bombers who have attacked have killed people [while] wearing the burka,” Fatah said. “This is the truth, we should be speaking the truth rather than what people expect us to say. ”
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, told The Daily Caller that though Williams could have been more tactful, his ouster is symptomatic of the problems Americans continue to face when discussing Islam.
“As much as the way he said it was poorly chosen, the era we find ourselves — of political correctness — we are not able to address what this fear is,” Jasser said. “Anybody that starts talking about this fear gets shut down.”
Fatah agreed, saying that he did not believe that anything Williams’ said was terrible enough to lose his job. “I think it is another expression of political correctness. I didn’t find anything that he said that he deserved to be fired,” he told TheDC.
According to Jasser, the fact that the vast majority of national security threats emanate from the Muslim world makes Williams’ fear reasonable. Without open discussion, however, those concerns will never be conquered.
More:
Stephen Schwartz, executive director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, echoed Fatah and Jasser. Schwartz told TheDC that he and his organization opposed NPR’s reaction to Williams’ comments.
“Mr. Williams is basically an opinion journalist and he offered an opinion based on an undeniable reality: American Muslims have so far failed in our duty to prevent negative perceptions among our non-Muslim neighbors, and many, unfortunately, have taken the existing concerns among non-Muslims as a challenge to assert Muslim identity more aggressively, through forms of dress as well as speech that are often extravagant and excessive,” Schwartz wrote in an e-mail to TheDC.
“Mr. Williams spoke to this reality in an understated, candid way. He did not express hatred or incite violence against Muslims. He should not have been dismissed.”
Hmmm...how will NPR and liberal America react to this backlash from the very people they are claiming to protect (but are using as a front to commit and ideological purge)?
Wait for it. Like blacks who walk off the Democratic plantation, or women who believe in conservative values, expect Schwartz, Fatah, and Jasser to be demonized by the left, who will then curl ever-so-deeper into CAIR hateful embrace.
Like a mouse curling up with a cobra for warmth...
วันศุกร์, ตุลาคม 22, 2553
On Juan Williams, Elizabeth Moon, and Kristallnacht
Some irritation over my post yesterday - Liberalism's Kristallnacht: October 21st, 2010 - led me to re-think my lede and my comparison.
And I will say it is not apt. Kristallnact, as a commenter pointed out, was a state-sponsored orgy of racial hatred, yesterday's bits of liberal housecleaning could not be properly compared. I will not change anything previously written (the "memory hole" is a liberal construct I do not apply, save perhaps on spelling errors).
I agree. The comparison I should have used was The Great Purge:
The Great Purge was a series of campaigns of political repression and persecution in the Soviet Union orchestrated by Joseph Stalin in 1936–1938. It involved a large-scale purge of the Communist Party and Government officials, repression of peasants, Red Army leadership, and the persecution of unaffiliated persons, characterized by widespread police surveillance, widespread suspicion of "saboteurs", imprisonment, and executions.
OK, so we peasants haven't been repressed yet, but the hatred in the eyes of the left, and their final answer to all inquiry being "because I said so!", is proof enough of what they wish they could do. See Tom Friedman in the New York Times, constantly cooing about how if only "we could be run like China for a day", we could fix everything that's wrong with us. Uh-huh.
But re-read the words spoken by Moon, and by Williams. If these softly-spoken, well-thought-out expressions of personal belief and concern can make you a person non grata, well...then anything you say can be twisted to be construed as a racist thought-crime, and put you on the same dingy as they are.
Re-think your position. They have already come for Juan Williams and Elizabeth Moon...and when your opinion moves slightly outside the mainstream of acceptable liberal thought, they will come for you next. And those friends that you believe will support you? Out of fear, and hatred, they will turn away, if only to protect themselves for one more day.
Purges are like that, you know. As I mentioned yesterday, the problems with purges is that they never stay small...
And I will say it is not apt. Kristallnact, as a commenter pointed out, was a state-sponsored orgy of racial hatred, yesterday's bits of liberal housecleaning could not be properly compared. I will not change anything previously written (the "memory hole" is a liberal construct I do not apply, save perhaps on spelling errors).
I agree. The comparison I should have used was The Great Purge:
The Great Purge was a series of campaigns of political repression and persecution in the Soviet Union orchestrated by Joseph Stalin in 1936–1938. It involved a large-scale purge of the Communist Party and Government officials, repression of peasants, Red Army leadership, and the persecution of unaffiliated persons, characterized by widespread police surveillance, widespread suspicion of "saboteurs", imprisonment, and executions.
OK, so we peasants haven't been repressed yet, but the hatred in the eyes of the left, and their final answer to all inquiry being "because I said so!", is proof enough of what they wish they could do. See Tom Friedman in the New York Times, constantly cooing about how if only "we could be run like China for a day", we could fix everything that's wrong with us. Uh-huh.
But re-read the words spoken by Moon, and by Williams. If these softly-spoken, well-thought-out expressions of personal belief and concern can make you a person non grata, well...then anything you say can be twisted to be construed as a racist thought-crime, and put you on the same dingy as they are.
Re-think your position. They have already come for Juan Williams and Elizabeth Moon...and when your opinion moves slightly outside the mainstream of acceptable liberal thought, they will come for you next. And those friends that you believe will support you? Out of fear, and hatred, they will turn away, if only to protect themselves for one more day.
Purges are like that, you know. As I mentioned yesterday, the problems with purges is that they never stay small...
วันพฤหัสบดี, ตุลาคม 21, 2553
Liberalism's Kristallnacht: October 21st, 2010
(w/updated thoughts and further commentary here)
The problems with purges is that they never stay small...
NPR got the ball rolling this morning by firing Juan Williams for speaking for himself, candidly, on FOX News. This afternoon, the lower-echelon cadres got involved, and followed the lead of their jackbooted masters by rescinding ex-Marine and celebrated Sci-Fi author Elizabeth Moon's invitation to attend WisCon 35 as "guest of honor". Instapundit has much more....
Why? Because she does not approve of building a mosque at Ground Zero. Here is the thought crime for which she has been summarily convicted, without trial:
When an Islamic group decided to build a memorial center at/near the site of the 9/11 attack, they should have been able to predict that this would upset a lot of people. Not only were the attackers Islamic--and not only did the Islamic world in general show indecent glee about the attack, but this was only the last of many attacks on citizens and installations of this country which Islamic groups proudly claimed credit for. That some Muslims died in the attacks is immaterial--does not wipe out the long, long chain of Islamic hostility. It would have been one thing to have the Muslim victims' names placed with the others, and identified there as Muslims--but to use that site to proselytize for the religion that lies behind so many attacks on the innocent (I cannot forget the Jewish man in a wheelchair pushed over the side of the ship to drown, or Maj. Nadal's attack on soldiers at Fort Hood) was bound to raise a stink.
It is hard to believe that those making the application did not know that--did not anticipate it--and were not, in a way, probing to see if they could start a controversy. If they did not know, then they did not know enough about the culture into which they had moved. Though I am not angry about it, and have not spoken out in opposition, I do think it was a rude and tactless thing to propose (and, if carried out, to do.)
Moon is a liberal, mind you. She just doesn't subscribe to party orthodoxy. And when the purges begin, and the blood starts running down the streets, it is not just the blood of the nonbeliever which seeps its way around the cobblestones. It is joined by the blood of those who only have the slightest traces of impurities, those who agree with 95% of what you say but proffered their own thoughts about the other 5%. (remember the drumming out of Joe Lieberman?) On the liberal's Kristallnacht, the man (or woman, in this case) with the slightest doubts about The Agenda are as guilty as Karl Rove, and must suffer his fate.
How much more of liberty's blood will run today?
UPDATE: When I use the word "summarily", it is done with full meaning. Juan Williams on his firing from NPR today:
Wednesday afternoon I got a message on my cell phone from Ellen Weiss who’s the head of news at NPR asking me to call. When I called back she said, “What did you say? What did you mean to say?” And I said, “I said what I meant to say.” Which is that it’s an honest experience that when I’m in an airport and I see people who are in Muslim garb, who identify themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I do a double take. I have a moment of anxiety or fear given what happened on 9/11. That’s just the reality. And she went on to say, “Well, that crosses the line.” And I said, “What line is that?” And she went on to somehow suggest that I had made a bigoted statement. And I said, “It’s not a bigoted statement.” I, in fact, in the course of this conversation with Bill O’Reilly, said that we have, as Americans, an obligation to be careful to protect the constitutional rights of everyone in the country and to make sure we don’t have any outbreak of bigotry. But that there’s a reality. You cannot ignore what happened on 9/11 and you cannot ignore the connection to Islamic radicalism. And you can’t ignore the fact of what has been recently said in court with regard to this as the first drop of blood in a Muslim war in America.
And then she said, “You know, this has been decided up the chain.” I said, “You mean, I don’t even get the chance to come in and we do this eyeball-to-eyeball, person-to-person, have a conversation? I’ve been there for more than ten years. We don’t have that chance to have a conversation about this?” And she said, “There’s nothing you can say that will change my mind. This has been decided above me and we’re terminating your contract.”
UPDATE II: More fascism - remember how the Soviets used to send dissenters to "insane asylums"? Well, that meme is alive and well at NPR:
Fired NPR news analyst Juan Williams should have kept his feeling about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist," the network's CEO told an audience at the Atlanta Press Club earlier today.
The problems with purges is that they never stay small...
NPR got the ball rolling this morning by firing Juan Williams for speaking for himself, candidly, on FOX News. This afternoon, the lower-echelon cadres got involved, and followed the lead of their jackbooted masters by rescinding ex-Marine and celebrated Sci-Fi author Elizabeth Moon's invitation to attend WisCon 35 as "guest of honor". Instapundit has much more....
Why? Because she does not approve of building a mosque at Ground Zero. Here is the thought crime for which she has been summarily convicted, without trial:
When an Islamic group decided to build a memorial center at/near the site of the 9/11 attack, they should have been able to predict that this would upset a lot of people. Not only were the attackers Islamic--and not only did the Islamic world in general show indecent glee about the attack, but this was only the last of many attacks on citizens and installations of this country which Islamic groups proudly claimed credit for. That some Muslims died in the attacks is immaterial--does not wipe out the long, long chain of Islamic hostility. It would have been one thing to have the Muslim victims' names placed with the others, and identified there as Muslims--but to use that site to proselytize for the religion that lies behind so many attacks on the innocent (I cannot forget the Jewish man in a wheelchair pushed over the side of the ship to drown, or Maj. Nadal's attack on soldiers at Fort Hood) was bound to raise a stink.
It is hard to believe that those making the application did not know that--did not anticipate it--and were not, in a way, probing to see if they could start a controversy. If they did not know, then they did not know enough about the culture into which they had moved. Though I am not angry about it, and have not spoken out in opposition, I do think it was a rude and tactless thing to propose (and, if carried out, to do.)
Moon is a liberal, mind you. She just doesn't subscribe to party orthodoxy. And when the purges begin, and the blood starts running down the streets, it is not just the blood of the nonbeliever which seeps its way around the cobblestones. It is joined by the blood of those who only have the slightest traces of impurities, those who agree with 95% of what you say but proffered their own thoughts about the other 5%. (remember the drumming out of Joe Lieberman?) On the liberal's Kristallnacht, the man (or woman, in this case) with the slightest doubts about The Agenda are as guilty as Karl Rove, and must suffer his fate.
How much more of liberty's blood will run today?
UPDATE: When I use the word "summarily", it is done with full meaning. Juan Williams on his firing from NPR today:
Wednesday afternoon I got a message on my cell phone from Ellen Weiss who’s the head of news at NPR asking me to call. When I called back she said, “What did you say? What did you mean to say?” And I said, “I said what I meant to say.” Which is that it’s an honest experience that when I’m in an airport and I see people who are in Muslim garb, who identify themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I do a double take. I have a moment of anxiety or fear given what happened on 9/11. That’s just the reality. And she went on to say, “Well, that crosses the line.” And I said, “What line is that?” And she went on to somehow suggest that I had made a bigoted statement. And I said, “It’s not a bigoted statement.” I, in fact, in the course of this conversation with Bill O’Reilly, said that we have, as Americans, an obligation to be careful to protect the constitutional rights of everyone in the country and to make sure we don’t have any outbreak of bigotry. But that there’s a reality. You cannot ignore what happened on 9/11 and you cannot ignore the connection to Islamic radicalism. And you can’t ignore the fact of what has been recently said in court with regard to this as the first drop of blood in a Muslim war in America.
And then she said, “You know, this has been decided up the chain.” I said, “You mean, I don’t even get the chance to come in and we do this eyeball-to-eyeball, person-to-person, have a conversation? I’ve been there for more than ten years. We don’t have that chance to have a conversation about this?” And she said, “There’s nothing you can say that will change my mind. This has been decided above me and we’re terminating your contract.”
UPDATE II: More fascism - remember how the Soviets used to send dissenters to "insane asylums"? Well, that meme is alive and well at NPR:
Fired NPR news analyst Juan Williams should have kept his feeling about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist," the network's CEO told an audience at the Atlanta Press Club earlier today.
Marisol Valles Garcia - Mexico's Joan of Arc?
My heart ached when I read this, because you just know it is not going to end well:
She's only 20 years old, has a baby son and is still in college -- but now she's also the top cop in one of the most dangerous towns in Mexico.
Marisol Valles Garcia was sworn in Monday as police chief of the border city of Praxedis
Guadalupe Guerrero -- which has been plagued by horrific drug-trade bloodshed -- after literally everyone else considered for the job refused to take it out of terror of becoming the next target.
"We're all afraid in Mexico now. We can't let fear beat us," said the brave, or foolhardy, Valles Garcia after being sworn in to protect the 9,149-resident town -- where eight people were slaughtered in the past week alone.
"I took the risk because I want my son to live in a different community to the one we have today. I want people to be able to go out without fear, as it was before," said the petite new chief -- who amazingly won't carry a weapon in her new job.
Praxedis is part of the Juarez valley region, where the 2,500 drug-related murders so far this year have made it the most violent region in Mexico.
Will her youth and femininity protect her? Or is she doomed to be a martyr, with her death being the rallying cry across Mexico to end the rule of the drug lords once and for all?
Pity the Mexicans, where the only citizens willing to stand up and fight evil are young girls, barely beyond their teenage years.
Joan of Arc won many battles (including lifting the siege of Orleans in just nine days), doing the work that lesser men feared to do, before being captured and burned at the stake. Will Marisol Valles Garcia suffer a similar fate?
I will pray for her. But it will take more than that to save her, and Mexico...
She's only 20 years old, has a baby son and is still in college -- but now she's also the top cop in one of the most dangerous towns in Mexico.
Marisol Valles Garcia was sworn in Monday as police chief of the border city of Praxedis
Guadalupe Guerrero -- which has been plagued by horrific drug-trade bloodshed -- after literally everyone else considered for the job refused to take it out of terror of becoming the next target."We're all afraid in Mexico now. We can't let fear beat us," said the brave, or foolhardy, Valles Garcia after being sworn in to protect the 9,149-resident town -- where eight people were slaughtered in the past week alone.
"I took the risk because I want my son to live in a different community to the one we have today. I want people to be able to go out without fear, as it was before," said the petite new chief -- who amazingly won't carry a weapon in her new job.
Praxedis is part of the Juarez valley region, where the 2,500 drug-related murders so far this year have made it the most violent region in Mexico.
Will her youth and femininity protect her? Or is she doomed to be a martyr, with her death being the rallying cry across Mexico to end the rule of the drug lords once and for all?
Pity the Mexicans, where the only citizens willing to stand up and fight evil are young girls, barely beyond their teenage years.
Joan of Arc won many battles (including lifting the siege of Orleans in just nine days), doing the work that lesser men feared to do, before being captured and burned at the stake. Will Marisol Valles Garcia suffer a similar fate?
I will pray for her. But it will take more than that to save her, and Mexico...
NPR Fires Juan Williams...Because He Strayed "Off The Plantation"?
I must admit, I was surprised when I heard this. Not a big fan of Juan Williams ,but he had the occasional semblance of balance, which is more than can be said for 99% of media liberals.
Which, of course, may explain this:
NPR terminated its contract this evening with Juan Williams, who worked with them as a senior political analyst, after Williams appeared on Bill O’Reilly and spoke of a “Muslim dilemma”
Mr. Williams said...“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”
Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.
NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
So odd. I have questions:
-How does the act of Mr. Williams relating his own concern about seeing full-fledged Muslims on airplanes "undermine his credibility"? Nowhere does he say that he believes all Muslims are terrorists, he only speaks of his own feelings of nervousness when he flies. Being that all recent terrorist-related airplane disasters were orchestrated by Muslims, is he not simply reflecting upon an overall national concern (one that is likely shared by most Americans), and thus enhancing his position as a legitimate "news analyst"?
-do NPR's "editorial standards" including hiding from the American public basic facts about radical Islam's attitude towards America? Note NPR does not repudiate the facts involved, only the speaker and the fact they were spoken...
-why is a taxpayer-funded organization firing someone for engaging in free speech?
Which, of course, may explain this:
NPR terminated its contract this evening with Juan Williams, who worked with them as a senior political analyst, after Williams appeared on Bill O’Reilly and spoke of a “Muslim dilemma”
Mr. Williams said...“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”
Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.
NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
So odd. I have questions:
-How does the act of Mr. Williams relating his own concern about seeing full-fledged Muslims on airplanes "undermine his credibility"? Nowhere does he say that he believes all Muslims are terrorists, he only speaks of his own feelings of nervousness when he flies. Being that all recent terrorist-related airplane disasters were orchestrated by Muslims, is he not simply reflecting upon an overall national concern (one that is likely shared by most Americans), and thus enhancing his position as a legitimate "news analyst"?
-do NPR's "editorial standards" including hiding from the American public basic facts about radical Islam's attitude towards America? Note NPR does not repudiate the facts involved, only the speaker and the fact they were spoken...
-why is a taxpayer-funded organization firing someone for engaging in free speech?
-would Williams have been fired if he made similar remarks about Jews, or Israel? Never mind, I know the answer to that one...
-was Williams fired because he appears often on FOX, and made his comments on O'Reilly's show? Would he have been fired had they been made on Rachel Maddow's show, or CNN? Not that anyone would have seen them anyway...
-was Juan Williams fired because he said these things while being black? Certainly, members of specific groups who Democrats feel are rightly "their" constituency are the ones who take the most heat for straying off the ideological plantation. Colin Powell, Condi Rice, women such as Sarah Palin, Christie O'Donnell....you get the drift. So does Dan Riehl:
What Juan Williams did is very similar to why the Left hates Sarah Palin, other conservative women and conservative homosexuals. He played against the progressive stereotype of himself, revealing a balanced and too candid humanity within. For a moment, in essence, he became too real.
Well, if Juan Williams is impacted by the behavior of Muslims, then progressives - and NPR is that, can't lecture white America that their concerns are based on hate, religious intolerance, bigotry or xenophobia. Juan Williams didn't drop his mask and reveal any Islamophobia last night on Fox. What he did was rip the mask off the tactics NPR and other progressives, including the liberal media, use to lecture America and prevent an honest discussion of the threat from Islam.
Sorry, Juan. You got screwed by the very progressive cause you championed. In the old days, a conservative was "a liberal who had been mugged". We are seeing a lot of that today, as Democratic voters migrate towards the Right in the run-up to the 2010 midterms: Today's conservatives are liberals who realized they wouldn't be the ones wearing the boots, they'd be the ones feeling the heel stomp across their collective faces...
UPDATE: Thoughts from Cliff May, which confirm some of my analysis:
Bottom line: NPR has its own interpretation of sharia, and Juan violated it — and paid the price....It’s also true — I have this on good authority — that NPR has long been furious with Juan simply for being a regular on Fox. You’d think they’d appreciate the fact that he is making the liberal case, intelligently, to a largely conservative audience. How else are right-wingers going to learn? But no, at NPR most people favor engagement with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — but not with Bill O’Reilly...
วันพุธ, ตุลาคม 20, 2553
Asbury Park Press Endorses Frank Pallone (D); Readers Go Nuts
...it wasn't even the fact that the paper endorsed Frank "I wrote the health care bill" Pallone that pissed people off so much. It was the effusive praise for a out-of-touch Congressman and the curt, sneering dismissal of his opponent, Anna Little (as well as the Tea Party) - who happens to be only a point back in the polls - that sent some of the APP's readers off the deep end.
The offending editorial is here. The comments are classic:
This editorial is incomplete - it's missing the last two / bottom lines:
"This editorial was written, and paid for by the Washington DC based Political Action Committee to re-elect Frankie Pallone".
"Hi, I'm Congressman Frankie Pallone, and I approve this ad".
Pallone is a tireless advocate for himself, and for the Pelosi agenda. Time for a change. Maybe time to cancel a subscription to the Asbury Park Press too.
TFPP: you forgot to mention all the work he did to save Fort Monmouth. OOPS, sorry. Maybe Pallone, the Tinton Falls Press, their "journalists", and their supporters will have better lives in Maryland. I know we would be better off if they did.
APP's decision to endorse Mr. Pallone for re-election discredits their judgement, and illustrates the growing irrelevance and cultural disconnect of today's MSM.
Anna Little is a principled candidate who not only believes in freedom and capitalism, but actually appears to know something about economics as well.
Wow. Not only are these editorials completely wrong, they read like campaign rhetoric lifted directly from the candidates they endorse.
I've seen enough of Pallone to know that "thoughtful" and "tireless" are the last adjectives that I would apply to him. The first that come to mind for me are "arrogant" and "ideological".
No wonder no one reads your paper or advertises anymore...
Pallone is an arrogant out of touch typical Washington democrat who cares more about special interests that his constituents.
It's called the house of REPRESENTATIVES! Your paper was the one who reported that when asked if he would vote for obamacare even if he knew the majority of his constituents were against it - HE SAID HE STILL WOULD VOTE FOR IT! And this is who your paper endorses?? And the media depicts the Tea Party People as nuts?!?! Your paper is not fit for the bottom of a bird cage. Go away.
It does not sound like anyone from the APP attended Sunday"s debate in Aberdeen...
I am really shocked that you would endorse Pallone. If you had been to the debate Sunday evening, you would know that Frankie gets all his information from the Newark Star Ledger!
I've Been a lifelong and commited Democrat. Truly, Frank Pallone does NOT LISTEN TO HIS CONSTITUENTS. Most definately, he decieved many of his supporters and lost many (including me). This is a no brainer: Frank Pallone does not get my vote! The Asbury Park Press lost my support! ANNA LITTLE IS THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO US!
It seems to be quite evident that Asbury Park Press editorial staff is as out of touch with the general public as Pallone and Holt.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket and you endorse the same clowns, Pallone and Holt, that got us in this predicament.
The other day the APP endorsed Holt. Today they are endorsing Pallone. Soon they will endorse Adler. The day after all three fall in the election the editors will sit and wonder why Gannett Publishing is looking at bankruptcy and APP personnel are being laid off.
"Return Pallone to Washington"? For the love of God, WHY? Mr. Pallone is the living, breathing embodyment of everything that's wrong with the American political landscape. He represents no one outside of his own narrow, toxic party ideology. And the APP's intellectually bankrupt endorsement ...Last ditch effort of the liberal "mainstream" media to try and give their candidate a boost
The Press has gone absolutely BONKERS!
It is now official. The Asbury Park Press is on crack!
Dear Asbury Park Press,
The reason I called and cancelled my subscription last week, after 30+ years, is because I could no longer afford it due to the increase in my health care premiums. This is a direct result of Pallone's handiwork. Be careful of what you wish for.
Ok, the APP has lost all credibility.
APP You have got to be kidding me.....Is this some kind of April Fools joke????? You are not a serious media outlet at this point
And trust me...this is not minority opinion. Go read 'em all....
The offending editorial is here. The comments are classic:
This editorial is incomplete - it's missing the last two / bottom lines:
"This editorial was written, and paid for by the Washington DC based Political Action Committee to re-elect Frankie Pallone".
"Hi, I'm Congressman Frankie Pallone, and I approve this ad".
Pallone is a tireless advocate for himself, and for the Pelosi agenda. Time for a change. Maybe time to cancel a subscription to the Asbury Park Press too.
TFPP: you forgot to mention all the work he did to save Fort Monmouth. OOPS, sorry. Maybe Pallone, the Tinton Falls Press, their "journalists", and their supporters will have better lives in Maryland. I know we would be better off if they did.
APP's decision to endorse Mr. Pallone for re-election discredits their judgement, and illustrates the growing irrelevance and cultural disconnect of today's MSM.
Anna Little is a principled candidate who not only believes in freedom and capitalism, but actually appears to know something about economics as well.
Wow. Not only are these editorials completely wrong, they read like campaign rhetoric lifted directly from the candidates they endorse.
I've seen enough of Pallone to know that "thoughtful" and "tireless" are the last adjectives that I would apply to him. The first that come to mind for me are "arrogant" and "ideological".
No wonder no one reads your paper or advertises anymore...
Pallone is an arrogant out of touch typical Washington democrat who cares more about special interests that his constituents.
It's called the house of REPRESENTATIVES! Your paper was the one who reported that when asked if he would vote for obamacare even if he knew the majority of his constituents were against it - HE SAID HE STILL WOULD VOTE FOR IT! And this is who your paper endorses?? And the media depicts the Tea Party People as nuts?!?! Your paper is not fit for the bottom of a bird cage. Go away.
It does not sound like anyone from the APP attended Sunday"s debate in Aberdeen...
I am really shocked that you would endorse Pallone. If you had been to the debate Sunday evening, you would know that Frankie gets all his information from the Newark Star Ledger!
I've Been a lifelong and commited Democrat. Truly, Frank Pallone does NOT LISTEN TO HIS CONSTITUENTS. Most definately, he decieved many of his supporters and lost many (including me). This is a no brainer: Frank Pallone does not get my vote! The Asbury Park Press lost my support! ANNA LITTLE IS THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO US!
It seems to be quite evident that Asbury Park Press editorial staff is as out of touch with the general public as Pallone and Holt.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket and you endorse the same clowns, Pallone and Holt, that got us in this predicament.
The other day the APP endorsed Holt. Today they are endorsing Pallone. Soon they will endorse Adler. The day after all three fall in the election the editors will sit and wonder why Gannett Publishing is looking at bankruptcy and APP personnel are being laid off.
"Return Pallone to Washington"? For the love of God, WHY? Mr. Pallone is the living, breathing embodyment of everything that's wrong with the American political landscape. He represents no one outside of his own narrow, toxic party ideology. And the APP's intellectually bankrupt endorsement ...Last ditch effort of the liberal "mainstream" media to try and give their candidate a boost
The Press has gone absolutely BONKERS!
It is now official. The Asbury Park Press is on crack!
Dear Asbury Park Press,
The reason I called and cancelled my subscription last week, after 30+ years, is because I could no longer afford it due to the increase in my health care premiums. This is a direct result of Pallone's handiwork. Be careful of what you wish for.
Ok, the APP has lost all credibility.
APP You have got to be kidding me.....Is this some kind of April Fools joke????? You are not a serious media outlet at this point
And trust me...this is not minority opinion. Go read 'em all....
No Need To Sweat Those Pat Toomey Polls in PA...
Don't worry, Pennsylvania voters haven't lost their mind. Only the pollsters have.
This latest poll is causing some on the right to break out in a sweat:
Democrat Sestak now leads Republican Toomey 44 percent to 41 percent with 15 percent undecided, a Morning Call/Muhlenberg College Tracker poll shows.
…It’s hard to explain Sestak’s latest apparent comeback.There’s a sense that faithful Democrats are paying closer attention in the closing weeks as President Barack Obama crisscrosses the country making the case for keeping Democrats in charge...
Unlikely. The reason you need to clutch at straws such as "The most unpopular president in decades is helping the Democratic candidate" is because there is no comeback. There always seems to be strange polling in the final stretch before an election, especially when it is the Democrat who is trailing badly.
Case in point - the following poll/piece from October 27th, 2009 - just a week before the 2009 New Jersey governor's election:
Don’t get too excited about a Suffolk University poll that has Gov. Corzine leading Republican Chris Christie by 9 points, 42-33, with Chris Daggett getting 7 per cent.....
Yeah, because all the Democrats were finally paying attention! The nonstop negative ads that Jon Corzine were running - outspending Chris Christie by 3-1 - were taking their toll. The conservative pundits wailed, but with a smirk and an unspoken "told ya so - a Republican cannot win in Jersey" (The Campaign Spot's Jim Geraghty, who I greatly admire, was one of the biggest offenders).
Seven days later, Christie went on to defeat Corzine by 3 in a state where Democrats had a 600,000+ voter registration advantage. Because the people of New Jersey were fed up and had enough.
Just like the people of Pennsylvania. Watch for it to be repeated all over America on 11/2.
You heard it here first: If A Democrat does not have a lead outside of the margin of error on election eve, they're toast...
This latest poll is causing some on the right to break out in a sweat:
Democrat Sestak now leads Republican Toomey 44 percent to 41 percent with 15 percent undecided, a Morning Call/Muhlenberg College Tracker poll shows.
…It’s hard to explain Sestak’s latest apparent comeback.There’s a sense that faithful Democrats are paying closer attention in the closing weeks as President Barack Obama crisscrosses the country making the case for keeping Democrats in charge...
Unlikely. The reason you need to clutch at straws such as "The most unpopular president in decades is helping the Democratic candidate" is because there is no comeback. There always seems to be strange polling in the final stretch before an election, especially when it is the Democrat who is trailing badly.
Case in point - the following poll/piece from October 27th, 2009 - just a week before the 2009 New Jersey governor's election:
Don’t get too excited about a Suffolk University poll that has Gov. Corzine leading Republican Chris Christie by 9 points, 42-33, with Chris Daggett getting 7 per cent.....
Yeah, because all the Democrats were finally paying attention! The nonstop negative ads that Jon Corzine were running - outspending Chris Christie by 3-1 - were taking their toll. The conservative pundits wailed, but with a smirk and an unspoken "told ya so - a Republican cannot win in Jersey" (The Campaign Spot's Jim Geraghty, who I greatly admire, was one of the biggest offenders).
Seven days later, Christie went on to defeat Corzine by 3 in a state where Democrats had a 600,000+ voter registration advantage. Because the people of New Jersey were fed up and had enough.
Just like the people of Pennsylvania. Watch for it to be repeated all over America on 11/2.
You heard it here first: If A Democrat does not have a lead outside of the margin of error on election eve, they're toast...
วันอังคาร, ตุลาคม 19, 2553
Jimmy McMillan Has All The Answers!
Jimmy is a candidate for governor in New York, has a wonderful speaking cadence, the best facial hair of any candidate nationwide, and a very simple message: The Rent Is Too Damn High!
When you look at the motley crew of candidates angling to run New York State - from the smug Cuomo to the batshit-crazy Carl Paladino, one must ask themselves: Why not just vote for the biggest loon of all?
An Obama with muttonchops, with twice the charm and three times the laughs:
When you look at the motley crew of candidates angling to run New York State - from the smug Cuomo to the batshit-crazy Carl Paladino, one must ask themselves: Why not just vote for the biggest loon of all?
An Obama with muttonchops, with twice the charm and three times the laughs:
Poll: Tea Party's Anna Little Within 1 of Frank Pallone?
WOW! I knew the ground movement was big, but most of the polling has been a bit depressing, with the most recent showing her behind by as many as 8-9 points. And yes, this is an internal poll, but with all of the good will Anna has built up in the community over the past few months, I can't imagine her releasing numbers like these if they were fudged:
Republican numbers cruncher Adam Geller of National Research, Inc. shows Republican challenger Little with a shot to win in her challenge of a vulnerable U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-Long Branch).
Commissioned by the Little campaign, Geller puts Pallone ahead of Little by one point, 44-43%, in a survey Geller conducted from Oct. 5-6.
The survey of 300 likely 6th Congressional District voters with a +/- 5.66% margin of error shows that district voters favor the generic Republican candidate by a margin of 43-39%.
Pallone has a favorability rating of 42%, compared to 36% unfavorable. His job approval rating, according to the poll, is 35%, compared to 39% who disapprove. Among voters who have heard of both candidates, Little leads Pallone, 58-32%. Those with a "formed opnion" of both candidates give Little the lead, 66-27%. Among voters who are a self-reported "10" in vote likelihood, Little leads 48-40%. Among independents, Little leads 49-34%
Who's gonna show up on November 2nd? That's going to make all the difference. If discouraged Democrats stay home, Pallone will have "Little" to cheer about on the 3rd....
And a big public endorsement from the Chris Christie can't hurt, either, who has said repeatedly,“there’s nobody I want to see defeated more than Frank Pallone.”
We're with you, governor:
And check out some videos of Anna Little thoroughly kicking Frank "I wrote the health care bill! It's mine! All mine!" Pallone's sorry ass in a recent debate here...
Republican numbers cruncher Adam Geller of National Research, Inc. shows Republican challenger Little with a shot to win in her challenge of a vulnerable U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-Long Branch).
Commissioned by the Little campaign, Geller puts Pallone ahead of Little by one point, 44-43%, in a survey Geller conducted from Oct. 5-6.
The survey of 300 likely 6th Congressional District voters with a +/- 5.66% margin of error shows that district voters favor the generic Republican candidate by a margin of 43-39%.
Pallone has a favorability rating of 42%, compared to 36% unfavorable. His job approval rating, according to the poll, is 35%, compared to 39% who disapprove. Among voters who have heard of both candidates, Little leads Pallone, 58-32%. Those with a "formed opnion" of both candidates give Little the lead, 66-27%. Among voters who are a self-reported "10" in vote likelihood, Little leads 48-40%. Among independents, Little leads 49-34%
Who's gonna show up on November 2nd? That's going to make all the difference. If discouraged Democrats stay home, Pallone will have "Little" to cheer about on the 3rd....
And a big public endorsement from the Chris Christie can't hurt, either, who has said repeatedly,“there’s nobody I want to see defeated more than Frank Pallone.”
We're with you, governor:
And check out some videos of Anna Little thoroughly kicking Frank "I wrote the health care bill! It's mine! All mine!" Pallone's sorry ass in a recent debate here...
Folks, The "Enthusiasm Gap" Is Real...
..especially if we take Marco Rubio at his word, as well as the St. Petersburg Times, which reports this development:
Early voting starts today, but absentee voting by mail has been underway for weeks. The Florida GOP has long enjoyed a superior absentee ballot program, but Democrats have made strides cutting into that advantage. Still, even as Democrats say they have the biggest voter mobilization of any election except for 2008, they appear to be lagging well behind in absentee votes.
This nugget from a Marco Rubio early voting alert to supporters: ...Ballots are being cast as you read this. About 370,000 people have voted already by returning their absentee ballot. So far Republicans hold a 73,000 lead in votes cast! We have 65 victory offices open throughout the state and last week alone our volunteer army made over 160,000 calls to help spread the word. Our Get Out The Vote operations are full speed ahead!..
Somewhere, a president has just soiled himself...
Early voting starts today, but absentee voting by mail has been underway for weeks. The Florida GOP has long enjoyed a superior absentee ballot program, but Democrats have made strides cutting into that advantage. Still, even as Democrats say they have the biggest voter mobilization of any election except for 2008, they appear to be lagging well behind in absentee votes.
This nugget from a Marco Rubio early voting alert to supporters: ...Ballots are being cast as you read this. About 370,000 people have voted already by returning their absentee ballot. So far Republicans hold a 73,000 lead in votes cast! We have 65 victory offices open throughout the state and last week alone our volunteer army made over 160,000 calls to help spread the word. Our Get Out The Vote operations are full speed ahead!..
Somewhere, a president has just soiled himself...
วันจันทร์, ตุลาคม 18, 2553
Michelle Obama & Jill Biden: Whores
Hey- it's OK to call women in politics "whores" now! California's Jerry Brown did it, and got an endorsement from NOW the very next day! I mean, it almost came off as...a reward for his remarks! So where's mine?
Anyway, if we use the definition of "whore" as somebody who sells their bodies to raise money (and deliver a rather large percentage of it back to "the pimp"), Michelle and Jill fit the bill to a "(slu)T":
Michelle Obama and Jill Biden are expected to raise $1 million at two New York City fundraisers Monday night.
The first reception, hosted by fashion designer Donna Karan, will raise $800,000, according to a Democratic National Committee official. Eighty-five guests were invited to buy $10,000-a-person tickets to the Greenwich Village reception.
The second event will be a concert at the St. James Theater hosted by the actress Sarah Jessica Parker and featuring the singer Patti LaBelle, the official said. Tickets range from $100 to $2,500, but Gen44 supporters will be able to get $100 tickets.
Folks paying $10K just to spend an hour with you? Sheeeeeet, somewhere, Ashley Dupre is grinding her teeth...
Anyway, if we use the definition of "whore" as somebody who sells their bodies to raise money (and deliver a rather large percentage of it back to "the pimp"), Michelle and Jill fit the bill to a "(slu)T":
Michelle Obama and Jill Biden are expected to raise $1 million at two New York City fundraisers Monday night.
The first reception, hosted by fashion designer Donna Karan, will raise $800,000, according to a Democratic National Committee official. Eighty-five guests were invited to buy $10,000-a-person tickets to the Greenwich Village reception.
The second event will be a concert at the St. James Theater hosted by the actress Sarah Jessica Parker and featuring the singer Patti LaBelle, the official said. Tickets range from $100 to $2,500, but Gen44 supporters will be able to get $100 tickets.
Folks paying $10K just to spend an hour with you? Sheeeeeet, somewhere, Ashley Dupre is grinding her teeth...
Connecticut Senate: Vince McMahon Calls In The WWE !
Tired of the abuse his wife is taking - but more likely, concerned about the fallout to his multi-billion dollar wrestling enterprise - Vince McMahon is fighting back against Richard Blumenthal's smears against the WWE:
BusinessWire - World Wrestling Entertainment(R) is calling on WWE fans worldwide to "Stand Up For WWE" in a new viral campaign launched today on WWE.com and social networking websites, including Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. WWE invites fans to voice their support for the company because it has come under unfair and biased attack from certain politicians and media outlets. WWE will correct factual inaccuracies that have been reported about the company during this election season.
Videos will feature Vince McMahon, WWE Chairman and CEO, along with several WWE Superstars discussing various topics including WWE's PG content, treatment of WWE's full-time employees and its performers, and WWE's Talent Health and Wellness Program. In addition, the videos will highlight WWE's longstanding commitment to give back to communities through literacy programs, support of the military and their families, the annual "Tribute To The Troops" holiday special and the company's more than 25 year relationship with the Make-A-Wish Foundation.
BusinessWire - World Wrestling Entertainment(R) is calling on WWE fans worldwide to "Stand Up For WWE" in a new viral campaign launched today on WWE.com and social networking websites, including Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. WWE invites fans to voice their support for the company because it has come under unfair and biased attack from certain politicians and media outlets. WWE will correct factual inaccuracies that have been reported about the company during this election season.
Videos will feature Vince McMahon, WWE Chairman and CEO, along with several WWE Superstars discussing various topics including WWE's PG content, treatment of WWE's full-time employees and its performers, and WWE's Talent Health and Wellness Program. In addition, the videos will highlight WWE's longstanding commitment to give back to communities through literacy programs, support of the military and their families, the annual "Tribute To The Troops" holiday special and the company's more than 25 year relationship with the Make-A-Wish Foundation.
Well, there are a ton of people who watch the WWE - their TV broadcasts are usually among cable's #10 watched on any given week, and their pay-per-views are insanely lucrative, both for the WWE and the cable providers. How many of them vote, however, is an unknown, and this is unlikely to make much of a dent in the Connecticut Senate race.
HOWEVER - McMahon is a genius at playing up the bad guy; if the media thinks they can go "Christine O'Donnell" on this guy, they're stupider than I even ever imagined. McMahon would love nothing more than a clip calling him and his millions of WWE fans "idiots"; the media as the ultimate heel would be a boon to both Linda and Vince, as he would play and replay the clips over and over, to the booing of the crowd, with a "bad guy" wrestler taking Dick Blumenthal's side, and his "good guys" vowing war for the sake of their honor....
If millions of viewers can become thousands of votes, it could be a game-changer.
You know what else would help? Pointing out how involved the WWE is with our men and women serving overseas, as opposed to Blumenthal, who just lies about being involved overseas:
David Gregory Continues To Push His "Tea Party Is Racist" Position
Was struck by this sentence in a story about the Michael Bennett/Ken Buck debate in Colorado the other night:
NBC’s David Gregory gave appointed Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet the chance to bash the Tea Party movement during Sunday’s Meet the Press debate with his Tea Party-backed Republican opponent, but he didn’t take the bait.
“I haven’t seen a lot of that either,” Bennet said during a discussion about whether there are racist or extreme elements within the Tea Party movement
I can't find the exact question, but the answer leads me to believe that Gregory either asked the candidates if the Tea Party was racist, or just led them with a question inquiring about their positions on the "racist Tea Party".
Neither would surprise me; although it is not well-known, Gregory made his opinions clear on the matter at a little Q&A on the West Coast a few weeks ago:
David Gregory - host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” and longtime NBC White House correspondent, spoke to about 500 people at Seattle’s Town Hall back on September 21. When asked about the Tea Party, he starts out speaking rationally:
It’s a “populist, conservative, small-government, anti-Washington [D.C.] movement,” upset with “bailouts” and “too much deficit spending.”
Alas, he descends into madness:
“And a real antipathy toward Obama that in some cases is racism.”
Where is Gregory's proof of that assertion? He doesn't offer any, of course...
Would love to know the actual question. Or see proof of his repeated smears. Who knows, maybe he's f*cking Christiane Amanpour, and he's one of the "people" she refers to that's just so upset about Tea Party "extremism"...
NBC’s David Gregory gave appointed Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet the chance to bash the Tea Party movement during Sunday’s Meet the Press debate with his Tea Party-backed Republican opponent, but he didn’t take the bait.
“I haven’t seen a lot of that either,” Bennet said during a discussion about whether there are racist or extreme elements within the Tea Party movement
I can't find the exact question, but the answer leads me to believe that Gregory either asked the candidates if the Tea Party was racist, or just led them with a question inquiring about their positions on the "racist Tea Party".
Neither would surprise me; although it is not well-known, Gregory made his opinions clear on the matter at a little Q&A on the West Coast a few weeks ago:
David Gregory - host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” and longtime NBC White House correspondent, spoke to about 500 people at Seattle’s Town Hall back on September 21. When asked about the Tea Party, he starts out speaking rationally:
It’s a “populist, conservative, small-government, anti-Washington [D.C.] movement,” upset with “bailouts” and “too much deficit spending.”
Alas, he descends into madness:
“And a real antipathy toward Obama that in some cases is racism.”
Where is Gregory's proof of that assertion? He doesn't offer any, of course...
Would love to know the actual question. Or see proof of his repeated smears. Who knows, maybe he's f*cking Christiane Amanpour, and he's one of the "people" she refers to that's just so upset about Tea Party "extremism"...
Who Are Christiane Amanpour's "People", Exactly?
I refer to this quote from this past Sunday's This Week on ABC, as Christiane went on a little tirade about the Tea Party:
"I mean there's been a long and venerable tradition of conservatism in this country. You can go back at least to Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, all of that sort of intellectual conservatism that lasted about 30 years and people are saying that right now, it's really gone to the extreme. People are looking at the tea party and saying this is not conservatism as we knew it, but it's extreme."
Which people, Christiane? Certainly you're not referring to the American people, because if you've bothered to listen to anything outside of your own echo chamber lately, you would have heard that 44 percent of likely voters say the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements; whereas 37 percent say it’s the Republican Party that is more dominated by extremists.
So which people are calling the Tea Party "extremist", Christiane? Perhaps your friends in the salons of DC, who see their lucrative "business as usual" lifestyle about to fall apart? From your husband, the Obama/Clinton policy advisor, and his friends inside the White House ? Or is that just what your guests are saying down at your mansion in the south of France?
Incidentally, nice to hear you call Reagen an "intellectual conservative". If I recollect, in the '80's, the liberal peanut gallery derided him as an idiotic B-list actor whose simplistic ideas would doom the nation. Wonder what you will be saying about Sarah Palin in 2040...
Prediction: Amanpour melts down either immediately before, or shortly after, the November 2nd election, and says something heartfelt and horrible about the American people, assuming she doesn't go off blaming the Jews for America's turn to the right. And with the Tea Party flag flying high and their ratings sinking to new lows, ABC opts for a new face on Sunday morning. Jake Tapper will get her job, Christiane will blame the stupid American people for not watching her, and she will be rewarded with a spot in the Obama administration.
Heard it here first...!
UPDATE: Apparently, one of the people who Amanpour listens to is Meghan McCain, who apparently earned a spot on This Week as well, if for no other reason than to make Christiane looker brighter by comparison:
Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman. And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how much lack of experience
you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know (inaudible) it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nutjob.
No matter what the Republican Party wants to think about this Tea Party movement, it is losing young voters at a rapid rate. And this isn’t going to change unless we start changing our message....
Well, actually, it is Obama who has been losing young people at a rapid, almost dizzying rate, but Meghan's not there because of her command of the facts. She's there as a representative of every "26 year old woman" in America! A self-proclaimed voice of her "generation"! And a great example of how somebody with no sense of business and no history of success can wind up as an "expert" on TV!
So what is she doing there, besides the fact she's a so-called "conservative" who hates conservatives? Oh, yeah...see above right...
"I mean there's been a long and venerable tradition of conservatism in this country. You can go back at least to Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, all of that sort of intellectual conservatism that lasted about 30 years and people are saying that right now, it's really gone to the extreme. People are looking at the tea party and saying this is not conservatism as we knew it, but it's extreme."
Which people, Christiane? Certainly you're not referring to the American people, because if you've bothered to listen to anything outside of your own echo chamber lately, you would have heard that 44 percent of likely voters say the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements; whereas 37 percent say it’s the Republican Party that is more dominated by extremists.
So which people are calling the Tea Party "extremist", Christiane? Perhaps your friends in the salons of DC, who see their lucrative "business as usual" lifestyle about to fall apart? From your husband, the Obama/Clinton policy advisor, and his friends inside the White House ? Or is that just what your guests are saying down at your mansion in the south of France?
Incidentally, nice to hear you call Reagen an "intellectual conservative". If I recollect, in the '80's, the liberal peanut gallery derided him as an idiotic B-list actor whose simplistic ideas would doom the nation. Wonder what you will be saying about Sarah Palin in 2040...
Prediction: Amanpour melts down either immediately before, or shortly after, the November 2nd election, and says something heartfelt and horrible about the American people, assuming she doesn't go off blaming the Jews for America's turn to the right. And with the Tea Party flag flying high and their ratings sinking to new lows, ABC opts for a new face on Sunday morning. Jake Tapper will get her job, Christiane will blame the stupid American people for not watching her, and she will be rewarded with a spot in the Obama administration.
Heard it here first...!
UPDATE: Apparently, one of the people who Amanpour listens to is Meghan McCain, who apparently earned a spot on This Week as well, if for no other reason than to make Christiane looker brighter by comparison:
Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman. And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how much lack of experience
you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know (inaudible) it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nutjob.No matter what the Republican Party wants to think about this Tea Party movement, it is losing young voters at a rapid rate. And this isn’t going to change unless we start changing our message....
Well, actually, it is Obama who has been losing young people at a rapid, almost dizzying rate, but Meghan's not there because of her command of the facts. She's there as a representative of every "26 year old woman" in America! A self-proclaimed voice of her "generation"! And a great example of how somebody with no sense of business and no history of success can wind up as an "expert" on TV!
So what is she doing there, besides the fact she's a so-called "conservative" who hates conservatives? Oh, yeah...see above right...
วันอาทิตย์, ตุลาคม 17, 2553
Obama Heeps More Scorn Upon The Americans People...
...yeah, pal, that's how you'll win our hearts back - telling us we're so scared we've lost all control of our facilities of reason. And like his prior remarks about "clinging", the truth about Obama's feelings towards his fellow Americans (if he even considers us as such) comes out behind closed doors, this time at a fundraiser outside of Boston:
WEST NEWTON, Mass. - President Barack Obama said Americans' "fear and frustration" is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.
"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country's scared.”
Obama told the several dozen donors that he was offering them his “view from the Oval Office.” He faulted the economic downturn for Americans’ inability to “think clearly” and said the burden is on Democrats “to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling.”
It seems beyond Obama's ken that the American people understand his arguments all too well, and are rejecting them based upon clear thinking, science, and factual analysis. No, if anything, Obama is so confident he is right and we are wrong that he is planning on moving ahead with another piece of legislation that is also solidly opposed by the American people:
Obama indicated that he intends to move forward with an energy bill, regardless of what happens on Nov. 2, but said he needs a Democratic majority in the Senate to do so. He called the legislation "a piece of unfinished business" that's going to require some heavy lifting, and he predicted being able to win over as many as seven Republican Senators to support the legislation.
Wow. Is he delusional, or just a pathological liar? According to this piece, Obama's cadres couldn't even pick up one Senate vote for cap & tax. Where the hell does he think he's going to get seven from, out of a group that will include Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ron Johsnon, Kelly Ayotte, Roy Blunt, and whoever gets elected from West Virginia? Most of them with the shadow of Sarah Palin over their shoulder, no less...
You know what? Maybe we are a nation in fear - of Barack Obama and the Democrats, and what insane scheme to loot our public treasure and private wealth they intend to foist upon us next in the name of the "public good" . In fear of a president who is a closed-minded economic illiterate, surrounded by sycophants who know how to take advantage of his weaknesses for their own ends. And perhaps, due to this fear, we have tuned out everything the president and his party have to say, for good and ill, knowing that it is all window dressing to cover up the next round of government invasion into every sphere of our private lives. Maybe that's why so many Obama voters plan to vote Republican in two weeks...
And so, with our backs against the wall, we have decided, like cornered animals, to fight back. And now that we are gaining the upper hand, we cannot hear the pleas of our former tormentors saying "no more, no more, we'll be good, we promise!" as we circle them with deliberate attempt to finish off the job on November 2nd. Or perhaps we hear all too well, and know that once their fear vanishes, they'll be right back to picking our pockets...
Or maybe we are just the last scions of a generation of frogs, who now refuse to carry the scorpions on our backs....
WEST NEWTON, Mass. - President Barack Obama said Americans' "fear and frustration" is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.
"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country's scared.”
Obama told the several dozen donors that he was offering them his “view from the Oval Office.” He faulted the economic downturn for Americans’ inability to “think clearly” and said the burden is on Democrats “to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling.”
It seems beyond Obama's ken that the American people understand his arguments all too well, and are rejecting them based upon clear thinking, science, and factual analysis. No, if anything, Obama is so confident he is right and we are wrong that he is planning on moving ahead with another piece of legislation that is also solidly opposed by the American people:
Obama indicated that he intends to move forward with an energy bill, regardless of what happens on Nov. 2, but said he needs a Democratic majority in the Senate to do so. He called the legislation "a piece of unfinished business" that's going to require some heavy lifting, and he predicted being able to win over as many as seven Republican Senators to support the legislation.
Wow. Is he delusional, or just a pathological liar? According to this piece, Obama's cadres couldn't even pick up one Senate vote for cap & tax. Where the hell does he think he's going to get seven from, out of a group that will include Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ron Johsnon, Kelly Ayotte, Roy Blunt, and whoever gets elected from West Virginia? Most of them with the shadow of Sarah Palin over their shoulder, no less...
You know what? Maybe we are a nation in fear - of Barack Obama and the Democrats, and what insane scheme to loot our public treasure and private wealth they intend to foist upon us next in the name of the "public good" . In fear of a president who is a closed-minded economic illiterate, surrounded by sycophants who know how to take advantage of his weaknesses for their own ends. And perhaps, due to this fear, we have tuned out everything the president and his party have to say, for good and ill, knowing that it is all window dressing to cover up the next round of government invasion into every sphere of our private lives. Maybe that's why so many Obama voters plan to vote Republican in two weeks...
And so, with our backs against the wall, we have decided, like cornered animals, to fight back. And now that we are gaining the upper hand, we cannot hear the pleas of our former tormentors saying "no more, no more, we'll be good, we promise!" as we circle them with deliberate attempt to finish off the job on November 2nd. Or perhaps we hear all too well, and know that once their fear vanishes, they'll be right back to picking our pockets...
Or maybe we are just the last scions of a generation of frogs, who now refuse to carry the scorpions on our backs....
วันเสาร์, ตุลาคม 16, 2553
Chevy Volt: Mileage (Way) Less Than Advertised?
Ah, those wacky liberals - they thought the only reason private industry hadn't yet developed a 60 MPG electric car was simply because nobody ordered them to. So Baracky did, and gave GM billions of dollar of our money to do it with, and thus was born the Chevy Volt (not unlike the birthing of an Orc).
The "car of the future"? America's "Volks" wagon? Hardly. Turns out that when test-driven, the Volt's MPG is only slightly better than a 2WD Jeep:
Jalopnik:
In August of last year, we heard GM's then-CEO Fritz Henderson claimed with all the marketing might it could muster at a Detroit-area press event, that the Chevy Volt would get 230 MPG in city driving conditions. Now, as the Volt's being tested by the auto trade press, we're seeing some surprisingly low fuel economy figures amid the expected lavish praise buff books are heaping upon the Volt.
Let's see what they've found out. Popular Mechanics saw just 37.5 MPG in city driving. Car and Driver apparently didn't choose to use their wheel time for any city driving — but found with all-electric driving
"...getting on the nearest highway and commuting with the 80-mph flow of traffic-basically the worst-case scenario-yielded 26 miles; a fairly spirited back-road loop netted 31; and a carefully modulated cruise below 60 mph pushed the figure into the upper 30s."
Motor Trend, like the rest of the trade press other than Popular Mechanics, didn't appear to do any testing in city conditions, but did find that
"Without any plugging in, [a weeklong trip to Grandma's house] should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s."
They also parrot GM's new line of 25-50 miles of all-electric — a far cry from the 230 MPG they originally marketed — that the "Volt provides 25-50 miles of real-world electric operation no matter how hard you flog it."
Add "building a beter car" to all the other things Barack Obama swore only he could do, and failed at miserably.
Pick up your tools and go home, son. But there's a consolation prize for you, Baracky - you will be etched in history as the face of the 21st century's version of the Edsel...
Via I Hate The Media!
The "car of the future"? America's "Volks" wagon? Hardly. Turns out that when test-driven, the Volt's MPG is only slightly better than a 2WD Jeep:
Jalopnik:
In August of last year, we heard GM's then-CEO Fritz Henderson claimed with all the marketing might it could muster at a Detroit-area press event, that the Chevy Volt would get 230 MPG in city driving conditions. Now, as the Volt's being tested by the auto trade press, we're seeing some surprisingly low fuel economy figures amid the expected lavish praise buff books are heaping upon the Volt.
Let's see what they've found out. Popular Mechanics saw just 37.5 MPG in city driving. Car and Driver apparently didn't choose to use their wheel time for any city driving — but found with all-electric driving
"...getting on the nearest highway and commuting with the 80-mph flow of traffic-basically the worst-case scenario-yielded 26 miles; a fairly spirited back-road loop netted 31; and a carefully modulated cruise below 60 mph pushed the figure into the upper 30s."
Motor Trend, like the rest of the trade press other than Popular Mechanics, didn't appear to do any testing in city conditions, but did find that
"Without any plugging in, [a weeklong trip to Grandma's house] should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s."
They also parrot GM's new line of 25-50 miles of all-electric — a far cry from the 230 MPG they originally marketed — that the "Volt provides 25-50 miles of real-world electric operation no matter how hard you flog it."
Add "building a beter car" to all the other things Barack Obama swore only he could do, and failed at miserably.
Pick up your tools and go home, son. But there's a consolation prize for you, Baracky - you will be etched in history as the face of the 21st century's version of the Edsel...
Via I Hate The Media!
วันศุกร์, ตุลาคม 15, 2553
Did Ray LaHood Try To Intimdate Chris Christie?
...with a follow up question of, "Just how f*cking stupid is Ray Lahood?"
Answered thusly: "He's a member of Obama's Cabinet. What else do you need to know?"
Apparently, Transportation Secretary LaHood flew into Jersey last week to try and talk Christie out of cancelling the $8-$12 billion dollar (no one will admit to the eventual cost) ARC tunnel that Jon Corzine authorized in the days before his failed re-election bid, in a desperate attempt to shore up union support. Incidentally - LaHood flew in with his posse on a private jet; remember that when he's forcing you into an electric shoebox in the name of "global warming". But more to the point - the Newark Star Ledger reported the following on the meeting:
LaHood and his top aides huddled over Christie’s announcement. The group was well aware of Christie’s reputation, the national political tour he had been on in recent weeks and his status as a main attraction and rising star in the Republican Party.
“Some around the secretary, according to those aware of the meeting, suggested Christie was little more than schoolyard bully who had to be put back in his place through the public-relations strength that can be mustered by a member of the president’s Cabinet.
‘We should slam him,’ one of LaHood’s advisers thought out loud. “Start talking about the thousands of jobs lost, all that.”
However, LaHood apparently was not ready for that....
Smart boy.
"Junior Soprano's the new boss and he ain't respectin' old arrangements "
What was LaHood ready for? Tax hikes to pay for the project:
[LaHood] threw out some back-of-the-envelope ideas, none of which was new to the New Jersey side of the discussions.
How about a 50-cent ticket surcharge for commuters?
Christie said he knew that concept and had already dismissed it in light of the recent toll hikes that are hitting hard the very same commuters who might one day be aided by ARC.
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Oh, yeah? Who knows more about extortion, me or you?
LaHood knew who was boss:
They agreed that both sides would look over the proposed options. The secretary’s aides asked for four weeks. Christie shot that down without a blink.
"Two weeks," the governor offered.
LaHood, after a career in the hard-edged world of Illinois politics, knew the score and quickly chimed in: "Two weeks it is."
And in case you're not sure how it is in Jersey, Christie made it perfectly clear:
As they broke, up the bottom line was reinforced by the governor.
"We have to work on the money," he said.
Silvio Dante: You're only as good as your last envelope
Maybe Lahood's not that stupid after all...
Answered thusly: "He's a member of Obama's Cabinet. What else do you need to know?"
Apparently, Transportation Secretary LaHood flew into Jersey last week to try and talk Christie out of cancelling the $8-$12 billion dollar (no one will admit to the eventual cost) ARC tunnel that Jon Corzine authorized in the days before his failed re-election bid, in a desperate attempt to shore up union support. Incidentally - LaHood flew in with his posse on a private jet; remember that when he's forcing you into an electric shoebox in the name of "global warming". But more to the point - the Newark Star Ledger reported the following on the meeting:
LaHood and his top aides huddled over Christie’s announcement. The group was well aware of Christie’s reputation, the national political tour he had been on in recent weeks and his status as a main attraction and rising star in the Republican Party.
“Some around the secretary, according to those aware of the meeting, suggested Christie was little more than schoolyard bully who had to be put back in his place through the public-relations strength that can be mustered by a member of the president’s Cabinet.
‘We should slam him,’ one of LaHood’s advisers thought out loud. “Start talking about the thousands of jobs lost, all that.”
However, LaHood apparently was not ready for that....
Smart boy.
"Junior Soprano's the new boss and he ain't respectin' old arrangements "
What was LaHood ready for? Tax hikes to pay for the project:
[LaHood] threw out some back-of-the-envelope ideas, none of which was new to the New Jersey side of the discussions.
How about a 50-cent ticket surcharge for commuters?
Christie said he knew that concept and had already dismissed it in light of the recent toll hikes that are hitting hard the very same commuters who might one day be aided by ARC.
Anthony 'Tony' Soprano Sr.: Oh, yeah? Who knows more about extortion, me or you?
LaHood knew who was boss:
They agreed that both sides would look over the proposed options. The secretary’s aides asked for four weeks. Christie shot that down without a blink.
"Two weeks," the governor offered.
LaHood, after a career in the hard-edged world of Illinois politics, knew the score and quickly chimed in: "Two weeks it is."
And in case you're not sure how it is in Jersey, Christie made it perfectly clear:
As they broke, up the bottom line was reinforced by the governor.
"We have to work on the money," he said.
Silvio Dante: You're only as good as your last envelope
Maybe Lahood's not that stupid after all...
Nancy Pelosi: 15 Months, 85 "Free" Trips On Military Jets!
It's like the best "Frequent Flyer/Friends and Family Plan" you can ever imagine! You, your kids, your grand-kids, even your in-laws, fly for free on an American military jet anywhere you want to go! With unlimited amenities, including bottomless bottles of booze!
How do you get such perks? Be the Speaker of the House. Be unscrupulous and amoral. Be a Democrat (redundant?). And laugh, laugh like the Joker and clink your champagne glasses as you toast the common American taxpayer who's footing the bill for your life of luxury as they slowly starve to death in an economy you decimated!
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and members of her family and staff took 85 tax-paid trips on military aircraft between March 2, 2009, and June 7, 2010, according to new documents uncovered by Judicial Watch
Judicial Watch obtained the documents as a result of a January 25, 2009, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Previous documents received by the non-profit watchdog group revealed that Pelosi's travel "cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol," according to Judicial Watch.
"For example, purchases for one Pelosi-led congressional delegation traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008 included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewar’s scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine."
Keep laughing, Nancy. All the way to a well-deserved oblivion....
How do you get such perks? Be the Speaker of the House. Be unscrupulous and amoral. Be a Democrat (redundant?). And laugh, laugh like the Joker and clink your champagne glasses as you toast the common American taxpayer who's footing the bill for your life of luxury as they slowly starve to death in an economy you decimated!
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and members of her family and staff took 85 tax-paid trips on military aircraft between March 2, 2009, and June 7, 2010, according to new documents uncovered by Judicial Watch
Judicial Watch obtained the documents as a result of a January 25, 2009, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Previous documents received by the non-profit watchdog group revealed that Pelosi's travel "cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol," according to Judicial Watch.
"For example, purchases for one Pelosi-led congressional delegation traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008 included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewar’s scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine."
Keep laughing, Nancy. All the way to a well-deserved oblivion....
วันพฤหัสบดี, ตุลาคม 14, 2553
Wolf Blitzer Joins The Gang-Rape of Christine O'Donnell...
...because, after all, she's a conservative woman - and an attractive one at that - and isn't that the essence of asking for it?
Well, Wolf Blitzer seems to have bought into the "nuts and sluts" storyline rolled out against virtually every female Republican - they're either crazy, or whores - and like a jock who heard a rumor that the head cheerleader was easy, gets a bit aggressive on the first date - or debate, in this case.
He is all over Christine O'Donnell here - watch him wag his finger in her face, like big daddy telling the naughty schoolgirl she needs to be taught a lesson. She fights back as gamely as she can:
Yeah, "rape" is a loaded word. But I use it with full understanding, and not to shock. From an earlier post on a similar subject:
For some reason, when liberals see a Sarah Palin or a Carrie Prejean [and now a Christine O'Donnell], the impulse immediately is for the lowest road possible: not to engage them, but to defile them. Not to prove them wrong, but to humiliate them in the vilest way possible. The immediate, insatiable urge of the Left is to wreck a female adversary so completely that no one can look at them the same way; so that anyone who sees their victim will see the marks on them and turn away in disgust or openly mock with righteous venom, and to hopefully so emotionally destroy their female "enemies" that their self-esteem is ravaged, and they slink away from public life, alone and ashamed.
There's a word for this type of assault. Rape.
Yes, the assault isn't physical, but the thought process behind the rapes of Palin and Prejean are identical to that of the common street rapist: To defile, degrade, humiliate, embarrass, and make themselves feel better in the process. A broken victim is what each hopes to obtain, and neither stops the assault until the surrender is complete.
Well, Wolf Blitzer seems to have bought into the "nuts and sluts" storyline rolled out against virtually every female Republican - they're either crazy, or whores - and like a jock who heard a rumor that the head cheerleader was easy, gets a bit aggressive on the first date - or debate, in this case.
He is all over Christine O'Donnell here - watch him wag his finger in her face, like big daddy telling the naughty schoolgirl she needs to be taught a lesson. She fights back as gamely as she can:
Yeah, "rape" is a loaded word. But I use it with full understanding, and not to shock. From an earlier post on a similar subject:
For some reason, when liberals see a Sarah Palin or a Carrie Prejean [and now a Christine O'Donnell], the impulse immediately is for the lowest road possible: not to engage them, but to defile them. Not to prove them wrong, but to humiliate them in the vilest way possible. The immediate, insatiable urge of the Left is to wreck a female adversary so completely that no one can look at them the same way; so that anyone who sees their victim will see the marks on them and turn away in disgust or openly mock with righteous venom, and to hopefully so emotionally destroy their female "enemies" that their self-esteem is ravaged, and they slink away from public life, alone and ashamed.
There's a word for this type of assault. Rape.
Yes, the assault isn't physical, but the thought process behind the rapes of Palin and Prejean are identical to that of the common street rapist: To defile, degrade, humiliate, embarrass, and make themselves feel better in the process. A broken victim is what each hopes to obtain, and neither stops the assault until the surrender is complete.
NPR's Terry Gross & Princeton Pal Giggle Over "Whacko" Tea Party
So I was listening to this shite on the way home from work yesterday - dirty work, yes, but sometimes you must scout the enemy's movements to see where he'll strike next - and I was simply astounded by how out of touch, clueless, and condescending both Fresh Air host Terry Gross and her guest, Princeton professor Sean Wilentz were towards Glenn Beck, the Tea Party, and the American people.
Punctuated with giggles, chuckles, guffaws, there could not have been a better example of what two elitists sound like when they are talking in a circle of like-minded individuals - there assumption being that the entire NPR listening audience was in agreement with them.
Well, perhaps not all, Gross Terry....here's a few excerpts from their smarmy little chat:
GROSS: Wilentz has an article in the current edition of the New Yorker titled "Confounding Fathers: The Tea Party's Cold War Roots." He asks why current Republican Party leaders have done virtually nothing to challenge extremist ideas in their party and a great deal to abet them.
...What interests me as an historian, is how Glenn Beck's version of American history...It's pretty much what the John Birch Society - that they've been teaching for 50 years.
It's a version of history that demonizes the progressive era, particularly Woodrow Wilson, sees it as the beginnings of America's going down the road to totalitarianism, which ends in Beck's version, with Barack Obama.
It's a version of history that is beyond skewed. One history professor said that, you know, it's not worth a pitcher of warm spit. But of course, that's what Beck expects us to say. He lives in a kind of, you know, Alice in Wonderland world....
So insofar as the Tea Party looks up to Beck, and there are polls that show that Tea Party members really do respect Beck more than anybody else, more even than Sarah Palin, and that they consider him not as an entertainer, the way that they describe Rush Limbaugh, but as an educator.... the things that he's giving out as the truth, which are just as wacko as what he's talking about.
I think what's happening is the Republican Party is willing to chase after whatever it can to get party back - to get power back and, you know, this is whats happening to the Republican Party. So instead of drawing lines, people are jumping over fences in order to look like they're in the good graces of these - of the Tea Party types.
Gross asks quite a few similar, leading questions:
GROSS: We're talking about his article in the current edition of The New Yorker, in which he writes that Glenn Beck and the Tea Party Movement are reviving ideas that circulated in the extremist right half a century ago, especially in the John Birch Society
GROSS: Can you think of another time in American history when there have been as many people running for Congress who seem to be on the extreme?
Mr. WILENTZ: Not running for Congress, no.
GROSS: So a question that you're asking in your article is how is it that the Republican Party managed to hold this kind of extremism at bay for decades.
Mr. WILENTZ: Right.
GROSS: And now that extremism is getting expressed in voting-booth politics.
Mr. WILENTZ: Mm-hmm.
GROSS: We hear candidates expressing these views. What's changed in the party that has opened the door to this kind of extremism?
And remember, your tax dollars pay for this...
But even more amusing than the mutual intellectual masturbation being conducted between Gross and Wilentz is how far out of touch they are with the reality of America, and who and what the people believe is extremist. Via JammieWearingFool, we return to reality:
Likely voters in battleground districts see extremists as having a more dominant influence over the Democratic Party than the GOP.
This result comes from The Hill 2010 Midterm Election Poll, which found that 44 percent of likely voters say the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements; whereas 37 percent say it’s the Republican Party that is more dominated by extremists.
The polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland conducted the survey, contacting 4,047 likely voters by phone between Oct. 2 and Oct. 7. The margin of error for this sample is 1.5 percent.
More than one in every five Democrats (22 percent) in The Hill’s survey said their party was more dominated than the GOP by extreme views. The equivalent figure among Republicans is 11 percent.
This is a Democrat polling firm, no less.
The data surprised Democratic strategists and political experts in a campaign season when much media attention has focused on the battle between the GOP establishment and Tea Party-backed candidates such as Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware.
They said it suggests problems for a Democratic party seen as too liberal.
“That’s real trouble for Democrats,” said Jim Kessler, co-founder of the Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank.
“All the press coverage has been about how these Tea Party candidates are fringe ideologues, and there have been high-profile examples of them proving the point,” he added. “Yet, still at this moment, you have independents saying, ‘I think the Democrats are little more extreme than the Republicans.’”
Poor Terry and Sean. It's like they're sitting inside a warm house in the middle of December, and telling everyone that the weather is exactly the same outside - after all, they all agree it must be, because they say so - and opening the door and walking directly into a winter blizzard with a t-shirt and surf jams.
it's going to be a real confusing November 3rd for them as well...
Punctuated with giggles, chuckles, guffaws, there could not have been a better example of what two elitists sound like when they are talking in a circle of like-minded individuals - there assumption being that the entire NPR listening audience was in agreement with them.
Well, perhaps not all, Gross Terry....here's a few excerpts from their smarmy little chat:
GROSS: Wilentz has an article in the current edition of the New Yorker titled "Confounding Fathers: The Tea Party's Cold War Roots." He asks why current Republican Party leaders have done virtually nothing to challenge extremist ideas in their party and a great deal to abet them.
...What interests me as an historian, is how Glenn Beck's version of American history...It's pretty much what the John Birch Society - that they've been teaching for 50 years.
It's a version of history that demonizes the progressive era, particularly Woodrow Wilson, sees it as the beginnings of America's going down the road to totalitarianism, which ends in Beck's version, with Barack Obama.
It's a version of history that is beyond skewed. One history professor said that, you know, it's not worth a pitcher of warm spit. But of course, that's what Beck expects us to say. He lives in a kind of, you know, Alice in Wonderland world....
So insofar as the Tea Party looks up to Beck, and there are polls that show that Tea Party members really do respect Beck more than anybody else, more even than Sarah Palin, and that they consider him not as an entertainer, the way that they describe Rush Limbaugh, but as an educator.... the things that he's giving out as the truth, which are just as wacko as what he's talking about.
I think what's happening is the Republican Party is willing to chase after whatever it can to get party back - to get power back and, you know, this is whats happening to the Republican Party. So instead of drawing lines, people are jumping over fences in order to look like they're in the good graces of these - of the Tea Party types.
Gross asks quite a few similar, leading questions:
GROSS: We're talking about his article in the current edition of The New Yorker, in which he writes that Glenn Beck and the Tea Party Movement are reviving ideas that circulated in the extremist right half a century ago, especially in the John Birch Society
GROSS: Can you think of another time in American history when there have been as many people running for Congress who seem to be on the extreme?
Mr. WILENTZ: Not running for Congress, no.
GROSS: So a question that you're asking in your article is how is it that the Republican Party managed to hold this kind of extremism at bay for decades.
Mr. WILENTZ: Right.
GROSS: And now that extremism is getting expressed in voting-booth politics.
Mr. WILENTZ: Mm-hmm.
GROSS: We hear candidates expressing these views. What's changed in the party that has opened the door to this kind of extremism?
And remember, your tax dollars pay for this...
But even more amusing than the mutual intellectual masturbation being conducted between Gross and Wilentz is how far out of touch they are with the reality of America, and who and what the people believe is extremist. Via JammieWearingFool, we return to reality:
Likely voters in battleground districts see extremists as having a more dominant influence over the Democratic Party than the GOP.
This result comes from The Hill 2010 Midterm Election Poll, which found that 44 percent of likely voters say the Democratic Party is more dominated by its extreme elements; whereas 37 percent say it’s the Republican Party that is more dominated by extremists.
The polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland conducted the survey, contacting 4,047 likely voters by phone between Oct. 2 and Oct. 7. The margin of error for this sample is 1.5 percent.
More than one in every five Democrats (22 percent) in The Hill’s survey said their party was more dominated than the GOP by extreme views. The equivalent figure among Republicans is 11 percent.
This is a Democrat polling firm, no less.
The data surprised Democratic strategists and political experts in a campaign season when much media attention has focused on the battle between the GOP establishment and Tea Party-backed candidates such as Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware.
They said it suggests problems for a Democratic party seen as too liberal.
“That’s real trouble for Democrats,” said Jim Kessler, co-founder of the Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank.
“All the press coverage has been about how these Tea Party candidates are fringe ideologues, and there have been high-profile examples of them proving the point,” he added. “Yet, still at this moment, you have independents saying, ‘I think the Democrats are little more extreme than the Republicans.’”
Poor Terry and Sean. It's like they're sitting inside a warm house in the middle of December, and telling everyone that the weather is exactly the same outside - after all, they all agree it must be, because they say so - and opening the door and walking directly into a winter blizzard with a t-shirt and surf jams.
it's going to be a real confusing November 3rd for them as well...
สมัครสมาชิก:
บทความ (Atom)