Sharp Elbows Blows Away Local Sports "Journalists"

Sharp Elbows blog listened to his local sports radio station in St. Louis today, and he heard one of the hosts (one of whom is a reporter for the Post-Dispatch) claim that Rush Limbaugh "incites violence on a daily basis."

Since these morons were broadcasting from a local bar, he decided to drive on down there and confront them.

You Tube video below, but visit Sharp Elbows for the rest of his comments and the comments section.  View the video to see what happens when Liberal weasels are confronted.  Hide behind your microphone, you Liberal  putzes.

Obama voters. Ugh!!!!!!!

With a h/t to Gateway Pundit, you must watch this, the best argument for poll taxes ever made. I am sorry folks, but I am sick of my well informed vote having to contend with these uninformed (though I am sure they are not stupid) people.

It'll make you cry (and, if it doesn't, it's because you voted for Obama, and you are happy we're a nation of ignoramouses).

For more, visit How Obama Got Elected, and stay tuned for the documentary.



Don't...

Camille Paglia - On Palin, The Media, Ayers, Dohrn

Camille Paglia, my favorite feminist, is having some post-election buyers remorse, I think.

She has spoken glowingly of Sarah Palin before, and she does so again today, affirming:

"As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is -- and quite frankly, I think the people who don't see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn't speak the King's English -- big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns -- that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World."

Like me, she thinks the Senate is the wrong move for Palin (I think it's the kiss of death for a presidential run). Again, Paglia says:

"What a claustrophobic, nitpicking comedown for an energetic Alaskan. Sarah Palin should stick to her governorship and just hit the rubber-chicken circuit, as Richard Nixon did in his long haul back from political limbo following his California gubernatorial defeat in 1962. Step by step, the mainstream media will come around, wipe its own mud out of its eyes, and see Palin for the populist phenomenon that she is."

Of the Media's treatment of Obama:

"In the closing weeks of the election, however, I became increasingly disturbed by the mainstream media's avoidance of forthright dealing with several controversies that had been dogging Obama."

One of those controversies, Ayers/Dohrn:

"My concern about Ayers has been very slow in developing. The mainstream media should have fully explored the subject early this year and not allowed it to simmer and boil until it flared up ferociously in the last month of the campaign.

"Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views."

Read the whole article. Paglia should be on your must read list.

Don't...

Newspapers are dying

The latest circulation numbers for major daily papers are in, and I am happy to see that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has lost the most (by percentage) subscribers of the top 25 major dailies. We can hope that soon, Cynthia Tucker will be able to sample Barack Obama's welfare programs!

Only the Wall Street Journal (that right-wing bastion of capitalism) and USA Today (the hated McPaper) saw increases in circulation, though so slight as to be nearly unmeasurable (0.01% increases).

end..

CNN Joins MSNBC in Politicking for Obama

Hopefully, by now, many of my readers have seen this clip, or heard about it, and just how horribly CNN and their reporter (I mean, Obama press agent) Drew Wilson, took a quote from a Byron York article in National Review completely out of context.

Here's the transcript from CNN:

"CNN: Yeah. Governor, you've been mocked in the press. The press has been pretty hard on you, the Democrats have been pretty hard on you, but also some conservatives have been pretty hard on you as well. The National Review had a story saying that, you know, I can't tell if Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt or all of the above.

"Palin: Who wrote that one?

"CNN: That was in the National Review, I don't, have the author.

"Palin: I'd like to talk to that person.

"CNN: But they were talking about the fact that your experience as governor is not getting out. Do you feel trapped in this campaign, that your message is not getting out, and if so who do you blame?"

The actual quote was:

"Watching press coverage of the Republican candidate for vice president, it's sometimes hard to decide whether Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt, backward, or — or, well, all of the above."

Brent Bozell over at the Media Research Center has demanded that CNN apologize for this, as has Greta Van Susteren, and Rush Limbaugh riffed on this today, and O'Reilly made it his "Talking Points" theme.

You can leave a little feedback over at CNN, but, don't expect anything from the new Obama News Network.

As far as I am concerned, CNN will no longer be watched in my house, nor will their web site be permitted either (I can block these things).

I advise all of you to do the same.

end..

Subtle Media Bias

An AP story about Sarah Palin's attacks on Obama's connections to J. Wright and Bill Ayers contains this little paragraph, see if you can spot the AP bias:

"Palin cited a New York Times story published Saturday that detailed Obama's relationship with Ayers. In an interview with CBS News earlier in the week, Palin didn't name any newspapers or magazines that had shaped her view of the world."

I ask you, my readers, what is the relevance of Palin's statement to Katie Couric last week in this story? Now, every time Sarah Palin refers to some published report (in a left-wing rag, no less, than the NYT), are we going to get the qualifiers from the left-wing, drive-by media, that "In an interview with CBS News earlier in the week, Palin didn't name any newspapers or magazines that had shaped her view of the world"?

There are people that don't believe bias exist. They either or stupid, or part of it.

Sunday's Fact Free Cynthia Tucker Column - Talk about the Politics of Fear!

Cynthia Tucker, mouthpiece of the Democrats and Obama Campaign, and part time Op-Ed page Editor at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution had a column this weekend comparing Sarah Palin to Dick Cheney. This is my response to her, repeated here for you, my readers.

Note, she has never replied to my last complaint about her lying columns, so I don't expect one now.

My reply to her (the op-ed is at the "writing fiction" link):

As usual, your shilling for the Democratic party is humorous, and sickening at the same time. Perhaps because you write on the Op-Ed page, you think you are writing fiction.

After the mainstream media and Democratic operaratives failed to paint Sarah Palin as the right's new bogeyman with lies about the genesis of her children and belittling of her career as a "small-town" mayor and governor, YOU have shifted to now characterizing her as someone who has "mastered the fine art of manipulation and mendacity" just like Dick Cheney (I am not sure what specific examples you have of Cheney doing this, but it seems an accepted fact on the Far Left).

I really wish you Liberals would choose what the story is you want to tell about Palin. Is Sarah Palin a small town rube, dumber even than George W. Bush, or is she the female Machiavelli, "telling lie after lie to conceal her misdeeds from public view?" We used to hear this same storyline about Bush, too dumb to be President, yet somehow clever enough to fool an entire Congress, including John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden. Yes, the crafty, but dumber-than-dirt Bush tricked them all into voting for his personal war on Iraq for his robebr baron oil buddies. Now, only Obama stands in the way of a similar fate with Palin on the McCain ticket. Good thing the omniscient Obama foresaw Palin 19 months ago when he started his run for the Presidency!. (Note: That's what we call "sarcasm.")

Cynthia, I am going to do something that may disturb you and the editors at the circulation-challenged AJC, I am going to inject FACTS into the debate and challenge you to prove some of the allegations you make in the Sept. 21 editorial.

It is a fact that Palin supported a bridge between Gravina and the airport at Ketchikan when the Federal Government was going to pony up the money for it. But, need I remind you that Senator Obama, when presented with the opportunity in 2005 to shift the "Bridge" money to Katrina repairs, voted for the Bridge, and when presented with the opportunity to shift earmarks from Bicycle Paths to fixing other American bridges, voted for the bikes. I think the final word here can come from watchdog group, "Citizens Against Government Waste, who has spoken on the "Bridge to Nowhere, "The 2006 transportation appropriations bill allowed Alaska to decide whether or not to move forward. Governor Murkowski said yes; Governor Palin said no. Any discussion about the project should begin with facts."

As Wasilla's mayor, she pursued earmarks, just as any mayor (and usually, governor) pursues federal dollars to be plowed into their disricts, cities, states. Shocking that should happen!

However, it's funny you have to go back to her time as Wasilla's mayor to make this allegation. It's actually not funny, it's misleading (a common theme of this editorial) because during her tenure as Alaska's governor, she has reduced the number of earmarks coming to Alaska. If you knew how to use Google, you could have learned this in five minutes. I have to believe this failure to inform your readers is out of ignorance and not a mendacity of manipulation by witholding important facts - we know Cynthia Tucker and her editors at the AJC would never do that. (Note: more sarcasm.)

From here, you launch into the story of Palin and the librarian she "ran off." This was pretty well debunked by factcheck.org. An easy reference to find, had you cared to look, or, share it with your readers. I don't know what you're using to support your characterization that she "didn't take kindly to the mayor's inquiries" or your assertion that Palin ran her off. If she "ran off:" she did it on her own, after working for Palin for 3 years.

Your next line of attack is the revelation from last week's New York Times (a source as reputable as the AJC, when it comes to hit pieces on Republicans) that she had a city attorney fired after he placed a stop-order on a "home being built by one of her campaign supporters". Interesting how this morphed from a "builder" working on a "housing project" in the NYT article to your characterization. Can you please point me to your source that provides this level of detail, and something that makes the linkage you are making and that backs up your assertions? I'm sure the NYT would appreciate that source, too. Seriously, I looked. (All I could find on Google were repeats of the Times article, which I quote, and you misquote.)

Since we're speaking of homes and favors, I should probably remind AJC readers (what's left of them) that it was Barack Obama who participated in a million dollar sweetheart deal with convicted felon and Obama supporter Tony Rezko to buy Obama's $2M Hyde Park home (isn't that kind of like Country Club of the South, without the former terrorists?). For the record, it is Senator Obama who is the second largest recipient of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac contributions in Congress (doing in three years what no other Senator, bar Chris Dodd, could do in ten. Guess he has accomplished something in the Senate!). Furthermore, to cement the linkage between Obama and the current mess (though the Obama campaign denies he was an "advisor") the former disgraced CEO of Fannie Mae, Franklin Raines, admitted he took calls from the Obama campaign to provide mortgage and housing industry advice. It's been a laugher watching the Washington Post call it's own reporting disreputable on this one.

Next, you move on to the (I guess) current email bru-ha-ha, where, with ZERO evidence, you allege that Palin used a personal email account to "shield her official communications from public records." I feel quite certain that were that true, we'd have seen those emails all over the Internet by now, instead of the few boring, privacy-invading ones we have seen. It's interesting that five years ago, when the GOP was looking at "confidential" Democrat emails on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Liberals were concerned about the act of reading the emails, not the content of the emails, which showed a clear conspiracy between Dems on the Judiciary committee and Liberal special interest groups to tar GOP nominess.

Then, you move on to the Alaska Commissioner of Public Safety's removal in the trooper issue. I guess we have to say the jury's still out on this one. We do know that Palin's office says he was removed from the Commissioner's job because of insubordination and going behind the governor's back on budgeting issues. (One of those things you can decide as Governor is who serves the public with you). They claim to have the "official" emails to prove it. And, even if he she did ask for the firing of a clearly violent and vindictive man who had tasered his pre-teenage son, threatened his father-in-law, and brandished weapons in public, that would not have been an ethics violation. It would have been a service to the people of Alaska. How hypocritical can you people get on the Left??? Here, we have a republican governor who wants to get a gun-toting nut off the state troopers, and you guys want to defend his right to carry a gun, but you won't defend mine! Wow!

You're way off base Cynthia, and, once again, you lie and obfuscate the facts to suit your argument.

You know, when O'Reilly's guys accosted you, I felt a twinge of pity for you. Not anymore. You actually deserve to have someone call you on your lies and smears.

end..

O'Reilly vs. Tucker, redux

Dear Ms.Cynthia Tucker,

Will you retract these statements about Sarah Palin in your 9/7/08 editorial in light of their clear falsity as spelled out at factcheck.org?

You wrote these two proven falsehoods:
“…she urged an Alaska librarian to ban books; she believes “creationism” should be taught in public schools;”
Those statements are false, as debunked in this factcheck.org article.

You wrote these statements which are either distortions or phrased to place her in the worst light (for your followers):

“She opposes abortion, even in cases of rape and incest…”

She has made it very public that her personal opinion is that abortion is only acceptable to her, in the case of the mother’s life being in jeopardy, even if it was her own daughter. As this Alaska Daily News article points out, she has not pushed that agenda as governor. It should be noted that under Alaska law, a 17 year old girl can get an abortion without her parent’s consent, though that is a law that Palin is trying to change.

You wrote, “she asked ministry students at her former church to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it ‘God’s will.’” Only, that’s not exactly what she said. What she said was, “I think God's will has to be done, in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that.” I know it’s a small distinction, but she’s asking these students to pray that God’s Will be done. If Palin was certain that God’s will was that the pipeline be built, why the need for prayer? Anyway, it’s certainly not outside the realm of Christian doctrine for people to pray for all manner of things and ask God to reveal His will. I realize attacking evangelical Christians is sport for Liberal Columnists, but, do so at your peril.

On a different tack, it’s interesting that you rail at Bill O’Reilly for his double-standard in the Palin/Spears cases. It’s not hypocrisy as you suggested in his driveway “interview” with you. Double standard, sure, hypocrisy, no. While you’re at it, can you supply a definition for “Christianist?”

Finally, you have no problem repeating proven falshehoods in your column and distorting other statements to serve your political views, which is par for the course for the AJC editorial page and why I no longer pay for this newspaper. I’d also suggest that if you want a little more truth and better context, instead of pulling your information from The Daily Kos, you use a search engine and look for some local Alaskan news sources, you’ll get more complete coverage there.

While O’Reilly practices a journalistic double standard, you outright lie.

I’m not surprised.

end

O'Reilly and his double standard (update)

Updated 9/9/08: Found the "Christianist" reference!!

Whether you like Bill O'Reilly or not, you have to agree he's an in-your-face and sometimes obnoxious commentator.

Here in the Atlanta area, he created a bit of a row, because he is in a tiff with our local newsrag, the Atlanta Journal Constitution's editorial page editor, Cynthia Tucker. Let's stipulate that the AJC is a leftist rag and that Tucker is a reliable liberal, who will spout the party line on cue from her daily talking notes.

Tucker recently took O'Reilly to task for his comments regarding the Palin's eldest daughter and Jamie Lynn Spears. I agree that O'Reilly needs a beat down, and was practicing a double-standard, but, you can see the hatred for social conservatives in Tucker's column, where she uses the adjective "pious" in a pejorative sense to describe Christians, accuses the Palin's of providing little instruction to her daughter about contraception (as though she has some inside information), and essentially accuses social conservatives of not caring about the mothers or the babies of less well off teenage girls. She has previously referred to those supporting Palin as "Christianists." I tried finding this word in dictionary.com, but couldn't. I also tried finding the column with this word in it, but couldn't so I am going on the quote from her O'Reilly used in his story tonight. Clearly, Tucker has a problem with some Christians.

Furthermore, Cynthia, in your driveway interview with the O'Reilly producer, you accuse O'Reilly of "hypocrisy." Well, a double-standard, maybe, hypocrisy, no. That would be true if he himself had a teenage daughter who was pregnant. Maybe you can get the definition of that when you find Christianist.

It is nice to see that Tucker cares so much about the mothers and babies that get born, but, I know if she had her way, there'd be much fewer of these.

Cynthia, and Jay Bookman, if you're reading this - there's a reason why the AJC is not read by anyone, and why I haven't subscribed to it for 10 years, and it's largely your editorial page. I'm sure, judging by Cynthia's BMW, she's saved enough to survive the unemployment line sure to come, hopefully the rest of the staff has been so lucky.

end..

Arianna Huffington is a big idiot

What is with Arianna Huffington? AS I sit here waiting to catch a plane, she is on The Situation Room, with Wolf Blitzed, and she just decried Hillary Clinton's use of the 3am ad as a page out of the Karl Rove playbook and something he had done against John Kerrey. Doesn't she remember this was run in 1984 against Gary Hart by the Mondull campaign, in fact, an ad almost identical to the one Hillary ran.

Why do we allow these leftists get away with outright lies. By the way, Wolf let he slide, too. As a matter of fact, he basically let her filibuster his show for 4 minutes.