National Public Radio's Morning Edition made an interesting observation this morning, an observation that I think is quite correct. If you read (or listen to) the entire, rather lengthy, essay the bottom line is that most of the younger generation is really OK with the fact that Gay and Lesbian peers inhabit their world. Far from fear and loathing, there is acceptance, humor and genuine affection.
While Ann Powers, the author of the essay Dudes Act Like A Lady: 'Call Me Maybe' Takes Over YouTube doesn't take the observation a step further, but I will. The biggest obsticle standing in the way of acceptance of gay marriage or at least full recognized rights for gays, lesbians and transgender people is grandstanding politcians in search of polarizing issues and emotional votes.
I urge you to follow the link above and read the entire essay. And for starters in your education into the younger generation, just watch the wonderful video below. At over 50 million views, it's one of the most popular videos out there today.
Monday, May 07, 2012
Monday, April 23, 2012
The Children are our Future
I know this has already gone VIRAL and therefore you've already seen it. Let's face it, when MSN Trending Now posts it you're too late.
But I'm so impressed with Frans Hofmeester's work here (and his beautiful daughter), that I felt I had to post it. I hope you'll watch it again. Turn the volume up, too. The background music is beautiful.
As I watched it here I realized that, without saying a single word, it is a stunning political statement. And the beauty of this video is that it make a compelling statement for most any cause, left or right.
Of course we need to save the planet for our children. And every child deserve love, food, family and warmth.
And who could watch this video and not see it make a strong "pro-life" statement, as well.
I don't want to hijack Frans Hofmeester's video or his daughter. It possesses many universal truths.
The children are our future.
But I'm so impressed with Frans Hofmeester's work here (and his beautiful daughter), that I felt I had to post it. I hope you'll watch it again. Turn the volume up, too. The background music is beautiful.
As I watched it here I realized that, without saying a single word, it is a stunning political statement. And the beauty of this video is that it make a compelling statement for most any cause, left or right.
Of course we need to save the planet for our children. And every child deserve love, food, family and warmth.
And who could watch this video and not see it make a strong "pro-life" statement, as well.
I don't want to hijack Frans Hofmeester's video or his daughter. It possesses many universal truths.
The children are our future.
Saturday, April 14, 2012
After All These Years, Hilary Rosen is Still a Tone Deaf Hack
My history with today's top name in the news:
I need to rebuild and restore the links to the original THE WIZARD, FKAP website archives. My original webpage collection was started long before the term blog ever existed, but included a regular essay under the title The Existential Blues. All the essays and files still exist and are still on-line. I'll get the links restored and embedded in the right hand column as soon as possible.
When those link appear, you'll find I've written to and about Hilary Rosen since the early 1990's. As the head of the Recording Industry Artists of America (RIAA) she is the subject of many of my earliest essays. She has always been a tone deaf hack and in her official RIAA position, she almost single-handedly destroyed the entire music industry. She fought legal digital downloads with a single-minded (closed minded) zeal that was breath-taking to behold. If you wanted to sue Grandma for an illegal download, Hilary was your gal!
She seems incapable of independent thought, and functions mostly as an agent who does the bidding of her masters, currently the Democratic Party National Committee (DNC).
That Hilary Rosen is currently employed by CNN is an embarrassment to journalism.
Today, Hilary Rosen is in the headlines through her foolish comment about Ann Romney. Here is a summary of the latest Rosen disaster from the AP Newswires:
The multimedia furor erupted Wednesday night when Rosen said on CNN that Ann Romney, whose husband is worth millions, never had to work to pay the bills and should not be her husband's surrogate on women and the economy. "His wife has actually never worked a day in her life," Rosen said. "She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of women in this country are facing."
The backlash was brutal and swift.
David Axelrod, Obama's top campaign strategist, tweeted that Rosen's comments were "inappropriate and offensive." The president's campaign manager, Jim Messina, said Rosen should apologize. And the Democratic National Committee downplayed any connection to Rosen or her firm.
Although I've written in these spaces that the Republican "war on women" doesn't actually exist, Democrats and President Obama had successfully used this fabricated issue and had gained a virtually insurmountable lean among women voters.
Hilary Rosen single-handedly turned the tide and gave the issue back to the Republicans on a silver platter. That she then tripled down on her ill advised statement, assuring that the public forgot, if not forgave, Rush Limbaugh, was stunning to behold.
Republican comments were unnecessary. We are watching a train wreck in progress.
Her apologies, two so far, were ever worse. Hilary Rosen doesn't understand the public or the issues involved. The Democrats need to drop her like the hot potato she has become. So does CNN.
I need to rebuild and restore the links to the original THE WIZARD, FKAP website archives. My original webpage collection was started long before the term blog ever existed, but included a regular essay under the title The Existential Blues. All the essays and files still exist and are still on-line. I'll get the links restored and embedded in the right hand column as soon as possible.
When those link appear, you'll find I've written to and about Hilary Rosen since the early 1990's. As the head of the Recording Industry Artists of America (RIAA) she is the subject of many of my earliest essays. She has always been a tone deaf hack and in her official RIAA position, she almost single-handedly destroyed the entire music industry. She fought legal digital downloads with a single-minded (closed minded) zeal that was breath-taking to behold. If you wanted to sue Grandma for an illegal download, Hilary was your gal!
She seems incapable of independent thought, and functions mostly as an agent who does the bidding of her masters, currently the Democratic Party National Committee (DNC).
That Hilary Rosen is currently employed by CNN is an embarrassment to journalism.
Today, Hilary Rosen is in the headlines through her foolish comment about Ann Romney. Here is a summary of the latest Rosen disaster from the AP Newswires:
The multimedia furor erupted Wednesday night when Rosen said on CNN that Ann Romney, whose husband is worth millions, never had to work to pay the bills and should not be her husband's surrogate on women and the economy. "His wife has actually never worked a day in her life," Rosen said. "She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of women in this country are facing."
The backlash was brutal and swift.
David Axelrod, Obama's top campaign strategist, tweeted that Rosen's comments were "inappropriate and offensive." The president's campaign manager, Jim Messina, said Rosen should apologize. And the Democratic National Committee downplayed any connection to Rosen or her firm.
Although I've written in these spaces that the Republican "war on women" doesn't actually exist, Democrats and President Obama had successfully used this fabricated issue and had gained a virtually insurmountable lean among women voters.
Hilary Rosen single-handedly turned the tide and gave the issue back to the Republicans on a silver platter. That she then tripled down on her ill advised statement, assuring that the public forgot, if not forgave, Rush Limbaugh, was stunning to behold.
Republican comments were unnecessary. We are watching a train wreck in progress.
Her apologies, two so far, were ever worse. Hilary Rosen doesn't understand the public or the issues involved. The Democrats need to drop her like the hot potato she has become. So does CNN.
Monday, April 02, 2012
We Care About Trayvon Martin's Murder Because It's So Rare
We're still looking for justice for Trayvon Martin. As well we should. His death is at once both tragic and horrific.
And exceedingly rare.
If you watch television you might think there is an absolute epidemic of whites murdering blacks without so much as a single arrest and even a passing glance from law enforcement.
Alas, there is a greater and more horrific truth. There is an epidemic of young teen and early twenty year old black men being murdered in cold blood! About 4,000 were murdered in the last 12 months! It's a real and horrific epidemic.
The problem is almost all die at the hands of other black teen and twenty something year old men.
Young black men comprise only about seven percent of the population, yet account for a whopping 50 percent of the murder victims.
Without "Googling" can you name a single one of them other than Trayvon Martin? No cheating. You have 4,000 from which to chose. Name one.
Now tell me we don't have a serious problem here in the United States than NO ONE IS WILLING TO ADDRESS.
And exceedingly rare.
If you watch television you might think there is an absolute epidemic of whites murdering blacks without so much as a single arrest and even a passing glance from law enforcement.
Alas, there is a greater and more horrific truth. There is an epidemic of young teen and early twenty year old black men being murdered in cold blood! About 4,000 were murdered in the last 12 months! It's a real and horrific epidemic.
The problem is almost all die at the hands of other black teen and twenty something year old men.
Young black men comprise only about seven percent of the population, yet account for a whopping 50 percent of the murder victims.
Without "Googling" can you name a single one of them other than Trayvon Martin? No cheating. You have 4,000 from which to chose. Name one.
Now tell me we don't have a serious problem here in the United States than NO ONE IS WILLING TO ADDRESS.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Silence of the Lambs
Above is a Photo-shopped image of George Zimmerman
being used by the @killzimmerman account on Twitter
I'd like to believe that everyone wants justice for Trayvon Martin. His death at the hands of George Zimmerman (in the photo-shopped picture above) is tragic and very possibly criminal. I hope a thorough investigation is possible, but I'm beginning to have my doubts. The problem isn't the Federal and State judicial system which is working hard (if belatedly) to provide answers, it's the mob violence being championed by the leaders on the left.
I find what's happening on the "left" side of the political spectrum here in the United States to be upsetting, even distressing. People I thought shared the values of justice, honesty, fairness, restraint, kindness, cooperation and dialogue have become an American Taliban, fundamentalists demanding everyone hold their narrow minded bigoted views or face certain annihilation.
That many of these people call themselves "Liberal" is a tragic joke. A joke that as of today is no longer funny.
These people are a disgrace to liberalism. They are, in fact, a disgrace to the human race.
The list starts with virtually every so-called journalist and on-air personalities on MSNBC. It extends to the bastions of the liberal blogosphere with The Huffington Post and Daily Kos and flows down stream to the tens of thousands on Twitter and Facebook who are demanding the death of George Zimmerman without benefit of an investigation or a trial. The New Black Panther Party has placed a ONE MILLION DOLLAR bounty on Zimmerman's head., dead or alive.
You'll find no condemnation or even mild criticism of this action anywhere in the left media or blogosphere. The same folks who spent weeks condemning Sarah Palin for using "cross hairs" on a political map, don't think the call for vigilante justice against Zimmerman is ever worth a sentence in their blogs. It isn't worth one minute of their valuable air time on television.
And if Zimmerman is killed, these same so-called liberal pundits will rush to the defense of the perpetrator, blaming the "system" for it's failure to bring swift justice for young Trayvon.
Curiously, these same liberal activists will protest by the thousands outside a prison to protest the execution of a convicted murderer, but they're happy to cheer lead the murder someone who hasn't had the benefit of a trial.
One Twitter user has adopted the name @killzimmerman and spews hate and death threats 24 hours a day. Twitter, which routinely shuts down accounts for minor infractions of it's terms of use, hasn't touched this account, let alone shut it down.
A Twitter thread using the hashtag #killzimmerman has thousands of entries, most demanding Zimmerman's death.
The media, especially MSNBC are deathly silent. They not only don't care, they are actively rooting for violence, especially Reverend Al Sharpton.
And what I've written here is just the tip of the iceberg. The coordinated effort to silence all who disagree with them is massive, well funded and frightening. More on that in a future post.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Paul Ryan, Washington DC's Lone Adult
Over on the Democratic Party side of Washington, DC there was rejoicing in a new PPP Poll that showed when the public was made aware of Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney's arguable mistreatment of his dog Seamus, over 28 years ago, Romney's approval rating tanked.
Seriously, my Liberal and Progressive friends on Tiwtter are simply giddy with excitement. Leave it to Mitt Romney's dog to sniff out a path to Obama's victory.
Our future is now safe.
Meanwhile, on planet Earth, Representative Paul Ryan has prepared and proposed the most realistic, bold and brilliant budget in the last 20 years. To do what Ryan has done takes thought, analysis, honesty and courage. And no polling.
Ryan will be savaged by Democrats who deserve no place in government, cowards and liars, manipulators and pollsters who will not only allow our country to fail, but will ride Seamuss into the very gates of hell.
One does not need to agree with Ryan's every idea, but he should be held in high regard for discussing the real issues of our economy and our exploding debt.
Democrats have failed to produce a budget for three years and they've already signaled that will fail to do so again. It's so much easier to criticize than to propose ideas and stand behind them. And that's the Democrat plan.
Here are just a few lines from the Washington Post Story linked here and above:
House Republicans laid down a bold but risky election-year marker Tuesday, unveiling a budget proposal that aims to tame the national debt by reshaping Medicare and cutting deeply into Medicaid, food stamps and other programs for the poor, while reshuffling the tax code to sharply lower rates.
Congressional Republicans plan to use the document to demonstrate their willingness to tackle the nation’s difficult fiscal problems head-on. They argue that restraining future borrowing is a moral imperative and that entitlement programs for the elderly and the poor must be redrawn both to reduce red ink and to ensure that federal benefits continue to be available.
The proposal, authored by Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), calls for spending cuts and tax changes that would put the nation on course to wipe out deficits and balance the budget by 2040. The national debt would continue to rise but would shrink to the historic norm as a percentage of an expanding economy.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Wag the Dog
As I say at the top of every page of this blog, stick to your principles and NOT political parties which manipulate facts in order to increase their vote count, and ultimately, their power.
One of the biggest , most used, tricks of political parties is to create a false story to detract from a real one. Right now Gas Prices and a still faltering economy are not good for Democrats or President Obama.
So what to do?
Well, thanks to a very minor amount of blabber mouth slut-shouting help from Rush Limbaugh, Democrats have created an entire non-existent "War on Women." Curiously, Republicans, most women and virtually all independents haven't fallen for the ruse. I'm slightly surprised. The public is so often easily misled.
Ahhhh.... but Progressives? They've fallen for the ploy hook, line and sinker. They've fired up their virtual presses and launched their vast army of followers into the Twittersphere.
To keep the progressive armies fully motivated, Senator Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats have set up a Kabuki Theater around another completely false meme: Republicans are now supposedly against the very "Violence Against Women Act" they originally passed and have overwhelmingly supported for two renewals.
Here's how Harry is manipulating a false story:
The Democrats quietly and secretly included four new “poison pill” provisions into this years proposed renewal. These odd "poison pills" were never in the act before. These provisions have nothing to do with violence against women or the Act itself, but instead deal with Immigration and an massive increase in Visa’s, Budget Office Accounting (loosens rules in a time of budget deficits???) and funding of third party providers.
ONCE AGAIN LET ME EMPHASIZE NOT ONE OF THESE WEIRD PROVISIONS HAS EVER BEEN IN THE BILL BEFORE. But they're there now, ugly and festering.
Next Harry Reid sets up a demand for a very quick quick vote with limited debate and absolutely no amendments – no chance to remove or modify the poison pills. WHY? Reid knows that the very deliberative Senate, with its 60 vote threshold, will NEVER pass any bill under these circumstances.
Here's the fun part! Harry Reid DOES NOT WANT THIS RUBE GOLDBERG OF A BILL TO PASS. But he does want to force the Republicans to be the bad guys and vote against the bill just so he can CLAIM (completely falsely) that Republicans are against VAWA.
Later, after all the stupid political posturing is over, Reid will allow the real bill to come before the Senate and it will pass with the overwhelming support from Republicans it has ALWAYS enjoyed.
This is not an anti-Democratic Party rant. Historically, Republicans have played the same game. It's often called Legislative sausage making.
What bothers me is that so many folks believe the false meme and repeat it, never once bothering to learn the facts.
One of the biggest , most used, tricks of political parties is to create a false story to detract from a real one. Right now Gas Prices and a still faltering economy are not good for Democrats or President Obama.
So what to do?
Well, thanks to a very minor amount of blabber mouth slut-shouting help from Rush Limbaugh, Democrats have created an entire non-existent "War on Women." Curiously, Republicans, most women and virtually all independents haven't fallen for the ruse. I'm slightly surprised. The public is so often easily misled.
Ahhhh.... but Progressives? They've fallen for the ploy hook, line and sinker. They've fired up their virtual presses and launched their vast army of followers into the Twittersphere.
To keep the progressive armies fully motivated, Senator Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats have set up a Kabuki Theater around another completely false meme: Republicans are now supposedly against the very "Violence Against Women Act" they originally passed and have overwhelmingly supported for two renewals.
Here's how Harry is manipulating a false story:
ONCE AGAIN LET ME EMPHASIZE NOT ONE OF THESE WEIRD PROVISIONS HAS EVER BEEN IN THE BILL BEFORE. But they're there now, ugly and festering.
Next Harry Reid sets up a demand for a very quick quick vote with limited debate and absolutely no amendments – no chance to remove or modify the poison pills. WHY? Reid knows that the very deliberative Senate, with its 60 vote threshold, will NEVER pass any bill under these circumstances.
Here's the fun part! Harry Reid DOES NOT WANT THIS RUBE GOLDBERG OF A BILL TO PASS. But he does want to force the Republicans to be the bad guys and vote against the bill just so he can CLAIM (completely falsely) that Republicans are against VAWA.
Later, after all the stupid political posturing is over, Reid will allow the real bill to come before the Senate and it will pass with the overwhelming support from Republicans it has ALWAYS enjoyed.
This is not an anti-Democratic Party rant. Historically, Republicans have played the same game. It's often called Legislative sausage making.
What bothers me is that so many folks believe the false meme and repeat it, never once bothering to learn the facts.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
When did "Yes We Can" become "It's All Sarah Palin's Fault?"
Here's the newest Obama Fund Raising ad.
I can't find an ounce of Hope anywhere in it.
Nor can I find an ounce of courage or a modicum of integrity.
Hope and Change has given way to slander and blame.
I can't find an ounce of Hope anywhere in it.
Nor can I find an ounce of courage or a modicum of integrity.
Hope and Change has given way to slander and blame.
Wednesday, March 07, 2012
The War On Conservative Women
STORY ONE: Michelle Malkin: The war on conservative women
STORY TWO: B. Daniel Blatt: Where was liberal outrage when female Republicans were slurred?
I have no problem with outrage or passion. I rarely condemn hate speech, as is obvious from my last two blog entries. Instead I've been merely pointing out that one side's "hate speech" is often the other side's "careful analysis of the facts" or "instructive discourse."
What has me upset is the selective call for civil discourse from the left when they are by far the worst purveyors of horrific, outrageous and slanderous hate speech. In my experience the right is often measured, logical and fair in their criticism, refraining from hyperbole.
Let me be clear. Rush Limbaugh was guilty of extreme over-the-top slander and hyperbole, but he is the exception. But I've not condemned Limbaugh and I've not condemned Ed Schultz and I've not condemned Bill Maher. They all have points they were attempting to make.
By the way, Maher took to Twitter yesterday to defend Rush Limbaugh. Kudos to Bill Maher for that. You can follow Maher on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/billmaher
But, if you dare to read them, the two above referenced articles will make your skin crawl. The decumented hate speech by well known, major Liberal, Progressive and Democratic personalities is stunning. And it's simply never condemned.
I'm outraged by President Obama's press conference yesterday where he used his daughters as justification to attack Rush Limbaugh then, later in the same press conference, had the gall to say he “didn’t want to get into the business of arbitrating” language and civility. This, of course, prevented the reporter from asking the obvious follow-up question, "Will you condemn similar hate speech on the left?"
I'm a Democrat and a pretty far left liberal. The chances of my voting for President Obama in 2012 are damned near close to zero.
STORY TWO: B. Daniel Blatt: Where was liberal outrage when female Republicans were slurred?
I have no problem with outrage or passion. I rarely condemn hate speech, as is obvious from my last two blog entries. Instead I've been merely pointing out that one side's "hate speech" is often the other side's "careful analysis of the facts" or "instructive discourse."
What has me upset is the selective call for civil discourse from the left when they are by far the worst purveyors of horrific, outrageous and slanderous hate speech. In my experience the right is often measured, logical and fair in their criticism, refraining from hyperbole.
Let me be clear. Rush Limbaugh was guilty of extreme over-the-top slander and hyperbole, but he is the exception. But I've not condemned Limbaugh and I've not condemned Ed Schultz and I've not condemned Bill Maher. They all have points they were attempting to make.
By the way, Maher took to Twitter yesterday to defend Rush Limbaugh. Kudos to Bill Maher for that. You can follow Maher on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/billmaher
But, if you dare to read them, the two above referenced articles will make your skin crawl. The decumented hate speech by well known, major Liberal, Progressive and Democratic personalities is stunning. And it's simply never condemned.
I'm outraged by President Obama's press conference yesterday where he used his daughters as justification to attack Rush Limbaugh then, later in the same press conference, had the gall to say he “didn’t want to get into the business of arbitrating” language and civility. This, of course, prevented the reporter from asking the obvious follow-up question, "Will you condemn similar hate speech on the left?"
I'm a Democrat and a pretty far left liberal. The chances of my voting for President Obama in 2012 are damned near close to zero.
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
The One Thing Absolutely No One Wants: "More Civilized Public Discourse"
The Rush Limbaugh Controversy rages on and on and on. If you've lived under a rock for the last few weeks, Limbaugh called Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke a slut, among other things. See my previous blog post if you'd like more information.
Right now the Progressives and Liberals seem to have the upper hand. The brilliantly orchestrated advertiser boycott is working and at least 13 advertisers and two radio stations have jumped off the Limbaugh ship. Limbaugh has been forced to apologize. And while the conservative loyalists are attempting to bail water, the progressives have hit Limbaugh with a broadside torpedo.
Again and again and again and again we heard President Obama, Limbaugh's departing advertisers, Democratic Party operatives and pundits,television hosts and even comics all exclaim, "All that we want is a more civilized public discourse!"
This is, of course, pure unadulterated BULLSHIT! No a single one of them wants "more civilized discourse." They just want to cower their opponents and, if possible, silence them. They would be pleased if their opponents were civil, as long as their allies were as vile, hateful and uncivil as ever.
My PROOF? I dare you to find a single person, advertiser, corporate entity, pundit, commentator or comic that is condemning the hate speech coming from his or her side of the aisle. Find me one that condemns both sides equally. Don't worry, you're not going to find one, because their isn't one!
Today, in another of this episode's most bizarre moments, President Obama inserted his two daughters into his attack on Rush Limbaugh. Below are the quotes from The Hill Briefing Room story this afternoon:
President Obama said he called Sandra Fluke, the college student at the center of the latest Rush Limbaugh controversy, after thinking about how his own daughters would have handled the criticism.
“I thought about Malia and Sasha,” Obama said Tuesday at a news conference. “And one of the things I want them … to be able to do is speak their minds in a civil and thoughtful way, and I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names when they’re being good citizens.
I want to tread lightly here and carefully respect both Malia and Sasha. But the President's comments raise a serious question. Is it possible that while he wouldn't want Limbaugh to his beautiful daughters "sluts," it would be perfectly OK if Bill Maher called them "T***s" or "C***s?" I only make this assumption because President Obama has yet to even mention these misogynistic slurs from his million dollar campaign donor. Limbaugh's slurs were mild compared to Maher's.
But certainly President Obama isn't alone is his one sided outrage. David Friend, CEO of Carbonite(r) actually set the stage for President Obama when he, too, invoked his two daughters as a reason he cancelled advertising of the Rush Limbaugh Show. Here is his statement (from an interesting essay on this issue on Red State):
"No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse."
Gosh! And look. Friend used the patented "more civilized public discourse" excuse, too! Wow! He's covered all the bases!
Except for the base called "truth." Friend missed that one. For many years Friend has made heavy political donations for President Obama's election and re-election campaigns. Curiously he was and remains a heavy advertiser of the Ed Schultz Show. Schultz, if you remember, was suspended by MSNBC and forced to apologize for calling Laura Ingram a "slut," the exact term Limbaugh used to refer to Fluke. Friend, exactly like everyone else, is only offended when his political opponents use vile speech. He's super cool OK when his allies use the identical speech.
This works on both sides of the aisle. No one in politics has been the subject of more hate speech than Michelle Bachmann. Amazingly Bachmann appeared on MSNBC this morning and was grilled relentlessly as to why she won't condemn Limbaugh's hate speech. Bachmann correctly pointed out that no one had ever been the victim of more hate speech than she has, BUT, she still refused to condemn Limbaugh. The MSNBC announcer certainly never apologized for the hate spewed from her network associates, either. STALEMATE.
Here's where I stand. Either it's wrong 100% of the time or it's not. I don't like today's hate speech, but I've never said speech should be censored. I'm from the school that says you can and should argue the points, but I don't think you should ever silence the critics.
In other words, I don't need the pig to get out of the mud, but I feel no need to climb in there with him.
"No one with daughters the age of Sandra Fluke, and I have two, could possibly abide the insult and abuse heaped upon this courageous and well-intentioned young lady. Mr. Limbaugh, with his highly personal attacks on Miss Fluke, overstepped any reasonable bounds of decency. Even though Mr. Limbaugh has now issued an apology, we have nonetheless decided to withdraw our advertising from his show. We hope that our action, along with the other advertisers who have already withdrawn their ads, will ultimately contribute to a more civilized public discourse."
Gosh! And look. Friend used the patented "more civilized public discourse" excuse, too! Wow! He's covered all the bases!
Except for the base called "truth." Friend missed that one. For many years Friend has made heavy political donations for President Obama's election and re-election campaigns. Curiously he was and remains a heavy advertiser of the Ed Schultz Show. Schultz, if you remember, was suspended by MSNBC and forced to apologize for calling Laura Ingram a "slut," the exact term Limbaugh used to refer to Fluke. Friend, exactly like everyone else, is only offended when his political opponents use vile speech. He's super cool OK when his allies use the identical speech.
This works on both sides of the aisle. No one in politics has been the subject of more hate speech than Michelle Bachmann. Amazingly Bachmann appeared on MSNBC this morning and was grilled relentlessly as to why she won't condemn Limbaugh's hate speech. Bachmann correctly pointed out that no one had ever been the victim of more hate speech than she has, BUT, she still refused to condemn Limbaugh. The MSNBC announcer certainly never apologized for the hate spewed from her network associates, either. STALEMATE.
Here's where I stand. Either it's wrong 100% of the time or it's not. I don't like today's hate speech, but I've never said speech should be censored. I'm from the school that says you can and should argue the points, but I don't think you should ever silence the critics.
In other words, I don't need the pig to get out of the mud, but I feel no need to climb in there with him.
Friday, March 02, 2012
The Cesspool of Hate and Hypocrisy
STORY ONE: Larry Doyle - The Jesus Eating Cult of Rick Santorum
STORY TWO: Michelle Malkin - Devastating: Andrew Breitbart R.I.P.
STORY THREE: White House enters controversy over Limbaugh comments on Georgetown student
The top link above STORY ONE takes you to an op-ed essay in The Huffington Post by Larry Doyle, a work he now claims is satire. I had intended to write today's blog entry entirely about the strange logic and blatant hypocrisy of Doyle's hate filled screed.
But then Andrew Breitbart died and any small point I might have wanted to make about hate speech on the Internet exploded in my face. In fact Breitbart's death created a nuclear explosion of hatred in the blogosphere and the Twitterverse. My small essay was reduced to radioactive dust.
Just when I couldn't imagine the discourse becoming any more toxic, enter Rush Limbaugh with his laser guided venom filled missiles lighting the ionosphere. Mere Bloggers and Twitters are no match for El Rushbo, whose "talent is on loan from God." I know that's true because Rush said so.
Just how powerful was Rush's poisonous attack? So toxic the President of the United States himself felt compelled to weigh in and condemn El Rushbo. Thank you President Obama for making the point I wanted to make.
Why am I thanking President Obama? Not for defending Georgetown student Sandra Fluke, who, in fact, never needed any defense. But instead for providing the highest example of our hypocrisy toward hate speech.
Obama proved the point I wanted to make: HATE SPEECH IS ONLY HATE SPEECH WHEN IT COMES FROM THE OTHER SIDE. President Obama condemns Rush Limbaugh who called Sandra Fluke a "slut."
However, there is one man on earth who is consistently more vile, more vulgar and much more of a misogynist than even Rush Limbaugh and that's Bill Maher. Maher's famous televised attacks last year attacking Sarah Palin went far beyond the mild term of "slut," preferring to use the words "dumb Twat" and "Cunt" instead. Maher doubled down, refusing to apologize for his remarks and upped the anti to make even more vile comments.
Did President Obama condemn Maher? Did Obama call Sarah Palin and give her his sympathies for the rough nature of political debate in this country? Nope. Instead Obama happily accepted a $1,000,000.00 (one million dollars) donation from Maher.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT MOST FOLKS CAN ONLY SEE HATE SPEECH WHEN IT'S SPRINGS FROM THE OPPOSITION. THEY NEVER SEEM TO RECOGNIZE IT ON THEIR SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, EVEN IF IT SPRINGS FROM THEIR OWN PEN, KEYBOARD OR MOUTH.
In STORY ONE above, Doyle writes one of the most disgusting essays every written about any religion in order to teach conservatives a lesson that they should respect Islam. It's a lot like a father who beats the living crap out of his son in order to teach him not to be a bully. As we say on Twitter, #EpicFail.
And in STORY TWO Malkin illustrates how folks condemn Breitbart's "hate speech" by using even more vile and disgusting hate speech themselves. If they really hated Andrew Breitbart's hate speech, why did the imitate it so precisely?
And finally from STORY THREE: President Obama, if you really hate the lowering of civil discourse, why can you only ever seem to condemn it in your opponents, yet accept huge donations from serial haters on your side of the political spectrum?
__________________________________________________________
ADDENDUM 3/4/2012: As my friend Lee pointed out (see his comments to this post), Rush Limbaugh has apologized to his listeners and to Sandra Fluke. It must be noted that Rush has been under intense pressure from a left wing campaign to boycott all his advertisers. As of this morning seven advertisers have cancelled their sponsorship of Limbaugh's program.
I have edited my original blog entry to correctly reflect these recent developments. I also plan a follow-up post on this issue, especially in reference to Carbonite, one of Limbaugh's ex-advertisers.
STORY TWO: Michelle Malkin - Devastating: Andrew Breitbart R.I.P.
STORY THREE: White House enters controversy over Limbaugh comments on Georgetown student
The top link above STORY ONE takes you to an op-ed essay in The Huffington Post by Larry Doyle, a work he now claims is satire. I had intended to write today's blog entry entirely about the strange logic and blatant hypocrisy of Doyle's hate filled screed.
But then Andrew Breitbart died and any small point I might have wanted to make about hate speech on the Internet exploded in my face. In fact Breitbart's death created a nuclear explosion of hatred in the blogosphere and the Twitterverse. My small essay was reduced to radioactive dust.
Just when I couldn't imagine the discourse becoming any more toxic, enter Rush Limbaugh with his laser guided venom filled missiles lighting the ionosphere. Mere Bloggers and Twitters are no match for El Rushbo, whose "talent is on loan from God." I know that's true because Rush said so.
Just how powerful was Rush's poisonous attack? So toxic the President of the United States himself felt compelled to weigh in and condemn El Rushbo. Thank you President Obama for making the point I wanted to make.
Why am I thanking President Obama? Not for defending Georgetown student Sandra Fluke, who, in fact, never needed any defense. But instead for providing the highest example of our hypocrisy toward hate speech.
Obama proved the point I wanted to make: HATE SPEECH IS ONLY HATE SPEECH WHEN IT COMES FROM THE OTHER SIDE. President Obama condemns Rush Limbaugh who called Sandra Fluke a "slut."
ANDREW BREITBART & BILL MAHER LOOKED
REMARKABLY ALIKE. COULD THEY HAVE BEEN TWINS?
REMARKABLY ALIKE. COULD THEY HAVE BEEN TWINS?
Did President Obama condemn Maher? Did Obama call Sarah Palin and give her his sympathies for the rough nature of political debate in this country? Nope. Instead Obama happily accepted a $1,000,000.00 (one million dollars) donation from Maher.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT MOST FOLKS CAN ONLY SEE HATE SPEECH WHEN IT'S SPRINGS FROM THE OPPOSITION. THEY NEVER SEEM TO RECOGNIZE IT ON THEIR SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, EVEN IF IT SPRINGS FROM THEIR OWN PEN, KEYBOARD OR MOUTH.
In STORY ONE above, Doyle writes one of the most disgusting essays every written about any religion in order to teach conservatives a lesson that they should respect Islam. It's a lot like a father who beats the living crap out of his son in order to teach him not to be a bully. As we say on Twitter, #EpicFail.
And in STORY TWO Malkin illustrates how folks condemn Breitbart's "hate speech" by using even more vile and disgusting hate speech themselves. If they really hated Andrew Breitbart's hate speech, why did the imitate it so precisely?
And finally from STORY THREE: President Obama, if you really hate the lowering of civil discourse, why can you only ever seem to condemn it in your opponents, yet accept huge donations from serial haters on your side of the political spectrum?
__________________________________________________________
ADDENDUM 3/4/2012: As my friend Lee pointed out (see his comments to this post), Rush Limbaugh has apologized to his listeners and to Sandra Fluke. It must be noted that Rush has been under intense pressure from a left wing campaign to boycott all his advertisers. As of this morning seven advertisers have cancelled their sponsorship of Limbaugh's program.
I have edited my original blog entry to correctly reflect these recent developments. I also plan a follow-up post on this issue, especially in reference to Carbonite, one of Limbaugh's ex-advertisers.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Obama's Bone Headed Tax Strategy
STORY ONE: Obama Plans to Triple Dividend Tax Rate to nearly 50%
STORY TWO: Britain's 50p Tax Rate Hike Backfires - Revenue's Drop Dramatically
While Republicans Mitt Romney and especially Rick Santorum attempt to hand President Obama his reelection on a silver platter, President Obama continues his tone deaf and strangely self destructive approach to governing with a massive proposed tax hike that would hit vulnerable senior citizens hardest. And, history clearly shows, it's a plan that will not work or raise revenues for the government.
As all my Twitter friends are saying, "WTF!!!" (I'm sure they mean "Win the Future." Yeah, that's it.)
Been there, done that. By raising Dividend Tax to an insane rate without also raising Capital Gains Tax, companies simply stop issuing dividends and instead plow the same money into stock repurchase plans, effectively turning the returns into Capital Gains. The graph to the right shows the actual history of this effect in reverse. Once we dropped the dividend tax rate in 2002, dividends increased dramatically as did tax revenue.
In STORY TWO above, we also see this type of tax increase in the "rich" also always backfires, driving investment, earnings, citizenship and tax revenues downward. Instead of raising revenue, Great Britain has learned such tax rate increases actually reduce revenue. There is plenty of historical evidence in the United States that proves the same thing.
Now (and I'm bracing for the attacks I will receive), we are actually harming the country more by totally exempting 50% of Americans from paying any income tax at all and reducing further their contributions to social security and medicare. All of this is a plan to fail.
Today's it's hard to see how President Obama can lose in November, but he certainly is working to find a way.
P.S. No matter what the pundits are saying today, the gas price increases are absolutely killing the economy. I'm on the front line and I can see it clearly. Remember, you heard it here first.
STORY TWO: Britain's 50p Tax Rate Hike Backfires - Revenue's Drop Dramatically
While Republicans Mitt Romney and especially Rick Santorum attempt to hand President Obama his reelection on a silver platter, President Obama continues his tone deaf and strangely self destructive approach to governing with a massive proposed tax hike that would hit vulnerable senior citizens hardest. And, history clearly shows, it's a plan that will not work or raise revenues for the government.
As all my Twitter friends are saying, "WTF!!!" (I'm sure they mean "Win the Future." Yeah, that's it.)
In STORY TWO above, we also see this type of tax increase in the "rich" also always backfires, driving investment, earnings, citizenship and tax revenues downward. Instead of raising revenue, Great Britain has learned such tax rate increases actually reduce revenue. There is plenty of historical evidence in the United States that proves the same thing.
Now (and I'm bracing for the attacks I will receive), we are actually harming the country more by totally exempting 50% of Americans from paying any income tax at all and reducing further their contributions to social security and medicare. All of this is a plan to fail.
Today's it's hard to see how President Obama can lose in November, but he certainly is working to find a way.
P.S. No matter what the pundits are saying today, the gas price increases are absolutely killing the economy. I'm on the front line and I can see it clearly. Remember, you heard it here first.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)