When Liberals Consider Ad Hominem Attacks as a Logical Choice in their Debates

Sigh. I can certainly understand and empathize Michelle Malkin's feelings whenever she encounters Liberal extremists who have as much staying power with their logical arguments as a wet, limp noodle using Ad Hominem attacks as their soup du jour ("argument" of the day). Attacks are usually their "forte," so to speak, whenever they are unable to provide any platform to stand on in an honest debate without resorting to trickery and deceitfulness.

In the last two comments that had my name in Netrox's blog comment (now since removed per my request and you'll see somebody at the end apparently talking to himself frothing at the mouth. Thank you Netrox) in the "Supersize Me" debate were apparently inserted by somebody else who copied my own comments from elsewhere and inserted them into the comment box after I had apologized to Netrox on how other people's comments (and mine) deviated from the subject and I ended it right there leaving it as is. The last two inserted comments in Netrox's blog comment box were not my doing.

However, this somebody was so desperate to respond to my comments here in my own blog but were unable to since the person in question is currently banned from commenting in my blog comment box for apparent reasons by breaking the rules in my blog comment box. Anybody can post comments in my blog, even if I disagree with them. I've no problem with that. However, I do have a problem when people attack commenters using venom and foul language and will give them several warnings to cease and desist before I finally ban them. Another reason why one should get Haloscan. There are people out there who will froth at the mouths and spew absolute nonsense simply need to be locked out.

Now, this somebody (not necessarily the person in question) inserted my comments from elsewhere into Netrox's blog comment box hoping or knowingly that this person in question will at least have a place to desperately respond. Pretty low. An apt description of how some Liberals will do such a thing.

Desperate people will do desperate things and will go down the route using Ad Hominem attacks and foul language as way to counter an argument. Why? Just to make a point? What point would that be other than wanting to show people their excellent range of foul words and racist attacks?

However, my point here is that *I* don't throw temper tantrums like a prepubescent 12 year old, pimply, white-washed kid with pants drooping below the waistline with a bad mouth to sport. Dig? If other people prefer to go through the temper tantrum, bad boy route, then by all means be my guest and let the readers see for who they are.

And as a final note, the comment I made in my blog comment was not about the spelling issue or whether it's a slang word or not. I was making a point about using words that actually mean something. Using foul epithets that start with an "F" along with spitballing and name calling are hardly what a seasoned debater would use, such as Netrox or I. Which is why I suggested the Oxford dictionary.

Wishing the person in question luck in that arena. This will be my last post or comments on this matter regarding this person in question. Perhaps another round of English 50 for him instead?


UPDATE: I rest my case. I ain't surprised.

Google - "Don't Be Evil."

The NY Post (pesky sign up required) I read today reminds us that even such innocuous act as providing publicly via Google free satellite photos in such sharp, close-up details would be a boon for terrorists everywhere.

A Queens assemblyman says a popular new program offered by Google could help terrorists scout targets like the White House, power plants and transportation hubs — and is urging the search-engine giant to shut it down. The service, Google Earth, offers users close-up aerial photos of almost any building in the world — a potential gold mine for mayhem-minded fanatics, says Assemblyman Michael Gianaris. "They get incredibly detailed," said Gianaris (D-Astoria) of the satellite shots. "You can zoom in and see security outposts, fencing. It's almost like you're hovering over the building. We got photos from the Google headquarters and you even see the 'No Parking' signs."

Such extreme details breaches much of America's security when it comes to terrorists' planning to hurt America more.

While the mapping feature "may be entertaining," he writes, "the satellite images offer detailed aerial views of sensitive locations that can provide terrorists with a virtual blueprint of potential targets."

Michael Gianaris notes Google's unofficial slogan:

"Don't Be Evil."

Let's remind Google to be alot less evil by not giving terrorists additional tools to use against the United States.

UPDATE: Just to let people know, I found out about the Google Earth from the NY Post (see link above) article I came across about Google Earth. The article is dated August 21, which is the same day I blogged "Google - Don't be evil." One person (who is one of the Deaf version of Beavis and Butthead - I swear.) sincerely believes I "took" his idea about Google Earth when he blogged about it a week ago from August 21. Listen here, Butthead, I don't read everything you blog. Dig? And I never came across reading your blog about Google Earth. I blogged what I read that day on the NY Post. Ever wonder why the same date?

Really folks. In my world, if you attack or harass commenters with epithets and call them names in my blog comment box, you will be summarily warned, and after a few warnings more and you don't get it, I will ban you. Simple as that. Even if I disagree with your comments you will NOT be banned unless you insist on using foul language, hurl epithets, and call commenters. Those actions warrant banishment from my blog world. I'm King here. My rules are supreme. Yours are... inconsequential.

Forbes, We Also Have Trackbacks, too.

One thing that's interesting, after making a remark about Michelle's refusal to have the comment box switched on, is that why didn't Forbes put up a comment box up of its own just to gage the reader's responses in the spirit of bloggers everywhere? Seems kind of facetious and one-sided of Forbes to put down Michelle Malkin for her refusal to turn on the comment box in her blog. Is there some kind of an unwritten bloggers' rule where you MUST have the comment box turned on? Why would Michelle Malkin want to see such tripes from mindless dweebs bent on Ad Hominem attacks?

Here is what Forbes missed. Michelle Malkin's has her trackback turned on while Little Green Footballs does not but have the comment box turned on instead. While Powerline blog does not have either trackback nor comment turned on. Why the deft targeting at Michelle Malkin's blog, Forbes?

As for trackbacks, they are also another way of voicing your own opinions by agreeing, disagreeing or simply have a different view of Michelle Malkin's blogs by linking (as a common courtesy and an unwritten rule of thumb) to her site by using her trackback address.

How dense is Forbes in the world of blogging?


UPDATE: Michelle Malkin (Betsy Newmark) added my link in her update regarding Forbes absentmindedness.

UPDATE2: Welcome Michelle Malkin readers. Be sure to give Betsy Newmark a hearty "Thank You" for helping Michelle Malkin a much needed vacation break. People do need a break now and then. Meanwhile, happy recharging Michelle Malkin!

When the Tables Are Turned - 12 Year Old Boys Rape Deaf Man

Everybody can see how some adult males like to rape a young, prepubescent 12 year old boy either by coercing (friendly or aggressively) or getting him drunk at a New Years party, for example, just so the man can play with it. Now, the tables were turn a few weeks ago when two 12-year old boys raped a deaf man!

One of the boys faces two counts of rape and two of committing a serious sexual offence against a man who was unable to refuse because of his mental disorder. The other faces one count of rape and two of committing a serious sexual assault.

They will appear in court again on 28 September when they will be committed for trial at Crown Court.

These two boys will most likely be future adult rapists when they become adults.

Yes, there are definitely gay (and lesbian) rapists out there who prey on young boys (or girls), just as there are heterosexual rapists who prey on young girls or even boys. Nobody's immune from these pedophile monsters whether the monster go down on a boy for a little fun or force/coerce the boy to go down on the monster. I'm sure there are some gay people out there in their sick minds wouldn't mind going down on a 12 year old prepubescent kid by making sure the kid's drunk, of course, in many instances.

Are these adults desperate or what? Are there people among us that we know who harbor these sick feelings or hold some dark deep past secrets of fondling and messing around with 12 year old kids? Sickos!! It's wrong and you should know the difference. These people need help by spending time in jail along with a lobotomy job. Castration wouldn't be too bad, either. And the two boys? *shakes head* I think they've already choosen their paths.

WaPo Leads Charge to Shift Focus Away from Air America to Gov. Bob Taft

I think I know why the MSM is particularly quiet over Air America 1.5 million dollar scandal as reported by Michelle Malkin today. I believe the Liberals will try and shift the attention away from the Air America Radio financial scandal to a (perceived) potentially bigger scandal by Governor Bob Taft of Ohio, a Republican, who failed to report nearly $6,000 in gifts as reported by the New York Times and other MSM. But, as expected, the NYT still hasn't reported on the Air America Radio scandal since August 13, 2005, unless you want to count one report that falsely quoted Al Franken on purpose. The bloggers broke the news first, notably by Brian Maloney and Michelle Malkin.

The New York Times is giving the signal to attack Gov. Bob Taft where a judge ordered him to pay $4,000 in fines as well as write a letter to the people of Ohio acknowledging his violation of ethics laws. Fine. No problem. The Liberal bloggers and MSM will certainly not go after the governor seeing that $6,000 not reported compared to $1.5 million yet accounted for, however. This is what they'll screech over and pull their hairs out over in a political frenzy in their attempt to connect Thomas Noe to Governor Taft in a potentially bigger financial scandal using guilt by association:

The conviction stems from a broader investigation into accusations that Thomas Noe, a Republican fund-raiser and rare-coin dealer, mishandled and possibly stole millions from the Ohio Workers' Compensation Bureau. A lawsuit filed by the state attorney general against Mr. Noe accuses him of diverting up to $4 million of the investments for personal use.

William C. Wilkinson, a lawyer for Mr. Noe, has said that as much as $13 million cannot be accounted for and that his client has been cooperating fully with the criminal investigation. Mr. Noe provided some of the free golf outings and gifts that Mr. Taft has acknowledged.

This story is but a day or two old and yet compare the The New York Time's Air America's coverage (along with the fake quote of Al Franken about the Air America scandal of which the NYTimes still hasn't corrected as seen in the previous link) versus Gov. Bob Taft where the NYT correctly identified all of the details about the scandal. We can see where the Liberals are going with this thing. Compare CNN with Air America to Bob Taft. Also, not surprising when you compare WaPo on Air America versus Governor Bob Taft. Looks like WaPo is leading the charge in their attempt to shift the focus away from Air America to an Ohio Republican Governor, Bob Taft using guilt by association of Thomas Noe.

Just as well, bloggers are going after Gov. Bob Taft with 2644 postings (as of August 19, 2005, 8:30 AM MT) while 17,375 postings on Air America. However, WaPo is leading the charge and giving cue to Liberal bloggers to attack Gov. Bob Taft for his $6,000 oversight than Air America's "oversight" of $1.5 million dollars.

Ironically, The New York Times (and other MSM rags) quoted Ohio Democratic House leader by succinctly commenting on the corruption issue:

The Democratic House leader, Representative Chris Redfern, said lawmakers must rid Ohio of a "culture of corruption that is much bigger than Bob Taft and his golfing habits."

How true. This goes as well for the managment and owners (pass and current)of Air America Radio in their latest financial scandal. We don't need or want to see these corruptions going on but let's put things into perspective here first, The problem is that The New York Times and other MSM outlets are not doing their job to inform readers, listeners and watchers by reporting on Air America's scandal by turning a blind eye hoping the Liberal radio station will survive and at the same time basically telling bloggers to sic on Gov. Bob Taft. Not that I don't mind but it is just the hypocrisy of these Liberal bloggers and MSM dunderheads that make them so apparent.

When Randi Rhodes is Actually the Star of Air America...not Al Franken

Michelle Malkin continues her investigative "blogory" (blog + story, but in this case the Air Scamerica is beginnng to get a bit gory) of Air America's latest financial scandal. When MSM refuse to cover a story bloggers take over and a "blogswarm" ensues and when bloggers provide the news it is known as a "Blogory". However, getting to the truth is what we want to know. Many are asking questions about Sheldon and Anita Drobny's financial plans:

the deep-pocketed, far left Illinois Democrat couple who dreamed up Air America and have been involved in its many strange and dubious business reorganizations.

What many do not know is that Sheldon Drobny wrote a book in December 2003 called "Road To Air America: Breaking The Right Wing Stranglehold On Our Nation's Airwaves." But it is interesting to read what readers had to say about Sheldon Drobny's book in Amazon's customer review page:

I've been listening to Air America since day one. I tuned in for Al Franken but kept coming back for Randi Rhodes. She is the true star of Air America and probably the most brilliant commentator in the country.

OUCH!

And another reviewer gives the book a 4 out of 5 stars but makes an ominous note:

The story of the beginning of Air America Radio is quite compelling, though the book suffers from repetitiveness and a lack of detail. This is definitely the story from Drobny's point-of-view, and it lacks interesting information that he was either not privy to or chose not to share. For instance, I was interested to know how and why the station started, but when it came to learning about how they found and negotiated with on-air talent, we get only a little information about Al Franken and nothing about anybody else! Also, there was a bit of a fiasco with early financial dealing, but we get only sketchy details from Drobny.

Sounds like the Drobny's are already acting suspicious in light of the latest Air America near million-dollar financial scandal.

From the same reviewer who noted Sheldon Drobny's difficult days in getting financial backings but had some questions:

On several occasions, we learn, the Drobnys were asked to give interviews to various networks about the new station, but they declined to do so, fearing that the story would get negative spin!! No wonder they had troube getting initial investors, when they were perpetually declining free publicity! Drobny spends a lot of time lamenting the difficulty in finding finanial backers, but it never seems to have occurred to him to have the station be a non-profit organization funded by contributors. I think a lot of people, myself included, would have donated generously to have a liberal radio station. Later, the management spent a fair amount of money having a PR firm decide on a name -- why not ask potential listeners to try their hand?

If that's the case, then shouldn't the Liberal Lefties start a fund-raising drive to help come up with nearly a million dollars cash to help out Air America Radio's latest financial scam when the money was intended for alzheimer patients and inner city kids in the first place? Will Liberals actually touch (yes, touch) Air America Radio with a 10-ft pole this time?

Oh, and the final clincher came from Bill Clinton from a December 2003 Chicage magazine about the Drobny's regarding Air America Radio:

(The Drobnys) want to do something good for our country by working to restore a sense of balance.....

Balance? Does that include stealing money (which hasn't been repaid in over a year) from a Federal grant intended for Alzheimer patients and inner city kids?

And the last laugh that I got was from another reviewer who bemoans about the "liberal media":

I long suspected it, but my suspicions were confirmed that the "liberal media" in America was vanishing after reading this book.

Ever consider why that is so? Ever consider that possibly, just possibly the "liberal media" resort to lying, twisting of facts, and do just about everything to slam the Republican/Conservative party line? Always playing the gloom and doom scenario at every turn. When was the last time a "liberal media" reported anything positive that readers and listeners would like to hear? No excuses. Just give me an example. Even the AP pratically concedes it won't report anything good but would rather report the bombings, the killings and injuries from their hotel rooms.

Where are the Drobny's now? Is there a scam in the works?



More on Air America scam at:
When NYTimes Gets Busted for Lying to Help Cover Up Air America's Scandal

A Live Air America Radio Band Aid Solution

When Mainstream Media Refuse to Cover Air America Scandal

Lawyers Weigh In on Air America If "Stealing" of Kiddie Funds Actually Existed

Air America Stealing Money from Poor-Inner City Kids and Elderly?

The Simich Jr. Double Homicide Case

On May 3, 2005 I reported about a culturally deaf man, Simich Jr., who murdered his Deaf sister and Deaf brother-in-law. Now, a reliable source close to me that's keeping a close eye on the Simich Jr. double homicide case said that:

The preliminary hearing for the double homicide is Sept. 19, however it's very likely to be postponed because both attorneys will want to do psych evaluations. The public defender said that so far Simich Jr. is getting fair ADA access in everything related to the case.

It makes sense to do a psych evaluation to determine Simich Jr.'s current mental state. And see whether he is able to stand up in court.

Also, the source indicated an increased awareness about the communication issue between hearing police officers and deaf people:

One of the local papers here did a story about how some of the police officers that responded to the homicide have recently enrolled in sign language classes.

Sometimes it takes a tragedy to open people's eyes.


See my past blogs on the Simich Jr case here, here, and here.

Kokonut Pundits will follow the Simich Jr. double homicide case throughout its entirety, as much as possible when necessary.

More "Supersize Me" Bunkum

In my previous post I discussed Morgan Spurlock's wanton disregard for a balanced documentary favoring wild accusations, though hugely implied, blaming McDonalds (and the fast food industry) as the source of America's obesity.

Foxnews makes a critical report about Spurlock's book "Don't Eat This Book" where he makes false and defamatory accusations about McDonalds.

--Spurlock writes in his book that McDonalds uses beef that has been fed the ground-up remains of other cows. But the FDA has banned this practice of feeding ruminant remnants to other ruminants since 1997. Spurlock essentially accuses McDonalds of breaking federal law for the past eight years, and provides no sources for his accusation.

--In one particularly egregious passage, Spurlock tells his readers that the FDA has linked the artificial sweetener aspartame to side effects such as headaches, dizziness, nausea and hallucinations. But Spurlock's own source for that passage -- a 1999 issue of the FDA Consumer

-- lists these effects only to specifically refute them. The newsletter attributes the claims to "[w]ebsites with screaming headlines," and finds them wholly without merit.

--Spurlock writes that "a friend" told him McDonalds no longer calls its shakes "milkshakes" because they're all chemicals, and no milk. This is an urban legend. The primary ingredient in a McDonalds shake is "whole milk."

As always, Morgan Spurlock sides with sensationalism at the expense of truth. Foxnews makes a point about Spurlock's wanton disregard for truth:

Much of the book rests on the same kinds of poor sourcing and shoddy research. Spurlock appears to have run with any dirt on the food industry he could find. He even dismisses the Ronald McDonald Children's Charities, which he implies are merely a ruse to get sick kids hooked on the Big Mac.

Spurlock lambastes the food industry for deceptive marketing and bad business practices. The problem is, for someone so critical of deceptive marketing practices, Spurlock himself seems to have problems with the truth.

Another reason to cast a very wary eye on Morgan Spurlock. The Associated Press gets in on the action:

Merab Morgan, from Raleigh, thought the documentary had unfairly targeted the world's largest restaurant company, implying that the obese were victims of a careless corporate giant. People are responsible for what they eat, she said, not restaurants. The problem with a McDonald's-only diet isn't what's on the menu, but the choices made from it, she said.

And that was my contention here stating that the choices made by people who eat the food are theirs alone. No one forced customers through the doors of fast food restaurants. No employees told customers that they cannot eat the foods because they're fat. The only thing left is to ensure that nutrional information are readily available to willing customers whether in fast food or fancy restaurants so they can make informed decisions. But people continue to play the "Let's Blame Corporate America for Our Fattyness" even if people cannot read a nutritional chart or just don't care for that information and want their Big Macs and fries, pronto.

Spurlock's film "really spurred a backlash based on common sense," Riker said.

Merab Morgan used nutritional information downloaded from McDonald's Web site to create meal plans of no more than 1,400 calories a day. She only ate french fries twice, usually choosing burgers and salads. Those choices are a stark contrast with those made by Spurlock, who ate every menu item at least once.

At the end of the 90 days, she had dropped from 227 to 190 pounds

You make the choices, you bear the responsibility of your own actions. That's the bottom line. Even though the food industry bears some responsibility but ultimately the choice to decide comes down to one person...you. Be careful who you blame the next time. It's all about common sense. Some people have 'em, some don't. You are what you eat, inside and out.

Howard Dean Talking Nonsense About Women In Iraq

There goes kooky Howard Dean again speaking before thinking.

Howard Dean still doesn't think the Iraqis are better off with dictator Saddam Hussein out of power and in prison.

Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation" yesterday, the fiery former Vermont governor said, "It looks like today, and this could change, as of today it looks like women will be worse off in Iraq than they were when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq."

Will wonder never cease about this guy not realizing that prior to Saddam Hussein Iraqi women were very much involved in politics:

Prior to Saddam Hussein, women were very much included in the politics of Iraq, according to Anita Sharma, director of the conflict prevention project at the Woodrow Wilson Center. "That changed under the Baath regime," she said.

Bayannkidnappings of themselves or their children, she said. "More women wear veils in Baghdad out of fear." A solution is as simple as "street lighting," she said.e Surdashi, a refugee from Northern Iraq who lost scores of relatives to Saddam Hussein's genocidal campaign in the late 1980's, spoke of similarities between women in central and southern Iraq today and the Kurdish women after the Gulf War. "Now, most women may not be politically involved because basic necessities take first seat," she said.

Sharma agreed, saying better security is necessary before large numbers of women become involved in politics. Women fear kidnappings of themselves or their children, she said. "More women wear veils in Baghdad out of fear." A solution is as simple as "street lighting," she said.

And they still have the desire to improve and add more women in important roles of the Iraqi government:

Nevertheless, Surdahsi noted that several women's groups have recently sprung up, a precursor to bigger political roles for women. The National Council of Women attracted 1,000 women to a February conference on transitional assembly law, Surdahsi said. The Society of Iraqi Women for the Future, just three months old, is promoting women in government positions. The Coordinating Council of Women's Non-Governmental Organizations has brought together 40 women's groups in Baghdad. And Women for a Free Iraq is lobbying for women's rights.

And contrast that during Saddam's regime and how women suffered under him:

Under the Baath regime, not only did women lose political power, Sharma said, but also jobs. High unemployment in manufacturing after the Gulf War pushed Iraqi men into jobs traditionally held by women. "Today only 19% of the workforce is female," she said, yet Iraqi women are "highly educated and employable."

How dumb is Howard Dean? Dumb enough to ignore that currently Iraq have 7 Iraqi women ministers among 25 other Iraqi male ministers?

We have according to Defend America' Iraq Weekly Status Report (page 10) those 7 women ministers:

Minister of Communications - Juwan Fu'ad Ma'sum
Minister of Displacement and Migration - Suhayla al-Kinani
Minister of Environment - Narmin 'Uthman
Minister of Human Rights - (Acting) Narmin 'Uthman
Minister of Technology - Basima Butrus
Minister of Municipalities and Public Works - Nasreen Berwari
Minister of State for Women's Affairs - Azhar al-Shaykhli

Also, on page 17 in the Iraq Weekly Status Report:

The Iraq Reconstruction Management Office’s $35 million microfinance program has disbursed over 14,000 microfinance loans to small businesses, for a total of $28 million to date. Loans range from $500 to $25,000 (with an average loanof about $2000); 9 percent of the loans have been made to women.

I don't know what Howard Dean is smoking but I'm pretty sure that the "Quagmire" Liberal crowd are absolutely ecstatic over Dean's astute knowledge and intellect on the subject of women in Iraq.

Pretty durn proud I'd say.

UPDATE: Captain's Quarters report on Dean's fabulously astute knowledge that Iraqi women fared better under Saddam.

Under Saddam, women had all the same opportunities as men -- to get tortured, raped, falsely imprisoned, starved off their land, and to serve as test subjects for his chemical-weapons programs, as in Halabja.

A Lesson Story From Michelle Malkin On Using Racist Comments

Michelle Malkin's article reminds us in her update about a passenger who sued Southwest Airline for "discrimination" because the flight attendent said

"Eenie, meenie, minie, moe; pick a seat, we gotta go."

Hoping that passengers would laugh about the cute nursery rhyme in getting them to hurry up and get seated. Well, almost everybody laughed.

But Sawyer and Fuller, who are black, felt ridiculed and persecuted by Cundiff, who is white. Bingo: Racist hate crime. "I was infuriated by the comment," Sawyer said. Fuller whined: "It was like I was too dumb to find a seat."

All together now: Awwwwwwwwww.

These are the overly sensitive people who need to get a clue and try not to take everything so personally and totally out of context. Just like this guy who didn't get an email reply from Michelle Malkin and in turn called her a terrible racist name because how dare she, Michelle Malkin, not answer his emails!

Ok, altogether now, again: Awwwwwwwwwwwwww.

Sensitivity training class anyone? For the passengers and emailers I mean.

A Clueless Associated Press (AP) Reports

Now, we had so far one MSM outlet who reported on President Bush strong and sincere emotions meeting more than 900 family members of some 270 soldier skilled in Iraq or Afghanistan over the past two years. It was Newsweek, the original distributor and author of the President Bush' story, who distributed the story and had the PR Newswire distribute the news story further, until Yahoo News picked it. Now, will the NY Times or Wapo pick this story up? You're funnin' me? Heck, even the AP editors as reported by the NY Times said that people were "worried" that they were not getting other news aside from the regular reporting on the bombings and killings.

"Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?" the anonymous polemic asks, in part. "Did you know that 3,100 schools have been renovated?"

"Of course we didn't know!" the message concludes. "Our media doesn't tell us!"

Ms. Goudreau's newspaper, like most dailies in America, relies largely on The Associated Press for its coverage of the Iraq war. So she finally forwarded the e-mail message to Mike Silverman, managing editor of The A.P., asking if there was a way to check these assertions and to put them into context. Like many other journalists, Mr. Silverman had also received a copy of the message.

How simple is it to peruse U.S. military websites such as Defend America to check up on construction updates and the likes? And make a few phones calls or even visit commanders nearby? All one has to do is look up the Iraq Weekly Progress Report on the internet reported by the Defend America military website. The IWPR has been reporting these reconstruction news and other good news for more than 16 months!

The bottom-line question was, people wanted to know if we're making progress in Iraq," Ms. Goudreau said, and the A.P. articles were not helping to answer that question.

"It was uncomfortable questioning The A.P., knowing that Iraq is such a dangerous place," she said. "But there's a perception that we're not telling the whole story."

Mr. Silverman said in an interview that he was aware of that perception. "Other editors said they get calls from readers who are hearing stories from returning troops of the good things they have accomplished while there, and readers find that at odds with the generally gloomy portrayal in the papers of what's going on in Iraq," he said.

Mr. Silverman said the editors were asking for help in making sense of the situation. "I was glad to have that discussion with the editors because they have to deal with the perception that the media is emphasizing the negative," he said.

"We're there to report the good and the bad and we try to give due weight to everything going on," he said. "It is unfortunate that the explosions and shootings and fatalities and injuries on some days seem to dominate the news."

Suki Dardarian, deputy managing editor of The Seattle Times and vice president of the board of the Associated Press Managing Editors, said that the discussion was "a pretty healthy one."

"One of the things the editors felt was that as much context as you can bring, the better," Ms.
Dardarian said. "They wanted them to get beyond the breaking news to 'What does this mean?' "

"What does that mean?" ?? Are they actually that clueless? Newsweek got it about President Bush that he is really human. For the AP reporters they make these phone calls to determine how many were killed or injured in blasts or firefights as a part of their confirmation process from their hotel rooms. What makes them think they can't get other information besides deaths and injuries??

Mr. Silverman said the wire service was covering Iraq "as accurately as we can" while "also trying to keep our people out of harm's way."

"The main obstacle we face," he said, "is the severe limitation on our movement and our ability to get out and report. It's very confining for our staff to go into Baghdad and have to spend most of their time on the fifth floor of the Palestine Hotel," which is home to most of the press corps. The hotel was struck by a tank shell in 2003, killing two journalists.

Ok. Ever considered using the phones, Instant Messaging for real time chat interviews, check the internet or even do email interviews with U.S. commanders on what's happening out there, construction-wise? How hard is that when bloggers are getting most of the alternate news out to the people? But then the famous CYA response comes from the AP:

By the end, she said, editors were acknowledging that even in their own hometowns, "we're more likely to focus on people who are killed than on the positive news out of a school."

More likely they just want to keep doing what they've always been doing considering the history of the AP and an agenda to report only bad news and their dislike for President Bush' administration. The AP continues to report the deaths and bombings with the gloom and doom scenarios they portray in Iraq.


UPDATE: Michelle Malkins makes a note about the AP's excuse on reporting the war, albeit one day late to mine. But has lots of links to others who reported about the weak-kneed AP's excuse.

Proof That President Bush Cares About US Soldiers Killed in Action

Seems like Newsweek is making amends to president Bush after a false story on the Guatanamo Bay fake Koran descecration by writing a moving story of President Bush' meetings with widows and kids without their fathers, and brothers of those who were killed in the Iraq or Afghanistan war.

Aug. 22, 2005 issue - The grieving room was arranged like a doctor's office. The families and loved ones of 33 soldiers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan were summoned to a large waiting area at Fort Bragg, N.C. For three hours, they were rotated through five private rooms, where they met with President George W. Bush, accompanied by two Secret Service men and a photographer. Because the walls were thin, the families awaiting their turn could hear the crying inside.

President Bush was wearing "a huge smile," but his eyes were red and he looked drained by the time he got to the last widow, Crystal Owen, a third-grade schoolteacher who had lost her husband in Iraq. "Tell me about Mike," he said immediately. "I don't want my husband's death to be in vain," she told him. The president apologized repeatedly for her husband's death. When Owen began to cry, Bush grabbed her hands. "Don't worry, don't worry," he said, though his choking voice suggested that he had worries of his own. The president and the widow hugged. "It felt like he could have been my dad," Owen recalled to NEWSWEEK. "It was like we were old friends. It almost makes me sad. In a way, I wish he weren't the president, just so I could talk to him all the time..."

Bush routinely asks to see the families of the fallen when he visits military bases, which he does about 10 times a year. It does not appear that the White House or the military makes any effort to screen out dissenters or embittered families, though some families decline the invitation to meet with Bush. Most families encourage the president to stay the course in Iraq. "To oppose something my husband lost his life for would be a betrayal," says Inge Colton, whose husband, Shane, died in April 2004 when his Apache helicopter was shot down over Baghdad. Bush does, however, hear plenty of complaints. He has been asked about missing medals on the returned uniform of a loved one, about financial assistance for a child going to college and about how soldiers really died when the Pentagon claimed the details were classified.

At her meeting with the president at Fort Hood, Texas, last spring, Colton says she lit into Bush for "stingy" military benefits. Her complaints caught Bush "a little off guard," she recalls. "He tried to argue with me a little bit, but he promised he would have someone look into it." The next day she got a call from White House chief of staff Andrew Card, who said the White House would follow up. "My main goal was to have him look at my son, look him in the eyes and apologize," says Colton. "I wanted him to know, to really understand who he has hurt." She says Bush was "attentive, though not in a fake way," and sometimes at a loss for words. "He didn't try to overcompensate," she says.

The most telling—and moving—picture of Bush grieving with the families of the dead was provided by Rachel Ascione, who met with him last summer. Her older brother, Ron Payne, was a Marine who had been killed in Afghanistan only a few weeks before Ascione was invited to meet with Bush at MacDill Air Force Base, near Tampa, Fla.

Ascione wasn't sure she could restrain herself with the president. She was feeling "raw." "I wanted him to look me in the eye and tell me why my brother was never coming back, and I wanted him to know it was his fault that my heart was broken," she recalls. The president was coming to Florida, a key swing state, in the middle of his re-election campaign. Ascione was worried that her family would be "exploited" by a "phony effort to make good with people in order to get votes."

Ascione and her family were gathered with 18 other families in a large room on the air base. The president entered with some Secret Service agents, a military entourage and a White House photographer. "I'm here for you, and I will take as much time as you need," Bush said. He began moving from family to family. Ascione watched as mothers confronted him: "How could you let this happen? Why is my son gone?" one asked. Ascione couldn't hear his answer, but soon "she began to sob, and he began crying, too. And then he just hugged her tight, and they cried together for what seemed like forever."

Read the whole thing for you naysayers that President Bush is a heartless SOB and cares nothing about families who lost their husbands, brothers or fathers.

Privately, Bush has met with about 900 family members of some 270 soldiers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. The conversations are closed to the press, and Bush does not like to talk about what goes on in these grieving sessions, though there have been hints. An hour after he met with the families at Fort Bragg in June, he gave a hard-line speech on national TV. When he mentioned the sacrifice of military families, his lips visibly quivered.

No lip bitting here. No going from laughing to quickly producing a single teardrop in 7 steps after noticing a video camera pointing his way. This is the president we know and love for his sincere and real emotions regardless whether a camera is around or not. This is a president that truly knows how to connect with his people.

Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin

When Anti-war Activists Scream Over Invasion of Iraq for Oil is Debunked

The U.S. went to war in Iraq to free up the Iraqi people from a tyrannical leader and his cruel regime rather than going to war solely to gain control of Iraq's oil. Today the NY Times (gasp!) reports:

Under the agreement, oil revenue would be shared by the central government and Iraq’s 18 provinces, and split roughly according to their populations. It was unclear which entity would control the money, though one Iraqi leader said it would be the central government.

“The agreement is that the distribution would be under the control of the federal government,” said the leader, Saleh Mutlak, a member of the committee charged with writing the constitution.

If it holds, the deal will constitute a major advance in the effort to complete a constitution. The control of oil revenue, which provides the bulk of Iraq’s income, could significantly strengthen the hand of the central government over the regions, like Kurdistan and southern Iraq, that are pushing for greater self-rule.

Most of Iraq’s oil is concentrated in fields well to the south and north, raising fears, especially among the Sunni Arab population, that the revenues will fall under the control of the Shiite Arabs and the Kurds. Until this week, Kurdish leaders were demanding that they keep at least 60 percent of the money earned from oil in their area, in the north. A Kurdish official said Friday that they had dropped that demand.

“This is a formula that everyone can agree on,” said Mahmood Othman, a Kurdish member of the constitutional committee.

This was in light of the Iraq's Constitution which was completed one day ahead of schedule which will require an October 15 referendum (see page 9 and don't be shy to read the rest of the pdf file) to accept the Constitution by voters to held in another National Election on December 15, 2005.

While you are at it, check out the latest massive infrastructure works in Iraq succumbing to massive quagmires in Iraq.

And they said that the primary U.S. motive was entirely about controlling Iraq's oil? The Kos Kids think so. From all indications they would love nothing better than to see Iraq fail.

UPDATE: Check out "Generation Why" on how the oil cost is divided in the United States and how much profits are actually made. Thanks to "Generation Why" for linking to my blogsite here.

When Kos Kids Get Unhinged Over Casey Sheehan's Pictures

How ironic. When the Kos kids get upset when supporters of Spc. Casey Sheehan, who was killed recently in Iraq, honored him by carrying signs with his pictures of him as a "Fallen Hero" and that "Freedom isn't Free."

I really thought no one could stoop so low as to using the pictures of a dead soldier AGAINST his own MOTHER! No shame, no decency, no empathy - just sheer heartlessness. I'm not normally a violent woman, but when I saw this I wanted to hurt someone - after I nearly vomited.

Never mind the fact that Patrick Sheehan, husband of Cindy Sheehan, is filing for divorce possibly because of her grieving antics that strained their already separated relationship. And also never mind the fact that Sheehan's extended family are asking her to stop this antics even though they support the troops in Iraq in an open email signed by Casey's aunt Cherie Quartarolo on behalf of his paternal grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins:

We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the expense of her sons good name and reputation.

The Sheehan family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving, the e-mail stated. The rest of the Sheehan family supports the troops, our country and our president, silently, with prayer and respect.

If the Kos kids are outraged by the honorable display of Casey's pictures in support of a fallen hero at Casey Camp then where are their outrage for Citizen Smash of Indepundit when he got angry over scores of pictures of US soldiers on banners who were killed in Iraq to protest against the Iraq war policy in a bad way?

I NOTICED four people from the peace group preparing to display an unusually long banner, so I decided to check it out for myself. Putting on my friendly face, I slipped in behind them to take a peek. What you got there? I asked, looking over the top of the banner. It was a series of photographs, most of them formal portraits of soldiers in uniform. It took a moment to register, but then I was hit by a wave of rage. These are servicemen who died in Iraq!

That's right, replied the middle-aged woman standing closest to me.

I know two of these guys, they were my friends! YOU CAN'T DO THIS!

What do you mean, we can't do this?

Did you get permission from their families to use their photos? You don't speak for them, these men did not die for your cause!?

No, they died for OIL.

Now I was really angry. That is the MOST INSULTING thing I've EVER HEARD! I was raising my voice now. Nobody joins the military because they love OIL, they volunteer because they value FREEDOM

Why don't YOU sign up?

I served for TEN YEARS!

So, why did you leave the service, then?

I DIDN'T! But this last exchange was over my shoulder. I had become too angry, and had to walk away before things got really ugly. But they're using photos of my college roommate and my brother's best friend on one of their banners over there.

Ok. I guess Kos Kids get angry over a photo of Casey used in an honorable way but they are not even remotely outraged over a string of photos of numerous different US soldiers killed in Iraq who volunteered to sign up. U.S. soldiers died to protect our freedom so protestors like Liberals can do their thing to demean and demoralize US soldiers in the most dishonorable way...including the trampling of U.S. flag when U.S. soldiers have died and fought so hard for over 200 years to protect America and the belief in democracy and freedom.

And if the Kos Kids are truly outraged over a few pictures of Casey, shouldn't they be even more outraged when Michael Moore filmed the Arlington memorial scene of Betty Lenzi (Maj. Gregory Stone's mother) and Tammie Eslinger (Stone's fiancee') without their permission and used the scene in Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 movie? All to demean and demoralize US troops and give more fodder to Muslim terrorists who abhor freedom and democracy?

Very funny of Laura D. of The Daily Kos to do this. Next time, Laura, make up your mind.

Clinton's "Talk No Evil" Photo...Thumbs Up.

I've seen the photo before in Michelle Malkin's latest blog on the 9/11 Omission Report. But for the first time I just now noticed Clinton's "thumbs up" on his lap while his mouth is covered. Is this a morbid, secret symbolic gesture about his Lewinsky affiar? Now, what was that joke about Wee Willie again?


Hear No Evil. Speak No Evil. See No Evil. Major Heartburn.

When a Deaf Person Calls Michelle Malkin a "Chink Bitch"

It's amazing how people react when they do not get an email reply back. This one Deaf dude called Michelle Malkin a "Chink Bitch" as outlined in Rhymes with Right blog. Only because Michelle Malkin didn't return his email. All this over a discussion of Cindy Sheehan claiming that RWR blog attacked Cindy Sheehan's good name. Hardly even close. RWR was careful and respectful of Cindy's loss of her son. But the viciousness of the Loony Liberal Left just gets lower and lower just as Michelle Malkin pointed them out because we dare to criticize Sheehan's action and the questionable actions of the MSM by taking advantage of Sheehan's situation. How many emails did Michelle Malkin answer? Who really cares?

Now, good lord! Everybody knows that Michelle Malkin's blogsite is popular and that she must get tons of emails. Even I sent her several emails but no reply, and I didn't expect a reply either knowing that she gets tons of emails. Am I bitter? No. Am I disappointed? No. What I *don't* do is roll on the floor in a rage of fit just because somebody didn't answer my email. How DARE she ignore me! Hey, I'm flexible and I understand that people cannot answer all emails, especially if they get tons of it with half of it being scathing, idiotic and thoughtless spews.

The temper tantrum result was over the claim that Michelle Malkin used the words "deaf-mute" as a derogatory term in her article a few months back. And in return called her a "gook" in a deliberate attempt to be racist by purposely using a derogatory term against her in the form of a question. An odd way at rationalizing the justification in doing so when Michelle Malkin wasn't trying to be racist nor purposely using "deaf mute" as a derogatory term. But to say "deaf and dumb" would be the more obvious derogatory term. The term "deaf mute" in Michelle's instance doesn't qualify as a derogatory term but rather to explain medically the girl's limitation rather than trying to be mean. But this Lovable LLL purposely used a derogatory term as if "gook" and "deaf mute" have the same derogatory standard. Hardly. "Gook" is never a medical term or medical description but a racist one by the person saying it.

How Often Did the NYTimes Consistently Lied or Misled Readers of the Past?

Michelle Malkin reports that NYTimes' "transcript" of Al Franken's remark never existed. Now, how often has the NYTimes consistently lied and mislead readers of the past prior to the blogging explosion? It would be nice to gather up the last, oh say, 5, 10 or 20 years of the NYTimes newspaper publication and see how often they purposely mislead readers to think otherwise that was just as blatant as this NYTimes latest disinformation. We all know that the publication is wanton to do this but to see the actual numbers and articles in front of us would be priceless. Their own past would sure to haunt them.

When NYTimes Gets Busted for Lying to Help Cover Up Air America's Scandal

From Michelle Malkin.

The NYTimes reports buried deep in their newspaper:

"I don't know why he did it," Mr. Franken said, according to a transcript of the broadcast made by the Department of Investigation. "I don't know where the money went. I don't know if it was used for operations. I think he was borrowing from Peter to pay Paul."

Here's what Franken actually said (via audio at Brainster's Blog and transcript at Brian Maloney, who busted this story wide open in the blogosphere the Times sneers at):

I don't know why they did it, and I don't know where the money went, I don't know if it was used for operations [softer, especially fast], which I imagine it was. I think he was robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I've listened to the audio link and compared that with the available transcript and sure enough, Brian Maloney reported it correctly on what Al Franken actually said about the missing $870,000 Federal Grant that was stolen from Gloria Wise for Boys and Girls to act as a "loan" for Air ScamAmerica.

Why is the NYTimes helping to cover up Air America "loan"? Why were they so bold to say "according to a transcript" (of the AA show) in the article and write down differently what Al Franken actually said?

The NYTimes got caught with their pants down, literally. Will they issue a correction? An apology? Not likely. Will they do a more in depth reporting on AA's scam even though they fawned all over Air America Radio debut as a Liberals' answer to conservative radio talk shows?

- On March 11, 2004, the Times Business section introduced Air America in a story titled "Liberal Talk Radio Network To Start Up in Three Cities."

- On March 21, 2004, the Times Magazine ran a 7,659-word cover story about Al Franken titled "Al Franken, Seriously So." The reporter, Russell Shorto, said that everyone he talked to "agreed that Al Franken has excellent prospects for success in talk radio." He also reports that "Franken's political views are more eclectic than you might imagine." (Kokonut - I'm laughing over this one).

- On March 31, 2004--the day of Air America's debut--the Times ran a 1,403 word puff piece on page E1. The reporter, Jaques Steinberg, said Air America host Jeaneane Garofalo is merely "poking fun" at Karl Rove when she accuses him of pursuing ''the elusive 18-25 Klan demo" as if accusing a high-ranking White House official of pandering to one of the most vile organizations in America is akin to telling a lighthearted knock knock joke.

- On April 1, 2004, media critic Alessandra Stanley followed up with a 752-word review of Franken's first day on the air.

- On April 2, 2004, the front page of the metro section carried a 755-word article by reporter Clyde Haberman about the "debut of all-day Air America," which had occurred the previous day.

Will the NYTimes report the scam with more in-depth and correct reporting? Now, really!



More on Air America scam at:
A Live Air America Radio Band Aid Solution

When Mainstream Media Refuse to Cover Air America Scandal

Lawyers Weigh In on Air America If "Stealing" of Kiddie Funds Actually Existed

Air America Stealing Money from Poor-Inner City Kids and Elderly?

A Little Phun.

Accuracy is one thing when it comes to Googling and seeing who has what when comparing bloggers. The "Googlefight" is a quaint site and doesn't mean much when comparisons are done. Although it's more phun when I do this. So small, a magnifying glass is needed to see this one. And, of course, let the greater idiot be the winner. Although, this type of thing is not entirely accurate. So, take it with a grain of salt and have phun with it.

When Live Donkeys and Mentally Retarded People Are Used as Bombing Devices

Check out the desperation of terrorists using live animals such as a donkey or a dog and the use of mentally retarded Arabic people to carry bombs killing himself (or the animal) while maiming and killing innocent people nearby. What idiocy these terrorists are!

This is what Michael Moore support by calling these people "Minutemen". Maybe Michael Moore ought to participate in Spurlock's next 30-day McDonalds binge for the next schlockumentary?

When Idiots Prevail Over Common Sense on Gas Prices

I am surrounded by more idiots. What many people do not realize is that President Bush does not control oil prices nor does he set the prices of oil anymore than former President Clinton could. Anybody who believes this is a person whose brain is totally fried. Oh, btw, Halliburton is not the end all be all controller of oil prices, either. We also don't depend entirely on Saudi Arabia either. We get most of our oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. We get more oil from Canada or Mexico than we do from Saudi Arabia.

It's all about quota. Supply and demand versus future expectation. And not about laughable conspiracy theories.

I suspect the Bush Administration has been allowing the oil prices to make a lot of gains close to $65 a barrel, perhaps just to make profits. Because the numbers of administrators including GW Bush invested/owned/ran the oil companies ... when they are done with the presidency, they are going to reap the harvest that they invested in these stocks.

With todays news from MSNBC:

While oil prices are 40 percent higher than a year ago, they would need to surpass $90 a barrel to exceed the inflation-adjusted peak set in 1980.

In other words, we were paying for oil and gas dirt cheap for such a long time and now the price of oil is catching up - inflation-wise - to where it supposed to be along with the rest of the products bought and sold (scroll down to the MSNBC "Fact File").

And yet people whine about oil prices not even realizing that U.S. oil and gas prices are SUBSIDIZED! Without the U.S. subsidy of oil and gas we would see prices up into the $6.00 dollar range, which is where Europe is right now. You're still complaining about gas prices? Move to Venezuela and you'll see gas prices at around 0.12 cents a gallon.

Yeah, right. One U.S. President controls the world oil prices. Hey, psst, I have a London Bridge to sell ya! Dirt cheap, too!

Please, no more idiots tonight. Gawd, bunch of clueless, whiny little ingrates! Hey, I'm not complaining. Just a sad fact here. Very sad. I'm glad I'm not in Europe. Go ahead and move over there if you wish and you'll have more to complain about gas prices.

Peter Jennings' smoking...revisted.

A few days ago I said my condolence piece about the passing of Peter Jennings and left a question on whether or not his lung cancer was a result of resuming his smoking habit after 9/11 (the link I posted to USATODAY "9/11" in my previous post that explained Jennings' smoking habit he resumed AFTER 9/11.....not a one day thing of him getting lung cancer....sheesh!! READ THE LINK!! What are you smoking boy? See below in red) breaking his 20 smoke-free years.

I prefer to leave my question open-ended rather than to claim that Jennings' lung cancer was not the result of resuming his smoking. This is because I know there are two types of cancer... the agressive ones that can metastasized easily and very quickly throughout the body and the common slow growing and localized variety that would allow a person with this type of lung cancer to have a better chance of surviving. My grandparents suffered the fate of both types of lung cancer.

According to Oncolink:

The longer you go without smoking, the greater your risk declines; but it is never too late to quit because your risk declines somewhat no matter how long you have been smoking.

Is it any wonder why people are encouraged to quit smoking?

Now, smoking combined with stress can certainly be trigger causes for lung cancer with smoking (ie. carcinogen) being primarily the culprit. People have been known to get lung cancer after smoking for only several years rather than 30 years down the road. This could likely be a genetic predispostion or sensitivity to get lung cancer easily. We know that Peter Jennings began smoking by breaking his 20 year hiatus after 9/11 which was a very stressful time for Jennings and many U.S. citizens. Only a fool (and a complete idiot coupled with feeblemindedness) would say that Peter Jennings had lung cancer prior to 9/11 or that his lung cancer was not the result of his resuming his smoking after 9/11 without even looking at his medical records. What is this silly notion thinking this was a one-day marathon smoke that resulted Peter Jennings in getting lung cancer 4 years later? I said "Did 9/11 event ultimately put a path to his fateful destiny?" Note the word "path" and the article link to USATODAY, and put 2 and 2 together. Again, READ THE LINK YOU IDIOT!! More English 101 for you guys. No. Make that English 90. Rudimentary stuff I'd tell ya.

This lung cancer thing is entirely moot until we get more information on exactly what type of lung cancer Peter Jennings had, the stage he discovered the cancer, and when it may have occurred (cancerous to metastasized). Nor do we have information on how often or heavily he smoked prior to quiting versus smoking after 9/11. There are details missing here. I err on the caution side before making any sweeping conclusions about Peter Jennings' lung cancer. Only idiots would make these sweeping conclusions.

Generally so, smoking would be the most plausible culprit when it comes to lung cancer and smokers. However, during the 20 smoke free years we don't know whether Peter Jennings subjected himself to city pollution, 2nd hand smoke from his news colleagues or friends, radon or other environmental factors that would predispose Jennings to get lung cancer early on before 9/11 or after. However, we do know that Peter Jennings resumed smoking after 9/11. The question is, did his resumption of his smoking habit sealed his fate to get lung cancer? Did he already have cancer prior to his resumption to smoking? Or did this occur after 9/11? All of this is entirely moot rather than a conclusion.

And oh, I am a blogger. Not a wanna-be blogger. See? I write here which means I blog here. Therefore I am a blogger. Blogging doesn't have to be a profession. It's a hobby for me. Like hundred of thousand of other people around the world. Geez Louise!

What imbeciles I must come across to explain these things for those who failed to read carefully or cannot get the gist of my context in my blogs combined with the links. *sigh* Gawd almighty. What a totally discombobulated person we have over there.

RIP Peter Jennings. You had a long illustrious career! He left too early, IMO. He had class.

Rev. Fred Phelps is a Rabid Democrat Activist - you keep him.

Rev. Fred Phelps is a rabid Democrat Activist. I never did like Phelps. He is a total idiot who spouts nonsense with anti-American activities. He would go so far as to smear the memory of a dead U.S. soldier. This is exactly what many rabid anti-war Liberals would not mind doing.

In addition to mocking patriotic songs and waving anti-gay signs, one group member dragged an American flag on the ground with her foot.

Rev. Fred Phelps fits right in with these Liberal anti-war wackos.

You can have him!

Enjoy him for all he's worth.



Hat tip: Rhymes with Right.

Peter Jennings - RIP. Did 9/11 Event Helped Seal His Fate?

Peter Jennings dies at age 67 in his home from lung cancer. He was an admitted smoker and smoked over 9/11.

Did 9/11 event ultimately put a path to his fateful destiny?

Michelle Malkin notes condolences. Bloggers from around the world add to the growing list of condolences and remembrances of Peter Jennings and his smooth style of television journalism.

A Live Air America Radio Band Aid Solution

In David Reinhard's editorial he offered a great idea on how to help the cash-strapped, scandal ridden, check bouncin' Air America Radio by setting up a Live Air America Radio Band Aid or the L.A.A.R.B.A solution. Get Dixie Chicks, Madonna, Sheryl Crow, Bruce Springsteen and Barbara Streisand on board to help with the Band Aid solution to help cover Air America Radio's string of faux pas and financial inequities, though questionable at times, that are testing Air America Radio's finances with debts in the millions. Selling T-shirts, coffee mugs, and bumper stickers can no longer help support Air America Radio's finances and so a Band Aid solution is needed.

We know that Al Franken cannot do this by himself to garner the needed help and exposure of Air America Radio. Air America Radio. Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, and all of the Liberals who listen to Air America Radio need your help to keep this flotsam afloat by setting up the first ever temporary Band Aid solution.

Support the Live Air America Radio Band Aid and help end the needless sufferering of Al Franken's constant embarrassment among Liberals everywhere.

Michelle Malkin makes a point about pennies.

Donate your pennies to:


Live Air America Radio Band Aid
PO Box 00001
LAARBA, CA 12345

When Mainstream Media Refuse to Cover Air America Scandal

Cox and Forkum

That's why we have bloggers when cBS, NBC, NYTimes, ABC et al failed (ie refused) to cover the news on Air America Radio scandal. Check out Technorati's list of bloggers covering Air America as well. Only Foxnews cable station covered the scandal as far as a major news source covering the scandal. Michelle Malkin covers it well. Not only the financial scandal is the current problem, there were questions in the past that Air America Radio was (or maybe still is or has been) a campaign finance loophole machination.

I think the airness in Air America Radio is deflating.

Morgan Spurlock Watch

Remember the show "Super Size Me" about how one guy, Morgan Spurlock, who lived off of McDonalds food for 30 days by doubling his normal caloric intake of 5000 calories a day? And how he skewed the whole results after 30 days with high blood pressure, bad cholesterol readings, and absolutely no excercise with the exception of lifting up a Big Mac, fries and coke?:

Sayer is a biology professor who replicated Spurlock's thirty-day experiment to teach his students about how the documentary medium can be abused to further a political agenda. The difference between Sayer and Spurlock: Sayer didn't deliberately double his daily calorie intake, nor did he stop exercising. He ate three meals per day at McDonalds, diversified what he ate, and was able to keep his calorie count between 2,000 and 3,000. Over 30 days, he lost 17 pounds. His blood pressure dropped. And his cholesterol basically remained the same. He suffered none of the effects Spurlock shows in Super Size Me.

Really. It's all about personal responsibility. Spurlock showed none of it.

The experiment is the most interesting, but not necessarily the most informative, aspect of Super Size Me. Spurlock goes on a one-month McDonald's spree in which he eats three gluttonous meals per day. He plays by a few rules: everything he eats has to be on the McDonald's menu, he must sample every food choice at least once, and he only super sizes when asked by a cashier. Over the course of his study, he gains 25 pounds; experiences an extreme increase in cholesterol; suffers sexual dysfunction, headaches, and nausea; and shows signs of addiction. It's not a pretty picture, and, while the extremity of Spurlock's reactions are in part a result of his excessive indulgence(5000 calories per day), it illustrates a point about the unhealthiness of fast food eating.

Anybody who does that deserve that kind of fate. However, McDonalds does provide nutritional information so that customers can make an informed decision regarding which food to eat if they are trying to manage their dietary intake. Something that Spurlock hardly want to acknowledge. His attitude reflects that in his videos a la Michael Moore when lying and/or disinformation is the way to go to become a star. Will Michael Moore continue to eat at McDonalds?

Pathetic.

Check out the Morgan Spurlock Watch blogsite - a blog devoted to holding Mr. Spurlock accountable for the inaccuracies and factual distortions in his movie, book, and TV show.

UPDATE: More goodies about Morgan Spurlock and his pathetic attempts on filming documentaries where half-truths are hardly the case.

Also, what Netrox failed to note is that you can eat 5k worth of calories a day for 30 days practically at any food establishments from the fast foods to a 5-star French restaurant and still suffer the consequences of bloating oneself up to 25 and feel absolutely miserable! And, oh, the thin man he refers to in the documentary? He never ate 5k worth of McDonalds everyday. And thin doesn't equate being healthy, either. And many fast foods do carry alternate meals consisting of salads, fruits and whole grain! See here, here, here, here at Subway, here, here, KFC, and, of course, the best and worst of fast foods (2002) in America when it comes to vegetables, fruits and grain. My wife absolutely loves Wendy's Mandarin Chicken Salad. So much for "lack" of healthy choices. The choices are growing.

But Americans want tasty food...not tofu. But there's always room for more food imagination and the right mix to appease both types of consumers who choose between healthy foods and regular fast foods.

Where are the fast food resturants that serve dishes that are rich in vegetables and fruits and whole grains? I want them. Bet you cannot find one.- Netrox

I just did. Netrox doesn't look very hard, apparently. Was he swayed and blinded by Spurlock's schlockumentary thinking that corporate America of the fast food industry is not thinking about alternative healthy choices??

Spurlock sends a terrible message to America: "Obesity is not your responsibility. It's the fault of greedy corporations." This is where Netrox is wrong regarding Spurlock's "documentary" as not being biased. It is extremely biased that is literally tilting to one side. "Super Size Me" demonizes fast food to such a high degree.

Bottom line, Spurlock never discussed about personal responsibility when it comes to eating at fast food restuarants and exercising in his, uh, "documentary" and that his eating 5k for 30 days is not typical of what most Americans eat at fast food restaurants.

Not biased? Yeah, right.

Wolcott and Al Capone: Lost cousins?

These hoity toity Vanity Fair writers must use their own caricatures of themselves instead of a photograph? We know why. A caricature of a person does make him or her look slim and brings about his or her "best" and prominent features. Michelle Malkin makes a point about James Wolcott, a "professional" editorial writer in Vanity Fair, relishing his role on making fun of other people's physical appearances by picking on Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters blog. Angry in the Great White North takes a jab at James Wolcott's "professional" editorialized article on making fun of Ed Morrissey's of Captain's Quarters.

Now, far from it for me to say that there isn't any resemblance between Capone and Wolcott. But one thing for sure, I wouldn't want to hang around with Al Capone who had a penchant for a baseball bat on a human being's head. He's simply a disgusting figure. Simply.... creepy.


Al Capone & James Wolcott

But hey, many of us bloggers would rather debate on the merits of an argument at hand rather than sling mud, call people names and generally be a creepy person to begin with. I guess James Wolcott doesn't fit the bill as a "professional" writer.