Oh By The Way … This Was An Uncalled-For Cheap Shot Against CMU

This comment from Graham Couch, blogging for Bronco Insider, about the Central Michigan University football team after its tough loss in Ypsilanti, Mich., against in-state rival Eastern Michigan University, was an absolute cheap shot:

"Nothing may have been stake in terms of the MAC title, thanks to Ball State’s win over WMU Tuesday, but what happened to CMU Friday says something about its coaching staff’s ability to prepare its players and the character of the kids up there."

That was uncalled for and pathetic. To smear that successful coaching staff by dogging its preparation, by smearing the CMU kids and by undervaluing the great performance by Eastern Michigan says more about the character of Graham Couch than it says about CMU, Coach Butch Jones or the Chippewas’ players.

Bronco Insider:
http://blog.mlive.com/broncosinsider/2008/11/embarrassing_day_for_mac.html#more

MAC Is A Good League, But Quit the Craziness

I am always amused by people in the Mid-American Conference who believe their brand of college football is near the equal of that of its big brother, the Big Ten Conference. Sorry, but it is nothing short of laughable. It is true that the occasional MAC team will score an upset over a Big Ten team or play a Big Ten team tough. But, the statistics over the years illustrate the dominance of BCS conferences over mid-major conferences like the MAC. Now, to be fair, the MAC is a very good league and perhaps underrated on a national scale. Unfortunately for the MAC, and other leagues like it nationwide, the big-time leagues hog most of the national spotlight. Now, recently, I was reading a column written by Graham Couch of the Kalamazoo Gazette. He is chief defender of the MAC’s status and, more significantly, Western Michigan University’s football and men’s basketball prowess. Couch believes that schools like Western are unfairly lost in the large shadow created by the Big Ten. Here is a recent item from one of Couch’s columns that I found particularly interesting:

“Just when the Mid-American Conference appears to have strength and depth at the top of the league, a day like Friday happens and any claim that this conference’s top four or five teams are equals with the second tier of BCS conferences sounds ridiculous. I’ve been saying all year that I thought Central Michigan and Western Michigan were the top two teams in the state. I also believed, until Friday, that outside of Penn State, Ohio State and Iowa, the top four teams in the MAC — Ball State, CMU, WMU and Buffalo — were at least as good as the Big Ten’s fourth best team. In other words, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Illinois would be nothing more than in the mix in either of the MAC’s divisions.”

WOW! Now, Graham is entitled to his opinion. Frankly, I do agree with him in essence in thinking that the MAC is undervalued as a conference. I will concede that the Big Ten is as poor this year as it has been in my recent memory. But, it is credibility-damaging if not outright laughable to say that Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Illinois “would be nothing more than in the mix in either of the MAC’s divisions. The MAC teams know they are on the big stage when they play their big brothers from the Big Ten. So, they play out of their minds and give it everything they have for this showcase game. Could a MAC team sustain that kind of an effort over the course of a long and grueling Big Ten schedule? It’s a lot tougher when teams are playing for a conference championship than when they schedule a non-conference game to warm up for their league schedule (as most of these BCS schools view games against mid-major schools from conference’s like the MAC). The MAC is a good league, but it’s time for MAC supporters to keep their rare success and close shaves against Big Ten teams in a little more perspective. It reminds me of people from Division II national power Grand Valley State University believing the same thing about the MAC that the MAC believes about the Big Ten. And, you know what, I’ve heard MAC people laugh at the suggestion that a Division II superpower could hang with them. Well, I am sure the BCS teams feel the same way about the mid-major schools.

Bronco Insider:
http://blog.mlive.com/broncosinsider/2008/11/embarrassing_day_for_mac.html

Columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. Ridiculously Rips President-elect Barack Obama

Columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. is really upset because he feels that somehow President-elect Barack Obama has dissed the Latino community. How has the president-elect dissed the Latino community? Well, according to Navarrette Jr., Obama did this by not appointing or nominating Bill Richardson as secretary of state and instead (apparently) picking Hillary Clinton for this post. It appears that Richardson is headed toward becoming the secretary of commerce. This, to this member of the Latino community, is a slap in the face to Latinos who he feels “deserved better.”

Here is a passage from Navarrette Jr. in his column:
This isn’t about
Richardson, who might be very happy heading for ribbon cuttings in Toledo while
Clinton heads for blue-ribbon summits in Tel Aviv. This is about something larger. Richardson is the nation’s only Hispanic governor and the most prominent Hispanic elected official in the country. And the way he was treated doesn’t say much about Obama’s respect for the Hispanic community. Nor does the fact that Obama seems to have filled his top four Cabinet posts – Justice, Treasury, Defense and State – and couldn’t find a single Hispanic to put in any of them. America’s largest minority took a chance on Obama despite the fact that the president-elect had no track record in reaching out to them and didn’t break a sweat trying to win their votes. They deserve better.

It seems awfully premature for Navarrette Jr. or anyone else to be whine about being snubbed by the President-elect Obama … particularly when he has not even officially taken office or assumed the duties of the presidency. So, according to Navarrette Jr., because Richardson was apparently not given the secretary of state position that it was Obama’s way of snubbing the Hispanic community. According to this author, it seems to mean he does not care about the Hispanic community. How can Navarrette Jr., who acts as if he is the spokesman for the Hispanic community, put so much stock in this one appointment. To say Obama “didn’t break a sweat trying to win their (Hispanics) votes” is also a ridiculous statement. We all deserve better than someone who is already whining and throwing the president elect under the bus nearly two months before he has even taken office.

San Diego Union-Tribune:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/navarrette/20081126-9999-lz1e26navarre.html

Gay Marriage Issues Not The Same As Civil Rights Movement

A column written by Merlene Davis in the Lexington Herald-Leader reignites the issue of gay marriage by linking it to the Civil Rights Movement. Her column seems to be written with good intention. This is, of course, a misguided effort on the part of those who support a worthwhile cause. Many people are in favor of gay civil unions (which should be granted the same rights as legal marriages of heterosexual couples). I am one of those individuals. But, this consistent attempt to try and legitimize the gay marriage initiative by piggy-backing the civil rights movement is just plain wrong. As a nation, we’re moving far closer to acceptance of and comfort with the gays and lesbians. Are we there yet? No. But, some times progress is a slow process that can drive even the most patient of us into impatient madness. A woman written about in the column, University of Kentucky professor Joan Callahan, made this statement about civil unions instead of marriage: “That is separate-but-equal thinking.” Again, this is an attempt to link homosexuality to race. A lot of us simply are not comfortable with that. Many people still consider homosexuality to be a lifestyle, some consider homosexuality to be a choice and some consider it to be a lifestyle based on life experiences that served as a guide. Added Callahan, “The state has a role to play here. Whether the majority agreed or didn’t agree with the abolition of slavery, the abolition of slavery needed to exist. It affected the will of the majority without affecting the fundamental rights of the minority. Suppose the majority decided these blacks have gone too far. Make them ride in the back of the bus again. Suppose that under some conditions, we decided to persecute blacks like we used to.” I agree that the majority should not always be allowed to rule with an iron fist. But, to link homosexuality to race or gender is wrong. I understand that it is a tactic (I believe designed to force many whites to view homosexuality as another minority and to nudge blacks, Asians, Hispanics and other ethnic minorities to join the cause to support “one of their own” in this fight). But, the tactic is a bad one, and it must be reconsidered. The better goal is to fight to make civil unions for gay couples strong and on equal footing with marriage. Gay marriage should be treated equally with so-called traditional marriage. This is the next logical step for gays, and if they want to turn their hopes and dreams into reality this is the step they will take. Otherwise, it’s a strong possibility these obstacles will continue to impede this progress.

Lexington Herald-Leader:
http://www.kentucky.com/139/story/602737.html

Michelle Malkin Column A Bit Misguided in Blackberry/E-Mail Issue With Barack Obama, Sarah Palin

We’ve had numerous stories in the media about President-elect Barack Obama supposedly wanting to continue normal/personal use of his Blackberry device. A part of me can understand the desire to want to maintain a sense of privacy. But, as we know, politicians sacrifice a lot of privacy a lot of people hold dear when they take on this responsibility (particularly as a national politician). It’s the nature of the beast. With this as the backdrop, I happened to stumble across an itemwritten by conservative columnist/blogger/commentator Michelle Malkin, who is known to be just slightly outspoken and opinionated. In this item, she discussed Obama’s Blackberry (the president-elect’s desire to maintain use of it vs. public access to the records as such a high-ranking official).

A Malkin “Afterthought” read this way:
“Afterthought: Will the same people who lambasted Sarah Palin for keeping a personal Yahoo! account and using her Blackberry attack Obama for ‘evading public disclosure,’ too?”

One thing that is worth noting is that Sarah Palin’s trouble was self-inflicted. The controversy with Palin (certainly, she was no stranger to controversy and continues to be a magnet for controversy) was that she was using her personal Yahoo e-mail account to conduct state government business and possibly trying to use personal privacy as a shield from the media and the public.

From Time Magazine:
“The Alaska governor could also face charges for
conducting official state business using her personal, unarchived e-mail account
(a crime); some critics accuse her of skirting freedom-of-information laws in
doing so. An Alaska Republican activist is trying to force Palin to release more
than 1,100 e-mails she withheld from a public-records request, the Washington
Post reported last week.”

So, Malkin is not being particularly clear or straight up when attempting to draw the comparison between the two controversies (as far as the e-mail aspect is concerned). If the device or technology is being used to conduct government business than a politician can hardly expect a level of privacy. But, if a device is of a personal nature then there should be some flexibility for politicians (as long as it is not used for official government business). I am not familiar with the controversy Palin may have had with a Blackberry, but the e-mail issue was an issue that was publicly vetted.

Time Magazine:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1842097,00.html

Michelle Malkin:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/26/obama-wants-his-blackberry-back/

Sean Hannity Should Visit The Wizard And Ask For A Heart!

We know that Sean Hannity is the classic bully. But, now that long-time co-host Alan Colmes is stepping aside, ThinK Progress presented an intriguing topic of discussion: Will Hannity have the heart to take on the challenge of working with a strong liberal voice who is as aggressive as he is every day and every night? Colmes is a good man, but he was too classy and too mild-mannered to effectively be the good twin to Hannity’s evil twin (on equal footing that is) on “Hannity and Colmes” most nights. I also wonder if Hannity is man enough to bring in a strong liberal voice that will aggressively go at him the way he uses conservative blind rage to attack anything even remotely moderate or liberal. Hannity is like the glass-jaw boxer that schedules 25 straight bums he can knock out and then gets in the big fight and gets blasted out in like two minutes because he’s weak. Fox News and Hannity should bring in a strong liberal. I doubt (though I will cling to hope) that this will happen, for two reasons: (1) Hannity is too much like the Cowardly Lion from “The Wizard of Oz” and doesn’t have the heart to man up against someone from the left who is as radical as he is and (2) Fox News wants to minimize the number of strong liberal voices (if there are any at all) who appear on the highly-conservative network. I hope that Fox News proves me wrong, but I doubt it. Still, I encourage Hannity to follow the yellow-brick road.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/26/hannity-guts/

Can Republicans Reach Black People … Not Without A Change Of Direction

Obviously, the Republicans were historically poor in terms of appealing to blacks during the recent general presidential election. Sure, some of it - OK, a lot of it - will be attributed to the fact that it ran an older white guy (John McCain) against a young black guy (Barack Obama). But, the problem is far deeper than that. In every general presidential election in recent history, the Democrats have wiped the floor with the Republicans in terms of winning the black vote. In fact, Democrats are winning the black vote and winning the Hispanic vote (a vote that will be especially important in the future of this country with the growing Hispanic population). I thought of all this as I read a column from the Cleveland Plain Dealer Web site about black people and the Republicans. Here is a comment from Shannon Reeves, a black woman who started a Republican chapter at Grambling State University back in 1988. Wrote Reeves, “I am tired of being embarrassed by elected Republican officials who have no sensitivity for issues that alienate whole segments of our population. This embarrassment is different for a black Republican. Not only do we have to sit in rooms and behave professionally towards Republicans who share this ideology, we have to go home to a hostile environment where we are called Uncle Tom and maligned as a sell-out to the community because of our membership in the Republican Party.” Truth be told, it is tough on a lot of blacks who cross over and join or otherwise support the Republican Party with policies and in most elections. So many Republicans worked to use racial politics to divide the races and scare white people from wanting to vote for or otherwise support a black president. Republicans need to get into the black community, cut out the racial politics from the likes of Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Savage and others. But, it is not going to happen. Those voices are too strong on the right wing. Those voices are vicious and many times are just hate filled and clearly divisive. Voices like that will prevent blacks from supporting the right wing/Republicans/conservatives in large numbers. These individuals have feasted on racial politics (portraying affirmative action as a handout to under-qualified and/or lazy black people, portraying welfare as a hand out to undeserving/lazy black people and so on). Need some more evidence? Look at how Republicans savagely attacked Gen. Colin Powell when he broke from the party and supported Barack Obama. A number of prominent Republicans either marginalized his importance and/or accused him of only supporting Obama because they are both black. Fox News factors in this as well with the racial politics it played throughout the campaign with its steady stream of conservative hosts and conservative anchors who worked to overplay the Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger angles. Wright and Pfleger were used to try and portray Obama as a black radical. These are just a handful of examples. Republicans have a lot of work to do to appeal to African Americans, especially, and Hispanic Americans, too. A good start would be to silence the words of haters like Hannity, Coulter, Savage, Limbaugh, O’Reilly and others. It’s not going to happen anytime soon.

Cleveland Plain Dealer:
http://blog.cleveland.com/pdopinion/2008/11/its_my_party_but_i_dont_feel_p.html

Do Some Whites Feel Overdosed By The “First Black President” Thing?

The fatigue factor some people are feeling, with all this talk of Barack Obama being elected as the first African American president of the United States of America went into effect early. In all honesty, the hate started when it became fairly obvious that the country was moving in the direction of the historical election results it experienced. But, not all of us were ready for history; and certainly, not ll of us were ready for history of this kind. Ted Diadiun, a columnist with the Cleveland Plain Dealer discussed the subject during a piece he wrote on Sunday. In his column, Diadiun disgusts a small portion of the ample disgust many peopleexpressed at hearing so much about President-elect Obama - some of which was reflected in hate-filled voicemail messages, letters and other comments that made their way to the Plain Dealer. Obviously, he could not talk of some of the most explosive and offensive words expressed. Who really could talk about the most offensive or racist of the comments many of us have heard about President-elect Obama. For many Americans, it is too soon for a black president. We are, after all, just 40 years removed from the painful heights of the civil rights movement and the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. The thought of “black” or “African American” being in the same sentence - in a positive way - with “president” is still a little too much to take. With that thought in mind, some Plain Dealer readers have taken issue with President-elect Obama being referred to as an “African American” - in spite of the fact that this is how he chooses to be referred to from everything I’ve seen. Diadiun’s column is an interesting one because it kind of turns a mirror to so many people who are inexplicably showing so much hatred in the wake of the historic presidential election.

Cleveland Plain Dealer:
http://www.cleveland.com/readers/index.ssf?/base/opinion-0/1227346271180300.xml&coll=2

Racist Ann Coulter Preparing Book To Attack President-elect Barack Obama And So-Called “Liberal” Media!

Here is what Huffington Post reported from Drudge Report on an upcoming book being written by conservative and racist Ann Coulter, who insists on calling President-elect Barack Obama … “B. Hussein Obama” because it exhibits anti-Muslim/anti-Arab racism and anti-African American racism to scare white America: “The book exposes and mocks, in graphic detail, the media’s love affair with all things Democrat and Obama. Coulter presents exhibits A through Z. ‘GUILTY is a much-needed reality check on a Left gone wild,’ declares the book’s jacket. “When it comes to bullying, no one outdoes the Left. Citing case after case, ranging from the hilariously absurd to the shockingly vicious, Coulter dissects so-called victims who are invariably the oppressors. For instance: While B. Hussein Obama piously condemned attacks on candidates’ families, his media and campaign surrogates ripped open the court-sealed divorce records of his two principal opponents in his Senate race in Illinois.’” It’s one thing to be conservative or liberal; we all have a right to hold our own political views. It’s another thing when you use racism to darken an adversary while trying to scare white Americaby portraying a person of color as dangerously of another race. How amazing is it that we have the first black president of the United States of America coming into office and the right-wing nuts start trippin’ out and comparing him to people who are perceived as terrorists or as otherwise dangerous. It’s sad. Coulter’s racism and bigotry are additional racist reminders of how she, and so many others like her feel about the president-elect: “Obama … he’s not one of us. He has one of their names … he’s secretly one of them. Oh yeah, he has dark skin, too.”

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/25/ann-coulters-emguiltyem-b_n_146342.html

It Would Be An Atrocity For Fox News To Give A Bigot Like Sean Hannity His Own Show

It was bad enough having to be subjected the extremist right-wing rantings of Sean Hannity when he was somewhat balanced by (soon-to-be former co-host) Alan Colmes. But, with Colmes stepping aside from the highly-rated Fox News prime-time show “Hannity and Colmes” there is a chance that Hannity could be give the full hour to spew his bigotry and disguised racism (of course, he brings in that old house negro, Jesse Lee Peterson, to do his real dirty work when blacks need to be put back in place). There’s a thought. Maybe Hannity will try to convince Fox News to let him bring in Peterson as his co-host. That is just what we need … late-night vomit just before bed. Hannity who has been linked to racists like Hal Turner, a neo-Nazi, is the wrong person to have a full-hour show. It’s bad enough to get the right-wing garbage from Bill O’Reilly for one hour, but then to go from that to 60 minutes of Sean Hannity would be nothing short of disgraceful. Then, at 10 p.m., we have to listen to Greta Van Susteren, who dropped sacrificed all pretense of objectivity or of being a “liberal” when she started to worship the ground that Gov. Sarah Palin walked on throughout the campaign and practically became her publicity firm. It was during this past general election that her true colors were revealed and she was exposed for being a fairly typical Fox News show host.

For more on Sean Hannity’s record of bigotry, visit News Hounds:
http://www.newshounds.us/2008/11/25/unrepentant_bigot_sean_hannity_to_get_his_own_fox_news_show.php

Citigroup Gets “Stabilization” While Big 3 Want “Bailout”

News Hounds makes an interesting catch on the discussions on Fox News related to the recent bailout of Citigroup and the proposed bailouts for the Big Three. Apparently, when Fox News discusses Citigroup, the bailout is not a bailout - it is a “stabilization” effort. But, when it comes to the automotive industry, where so many blue-collar people work to feed their families, that is called a “bailout” by Fox News. This is right from the Republican playbook. It’s part of an orchestrated attack on working-class people who are perceived as being lazy and overpaid. A lot of economists and wanna-be economists perceive the auto industry as being in trouble because auto workers are making too much money since they have unions as activists for them. In other words, this is a not-so-subtle backhanded swipe at unions - a group some conservatives have not always been excited about in this country. But, it is interesting to see how one group is being “stabilized” while another group is being “bailed” out. But, I do believe it is a matter of time before the auto industry will be “stabilized” like Citigroup. It is reasonable to ask for a plan from the automakers as to how they will recover and how this money will be used, but it is unreasonable to deny it when there is so much at stake for so many blue-collar families.

News Hounds:
http://www.newshounds.us/2008/11/26/on_fox_citigroup_gets_stabilized_auto_makers_seek_bailout.php

Mike And Mike … With Guest Star Mike Turn Into Turkeys With Thanksgiving Day Tradition, Detroit Lions

Like it or not, the Detroit Lions and the Thanksgiving Day game are tradition … they go hand in hand and it’s a relationship that is and should continue to be rock solid. I know there are a bunch of boneheads out there who think that the game should be snatched away from the Lions who played in it for years before it became fashionable. Obviously, the Lions stink this year. No one is going to argue with that line of thinking. But, in this case, the caliber of the Lions as a football team is irrelevant. The National Football League has been wise to keep this game with Detroit and Dallas … two cities synonymous with the game and the tradition. It would be the height of disgrace and like spitting in the face of tradition for the league to even consider taking the contest away from Detroit or Dallas. Normally, I am a big Mike Ditka fan, but in this case he was dead wrong with his comments, Hall of Famer or not. Said Ditka, on the ESPN Show “Mike and Mike,” recently, “The league is missing the point. We need to put two teams on every Thanksgiving who are competitive. We all stuff a turkey on Thanksgiving. That doesn’t mean you have to stuff that turkey down our throats.” First of all, there is no guarantee when the schedule comes out that you will have two teams that are competitive. Things change in the NFL too much from year to year and a team that is competitive and good in 2007 is not going to be competitive and good in 2008. Besides, tradition is something you don’t want mess with in this short-attention-span era where tradition is thrown out like garbage. Golic and Greenberg, the two Mikes who host the show, fell in line with Ditka’s talking points. “It just shouldn’t happen anymore, tradition be damned,” said Golic, a former NFL defensive lineman who played in two Thanksgiving games during his career, both in Dallas. Great point Mike. Let me repeat your words, “tradition be damned.” That is part of what is wrong with this country. No one has respect for tradition - time honored or otherwise. People are so into what is happening here and now that they want to throw out things that a lot of people hold sacred. Throw out tradition for what may or may not be a better game. Here’s Greenberg, another country to be heard from, “Let’s think about the logic of this. The fans in Detroit want so desperately not to see the Lions, they don’t buy tickets and don’t care if the game is on television. But all of us have to watch them on Thanksgiving. Common sense says having the Lions play every year in that 1 o’clock (actually 12:30 p.m.) slot on Thanksgiving is a terrible idea and it should be changed.” Wow, apparently the value of common sense must have plummeted with the stock market. It is not a terrible idea. The Lions have played in some of the best Thanksgiving Day games ever. With America’s Thanksgiving Day Parade in Downtown Detroit, Thanksgiving Day is a tradition. Not that it should matter for people like Greenberg and Golic who would rather see tradition changed as often as some of us change toothbrushes.

Detroit Free Press:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081125/SPORTS0101/811250360/1004

I Also Found This On Michelle Malkin’s Web Site

Right-wing commentator/columnist Michelle Malkin headline read: “Five most laughable words Obama has spoken as president-elect.” Here are those words, in a quote: “A government that spends wisely.” I have to agree, that is funny. Hey, maybe Malkin is correct. Think about it, since the end of the Bill Clinton/Al Gore administration, our executive branch of the government has not done a whole lot wisely … beyond even spending. Let us pause for a moment of silence as we think about the state of the United States of America that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will leave us and remember what it was before this duo assumed power back in 2000 (through what some people call a bloodless coup) ……………………………………….. thank you.

Michelle Malkin:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/24/five-most-laughable-words-obama-has-spoken-as-president-elect/

Haters Like Michelle Malkin Show Their Jealousy For President-elect Barack Obama

I knew it would not be long before the conservative haters would be out in full force to mock the New York elementary school that has chosen to be renamed for the historic figure, President-elect Barack Obama. Leave it to one of the queens of hate, conservative writer/commentator Michelle Malkin. For so many of us, it has been nothing short of amazing to watch the jealousy of our little conservative buddies who are working hard to manufacture ways of mocking the school district for the name change and trying to rehabilitate the tired angles of Jeremiah Wright and others. It’s sad … so sad. This from the party represented so prominently by Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who most recently was dumb enough and seemingly oblivious enough to stand in front of a turkey being slaughtered on television. What goes on in that woman’s head? Here’s a better question: How did she become a leader of the Republican Party? Sorry, I digress. You can be sure of one thing: This is not the last school that will be renamed in honor of President-elect Obama (much to the disappointment of our right-wing friends). In the United States of America, we have a long history of naming schools and other buildings in honor of historic figures in America. By virtue of being elected as the first black president in the history of the United States of America, Obama has become a historic figure. So, in that sense, this is hardly unprecedented. But, for the small-minded people out there, this is another reason to attack the uppity black they probably fear will rename the White House the Black House or, as was joked about briefly on “Saturday Night Live,” have the White House somehow converted intoa pyramid (for the crazy lady at the one McCain rally who referred to Obama as an “Arab” before even McCain snatched the microphone from her). So, conservatives can make all the jokes they want about a school being renamed in honor of Obama. But, it will do nothing to change eight years of futility … better known as the Bush/Cheney years.

Michelle Malkin’s Web site:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/24/signs-of-the-times-coming-to-an-obama-school-near-you/

First Lady Got Back Column Proves Controversial

I held off writing about this subject because I was curious to see where public opinion might be headed after a column was written about Michelle Obama entitled, “First Lady Got Back.” The piece was written by Los Angeles Times and Salon.com columnist Erin Aubry Kaplan. For those of you who are familiar with the famous rap from Sir Mix A Lot, “Baby Got Back,” you know what this is all about. Here is the sub headline under Kaplan’s title: “I’m a black woman who never thought I’d see a powerful, beautiful female with a body like mine in the White House. Then I saw Michelle Obama — and her booty!” Of course, just as was the case when that timeless “classic” came out, the controversy boils over. Here is a comment that columnist Richard Prince used in his column that Kaplan wrote as the controversy grew, “‘Well, it wasn’t really about her butt (though that was a lively starting point, for sure), it was about the psychological impact of having a First Lady who is black and, for the first time in history, who looks like me,’ Kaplan wrote after receiving 400 responses on salon.com before, she suspects, salon cut them off. ‘Ultimately, my piece was about removing the lens of white scrutiny and approval from the black gaze and seeing what lies underneath.’” I can understand where Kaplan is coming from with her original column and subsequent comments. But, headline writing is huge in journalism and in blogging. Either she or someone else picked a headline that was bound to attract some attention - positively and negatively. I suspect Kaplan is tough enough to take the heat and will triumph over this controversy by the time everything is said, done and written.

Richard Prince column:
http://www.mije.org/richardprince/economy-still-sidelines

Erin Aubry Kaplan column:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/11/18/michelles_booty/?source=newsletter

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Shows There May Be Hope Yet For Republicans

I must admit, I am a fan of Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. He is a fresh face on top of an old and tired brand (the Republican Party). Jindal is young, at 37, but more importantly he is intelligent enough to both understand and adapt to the changing political culture. The people of the United States of America are looking for a leader who is much more of a uniter. We’ve been down this road of divisive leaders and no one liked the taste of it. Our world standing was severely damaged during the administration of our lame-duck president, George W. Bush. We need to built coalitions - the kind of coalitions President Bush had back in 2001 … particularly after 9/11. Jindal offers hope, but I wonder if 2012 is the right time for him. If Obama is popular, Jindal has no shot. I’d hate to see a potentially great political career thrown down the tubes by going into a political contest that can’t be won. Only time will tell how the Obama administration will play out. Jindal, currently, is testing out the political circuit as he made a stop in Iowa for a speech. To show his intelligence, contrasted by the ineptness of so many in his party, here are some of his comments, “Whether you voted for him or not,” he said of President-elect Obama. “Whether you supported the new leaders of Congress or not, they’re our president. They’re our Congress. They need our prayers. They need our support.” A Republican who perhaps gets it. Maybe there is hope for the GOP.

Los Angeles Times blog:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/11/jindal-iowa-gop.html

Impeachment Talk Against President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney Is Misguided

Is it really worth it to try to reignite impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in the twilight of this current administration? One of my favorite columnists, Rochelle Riley of the Detroit Free Press thinks so as she was critical of Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi and many others in the Democratic Party. Riley writes: “Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s ineffectiveness became clear the day she became Speaker of the House and immediately announced that there would be no impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.” I can understand the growing sentiment (growing over the better part of the last four to six years) to find some way of making Bush and Cheney and their administration pay for the pain this nation is suffering today economically, the loss of some basic freedoms, torture, being involved in two wars, a housing crisis, massive corporate welfare and more. But, the effort is misguided now. Instead, we should be gleefully preparing to send President Bush and Vice President Cheney on their way. A new administration, led by President-elect Barack Obama will take office in less than two months. This is what our nation needs to focus on. We know that Bush and Cheney will be issuing pardons to some of their cronies as a last act of solidarity. But, how many presidents have not done this to protect some? In this sense, George W. Bush is no different from so many of the presidents who preceded him. Impeaching him now, assuming it would even be successful, would almost be akin to firing someone who has already given notice and is 12 days into their 14-day (two-week) notice. The Bush Administration is just about a wrap. It’s time to look to the future. I can understand the anger of men like Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Rep. John Conyers, but it does this nation no good. It’s time to move on. Although, I must admit one thing: It is tempting to want to make some people, particularly those in the Bush Administration, pay dearly for the agony our nation suffers. There is plenty that Bush and Cheney can do in the the final month or so of their administration that might give many of us pause for concern. But, anything we do now will be too little too late and stall us from focusing on what we should all hope is a bright future.

Detroit Free Press:
http://www.freep.com/article/20081125/COL10/81125018

Alan Colmes Leaving Hannity And Colmes Show On Fox News Channel

It was announced on Monday that “liberal” Alan Colmes is leaving his post on the “Hannity and Colmes” show on Fox News. For years, the misused and underappreciated Colmes has been used mostly as a second-class citizen to the true star of the show, extremist right winger Sean Hannity, who is the darling of the conservative-leaning network. Colmes deserves much better than a partnership with someone like Hannity. I know that Colmes will say all of the right things about Hannity, but in reality the show was molded around Hannity with Colmes on there mostly as decoration. That was a sad use of someone of Colmes’ considerable abilities and intellect. Colmes many times had shorter segments and was always in the minority on unbalanced panels that were often clouded by right wingers like Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, Oliver North, Dick Morris and others (you get the picture). Colmes deserves better and here is to hoping he will get better if he stays with Fox News. Don’t expect it, however. He will probably be exiled to the weekend with another great “liberal” talent, Geraldo Rivera. Fox News wants to marginalize liberal opinion to promote its conservative agenda.

Gingrich To Gingrich: Newt, Stop Being A Hater

This will be well worth your time if you’re one of those disgusted by the politics of hate and fear from Republican extremist Newt Gingrich.

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/candace-gingrich/a-letter-to-my-brother-ne_b_145739.html

Time Magazine’s Halperin Neglects To Call The Bias Going Both Ways

We heard so much about so-called liberal media bias during the campaign. Actually, one of the funniest aspects of the campaign was listening to Fox News crying about media bias. As we know, Fox News was clearly in the pocket of Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin throughout the general election. During the primaries, Fox News jumped on the bandwagon of Sen. Hillary Clinton. However, this was not done because Fox News was comfortable with Sen. Clinton for her policies. It was done because of their desire to see the primary continue for as long as possible and to watch as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton beat up on each other as much as possible. It was also done to tear down Obama when it became fairly clear that he was on his way to securing the Democratic nomination. Fox News also pushed the stories about Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers while mostly ignoring McCain’s associations with Charles Keating, Rod Parsley, John Hagee and G. Gordon Liddy. Most of these stories on McCain were virtually ignored (if not ignored completely). Was this not an example of media bias … right-wing media bias? Of course this was an example of right-wing media bias. Syndicated radio talk show hosts like Laura Ingraham, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage were among those who trashed Obama day after day. Was there more positive coverage of Obama? There probably was more positive coverage of Obama. He was new, he was fresh and he had inspired legions of people who had become disgusted with and disenchanted by the political process. Obama was making history as the first candidate to make it this deep into a presidential election on a major party ticket (never mind the history he made by being elected as the first black president of the United States). I write this because Politico reported some recent comments from Mark Halperin of Time magazine, who said: ”It’s the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war,” Halperin said at a panel of media analysts. “It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage.” Maybe Halperin was asleep when Obama was being attacked over and over again for his “associations” during the primary and throughout the general election. Maybe he missed some of the sexism (although not as great as I think some people believe) against Hillary Clinton or the racism and sexism directed at Michelle Obama. Certainly there were pockets of media bias, but it should be pointed out on both sides.

Politico:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15885.html

Elementary School To Be Named For President-elect Barack Obama

Fox News asked the question: Is it too early for a New York elementary school to change its name to honor President-elect Barack Obama, the first black man to be elected president of the United States of America? The school will become Barack Obama Elementary School. Obviously, this is the first of many schools and more that will seek to be renamed in honor of Obama, who already has made history as the result of his election. Is it too early for such an honor? Maybe, but it depends on who you ask whether this is too soon or not. Considering the historic nature, I don’t think it’s necessarily too soon. It’s up to those who run the school and the school district. It’s their call and they made it.

My Michigan Wolverines Finally End A Woeful Season Of College Football

Hopefully, first-year Michigan head football coach Rich Rodriguez has learned his lessons from this miserable season of college football he just wrapped up. Fans of the Wolverines are not accustomed to seasons a little above .500 - never mind seasons where .500 would have been nice. It was a year of near-complete futility. It’s a shame Rodriguez did not realize how much work he really needed to do to have a successful season on the gridiron. Rich Rod installed an offense that requires a certain kind of quarterback and he simply did not have that. The quarterback he thought he had was the one who beat him 42-7 Saturday afternoon, playing for Ohio State (Terrelle Pryor). The single-biggest thing Michigan must do is identify and bring in someone who is capable of running that offense. The right quarterback alone probably has Michigan getting at least one more game (a bowl game of one kind or another). The jury is still out on Rodriguez. He has a nice track record, but that will not help him win football games at Michigan. He now needs to go out and bring in the players to get the Michigan program back to where it was (never mind take it to the higher level he was brought to Ann Arbor to take it to). Rodriguez had some players transfer who would have helped him. Now, he has to make it happen with his players a little sooner than he expected.

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly Is Trippin’ Out Again

Bill O’Reilly, the highly conservative Fox News channel host who unbelievably tries to portray himself as unbiased, is displaying foolishness again. There has been talk about the Fairness Doctrine which would, in essence, work to balance out the media between liberal and conservative voices. This, of course, sent Big Bill off the deep end since he believes that most of the media is liberal. O’Reilly, on a network that serves as the public relations firm for the Republican Party, is once again bashing the media for being too liberal, as reported by Think Progress:

O’REILLY: A good case can be made there are more liberal voices in the media than conservative voices. The newspaper industry is certainly left. So is the Internet. NBC News almost completely liberal. So is PBS, so is NPR.

Of course, what O’Reilly does not tell us is that Fox News is at least as biased to the right as he could ever claim that NBC is to the left. He is delusional, however, and sees the Fox News channel as some kind of beacon of journalistic fairness (pardon me while I laugh). As many of us know all too well, however, absolutely nothing could be further from the truth. There are many voices out there on the Internet (conservative, liberal and moderate). O’Reilly, of course, obsesses about the liberal voices (many of which upset him because they are not afraid to call him out on his bias). So, while O’Reilly whines about the supposed bias he sees at NPR or PBS, we are subjected to bigotry and racism (disguised well at times, but other times not so much so) from the likes of O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Fox and Friends, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and the list goes on. The Fairness Doctrine would be interesting on Fox News to see how it goes over on the network conservatives trust.
Think Progress:http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/21/oreilly-internet-bias/

Fear Of A Black President Drives Michael Savage’s Bigotry

Doomsday scenarios for white men being predicted by conservative talk show host Michael Savage (a white man). Here are recent comments from Savage, as documented by Media Matters, on his syndicated talk show:

SAVAGE: But this is just the beginning of it, my friend. You haven’t seen any of what’s coming in this country. You are going to see the wholesale replacement of competent white men, and I’m targeting exactly the group that’s gonna be thrown out of jobs in the government. And I’ll say it, and I’ll be the first to say it, and I may be not the only — the last to say it. I am telling you that there’s gonna be a wholesale firing of competent white men in the United States government up and down the line, in police departments, in fire departments. Everywhere in America, you’re going to see an exchange that you’ve never seen in history, and it’s not gonna be necessarily for the betterment of this country.

Here is the problem with Savage’s comments: (1) He shows his sexism by failing to even acknowledge women in his comments, (2) white men have been fired by incoming white presidents since the beginning of this nation, (3) he finds that there is something wrong with opening doors to qualified women and minorities in many positions that they have been excluded from and (4) he is a bigot. The incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama has those on the hardcore right scared. Years ago, the rap group Public Enemy had an album called “Fear of a Black Planet.” We could call this “Fear of a Black President.”

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200811190016?f=h_latest

Right-Wing Nut Spews More Hate Against President-elect Barack Obama

Conservative radio show host Michael Savage is up to his old tricks trying to scare conservative whites into thinking President-elect Barack Obama has a bunch of sinister plans in his head. On a recent radio show, the host got into it with one of his callers about President-elect Obama. Part of the conversation focused on some kind of phenomenon he referred to as being “socially promoted.”

The comment from Savage follows, as documented by Media Matters:

SAVAGE: No, no, when you’re socially promoted, you wind up as president of the United States. If you’re socially promoted your whole life and nobody challenges you because you’re of the proper constitution and composition and you look exactly right and no one’s — everyone’s afraid to say a word to you, why, you then go to Harvard, you then go to the law review, you then get elected, you then get elected to the next level. This is what happens in a country that’s intimidated by its own policies and its own fears.

So, let us break the code. Being “socially promoted” is code for affirmative action. And, affirmative action is code for, at least in this case, an undeserving black man getting something that rightfully belongs to a far more deserving white man. “Proper constitution and composition” is translated to mean “black” or “African American.” “Everyone’s afraid to say a word to you …” is code for “you are an affirmative action black and we don’t want to be called out for saying that and being labeled racist.” Savage is playing the old tired deck of cards of right-wing extremists.

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200811190016?f=h_latest

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly Tries To Use The Jedi Mind Trick On His Viewers In Norm Coleman-Al Franken Senate Race

Master Yoda might be so proud of Fox News channel’s Bill O’Reilly. But, Bill, you are not yet a Jedi. O’Reilly, on a recent show, tried to convince his viewers that incumbent Norm Coleman had been certified as the winner of the Minnesota United States Senate race against challenger Al Franken. The margin in the race is razor thin (in Coleman’s favor) and triggered a recount to settle disputed ballots and, quite frankly, just to be as sure as possible. Media Matters was all over O’Reilly for his attempt to deceive his faithful followers into somehow thinking that Coleman had won and this was little more than a desperate attempt by, Franken, a Democrat to steal something from a Republican. Here is a quote from O’Reilly: “‘Factor Follow-up’ segment tonight: Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman was certified the winner in his race against Al Franken today. Coleman won by a mere 215 votes. But about 400,000 voters in Minnesota rejectedFranken, while voting for Obama. They crossed the ticket to supportColeman, a stunning statistic.” This is absolutely not true. Media Matters goes on to document information from the two major papers in the state and from state election officials that, in fact, Coleman has not been certified as the winner as the margin is far too close, there are disputed ballots and it would be stupid to declare a winner when a recount has been ordered and is underway. Here are some of the issues at work for O’Reilly: (1) He is a conservative, (2) Fox News is a conservative publicity firm for the Republicans, (3) O’Reilly has a vendetta against Franken who has challenged and called him out numerous times and (4) O’Reilly is not always one to let the facts muddy up his perspective or his brand of “journalism.” So Bill, as some might have said from the Star Wars series: “You are powerful indeed, but you are not yet a Jedi!”

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200811190019?f=h_top

Player Hater Alan Keyes Needs A Psychiatric Evaluation

Conservative commentator Alan Keyes, a fantastic speaker with questionable stability, is continuing his vendetta against President-elect Barack Obama. The obsessed Keyes is a former presidential candidate and he also failed miserably in his attempt to defeat Obama in the 2004 United States Senate race. He is reinventing the failed tactic of trying to prove that Obama is not a United States citizen (and thus would not qualify to become the president of the United States of America). Keyes and others may not realize it, but Hawaii is one of the 50 states and that is where Obama was born in 1961. This is part of an ongoing campaign that attempts to paint Obama as scary because he is different and “not one of us.” Sorry Keyes, but the people of this nation have spoken and Obama is in … President George W. Bush is soon to be out. Just like the people of Illinois spoke strongly in support of Obama against Keyes, in 2004, so too have they spoken loudly and convincingly in 2008.

NBC:
http://www.nbcaugusta.com/news/elections/presheadlines/34587804.html

Reelected Rep. Michele Bachmann Continues To Tell Lies

Crooks and Liars found a contradiction on the part of ridiculous Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, a controversial woman who oftentimes has a crazed look on her face and lies and smears as easy as most people blink and smile.

Let’s review; here are Bachmann’s controversial comments on MSNBC talking to Chris Matthews:

BACHMANN: I would say, what I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look — I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America? I think the people would love to see an expose like that.

Now, fast forward to more recent comments made by Bachmann on Fox News (I am sure she is much more comfortable on the network conservatives trust).

COLMES: You said you were concerned during the campaign that Obama had anti American views and you said the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look at the people and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America
BACHMANN: Actually that’s not what I said. It’s an urban legend that was created and that’s not what I said.
COLMES: I have the tape at my website Alan.com
BACHMANN: What I called on Alan was for the main stream media to do their job. They failed to vet Barack Obama the way they had John McCain. That’s what I was called for.
COLMES: I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America. Do you really want…
BACHMANN: What I said was that I’m not qualified to say whether members views are pro or anti American. That’s not my job to do.

It makes you wonder what exactly she is qualified to say or do. She lacks the integrity to even admit what she said and what she called for during the general election campaign when she was working to smear then candidate Barack Obama, who now is President-elect Barack Obama. Bachmann was using the fear to try and paint Obama as being dangerous and anti-American as so many attempted to paint individuals as communists as part of McCarthyism. Bachmann, representing the state of Minnesota, is ridiculous. She called the contention that she questioned whether Obama might have anti-American views (she did that) an “urban legend.” She is crazy. It amazes that she can deny something that she said on television that so many people have seen, deny it and call it an “urban legend.” Wow, people actually voted for her … a lot of people.

Crooks and Liars:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/michelle-bachmann-denies-saying-she-wan

Rush Limbaugh Wants Old People To Come Out Of The Rest Home And Work

Rush Limbaugh is tired of seeing people retiring at the age of 55. As far as the right-wing extremist commentator is concerned, old people need to hop out of the recliner, grab your walker and head to Wal-Mart and be a greeter for customers … or, just do something.

Here are comments made recently by Limbaugh:

LIMBAUGH: You’re a nice guy and I’m sure that you are a salt of the earth guy but since you asked, What I am supposed to do, go back to work at 67? No, you’re not supposed to retire when you’re 55. You sound to me like you are totally capable of still working. Unless you work for a place that forces you out and says 55 you can no longer do the job, you got no business retiring at 55 IF you can’t afford to retire. What’s wrong….My boss is having a conniption there. What’s wrong? Is that the unpolitick thing to say? I have not … the American Dream. I have not redefined the American Dream. The American Dream is retire at 65. People are retiring now at 50 and 55 and so forth when they are still capable of working. According to the tables at 55, you’ve got 22 years left. … I have not redefined the American Dream. I have not redefined it. … I don’t understand what I said that’s wrong here.”

We can’t all park our rich and fat asses in a chair and speak our opinions into a microphone to rake in big money. Maybe Limbaugh can do that until he is 67, but for those who have worked hard, been smart with their money and can afford to retire … I say go with the Nike slogan, “Just Do It.” it takes planning, hard work and some sacrifice, but some Americans are able to retire at an age like 55 (probably a lot more simply are unable to do so and have to wait until they’re capable). But, that is a decision for individuals to make based on the retirement planning, retirement benefits and how wise they have been with their money. It’s not up to fat-cat commentators who make millions running their mouths.

Crooks and Liars:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/rush-limbaugh-you-should-work-till-you-

Knuckleheads Don’t See The Big Picture In Auto Industry Bailout

It amazes me how many people are sitting around so readily willing to let the automotive industry fall into bankruptcy. I can hear them now: OH, it’s there own fault … let them go into bankruptcy and lets see what happens (as if it is some kind of television show we can just turn off if we don’t like). This is not some television show. This is for real. Of course, most people do not care if they have a job outside of that industry and they’re doing OK. Uncle Sam needs to step up and work on this bailout for the auto industry. Obviously, there must be conditions so that the automakers work to create more fuel-efficient cars, better cars and work harder to control their spending. Certainly Congress has a responsibility to make sure there are conditions to this bailout, but if we can bail out the banks and airline industries, then we need to bail out the automakers. There are too many jobs at stake and too many jobs that are held by people in middle America. Jealousy makes us hate all people that we feel make too much. This is why people erroneously blame the salaries of professors (even though they do go up) for higher tuition costs. This ignores, among other factors, less funding coming from the states (for state-run institutions). There are too many working families who will be positively impacted by this bailout (if it is properly structured). The economy is already in crisis, and the last thing we need is for one or more of our automotive giants to go in the tank and begin slashing jobs (people working in plants, suppliers, shippers, parts makers, etc.) being filled by people who can afford it the least.

Nitwit Mitt Romney Is Hating On Detroit, Auto Industry … Patterson Hits Back

Mitt Romney, the failed presidential candidate who also is a former Massachusetts governor and son of Michigan’s former Gov. George Romney, had some less than kind words to say about Detroit and the auto industry. Romney, sipping on a full bottle of his favorite flavor of Haterade, went to work criticizing the auto industry in an op-ed page piece in the New York Times. Now, to be fair, some of what Romney said does make some sense: for example, cutting costs and creating more fuel-efficient cars. Romney suggests a form of bankruptcy as a way of solving the woes of the Big Three (who are seeking a bailout like pretty much everyone else has gotten … everyone but the actual American people). I have not always been the biggest fan of Oakland (Mich.) County Executive L. Brooks Patterson, but I could hardly have agreed more with him on this one, as he responded to Romney’s words in the Detroit Free Press: “I can’t believe those words tumbled out of his mouth. I think Mitt is way off base on this one. I’m disappointed because I’m a big fan of his.” I, of course, have not always been a big fan of Romney and now I am even less a fan of him. This is a crisis that is (or should be) of even greater importance to people. An auto industry crisis can adversely impact regular people who have jobs that they rely on … working-class people. Who is going to want to buy cars when the Big Three seem to be on such shaky ground? The economy is already bad enough. As Patterson points out, it’s one thing to fly on an airline for a few hundred bucks during a Chapter 11-induced reorganization, but a car is a major investment for working-class families. The fear of auto bankruptcy could create buyer fear that would damage the auto industry even more. Patterson also added this: “If that company isn’t around, what are you going to do with that piece of junk you can’t get parts for?” This impacts not only the auto makers, but also the parts people and suppliers. The Free Press than paraphrased Patterson, “… Romney should instead scold Congress for allowing subprime home mortgages to flourish, with a resulting market collapse that has infected global financial markets.”

Detroit Free Press:
http://www.freep.com/article/20081119/BUSINESS01/81119058

Fox News Talk Shows For Dummies Graduate Mike Huckabee Proves Foolish And Homophobic

Perhaps the fact that former Arkansas Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee can get his own talk show on a major network like Fox News proves that there is hope for even the least of us to succeed. How Huckabee has ended up with a show on Fox News (outside of the fact that he is a high-profile conservative Republican) proves that we can believe in miracles (especially if you’ve actually watched the show). Anyway, Huckabee made an appearance on “The View” and started to speak about an issue that has so many Republicans up in arms these days: gay rights. During a recent episode, Huckabee, a true-blue Republican, was apparently contending that since gays and lesbians have not been victims of violence (his sentiment) to the degree that blacks were during the Civil Rights Movement, that the bigotry, hate and violence that gays and lesbians face is not nearly as significant. I agree that there is a difference between being a woman vs. being a man is different than being gay or lesbian and that being an ethnic minority is different than being a gay or a lesbian. Different, however, should not equate to lesser in regards to many of our basic rights. Just because it is different doesn’t mean that the discrimination against gays is any less reprehensible.

Here are Huckabee’s words on “The View,” recently as he spoke with Joy Behar:

HUCKABEE: It’s a different set of rights. People who are homosexuals should have
every right in terms of their civil rights, to be employed, to do anything they want. But that’s not really the issue. I know you talked about it and I think you got into it a little bit early on. But when we’re talking about a redefinition of an institution, that’s different than individual civil rights.
BEHAR: Well, segregation was an institution, too, in a way. It was right there on the books.
HUCKABEE: But here is the difference. Bull Connor was hosing people down in the streets of Alabama. John Lewis got his skull cracked on the Selma bridge.

Gays and lesbians have been the victims of violence and that can not and should not be ignored regardless of how people feel about homosexuality. We should all abhor violence and work to find common ground in the world’s greatest country.
Think Progress:http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/18/huckabee-gay-rights/

Fox News: A Safe Haven For Homophobia?

Fox News is amazing in its right-wing bigotry. But, the rising tide of homophobia is becoming increasingly evident in Fox News broadcasts as of late. Extremist conservatives like Fox News host Bill O’Reilly have been soldiers on the front line of a ridiculous effort from right wingers to slow down the move toward compassion and equal rights for gays and lesbians in the United States of America. But, Fox News homophobia extends beyond O’Reilly and the nasty comment made by one of his guests, comedian Dennis Miller during one particularly nasty segment. Here is a comment of Fox News host Greg Gutfield about Congressman Barney Frank that was caught by Think Progress:

Look, I don’t dispute that aliens exist, but there are more urgent matters to deal with, other than wrinkly creatures with a knack for anal probing. But enough about Barney Frank. I couldn’t resist.

It's amazing what some people will say on television. About the only good thing to come out of this was the fact that apparently someone at Fox News realized the disgusting nature of those homophobic words and attempted to cover it up.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/18/gutfeld-fox-edit/

Can Guantanamo Bay Be Maintained With Torture Eliminated?

President-elect Barack Obama has one of his first controversies as he seeks to clean up some of the messes created by the administration of current President George W. Bush. Among the messes that President-elect Obama will have to deal with is torture and Guantanamo Bay. On 60 Minutes, during an interview with Steve Croft on the CBS program, President-elect Obama had the following exchange:

CBS: One of them is to shut down Guantanamo Bay. Another is to change interrogation methods that are used by U.S. troops. Are those things that you plan to take early action on?

OBAMA: Yes. I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn’t torture, and I’m going to make sure that we don’t torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America’s moral stature in the world.

What I wonder is whether or not Guantanamo Bay must be closed to end torture? Are the two necessarily joined at the hip? I, like many other Americans, am wholeheartedly against the horrible forms of torture we’ve been hearing about reportedly taking place at Guantanamo Bay. What I wonder is why can we not end torture, but continue to use the advantage the United States has with Guantanamo Bay as a place for some of the most dangerous individuals who are being housed there right now? I think we can maintain Guantanamo Bay, but we certainly need to clean up the atrocities that have taken place there.

Donovan McNabb Being Raked Over The Coals For Not Knowing Games End In Overtime

Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb is really being hammered because he confessed that he did not know football games could end in ties after the overtime period of Sunday’s game against the Cincinnati Bengals (that ended in a 13-13 tie). Some of this is, in essence, self inflicted. Now, I could jump in and pile on McNabb for not knowing something that he should have known about. On the other hand, I have to admit … it’s a little refreshing to hear a guy being honest about something that he does not know. McNabb should have known about the rule that games can end in overtime, but I think people are piling on McNabb a little too aggressively. I was listening as some people were hammering McNabb (questioning his intellect) and saying he should be dumped by the team after his borderline stunning confession in front of the media at a post-game press conference. McNabb is a smart individual and has done some amazing work for the Eagles during his professional football career. Some people will use this as an excuse to bash him, but Donovan should take some time to remember a very important rule: Never give our enemy or enemies the ammunition to use against you.

President-elect Barack Obama An Advocate For College Football Playoff

President-elect Barack Obama has and will have a lot on his plate as he prepares to officially become the next president of the United States. President-elect Obama has already made it pretty clear that he has a major passion for college football and a college football playoff. On 60 Minutes, while being interviewed by Steve Croft, the president-elect spoke of an eight-team, three-round playoff to decide what now is a somewhat subjective national championship process. Said President-elect Obama, “It would add three extra weeks to the season. You could trim back on the regular season. I don’t know any serious fan of college football who has disagreed with me on this. So, I’m going to throw my weight around a little bit. I think it’s the right thing to do.” It’s a great idea to have a playoff and it will be nice to have someone in a high place who is an advocate of settling the national championship on the field instead of mostly in computers. More than a few schools have been victimized by the current system and perhaps this could be a welcomed change. No system will be 100 percent perfect, but this will move us a lot closer to a better system that more closely upholds a higher level of credibility within the system. Sometimes, the system lucks out and gets what most people feel are the two best teams. Other years, it has led some to feel a sense of betrayal with regard to the quality of the system. Perhaps the 60 Minutes comments of President-elect Obama will light a fire under those who are a little too happy with the cash-cow bowl system that allows so many of the big, medium and small corporations to make money advertising as part of the current system. Maybe change could be in the air for college football.

ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3708348

Response #3 To Christian Science Monitor Editorial: Thank Goodness for Slavery?

This part of this editorial from The Christian Science Monitor was appalling: “Those who are sympathetic to the victim view of African-Americans should read ‘Out of America,’a stunning book by journalist Keith Richburg. After seeing firsthand the reality of the lives of the vast majority of Africans, he expressed gratitude that his ancestors had come to the United States, even as slaves.” This is nothing short of “stunning,” disgusting and indicative of a growing sentiment among conservative whites and House Negro blacks that all black people should be thankful for slavery. It is ridiculous and absurd to believe that anyone should be thankful for the atrocities of slavery that saw the deaths of so many people in Africa, through the Middle Passage and into North America. We as Westerners of the world, thumb are nose at other cultures and think that so many other cultures are inferior. So, it is no surprise that a Westerner would see Africans and believe that they are inferior to what a lot of people in the United States have come to know and love. The United States is a great country, perhaps the greatest in the world, but that is no reason to thumb are nose at other cultures that some arrogantly feel don’t measure up to Western standards. Forgive me if I am not quite ready to give thanks for slavery.

Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0806/p09s01-coop.html

Response #2 To Christian Science Monitor Editorial: Affirmative Action

The Christian Science Monitor editorial that caught my attention had another issue that kind of made me shake my head: affirmative action. Obviously, affirmative action is a controversial issue in the United States of America. But, here is a quote that sort of defined affirmative action (at least in the eyes of those at The Christian Science Monitor): “Affirmative action has become a highly significant symbol of the divide on race. For those who see African-Americans chiefly as victims, affirmative action is an indispensable policy of expiation for the sins of slavery, segregation, and all the other forms of racism and discrimination.” This is an oversimplification of what affirmative action is all about. It’s not just about making amends or saying “oh, my bad.” But, since we are into oversimplification, affirmative action seeks to level the playing field by providing access to areas that blacks had historically been denied access to. If one person is able to start the 100-meter dash early … he can’t get to the finish line and say, “Yeah, I got an unfair advantage at the start, but the rest of the race was fair.” I’m not going to go into a long debate about affirmative action. Colleges and Universities are clever enough to work around the wave of anti-affirmative action movements sprouting up around the country. We know that President-elect Barack Obama wants to open up access to colleges and universities based on class, too. There are many different forms of affirmative action that a lot of people have no issue with, but can achieve the same objective. Since our nation is still relatively segregated, policies can be tailored to target certain geographic regions to achieve the same objectives of affirmative action. Sure, we all seek to achieve a color-blind society, but it’s difficult to get respect without access to the same power that some groups have built up over generations. There is no question the playing field is far more level today than it was 10, 20 or 30 years ago. We all look forward to the day when affirmative action will be a thing of the past. We’re close, but we’re not there yet. And, as I said in another blog entry, the election of President-elect Barack Obama does not simply mean racism vanishes. We still have work to do.

Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0806/p09s01-coop.html

Response #1 To Christian Science Monitor Editorial: So-Called Victimology

I can’t honestly say that I would normally read The Christian Science Monitor. I’ve heard of it, but that is about it. However, I did stumble across an editorial written (online) that certainly grabbed my attention with the headline: “Could Obama’s rise signal the end of black victimology?” The headline instantly made me think of the negative perceptions that a lot of conservative whites have of black people and nearly any claim of racism (cleverly subtle or arrogantly overt). For the purpose of this blog, I am focusing on this particular passage in the editorial: “Victimology, in the view of black writer John McWhorter, is the theory that (1) African-Americans are continuing victims of racism and discrimination, and (2) their progress consequently depends chiefly on acts of repentant benevolence by whites – in the extreme case, reparations for slavery.” I must admit my ignorance of who John McWhorter is, but according to The Christian Science Monitor, he is a “black writer.” Perhaps that means he speaks for all black people because he is a “black writer.” I am not sure. I became even more confused as the written piece started to rip apart Jesse Jackson (a convenient target for many conservative white people who get angry at even the mention of racism, diversity or anything of the kind). These are the same people who would be tearing apart Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. If he were alive today for most of the same reasons they use to attack Jackson (they will not admit it, since so many of have a glorified memory of Dr. King and perhaps justifiably so, but it is true). I am not denying that Jesse Jackson may have been doing some player hatin’ on President-elect Barack Obama at one point, but whatever. Jackson is a human being and, like the rest of us, he is hardly perfect. But, back to the so-called “victimology” passage I quoted. Many people of all races believe that racism exists. Many of us also believe that the United States of America has made great strides (strides greater than most of our parents would have ever dreamed possible) during the last 40 years since the assassination of Dr. King in Memphis, Tenn. But, even with that progress, there is still work to be done. So, to believe that black people or people of any other color still believe that racism exists is not a sign of so-called victimology. The second point is that many blacks believe that their progress depends upon “acts of repentant benevolence by whites - in the extreme case, reparations for slavery.” This is conservative bull—t. Without anything to necessarily back me up, I would venture to guess that there would be a small amount of people of all races who would strongly support reparation for slavery (even though some races clearly had advantages in the young United States of America as a result of slavery that blacks did not enjoy). This written piece implies that there are a lot of black people who feel this way, but I think not. This article also asks a question that seems to further imply that Barack Obama’s election as president of the United States of America instantly wipes racism off the face of the country. Anyone who believes that is foolish.

Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0806/p09s01-coop.html

Was The Media Biased Or Was Obama Simply A Better Story Than McCain?

We’ve heard so much about so-called mainstream media bias in the campaign; this is a bias that some believe proved to be anti-John McCain and pro-Barack Obama. But, was there really a bias in the sense that the media was cheerleading for Obama as some on the conservative wing of the political spectrum wholeheartedly believe? I have long contended that people in the media are human beings - in spite of how so many like to push the illusion that the media are simply fair-minded people with a robotic-like sense of right and wrong when it comes to coverage of candidates in political races. Frankly, human nature is the reason that perhaps Barack Obama did get a little more attention from the press during the election coverage. What is a better story: (At the risk of being harsh) Another old white guy being named president of the United States of America, or the first black man being named president of the United States of America? Sure, John McCain had a great story with his war record, but other than that Obama was clearly a more intriguing figure to the media and to the public. Besides, not all the coverage of Obama was a love affair between him and the press. We should all remember that he was pounded throughout the campaign by negative coverage from stories about Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, Bill Ayers and others. This was scrutiny McCain did not have to deal with for his associations with G. Gordon Liddy, Charles Keating, Rod Parsley and John Hagee. McCain mostly got a free pass on this from the mainstream media, the tabloids, the Internet bloggers and so many others (while Obama was subjected to all kinds of scrutiny for his associations). So, Obama may have gotten more press coverage, but it was hardly all good (let’s be up front and honest about that). Obama, in the simplest of terms, was a more compelling story (positively and negatively).

We’re Divorced … So, It’s Over Baby!

I have to confess (sadly enough) I have never been married. Apparently, I have not met the right woman or it just has not yet developed to that point. Anyway, a CNN.com article recently caught my attention. The article was titled: We’re divorced - you’re not my friend.” Obviously, the headline did what it was supposed to do since it caught my attention enough to make me want to read it. So, as I read the article, this early paragraph caught my attention and I will share it with you:

“Crystal Byrd of Cedar Creek Lake, Texas, has a pretty good idea. She says her ex-husband asks to borrow money for gas and groceries, has requested that she make lunch for him when he comes to pick up their 5-year-old daughter and 11-year-old son, and even inquired whether she could make a deposit on his new apartment.”

Apparently, this dude has forgotten that a divorce has taken place and it is time to move along in mostly separate directions. Obviously, with kids in the picture, there has to be some level of cooperation, but I am not sure that includes borrowing money for gas and groceries or paying a deposit for an apartment. It’s hard to get to know the dynamics of this couple, what brought them together and what split them apart. I have a hard time imaging how tough it would be to divorce, but then again I have never been married either so that makes it even more difficult to think much of how I might be impacted by divorce.

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/11/14/lw.divorced.not.friends/index.html

Controversial Gay Marriage Issue Divides Us All

NOTE: This is a very controversial and emotional topic (for me and for so many others) that I was not going to write about, at first, but later changed my mind.

On Election Day, as so many of us celebrated the the victorious effort of now President-elect Barack Obama, another movement was taking place in three states around the country - though, most notably, in California. Anti-gay marriage initiatives were passed in California, Arizona and Florida on Election Day - moves that have since sparked protests across the country. For the record, I am not in favor of gay marriage (because I feel that marriage is between a man and a woman … that is my personal opinion). On the other hand, I do support civil unions that would offer gays and lesbians all the rights of heterosexual married couples. Some people might argue “what is the difference?” That is a good and legitimate question, but it also is my opinion that marriage is between a man and a woman. I think the most important step that the gay community needs to take is to rethink the way that these initiatives are being pursued. I am torn, because I can understand what so many gays and lesbians want and I can understand why they would want what they feel are the same rights a heterosexual couples. I favor the basic rights that they seek, but I suppose my only quarrel is with the language of calling it “marriage” vs. calling it a “civil union.” I am not sure our country is ready to fully embrace equal rights for gays and calling for gay marriage gives so many of the bigots (those who oppose equal rights for gay couples regardless of whether it is called marriage or a civil union) an easy escape. They can simply oppose it because it is called marriage. Initiatives like this are tricky. If they are not worded correctly they will not pass even if the intentions are noble (as I believe the intentions are with this gay marriage effort). Frankly, I would not have been angered had the initiative failed and gay marriage been legalized. I feel that there are too many bigots out there who are opposed to gay marriage for hateful reasons and oppose nearly all rights for gay and lesbian couples (including gay adoption). It is understandable for gays and lesbians to want the same rights as heterosexual couples. Gay couples should clearly be allowed to adopt and they should be allowed to have civil unions with the same rights as heterosexual couples. Those who want to advance the cause of gay Americans need to take it one step at a time to change the hearts and souls of those who are violently opposed to their causes. Working for civil unions, first, would have been a wiser move. Then, the movement toward gay marriage, if that was something activists really want to pursue, would have been a move that would have made more sense. Also, there is homophobia in the black community, but there is homophobia in many different communities and in our nation as a whole. So, to blame black people for the gay community’s loss in California is inappropriate. Right or wrong, many ethnic minorities and both genders are uncomfortable with considering being gay and lesbian as the same as being part of an ethnic group or being a gender (being a man or a woman). This is part of the reason the approach for the gay community has to change if it continues to pursue change in this country right now.

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/11/15/same.sex.marriage/index.html

The Disgusting Michael Savage Makes Another Vicious Attack On President-elect Barack Obama

Right-wing extremist commentator Michael Savage, syndicated on far too many radio networks around the nation for reasons that I will never understand, has made yet another outrageous (albeit old) attack on President-elect Barack Obama.

Here is a recent comment from Savage on his Nov. 10 radio show:
“Well, we don’t even know where Obama was born. His grandmother died the night before the election. There’s a lot of questions around this character that the media won’t answer. Let’s start with what country he’s from. Why was the birth certificate never produced? Why in the world did he take time off from the campaign to visit the grandmother who then suddenly and suspiciously died virtually the night before the election? Tell me about that.”

Yet another disgusting commentary from a man who has made a career of appealing to the lowest elements of society with hateful and bigoted rhetoric. Again, Savage tries to bring back the ridiculous rumor from right-wing extremists about President-elect Obama possibly not being born in the United States. This was a failed “Hail Mary” attempt late in the campaign (and even at earlier stages) to try and eliminate him from the presidential race (by declaring him ineligible for not being born in the United States). Just as is the case in football, “Hail Mary” passes generally fail. Savage’s above comments, however, have an even more disturbing element to them. Savage brings up Sen. Obama taking time off from his campaign to visit with his ailing (we now know she was dying) grandmother. This comment, “Why in the world did he take time off from the campaign to visit the grandmother who suddenly and suspiciously died virtually the night before the election? Tell me about that?” These are wicked and evil words designed to make an implication that perhaps there was something suspicious about her death. Savage is trash and his comments give us a smell of just how bad the source of that scent must be.

For more on this garbage, visit Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200811140011?f=h_clips

Sarah Palin Continues To Pass The Buck For Failures Of The McCain-Palin Ticket

It just amazes me to listen to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin continue to blame others for her personal failures and the failures of the ticket of her and Sen. John McCain to take the White House. Palin continues to push this vague and disturbing theme of blaming all of her failures, misstatements, half truths and everything else that went wrong on the “mainstream media.” She has worked this mainstream media angle well past its prime. Any rumor that came up in the tabloids or was driven by an Internet blogger she lumped in with what she referred to as the “mainstream media.” My question is this: Does she know what the term “mainstream media” means? Is she lumping blogging Web sites like this one and millions of others in with the likes of CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN? Does she really know what she is talking about when she says “mainstream media” or is she simply regurgitating tired Republican talking points from the now dead presidential and vice presidential bid of the McCain campaign? Here is another question: When does Sarah Palin start to take credit for her own mistakes, her own errors in interviews, her own contradictions, her own half truths and her own continuing unwillingness (and perhaps) inability to answer tough (but fair) questions that we would expect a vice presidential candidate on a major-party ticket to be able to answer?

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly Loves To Pat Himself On The Back … Even If He Doesn’t Always Give The Full Story

I was flipping back and forth on the television when I stopped by Fox News to check out a part of one of Bill O’Reilly’s show this week. O’Reilly spends a large chunk of his Fox News air time patting himself on the back and singing his own praises, the praises of his show’s ratings, the ratings of Fox News, promoting his own books, promoting his own Web site, promoting his radio show and bashing rivals like CNN and MSNBC. That is a small part of his self-promoting ways so many of us have come to know and loathe. The other night, I was watching and he spent time talking about a Pew Research Center poll about how some Americans viewed the election coverage. O’Reilly talked about some of the positive numbers he got for being one of the favorite choices, but also talked about how he also topped the list of least-liked hosts, too. So, in that sense, it was rare fair-and-balanced moment for Bill O’Reilly. Now, he does this for a reason: to show that he is fair and balanced (equally liked and disliked). There is a method to at least some of the madness. He rarely consciously puts anything on the air that he does not think will reflect positively on him and on Fox News as a network. Here is something interesting that I found from Richard Prince’s column Journal-isms: “In a racial breakdown provided for Journal-isms, blacks were twice as likely to name Fox News’ O’Reilly as their least favorite and three times as likely to cite conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh. Of 25 names on the list of favorite or least favorite, none was a journalist or commentator of color. Some 88 blacks were in the sample, according to chief researcher Kim Parker.” Mentioning how unpopular he was among black viewers was a part of the Pew Research Center poll that O’Reilly and his team must have overlooked as they prepared for the show. It must have been an accidental oversight. It is interesting how a man who tries to portray himself as so fair and balanced that is linked so securely at the hip with conservative minister of propaganda Rush Limbaugh. O’Reilly and Limbaugh, apparently, are two peas in a conservative pod.

Richard Prince:
http://www.mije.org/richardprince/what-journalists-were-thinking

The Latest Edition of Foxholes

“Foxholes” will be a new regular feature in which I will highlight one of the more outrageous, ignorant, insane or just outright dumb things said by people posting on the Fox News Web site. This is in the developmental stage right now. I am going to continue to work to develop this soon-to-be regular feature within my blog, but here is the latest entry. This one is in regards to the possibility of Sen. Hillary Clinton becoming Secretary of State in the administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

Mary November 14th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
She will be a total bomb, just like her hubby was, he was the one that got us in this mess. but you that voted for Obama are going to get whats coming to you.
When you sit back and lsoe your house, job and your insursnce, DON’T CRY FOUL!!!!WHENTHE DEM WITS TAKE OVER THIS WORLD FOR THE NEXT 4 YEARS, WE ALL WILL BE CRYING .
The lines are long now at the unemployment office and they can’t handle the over flow of people, people are going to be turned away and I pray all those that voted for the Dems to take over will spred their wealth, and open their homes and open their pocket books to us that didn’t vote for the Dems. O promised everyone alot and will he deliver? NO he can’t, His promises got him in the white house and we the peole will suffer for it, mark my words, we all will be left behind because we can’t afford what he will be dishing out.

COMMENTARY: It is always funny to me to listen to Republicans try to talk about how former President Bill Clinton gut us into all these problems and now there are going to be more problems when President-elect Barack Obama takes office. This comment, “She will be a total bomb. just like her hubby was, he was the one that got us in this mess. but you that voted for Obama are going to get whats coming to you,” is hillarious. Apparently, Mary thinks things have been going great under President George W. Bush with record deficits, unemployment issues, health care struggles, a housing mortgage crisis, wars going on in Afghanistan and Iraq, growing tensions with Russia, an issue that remains with North Korea, the opinions of the United States around the world going into the toilet under President Bush, the economy going into a historically-bad crisis state during the last couple of months and more.

I’ve been more than a little amused at the rabid right wingers running to the gun shops to stock up on their guns as the anticipation builds for President-elect Barack Obama to officially take office in January. Gun rights people (I have no problem with reasonable guns rights) have used the incoming President-elect Obama’s administration to scare the right-wing nuts (a great marketing initiative) into running out to the nearest gun shop or gun store to stockpile weapons (with the idea being that the Obama administration is going to limit the rights of gun owners). Proof that a suck is born every single minute, so many people are running out to pretty much fatten the pockets of the smiling owners of these gun shops and organizers of these popular gun shows.
Here is an excerpt from a piece that Crooks and Liars posted from CNN:

Weapons dealers in much of the United States are reporting sharply higher sales since Barack Obama won the presidency a week ago. Buyers and sellers attribute the surge to worries that Obama and a Democratic-controlled Congress will move to restrict firearm ownership, despite the insistence of campaign aides that the president-elect supports gun rights and considers the issue a low priority. Video Watch shoppers snap up guns of all types » According to FBI figures for the week of November 3 to 9, the bureau received more than 374,000 requests for background checks on gun purchasers — a nearly 49 percent increase over the same period in 2007. Conatser said his store, Virginia Arms Company, has run out of some models — such as the AR-15 rifle, the civilian version of the military’s M-16 — and is running low on others.

Such assault weapons are among the firearms that gun dealers and customers say they fear Obama will hit with new restrictions, or even take off the market.

I still don’t understand why any “rational” people are all but pulling hamstrings running out so fast and buying assault weapons and other types of guns, but that is just me.

Crooks and Liars:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/gun-sales-and-paranoid-right-sucker-

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html

Even Sheperd Smith Sick Of Republicans Blaming “Mainstream Media Bias” For John McCain’s Loss To Barack Obama

I look hard and I love to give credit to people at Fox News who fight back against the propaganda machine and tell it like it is from time to time. This time, it was Shepard Smith, a Fox News anchor, who had heard more than enough of Republicans trying to pin Sen. John McCain’s loss in the presidential race to now President-elect Barack Obama on so-called mainstream media bias (a Republican talking point throughout a chunk of the campaign). Watch as Smith becomes fed up and tells it like it is … pointing out, most interesting of all, that Republican George W. Bush won two presidential elections in spite of this so-called media bias.
Smith’s comments:

“Oh, please…the mainstream media reflected what was happening in this nation. It did not drive it. The blogs didn’t drive this movement. The media didn’t drive this movement. Barack Obama did not lose this election. It was his to lose, it was not John McCain’s to win. The Republicans had no shot unless the Democrats gave it to them, and they didn’t. And to blame the media is a cop out and ridiculous. We are always here to be blamed by people like you who enjoy that activity. We always will be. When the Democrats lost last time, it was our fault. When the Republicans lost this time, it was our fault. It’s not.”

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/12/foxs-shepard-smith-disput_n_143393.html

Fox News Continues To Blue The Line Between Objective Journalism And Tabloid-Like Opinion And Sensationalism

The people at Fox News are obsessed with trying to force-feed us this phony image of its network as this bastion for fair and balanced news reporting. Those of us who have spent any amount of time watching Fox and comparing it to CNN and MSNBC, however, know better. One of the dangers of Fox News, functioning as a machine of right-wing propaganda, is that many people are fooled by the mixed messages Fox sends in its broadcasts. Frankly, this is what makes Fox News so crafty and (as much as it pains people to hear it) relatively successful. What Fox News has done is to blur the line between what is objective news (some of the actual reporting of Fox) and what is opinion loosely-based (if at all) on facts (Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren, Laura Ingraham, Fox and Friends, etc.). Watching Fox is kind of like reading a lot of college student newspapers where some writers (I’m not talking about the columnists) have been known to take some liberties to dress up stories by editorializing and stretching the facts to near the breaking point (if not, at times, past the breaking point). Fox News is slick in its presentations. The messages that news channels run along the bottom of the screen for “objective” news are the same types Fox News uses during its high-viewership prime-time run with the likes of O’Reilly and Hannity - ideologues who force-feed viewers their values wrapped in what they see as a protective jacket of “facts” as they see it. Because of this, many blind followers and believers of Fox News become fooled into taking so much of the unbalanced opinion of people like devout right wingers such as O’Reilly, Ingraham, Van Susteren and Hannity and believing it (simply because it is on Fox News and Fox News portrays itself as “fair and balanced” on a nightly basis). Fox News is good at what it does. But, then again, Vince McMahon (the wrestling counterpart to Rupert Murdoch, who is the man at Fox News) has been pretty good at what he has done with World Wrestling Entertainment. When you think about it, however, there are a lot of similarities between WWE and Fox News.

U.S. News and World Report’s Michael Barone Proves To Be Misguided About Sarah Palin’s Critics

Republican Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was criticized for a lot of things, but U.S. News and World Report’s Michael Barone recently made one of the most outrageous claims I’ve heard (and I’ve heard some outrageous claims). Of course, Barone’s claim is perfect gasoline to pour on talking points from the extremist wing of the Republican Party. This man claims that the media (he says, of course, the “liberal media”) attacked her because “she did not aborther Down syndrome baby.” This is horrifyingly ignorant. Palin, I believe, has mostly been commended for her willingness to bring this life into the world and show a willingness to be a mother to a child who will, obviously, have special needs. Her criticisms had more to do with mistakes that she and perhaps the campaign in general made during the run for the White House. Any difficulties she had with the media should not be blamed on the liberal media or that baby. Barone continued: “They wanted her to kill that child. … I’m talking about my media colleagues with whom I’ve worked for 35 years.” His ridiculous comments were not well received as, according to Politico, as “[a]bout 500 people were in the room, and some walked out.” The Think Progress article continued, “Barone did not dispute his remarks, saying he ‘was attempting to be humorous and, as many in public do, went over the line.’” Frankly, it’s difficult some days to understand exactly what some people view as humor. By any sane person’s thinking, this was nothing resembling humor.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/12/barone-palin-abortion/