Week in Review 6/12/09

One more week, several more attacks from the right. Sotomayor spotlight got a little dimmer after the holocaust museum shooting took center stage, as both sides tried like children to find a way to tie the shooter to the opposing side.

Hate speech and fear mongering definitely is becoming a problem. You will continue to have violence from mentally sick people who only need encouragement by their delusional thoughts to attack by media figures against those who they believe are the enemy. Hopefully sometime soon we can rise above the petty and silly rhetoric that flies around by both side right and left.

Have a good weekend everyone:

Sarah Palin's Feud With Letterman Becoming Silly

No matter how you feel about the comments that David Letterman said about Governor Sarah Palin and one of her daughters, he is allowed to say them. Just like Rush Limbaugh is allowed to say what he wants, no matter how someone else feels.

Back when the president Obama mentioned Rush Limbaugh by name in a closed meeting with republicans I found that silly and beneath him, just as I find Sarah Palin's continued back and forth feud with David Letterman beneath her.

As a public figure you are a target for comments from all. Some will adore your every experience, others will despise your very existence. Responding to those criticisms only gives those who thrive on debate and public attention a bigger audience and more attention. David Letterman and Rush Limbaugh both can attest to that. The more controversy the more viewers and listeners.

David Letterman and Rush Limbaugh have built their empires on the ears of those who agree or find what they say interesting. Both are entertainers, and make the most of their talent to draw and maintain viewers and listeners.

I could have a blog dedicated to daily insults that both men broadcast without ever missing a post. But why would I do that? What would change? A few comments condemning what each man said, or a few agreeing with every word. In the long run, I would only be helping increasing the ratings of both by creating controversy around what they have been successful doing for over twenty years. I certainly won't get a cut of the either man's 40 million dollar haul they take in every year.

Although I do not agree with Sarah Palin being a leading voice for conservatives or her being a front runner for 2012, nor do I agree with most of her policies, I do think however she is above and too classy to be responding to someone who has made a king's fortune on being a juvenile.


Gov. Palin on the Today Show this morning:

Petraeus Sets the Record Straight on Miranda Rights for Detainees in Afghanistan

Any random news article normally prompts wing-nuts to come out and start preaching their shock and outrage if it's something they can use as an attack against the opposing party. In comes the Weekly Standard report that claims that the Obama administration has secretly been mirandizing detainees in Afghanistan.

Well General Petraeus quickly dismissed that report as false while giving his keynote speech this morning at the Center for a New American Security conference.

“The real rumor yesterday is whether our forces were reading Miranda rights to detainees and the answer to that is no,” Petraeus said today.

The republican who supplied the information to the Standard was Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan.

When they mirandize a suspect, the first thing they do is warn them that they have the ‘right to remain silent.’ It would seem the last thing we want is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other al-Qaeda terrorist to remain silent. Our focus should be on preventing the next attack, not giving radical jihadists a new tactic to resist interrogation–lawyering up.

Piggybacking on him was Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.)

When they mirandize a suspect, the first thing they do is warn them that they have the ‘right to remain silent.’ It would seem the last thing we want is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any other al-Qaeda terrorist to remain silent. Our focus should be on preventing the next attack, not giving radical jihadists a new tactic to resist interrogation–lawyering up.

At this point, who you gonna believe, two politicians or a General who is in the middle of it all?



Rodgers and Hoekstra weren't the only republicans jumping in on the report:

Daily Show: Only in New York (Video)

Jon Stewart and team make fun of conservatives fear mongering on bringing detainees to U.S. soil, even though a nice chunk have already been here serving their time.

Even as Ahmed Ghailani comes to New York, most people don't even know some of his cohorts are already here serving time in the U.S. as we speak.

It Must All Depends on Who Says It

When you are of opposite political parties you often have some similarities as far as beliefs and principles, but mostly disagree on the larger issues. It looks like president Reagan and president Obama shared one belief, and ousted House Speaker Newt Gingrich has another:

Republicans Don't Even Know Who Speaks for Them

(Faces of the Future for the Republican Party?)

Imagine been a fan of a team you don't even like. That was me with the Cubs until I gave up on them years ago. You watch the team tell all the things they want to accomplish, they sign players they say will make a difference, and even promote the team to no ends.

Then the season starts. They pull out the same old plays you saw in seasons past, they struggle to pull out any wins, and wind up in last place as usual. Sounds like the republican party of late.

Registered republican voters still seem lost as to who speaks for the party, and who will lead them in the fight to take the White House in 2012. The biggest problem, the same faces from twenty years ago are the same faces that republicans see as their current leaders.

In a USA Today/Gallup poll, a 52% majority of republicans could not even come up with a name of the main person who speaks for the party. Of those who could give an answer, the top responses were Rush Limbaugh (13%), followed in order by former vice president Dick Cheney, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former House speaker Newt Gingrich. Former president George W. Bush ranked fifth, at 3%. Only Mccain actually holds elective office at the age of 72.

The future of the republican party in the hands of senior citizens? Where's Bobby Jindal, Mark Sanford, Tim Pawlenty and Sarah Palin. Do republican only consider them good sidekicks and not leaders? I don't understand why someone like Mark Sanford, who I consider to be one of the most fiscally conservative people in the republican party is not in the forefront in the mind of voters. This is someone who could easily win over independents and even some conservative democrats. Yet the party keeps them in the background.

Also in the in the poll, 34% had a favorable impression of the Republican Party, matching the lowest level in more than a decade. In comparison, 53% had a favorable impression of the Democratic Party.

The party of Reagan still has a lot of work to do, they might take them till 2016 to finish. I'm ready to vote for a true conservative that isn't ruled by religious groups and stuck old ideas etc... until then I will continue leaning left.

Media Matters:'Conservative Misinformation University Salutes The Class Of 2009'

What some people will believe......

Daily Show: "i" on News (Video)

Jon Stewart pokes fun at the three cable news networks this time. First up Fox News who seems to throw accusations all the time at the Obama administration. I think they have a crush on him.

Next up MSNBC. He takes a look at their obsession with the voice of conservatism Rush Limbaugh, he is brought up at least once an hour on the network.

Last in ratings but not least, it's CNN. They seem to have developed a fatal attraction to hearing from viewers, getting tweets, i-reporters, e-mails etc......

School Board President Says He Did Not Mean to Offend Anyone By Sending Racist E-Mails

Buffalo, New York - Lewiston-Porter School Board President Robert J. Weller likes to forward e-mails just like a lot of people. He forwards them to fellow board members past and present and also friends.

So what's wrong with that? Nothing if you ask Robert J. Wellerlikes, “They can accuse all they want to,” he said, “but I didn’t do anything other than what everybody else in the world does.” The messages fall under his freedom of speech, he said, adding that he did not author them, but merely forwarded them.

I'm with you Robert! They're crying about some harmless e-mails? Ridiculous! Hey let's check out some of those e-mails to see what these whiny SOB's are so upset with:

• A photo of Barack Obama, depicted making a campaign promise to deliver jobs to “everyone who can work.” In the background of the doctored image is a group of African-Americans running away.

•A mock news release from the Detroit Police Department that claims the department will replace German shepherd police dogs with “coon dogs, due to the fact the city is not having any problems with Germans.”

• A doctored photo of Chelsea Clinton holding up a T-shirt that reads, “My mom is getting her ass kicked by a Negro.”

• A list of a dozen male chauvinist “jokes,” including an explanation that women have smaller feet to allow them “to stand closer to the kitchen sink,” and a woman’s broken watch shouldn’t be fixed because “there is a clock on the oven.”

Hmmmm......okay, I get it now. Rob is an idiot, and probably a little racist. Let me explain something to you Mr. Weller, as a representative of the school board, it's leader no less, you have a responsibility to be professional and to be careful not to offend those around you.

Of course you are free to to send as many racist and offensive e-mails as you want, but don't be surprised if soon you are no longer school president.

One of Robert Weller's e-mails

The Buffalo News: "Buffalo pastor demands apology for alleged racist e-mails in Lew-Port"

Some Banks Paying Back Bailout Funds

In the beginning, when the Bush administration started with the initial bailout payments, each bank one by one lined up to collect the funds. We were under the impression from president Bush, candidate Obama and candidate Mccain that these bailout were necessary to for these banks to remain viable and open.

If that was the case, why are these banks lining back up to repay the money? How bad were they actually hurting? Did they somehow think that this would be some freebie no strings attach gift?

The Treasury Department will allow 10 banks to pay back Troubled Asset Relief Program funds, Bloomberg reported Tuesday, citing people familiar with the matter.

JPMorgan Chase, whose CEO called the money a "scarlet letter," referring to the public backlash and federal scrutiny that came with it, is one of the banks, the news agency said, citing an anonymous source.

Banks have been eager to pay back bailout money almost since the moment they first accepted it. Now the government is deciding which banks can return the cash -- at the risk of setting up a system of winners and losers.

Read entire article.....

A scarlet letter, eager to return? So why did we give it to them and why the hell did they accept it if their situation was not as dire as we were led to believe?

ACLU Releases Report on Sotomayor

Of course you know the ACLU was going to release a report on her. Check it out.

I will follow up later with some of the highlights after I get a chance to look it over.

One Tasty Burger.........

Yes, this is sick in every way....but I couldn't stop looking at it so I had to post it.



Speaking of tasty burgers, one of my favorite movie scenes:

Source: BarstoolSports.com

O'Reilly & Beck Admit They Can't Prove Anything on ACORN

I guess ACORN will be innocent until O'Reilly & Beck Prove them Guilty:

A Modern Day Lynching?

Racism against anyone is an ugly thing, I should know I have experienced it myself and have been witness to it. Fortunately I did not have to live through the early and mid 20th century for being a minority was not nearly as pleasant as is it today.

However I would like to explain to Bay Buchanan that a modern day lynching as she sees it is an insult to anyone who lost a family member to that vicious act. The fact that the left wing media chooses to expose a Republican's drunken night and racial assault does not make a modern day lynching.

Bay Buchanan (Human Events.com):

Last month the left wing blog, One People’s Project, posted a story about one Marcus Epstein. Within this story it was reported that two years ago next month Marcus assaulted a black woman in Georgetown calling her the “n” word.

With respect to the incident I have been asked not to comment by Marcus’ attorney since the case is still pending. But putting the incident aside, the stories about Marcus were for the most part inaccurate and incomplete. Yet, the left wing bloggers ran with this little factoid because the assailant worked for organizations associated with Pat Buchanan and Tom Tancredo.

What happened next was a modern day lynching by a faceless, angry, ignorant mob who reveled in the collective assault on their victim. They had wounded an adversary and drawn blood -- without pausing to ask how so talented a young man could have found himself in such a mess.

A man who gets drunk, bumps into a Black woman, gets angry and psychically assaults her, all in front of a Secret Service agents. He even pleads guilty, and because he gets trashed by the left wing, it's considered a modern day lynching.........

I think not, the above is a result of a angry ignorant mob, Ms. Buchanan