Well gee whiz, ain’t that just the shocker of the century!!
Bill O’Reilly discussed it on The O’Reilly Factor with Dick Morris, mentioning he invited Elizabeth Edwards on his show to discuss personal attacks from the left:
“Okay, now after that interview, and nobody knows this, we called Elizabeth Edwards. And we said, ‘you know we’re real interested in this personal attack stuff because we have a problem with that on the left. Would you come on, either sit, you know, on a set, or on the phone?’ ‘No.’ Now, I’m saying to myself, wait a minute, you call into a program that no one watches, alright. And you have a point, no one watches. She’s- nobody sees this. I’m giving you a forum where ten million people on radio and TV are going to see it and you say no.”
“Alright, now, we called Edwards as I mentioned, Elizabeth Edwards. And said, ‘look we want to talk about this too, these personal attacks.’ And she says ‘no.’”
And gee, she said no. I’m just shocked. Shocked and appalled. Who would’ve thought?
Hat tip: Newsbusters
Bet you never thought you’d hear anyone be encouraged for saying that, huh?
A video on CNN proves that, for moonbattery, no low is too low.
Paula Zahn interviews a “transgendered” boy and his family. All right, fair enough. Transgenders can make that decision for themselves and their family should love and accept them for it, right?
Except, in this case, the boy is seven. Let’s start with his parents. They have five boys, and then have a sixth Paula refers to as “George”. And his parents started dressing and referring to him as a girl at around the age of two when they “realized” that he liked pink, pretty, and feminine things — which clearly was a sign from their eighteen-month-old that he wanted to be a girl, not a boy. And the mother gushes about how she “let” her four-year-old boy dress up in a pink gown, there was sheer joy in “her” face and how “she” came out of “her” shell.
More evidence that “George” supposedly wanted to be a girl was that he wanted to go to the bathroom in public with Mommy instead of Daddy — because, you know, little boys never use public bathrooms with their moms. That’s a rare sight, right there. They say “George” became depressed and angry, and attempted to cut off his penis with scissors. And the mother states, very seriously, that if she didn’t “let” her son become a girl, he/she would take his/her own life… “whether it be tomorrow, or the next week, or the next month”.
Because, you know, five-year-olds understand what suicide is and everything.
So the parents took him/her out of school for a year, grew out his/her hair, dressed him/her in girl clothes, and re-enrolled him/her into a new school as a girl.
One of the most disturbing parts of the video is when they interview “Ashley”, who agreed to be interviewed only if “her” face was hidden — because a seven-year-old thinks of things like that. And “her” answers seemed to come too easily for a seven-year-old to have thought them up on their own… it was too scripted, too coached.
As Van Helsing notes at MoonBattery:
In the olden days, if a disturbed child exhibited persistent delusions, science would attempt to provide a cure. But we’re more enlightened now. We indulge the delusions, and twist reality around in an attempt to conform to them. After all, who’s to say one reality is more real than another?
In conclusion, Zahn says of the parents:
They know they will face difficult decisions as [the boy] reaches puberty, but for now they say they’ll do whatever it takes to make their child happy.
How thoughtful. Apparently his future will feature hormone-induced mutation and sexual mutilation, all because no one was politically incorrect enough to refrain from feeding a small child’s delusions.
Frankly, this video makes me sick, and it doesn’t have anything to do with the transgender population making the choice to be transgender. It is because a child at eighteen months, or four years, or seven years, does not understand what transgender is. The parents are the ones pushing this on the child, and at less than two years old! How much more sickening can you get?!
I feel bad for that poor child… robbed of a normal childhood by parents twisting around innocent actions to fit their own sickening ideals.
Michael Moore, that man who just wants to spread the words of truth and freedom, will make an astonishing 50% of all of Sicko’s profits, the LA Times is reporting.
But what’s even better is the statement he made:
The ramifications of that loaded deal are not lost on the filmmaker, particularly since “Sicko” is arguably his most populist film yet.
“It’s a really interesting irony for me,” Moore says, as his chauffeured Lexus SUV (a hybrid) steers through afternoon traffic on the filmmaker’s return from a taping of “The Tonight Show With Jay Leno.”
While some filmmakers’ wealth can make their films seem elitist, Moore argues that his moviemaking and financial accomplishments actually have allowed him to remain even more focused on the real world.
“What it should do to me is remind me every single day that I have an even greater responsibility to do good with the success that I have been blessed with,” Moore says. “I need to make sure that I am able to make the next film with the money that I have made on this film.”
By being financially independent, Moore says, he is insulated from the corporate pressures that might try to dilute his impassioned documentaries, which include “Roger & Me,” “Bowling for Columbine” and the Oscar-winning “Fahrenheit 9/11.”
“The money allows me to never have to give in, never compromise,” says Moore, wearing his trademark T-shirt, jeans and windbreaker, his Michigan State baseball hat off for the moment. “Nothing can ever be held over my head in the sense of, ‘If you don’t do this, we won’t give you your money!’ ‘Oh, wow, I guess I’ll be in really bad shape, won’t I?’“That’s an enormous bit of freedom that I have — to stay completely true to the things I believe in. But I have an even greater responsibility because I have been blessed with that great success. I challenge myself with that, constantly.”
“Certainly, the No. 1 question I get asked is, ‘What can I do?’ ” Moore says. “I am not prepared for that. Because I am not leading a movement to revolutionize the healthcare system in America. I am making a movie. I have spent a year and a half making this film, and this is my contribution.”
Moore says his first-class travel, accommodations and car service are not his choice, or even his preference (the latter statement has been disputed by some people who have worked with him).
“Harvey pays for all this,” he says. “I would never stay at the Four Seasons, with all due respect to the Four Seasons. If I were coming out here on my own, I would never stay there. They pay for that because that’s the workplace and I’m working and we do the junket there.”
People who resent his wealth, Moore says, are not generally working-class stiffs like himself who have moved into the upper class. “When one of us succeeds, we’re happy about that. We don’t begrudge that. The begrudging that comes from my success or my financial success comes from people who grew up in a little nicer home and somehow didn’t get the same break that I was fortunate enough to get in this business. So they are embittered.”
I love how he claims he doesn’t want first class treatment or anything… as he is being driven around town in a chauffeured Lexus SUV hybrid. Did I say love? I meant hate. I can’t stand when rich people try to make themselves sound more like us… “Oh, well, we don’t really splurge on too much, we try to spend our money responsibly,” says ____, speaking from the balcony overlooking the tennis courts, pool, and beach view of their estate. Good grief! This is America! We believe in capitalism! It’s ok to spend the money you earned on whatever it is that you want!
However, when you are part of the “do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do” class, like Michael Moore is, I guess you want to keep those little tidbits to yourself.
Anyways, I just found this interesting, to say the least — especially Michael Moore’s whole “Now I can be true to myself!” drivel. Yeah, yeah, we got it. Just stop talking. We’d all be a lot happier.
I also love how he says that his first few crockumentaries were “impassioned”… because he didn’t really care about those. He cares about the healthcare industry… even though he doesn’t want to lead a revolution to change it. Gotcha, Mikey.
I guess we can put it this way: if Dubya was for socialized healthcare, like what they have in Cuba and Canada, then you’d make a crockumentary railing about that, too, huh? Whatever conservatives are against and liberals are for — got it. Michael Moore’s foot, meet Michael Moore’s mouth.
Seriously… just stop talking. Really.
As if I needed another reason to dislike Michael Moore… blech.
I just received this statement from presidential candidate Duncan Hunter:
By a vote of 46 to 53, the U.S. Senate voted today not to proceed with debate on legislation providing amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants presently living in the United States. Following the Senate’s vote, Presidential Candidate and U.S. Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) made the following statement:
“From the very beginning of the immigration debate, the American people were clear in their strong opposition to granting amnesty to more than 12 million illegal immigrants. While this flawed piece of legislation should never have been considered in the first place, I commend my colleagues in the Senate who positioned themselves with the American people and rejected this amnesty bill.
“The idea that amnesty must be accepted in order to achieve secure and enforceable borders is absurd. The effort to provide citizenship benefits to millions of illegal immigrants failed — not once, but twice. It is time that we abandon the concept of rewarding those who have broken our laws and take action to secure our borders and enforce existing immigration laws. This is what the American people have been demanding and this is what they deserve.
“Executing one existing law in particular, the Secure Fence Act, would go a long way to bringing a greater element of security to our Southern land border. By constructing double-layered security fencing across the major smuggling corridors on the U.S.-Mexico border, as required by the Secure Fence Act, we will have taken a significant step towards achieving a border that is enforceable and no longer a conduit for illegal activity.”
NOTE: Congressman Duncan authored the fencing provisions in the Secure Fence Act, extending the San Diego Border Fence across Arizona, and portions of New Mexico and Texas.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again — we need Duncan Hunter in 2008.
On June 30th, another FEC finance report is due. You can donate using the form located below on my blog, or go on over to Duncan’s page at www.gohunter08.com. If you want a true conservative in the White House — and Hunter is — then get on over to his page and donate a few dollars if you can.
… would “anxiety” be an excuse for “medicinal marijuana” use. My bs-o-meter is going off here.
I love the one line: “Dave never thought he was the type who would use marijuana as medicine, until he did - and realized marijuana works.”
But I’m sure he’d use it just for fun, right? And hey, now that he found some doc to say he was “suffering from anxiety” he can use it every day if he wants and not get in trouble. I can just imagine the scene at work:
Boss: Dave, why are you staring at your screen saver eating Doritos?
Dave: Well, the fish… they’re just like… all swimming… hehe…
Boss: Dave, you smell like… have you been smoking pot!?
Dave: Here ya’ go… (hands prescription allowing medicinal marijuana use)
Boss: (Rolls his eyes and stomps away)
As the Edwards campaign wallows in hypocrisy, the MSM has decided to completely ignore it and has jumped on board enthusiastically. The Edwards-Coulter match has been almost tabloid fodder for the media, as it is yet another excuse for them to portray a successful conservative woman as “hateful”, and the liberal woman as a kindly, compassionate person who simply wants to “rise above” hate speech and keep the political dialogue higher than that.
Yet, when Ann Coulter engaged in “hate speech” at CPAC earlier this year, John Edwards celebrated as he found another way to make money by using “Coulter Cash”:
Friday afternoon, Republican mouthpiece Ann Coulter brought hate-speech politics to a new low.
This video shows Coulter addressing the American Conservative Union’s Political Action Conference, March, 2, 2007 in Washington, D.C.
We must show that inflaming prejudice to attack progressive leaders will only backfire.
Can you help us raise $100,000 in “Coulter Cash” this week to keep this campaign charging ahead and fight back against the politics of bigotry?
With such a genius fundraising opportunity, I don’t know why the Edwards campaign is complaining, as it obviously gives them the chance to raise so much money. But I digress. The point here is the Edwards’ campaign’s blatant hypocrisy.
Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center has fired back at Elizabeth Edwards over the hiring and firing of controversial, bigoted, hate-filled bloggers Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan in a new press release:
Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, has called on Americans to stop conservative Ann Coulter’s “hate words.” But when that campaign hired two hateful, anti-Christian bigots as “official” bloggers, Mrs. Edwards did not object and the campaign decided to give them a “fair shake,” as John Edwards said. The bloggers resigned in February only after their bigoted writings were exposed by other bloggers and conservative talk radio, causing a huge embarrassment.
ABC, CBS, and NBC interviewed Elizabeth Edwards this morning to allow her to further complain about Coulter’s “hate words,” but none mentioned the Edwards campaign’s bigoted bloggers. Concerning Elizabeth Edwards’ silence about the “hate-mongers” in her husband’s own presidential campaign, MRC President Brent Bozell issued the following statement:
“Elizabeth Edwards, who apparently is now acting as spokesperson for the Edwards campaign and who is very familiar with and active in the blog world, never said a word about the campaign’s hiring and defending of Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan. Mrs. Edwards is a hypocrite. These two bloggers are notorious for writing such repulsive things as,
“What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.” (Marcotte)
In the Duke Lacrosse case, “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it?” (Marcotte) Sen. Rick Santorum talks about sex “lest his lack of self-control be manifested by f***ing his desk on the Senate floor.” (Marcotte) God is “a sadistic bastard.” (Marcotte) Pope Benedict, “he’s just a dictator … the Pope’s gotta’ tell women who give birth to stillborns that their babies are cast into Satan’s maw.” (Marcotte) President Bush has a “wingnut Christofascist base.” (McEwan) “When CNN invited Ann Coulter to comment on the 2004 presidential debates, I sniffed, ‘I didn’t realize they had officially transformed into the C*** News Network.” (McEwan) “Elizabeth Edwards and the liberal media have a double standard when it comes to ‘hate words.’ If it’s hate towards conservatives, it’s okay with them. But if it’s criticism of the Edwards campaign by a conservative, it’s ‘ugliness’ that ‘debases political dialogue.’ The liberal media need to ask, Will Elizabeth Edwards rebuke those hateful bloggers and, by the way, did she have a hand in hiring them?
I still want to know why Elizabeth Edwards is defending her husband, anyways. Isn’t he the one running for President? Shouldn’t he have the, uh, cojones to handle this himself? Oh, silly me. Why would I think that a man who gets $400 haircuts and then an additional $225 at a spa and salon called the “Pink Sapphire” in “services”, and charge exorbitant speaking fees to a poverty group, be able to defend himself? Of course he’s hiding behind his wife’s skirts.
Either way, the Edwards campaign should be slammed for their blatant, foul hypocrisy and lay off of Ann Coulter. Why was it ok for Bill Maher to say it about our vice president, but not ok for Ann Coulter to remark upon that hypocrisy when it comes to John Edwards? Was it that hard to understand what she was saying? I understood exactly what she meant.
But waiting for the mainstream media to call out a liberal for being hateful, hypocritical, treasonous, or any other negative anything, is like waiting for… well, John Edwards to stop being a greedy bastard.
Hat Tip: Newsbusters
The Hill is reporting that the Senate phones have crashed due to a “modest increase” in calling:
Many Senate office phones were down Thursday morning due to a “modest increase in call volume,” according to an e-mail from the Senate assistant sergeant at arms and the chief information officer.
Opponents of the bipartisan immigration reform bill that stalled in the Senate after a 46-53 cloture vote this morning said foes of the bill had flooded Senate offices with phone calls.
“The Verizon telephone switch[board] serving the Senate is experiencing problems that are being exacerbated by this morning’s modest increase in call volume,” says the e-mail, which was sent at 9:45 a.m.
Verizon is attempting to resolve problems and the voicemail system has been temporarily disconnected from the telephone switchboard.
“Calls will still go to the voice mail system, but callers will receive the generic voice mail greeting (‘You have reached the United States Senate voice messaging service …’) rather than the voice mail greeting of the person or office being called,” the notice continued.
It is unknown when the telephones and voicemail service will be up and running again.
Senate Sergeant at Arms Terrance Gainer could not be reached for comment.
Yet, a good number of Senators — even with so many calls saying they don’t support this bill — still don’t get it. Hopefully this thing will die for good now.
In the meantime, let’s enjoy the picture of the day:
Bill Barnes says he was scratching off a losing $2 lottery ticket inside a gas station when he felt a hand slip into his front-left pants pocket, where he had $300 in cash.
He immediately grabbed the person’s wrist with his left hand and started throwing punches with his right, landing six or seven blows before a store manager intervened.
“I guess he thought I was an easy mark,” Barnes, 72, told The Grand Rapids Press for a story Tuesday.
He’s anything but an easy mark: Barnes served in the Marines, was an accomplished Golden Gloves boxer and retired after 20 years as an iron worker.
Jesse Daniel Rae, 27, was arraigned Monday in Rockford District Court on one count of unarmed robbery.
Barnes said he had just withdrawn the money from a bank machine and put it in the pocket of his shorts before driving to a service station in Comstock Park, a Grand Rapids suburb.
He remembers noticing a patron acting suspiciously, asking the price of different brands of cigarettes and other items. While turned away, Barnes felt the hand in his pocket, so he took action.
“I guess I acted on instinct,” he said.
Barnes was a regional runner-up in Golden Gloves competition in the novice and open divisions before enlisting in the Marines in 1956.
After retiring as an iron worker, he now works part-time as a starter at a golf course.
Barnes said he’d probably do the same thing again under the same circumstances, if for no other reason than what he would face back home.
“I wouldn’t want my wife to give me hell for lettin’ that guy get my money,” he said with a smile.
These stories go to show, time and time again, be careful who you mess with, because they just might end up being or having been a member of our Armed Forces.
