Custom Search

Sir Ian McKellen's Grudge with Leviticus

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

By Michael A. Jones

How's this for the premise of X-Men 4: Magneto decides that instead of seeking world domination, he's just going to wage battle against radical right-wing religious folks who use the Bible as a means of beating up on LGBT people.
Well, it might hit a little close to home for Sir Ian McKellen, the out British actor who plays Magneto. As it turns out, he's been quietly waging a war against the use of religion as a weapon of oppression against LGBT people all along in his real life. His method? At every hotel he visits, he rips out a page in Leviticus that fundamentalists use to label LGBT people as sinful.

McKellen tells Details magazine that he's not intending to vandalize the Bible. He just thinks the world would be better off if people took the passages in Leviticus a little less literally.

"I'm not proudly defacing the book, but it's a choice between removing that page and throwing away the whole Bible," McKellen says.

For those not familiar with Leviticus 18:22, it might be interpreted as the most homophobic verse in the Bible. It starts with the familiar refrain, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind," and finishes up with a powerful "it is an abomination" punch. But the passage is often misunderstood, and all too often used to justify hatred and violence toward LGBT people -- as was the case earlier this month in New York, where the friend of a gay basher said that attacking gay people was justified because the book of Leviticus approved....(Remainder.)


Today's Vote Will Tell Us Nothing About Barack Obama

By Rude One
The Rude Pundit

On today's Morning Starbucks with Joe over on the MSNBC, the thirty or so people on the air were talking with Republican Minnesota Governor Tim "My Name Sounds Like Something Elmer Fudd Would Say" Pawlenty about the upstate New York congressional race. It's where the Republican was chased out by right-wingers, like Pawlenty, who support Conservative Party candidate Doug "I've Been Endorsed By Everyone You Hate" Hoffman. Begoateed White House correspondent Chuck Todd asked Pawlenty what the minimum basic requirements were for a politician to be welcome as a Republican. Pawlenty went through a litany of what ex-candidate Dede Scozzafava voted for as examples of what a Republican can't do (even though Scozzafava was supported by the NRA and Newt Gingrich). In other words, Pawlenty didn't answer.

Then Joe Scarborough jumped in to ask Pawlenty if he thinks Republican Senator Olympia Snowe is welcome in his vision of the GOP. While Pawlenty allowed that he's glad that Maine elected a Republican, he refused to say that Snowe should be "in the big tent" of the party. He did say that Snowe "can't deviate" on too many issues and still be in that mythical tent, which more and more seems to be KKK-robe white. Scarborough explicitly asked, "Do you want Olympia Snowe in your Republican Party?" And Pawlenty, who was once considered presumptively moderate, became the flaccid cock of the GOP weasel, and he would not say he did.

Or, to put it simply, moderate is no longer conservative enough for the GOP. Conservative is moderate. Scrawl-with-your-own-shit crazy is conservative. So, essentially, the only way to be fringe on the right is to want to blow shit up, and even then it depends on what the target is.

The media, mainstream and not, is all abuzz over what the results of today's elections, especially the gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey and that 23rd district congressional race in New York, will tell us about whether or not Barack Obama and the Democrats have lost momentum and power. And the Rude Pundit's calling bullshit....(Remainder.)


You Say Person, I Say Zygote

By Michelle Bell

Hi there, everybody!  I’m one of the newer writers here at Gaytheist, nice to meet you all.  While I don’t have a very exciting life, I do have reproductive cells.  And I’m wondering, do you know where your gametes are?  What those filthy little buggers are up to? (I mean, besides sitting in a sock, a wad of cotton, or some other non-reproductive place).  Because if you happen to live in one of the 13 or so states* where wingnuts would like to extend the idea of legal personhood to zygotes and gametes, this may be something you want to think about.

Now, this idea of quibbling over when “personhood” begins isn’t anything new.  Various states have proposed amendments to define life as “beginning at conception”, and there have been many instances of states attempting to control and regulate early fetal loss.  Those promoting this idea of personhood for human fetal tissue freely admit that this is about making abortion illegal.  Some of them may cop up to wanting to abolish women-controlled contraception, and the super crazy ones want to do away with all forms of contraception all together.  Every proponent or sponsor of this bill seems to be from a homophobic, misogynistic control freak branch of Christianity (take your pick, there are a lot of denominations to chose from).

Some of the states that are listed as having personhood legislative action happening also happen to have fairly restrictive gay and/or unmarried adoption and fostering laws, creating yet another hurdle for queer parents to build families on their terms.  What I’ve not seen addressed in the varied responses to these personhood amendments is how this will effect people using assisted reproduction technologies (IVF, IUI, ICXY, etc), surrogacy and building non-traditional families. ...(Remainder.)


Gay Marriage is a Fundamental Right Under the U.S. Constitution

By Michael A. Jones

Two federal cases are moving forward challenging the legality of bans on same-sex marriage. One case, stemming out of Massachusetts, asserts that the Defense of Marriage Act unjustly hinders states from fully recognizing the equal rights of gay and lesbian citizens. Another case, out of California, is challenging Proposition 8, the ballot measure passed last year that rescinded the rights of gays and lesbians to marry in the state.

This particular lawsuit has made a big splash this year, in part because the two lawyers behind it are Ted Olson and David Boies, the two attorneys that argued Bush v. Gore, respectively. Today, Boies penned an op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer that made a pretty damn bold statement. To play off a Miracle on 34th Street reference, Boies essentially said, "Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a constitutional right to gay marriage."

Boies makes the case that if you look at U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence, it's clear that precedent falls on the side of letting people love whoever it is that they want to love.

"The constitutional issue is quite simple," Boies writes. "The Supreme Court repeatedly has held that the right to marry the person of your choice is a fundamental human right guaranteed by the equal-protection and due-process clauses of the Constitution."

Boies goes on to cite some of the cases that have become quite familiar to us all over the past couple of years. There's Loving v. Virginia, the case that ended state bans on inter-racial marriage. There's Zablocki v. Redhail, which overturned a Wisconsin law that banned people delinquent on their child support payments from getting married. And then there's Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 case that finally overturned statewide laws banning sexual relations between people of the same gender....(Remainder.)


Apparently, You Don't Need to Know Anything About Politics to Write About Politics at the Washington Post

By Jamison Foser
Media Matters

Baltimore: The filibuster is out of control. Why should 40 Republicans get to veto what the majority wants? Do you think we'll ever get filibuster reform? It wasn't always like this -- filibusters used to be rare.

Perry Bacon Jr.: The Democrats filibustered lots and lots of things from 2003 to 2007.
Bacon's questioner is right.  Filibusters used to be much more rare.  It's hard to believe it's even possible that a Washington Post political reporter would be unaware of this basic fact.  And yet, here we are, with Bacon pretending there's nothing unusual about the Republicans' use of the filibuster.

Then another questioner (who apparently reads this blog) noted that last week Bacon wrote "I think we may have misstated the strength of the opposition to the public option in the first place" and asked Bacon to explain why the media got it wrong.  Here's Bacon's response:
Perry Bacon Jr.: I'm skeptical of polling on issues as complicated as the public option that I think I fairly complicated. I'm still convinced the most energy around that issue is conservatives opposed it, as opposed to liberals backing it. Polls often don't influence what Congress does because polls don't reflect intensity, who is calling offices, etc. I think the big thing here was not the polls, but the intensity of the public option supporters in Nevada, as they pressed Harry Reid on this issue.


Marine Commandant Defies White House on Gay Troops

By Aaron Belkin
The Huffington Post

The Washington Times is reporting that Marine Corps Commandant General James Conway is opposing President Obama's pledge to repeal "don't ask, don't tell." Citing a former senior Pentagon official, the Times says that General Conway, "has emerged in internal Pentagon deliberations as the most outspoken opponent of permitting gay men and women to serve openly in the U.S. military." According to the Times, the official says that "Conway has gone further than others in stating his opposition to a change in policy."

If nothing else, Conway's apparent resistance may be a warning shot to the White House by telegraphing arguments that opponents of repeal will invoke if the Senate holds hearings on "don't ask, don't tell." Given that we are fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, opponents will say, we just cannot take time out to focus on civil rights issues like gays in the military.

But there could be other implications to the case, some of which have higher stakes than the gays in the military issue. On one hand, even if the White House did not coordinate the leaking of General Conway's views, there is a way in which his opposition plays into the administration's hand. The President, of course, is strongly in favor of repealing the ban. His political reality, however, is that he has to deal with a range of other crises before turning to repeal. What better way to justify going slowly than a statement by the Marine Commandant that we cannot do this now?

On the other hand, even though Conway's apparent resistance may buy some time, it could carry some risk for the White House as well. Law professor Diane Mazur, for example, worries that Conway's opposition could raise thorny questions of civilian control over the military. "The President has declared which way policy is heading," she said. "There is no faster way for a Commander-in-Chief to lose the respect of those serving under him than to allow his Service Chiefs to march in an opposite direction." Mazur should know. She is a former military officer and a top legal expert on civil-military relations....(Remainder.)


Article Critical of GOP Health Care Bill Vanishes From WSJ Website

By Karl Frisch
Media Matters

Last night if you went to this link, you would have seen this Wall Street Journal story headlined "GOP Health Bill Gives Insurers More Leeway":

This morning, however, if you attempted using the very same link, you'd find an entirely different story, by an entirely different reporter, under an entirely different headline.


A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Bigotry in Maine

By Michael A. Jones

Despite the fact that same-sex marriage supporters led the campaign of their life to preserve marriage rights for gays and lesbians in Maine, the state narrowly voted to overturn a marriage equality law in yesterday's ballot. It's a bit of deja vu all over again this year, as activists still reeling over the 2008 loss in California with Proposition 8 now have to cope with a second straight loss for marriage equality, this time in Maine.

Though final tallies aren't yet set, the Yes on 1 side (the bad guys who fought to take away same-sex marriage) claimed victory with 53 percent of the vote, compared to No on 1's 47 percent. That's a heartbreaking loss, both in numbers and because by all accounts, the No on 1 campaign in Maine was one of the best organized gay rights groups around. In the closing days of the election, nearly 8,000 volunteers traveled to Maine to urge voters to keep the marriage equality law in place. The raised funds well, and they were more on top of their messaging than perhaps any effort in history to preserve same-sex marriage at the ballot box.

But in the end, 2009 proved that it's just still too soon to fight gay marriage at the ballot box, at least in many parts of the country. Maine now becomes the 31st consecutive state to lose a same-sex marriage question at the polls. Does that mean that hearts and minds aren't changing fast enough on this issue?
The real kicker in all of this is that we will win on the issue of marriage equality. It's not a question of "if," it's a question of "when." Much will be written over the coming days about why same-sex marriage supporters couldn't get over the threshold in Maine. It feels a little raw yet to pour through some of those thoughts, given that same-sex couples in Maine are waking up this morning to find out that they're now again second-class citizens in their own state....(Remainder.)


Maine, Obama and the LGBT Community

By David Mixner

Tonight once again we will be forced to sit on the edge of our seats as the voters of Maine get to chose whether we get to be a free people in their state. The concept that a majority of voters in any state can decide if I shall have the same rights of all Americans is repugnant to me. We won't know the results until late in the evening, but there is one result that is overwhelmingly clear to LGBT citizens and their allies: President Obama and his team were zero help in this critical battle and in the last week might actually have hurt us. That is a fact.

Despite repeated pleas for assistance from this community from the start of the campaign, he chose to ignore every opportunity to grant us such relief. At the recent Human Rights Campaign dinner he never said the word "Maine" once. The most we were able to get out of the White House office of communications was that he was opposed to such efforts. Try weaving that into a powerful ad or robo-calling!

However, practicing benign neglect was not the end of it. This past week, Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States in the state of Maine said that this administration had no position on the ballot measure. Read that sentence again carefully. Our nation's chief law enforcement officer and the president's hand picked choice said that the issue was just not that important to this administration! Now don't be fooled by any rhetoric that presidents don't take stands on such issues. Going back as far as President Carter when he opposed Proposition Six, they have taken such stands.

So you fully understand the consequences of this administrations actions in the last week, just look at the statistics for Maine voters. In the latest Public Policy Poll yesterday which show us falling behind, they said that 54% of the voters say they supported Obama. Over 9% of the voters described themselves as 'non-white'. In that poll 28% of the Obama supporters say they were voting against marriage equality. More importantly, 56% of 'non-white' voters said they planned on voting against marriage equality....(Remainder.)


Pat Boone Wants Kevin Jennings Gassed

Pat Boone, the singer turned conservative political commentator, says the White House needs to be tented in order to get rid of the “parasites, vermin, roaches, rats, worms, and termites” that have found their way into the government.

By Christopher Mangum

Pat Boone, the singer turned conservative political commentator, says the White House needs to be tented in order to get rid of the “parasites, vermin, roaches, rats, worms, and termites” that have found their way into the government.

Amongst Boone’s list of “political voracious varmints” is Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, who was appointed by Obama as assistant deputy secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools within the U.S. Department of Education.

“I believe, figuratively, but in a very real way, we need to tent the White House!” wrote Boone in a commentary for the conservative Christian news site World Net Daily.

Boone refers to Jennings as a “czar” and “extreme gay activist.”

The religious crooner also falsely claims that Jennings “praised the late gay rights activist Harry Hay for his defense of [the North American Man/Boy Love Association].”

The accusations, also reported by the Fox Nation website and the Washington Examiner, stem from a speech Jennings made in 1997, reports Media Matters....(Remainder.)


The Myth of Fox News' Ratings Spike

By Eric Boehlert
Media Matters

Fact: The breathless claim that Fox News' ratings recently spiked thanks to the White House's public critique is bogus hype -- hype that Fox News and the Beltway press have relentlessly pushed.
It's just not true.

No matter how many times reporters and pundits made the claim, a detailed analysis of Nielsen ratings numbers clearly indicates that in the two weeks after the White House in mid-October sparked a media controversy by claiming Rupert Murdoch's channel was not a legitimate news organization, Fox News' ratings did not soar or go "through the roof." In fact, not only did Fox News' overall ratings not soar, they experienced no significant increase at all. Instead, in the two weeks following the initial verbal jousts with the White House, Fox News' total day ratings virtually flatlined.

Think about it. The unfolding controversy, which gobbled up untold hours and pages of news coverage as the Beltway press treated the dispute like a major news event (even though news consumers couldn't care less), and the hubbub barely moved the ratings needle one inch in Fox News' favor.

Another example of the Beltway press not letting the facts get in the way of a good story? It sure looks that way. In this case, we saw nearly universal agreement among media elites that the White House decision to publicly call out Fox News was monumentally dumb, thin-skinned, short-sighted, and uncivil. (Paging the etiquette police!)

Everyone said so. Therefore pundits were certain that Fox News' ratings were way up and that Obama and his aides had made a huge tactical blunder. The ratings angle simply provided statistical ammunition for what the Beltway press corps already knew to be the truth: Fact-checking Fox News, in the immortal words of The Washington Post's CW-loving Sally Quinn, was "absolutely crazy."...(Remainder.)


Glenn Beck's Hotline to Nowhere

The White House has no obligation to correct willful ignorance.

By Thomas Frank
The Wall Street Journal

Glenn Beck, the popular Fox News host, has a red telephone on his desk that never seems to ring. Every now and then, in a moment of acute frustration, he will pick it up and give the camera his trademark pleading-puppy look.

What Mr. Beck wants to hear from the phone are answers, and he wants to hear them from the highest authority in the land: the phone, he says, is "a dedicated line right to the White House." And when Mr. Beck gets things wrong, he wants his antagonists on Pennsylvania Avenue to correct him. But "They don't call. They're not going to call."

One of the specific answers Mr. Beck wanted, on one of the days I watched his program last week, had to do with White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, who has been caught on film quoting one of those Mao Zedong aphorisms that wouldn't look out of place on a motivational poster. She also remarked that Mao was one of her "favorite political philosophers," an honor the Chinese Communist shared with Mother Teresa.

Obviously Ms. Dunn was yet another person who deserved to be added to the long list of radicals that Mr. Beck had uncovered within the government.

What's more, no one would call that red phone to reassure Mr. Beck, to tell him that the Obama administration isn't crawling with traitors or to explain why his many nightmare scenarios will not actually come to pass....(Remainder.)


Rush Limbaugh and Joe Lieberman Sitting In A Tree (Audio)


Complete & Utter Moron, Beck Thinks He Changed CNN Because He "Proved He Wasn't a Hatemonger"


Reichsführer Beck Disgustingly Tries to Compare Health Care Reform & His 9/12 Klan Rally to 9/11!


Mentally Defective Beck Claims Federal Aid Causes People to "be Slaves"


Reichsführer Beck Thinks White House & Progressives Are Going to "Slaughter" People


In a Cavalcade of Chicanery, Batshit Crazy Beck & His "Attorney" Claims They Could "Win" Against "Anti-Free Market Maoist Radicals"


Clusterfox & Frauds Gives Certifiably Insane Bachmann a Forum for Her Bizarre "House Call" Protests


The Retarded Baby Jesus Plays With His Wee Little Hard-on Over Jeremiah Wright Video


Mike Huckabee Critized the Pig-Man Over "Man-Child" & Dover Comment & Hannity Poos His Pants


Droopy McDumbass Thinks Obama's Campaign Was Like China's Cultural Revolution


The Raving Oxy-Moron Continues to Fearmonger to His Zombie Listeners About H1N1 Vaccine & Obama


Fucktard O'Reilly Thinks NJ Gov Race is Really About Obama...60% of Voters Say Not So Much


Keith Olbermann Brilliantly Mocks Lyin' Sack of Crap John Fund for Manufacturing "Evidence" of Voter Fraud


Olbermann Destroys Beck: "Glenn, 9/12ers, if You Are Invoking 9/11 Just to Oppose HCR, GO TO HELL."


Oxy-Moron Whines Like the Infant He is to Complain that Media Isn't Mad at Castro for Criticizing Obama


President Obama: U.S. -European Union Summit


New CPR Ad Inadvertently Supports Democratic Health Care Reform

By Media Matters

Conservatives for Patients Rights has produced a new ad that encourages viewers to ask their elected officials three questions, saying a "no" response should inspire viewers to tell Congress to vote against health care reform.  However, since the answer to all three questions is "yes," CPR has inadvertently broadcast its support for Democratic health care proposals.

CPR Ad, "3 Questions":
"Before your congressmen and senators vote on overhauling health care, ask them three questions about a government-run, public option plan:

Woman 1: 'Does the plan guarantee I can keep my own doctor?'

Man: 'Does it guarantee I can keep the health insurance I have now?'

Woman 2: 'Does it guarantee that I won't face health care rationing?'

If Congress can't answer 'yes' to all three questions, tell them to vote 'no' on a public option plan.  Stop government-run health care. Now." [CPR Ad via
Politico, 11/2/09]
Answer To Question One: YES
CPR: "Does the plan guarantee I can keep my own doctor?" True Statement: "Nothing In This Plan Will Require You" To Change Doctors.  According to, President Obama "said that if you are [sic] 'already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.' That is true, there is nothing in the plan that proactively forces these kinds of changes, and the bills clearly intend to leave much of the current health care system in place. We rate Obama's statement True." [, 9/9/09, emphasis added]

Additionally, the legislation increases payments to Medicare doctors to ensure physicians are able to continue their care of patients....(Remainder.)


Virgina "So Fucked in the Head I Make Michele Bachmann Look Normal" Foxx Think Health Care is Worse than Terrorism

By Matt Finkelstein
Media Matters

Over the past year, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has earned a reputation for making outrageous statements on the floor of the House.  In late July, for example, Foxx suggested that the Democrats' health care plans would "put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government." Therefore, it may not come a surprise that Foxx has outdone herself yet again.

During a floor speech today, Foxx bluntly declared that the Affordable Health Care for America Act, which House Democrats unveiled last week, is a greater threat than any terrorist in the world:

FOXX: I believe that the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room -- this very room -- and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill.  I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.


Rep Steve King (R-Racistfuckistan) Talks About a 2012 Run

By Matt Finkelstein
Media Matters

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) raised some eyebrows recently when she said that she'd like to see Rep. Steve King (R-IA) run for president in 2012.

In the last few months, King has refused to vote for a bipartisan resolution acknowledging the role of slave labor in building the U.S. Capitol, bragged about opposing relief for Hurricane Katrina victims, stated that same-sex marriage is "a purely socialist concept," referred to hate crimes legislation as "the Pedophile Protection Act," and compared President Obama to Hitler.

And that's just since July.  Indeed, King often looks more interested in competing for the title of "Most Extreme Member of Congress" (in a friendly rivalry with Bachmann) than pursuing higher office.

But, when asked about a possible run in 2012, King did not rule it out.  In fact, he sounded an awful lot like someone who's thinking of running.  Although he did say he has "no plans to run for president," King stated that wants to be "engaged in this national debate" going forward.  Furthermore, he said that his roots in Iowa -- where the first primary caucuses are held -- give him a "platform to be able to articulate those arguments."
Well, it is flattering, and I am stunned ... My wife asked me about that.  She asked me, actually, last night, "Are you running for president?" I said, "Well, we don't talk much, do we?"  But here's what I'd like to do.  And that is, I want to be engaged in this national debate.  I want to lay out the parameters on what we need to do to refurbish the pillars of American exceptionalism.  We've got to have a vision, and it needs to be offered by more than one person, and I'd like to see a number of candidates articulate the vision, sort those visions, bring the best one forward.   We're going to need a lot of help in 2012.  And being in Iowa, from Iowa, representing Congress in a strong district in Iowa, gives me a platform to be able to articulate those arguments.  I intend to do that, and we'll what happens.  But I'm making no plans to run for president.  I didn't make any plans to run for Congress either.  So, I've long surpassed my personal aspirations and I just count it as a blessing to be able to engage in this debate.


Jon Krakauer: McChrystal's Explanation For Pat Tillman Cover-up Is 'Preposterous' 'Not Believable'

By Heather
Crooks and Liars

David Gregory talks to author Jon Krakauer about his new book 'Where Men Win Glory' and Gen. McChrystal's part in the cover up of Pat Tillman's death.
GREGORY: Jon Krakauer, I want to get to a key element of your book, "Where Men Win Glory," about Pat Tillman and how it relates to this current conversation about Afghanistan. Because it does involve General Stanley McChrystal, who was obviously critical on the stage now and was critical in the Tillman story of well. As a reminder, if you look at pictures of Pat Tillman, the NFL star with the Arizona Cardinals, decides to enlist in the Army, serves in the Rangers after 9/11. This was certainly a big story when he enlisted. And at the time, General McChrystal was actually head of Special Operations command.

So Pat Tillman was killed in a friendly fire incident and ultimately won the Silver Star, and that's what you focus on in the book and in a subsequent piece that you wrote for The Daily Beast. And here's what you wrote: "An October 5 Newsweek article [said, about General McChrystal] that `he has great political skills; he couldn't have risen to his current position without them.

But he definitelydoes not see himself as the sort of military man who would compromise his principles to do the politically convenient thing.' In the week after Tillman was killed, however, this is precisely what McChrystal appears to have done when he administered a fraudulent medical"--excuse me--"a fraudulent medal recommendation"--we're talking about the Silver Star--"and submitted it to the secretary of the Army, thereby concealing the cause of Tillman's death." Briefly explain what happened.

KRAKAUER: The--after Tillman died, the most important thing to know is that within--instantly, within 24 hours certainly, everybody on the ground, everyone intimately involved knew it was friendly fire. There's never any doubt it was friendly fire. McChrystal was told within 24 hours it was friendly fire. Also, immediately they started this paperwork to give Tillman a Silver Star....



Conservatard Media Fearmongers About H1N1 to Attack Health Care Reform

By Media Matters

Since President Obama declared the H1N1 pandemic a national emergency on October 24, conservative media figures have accused the Obama administration of attempting to, in the words of Rush Limbaugh, "create panic and chaos" in order to "sell health care." These charges ignore the prevalence of the disease, which, along with the consequent need to "enable U.S. health care facilities to implement emergency operations plans," were factors Obama specifically cited when he declared the national emergency....(Remainder.)


Professional Provaricator John Fund Flat-Out Lies & Manufactures "Evidence" of NJ Voter Fraud

By Media Matters

Appearing on Fox News' Glenn Beck, John Fund claimed that Hispanic voters in Camden, New Jersey, are being told that there is "a new way for you to vote, la nueva forma de votar" -- an anecdote Fund suggested was evidence of voter fraud in the state's 2009 gubernatorial election. In fact -- as Fund himself wrote in a Wall Street Journal column published hours earlier -- that incident actually occurred in Philadelphia in 1993....(Remainder.)


Matthew Hoh: There is No Winning in Afghanistan

By Heather
Crooks and Liars

Fareed Zakaria talks to former Foreign Service officer Matthew Hoh who recently resigned as a Political Officer in Afghanistan. You can watch the entire interview here.
ZAKARIA: Matthew Hoh is the young Foreign Service officer who resigned this week from his post in Afghanistan. He joins me now.

Matthew, I'm going to just start by reading a bit from your resignation letter. You say, "I fail to see the worth or value in continued U.S. casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is truly a 35-year-old civil war."

And then you go on to say, "Thousands of our men and women have returned home with physical and mental wounds. The dead return only in bodily form to be received by families who must be reassured that their dead have been sacrificed for a purpose worthy of such futures lost, love vanished and promised dreams unkept. I have lost confidence such assurances can any more be made. As such, I submit my resignation."

These are very strong words.

Give us some sense of what this insurgency that we are fighting looks like. What did you think people were fighting U.S. troops for?

MATTHEW HOH, FORMER MARINE CAPTAIN AND U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: The first place where I really had -- where this was codified for me and where I started to understand what we were doing and how we were involved -- the Korengal Valley, which I'm sure a lot of your viewers are familiar with. It's been on the cover of TIME Magazine. The "New York Times" refers to it as the valley of death. Off the top of my head, unfortunately, I can't remember how many American soldiers we have lost there, but it's probably 30 or 40....


Minute Man Founder Jim Gilchrist's Ties to Shawna Forde Were Close Right Up to Her Arrest for Murders

By David Neiwert
Crooks and Liars

A couple of weeks ago, when Harvard University withdrew its invitation to Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist to speak at a forum on immigration, Gilchrist could be heard whining that he was being unfairly smeared for his incendiary rhetoric.

Neil Cavuto, for instance, hosted Gilchrist on his Fox News show Oct. 16, and mostly blew sunshine up Gilchrist's butt, talking about how he was a war hero, and didn't those mean students know he had fought for their free-speech rights, blah blah blah. Then he added:
Cavuto: What the kids were saying in those pre-law classes was that you were going around, rounding up at the border illegal immigrants, was tantamount to, uh, physical abuse, some of them were saying. And that you were advocating violence. Now, I know that's not your schtick, or what you're saying, and it's a gross exaggeration of what you do -- that was the kids' position. What do you make of that?

Gilchrist: Ah, the kid is, obviously he's stupid. And if anyone should be banned and barred from Harvard University, it should be a student that stupid.
Somehow, that level of discourse is about the kind of reply we've come to expect from Jim Gilchrist. Because the problem isn't, as Cavuto put it, that Gilchrist is "advocating violence". Rather, as we've explained, the problem is that his rhetoric creates permission for violence, and his real-life activities help produce real-life violence -- including the murders of a 9-year-old girl and her father. That, as we reported, was the key reason for Harvard declining its invitation....(Remainder.)


Chris "Why Doesn't Daddy Want Me?" Wallace Lies About the Cost of House Health Bill

By Media Matters

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace stated that "the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says the real price tag [of the House health care reform bill] is $1.05 trillion." However, when accounting for the bill's savings and revenue provisions, the CBO analysis concluded that enacting the bill "would result in a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $104 billion" over 10 years.

Wallace: CBO "says the real price tag is $1.05 trillion"

Wallace reported only on CBO's estimate of bill's gross cost, rather than its net cost. Wallace stated of the bill: "Democrats say the total price tag is $894 billion -- that's under President Obama's ceiling. But the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says the real price tag is $1.05 trillion." Wallace also showed a graphic presenting cost estimates that exclude the bill's Medicare savings and high-income surcharge provisions:




All material is the copyright of the respective authors. The purveyor of this blog has made and attempt, whenever possible, to credit the appropriate copyright holder.

  © Blogger template Newspaper by 2008

Back to TOP