Archive for ‘liberal hypocrisy’

August 2, 2011

JONAH GOLDBERG TO MSM: “Go to Hell. All of you.”

GOLDBERG: “So flashforward to this week. Tom Friedman — who knows a bit about Hezbollah — calls the tea partiers the “Hezbollah faction” of the GOP bent on taking the country on a “suicide mission.” All over the place, conservative Republicans are “hostage takers” and “terrorists,” “terrorists” and “traitors.” They want to “end life as we know it on this planet,” says Nancy Pelosi. They are betraying the Founders, too. Chris Matthews all but signs up for the “Make an Ass of Yourself” contest at the State Fair. Joe Nocera writes today that “the Tea Party Republicans can put aside their suicide vests.” Lord knows what Krugman and Olbermann have said.

Then last night, on the very day Gabby Giffords heroically returns to cast her first vote since that tragic attack seven months ago, the vice president of the United States calls the Republican party a bunch of terrorists.

[Read more of Jonah Goldberg’s “To Hell with You People ” at the National Review Online].

July 26, 2011

Hey Lefty-Progressives, ask yourself the following: “So, why should I trust Ed Schultz or Lawrence O’Donnell or Rachel Maddow when they say the unions are good and the corporations are bad if they are taking million dollar paychecks from a corporation for saying it?”

ZURAWICK: “MSNBC is built on a lie, and it’s one that the cable channel is never going to be able escape as long as sticks to its leftist ideological guns.

That’s what I kept thinking as I watched Keith Olbermann’s strange, coded, wink-wink interview with Cenk Uygur last week on the new version of “Countdown.” (That’s the nightly show that is doing so well that Olbermann and Current TV  have not released any ratings since the first week of July — and those showed a 30 percent drop for Olbermann from his premiere week.)

You can see a video of the interview here, but there is not enough time left in my life to try and explain all the innuendo and nutsiness going back and forth between these two former MSNBC employes. In the video, Uygur once again lays out his paranoid charges that the political powers that be in Washington (read: White House) essentially called in his boss at MSNBC and told him to tone Uygur down.

[Read Dave Zurawick’s “Uygur, Olbermann and the sad, lost children of MSNBC ” at The Baltimore Sun]

July 26, 2011

REASON: Barton Hinkle on the MSM’s Tea Party coverage Double Standard

HINKLE: “...those opposed to raising the debt ceiling—or willing to do so in exchange for a slowdown in the rate of government growth—are “obstreperous,” “flatly and dangerously wrong,” and “not interested in governing.” (These are all quotes from major media organs, not obscure blogs.) They’re “crazy” proponents of a “dangerous delusion”—”ridiculous,” “extremist,” “ultraorthodox tax haters,” players of “ideological games,” “totally unrealistic,” authors of “madness,” etc. etc. Hey, what happened to people of conviction? Aren’t the Tea Partiers “firebrands”? Isn’t there little doubt where their hearts lie? Rather than praise Tea Partiers as passionate advocates for their beliefs, many in the press have taken to marginalizing them with mean-spirited attacks on their sanity.

At this point it might be useful to clarify precisely what the dispute concerns. The question is not whether the federal government should grow. As Reason’s Nick Gillespie pointed out a few days ago, nearly nobody in Washington has actually proposed shrinking the leviathan. To the contrary, the dispute is whether to raise federal spending from the current $3.8 trillion to $4.7 trillion over the next decade (the Paul Ryan plan)—or to $5.7 trillion (the Obama plan).
Bear in mind that those increases would come on top of one of the fastest expansions of federal spending in U.S. history. When President Obama took office, the budget stood at $2.9 trillion. Two. Point. Nine. Spending has risen 30 percent in the past three years.

[Read Barton Hinkle’s “Is the Tea Party Crazy or Just Nuts?” at]

July 3, 2011


More and more I get the feeling that the national media’s understanding of American history is based entirely on some mythic and superficial elementary school frame of reference, completely absence of detail, nuance, and understanding.

If Sarah Palin, for example, said, ‘Well, of course, as we know, George Washington didn’t actually cut down a cherry tree. That was an invented anecdote. ‘The front page headline would be: “Palin Doesn’t Know Her History (Again!): Claims Washington Cutting Down Cherry Tree is a Myth”. MSNBC would run the story all day: How Can Palin Be Trusted to Lead Our Country When She Doesn’t Even Know Basic Stuff Like George Washington Cutting Down the Cherry Tree. Bill Maher’s HBO show: “Can you believe this woman? Read a book!” he’d yell. “She doesn’t even know basic history that all elementary school kids know!”

On and on and on…

Point being, there’s a disconnect between the people who bother to read a book or recite history that they’ve learned — information that may not be so known to the public at large — and the mainstream press who seem to rely on a very shallow kindergarten-like knowledge base. It’s tiresome to do these stories where we find out a week later, Oh, hey! Palin/Bachmann was actually kind of right and if we’d bothered to read a book, we’d know this (and now we’re going to sit here with our tail between our legs and not even bother to give them credit! We’re just going to continue maligning these women, pushing the narrative that the conservative female is a flaky ditz, and not even bother passing a critical eye at our own Captain Awesome at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.)

In other words, Palin and Bachmann are being punished because many Americans — including the one’s with nightly news shows — have gone through the U.S. public education system. Palin and Bachmann are getting flogged by people who are probably unaware of what the federalist papers are. Yet these are the same people who rip on Palin and Bachmann for not knowing their history.

From the Washington Times a compilation of quotes on what the founders thought of slavery at the time:

“There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it.”

George Washington, letter to Robert Morris, April 12, 1786

“Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States. … I have, throughout my whole life, held the practice of slavery in … abhorrence.”

John Adams, letter to Robert Evans, June 8, 1819

“It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”

John Jay, letter to R. Lushington, March 15, 1786

“I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be offered to abolish this lamentable evil.”

Patrick Henry, letter to Robert Pleasants, Jan. 18, 1773

[Please READ MORE of “Bachman was right” at the Washington Times]

July 2, 2011

RED EYE FLASHBACK: Olbermann Gets Reamed by Coulter on Keith’s Claim He Went to Cornell

July 2, 2011

RED EYE FLASHBACK: Red Eye Crew Rips Garofalo and Olbermann

June 29, 2011

COULTER: “Liberals are not like most Americans. They are the biggest pussies on Earth, city-bred weaklings who didn’t play a sport and have never been in a fight in their entire lives. Their mothers made excuses for them when they threw tantrums and spent way too much time praising them during toilet training.”

Coulter: “I could draw a mug shot of every one of Beck’s tormentors, and I wasn’t there.

Beck and his family would have been fine at an outdoor rap concert. They would have been fine at a sporting event. They would have been fine at any paid event, mostly because people who work for the government and live in rent-controlled apartments would be too cheap to attend.

Only a sad leftist with a crappy job could be so brimming with self-righteousness to harangue a complete stranger in public.

A liberal’s idea of being a bad-ass is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can’t afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger’s face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall.

They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people’s manners. I know I’ll be safe because this person has better manners than I do.

But they’re not even embarrassed. To the contrary, being part of the majority makes liberals feel great! Honey, wasn’t I amazing? I stood in a crowd of liberals and called that conservative a c**t. Wasn’t I awesome?

This is a liberal’s idea of raw physical courage.

[READ Ann Coulter’s “Glenn Beck vs The Mob” at]

Some more examples of lefty hoodlums: David Kernell and Maurice Schwenkler

And of course Lindsey Piscitell:

June 29, 2011


[To get the full story check out]

Lindsey Piscitell is a twenty-something New Yorker/San Franciscan/Nomad who likes to think of herself as a member of the creative underclass. In between panic attacks and espresso-fueled internet benders she likes to write short stories and also sometimes poetry.”

Anyone who describes herself as a member of the creative underclass is conveying the following:

‘I write short stories, aka pieces, and my work is unknown because I’m unskilled at it. I’m unskilled at it, but I insist on doing it and branding myself as a writer because it makes me feel relevant. In the meantime I write for a zine!’

The truth is “creative underclass” means something far simpler:  unemployed and unemployable hippie losers with no working skills to speak of, and no redeeming social value (i.e. are completely useless in a capitalist society) whatsoever. We sit around and write amateurish stories and poetry all day that no one will ever read. We submit our stories for short story contests, some of them get published by random nobodies (we’re still unpublished) and it makes us happy.

I’m not a regular Glenn Beck follower. I don’t have strong feelings about the man one way or the other. I don’t love him. I don’t hate him. But I certainly can’t stand rude assholes like Lindsey Piscitell who violate personal space. I can’t stand deranged toolbags who feel the need to be obnoxious New Yorkers in front of a man who is simply trying to enjoy an evening with his family. When you’re out with your wife and daughter in NYC you are as vulnerable as you can be because you’re trying to protect the only two people who mean the world to you. Your only purpose in life at that moment is to completely protect them from harm. And some asshole like Piscitell has to be a total bitch (sorry, there’s no other word) while the man is minding his own business and not bothering anyone. You throw wine on his wife — what is the best way for him to defend his family right at that moment? Tell me. How is he supposed to respond? The man has been on his Gandhi ‘turn the other cheek’ kick for a year. What’s he going to do? Respond to Piscitell? Chew her out? Move to another part of the park (give Piscitell that satisfaction?) My gawd, the man is with his daughter. Can’t you pick another time to be a total asshole??

Here’s Piscitell’s tweet:

dANGLINGbABY‎: Fucking #asshole @glenbeck is siting next to me at Bryant park movie night #getthefuckoutofmycity [pic]

Oh! So it’s your city now?? Manhattan was built off the backs, not of the “creative underclass”, but off the sweat and ingenuity of people Ms. Piscatell would take issue with: those evil, corporatist fat-cats with their big wallets, their clever ideas that allow people to get employed, and their tendency to throw their money and invest all over the City. Entrepreneurs, capitalists, ya know, people who dig money. People like Beck who apparently has done quite well for himself with his radio career. He wants to watch The 39 Steps with his kid, and this asshat Piscitell is just so offended that a Republican or conservative would show up to watch an Alfred Hitchcock film; as if true art only belongs to the cultured elites of the creative underclass and you’re repulsed that a know-nothing Neanderthal like Beck would show up (oh lord, he might share your taste in film and art. god forbid!) You’re so emotionally disturbed that you can’t get over yourself for a couple of hours??

This is what these people do, right? They have no real use in society. They bitch and moan. They’re frustrated with their lives. Persistently unhappy. Their writing doesn’t get published by a major publishing house (writing being the one field they feel they’re exceptional at). They suspect they’ve been giant disappointments to their parents who’ve been supporting them financially for years. Ya know, liberals.

So Piscitell claims that spilling wine on Beck’s wife was a “happy accident” (‘happy’? really? keep it class, asshole). But then there’s this tweet from Piscitell’s friend, Marissa Barker, in response to Pisc’s tweet about Beck:

Yes… “accidentally”. What a gem this one is. Her parents must be ever so proud.

More on Piscitell:

Lindsey Piscitell

Marketing & Media Strategist

Greater New York City Area 
Marketing and Advertising
  • Marketing and Media Manager at
  • East Coast Marketing Manager at Genesis Today, Inc.
  • Field Marketing Manager Northeast at Mix1 Beverage Company
  • New York City Marketing Coordinator at IZZE Beverage Company (Division of PEPSICO)
    • Team Manager/ Research Assistant, Dept. Of Sociology atNew York University
    • Intern at WCBS News Radio 880
    • Law Intern at Dechert LLP
    • Part Time Administrative Assistant at DAMG Worldwide
  • New York University

A marketing and media strategist? Haha…okay, sure. Is there another more completely useless and uninformative job title in Manhattan? Basically you’re unemployed because you’re a loser. Another NYU genius.

Here are some more pics of Piscitell. She’s a peach, ain’t she. Lil’ miss “creative underclass”.

Here’s what Piscitell looks like mid-sentence as she’s harassing regular, hard-working people who have as much right to hang out in Bryant Park and watch classy movies as she does:

Here’s Piscitell on the left in all her toothy glory:

Piscitelli is the reason NYC went from being one of the awesome cities in the world to being one of those cities with a bunch of rude, obnoxious assholes. Thanks, Piscitell. You can’t leave people be? You can’t let a man enjoy a picturesque evening in Bryant Park? You have to be the rude, obnoxious New Yorker? You’re not even from New York, asshole. You’re a regular loser, leach, twat who contributes NOTHING to the city, but you take it upon yourself to throw wine on some woman you don’t even know. Classy.

If you wish to tell Ms. Piscitell your feelings personally, by all means: or (thanks, d)

[Whether or not I agree with Glenn Beck on particular issues, I’d like to offer my sincerest apologies to Mr. Beck, his wife, and his daughter. It’s a shame they had to be exposed to Lindsey Piscitell. I feel bad your wife was essentially assaulted, and it saddens me that your daughter had to come face to face with the realities of people like Piscitell and their deranged version of civil and tolerant behavior.]

Make sure to check out a Poetry Reading of one of Piscitell’s poems.

June 18, 2011


In Bill Keller’s little excuse for a blog, otherwise known as a New York Times op-ed, the former editor gives one of the sadder and more pathetic missives you’ll ever read in the world of pseudo-journalism. And when I say sad and pathetic, I mean that genuinely. This is a defeated man crying uncle because little, uneducated Sarah Palin — nemesis to all intellectuals and faculty academics — has checkmated him and his staff of credentialed dunces once too often.

If the 2012 election were held in the newsrooms of America and pitted Sarah Palin against Barack Obama, I doubt Palin would get 10 percent of the vote.

Seeing as how she likely would get anywhere from 30-40+% (at worst) in an actual election matchup against Obama, what does that say about the state of the current newsroom in America?

The evidence of Palin’s scorn for what she calls the lamestream media is abundant, but I was struck by the gratuitous quality of one remark she tossed off during that Rolling Thunder rally in Washington the Sunday before Memorial Day. When an NPR reporter asked what had brought her to the event, she replied, “It is our vets who we owe our freedom — not the politician, not the reporter — it is our vets, so that’s why we’re here.”

There is, I suppose, a gracious way to translate her comments. She might have meant to convey something along the lines of: “I’m sincerely humbled by the sacrifice our veterans have made to defend the freedoms I enjoy in my capacity as a politician and Fox News media pundit.” But I think we all know she meant nothing of the kind.

No, actually we don’t know that. And this is part of the problem with Lefty Liberal Whackadoos covering conservatives and libertarians. It’s a little thing from college undergrad called deconstructionism. Sometimes when normal, everyday Americans speaketh, they literally mean exactly what they say. I know, I know: you, Bill Keller, don’t give two caffe latte’s about U.S. veterans or the military. You despise them. We get it. And you think all human beings couldn’t possibly be serious when they praise the military. They’re just giving lip-service according to your world view. When she said that politicians and reporters were not directly responsible for our freedoms in the direct hands-on way that the U.S. military is, it was not an indictment of pols or the stenographers who report on the pols. But of course everything is about you, isn’t it Bill?

“I’ll let the politicians stick up for themselves; I do hope they’ll ask if her contempt applies to the politicians who wrote that Constitution our worthy veterans swore to defend.

Now you’re just not even making any damn sense. You seriously need an editor to go over this stuff. Where in Palin’s statement do you find an enmity toward politicians? What are you even talking about, Billy-boy? Are you writing this from Jerry Maguire’s hotel room, under the blankets??

But I do not think Palin intended her remark simply as a cheap applause line; after all, at that moment she was not pandering from a Tea Party stage but speaking to an audience of NPR listeners, who I’m pretty sure have a less malign view of the press. No, her remark was automatic, like acid reflux.

Automatic like acid reflux? That doesn’t even make any sense.What you meant to say is, “No, her remark was automatic, like the Babinski reflex.” Or “No, her remark was automatic, like a facial tic.” Those responses, on top of making intuitive sense, are also medically consistent with your point. Acid reflux is not automatic per se. There’s a chronic wear and tear process on the gastro-esophageal junction that allows acid to leak back up into the esophagus.  I’m guessing somehow you’re confusing reflux with reflexive? Is that what you’re going for?? You know, Bill, I have a lot of respect for what you attempt to do at your job. But, for an educated, elite Pomona grad: you’re kind of a fuckin’ moron. And, I mean that respectfully.

So, Mr. Keller goes on and on about Palin’s disdain for the media. Is this really worthy of the op-ed column of a once proud newspaper? Politicians having an adversarial relationship with the people who cover them ( at 11)? No one really cares about the New York Times not getting along with Sarah Palin. But the timing is unusual coming a couple of weeks after Palin’s Memorial Day media blitz when she completely pwned, used n’ abused, and played the mainstream press. Keller even acknowledges this (underline and bold added for emphasis): “The press, I think, returns her antipathy in part because she makes us feel ridiculous.

And I suspect the media embarrassment Keller and the entire MSM feel is what this entire silly and sad op-ed is truly about: Sarah Palin kicked our ass, wah! wah! wah! I can only imagine, in the weeks after Palin’s bus tours and Harley rides when she made the MSM grab their ankles and touch toes, Keller was cornered at Upper West Side dinner parties and confronted by haughty members of his crusty peer group: Sarah Palin made us look like fools, how could you let this happen, Bill? Your newspaper in particular has single-handedly done more to make Palin look sympathetic (and our liberal cause look pathetic) than anything else! Even Demi and Ashton are mad at you guys for pilfering through her emails!!

Plenty of others have endured the pain of mainstream-media excoriation but have remained civil and responsive.

This comment reveals Keller’s inability to grasp the current political climate and the role his paper plays (or, truly, does not play in it). No one needs the New York Times’ seal of approval to do anything in the news. Sarah Palin, and no Republican for that matter, doesn’t need an endorsement from the Editorial staff at the Times to defeat Obama. Palin, by my mind, has not been uncivil. She has been quite effectively mocking, playing with, and teasing the press. Within the swath of America, outside of the tiny isle of Manhattan, there are those who share Palin’s bewilderment and contempt at the state of news reporting and journalism; particularly at those who make no effort to report two sides of a story and allow their own personal biases and political affections to seep into their coverage. Palin has been very responsive to people who want to hear from her. Apparently, just not to the New York Times, and that’s fine by the rest of us. We canceled our subscriptions years ago, and we no longer even bother sneaking a peak at the stray copies on the floor of our local coffee shops. Hey, Bill, Palin doesn’t owe you a damn thing.

“Perhaps one key to Palin’s dislike of the news media is a streak of intellectual insecurity, or a trace of impostor syndrome.

Why say ‘perhaps’? Why not just say what you really mean: “I think Palin’s dislike of the news media is due in part to her lack of intelligence.” I don’t see your paper investigating the intellectual bankruptcy that is one Barack Obama, Jr. 57 states? Profits to earnings ratio? Cinco de quatro? Corpse-men? Giving asthmatics breathalyzers? Physicans needlessly taking out tonsils to scratch out a payroll?  Shovel-ready not so shovel-ready? And where are Barry’s legendary and stellar transcripts? He’s so well-educated, like the NYU woman on the Metro North, he doesn’t need to show his immaculate transcripts, right? Tell me again, Billy, about intellectual insecurity and a trace of the impostor syndrome.

“A few months ago I was startled to hear my 13-year-old daughter, who has a Hillary Clinton campaign sticker on her bedroom door, say she thought Palin was “cool.” I wondered if this was just a burst of teenage contrarianism. It turned out Molly’s sympathy had nothing to do with politics or feminism.”

Yes, yes. Because 13-year olds are so obsessed with politics and feminism, Bill. And why would it be contrarianism? Unless you’re preaching to your daughter that Palin is uncool, and she’s rebelling against you. Smart kid.

“It was simply that in watching “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” on TLC, my empathetic daughter had perceived a woman happily, spiritually at home. She suspected the Palin family would be miserable in the shark tank of national politics. ”

Bill, are you embarrassed that your daughter empathizes with Sarah Palin? Be honest.  (By the way, if you’ve seen Palin’s show, do you really have the impression that she’d be miserable in a shark tank?)

I thought of my daughter’s remark as I followed coverage of Palin’s bizarre noncampaign campaign bus tour, featuring Greta van Susteren as a sidekick in a sort of Sisterhood of the Traveling Palins.

Sisterhood of the Traveling Palins? Ahhh, I get it Bill. Because they’re both women and they’re gabbing, gossiping, and doing whatever it is that women do when they’re bonding. Great observation! With regards to Palin’s media blitz Keller concluded, “…on the whole it felt like an excruciating, fish-out-of-water sequel to her earlier reality show. ” You watch quite a bit of Fox News there, Billy. You intuit really peculiar things, because by my eye it looked like Palin was having  a blast. Perhaps you wished Palin felt more like a fish out of water so you could bully her and ostracize her out of politics. Every journalist’s wet dream is to satiate their Palin derangement syndrome by reenacting the opening gym shower scene from Carrie.

The most surreal moment in this odd cavalcade was 10-year-old Piper Palin scolding a Time magazine photographer, “Thanks for ruining our vacation.” That was the sound of a kid lashing out at her mom’s new live-in boyfriend.

How is that surreal? There’s nothing the least bit surreal about that. Surreal would be if Piper appeared in a mime costume in full make up and released a dove from her hands. That would be surreal, Bill! A 10-year old girl trying to protect her mom from reporters who are always trying to rag on her family is pretty normal well-adjusted behavior. What’s with this “live-in boyfriend” analogy?? Why you gotta’ go there, Bill? Something you want to get off your chest? I swear, between this and the acid reflux, you come up with the worst and the weakest metaphors. (Might I recommend the Gotham Writer’s Network? They could seriously help you with your writing.)

Palin can’t ignore us. ” Uhh, I’m pretty sure she does.

Or was that supposed to read more like, “PALIN CAN’T IGNORE US, DAMMIT!”? More along the lines of Glenn Close’s “I won’t be ignored, Dan!” from Fatal Attraction?

But if she does have ambitions for higher office…” Is that what this is all about Bill? Are you still worried Palin is going to be your President come January 2013 and you and half of Manhattan will have to make good on your promise to move to Canada? Perhaps I’m not reading her correctly, but I’m not really sure she does have those kinds of ambitions. I know you have no idea what she’s thinking. So why are you even fretting about something that hasn’t even happened yet? Let me try using one of your analogies: it’s like, she’s this hot girl who is completely of out your league and isn’t the least bit interested in your scrawny ass, and so there’s no point in you writing a long, long (long!) letter to pre-emptively break up with her, because, at this point, she still doesn’t even acknowledge your existence. Get it?

We can’t ignore her, either. ” If you really despise this woman as much as you do, then I believe, Bill Keller, that you can do anything you set your mind to. Example, I can’t stand the Kardashians. When I channel-surf, I don’t linger on the E! channel for hours at a time, watching and obsessing over the Kardashian show, and thinking about how much I hate the Kardashians. I just flip to the next channel. It’s called being a well-adjusted emotionally healthy adult, Bill. Try it out sometimes. It’s never too late.

The fact is, reporters want as badly as anyone else to see the country led by someone who inspires confidence. ”

As long as that leader is a nanny-government statist who believes in trillions of dollars in debt, massive government spending on useless social programs and entitlements that we can’t afford, and he must hate capitalism above all else. (I’m curious: three years on, does Barry still inspire confidence in you? And aren’t you a little sick and tired of constantly needing to be inspired by other people? Isn’t that old?)

But watching Palin answer a question is like watching a runaway train struggling to stay on the rails, and fact-checking her is like fishing with dynamite.

I must confess, Bill, I’m actually wondering if you have any real experience with these things (i.e. runaway trains, fishing). It’s just that you’re so, what’s the word…full of shit. I can’t take anything you say seriously.

I think a lot of journalists, regardless of their politics, find her confounding and a little frightening.” This is like that ‘some people say…’ trope. Billy: grow a pair and take ownership of your opinions. Say: “I find Palin confounding and frightening.”

Evidently, so do most Americans; only 21 percent of voters have a favorable impression of her in the latest CBS poll. ” Do I really have to point out to you that a low favorable rating is not the same as finding her ‘confounding’ and ‘frightening’. That’s a leap on your part.

So what was the real point of Bill Keller’s serious-minded critique of Palin? It sounded more like a mercy plea. Palin is ignoring us and we’re going to try and bully her into paying attention to us by making the New York Times seem like the helpless victim. Keller’s op-ed is more like cat-calling from a guy who thinks he’s a player, “HEYY, LAYYY-DEEEE! I see you ignoring me. Think you’re better than me? That’s cold, girl. Gonna’ just ignore me like that? Who you think you are? You can’t ignore me! (Do you know how well educated I am??)

Bill, I’m going to tell you what I’d tell any guy at a club in a similar predicament: “Dude, that chick is making you look the fool. She’s not interested in you. You’re not all that. Let it go.”

June 5, 2011


What to say about Kasie Hunt? Kasie Hunt is the genius behind the Politico piece “Sarah Palin’s Tour a Rolling Menace”. On Kacie’s personal website she makes a point of itemizing a few things that won’t be found: “political opinion, an ideological point of view or any activity that could pose a conflict of interest for POLITICO.” She adds,  “Posting an article from the opinion pages of a nonpartisan news site or a story from a partisan media outlet doesn’t constitute an endorsement.” So once again we have a person claiming to be an objective and professional journalist, but as we’ll show she’s anything but. She’s a typical Liberal Hack.

Here are some of the gems from Kasie’s Politico propaganda piece.

Kasie first says, “Journalists in the caravan trailing her “One Nation” tour bus describe the experience as harrowing..” No quote? We’re supposed to take Kasie at her word that journalists are describing their experience as harrowing. Not even an anonymous quote? Is this one journalist only or the plurality? Is it merely the feelings being expressed by one Kacie Hunt? Are we to assume that all the journalists feel that way?

Kasie then writes: “Palin’s two-SUV caravan traveled at 52 miles per hour in a 35 mph zone as it peeled away from the hosts’ neighborhood. Both cars blew through a stop sign about a mile later. They did 70 mph in a 55 mph zone on I-95 — and then, after they got off, without signaling, flew right past a flashing sign informing them they were going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone.”

While 52 in a 35 seems a bit much, 70 in a 55 on I-95 does not seem like the craziest speeding ever. And 45 in a 35? You’re going to bust her for that?

Without signaling? Seriously? Part of my problem is, how do I even believe you? You want me to take your word for it? That all these things happened just as you said? Is your credibility unimpeachable? There isn’t anything within your driving journal that sounds so outlandish. In fact, it sounds like you’re stretching, Kasie.

Then Kasie writes, “And that was after they had already stormed the major cities — and just missed driving through a tornado on the road into Boston.”

I noticed that Kasie Hunt, on top of considering herself a reporter, also has delusions that she’s a writer. And with the above line you can now see why. Hunt combined “stormed” with “just missed driving through a tornado”, in addition to the title of the piece “rolling menace”. What’s next Kasie? References to Palin as the Tasmanian devil?

Kasie adds this little anecdote: “On Tuesday, the bus nearly hit a biker turning off of Pine Street in Philadelphia.” Really Kasie? Nearly hit a biker? A large bus was making a turn on a narrow street and nearly hit a biker? What constitutes “nearly”? Is that like the time you nearly convinced me you were an objective journalist? Because, honestly, it really wasn’t that close. Pics or it didn’t happen Kasie. What surprises the hell out of me is that intrepid reporter, Kasie Hunt, having witnessed all these traffic violations, didn’t see fit to whip out her cell phone and take pics or even a video? As it is, most of us are left with the bitter aftertaste of dealing with a reporter who sounds completely full of shit. Which is par for the course for liberal hacks pretending to be objective reporters.

Hunt continues: “the bus ran at least two red lights racing up Sixth Avenue and through Columbus Circle in Midtown Manhattan.” Now I actually lived in Midtown Manhattan and spent a good bit of time around Columbus Circle. Newsflash, Kasie: IT’S MANHATTAN! And what’s this ‘at least two red lights’ garbage? Did you lose count or something? Were you distracted because colleague, Jim VandeHei, was texting his crotch-shots again? I’m surprised Kasie didn’t keep track of the number of times Palin’s bus slammed on the gas when the light turned yellow!

There’s more from Kasie: “…the trailing car in the entourage ran two red lights after the bus barely made it through the yellow, as did the media caravan, leaving behind a traffic jam for the locals.” Barely made it through a yellow??? Have you ever driven a car in your life, Kasie? What the hell?! How does one barely make it through a yellow? What does that even mean? (What’s bizarre is how detached Kasie’s driving snitchery is from the realities of day-to-day driving). You know, when you’re in the middle of an intersection on a yellow (or even a red), you’re allowed to make your turn. And leaving behind a traffic jam? That’s Palin’s fault too? As if she dropped an atom bomb, and left Hiroshima in her wake. Why stop there? Why not pin the start of World War I on her too? (Forget the Archduke Ferdinand, it was Sarah Palin and her bus that prompted it all). By the way, Kasie, I can’t wait to see your upcoming features on Obama’s motorcade clogging up traffic in Los Angeles (or the next time he’s in midtown Manhattan on date-night with Michelle). Is this really how Kasie Hunt wants to make a name for herself? Kasie Hunt: Traffic Snitch!

Finally: “The reporters who are speeding, tailgating, cutting off other cars, blasting through roundabouts and passing on the right in an effort to keep up, say they have no other choice since they never know what Palin’s up to or where she’s headed..” Well, considering you’re following a woman who is, at this point, a private citizen and NOT a presidential candidate, reporters are under no real obligation to do any of these things. Especially for a woman who they despise so much. So why are they so obsessed with following a private citizen they loathe anywhere? For finding the one error that will make sure she’s never able to be President of this country. Palin derangement syndrome.

What makes Kasie Hunt dishonest is the attempt to conflate the driving habits of the bus driver(s) with Sarah Palin. As if Sarah Palin was actually driving the bus herself or the driver was given orders directly from Sarah Palin on how to drive (presumably to screw with the reporters following her) and this reflects on Palin as a presidential contender (i.e. that she’s a reckless loose cannon). In short, reporters will draw no inferences from Obama sitting in Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s pews all those years (and how it might reflect on his leftist whackadoo ideology), but intrepid Liberal Hack reporter, Kasie Hunt, has no problem inferring that, because Sarah Palin drove in a bus that went over the speed limit, we can draw the conclusion that Palin is unfit to be President. Seriously Kasie? Is this how you’ve decided to put your masters in sociology to good work? Chronicling the driving habits of bus drivers? Hit pieces on women who aren’t spectators but actual participants in the world?

How many times has a Joe Biden motorcade been involved, not just in an accident with a bystander (1? 2? 3?), but in an accident that led to someone’s death? In each instance the reporters don’t personalize Biden’s involvement in the motorcade, except to say that his security detail or motorcade was involved in an accident. There’s no great sermonizing about the hazards of the Biden motorcade or the hardships endured by reporters.

What do you want to bet that Candidate Obama may have been inside a speeding vehicle that raced past a red light at some point in 2008? Would you have reported it, Kasie? I hope not, because it’s not newsworthy.

To be clear, criticizing Palin is not the problem. There are a million and one things to go after, but if you’re critiquing her drivers then you’re basically telling the world you’ve got nothing. When you’re carefully gauging your speedometer and using that to indict a person, it tells the world that you’re a sleaze, and most people, myself included, would be trying to speed away from you too. Because, on top of being a Liberal Whackadoo pretending to be a Journalist/Reporter, you’re also a Five-Star creep. And now wherever you go, whatever you do the rest of your career, this POLITICO article will follow you. Kasie Hunt has no credibility as a reporter or objective, fair-minded journalist.