BREAKING NEWS: Repubs grasp at straws, Kos may be a hypocrite.

And when I say "BREAKING NEWS" that actually means "the same ol' s**t as always".

First off, the Michelle Malkin's of the world have a huge hard-on (or female equivalent) for Daily Kos and all their related activities. They have a burning desire to find ANYTHING that they can criticize. It's really a mark of insanity if you ask me. Take for example, this years YearlyKos. In a desperate grasp, they focus on a video of a serviceman in uniform, trying to play politics [via American Prospect]:

As the Military and Progressives panel came to an end, a young man in uniform stood up to argue that the surge was working, and cutting down on Iraqi casualties. The moderator largely freaked out. When other members of the panel tried to answer his question, he demanded they “stand down.” He demanded the questioner give his name, the name of his commander, and the name of his unit.

Here's the video. And the geniuses at Little Green Footballs had this to say:

I’m not familiar with the exact regulations on this, but for the sake of argument let’s say that it was against the rules for a uniformed soldier to ask a question.

When did it become the duty of a YearlyKos panel moderator to enforce Army regulations?

So the grasping idiot spoke too soon, because apparently is WAS the moderators duty. Since he's still a Captain in the Reserves, he has the obligation to uphold military regulations... even at the Yearly Kos.

So, now, I await Mr. Kos's response to the whole situation. Because, in order to be consistent, he'll need to call the moderator an "idiot" and "un-American":

So they'll prosecute me if I wear my Army uniforms to an anti-war protest? Really?
[...]

He has every right enshrined under the Constitution, including those of free speech and peaceful assembly.

And anyone that thinks otherwise, quite frankly, is legitimately and objectively un-American.

How much you wanna bet that Kos either doesn't say ANYTHING about the incident, or tries to parse it in a way that justifies his hypocrisy?

O'Reilly and the Daily Kos really need to get a room.

Actually, this post is about John Aravosis at AmericaBlog, so maybe they should ALL get a room and have their gay threeway behind closed-doors.

In the latest chapter of Dumb vs. Dumber, Aravosis takes an isolated statement from O'Reilly's forum and uses it out of context:

"Maybe it's time to burn down the capitol building like Hitler did with the Reichstag building."

And how do jetBlue and Home Depot, big supporters of O'Reilly, feel about launching a terrorist attack against the US Capitol that would assassinate all 535 members of the US Congress?

The full quote is in response to that whole Keith Ellison thing where he compared Bush to Hitler. And the statement was meant to show how absurd the notion of comparing anyone to Hitler is. It's quite possible Aravosis realizes this, and is just playing a stupid, stupid game... but I'm not yet ready to give him too much credit.

Oh Really? O'Reilly.

Should I feel ashamed for laughing at simple-minded people acting like total a**holes? No? Well then, I don't feel guilty watching Bill O'Reilly and Daily Kossians bitch-slap each other like anorexic supermodels in a catfight over the last bit of crank. It's almost funnier than the last Larry The Cable Guy movie... which was about as funny as cancer.

First, we see that Bill O'Reilly doesn't like the Daily Kos, and calls it a "hate site", and yada yada I'm bored just typing this:

Earlier this week, we confronted JetBlue CEO Dave Barger about his airline sponsoring a conference held by the hate-filled website the Daily Kos. That far-left concern routinely posts vile thoughts such as [White house press secretary] Tony Snow should die from cancer, the pope is a primate, and Israel deserves to be attacked.

The hate this website traffics in rivals the KKK and Nazi websites.

I think most people agree that O'Reilly is a blowhard. Also, he's either a straight-up liar (and obfuscates the truth intentionally) or just really, really stupid and misinformed. As far as I'm concerned that's where the discussion of O'Reilly ends. Of course, the 12-year-olds at the Daily Kos aren't able to let things be...

So Kos Front Pagers are going after Bill O'Reilley's web site (over, and over, and over) in a grand cyber-gesture of "nyah, nyah, nyah":

Shocking, but true. Bill O'Reilly advocates the violent overthrow of our government, believes that a former President of the United States is planning a murder, feels that a sitting Senator is unfit for any office because he is a fake Christian, and that millions of Americans are members of a party of death. It must be true, because after all, it was posted at his website.

Ok buddy, put down the Red Bull and whatever Noam Chomsky book you're pretending to read, and listen closely: O'Reilly NEVER said that Kos himself actually HOLDS the beliefs of the people on the website.

Plus, any sane person can look at the Daily Kos for 5 seconds and find some very unhinged Lefties. If O'Reilly were smart enough to make a point, I think it would be that the Daily Kos site attracts crazy pinkos in greater numbers than most websites. No, not EVERYONE on the site is a nut... but it's not too difficult to find them. Just look at the response to O'Reilly.

And now, this "grasping for 15 more minutes of fame" blogger takes a silly comment and wastes my tax dollars having the Secret Service investigate it:

Here is the comment on O'Reilly's blog that crossed the line:

If Hillary wins, I will be respectful of our leader. If you could read my thoughts, I would be on the SS [Secret Service] watch list.


So, I did what a responsible person should do when they see something like this on a blog. I called the Secret Service to report it. This comment isn't about politics or defaming Senator Clinton. It outright states a threat to her life. It is unacceptable.

I think English must be this guy's second language, because he really doesn't know what "outright states" means. Using a fictional example, if I were to post "I want to kill Tony Soprano" that would be outright stating a threat to his life. However, if I post "I will respectfully follow all of Tony Sopranos orders, but if you could read my mind I'd be wearing cement shoes"... that's NOT an outright threat on his life.

In the Clinton case, how do you know that he's not thinking of sitting outside her window and watching her change clothes? I'm sure THAT would put him on the Secret Service watch list as well. Or maybe he's thinking of buying lots of pinapple-flavored snowcones and wants to throw them at her. I'm sure that TOO would get him on the list. So please, stop wasting my taxes on your petty bitchfest, and go back to Starbucks to discuss the latest Wilco CD.

Noel Sheppard hates the troops...

... the enemy troops, that is. See? You thought I was going to say he hates American troops, but I didn't.

Anyway, Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters (or creepy-looking, beady-eyed guy, as I like to call him) is so upset at someone suggesting that the U.S. Military is creating serial killers, that he wants everyone to read all about it:

In it, Corey Mitchell, a crime author and editor of In Cold Blog, addressed the "list of serial killers and mass murderers who have spent time in the military" while making the case that "a seemingly normal, everyday, All-American soldier [can] turn into a brain scooping cell phone camera posing beast."

Notice the "can" placed in brackets there? That means that it wasn't actually IN the article... this douchebag just put it in to further mislead his retarded readers. In fact, if you actually read the article, you'll see that Mitchell is LITERALLY talking about a soldier who took a cell phone picture with him pretending to eat the brains of a dead Iraqi. Mitchell's question is, in reality, a quite valid one: What happened to this soldier to make him think this was appropriate and/or funny?

Sure Mitchell is being outrageous with the title, and it's obviously meant to be sensational, but the actual text of the article is at least thought-provoking... unlike Sheppard's post, which I think was actually killing my brain cells while reading it. But Mitchell's argument really becomes a "chicken or the egg" question. Do potential serial killers just gravitate towards the military, or does being in the military unleash something in everyday people that wouldn't normally be unleashed? While I have no statistical evidence, I think the former is probably true. But then that begs the question: What do you do about it? Psych evals are imperfect, and I'd prefer the military not go down a cuddly, teddy bear route... so there really isn't much to do.

The other great (in a pathetic way) thing is that these idiots are on a rampage against Daily Kos about it, eventhough THEY TOOK IT DOWN!!!

The leftist blogosphere went out of their way to cover this one up as quickly as possible.

It was posted at Daily Kos, as Ace relates. But the Kidz are on edge about their credibility, so it was deleted within hours, without a word of explanation. Just doesn’t look right to be dissing the military when Kos is trying so hard to be the voice of the Democratic Party.
[...]
It was also posted at a “crime blog” called “In Cold Blog,” and again it was deleted, when they realized it was being noticed.

I don't understand this logic, but then again I'm not 12 years old. Kos disapproves of the article, takes it down, and you STILL place blame on Kos? And yes, it doesn't "look right to be dissing the military"... especially since Kos WAS in the military. So what's the problem? The stupidity about this is really making my brain hurt. And while the original post may be a horrible piece of trash, these idiots made sure to save a copy so EVERYONE can see... and are even referencing it in other posts. Is this some right-wing masochism that I've been unaware of?

Anatomy of stupid, stupid sign.

Kos himself has hopped on the fake outrage bandwagon. Here's a quote that he quotes in his post (talk about "meta"):

However, when you, as a candidate, hold a sign up, smile, and get your picture taken with a sign comparing Americans to Osama Bin Laden that sends a different message.

No, the sign did NOT compare "Americans to Osama Bin Laden", it was simply a statement of things that this woman says "no" to... and they just happen rhyme. For example, if I were to say:

I hate broccoli, Hitler, and the Dallas Cowboys

Does that mean I'm comparing Hitler to Wade Phillips? Absolutely not. However, if I said Hitler killed millions of Jews... just like the Dallas Cowboys. Now THAT would be a comparison. Of course, the only thing the Cowboys have killed is my love of American Football.

Even so, the only real thing the Republicans have going for themselves these days is comparing Democrats to terrorists. Most Americans don't actually buy into that bulls**t, so why spoil the Republicans fun?

Obama = Osama (and other things that aren't funny)

So there's a picture of Mitt Romney holding up some moronic woman's sign that says "No to Obama Osama and Chelsea's Moma". And in a recent Q&A, some kid decided to ask Romney about it, and wasn't too happy with the answer. Romney responds:

I don't look at all the signs that come up that I get pictures taken with . . . so I don't have anything particular to say about a sign someone else is holding. . . . Lighten up slightly. Lighten up. . . I'm not responsible for all the signs I'm handed.

And the pissed-off American responds to the response:

I don't understand how someone can compare any American to Osama Bin Laden, but pundits are still willing to prey on the emotions that everyone that lived through 9/11 feel, invoking images of the most hate man in America to describe the political opposition. It's a cheap, divisive, whorish move to make. It represents the worst of the politics of hate. It's a move that I expect presidential candidates of all parties to be above. But Mitt Romney is not.

Give me f**king break! In a perfect world, Romney should've just said "I take a lot of pictures, and THAT one was a bad idea". But of course, the partisan yahoos would NEVER accept that (or anything really) as an answer... and the right-wing yahoos don't give a damn... so what's a brutha' to do? He's telling the Liberal hipped to "lighten-the-f**k-up" (I'm paraphrasing).

Romney didn't make the sign. He didn't say "Obama and Osama are BFFs". He simply took an idiotic picture, with an idiotic woman, holding an idiotic sign. It's just like George Allen last year and the whole Macaca thing. The left getting all angry about it is just brain-dead posturing for posturing's sake. No one is really offended, they're just pretending to be because their bored or their microwavable corn dogs aren't heating up fast enough or something. I really don't know their motivation, but I do know it's all fake outrage. And of course, the Daily Kossians have to toss in some fake outrage, too:

So it went from just "an alliterative play on words" to "What sign?" And the voters who are genuinely upset that the candidate would be associated with that kind of talk are told to "Lighten up."

How about this, Mitt? Why don't you try "I'm sorry" next time?

I've got a simple answer for that: Because it wouldn't change anything, you stupid nit. It's not like you're EVER going to cast a ballot for Romney, and those that might couldn't care less about the sign, so why should he pander to YOU? Answer: He shouldn't.

sidenote: When did Chelsea Clinton get a Museum of Modern Art? And why does that woman dislike it so? Or is there a MOMA in New York's Chelsea district that she disapproves of?

Here's a dose of Daily Orwell... uh, I mean Daily Kos

Apparently, if you don't drink the Kos Kool-aid 100% of the time, you get "voted off the island". Case in point, the brave Cindy Sheehan, who has chosen to do everything in her power to make the Congress do it's job, has been banned from Daily Kos:

I can't post here anymore because my potential run for Congress is not on the Democratic ticket.

I once thought that Kos's idea of Crashing the Gates was a good one. But now I realize that once the current gates are "crashed", they're just going to erect brand new ones.

Here's a woman who has championed a cause while enduring MUCH scorn and ridicule, and now the pimply-faced automatons in the comments section have the gall to criticize her. Apparently, the thought-police chief is BarbinMD. I can guarantee that Sheehan does more to further justice and freedom in America before noon everyday, than this yahoo has done in a lifetime.

Kos is a hypocrite

In his brief analysis of a straw poll, Kos has this to say:

Oh, and 516 people don't care that Kucinich has become Fox News strongest defender.

If you're a Democrat, you probably agree with almost 100% of what Kucinich's platform is based on. On top of that, he's always had those positions and hasn't wavered or tried to spin any of his positions. So, Kos seems to be anti-Kucinich for just ONE single issue.

But let's not forget what Kos has said in the past:

Yet another example where single-issue groups myopic vision obscures the broader picture

So why does Kos have such a bad attitude towards Kucinich, when they supposedly agree on most everything? Is it because Kucinich won't kiss Kos's brass ring?