Monday, September 11, 2006
"Al Gore Says He Hasn't Ruled Out 2nd Run"
From My Way News ...
SYDNEY, Australia (AP) - Former Vice President Al Gore said Sunday he hadn't rule out making a second bid for the White House, though he said it was unlikely.
Gore spoke to reporters in Sydney, where he was promoting the local premiere of his documentary on global warming.
"I haven't completely ruled out running for president again in the future but I don't expect to," Gore said before the Sunday night premiere of "An Inconvenient Truth."
"I offer the explanation not as an effort to be coy or clever. It's just the internal shifting of gears after being in politics almost 30 years. I hate to grind the gears," he added.
Gore, who lost the presidency to President Bush in 2000 in disputed circumstances, said there was no doubt the impact of global warming would be best addressed through the power of the presidency, but making a documentary was second best.
Gore's renewed popularity and movie tours across the United States have spurred speculation of a White House run in 2008. He has previously repeatedly denied such intentions.
The documentary, which Gore narrates, is critical of the United States and Australia for refusing to adopt the Kyoto Protocol for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Prime Minister John Howard, a friend and ally of Bush, said he would not meet Gore during his Australian visit and would not heed his advice to sign up to Kyoto.
"I don't take policy advice from films," Howard told reporters.
LINK: Al Gore Says He Hasn't Ruled Out 2nd Run
-Mr. Joseph
Friday, September 08, 2006
Politicians Gone Wild: 2006 Campaign Edition
My personal favorite video is this one of Katherine Harris showing off her best "assets" while she flirts with Sean Hannity.
LINK: Politicians Gone Wild: 2006 Campaign Edition
-Mr. Joseph
Savage advocated "militarization of our children" to respond to terror threat
Anyway, here is the link and transcripts...
TRANSCRIPTS:
From the September 6 broadcast of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Now all of a sudden, Bush is hammering Islamofascism again. Well, OK, great. Well, why doesn't he tell the people it's real, they're here, they're liable to trigger them off, and I want you to understand that we may call upon you to defend yourselves? So I want every able-bodied man and woman who is licensed to carry a firearm or who knows how to use a weapon, I want you to organize in your neighborhood. We don't want you to commit violence, but we want you to learn how to create a homeland defense system in this country. What would be wrong with that vision, Jose?
CALLER: Nothing wrong with that vision. Our enemies right now are preparing for war every day. We live in America.
SAVAGE: Right.
CALLER: Why the hell do we --
SAVAGE: Right. We live in America, and we're teaching our sons how to kick a ball instead of how to fire a gun. Tell me who's gonna win. They're training their sons to use an AK-47, and we're teaching our sons how to swing a baseball bat. Tell me who wins that fight.
CALLER: You got it. And I --
SAVAGE: Thank you. I have nothing against baseball, but the times don't call for an obsession with sports. They call for a militarization of our children. And I've said this before.
AUDIO / LINK: Savage advocated "militarization of our children" to respond to terror threat
-Mr. Joseph
Fred Phelps goes after Stewart and Colbert: “Mockery”
LINK: Evil Reverend Fred Phelps Diatribe Against Stewart/Colbert
LINK: C&L: Fred Phelps goes after Stewart and Colbert: “Mockery”
-Mr. Joseph
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Rocky Statue to Return to Museum

From Seatlepi.com...
PHILADELPHIA -- Rocky Balboa - or more specifically, a statue of the Hollywood palooka, boxing gloves raised in triumph - is being restored to a spot outside the Philadelphia Museum of Art, the winner by a split decision in a bout between fine art and pop culture...
Read the Rest of the Article here: Rocky statue is being returned to museum
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
"Weekly" Column #2: "The O'Rivalry Factor"
by Joseph KayBill O'Reilly of FOX News's "The O'Reilly Factor" and Westwood One's "The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly" has always claimed to stick up for "the folks" and to do what (at least he thought) was right. He's a noteworthy journalist with plenty of years experience. However, he has quite a few people who don't take too kindly to him.
Al Franken said his name should be "O'Lie-lly". Keith Olberman constantly awards him the "Worst Person in the World" on his show, Countdown. Media Matters for America named him the "2004 Misinformer of the Year". Peter Hart wrote a book called "The Oh Really? Factor". Joseph Minton Amann and Tom Breuer wrote a book called "Sweet Jesus, I HATE Bill O'Reilly" and operate the website SweetJesusIHateBillOreilly.com.
So why would so many left-leaning citizens have such a beef with the self proclaimed "centrist", O'Reilly?
They all have their reasons. Al Franken says that he is a "bully" and a "liar". David Brock, the President of Media Matters for America, accused O'Reilly for being a "coward". And Keith Olberman probably does not appreciate O'Reilly's significantly higher viewer ratings during the time slot they share. No matter what, I think it is time to analyze every feud here and try to make sense of it all. Does O'Reilly deserve this abuse? Or are the "liberal elites" out to get him?
To start, the feud with Al Franken began first. In 2003, Al Franken wrote his book, "Lies! And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right". In this book, he dedicated and entire chapter to Bill O'Reilly and included a very unflattering picture of O'Reilly on the cover. Franken ripped O'Reilly on points like O'Reilly was irresponsible in naming a Polk Award a Peabody, the fact that O'Reilly was, at one time, a registered Republican, the fact that O'Reilly had been misleading about where he grew up, amoung other things. He took O'Reilly to town and did a good job of it. O'Reilly, apparently, didn't appreciate it. On a BookTV Conference, both O'Reilly and Franken appeared to talk about their books. According to Franken, before the show, O'Reilly yelled at both Franken and Franken's editor regarding the unflattering photo of him on Franken's book cover. Franken claims that was the reason why the photo stayed. Franken then got up and gave his speech. When O'Reilly stood up to give his speech he started by accusing Franken for speaking for "35" minutes (Franken spoke for about 20) and started to play down Franken's accusations. Franken tried to interrupt, but O'Reilly refused to let him by saying, "Hey, shut up! You had your thirty-five minutes! SHUT UP!" Franken then stated that "this isn't your show, Bill". According to the transcripts, O'Reilly then spend a good amount of time bashing Franken and saying that he did not "attack" people. (He had, before, called Franken an "idiot".) Ever since that confrontation, O'Reilly refuses to talk about it and he refers to Franken as "Stuart Smalley" (A Franken SNL character). Even more surprising, he convinced FOX News to sue Al Franken for using their "Fair and Balanced" slogan. Needless to say, the lawsuit was thrown out of court.
Was O'Reilly justified in his actions? Or did he overreact? In my opinion, being in the public eye and being as outspoken as O'Reilly, there will be a lot of abuse directed at you and you have to be able to deal with it professionally. I do not believe this was the case. O'Reilly should have taken the abuse from Franken and he would of came out at least looking respectable.
The next feud was with MSNBC host of Countdown, Keith Olberman. O'Reilly and Olberman share a time slot and compete very blatanly. Olberman names O'Reilly the "Worst Person in the World" and, in response O'Reilly put a petition up on his website to get Olberman off the air. Olberman made great fun of this and had his entire staff sign it. When O'Reilly's sexual harassment scandal broke, Olberman celebrated it by poking fun at O'Reilly and still does it today. Last March, O’Reilly dropped a caller from his live radio show, seemingly for mentioning Olbermann's name. O'Reilly accused the caller of being part of a larger group of individuals which had been calling O'Reilly with the sole purpose of mentioning Olbermann. The caller said "I like to listen to you during the day. I think Keith Olbermann..." when O'Reilly cut in, responding to "Mike" as follows:
"We have your own phone number and we're going to turn it over to Fox security and you'll be getting a little visit. [...] When you call us, ladies and gentlemen, just so you know, we do have your phone number, and if you say anything untoward, obscene or anything like that, FOX security then will contact your local authorities and you will be held accountable. Fair?"
Not so fair - Olberman pointed out that Westwood One broadcasts "The Radio Factor" (not FOX News) and it is illegal for O'Reilly to even do what he threatened. Olberman also has nicknamed O'Reilly, "The Giant Head". O'Reilly's only response to most of this is just something along the lines of "Nobody watches MSNBC". This is not true, FOX News' ratings are down 28% from this time last year while MSNBC's ratings are up 8%.
So who is right? Personally, I think O'Reilly's taking this too seriously. They are competitors and Olberman is making fun of it. However, this clearly demonstrates that O'Reilly doesn't like to compete. Unless he wins.
Media Matters for America is a website dedicated to disproving "conservative misinformation" in the news. O'Reilly has become one their favorite targets. They awarded him the "2004 Misinformer of the Year". Media Matters also points out...
"O'Reilly frequently denounces 'cowards' who refuse to face him on-air, saying, for example, 'If you attack someone publicly, as these men did to me, you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward.' But O'Reilly has repeatedly attacked Media Matters while refusing Media Matters President and CEO David Brock's request to appear on The O'Reilly Factor."
That is a very good point. O'Reilly responds to them much like he responds to Franken. He name calls. He has called Media Matters "dishonest", a "far left smear website", "loony", "oppressive", "smear merchants", "paid assassins", "morons", "despicable weasels", and "a creepy, little, left wing outfit".
I analyzed the Media Matters site and I can't say O'Reilly is justified. Media Matters is very good about quoting everything in context and pointing out "conservative misinformation". Of all the feuds, Bill O'Reilly loses the most to these guys.
Media Matters is not the only site like this. Newshounds.us, Fauxnews.com, FauxNewsChannel.com, FAIR.org, and even Oreilly-sucks.com are all websites dedicated to the the FOX News Channel's conservative bias. They are all very good about documenting this. Robert Greenwald came out with a film called "OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism". O'Reilly was one of the targets in that film. I do not believe he has commented on it. Featured on that documentary was Jeremy Glick who was know for O'Reilly's most notorious interview. I'm not going to recite those transcripts again because we all know them (if not Google "Jeremy Glick").
Now, the most recent feud (as of now) is not so much of a feud as it is an attack. Joseph Minton Amann and Tom Breuer wrote a book "Sweet Jesus, I HATE Bill O'Reilly" and operate a website of that domain. They have done pretty damn good about calling out O'Reilly's conservative bias and they are arguably the funniest of O'Reilly's rivals. Almost daily, they update their website to rip on O'Reilly. Although O'Reilly has not commented on them yet (as far as I know), this will be a very interesting feud to watch as time goes on.
So, in conclusion, the bottom line is that O'Reilly has many rivals and enemies -- that is fine, most media people do. However, I give little credit to O'Reilly for how he deals with these people. He claims to take a high road, but he calls them worse names then they him. If O'Reilly would meet with these people and try to settle things, he would gain much respect. But he won't, so he doesn't. And I guess that that truly is "The O'Rivalry Factor".
-Joseph Kay
Max Cleland: “I Don’t Agree with a Damn Thing the Attorney General Said”
Wolf Blitzer had an interview with Alberto Gonzales a little bit ago, which we won’t pain you with. Gonzales beat his drum right along the Whitehouse talking points and kept insisting that Iraq was a major front in the war on terror, as well as downplayed the importance of actually capturing Osama. Following the interview, Max Cleland came on to give his rebuttal:
Transcript:
BLITZER: Do you agree with the attorney general as far as his assessment of the importance or lack thereof, if you will, of Osama bin Laden overall in terms of the war on terror?
MAX CLELAND (D), FORMER GEORGIA SENATOR: I don’t agree with a damn thing the attorney general said. It is al Qaeda, stupid. It is Osama bin Laden and his terrorist cadre that must be killed or captured, period. If we don’t have high government officials in Washington who understand that, we need new high government officials.
VIDEO: Cleland on the Attorney General
LINK: Max Cleland: “I Don’t Agree with a Damn Thing the Attorney General Said”
(More Transcript is available)
Good ole' Max Cleland!
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Eighteen Years
By the way, her writing is obviously a ghostwriter. She does not write how she speaks.
I refuse to read Pat Buchanan's book, nor give him any more media attention than this mention. I can't stand him.
-Mr. Joseph
Friday, August 25, 2006
Milwaukee is named 'Drunkest City'
Here's the story...
MILWAUKEE - Milwaukee has been ranked by Forbes.com as "America's Drunkest City" on a list of 35 major metropolitan areas ranked for their drinking habits.
Forbes said Tuesday it used numbers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to rank cities in five areas: state laws, number of drinkers, number of heavy drinkers, number of binge drinkers and alcoholism.
Minneapolis-St. Paul was ranked second overall; followed by Columbus, Ohio; Boston; Austin, Texas; Chicago; Cleveland; Pittsburgh and then Philadelphia and Providence, R.I., in a tie for ninth.
Rick DeMeyer, 28, said Wednesday as he was celebrating his birthday at G-Daddy's BBC he could understand Milwaukee's ranking.
"I have had people stay with me from London and Chicago, and they can't get over how much we drink," he said. "I guess we do."
But officials at Visit Milwaukee, the area's convention and visitors bureau, contend that the city has come a long way in ridding itself of its beer-guzzling image.
Milwaukeeans have plenty of other ways to entertain themselves without drinking alcohol, said Dave Fantle, a spokesman for the group. He noted a new convention center and baseball park had been built and the Milwaukee Art Museum expanded in recent years.
"We've gone from Brew City to new city," he said.
LINK: Milwaukee is named 'Drunkest City'
-Mr. Joseph
Thursday, August 24, 2006
Westboro Baptist Church on Hannity and Colmes

Alan Colmes is not amused.
VIDEO / LINK: Westboro Baptist Church on Hannity and Colmes
I wouldn't be either.
-Mr. Joseph
Monday, August 21, 2006
Senator Chuck Hagel: A Fine American

This blog has always been slamming republicans and conservatives, so I decided I should point out one Repulican who I admire -- Senator Chuck Hagel from Nebraska.
He is not afraid to disagree with the Party and not afraid to stand up to the administration. I admire him very much and hope he continues his good work.
Here is a recent article regarding him...
LINK: Sen. Hagel says GOP has lost its way
Crooks and Liars has many reports of him...
C&L Profile on Chuck Hagel
You can check out his website here...
Senator Chuck Hagel Nebraska
I would support Chuck Hagel.
-Mr. Joseph
Bush: Iraq has "nothing" to do with 9/11 and "sometimes (he's) happy" about news from Iraq
Thanks to Think Progress and Media Matters for the clips...
VIDEO / LINK: Bush Now Says What He Wouldn’t Say Before War: Iraq Had ‘Nothing’ To Do With 9/11
TRANSCRIPT:
Next...BUSH: The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.
QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with it?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attack on the World Trade Center.
BUSH: Nothing. Except it’s part of — and nobody has suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody’s ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.
VIDEO / LINK: Wash. Post edited Bush's comments on Iraq, removed his admission: "Sometimes I'm happy"
TRANSCRIPT:
From the August 21 Post article:
Asked if he wasn't frustrated by the seeming lack of progress there, Bush replied, "Sometimes I'm frustrated, rarely surprised. War is not a time of joy. These are challenging times."
But when asked by NBC News White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell if he was indeed frustrated by the lack of progress in Iraq, Bush not only said that he is occasionally frustrated and "rarely surprised," he also claimed to "sometimes" be happy:
Well, now we have admittance...O'DONNELL: But are you frustrated, sir?
BUSH: Frustrated? Sometimes I'm frustrated. Rarely surprised. Sometimes I'm happy. You know, this is -- but war is not a time of joy. These aren't joyous times. These are challenging times, and they're difficult times, and they're straining the psyche of our country. I understand that. You know, nobody likes to see innocent people die. Nobody wants to turn on their TV on a daily basis and see havoc wrought by terrorists.
-Mr. Joseph
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Imus to ban all Democrats from program?
LINK: Did Imus just threaten to ban all Democrats from his show if they don’t support Lieberman?
Wierdo wingbats...
-Mr. Joseph
Hannity: "You're full of sh*t"

OK, as I continue to work on my "Sean Hannity Profile", I have three things for you now...
First, the pictue above.
Second, this little rant caught on video by Think Progress where he calls his guest "full of sh*t".
Here's the video link...
VIDEO / LINK: Hannity: "You're full of sh*t."
TRANSCRIPT:
And third...COLMES: What do you though — let’s say Hezbollah keeps firing, though. What do you do then?
ROSENBLUM: Well, you have to fire back. And what this particular resolution allows is Israel is defined as the victim. Hezbollah is the perpetrator. Israel has the right to defend itself while it stays in southern Lebanon. There has never been a United Nations resolution so friendly to Israeli security interests and right — but it is a piece of paper, not implemented yet.
HANNITY: A lot of good 1559 did. I think anything short of the defeat of Hezbollah or crippling it to a larger extent is a waste of time.
ROSENBLUM: By dropping your nuclear bomb, is what you said.
HANNITY: No, no, I never said drop a nuclear bomb. You said that they weren’t winning, and I said they could have won it in a second if they wanted to. I’m saying Israeli forces, their generals are saying they didn’t fight it to the full extent.
ROSENBLUM: And again you’re monolithing Israel. There’s a dispute on this in Israel.
HANNITY: But don’t mischaracterize what I said. I never said drop a weapon. I said they could, they could obliterate them. And if they wanted to, they could have.
ROSENBLUM: And you said a nuclear weapon could be…
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: It could have. They could obliterate them.
ROSENBLUM: Again, why would Israel choose not to do that?
HANNITY: What part of that don’t you understand?
ROSENBLUM: Look at Israeli self-interest.
HANNITY: All right, you’re full of sh*t. We’ve got to break. Coming up next, “60 Minutes” chats with the president of Iran as a nuclear deadline looms. We’ll talk about that.
From Crooks and Liars, this meltdown after Lamont's victory...
VIDEO: Hannity's Meltdown
LINK: Hannity's Meltdown
You got to love when Bob Beckel calls Santorum a "wingnut" so Hannity responds with "You’re a left wingnut. What’s with the name calling?".
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Lamont Victorious in CT Democratic Primary!


Crooks and Liars did the most documentation of this, so all my links will come from them...
LINK: Lamont Victory Video
LINK: Lieberman's Supposed Concession Speech
LINK: Rove Wants to Help Joe
LINK: Lieberman on the Today Show
LINK: Louis Black Goes After Lieberman and the Republican Candidates
LINK: Rush Limbaugh on Lieberman
LINK: Horowitz: “Democrats Worse Than Terrorists”
LINK: Hey Snow, –Are Lamont Supporters asking for another 9/11?
Enjoy!
-Mr. Joseph
Monday, August 07, 2006
Weekly Column #1: '06 Elections Will Be Interesting
Check my column on Newsvine! Political Thunder on Newsvine
All across the country, candidates for Congress, Governorships, and other local positions are starting to put their campaigns into gear. Close races that are vital to each party are heating up almost everywhere. I can hardly make sense of it all. However, there are two that I have been following intently.
The first of which is the Lieberman vs. Lamont Democratic Primary in Connecticut. Ned Lamont is gaining very quickly in the polls, in fact, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll, he has taken the lead (54 - 41) over Lieberman. It's hard to believe that a 3-term, former vice-presidental candidate, former "Shoo-in" Senator is going to be beaten. Why would Lieberman lose, why is he even being challenged? “I think my opponent has tried and appears to be succeeding in making this a referendum on George Bush and the Iraq war," Lieberman said. And he's right. The answer to my question is simple. This is happening because it needs to. For too long Lieberman had held a post he doesn't deserve. He has supported George W. Bush and the Republicans since he was defeated in his vice-presidental bid (in 2003, he voted with the GOP 30% of the time). And he is an outspoken proponent of the Iraq War. These positions are very unpopular with his base. According to the same Quinnipiac poll, of the Lamont supporters, 65 percent say their vote is mainly against Lieberman.
Ouch.
Lieberman has tried to swing voters by having big name Democrats campaign for him. However, it is having little effect, and not many Democrats are helping him out. Bill and Hillary Clinton have each said they support him in the Primary, but they will support the Democrat in the general election. According to "The Hill" (a newspaper for and about the U.S. Congress), Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), Minority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), Charles Schumer, Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Lieberman’s home-state colleague, Chris Dodd have all said they will support Lieberman in the primary, but have not answered who they will support if he loses. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, New Jersey Senators Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez, Tom Harkin (Iowa), and Senator Barack Obama (Ill.) all have said they will support the Democrat in the general election, but will not comment on the primary. A grand total of three senators have said they will support Lieberman no matter what, even if he loses the primary and runs as an independent.
Lieberman is being pushed out by unhappy Democrats who are tired of having him vote with Bush, support Bush, and get kissed by Bush on national TV. Lieberman will most likely lose the primary and then run as an independent. Lamont should have no problem in the general election, unless Holy Joe takes votes away from him. And if Lieberman succeeds in bringing Lamont down with him, and allowing Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger to win, then there is proof that Lieberman needs to go. If Lieberman loses, he has a responsibility to step aside so that the Democratic Party can be victorious in the race. Unfortunately, it appears that Lieberman is only interested remaining in power and will stop at nothing to keep it.
Speaking of "nothing", let's look at the disaster that is the Katherine Harris Senate race. This is a dream come true for those Democrats who watched her help Bush to steal the 2000 Presidential Election. Her campaign couldn't be any worse. According to another Quinnipiac poll, she's trailing Bill Nelson by 59 percent to 26 percent and "only 35 percent of Republicans polled said they wanted her as the nominee."
Harris' campaign has been self-defeating from the start. Her initial campaign was lackluster and her very name will excite the Democratic base to get out and vote... against her. Her initial 2.5 million dollar campaign fund was nothing compared to Bill Nelson's $10 million. However, on Hannity and Colmes she announced her secret weapon, a multi-million dollar inheritance from her father who passed away a mere two months before. She continued to say, "I'm going to put everything on the line. Everything. Not just my future, and my reputation, my father's name, I'm going to take his legacy, that he gave to me, everything that I have, and I'm going to put it in this race." She then also stated that, "I'm going to win", after pausing for dramatic effect.
Wow, strong words for a near-dead campaign. However, there is more to be said about her "everything". Because one week earlier, according to the Orlando Sentinel, "Campaign spokeswoman Morgan Dobbs said that ... Harris will sell her existing assets rather than rely on money from her father, a bank executive who died in January".
Aside from this disturbing backpedaling, her campaign only seems to get worse. Campaign managers have been resigning left and right, all of them noting her odd behavior. One of them said, "It smacks of real paranoia." The state GOP does not want her as the nominee, and even Jeb Bush will not back her. Gov. Bush said this about her, "I am the party leader. I've got concerns. The campaign can't be about her. It has to be about Bill Nelson and the future of our state and so far, she asked my advice and I gave her that exact advice and it's gotten worse since." In addition to this, according to the Tampa Tribune, she:
• Had locks changed and posted a security guard at the door of her campaign headquarters in Tampa and had former staff members escorted in to retrieve their belongings. • Told a gathering of supporters in Cocoa Beach on Saturday that the Republican Party had "infiltrated" her campaign staff to put "knives in my back." • Told a reporter that a longtime, trusted political adviser had leaked a story about her staff members quitting, then called back to retract the comments. • Announced hiring her new staff without identifying them
Disaster is the only word I can think of to describe this. But after what she did in 2000, I can't say I feel bad for her.
On a side note of all of this, just recently Pat Robertson, of CBN's The 700 Club, declared that he was "a convert" on the issue of Global Warming. This has to be good news for the environmental crowd. A staunch conservative has proven to be a little more open minded than once believed.
Since I have not figured out how to use the HTML codes on this page, I will have to post the names of all my sources here. Thanks to Democratic Underground, Think Progress, Quinnipiac University, "The Hill" and the local news sources that I mentioned in this column.
Saturday, August 05, 2006
An Anti-Gore Spoof... that was funded by ExxonMobil
Crooks and Liars did a great job documenting this.
"A remarkably dumb YouTube video is working its way through conservative circles, spoofing Al Gore, "An Inconvenient Truth," and global warming. It’s pretty weak — the video’s basic pitch is that Gore’s movie is boring and is intended to brainwash viewers. The Wall Street Journal noted that the video "has a home-made, humorous quality," though "humorous" is hardly the first word that comes to mind.
The video’s maker is listed as "Toutsmith," but there’s quite a bit more to it than that.
In an email exchange with The Wall Street Journal, Toutsmith didn’t answer when asked who he was or why he made the video, which has just over 59,000 views on YouTube. However, computer routing information contained in an email sent from Toutsmith’s Yahoo account indicate it didn’t come from an amateur working out of his basement.
Instead, the email originated from a computer registered to DCI Group, a Washington, D.C., public relations and lobbying firm whose clients include oil company Exxon Mobil Corp.
A DCI Group spokesman declines to say whether or not DCI made the anti-Gore penguin video, or to explain why Toutsmith appeared to be sending email from DCI’s computers.
Nancy Snow, a communications professor at California State University, Fullerton, called the video a lesson in "Propaganda 101."
One thing’s for sure: Al Gore has the oil industry in such a panic, it’s resorted to these rather pathetic stunts."
-Mr. Joseph
>
'Political Thunder' on Newsvine
My first column is not up yet, however it will be focusing on Lieberman's failure in Conneticut and the disaster that is Katherine Harris' campaign.
The url is http://political-thunder.newsvine.com
Political Thunder on Newsvine
I'll let you know when my column is posted.
-Mr. Joseph
Pat Robertson: I’m ‘A Convert’ On Global Warming
Usually, Pat is my whipping boy on the website, but I have to say, the old man isn't 100% crazy.
Damn it, I'm proud of Pat!
From Think Progress
TRANSCRIPT: They are defending the society. But I tell you stay in doors ladies and gentleman. Stay cool. Get fans or whatever. And the poor, they need emergency fans and ice to cool down — the number of people dead. I have not been one who believed in the global warming. But I tell you, they are making a convert out of me as these blistering summers. They have broken heat records in a number of cities already this year and broken all-time records and it is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air. We really need to address the burning of fossil fuels. If we are contributing to the destruction of the planet we need to do manage about it.
VIDEO: Pat Robertson: I’m ‘A Convert’ On Global Warming, ‘It Is Getting Hotter’
LINK: Pat Robertson: I’m ‘A Convert’ On Global Warming, ‘It Is Getting Hotter’
Good for Pat! Or should I say, "Good for Marion Gordon 'Pat' Robertson!"
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Al Franken on Rush Limbaugh
LINK: Al Franken: Where Rush Limbaugh's Facts Come From
This is the last update for today. Want more? Check out my other blog at The New SuperSite Blog!
-Mr. Joseph
The Worst Mistake in Political History
This is a doozy, but it is good for your records, it is straight from the Library of Congress.
Supreme Court on Florida Election Vote Recount
A historic document from On writ of certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court
Page 999 ![]()
Introduction
By a 5-4 vote divided along conservative-liberal lines, the Supreme Court on December 12, 2000, put an end to the five-week dispute over the presidential election results in Florida and effectively elected Republican George W. Bush as the nation's forty-third president. The decision stopped the manual count of several thousand contested ballots that had been ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, leaving Bush the certified winner by 537 votes of the state's twenty-five electoral votes, enough to give him the presidency. Although the U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back to the Florida court for further consideration, the decision left Vice President Al Gore's attorneys little maneuvering room to pursue his challenge, and the Democratic nominee conceded the election to Bush on December 13. It was a painful decision for Gore, who had won the nationwide popular vote by approximately 577,000 votes. (Bush, Gore speeches, p. 1025)
The Court's decision capped the most extraordinary period in U.S. presidential politics in more than a century. The November 7 election left Gore with 267 electoral votes—just 3 short of the 270 needed under the Constitution for election as president. Bush had 246 electoral votes coming out of the election. In doubt were Florida's 25 electoral votes, which would provide the margin of victory. There Bush had a slim advantage, and for five weeks lawyers and partisans for the two sides clashed in the courts, at local elections headquarters, and even in the streets. Bush sought to preserve his slim lead by erecting legal roadblocks to the recounting of thousands of ballots that were in dispute. Needing every vote he could get, Gore demanded that all disputed votes be counted.
Throughout the ordeal, the nation and the world watched as election workers peered at ballots looking for signs of voter intent, and as judges struggled with Florida's sometimes conflicting laws to determine the state legislature's intent. It was the closest the United States had come to a constitutional crisis over a presidential election since 1876, when an election dispute dragged on for months and was finally resolved by a contentious vote in the House of Representatives.
Page 1000 ![]()
In the end Bush won because he had two important allies working in tandem: the calendar and the Supreme Court. Under a federal law enacted in 1887, a state's electors had to be selected by December 12 if they were to be free from challenge in the U.S. Congress. Although nothing in the law prevented electors from being selected after December 12—in 1960 Hawaii did not select its electors until January 4—the Bush team argued that the Florida legislature had intended December 12 to be the deadline for selecting electors. Bush's attorneys then used every legal maneuver they could muster to prevent or delay voter recounts until this deadline had passed and it was too late to overturn the Bush lead. As the December 12 date approached, the final arbiter of whether additional votes would be counted was the Supreme Court, which for the first time in U.S. history found itself in the position of being able to determine who would become president. On the key decision in the case of Bush v. Gore, the Court's five most conservative justices sided with Bush, the conservative candidate, and the four most liberal justices sided with Gore, the liberal candidate.
The coincidence of this split did not go unremarked. Editorial writers and legal experts said that the Court should have refused to review the dispute and left it for Congress to resolve. By injecting the Supreme Court into a political issue, the Court had weakened its own legitimacy as well as Bush's claim to the White House, those critics said. John Paul Stevens, one of the dissenting justices, said the Court's ruling “can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land.” Another dissenter, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, referred to the Court action as “this self-inflicted wound.” Nor did it escape public notice that the Republican nominee who had campaigned on states' rights had turned to the federal judiciary to overrule the Florida state courts or that his promises of inclusion did not extend to disputed ballots cast primarily by blacks, the urban poor, and the elderly.
Although most Americans accepted the Court's decision and Gore's concession calmly, it remained to be seen to what extent the controversy had damaged the public's trust in its governing institutions and in the electoral process. Some observers predicted that the incident would discourage voter turnout in the future, especially among African-Americans and other minorities who were already skeptical about the voting process. Several news organizations immediately announced plans to perform their own recounts of the Florida ballots, while politicians and election officials across the country promised to review election laws and procedures to prevent similar situations in the future.
On December 14 Florida governor Jeb Bush announced that he was creating a special task force to investigate the integrity of Florida's election process. He also said he would welcome an investigation by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights into allegations into voting irregularities, including incidents of intimidation directed at black voters. Bush, the younger brother of the president-elect, and Florida secretary of state Katherine Harris, an acknowledged Bush supporter, had been accused by Gore partisans of using their offices to help thwart the recount.
Link to Full Primary Source
Bush v. Gore http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/supremecourt/00-949_dec12.fdf
-Mr. JosephBill O'Reilly vs. Al Franken
This is only part on the interview, but it is the best part. Thanks to YouTube and Media Matters.
LINK: Franken vs. O'Reilly
-Mr. Joseph
Michael Moore vs. Bill O'Reilly
Check it out...
Part One:
Link: Moore vs. O'Reilly Part One
Part Two:
Link: Moore vs. O'Reilly Part Two
I will probably be posting a lot more videos from YouTube
See ya!
-Mr. Joseph
UPDATE (1/06/07): You can find the transcripts via FOX News...
LINK: FOXNEWS.com: Moore: Bush 'Didn't Tell the Truth'
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Coulter: Clinton is a "latent homosexual"
Media Matters used the video clip from MSNBC.
Transcript:
From the July 26 edition of MSNBC News Live:
LINK / VIDEO: Coulter attacks Clinton as a "latent homosexual"ROBACH: Well, no one has ever accused Ann Coulter of holding back on what she really thinks. Now, she's sharing her theory on Bill Clinton's sexuality. In a taped segment on tonight's edition of CNBC's The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch, Coulter said she believes the former president's behavior shows, quote, "some level of latent homosexuality."
[begin video clip]
DEUTSCH: Off the air, you were talking about Bill Clinton. Is there anything you want to say about Clinton?
COULTER: No.
DEUTSCH: No? OK. All right. Did you find him attractive? Is that what it was?
COULTER: No!
DEUTSCH: You don't find him attractive?
COULTER: No. OK, fine, I'll say it on air.
DEUTSCH: Most women find him attractive.
COULTER: No.
DEUTSCH: OK, say it on air.
COULTER: I think that sort of rampant promiscuity does show some level of latent homosexuality.
DEUTSCH: OK, I think you need to say that again -- that Bill Clinton, you think, on some level has -- is a latent homosexual. Is that what you're saying?
COULTER: Yeah. I mean that sort of just completely anonymous -- I don't know if you read the Starr Report. The rest of us were glued to it. I have many passages memorized. No, there is more plot and dialogue in a porno movie.
[end video clip]
ROBACH: The Coulter interview can be seen in its entirety tonight on The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch, that's at 10 p.m. Eastern on CNBC. Coulter will also be a guest on Hardball tonight at 7. That's right here on MSNBC. A night of must-see TV, featuring the one and only Ann Coulter.
And that was that... until...
David Letterman struck back with a biting parody...
LINK: Crooks and Liars: Letterman parody
Ugh, when will that crazy bitch get off the air?
-Mr. Joseph
Friday, July 28, 2006
Armageddon? Conservative Media Thinks So.
Here are transcipts, video, and links...
Transcripts...
From the July 12 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Hey, everybody. Hurry up; we've got World War III to fight. Yes, it is the end of days. Isn't it?
[...]
BECK: Here's what I do know about World War III and the impending apocalypse. One, we can't coexist with people who want to blow up trains and subways and bring down buildings. If somebody has a death wish, not really the best negotiating partner.
I also know that whether you like it or not, this is a religious war. Radical Muslims want to wipe everybody else off the face of the earth.
From the July 13 edition of Glenn Beck:
BECK: Bob, you were on the show yesterday on television, you were on the radio show today. We talked about that World War III is here, and 1938, that's about where we are, 1938. With the events of the day are we any closer to the next world war?
BAER: Oh, we've moved -- we've moved forward in the last 12 hours. Hezbollah has dropped some rockets on Haifa, a major Israeli city. This is a major escalation. We can see this spreading into other countries. We are much closer to Armageddon.
From the July 18 edition of Glenn Beck:
BECK: Oh, I don't know what it's like at your house, but it feels like the apocalypse is coming here in New York in more ways than one.
As the fighting continues in the Middle East, many people in the international community today are calling for either negotiations and/or a U.N. peacekeeping force to halt the conflict. And that's just -- I can't understand that on so many levels.
[...]
BECK: Gemini was born with two mouths, two tongues, two noses, four eyes. Some say this is the work of the devil. I'm not going to argue, quite frankly. In fact, I'm going on record now and saying, "I'm sorry, PETA: The cat must be stopped."
This evil creature, without doubt, further evidence, oh, yes, that the end of days is approaching quickly. I say, what, 20 minutes from now? Could be. You know, in this week, we've got a mess in the Middle East; we've had wildfires burning out of control; of course, we got the heat waves, 113 degrees today in Death Valley; mudslides in California, oh, they're coming.
How far away from the plague of locusts are we? Geez. We used to be able to count on news footage of cute little kittens.
From the July 24 edition of Glenn Beck:
BECK: I just want to tell you that I truly believe these mullahs are far worse than Hitler. I mean, Hitler was crazy evil. I believe these guys are biblically evil. And don't miss tomorrow's program. We have a series starting tomorrow on the coming of the messiah. We'll do that tomorrow.
From the July 18 edition of CBN's The 700 Club:
ROBERTSON: Thanks, John. Ladies and gentlemen, you might like to know what the Bible has to say about Israel in the last days. Is this the beginning of Ezekiel 38? We don't know but its getting close. Here's what the book of Ezekiel tells us in the 38th chapter.
[...]
Well, that's the prophecy of Ezekiel, that in the latter days, a coalition is going to come against Israel. And some of us have been waiting. Is this the end of it all? No. Is this what precedes the coming of the Lord? I don't think so. But it's clearly prophesied by Ezekiel if you believe that.
Now let's look at the map and to see what he's talking about. Here is Israel in the middle. It's called the navel of the earth. This is one described as Put which we identify as Libya. The other is Cush, and Cush is not Ethiopia, Cush is Sudan. And this is Sudan, which is of course an Islamic state. Libya is an Islamic state. And beyond that, what are we talking about? Gomer is somehow in the Caucasian area in here. These are Muslim people. Beth-togarmah may be Turkey. We're not quite sure exactly where all these people are. But Gog and Magog, Meschech is up in what is now the Russian federation. Rosh means head but it also is apparently Russia. So Russia's going to be involved with Persia which is down here. This is where Iran is. And so you can see the difference if Iran can come across it would have to cross Iraq, but it's trying its best to kind of overrun Iraq. But anyhow, here's Syria on the border with Iraq. Here's Iran right up on the close part. Syria, of course, borders Israel here. And Turkey borders there.
Now, you've got Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan. All these stans are Islamic republics. They are friendly to us but nevertheless that's what it is. Where is Tubal? Up here someplace in Magog. You can read in Genesis where they are. But the idea was that in the latter days when Israel is gathered back from the nations, the people are living at peace in their land, there is going to be this armada of essentially these Muslim nations joined with Russia to invade Israel, it says, in the latter days. Now are we seeing a prelude to that? We're not sure. But certainly Iran is making noises; they want to do it. The Sudan would undoubtedly kick in because they are fanatical Muslim in their leadership. Moammar Gadhafi has been relatively quiet but conceivably Libya could come on board.
This doesn't include Egypt, doesn't include Jordan, doesn't include Saudi Arabia or Yemen or these nations and, lo and behold, these particular nations are not joining in the current fighting against Israel. As a matter of fact, they are condemning Hezbollah. They don't want to have any part of it. And they are hoping that Israel will take them down a notch. They're hoping that the Iranians and the Syrians will come down a notch from where they are now because they're making trouble and they don't want it. But nevertheless, that's the situation described by the prophet Ezekiel. You ought to read your Bibles; Ezekiel 38. Can this be a prelude to that? I don't know, but it could be. We are beginning to see the line up of Iran, Russia, Sudan, Libya, and the Caucasian Muslim republics. Maybe Chechnya, some of those would play a role in this, we don't know. But when it's all finished, God says I'm going to destroy them all and I will bring glory to myself.
From the July 12 broadcast of The Gunny Bob Show:
NEWMAN: The truth be told, I don't say "uh-oh" very often when I hear a piece of news. When I got up this morning, about 0600, or so, turned on the TV and was greeted with the news that Israel had invaded Lebanon, and the first so-called words out of my mouth were "uh-oh." A world gone mad. Can mankind survive itself in World War III? I mean, is this the start of the big A -- Armageddon?
[...]
NEWMAN: If you just tuned into the show, I want to know if you think this, in the Middle East, could this be the beginning of Armageddon, at least a modern-day Armageddon?
[...]
NEWMAN: A world gone mad. Can mankind survive itself in World War III? And that's what we are in; but it's just not the World War III we expected. We kind of thought we'd be throwing missiles back and forth with the Russians, the Soviets. Well, it didn't come out that way, it came out to be different. And when you talk about Armageddon, the possibility of Armageddon, meaning wars all over the place and an awful lot of people dying that make World War II look like a joke, you've got to start adding up all the other factors.
From the July 4 broadcast of Jack Van Impe Presents:
JACK VAN IMPE: There's going to be a horrible conflict over Israel and over the Middle East. What they're saying now is, the last Bible prophecy that's going to be fulfilled, Psalm 83:4. Let us cast Israel off from being a nation that their name be no more in remembrance. And that's what starts Armageddon. As they divide the land of Israel, Joel 3, verse 2. Yes, Armageddon is coming, Revelations 16:16. But I repeat, it's not going to be the end of the world. Billions are going to be standing there to meet Christ after the conflict is ended and then they'll beat their swords and their plowshares and their spears and their pruning hooks, Isiah 2, verse 4.
From the July 18 broadcast of Jack Van Impe Presents:
REXELLA VAN IMPE: Yesterday a lady said to me, "Oh, Rexella, I love your program, I'm anxious to hear what your husband's going to have to say about the Middle East, and can he bring some comfort to my heart?" And I know you can, Jack.
JACK VAN IMPE: Oh, Rexella, there is war now in the Middle East and we'll have more to say about that a little later in the program. But do you know that when the lord Jesus Christ returns to earth to set up his kingdom; when he comes as the king of kings and lord of lords, Revelations 19:16, to rule and reign for one thousand years, Revelation 20, verse 4, that his feet hit the Mount of Olives and it splits from east to west, Zachariah 14, verse 4. But you know why he comes? Armageddon is not the end of the world. It's never going to end. We made a video last week that's going to be released this fall. And we got hundreds of verses proving that the world will never end. For Isaiah 45:17 and Ephesians 3:21 both say it's a world without end amen, amen. So, when he comes, Armageddon's not the end of the world, Revelations 16:16. But Christ comes to put an end to the fighting that is going on in the Middle East and globally and, of course, that's Revelations Chapter 11, verse 18.
[...]
JACK VAN IMPE: The hour has arrived. Jesus said there'd be wars and rumors of wars -- Matthew 24, verses 6 and 7, Mark chapters 13, verses 7 and 8. But listen to him in Luke 21, verse 9. He says when you hear of wars and commotions, wars and terrorism, wars and revolutionaries, be not frightened. These things must first come. And I'll come back to that in a moment. But he's talking about two things there: wars and terrorism. I had articles today but we're going to have to cut them off because we don't have time concerning the bombing that just took place in India with 200 dead. And in Somalia, in London a year ago, and then in Sweden, in Spain, and now they are talking about it happening in Canada and in New York -- the tunnels. Why? Because that is what the Bible says will come just before Christ returns. Terrorism. Genesis 6:11, Matthew 24:37, 2nd Peter 2:5, 2nd Peter 3:6.
But let's get back to the war issue right now. What were these wars that Jesus talked about when he said there will be wars and rumors of wars? Well, the thing that's going on right now in Israel could become a major thing or it could just become a minor skirmish for the time being and have it settled. Just a week ago, Israel said 'we will divide Jerusalem and Israel.' Now that's when the real conflagration begins because Armageddon, Revelations 16:16, occurs when they split the nation, Joel 3 verse 2. So watch for that. But as these things unfold, if it were now or later, we see that this leader comes out of the European Union, Daniel 9:26, and makes a seven-year peace contract, verse 27. But after 42 months, it is broken, as a nation called Russia marches against Israel along with the Arab federation. They're together. That's Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39, chapter 3 verses 1 and 2, and that mentions Gog, Magog, Meschech, Tubal, Rosh -- all cities now identifiable in Russia.
From the July 19 edition of Jay Sekulow Live!:
ROSENBERG: Interestingly enough, Jay, as you know, The Ezekiel Option is based on a 2,500 year-old Bible prophecy, Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39, in which Russia teams up with Iran, Lebanon, Syria and a number of other Muslim countries to destroy Israel in what Ezekiel calls the last days. Now when I wrote the novel, people thought, "All right it's an interesting scenario, but Bible prophecy, you've got to be kidding me, that's never going to happen." What's interesting now, is we're watching is slowly, slowly, this exact coalition begin to form. And I have to say, I was very concerned on Monday when Russia talked about sending ground troops into the region, ostensibly as part of a peace-keeping force. But as you know, it's been bedrock U.S. foreign policy principle to keep Russian troops out of the Middle East for the last 60 years. And this would be a massively destabilizing event to watch actual Russian ground troops enter Lebanon. It's too soon to say, honestly, that Ezekiel 38 and 39 are coming true, but I think it's drawing a lot of interest in what the Bible has to say about future events in that part of the world given the parallels to those prophecies.
From the July 18 edition of Point of View:
CALLER: OK, I just wanted to discuss that according to the word of God -- I do a lot of research in Bible prophecy and things of the sort -- it discusses something on the order of that the holy city of Jerusalem will be trodden under the foot of -- I think it's a country from the North -- for 40 and two months. I just wondered: Do you believe that there will be any kind of a relevance on what you're talking about, about how Israel has been leaving their back door open a lot for several different attacks to happen?
ANDERSON: You know, I don't claim to be a prophecy expert, although we're going to have some on the program here pretty soon to begin to speak to that issue. But often times when they're talking about the north, they're usually talking about the kings of the north. Most people have identified that as what used to be the former Soviet Union, now Russia and that region of the world. But of course you also notice that Lebanon is north as well. I think the better answer to that -- and the quicker answer since we're coming up to the break here and we're going to have speaker of the house Newt Gingrich with us in just a minute -- is that this may not be the final scenes, but it may be rearranging some of the chairs, some of the scenery, if you will, on the final stage. And that may be a better way to say that.
From the July 24 edition of CNN's Paula Zahn Now:
ZAHN: Now, is the crisis in the Middle East predicted by the Bible? Next in our top story coverage: What does the Book of Revelation tell us about what's happening right now in the Middle East? Are we really approaching the end of the world, as some believe?
From the July 21 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Janet Parshall's America:
PARSHALL: That's a challenge to us as people of the word; understanding that this is really a Sunday school lesson being played out in front of us. What is our position on the nation of Israel?
Summary Link and Video...
VIDEO / LINK: In Middle East conflict, other crises, conservative media find signs of Biblical prophecy of Armageddon
It's the end of the World!!!
-Mr. Joseph
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Why Dr. James Dobson is so Weird
It definely shines some light on this odd character.
-Mr. Joseph
Frank Zappa on Crossfire
VIDEO (Part One): C&L: Frank Zappa Debates Liebermans Pals on Crossfire in 1986
VIDEO (Part Two): C&L: Frank Zappa Debate Censorship on Crossfire in 1987
LINK: Part One
LINK: Part Two
A well thought out argument of common sense. Who would've thought?
-Mr. Joseph
Why Lieberman Should Lose
Crooks and Liars does a great job documenting this...
LINK: Crooks and Liars: Lieberman's Rant Against Clinton in '98
VIDEO: Liberman's Anti-Clinton Rant
I hope he loses.
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Is U.S. now in World War III, IV, or V?

Media Matters did a great job compiling all of this.
Is it World War III, World War IV, or even World War V?
You decide!
Then, Stephen Colbert did a bit a satire on his show... take a look at that for a laugh.
Again, this is all from MediaMatters.org... I will post only the transcripts and a video link...
TRANSCRIPTS:
From the July 13 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight. Why should you care about the violence in Israel and Lebanon? That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."
The answer to that question is because it affects your life. Every time stuff like this happens, the price of oil goes up and the worldwide economy totters.
It's exactly what Iran wants. And Iran is behind the terror attacks on Israeli forces. The whole thing is part of World War III, ladies and gentlemen. Islamic fascism against the West. That global conflict, unfortunately, is here for the foreseeable future.
[...]
O'REILLY: Yeah. Last question, Mr. Cook. Military action, you know, look, here's what Iran's going to do. It's going to push us as far as it can. It's going to do as much damage to the world as it can. And then it'll draw back, if it thinks military action is coming its way, correct?
STEVEN COOK (fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations): I think that's precisely the case. And there won't be much upside for the United States to take military action directly against Iran. They have too many cards that they can play against us. They have cards to play against us in Afghanistan, cards to play -- continue to make our lives miserable in Iraq. And obviously as we've seen, they've continued -- they've heated up the border between Israel and Lebanon.
O'REILLY: All right, World War III, right?
COOK: Possibly.
O'REILLY: I think we're in it. I absolutely think we're in it.
From the July 10 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson:
GIBSON: From Kim Jong Il's missile testing to the Iranian president ranting that he'll wipe Israel off the map, and the fight to weed terrorists out of Iraq, some are calling the global war on terror something else, something more like World War III. Here now, Michael Ledeen, a columnist and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a public-policy research institute. Michael, it was a columnist in the New York Daily News today saying this is World War III, and it's on. Do you agree with him?
LEDEEN: Well, it's certainly on. It's more like World War IV, because there was a Cold War, which was certainly a world war. But sure, it's global, and it's on.
GIBSON: Where do we count the start of it?
LEDEEN: Well, that's always difficult to do. Probably the start of it was the Iranian revolution of 1979, when you had the first fanatical Islamic regime declare war on us, and that was explicit in the fall of 1979.
GIBSON: What would be the hallmarks of this? I mean, we know there's a war on terror. But the proposition put forward is that if you look at all of this stuff, what the Iranians are threatening to do, what the North Koreans are threatening to do, what the Japanese are threatening to do, what we are prepared to do and have done, that there really is one large world war under way. Does that concept hold together?
LEDEEN: Yeah, I think so. I think the president had it right at the beginning, and he seems to have forgotten about it, when he said that we're not going to distinguish between terrorist organizations and countries that support and feed and house and train and arm them. And so if you help terrorists, we're going to treat you as if you are a terrorist yourself. Well, there are many terrorist regimes around the world right now, and we're going to have to try to cope with them.
GIBSON: Michael, if the -- there is World War IV and it's under way, if that's a correct assumption --
LEDEEN: It is.
GIBSON: -- what should we be doing right now that we're not doing?
LEDEEN: We should be doing what we did most effectively in World War III. The way we won World War III was not by invading and bombing primarily, it was by bringing down regimes that were palpably failures, like the Soviet Union and the Soviet empire in general. If you look at the terrorist sponsors, Syria, Iran, North Korea, and so forth, all of whom work very closely together and so forth, these are all failed regimes. Their people hate them. They're not even feeding their people, even though some of them are drowning in oil revenues. So we should be supporting revolution in those countries against them, exactly as we did in Poland and Hungary and Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union itself. It worked in World War III, I don't see why it shouldn't work in World War IV.
GIBSON: Well, what if you throw into the mix the obvious, that we're not operating against states, we're not operating against governments in all cases, but what we call terrorists?
LEDEEN: It's exactly the same case. We are operating against states like Iran and Syria and North Korea. And in World War III, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union certainly supported terrorism around the world, as did allies of theirs like the Cubans and the Chinese and the North Koreans.
GIBSON: All right, Michael Ledeen, columnist, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Michael, thanks.
From the July 13 edition ABC Radio Networks' The Sean Hannity Show:
HANNITY: Welcome aboard, glad you're with us. Well, is World War III breaking out in the Middle? It may very well be. And we're gonna go for full, complete, comprehensive analysis that you're not going to get in the mainstream media.
[...]
We are loaded up today, as the Middle East on the brink of World War V, here.
From the May 24 edition of CNBC's Kudlow & Company:
KUDLOW: Now, all right. Jed Babbin is talking about some kind of World War IV, I guess. Actually, World War V. We have World War I and II and the Cold War as World War III, according to Norman Podhoretz. World War IV is the terror war, and war with China would be World War V. How likely, John? What would trigger such a thing?
From the July 12 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: Hey, everybody. Hurry up; we've got World War III to fight. Yes, it is the end of days, isn't it?
[...]
Here's what I do know about World War III and the impending apocalypse. One, we can't coexist with people who want to blow up trains and subways and bring down buildings. If somebody has a death wish, not really the best negotiating partner.
I also know that whether you like it or not, this is a religious war. Radical Muslims want to wipe everybody else off the face of the earth. And let me tell you something: Hollywood, clean the ears out and listen up. You are the first in line for the gas chambers if they ever win. You're the one who are producing a lot of the trash that's spilling out into their cave that's hacking them off.
Also, I know that people don't want to believe the worst. That's why more people aren't on the bandwagon. People are in denial. They don't want to think that we're facing something horrible. They want it to go away so we can all get back to our lives.
But listen to me, it is bad. And it's not just us. It's the whole Western way of life that is in trouble. That's why we need to get on that World War III bandwagon.
Now, here's what I don't know. I don't know if there are enough world leaders out there that actually have a spine anymore. Where are the real leaders? Not a lot of people are leading. That's not a real good place to be. Where's Churchill? Where's -- where's FDR?
You know -- I know we have, I know we have George Bush. He's doing it by himself. I mean, Tony Blair is doing good, too, but is that enough?
I also don't know what it's going to take to get people to wake up. My gosh, we were wide awake after 9-11. We've all gone back to sleep. We almost lost World War II because of apathy and denial. Please, let's not let it happen again.
[...]
BECK: Would you agree with me that World War III -- that we're here?
BAER: Oh, we've already, we've already started it.
BECK: Yeah, well I think we're 1938, World War II. It hasn't, it hasn't really hit yet where people are like, "Oh, I get it, we've got to fight." Would you agree?
BAER: This is like Hitler taking over Czechoslovakia. That's the stage we're at right now.
BECK: Right, right. OK. Do you believe -- please say yes -- do you believe it can be avoided?
BAER: No, we're going into a war. We have to brace ourself. It's coming.
From the July 13 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
BECK: I absolutely know that we need to prepare ourselves for World War III. It is here.
VIDEO / LINK: Right-wing media divided: Is U.S. now in World War III, IV, or V?
Stephen Colbert...
VIDEO / LINK: "It's a World War III. Or IV"COLBERT: All right, those of you following the Iraq war on television know that it's been pre-empted by the action-packed summer replacement series "Lebanon." It's new. It's new. It's scary. But it's important for everyone to remain calm and keep the situation in perspective.
[begin video clip]
GINGRICH: Look at all the different connectivity. You'd have to say to yourself, this is in fact World War III.
GIBSON: World War III.
O'REILLY: World War III, right?
GIBSON: This is World War III.
O'REILLY: World War III.
HANNITY: The start of World War III.
LEDEEN: More like World War IV.
[end video clip]
COLBERT: It's a world war. Remember, these guys know war. They're the ones who brought you the "war on Christmas." So, rest of the news media, stop calling it a regional conflict or a police action. It's a World War III. Or IV. Adjust your graphics accordingly.
Politics of fear? Nonsense!
-Mr. Joseph
House Conservatives Reveal What God Thinks About Gay Marriage Amendment
VIDEO: "God's Plan, Idea, and Issue"Rep. John Carter (R-TX): “It’s part of God’s plan for the future of mankind.”
Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN): “It wasn’t our idea, it was God’s.”
Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO): “We best not be messing with His plan.”
Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA): “I think God has spoken very clearly on this issue.”
LINK: House Conservatives Reveal What God Thinks About Gay Marriage Amendment
Yikes,
-Mr. Joseph
Monday, July 17, 2006
Creationist Hovind Has 58 Legal Problems

Oh boy, I love when my favorite Televangelist makes National News!
Anyways, you know the drill -- Batshit crazy creationist is arrested for breaking the law in the name of the Lord and all that.
Here's the story... I bolded the impostant parts...
Evangelist arrested on federal charges
A Pensacola evangelist who owns the defunct Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola was arrested Thursday on 58 federal charges, including failing to pay $473,818 in employee-related taxes and making threats against investigators.Of the 58 charges, 44 were filed against Kent Hovind and his wife, Jo, for evading bank reporting requirements as they withdrew $430,500 from AmSouth Bank between July 20, 2001, and Aug. 9, 2002.
At the couple's first court appearance Thursday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miles Davis, Kent Hovind professed not to understand why he is being prosecuted. Some 20 supporters were in the courtroom.
"I still don't understand what I'm being charged for and who is charging me," he said.
Kent Hovind, who often calls himself "Dr. Dino," has been sparring with the IRS for at least 17 years on his claims that he is employed by God, receives no income, has no expenses and owns no property.
"The debtor apparently maintains that as a minister of God, everything he owns belongs to God and he is not subject to paying taxes to the United States on money he receives for doing God's work," U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Lewis Killian Jr. wrote when he dismissed a claim from Hovind in 1996.
Hovind, an avowed creationist, has widely publicized his "standing offer" to pay $250,000 to anyone who can provide scientific evidence of evolution.
"No one has ever observed a dog produce a non-dog," Hovind once wrote in reply to a New York Times article.
In the indictment unsealed Thursday, a grand jury alleges that Kent Hovind failed to pay $473,818 in federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes on employees at his Creation Science Evangelism/Ministry between March 31, 2001, and Jan. 31, 2004.
As part of the ministry, Hovind operated the Dinosaur Adventure Land at 5800 N. Palafox St., which included rides, a museum and a science center. He also sold literature, videos, CDs and other materials and provided lecture services and live debates for a fee.
The indictment alleges Kent Hovind paid his employees in cash and labeled them "missionaries" to avoid payroll tax and FICA requirements.
On Thursday, a message on the Dinosaur Adventure Land telephone welcomed visitors to the place "where dinosaurs and the Bible meet" and stated that the museum and science center were closed temporarily.
The indictment also says the Hovinds' made cash withdrawals from AmSouth Bank in a manner that evaded federal requirements for reporting cash transactions.
The withdrawals were for $9,500 or $9,600, just below the $10,000 starting point for reporting cash transactions.
Most of the withdrawals were days apart. For example, the indictment shows three withdrawals of $9,500 each on July 20, July 23 and July 26 in 2001.
The indictment also charges Kent Hovind with impeding an IRS investigation.
Among the ways he is accused of doing:
· Filing a frivolous lawsuit against the agency demanding damages for criminal trespass.
· Filing an injunction against an IRS special agent.
· Filing false complaints against the IRS for false arrest, excessive use of force and theft.
· Making threats against investigators and those cooperating with the investigation.
Judge Davis released the Hovinds from custody pending their trial, which will be scheduled during their arraignment at 2 p.m. Monday.
Over Kent Hovind's protests, the judge took away his passport and guns Hovind claimed belonged to his church.
Hovind argued that he needs his passport to continue his evangelism work. He said "thousands and thousands" are waiting to hear him preach in South Africa next month.
But Davis agreed with Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Heldmyer, who argued that "like-minded people" might secret Hovind away if he left the country.
As for the guns, Davis said "ownership was not the issue."
Kent Hovind also has had run-ins with state authorities.
In April, Circuit Judge Michael Allen ordered the buildings at Dinosaur Adventure Land closed because Hovind failed to obtain a building permit during the 2002 construction. The outdoor theme park was allowed to stay open.
Members of Creation Science Evangelism said at the time that building permits violated their "deeply held" religious beliefs.
While the building permit case was tied up in a four-year court battle, ownership of the theme park was turned over to Glen Stoll, who works with Hovind on legal issues and is based in Washington.
Last year, the U.S. attorney in Seattle filed a lawsuit against Stoll, charging him with encouraging people to avoid tax payments by claiming to be religious entities, according to news reports.
LINK: Crooks and Liars: Creationist Hovind Has 58 Legal Problems
LINK: Evangelist Arrested on Federal Charges
Good stuff!
-Mr. Joseph
Putin Blasts Bush, Iraq
-Vladmir Putin
VIDEO: Putin Blasts Iraq's Democracy
LINK: Crooks and Liars: Putin
What a slam.
This just goes to show what Americans look like to the rest of the world.
-Mr. Joseph
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Adam Carolla hangs up on Ann Coulter!
From Crooks and Liars...
ROUGH TRANSCRIPT:
ADAM CAROLLA: Ann Coulter, who was suppose to be on the show about an hour and a half ago, is now on the phone, as well. Ann?
ANN COULTER: Hello.
CAROLLA: Hi Ann. You’re late, babydoll.
COULTER: Uh, somebody gave me the wrong number.
CAROLLA: Mmm… how did you get the right number? Just dialed randomly — eventually got to our show? (Laughter in background)
COULTER: Um, no. My publicist e-mailed it to me, I guess, after checking with you.
CAROLLA: Ahh, I see.
COULTER: But I am really tight on time right now because I already had a —
CAROLLA: Alright, well, get lost.
AUDIO: Carolla vs. Coulter
LINK: Crooks and Liars: Adam Carolla Hangs Up on Ann Coulter
That is good stuff -- here's a shout out to Adam Carolla!
-Mr. Joseph
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Kenny Boy is Dead
Ken Lay dies of heart attack
Wed Jul 5, 2006 5:30 PM BST
By Matt Daily
HOUSTON (Reuters) - Enron Corp. founder Ken Lay died of a heart attack on Wednesday, six weeks after being found guilty of fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.
Lay, 64, was awaiting sentencing later this year and was expected to face decades in prison for his fraud and conspiracy convictions in the Enron collapse.
"Ken Lay passed away early this morning," Lay family spokeswoman Kelly Kimberly said in a statement.
Lay and another former Enron CEO, Jeffrey Skilling, were found guilty of hiding the financial ruin at Enron, the company they built into the seventh largest in the United States. Enron plunged into bankruptcy in December 2001.
Lay, once a confidant of former President George H.W. Bush and dubbed "Kenny boy" by President George W. Bush, often appeared fatigued during the four-month trial, but there was no indication that he had suffered any adverse health effects.
"I guess you could say in the last few years I've achieved the American nightmare," Lay told the jury from the witness stand during the trial.
Pitkin County sheriff's deputies and an ambulance were dispatched to the Lay vacation home in Old Snowmass, Colorado, early Wednesday morning and transported him to Aspen Valley Hospital. He was pronounced dead there shortly after 10 a.m. British time.
"A coroner's autopsy is pending. There will be no further information or press release from this office until autopsy results are available later this week," the county said in a statement.
On Friday, federal prosecutors asked a federal judge to force Lay to pay $43.5 million (23.7 million pounds) they said he had received because of his crimes at Enron.
Both Lay and Skilling had maintained they were innocent of any crimes at Enron, and both had planned to appeal the guilty verdicts.
Lay, whose wealth at one time totalled more than $100 million, claimed he had little money left after the Enron bankruptcy, although prosecutors have said he still had millions in annuities and other investments.
Enron began as a quiet pipeline company under Lay's guidance in 1985 and grew quickly into an international energy powerhouse before it imploded in a wave of accounting scandals.
Enron became the most infamous financial scandal in decades, as images were beamed around the globe of thousands of sacked employees carrying their possessions past the company's crooked "E" logo outside its gleaming office tower in downtown Houston.
Lay basked in the limelight of his adopted hometown and was a fixture on the charity circuit, donating millions of his own money and Enron's funds.
Following his indictment, he was rarely seen in public, usually only on Sunday mornings as he attended church services.
Born into poverty as the son of a Baptist preacher in Missouri, Lay excelled in school and advanced quickly in the worlds of government and business before taking the helm of the company that would become Enron.
Lay is survived by his wife, Linda, five children and step-children and 12 grandchildren. Information on funeral arrangements had not yet been announced.
LINK: Ken Lay Dies of a Heart Attack
Good riddance!
-Mr. Joseph
A Message From a True Patriot
Wise words, Senator..."This Fourth of July it's right to spend some time thinking about what it means not just to be an American, but to be a patriot -- because the concept of patriotism itself is under assault in ways that remind me of a different time in our history.
When we protested the war in Vietnam some would weigh in against us saying: "My country right or wrong." Our response was simple: "Yes, my country right or wrong.
When right, keep it right and when wrong, make it right."I feel history repeating itself.
What did the United States Senate do before leaving town for the 4th of July break? In a summer when things are decidedly not right for American soldiers in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan, while their families at home are hit with record gas prices, health care costs a mess, and veterans still go without the health care they were promised, did we unite in some big hearted cause to make these urgent challenges right?
No. We debated a craven effort to amend the Constitution allegedly to protect the flag we all love. The Senate -- the place the original patriots -- the Founding Fathers -- imagined as the place big national issues would be addressed out of love of country, became a place where the Constitution itself was nearly shredded for political convenience, for ideology, for short term political gain and political timidity.
Make no mistake -- this wasn't a test of who loves the flag. But it was a test of who had the courage to protect the Constitution."
You can read the full column here...
LINK: How To Love Your Country
Here are the lyrics to my favorite patriotic song...
"God Bless the U.S.A." by Lee Greenwood
If tomorrow all the things were gone,
I’d worked for all my life.
And I had to start again,
with just my children and my wife.
I’d thank my lucky stars,
to be livin here today.
‘Cause the flag still stands for freedom,
and they can’t take that away.
And I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
‘Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.
From the lakes of Minnesota,
to the hills of Tennessee.
Across the plains of Texas,
From sea to shining sea.
From Detroit down to Houston,
and New York to L.A.
Well there's pride in every American heart,
and its time we stand and say.
That I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
‘Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.
And I’m proud to be and American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.
And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
‘Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.
-Mr. Joseph
Conservative Legal News...
Update: Company to Probe Coulter Plagiarism Charges
By Justin Rood - July 5, 2006, 2:35 PM
I heard back from Universal Press Syndicate's Kathie Kerr. Her company distributes Ann Coulter's column to over 100 newspapers around the country -- columns which, according to recent news, may have contained plagiarized material.
I had asked Kerr earlier this morning whether her company was taking any action in response to these published claims.
In an email, Kerr thanked me for bringing the assertions to UPS's attention, and asked me to get a copy of the report to them. "If Mr. Barrie would be so kind to send Lee Salem, President and Editor of Universal Press Syndicate his report, we will be happy to review it. Until we do, there's little we can say about it," she wrote me. John Barrie was the New York Post's expert source who claimed to have identified Coulter's plagiarized passages.
In my reply, I explained to Kerr that Barrie had been quoted not by me but by the New York Post, and perhaps that paper would be a good source of information. Kerr replied: "we have no contact information."
A few minutes later, however, Ms. Kerr located Barrie's contact information on the Web and said she would try to call him herself. Moments later, another email from Ms. Kerr arrived: "I've left Mr. Barrie a message."
Sounds like the Coulter plagiarism investigation is off to a flying start. I've put in a call myself to Mr. Barrie, and am waiting to hear back. I'll let you know what I find out.
LINK: TPMMuckraker.com: Company to Probe Coulter Plagiarism ChargesBad News...
No Charges for Limbaugh Over Viagra
By BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 5, 7:25 PM ET
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Rush Limbaugh will not face charges in Palm Beach County for the bottle of Viagra found in his luggage that was prescribed in his psychologist's name, prosecutors said Wednesday.
Charges could have nullified the conservative radio host's plea agreement in a "doctor shopping" case.
Limbaugh, 55, was detained for more than three hours at Palm Beach International Airport on June 26 after he returned on his private plane from a vacation in the Dominican Republic.
The state attorney's office said the medication was prescribed by Limbaugh's cardiologist, Dr. Steven Schnur, to Limbaugh's psychologist and addiction counselor, Steve Strumwasser. Strumwasser then provided the Viagra to Limbaugh, said state attorney spokesman Mike Edmondson.
Strumwasser told authorities he "agreed to have his name on the label in an effort to avoid potentially embarrassing publicity for the suspect," according to the state attorney's office filing. "Thus, the medication contained in the subject pill bottle was legitimately prescribed to the suspect by his physician."
It is generally not illegal under Florida law for a physician to prescribe medication in a third party's name if all parties are aware and the doctor documents it correctly, Edmondson said.
However, since the doctor wrote the prescription in Miami-Dade County, the case was forwarded to prosecutors there for review. The Miami-Dade state attorney's office had no immediate comment.
The Palm Beach County state attorney's office also said it forwarded the matter to the state Department of Professional Regulation and the Department of Health to determine whether the doctor breached ethics.
Department spokeswoman Thometta Cozart said she did not know whether the prescription was an ethical breach.
Limbaugh said on his radio show Wednesday that prosecutors declined to file charges because "there were no laws broken."
The office of Limbaugh's lawyer, Roy Black, referred questions Wednesday to Limbaugh spokesman Tony Knight. Knight declined to comment.
In an affidavit, Limbaugh said: "Dr. Strumwasser has been extraordinarily careful, at my request, to protect my privacy in all matters concerning his treatment of me."
Schnur had no comment because of patient confidentiality concerns, said spokesman Todd Templin. Calls seeking comment from Strumwasser were not immediately returned Wednesday.
Charges in the Viagra case could have nullified a deal Limbaugh reached with prosecutors last month in which a single "doctor shopping" charge was deferred for 18 months, so long as Limbaugh does not get arrested for any reason.
Authorities had accused Limbaugh of illegally deceiving multiple doctors to get overlapping painkiller prescriptions. Limbaugh denied the charges but acknowledged he was addicted to painkillers.
LINK: Associated Press: No Charges for LimbaughAnd they accuse liberals of veing immoral!
-Mr. Joseph















