Priorities: ‘Liberal’ media aired Bush’s stem cell speech, won’t air Obama’s on immigration

George W. Bush speaks to CBS News (screen grab)
George W. Bush speaks to CBS News (screen grab)


The mainstream media certainly has its priorities in order. Tonight, when President Obama announces his new plan for immigration reform, you can be sure that the networks will be airing totally ignoring the speech on one of the most pressing and relevant issues facing not only the country but the world. That’s right, ladies and gentleman ABC, CBS. NBC and Fox (duh) have said they won’t be covering the speech live.

In all fairness, this makes sense. After all, why should the networks cover this issue when it is soooo stale? It’s so ten years ago. Or eight years ago, to be precise. All four networks covered President Bush’s 2006 speech on immigration. So why should they cover another speech on the same issue? I mean the president’s have totally different policies and the context is pretty different. But, still, what’s the new angle? I don’t see one. Do you? Bush announced  he was sending National Guard troops to protect the U.S./Mexico border. Obama will announce an executive order that will grant legal status and work permits for as many as 5 million people. When you strip away the political jargon, aren’t the two policies  identical to each other?

Continue reading at RawStory

Tea Party spokesman who said Obama’s blackness kills people breaks into tears on TV

Lloyd Marcus

In this culture of hyper-masculinity, it’s refreshing to see a man who’s not afraid to show his emotions. So, let’s give a round of applause to Lloyd Marcus, the emotionally evolved Tea Party spokesman, and chair of the Conservative Campaign Committee, who broke into tears during an interview today with the right wing “news” outlet Newsmax.

Now, those of us who are fans of Marcus, who describes himself as “not an African-American,” but rather “An Americaaaaaaan!” know that he’s very capable of expressing his emotions. After all, who can forget his compelling headline warning that, “Because [Obama] is Black, Americans Suffer and Die.”

But perhaps an even greater example of his emotional connectedness is his writing the “Tea Party Anthem,” creatively called… “Tea Party Anthem.”

The lyrics deserve attention, because they express Lloyd’s sensibility, his creativity and his innovation. Look at how he employs an experimental second person shift. I certainly wasn’t expecting that. Were you? Continue reading “Tea Party spokesman who said Obama’s blackness kills people breaks into tears on TV”

Obama is just as racist as Ted Nugent, according to statutory rapist, self-defecating, draft dodger Nugent

ImageSo, it only took statutory rapist, self-defecating, draft dodger Ted Nugent a month to find the quote he thinks vindicates him for having called his president a subhuman mongrel. Drumroll please…. “So Obama called blacks mongrels on the View. Well well well” tweeted a comma-shy Nugent. So, what’s the deal? Did President Obama indeed call “blacks” mongrels? Well, it turns out he did, indeed, say, “We are sort of a mongrel people…. I mean we’re all kinds of mixed up.” So, now the question becomes, did Obama call “blacks” mongrels? Yes and no. He was referring to African Americans initially, but Obama explicitly said the same applied to white people: “That’s actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it.” But let’s, for argument’s sake, say Obama had really been speaking exclusively about Black people. Would that legitimize Ted Nugent’s use of the word. Not at all. First of all, there is the whole question of the identity of the speaker. But I’m not going to focus on this because I’m sure anyone dense or dishonest enough to think this is a gotcha moment for Obama is incapable of or unwilling to recognize the difference between a Black person using the N word, and a non-Black person using it; the difference between a gay man using the f word and a straight person using it etc.

What is undeniable and not up for debate is the fact that Obama and Nugent meant profoundly different things when they used the mongrel. Ted Nugent is a proud Obama-hater, who vowed that he would be dead or in jail if Obama won re-election. (I thought you were a man of your word, Ted.) When he called Obama “mongrel” he was being overtly and unmistakably critical (for argument’s sake, I’ll use the word “critical” as opposed to hateful, racist, derogatory, offensive etc). How do we know? Well, besides his record of Obama-victory-based death or prison threats (or teases, to me), the immediate context of the quote makes Nugent’s perspective crystal clear: “I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist raised communist educated communist nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.” So, he’s lamenting that Obama has not be voted out (or worse), calling him a gangster and, here’s the big kicker, subhuman. There’s an unspoken rule which governs the world that says that any word directly preceded by “subhuman” is not being used in a nice way. Now, compare this to Barack Obama’s use of the word. The only way for Obama’s use of the word to be at all comparable, would be if Obama had openly stated his opposition to African Americans previously or at the same point. If he had lamented being unable to galvanize people against African Americans and kick them out of the country. This is even more far fetched when we take into account that Obama was talking about white people, too. Now, for Nugent to have any leg to stand on, Obama would have had to have expressed a hatred of black people and white people and actually all people, since almost all people are mixes. Please note, Obama does not use the word “subhuman” or any other Hitlerian nomenclature in his appearance on the View. So there’s that, too.