This entry was posted on June 11, 2011 at 9:19 am and is filed under What's Hot/What's Not . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
CNN major fail. About an hour ago on CNN, they were reporting the Warren Buffet ebay bid. But instead of saying million, they said BILLION. On the screen and the host said it as well.
“Treatmant”, eh? Bull. The only treatmant for “horny and stupid” is grow the F up. I don’t care about “consenting adults”, but he was responding to very young women just saying hi with this perverted weirdness. That seems abusive. Now he admits he talked to the 17-year-old, but “nothing improper” transpired. Uh..you’re 46, she’s 17. You don’t see anything improper there? RESIGN.
I don’t think it’s about being horny and Weiner’s certainly not stupid. He thinks others are below him and exhibits a particular disdain toward women. This type of behaviour often stems from intense anger issues and I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to learn that he kicks those two cats he has in his apartment sometimes, either.
Not possible to discern the origin of his problems without a proper evaluation. Could be clinical depression or it might just be the nature of his personality. Either way, I wouldn’t trust him in any capacity be that personal or professional.
I’ve seen Ann Coulter in person. She’s hilarious. She took audience questions and pretty much insulted every liberal in the room. I had a fun time at least.
Interesting that you’d interpret “clinical” as being something of an “excuse”. Spitzer and Vitter committed crimes only because the act involved payment, but was otherwise little different than what Clinton and Schwarzenegger did. Those all were sexual in nature. Weiner’s problem is not; he is a predator.
There’s no way Weiner can be an affected Congressman now …but truth be told he wasn’t before..the MSM loved him for his attacks on Republicans and attempts to silence Glenn Beck over that Gold thing plus because he was good buddies with John Stewart but as an actual Congressman he hasn’t done anything of note and how he can do anything now but be an embarrassment is beyond me.
Though as I pointed out before there are different set of rules for Dems than Republicans and while a Republican would have to have resigned by now a Dem doesn’t have the same pressure on them I mean look at Charlie Rangle and Barney Franks if they weren’t Dems they be gone by now.
But contacting a 17yo girl just doesn’t look good and even a Dem can’t get away with it so he’ll have to go and he’ll be giving a strong hint by the Dem leadership to do so and I predict he resign by next week.
Quite frankly, I have much less of a problem with prostitution. There are parameters, expectations and rules. You don’t get to pick women at random, and treat them like an unpaid version.
I’m reacting to “clinical” in respect to “treatment”. The first tenet of 12-step programs is accepting you’re powerless over your addiction. Weiner isn’t addicted, and he’s not powerless. He’s just a dirty old man.
I do not need to examine the congressman in order to know – with certitude – that what he’s thus far admitted to doing is not a legitimate example of a recognised addiction. That is not to suggest he wouldn’t benefit from psychological treatment, however, and that should be his first step after resigning from congress.
And he’s not just a “dirty old man”. His is not a sexual offence. It’s about power and anger over anyone he considers to be his subordinate and women are usually the easier targets of such predators.
I agree with Joe. He’s just a dirty old man. I’ve never met him but I have zero reason to believe it has anything to do with “power and anger”. I think he just gets his kicks from talking dirty to young hotties.
#1 Several of Mr. Weiner’s friends have suggested that he will not resign unless forced to do so because he so closely identifies his own persona with the power of his job.
#2 He’s intensely manipulative. Despite the harm he knew he might inflict upon the reputations of close friends and colleagues, he manipulated them into arguing in his defence. Apparently he is not considered to be a trustworthy negotiator of legislation even amongst members of his own caucus.
#3 Domination and inflicting pain. I won’t copy those words onto Spud’s blog, but read some of the transcripts of his messages. They are not words of pleasure, they are of inflicting his dominance and pain onto women.
#4 A recurring theme. He seems to fancy himself as a cape-wearing, invincible super-hero. Again, this reflects Mr. Weiner’s fantasy of being in total control of someone else’s fate.
#5 His sculpted physique and hairless skin. Exercising for physical fitness is a good thing. I’ll just say that his muscle building appears more a vanity dressing than it does an evenly distributed exercise regimen.
“Dirty old man” denotes a relative harmless geezer who still loves the ladies. Mr. Weiner exhibits the traits of a misogynist.
I don’t think I or Lonestar implied his actions were harmless. Specifically, I have no inherent problem with two adults enjoying chatting about whatever makes them happy. Even between a 46yo and a 26yo, if they’ve come to a mutual conclusion that they would enjoy certain things, more power to ‘em.
What bothers me about Weiner’s behavior is that he seemed intent on creating these “relationships” with every pretty face on Twitter, regardless of age, and apparently with no interest in anything but cutting to the chase as quickly as possible. The 26yo mentioned being surprised at how fast he changed to his preferred topic. That behavior is certainly not “harmless”.
^ ^I dunno, maybe. But, sometimes, people are just a-holes. Sometimes, people are too stupid to realize what they’re doing will eventually get them into trouble. Some people are in to chatting with young women. Weiner could be all three. Not everyone has to fit a diagnosis. Sometimes, people are just dumb, horny, a-holes.
It’s also possible that, back in the day, he was a huge nerd who didn’t have a chance of landing the hottest girl in class. I mean, look at the guy. And, his last name is “Weiner”. He’s prolly trying to relive a less than memorable high school/college experience. Dude is ripped, though, gotta give him that. Who knew?
He was also probably a little jealous that that Schrock guy was getting all the publicity so he decided to play the “oh yeah, look at this” game.
Just a silly observation, to balance-off Dr. Demento up there.
Just once, I would like to see one of these guys go public with something along the lines of “I know that I present myself as a normal, button-down, middle-age government functionary. This is quite far from the case. I have chosen to submit myself for treatment, hopefully prior to the inevitable scandal that will expose me as the toe-sucking-freak that I am. Pray for me, cuz I’m gonna miss all that.”
I don’t have a problem with consenting adults talking about whatever they want to talk about, either. Nor do I expect members of congress to conduct private lives without faults or any moral deviations. The most effective people of any profession are often the ones with the biggest faults. I said a couple days ago that Weiner’s transgressions weren’t that big of a deal to me. That was before I realised that this wasn’t about him getting some jollies.
Eric Bolling of Fox News needs to be sent to the woodshed – and suspended for at least a week if not longer – for his outrageous racialist if not racist remarks when President Obama met with the President of Gabon the other day.
In a piece entitled, “Hoods in House” (yes, that was the title) Bolling went off on an ugly and bizarre rant about the rapper Common and the Gabonese President going to “hizzhouse” and how Obama judges black people by their race and not by their ideas.
It was all disgusting and really unacceptable.
If I ran the network he’d be gone if not forever for a long long time.
The Chris Cuomo interview with Howie Kurtz today was very impressive. I hadn’t seen much of Mr. Cuomo before but he was as smooth an interviewee as I’ve seen in a long time. It’s easy to see why GMA was keen to hire him.
Eric Bolling wants to replace Glenn Beck, but he misses one of the two key ingredients: Beck is bonkers and says some some unpleasant stuff sometimes, but he’s a nice guy, and it shows. Eric lacks an ounce of niceness, and doubles down on The Crazy. He’s the idiot who had Pamela Geller on after the birth certificate was released to help him continue to “question” it. Fox should fire the racist scumbag.
Unless Bolling somehow made those clips in his basement I’d like to know where the heck the editors and producers at Fox News were when the segments were cut. Did anyone monitor or approve these first? They must have some vetting process before putting things out on the air.
Within 10 seconds of watching them someone should have jumped up and said, “What the hell are you doing!?”
I’m talking about management, Steve. They never seem to crack down on anybody. Apparently Fox talkers have a “First Amendment right” to say any damn thing that pops in their heads.
It’s clear that they – well, Ailes – got fed up of Beck. Yeah, ’twas low hanging fruit (ahem) but at least something.
I still want to know why there wasn’t a producer or editor that didn’t see this and immediately understand how awful it was. Lordy, you have to be pretty much brain dead (if not worse) not to see the implications of what Bolling was suggesting.
Let’s see if Ailes or someone does something about it. I think it’s percolating under the surface and something will come out.
I don’t think Beck was canned for incendiary remarks; they were quite happy with him in that roll. I think they got fed up with his turn to religious end-of-the-world programming, which, incidentally, I predicted would happen. You’re welcome.
Bolling has an embarrassing “saw it on MTV” view of African-Americans. They’re all “hoods slamming forties in the house”, shooting hoops and listening to that gangsta rapper Common fo shizzle my nizzle. It’s hard to tell if he’s genuinely racist, or just genuinely dumb as a rock.
I agree that Eric Bolling comes off as a mean hack and that those clips were certainly offensive. But I also believe that one of the most scum-bag things any person can ever do to another is to accuse them of being a racist without an abundance of clear and convincing, objective evidence to support that charge. So I’ll just say Eric Bolling is an ass.
I think Bolling is one of these people who justifies his own lack of filter by saying “I just won’t be politically correct”. I also think that throwing-around the word ‘racist’ in some way justifies (in his mind) his own tendencies. He would tend to see himself as ‘fighting the power’ rather than ‘being an @sshole’.
What always seems to get lost in these dicussions is what constitutes racism. As far as I can tell from the righties around here, nothing does. How many negative stereotypes does a goon have to spew before you accept that White Boy has a problem with black people because they’re black?
What most offends me about this stuff is that – whether Bolling is a true racist, or just a jerk – he knows there’s real racists watching, and he’s intentionally firing up their “yeah, screw those people” tendencies. They should fire that pig.
- “whether Bolling is a true racist, or just a jerk” -
That tells me you haven’t fully decided in your own mind. Neither have I and that’s sufficient for me to refrain from giving him that label. We’ve all met true racists and most tend to stick out clearly enough that we don’t need to wonder about what they think. Accusing someone of racism is akin to calling them a child molester, and being a person who falsely attaches one of those labels to someone who is really nothing worse than just a plain old jerk… well, that’s every bit as bad as being a racist or child molester.
And using such terms is completely unnecessary given the hundreds of other, less-devastating-if-false adjectives we have at our disposal for labelling these jackasses.
Occurs to me that Weiner’s dirty trick was a tactic not terribly dissimilar to Eric Bolling’s offensive presentation.
When I meet a true racist, it’s easy to determine it because they’ve got no reason other than true belief to talk to me that way. With TV/radio people like Bolling and Rush (who’s done his share of race-baiting), it’s about impossible to tell how much is “real”, and how much is throwing red meat to the crowd.
Bolling strikes me as an opportunist willing to blurt out anything to keep his name in the game, including sounding blatantly racist. As far as I’m concerned, there’s little difference between sounding racist and being it.
Finally watched the Bolling thing. The only thing I got from it was that it sounded stupid coming from his mouth. But, “offensive” & “racist”, it’s not. You could find numerous examples, on a daily basis, of statements that are more “offensive” on other news networks if you don’t have a predisposition to judge statements different depending on who the speaker is and who the comment is directed to. It was obviously light-hearted, get over it.
“it’s about impossible to tell how much is “real”, and how much is throwing red meat to the crowd.”
Stupid.
Maybe if you got past your bigoted belief that everyone who listens to Rush and watches FNC hates black people, you’d be able to make a better argument.
But sounding racist is not racist, and your standard allows your subjective and/or possibly selective hearing to make a potentially un-retractable mistake. I seem to recall that one of those Ten Suggestions that Moses kicked down some big hill had to do with bearing false witness.
Yeah, I can always count on LS to blow off anything that may offend blacks.
“False witness” is bull. Bolling has repeatedly attacked African-Americans with derogatory stereotypes. If I repeatedly claim that women should be quiet, pregnant and in the kitchen; can I then claim I’m not really sexist? How could you tell?
How the hell is “hizzouse” offensive, anyway. Just because someone uses slang that mostly belongs to another group of people, doesn’t automatically make it “racist” or “offensive”.
Yeah yeah, last time it was “slamming forties”. Before that it was “I’ve seen the birth certificate, but I still don’t trust him”. Every damn comment leads to the same thing: “I can’t believe those nasty people are in the White House”. I know loathsome race-baiting when I hear it, and Bolling is making a habit out of it.
I’d say you’re out on the thinnest of limbs, Joe. I also don’t like it because such use steals its true meaning from those who have been hurt by actual racism, and because it erodes the term’s usefulness as a shameful label.
““I can’t believe those nasty people are in the White House””
I guarantee you he’s an equal-opportunity hater. Pick your favorite white liberal, throw him in the WH and I bet Bolling would be saying even nastier things. The things that come out of the mouths of your favorite lefties over at MSNBC are 100 times more egregious, hateful & “offensive”. But, you don’t care because they’re either directed at white people or black CONSERVATIVES.
Using slang and/or stereotypes isn’t racist. It’s not racist when Marc Lamont Hill uses his “white voice”, it wasn’t racist when the left mocked Bush for his accent or caricatured him as a cowboy. Either hold the same standards for all groups of people or hold none at all.
Continually calling everybody a racist is old, tired & ignorant.
Come on, Al. Bolling has repeatedly charicatured Obama as some gangsta rapper thug-type. It’s a stereotype. A racial one. “Colorblindness” is easy for the ones not being demeaned.
“Hizzhouse” is certainly offensive. For starters, Bolling’s premise is so paper-thin weak that he felt the need to resort to rap slang as a way to give it some added credibility, which failed miserably.
“Come on, Al. Bolling has repeatedly charicatured Obama as some gangsta rapper thug-type. It’s a stereotype. A racial one. “Colorblindness” is easy for the ones not being demeaned.”
Wahh, wahh, wahh
Obama still leads Bolling in the “racially insensitive commentary” category. Get back to me when you accuse him of being a racist. Or, any non-white, non-conservative for that matter.
“Gangsta thug” is a more modern version of the old “Chicago thug”, and both are construed as being negative elements of American society.
Would it be acceptable to use an “organised crime” or an elite East-coast university-type analogy? Might be a few Italians taking offence but so what? American culture includes black culture and it’s negative associations are not automatically off-limits “just because.”
You did notice that our president is a black man, right?
^ Italians-Americans & Irish-Americans are probably the most mocked group in our society. Outside of the large group that falls under the “Christian” umbrella.
But, that’s okay because they can take it. They don’t need white liberals running in to save them from all those evil white honky crackers.
^ I’d say Polish are probably the most mocked, or maybe those southern, mountain-hick people who live in.. oh, Georgia. Hey, we’re Americans and that’s what we do. We mock the new people who, instead of whining, toughen up and then their children grow up to live better lives and do Great Things.
I want to know who’s required to watch him long enough to hear him say anything. The best point made was about the ‘likability’-factor. He always looks to me as though he needs a shave and a bail-bond. “Ooh, I know. Let’s give Nixon a talkshow! What could go wrong?” Let him make a similarly snide comment about The Princess, and see how long he lasts. He probably has to fight that urge daily.
I’m not sure the Palin comment would be negative, but he looks like the kind of bloke who would say something complimentary in an appropriately disgusting manner.
I can’t see Fox sticking Bolling in Beck’s slot. All of the FNC hosts – even the more abrasive ones – have some measure of warmth to their personalities. Eric is just MEAN.
June 11, 2011 at 11:35 am
That Ann Coulter makes a lot of good points about the Wiener scandal if you can get underneath the jokes and offensive words.
June 11, 2011 at 1:26 pm
underneath the jokes and offensive words…
..there’s no Ann Coulter.
June 11, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Spud goes missing again. Anybody know what Seal 6 is up to this weekend..?
June 11, 2011 at 2:28 pm
Training once a month… or nudie beach surveillance.
June 11, 2011 at 2:33 pm
CNN major fail. About an hour ago on CNN, they were reporting the Warren Buffet ebay bid. But instead of saying million, they said BILLION. On the screen and the host said it as well.
June 11, 2011 at 3:01 pm
“Treatmant”, eh? Bull. The only treatmant for “horny and stupid” is grow the F up. I don’t care about “consenting adults”, but he was responding to very young women just saying hi with this perverted weirdness. That seems abusive. Now he admits he talked to the 17-year-old, but “nothing improper” transpired. Uh..you’re 46, she’s 17. You don’t see anything improper there? RESIGN.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43365868/ns/politics-capitol_hill/
June 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm
I don’t think it’s about being horny and Weiner’s certainly not stupid. He thinks others are below him and exhibits a particular disdain toward women. This type of behaviour often stems from intense anger issues and I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to learn that he kicks those two cats he has in his apartment sometimes, either.
Not possible to discern the origin of his problems without a proper evaluation. Could be clinical depression or it might just be the nature of his personality. Either way, I wouldn’t trust him in any capacity be that personal or professional.
June 11, 2011 at 4:39 pm
I’ve seen Ann Coulter in person. She’s hilarious. She took audience questions and pretty much insulted every liberal in the room. I had a fun time at least.
June 11, 2011 at 4:39 pm
There’s nothing “clinical” about dudes enjoying talking to chicks. Weiner enjoys it a little too much, has no self-control, and is therefore AN IDIOT.
June 11, 2011 at 4:41 pm
- Ann Coulter -
Ann is, of course, evil..but it’s such an over-the-top evil that it’s hard to be offended by her. She cracks me up.
June 11, 2011 at 5:03 pm
“Spud goes missing again.”
Quadaffi better watch his a**!
June 11, 2011 at 5:31 pm
-nothing “clinical” about -
Interesting that you’d interpret “clinical” as being something of an “excuse”. Spitzer and Vitter committed crimes only because the act involved payment, but was otherwise little different than what Clinton and Schwarzenegger did. Those all were sexual in nature. Weiner’s problem is not; he is a predator.
June 11, 2011 at 6:09 pm
There’s no way Weiner can be an affected Congressman now …but truth be told he wasn’t before..the MSM loved him for his attacks on Republicans and attempts to silence Glenn Beck over that Gold thing plus because he was good buddies with John Stewart but as an actual Congressman he hasn’t done anything of note and how he can do anything now but be an embarrassment is beyond me.
Though as I pointed out before there are different set of rules for Dems than Republicans and while a Republican would have to have resigned by now a Dem doesn’t have the same pressure on them I mean look at Charlie Rangle and Barney Franks if they weren’t Dems they be gone by now.
But contacting a 17yo girl just doesn’t look good and even a Dem can’t get away with it so he’ll have to go and he’ll be giving a strong hint by the Dem leadership to do so and I predict he resign by next week.
June 11, 2011 at 6:11 pm
Quite frankly, I have much less of a problem with prostitution. There are parameters, expectations and rules. You don’t get to pick women at random, and treat them like an unpaid version.
June 11, 2011 at 6:49 pm
I’m reacting to “clinical” in respect to “treatment”. The first tenet of 12-step programs is accepting you’re powerless over your addiction. Weiner isn’t addicted, and he’s not powerless. He’s just a dirty old man.
June 11, 2011 at 8:07 pm
I do not need to examine the congressman in order to know – with certitude – that what he’s thus far admitted to doing is not a legitimate example of a recognised addiction. That is not to suggest he wouldn’t benefit from psychological treatment, however, and that should be his first step after resigning from congress.
June 11, 2011 at 8:11 pm
And he’s not just a “dirty old man”. His is not a sexual offence. It’s about power and anger over anyone he considers to be his subordinate and women are usually the easier targets of such predators.
June 11, 2011 at 8:15 pm
I agree with Joe. He’s just a dirty old man. I’ve never met him but I have zero reason to believe it has anything to do with “power and anger”. I think he just gets his kicks from talking dirty to young hotties.
June 11, 2011 at 9:07 pm
#1 Several of Mr. Weiner’s friends have suggested that he will not resign unless forced to do so because he so closely identifies his own persona with the power of his job.
#2 He’s intensely manipulative. Despite the harm he knew he might inflict upon the reputations of close friends and colleagues, he manipulated them into arguing in his defence. Apparently he is not considered to be a trustworthy negotiator of legislation even amongst members of his own caucus.
#3 Domination and inflicting pain. I won’t copy those words onto Spud’s blog, but read some of the transcripts of his messages. They are not words of pleasure, they are of inflicting his dominance and pain onto women.
#4 A recurring theme. He seems to fancy himself as a cape-wearing, invincible super-hero. Again, this reflects Mr. Weiner’s fantasy of being in total control of someone else’s fate.
#5 His sculpted physique and hairless skin. Exercising for physical fitness is a good thing. I’ll just say that his muscle building appears more a vanity dressing than it does an evenly distributed exercise regimen.
“Dirty old man” denotes a relative harmless geezer who still loves the ladies. Mr. Weiner exhibits the traits of a misogynist.
June 11, 2011 at 9:35 pm
I don’t think I or Lonestar implied his actions were harmless. Specifically, I have no inherent problem with two adults enjoying chatting about whatever makes them happy. Even between a 46yo and a 26yo, if they’ve come to a mutual conclusion that they would enjoy certain things, more power to ‘em.
What bothers me about Weiner’s behavior is that he seemed intent on creating these “relationships” with every pretty face on Twitter, regardless of age, and apparently with no interest in anything but cutting to the chase as quickly as possible. The 26yo mentioned being surprised at how fast he changed to his preferred topic. That behavior is certainly not “harmless”.
June 11, 2011 at 9:38 pm
^ ^I dunno, maybe. But, sometimes, people are just a-holes. Sometimes, people are too stupid to realize what they’re doing will eventually get them into trouble. Some people are in to chatting with young women. Weiner could be all three. Not everyone has to fit a diagnosis. Sometimes, people are just dumb, horny, a-holes.
It’s also possible that, back in the day, he was a huge nerd who didn’t have a chance of landing the hottest girl in class. I mean, look at the guy. And, his last name is “Weiner”. He’s prolly trying to relive a less than memorable high school/college experience. Dude is ripped, though, gotta give him that. Who knew?
He was also probably a little jealous that that Schrock guy was getting all the publicity so he decided to play the “oh yeah, look at this” game.
June 11, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Just a silly observation, to balance-off Dr. Demento up there.
Just once, I would like to see one of these guys go public with something along the lines of “I know that I present myself as a normal, button-down, middle-age government functionary. This is quite far from the case. I have chosen to submit myself for treatment, hopefully prior to the inevitable scandal that will expose me as the toe-sucking-freak that I am. Pray for me, cuz I’m gonna miss all that.”
June 11, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Is there a single person in the entire country that thinks Weiner is going to go to rehab and be “cured”? What a freaking farce.
“Hi, My name is Anthony and I confuse tweet deck with tweet d!ck.” “Hi, Anthony”.
Stupid.
June 11, 2011 at 9:54 pm
This is on Netflix if you’re interested, Joe:
http://www.iwantyourmoney.net/
June 11, 2011 at 9:58 pm
I don’t have a problem with consenting adults talking about whatever they want to talk about, either. Nor do I expect members of congress to conduct private lives without faults or any moral deviations. The most effective people of any profession are often the ones with the biggest faults. I said a couple days ago that Weiner’s transgressions weren’t that big of a deal to me. That was before I realised that this wasn’t about him getting some jollies.
June 12, 2011 at 8:42 am
Eric Bolling of Fox News needs to be sent to the woodshed – and suspended for at least a week if not longer – for his outrageous racialist if not racist remarks when President Obama met with the President of Gabon the other day.
In a piece entitled, “Hoods in House” (yes, that was the title) Bolling went off on an ugly and bizarre rant about the rapper Common and the Gabonese President going to “hizzhouse” and how Obama judges black people by their race and not by their ideas.
It was all disgusting and really unacceptable.
If I ran the network he’d be gone if not forever for a long long time.
June 12, 2011 at 12:15 pm
^Agreed.
As a black person who almost never gets offended it has to be said, that was offensive.
June 12, 2011 at 12:32 pm
The Chris Cuomo interview with Howie Kurtz today was very impressive. I hadn’t seen much of Mr. Cuomo before but he was as smooth an interviewee as I’ve seen in a long time. It’s easy to see why GMA was keen to hire him.
June 12, 2011 at 3:16 pm
Eric Bolling wants to replace Glenn Beck, but he misses one of the two key ingredients: Beck is bonkers and says some some unpleasant stuff sometimes, but he’s a nice guy, and it shows. Eric lacks an ounce of niceness, and doubles down on The Crazy. He’s the idiot who had Pamela Geller on after the birth certificate was released to help him continue to “question” it. Fox should fire the racist scumbag.
June 12, 2011 at 3:49 pm
Unless Bolling somehow made those clips in his basement I’d like to know where the heck the editors and producers at Fox News were when the segments were cut. Did anyone monitor or approve these first? They must have some vetting process before putting things out on the air.
Within 10 seconds of watching them someone should have jumped up and said, “What the hell are you doing!?”
Those really are unbelievably offensive.
June 12, 2011 at 3:55 pm
It’s Fox, Steve. They have no standards..they do not care.
June 12, 2011 at 3:59 pm
It’s Fox, Steve. They have no standards..they do not care.
Sorry, I’m not going to start drinking the liberal Kool-aid about Fox.
They’re not all racists or irresponsible people there. They obviously have a lot of professional people.
But someone needs to be held accountable for this one.
June 12, 2011 at 4:10 pm
I’m talking about management, Steve. They never seem to crack down on anybody. Apparently Fox talkers have a “First Amendment right” to say any damn thing that pops in their heads.
June 12, 2011 at 4:15 pm
– management –
Oh, but you’re so wrong. Put up a clip of Tina Fey in place of Sarah Palin, and they’ll be really upset.
June 12, 2011 at 4:18 pm
It’s clear that they – well, Ailes – got fed up of Beck. Yeah, ’twas low hanging fruit (ahem) but at least something.
I still want to know why there wasn’t a producer or editor that didn’t see this and immediately understand how awful it was. Lordy, you have to be pretty much brain dead (if not worse) not to see the implications of what Bolling was suggesting.
Let’s see if Ailes or someone does something about it. I think it’s percolating under the surface and something will come out.
If not then you may be right.
June 12, 2011 at 4:21 pm
- Tina Fey -
Yep..I bet heads rolled over that one. I could hear Palin shouting from my house..
June 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm
I don’t think Beck was canned for incendiary remarks; they were quite happy with him in that roll. I think they got fed up with his turn to religious end-of-the-world programming, which, incidentally, I predicted would happen. You’re welcome.
June 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm
Bolling has an embarrassing “saw it on MTV” view of African-Americans. They’re all “hoods slamming forties in the house”, shooting hoops and listening to that gangsta rapper Common fo shizzle my nizzle. It’s hard to tell if he’s genuinely racist, or just genuinely dumb as a rock.
June 12, 2011 at 7:16 pm
I agree that Eric Bolling comes off as a mean hack and that those clips were certainly offensive. But I also believe that one of the most scum-bag things any person can ever do to another is to accuse them of being a racist without an abundance of clear and convincing, objective evidence to support that charge. So I’ll just say Eric Bolling is an ass.
June 12, 2011 at 7:49 pm
Interesting story, though I wonder if they would’ve written it a month ago.
The dirty trick that launched Anthony Weiner’s career
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/06/07/anthony_weiner_1991&source=newsletter&utm_source=contactology&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Salon_Daily Newsletter (Not Premium)_7_30_110
June 12, 2011 at 8:16 pm
I think Bolling is one of these people who justifies his own lack of filter by saying “I just won’t be politically correct”. I also think that throwing-around the word ‘racist’ in some way justifies (in his mind) his own tendencies. He would tend to see himself as ‘fighting the power’ rather than ‘being an @sshole’.
June 12, 2011 at 8:26 pm
What always seems to get lost in these dicussions is what constitutes racism. As far as I can tell from the righties around here, nothing does. How many negative stereotypes does a goon have to spew before you accept that White Boy has a problem with black people because they’re black?
June 12, 2011 at 8:31 pm
Five. Since the nuance isn’t going anywhere.
June 12, 2011 at 8:39 pm
What most offends me about this stuff is that – whether Bolling is a true racist, or just a jerk – he knows there’s real racists watching, and he’s intentionally firing up their “yeah, screw those people” tendencies. They should fire that pig.
June 12, 2011 at 8:53 pm
That Weiner article is amazing. The dude is loathsome.
June 12, 2011 at 9:30 pm
- “whether Bolling is a true racist, or just a jerk” -
That tells me you haven’t fully decided in your own mind. Neither have I and that’s sufficient for me to refrain from giving him that label. We’ve all met true racists and most tend to stick out clearly enough that we don’t need to wonder about what they think. Accusing someone of racism is akin to calling them a child molester, and being a person who falsely attaches one of those labels to someone who is really nothing worse than just a plain old jerk… well, that’s every bit as bad as being a racist or child molester.
And using such terms is completely unnecessary given the hundreds of other, less-devastating-if-false adjectives we have at our disposal for labelling these jackasses.
Occurs to me that Weiner’s dirty trick was a tactic not terribly dissimilar to Eric Bolling’s offensive presentation.
June 12, 2011 at 9:39 pm
When I meet a true racist, it’s easy to determine it because they’ve got no reason other than true belief to talk to me that way. With TV/radio people like Bolling and Rush (who’s done his share of race-baiting), it’s about impossible to tell how much is “real”, and how much is throwing red meat to the crowd.
Bolling strikes me as an opportunist willing to blurt out anything to keep his name in the game, including sounding blatantly racist. As far as I’m concerned, there’s little difference between sounding racist and being it.
June 12, 2011 at 9:46 pm
Finally watched the Bolling thing. The only thing I got from it was that it sounded stupid coming from his mouth. But, “offensive” & “racist”, it’s not. You could find numerous examples, on a daily basis, of statements that are more “offensive” on other news networks if you don’t have a predisposition to judge statements different depending on who the speaker is and who the comment is directed to. It was obviously light-hearted, get over it.
June 12, 2011 at 9:48 pm
“it’s about impossible to tell how much is “real”, and how much is throwing red meat to the crowd.”
Stupid.
Maybe if you got past your bigoted belief that everyone who listens to Rush and watches FNC hates black people, you’d be able to make a better argument.
June 12, 2011 at 9:49 pm
But sounding racist is not racist, and your standard allows your subjective and/or possibly selective hearing to make a potentially un-retractable mistake. I seem to recall that one of those Ten Suggestions that Moses kicked down some big hill had to do with bearing false witness.
June 12, 2011 at 9:57 pm
Yeah, I can always count on LS to blow off anything that may offend blacks.
“False witness” is bull. Bolling has repeatedly attacked African-Americans with derogatory stereotypes. If I repeatedly claim that women should be quiet, pregnant and in the kitchen; can I then claim I’m not really sexist? How could you tell?
June 12, 2011 at 10:01 pm
Because making stupid jokes and trying to sound funny & “hip”, doesn’t equal attacking &/or offending blacks. Put your big boy pants on.
June 12, 2011 at 10:05 pm
How the hell is “hizzouse” offensive, anyway. Just because someone uses slang that mostly belongs to another group of people, doesn’t automatically make it “racist” or “offensive”.
June 12, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Yeah yeah, last time it was “slamming forties”. Before that it was “I’ve seen the birth certificate, but I still don’t trust him”. Every damn comment leads to the same thing: “I can’t believe those nasty people are in the White House”. I know loathsome race-baiting when I hear it, and Bolling is making a habit out of it.
June 12, 2011 at 10:23 pm
I’d say you’re out on the thinnest of limbs, Joe. I also don’t like it because such use steals its true meaning from those who have been hurt by actual racism, and because it erodes the term’s usefulness as a shameful label.
June 12, 2011 at 10:26 pm
““I can’t believe those nasty people are in the White House””
I guarantee you he’s an equal-opportunity hater. Pick your favorite white liberal, throw him in the WH and I bet Bolling would be saying even nastier things. The things that come out of the mouths of your favorite lefties over at MSNBC are 100 times more egregious, hateful & “offensive”. But, you don’t care because they’re either directed at white people or black CONSERVATIVES.
Using slang and/or stereotypes isn’t racist. It’s not racist when Marc Lamont Hill uses his “white voice”, it wasn’t racist when the left mocked Bush for his accent or caricatured him as a cowboy. Either hold the same standards for all groups of people or hold none at all.
Continually calling everybody a racist is old, tired & ignorant.
June 12, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Come on, Al. Bolling has repeatedly charicatured Obama as some gangsta rapper thug-type. It’s a stereotype. A racial one. “Colorblindness” is easy for the ones not being demeaned.
June 12, 2011 at 10:35 pm
“Hizzhouse” is certainly offensive. For starters, Bolling’s premise is so paper-thin weak that he felt the need to resort to rap slang as a way to give it some added credibility, which failed miserably.
June 12, 2011 at 10:46 pm
“Come on, Al. Bolling has repeatedly charicatured Obama as some gangsta rapper thug-type. It’s a stereotype. A racial one. “Colorblindness” is easy for the ones not being demeaned.”
Wahh, wahh, wahh
Obama still leads Bolling in the “racially insensitive commentary” category. Get back to me when you accuse him of being a racist. Or, any non-white, non-conservative for that matter.
June 12, 2011 at 10:50 pm
“Gangsta thug” is a more modern version of the old “Chicago thug”, and both are construed as being negative elements of American society.
Would it be acceptable to use an “organised crime” or an elite East-coast university-type analogy? Might be a few Italians taking offence but so what? American culture includes black culture and it’s negative associations are not automatically off-limits “just because.”
You did notice that our president is a black man, right?
June 12, 2011 at 10:59 pm
^ Italians-Americans & Irish-Americans are probably the most mocked group in our society. Outside of the large group that falls under the “Christian” umbrella.
But, that’s okay because they can take it. They don’t need white liberals running in to save them from all those evil white honky crackers.
June 12, 2011 at 11:09 pm
^ I’d say Polish are probably the most mocked, or maybe those southern, mountain-hick people who live in.. oh, Georgia. Hey, we’re Americans and that’s what we do. We mock the new people who, instead of whining, toughen up and then their children grow up to live better lives and do Great Things.
June 12, 2011 at 11:17 pm
I want to know who’s required to watch him long enough to hear him say anything. The best point made was about the ‘likability’-factor. He always looks to me as though he needs a shave and a bail-bond. “Ooh, I know. Let’s give Nixon a talkshow! What could go wrong?” Let him make a similarly snide comment about The Princess, and see how long he lasts. He probably has to fight that urge daily.
June 12, 2011 at 11:29 pm
I’m not sure the Palin comment would be negative, but he looks like the kind of bloke who would say something complimentary in an appropriately disgusting manner.
June 12, 2011 at 11:32 pm
^ Exactly. Think Chris Matthews without the charm.
June 12, 2011 at 11:37 pm
I can’t see Fox sticking Bolling in Beck’s slot. All of the FNC hosts – even the more abrasive ones – have some measure of warmth to their personalities. Eric is just MEAN.
June 13, 2011 at 6:12 am
I’m getting REAL SICK of these V8 commercials. Stop it already!
I actually pine for the good old days of Susie and her Verizon phone.