Blogus Interruptus…
Traveling. No snorkels will be involved during this procedure. Blogging resumes either late Thursday or Friday morning…
Traveling. No snorkels will be involved during this procedure. Blogging resumes either late Thursday or Friday morning…
February 14, 2012 at 9:34 am
When exiting a boxcar make sure the train is fully stopped.
February 14, 2012 at 9:35 am
Party everybody!
February 14, 2012 at 12:53 pm
Okay, so can we now admit that conservatives have a legitimate concern about government overreach? And maybe this has something to do with the hysteria over Michelle Obama?
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8762
February 14, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Soledad O’Brien thinks the Center for Budget Policy & Priorities is a “non … bipartisan group”.
In other words, I was right.
February 14, 2012 at 3:34 pm
@ Laura L
Wow. Just wow.
February 14, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Why thank you. Oh, you mean the story..
February 14, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Their is real money to be made outside the cafeterias of our school selling candy, junk food, and even a bologna sandwich. Today’s black market food merchants are tomorrows crack dealers.
I believe children are our future.
February 14, 2012 at 4:05 pm
Their I go again.
February 14, 2012 at 5:20 pm
Newsflash: If you “flatten the tax code”, you’re lowering taxes on the wealthy while raising them on the middle class. That’s what a flat tax does, genius. He called her a liar, then repeated what she said.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sen-pat-toomey-cuts-off-soledad-obrien-calls-her-research-factually-wrong-and-ridiculous/
February 14, 2012 at 5:33 pm
40 years later, and it turns out Deep Throat was just a pissed off guy angling for a job. Well.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/02/14/v-fullstory/2639954/the-profound-lies-of-deep-throat.html
February 14, 2012 at 6:07 pm
joeremi Says:
February 14, 2012 at 5:20 pm
Why not lower the tax rate for everyone and make everyone happy?
February 14, 2012 at 6:17 pm
^ Why not shut down the government while we’re at it? I’m a liberal. I don’t believe in the inherent goodness of man to take care of the rest when left to his own devices. The free-market, no-regs model is inhumane. I prefer a functioning government, thanks.
February 14, 2012 at 6:26 pm
Fire Nancy Grace.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chez-pazienza/an-open-letter-to-cnn-reg_b_1276595.html?ref=tw
February 14, 2012 at 6:33 pm
^ Yeah, that pretty well sums it up.
February 14, 2012 at 7:17 pm
If you “flatten the tax code”,
A week or two ago I posted the effective tax rates for everyone from $50K through Romney, my source being the IRS, and it turned out that most were within a percent or three of being as high as Romney’s.
Along with a flat tax comes the elimination of most, if not all, deductions. The net effect for the wealthy with a flat tax is that they’d likely pay slightly more than they now do in taxes, but far less in legal tax avoidance.
February 14, 2012 at 7:29 pm
There would be less tax avoidance across the board. And tax lawyers and lobbyists would have to look for honest work. Best part is everyone would have to look at government as some thing THEY have to pay for. What a concept.
February 14, 2012 at 7:42 pm
– lawyers and lobbyists –
The exact reason why it will NEVER happen, along with the pols who buy votes by jacking with the tax-system. May as well discuss abortion.
February 14, 2012 at 7:48 pm
Instead of investing for the purpose of tax advantages, money would naturally flow to those ideas with the most promise. Alternative fuels, for example… the existing tax system pigeon holes investment into rigid categories while a much better innovation can left out of the loop and never getting its chance to succeed.
February 14, 2012 at 8:14 pm
Timothy P Carney @TPCarney
The contraception fight shows liberals mean “not subsidize” when they say “outlaw.” Kinda takes some of the teeth out of the Volcker Rule.
February 14, 2012 at 8:29 pm
I know exactly what’s needed on cable news channels: More pictures of Kate Upton and her barely there ‘kini wear.
February 14, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Keith Olbermann: Rape Apologist.
February 14, 2012 at 9:56 pm
I guess I wasn’t the only one who missed yesterday’s Moment of Trotta.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-destroys-foxs-liz-trotta-over-comments-on-military-women-who-are-raped-too-much/
February 14, 2012 at 11:49 pm
Liz Trotta has turned the weeist bit nuts.
February 15, 2012 at 8:19 am
Liz should hang out here. She’d fit right in.
February 15, 2012 at 8:39 am
Fun fact: Liz Trotta was the first female TV journalist to cover Vietnam.
February 15, 2012 at 9:03 am
She’s a tough old broad with some actual cred (unlike most of their commentators) and I like her. I’d like to see her on Fox for more than 4.5 minutes a week, as their token “woman who’s not a babe”. That said, it’s a classic “If a man had said that..”.
February 15, 2012 at 1:05 pm
As usual, the story is complicated. As usual, KO and Breitbart are morons who deserve each other.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/andrew-breitbart-and-crew-attack-keith-olbermann-and-markos-moulitsas-for-rape-denial/
February 15, 2012 at 1:35 pm
” it is apparent that the real mission here is to exploit the rapes to score points against Olbermann and the Occupy movement, to spread exaggerations and lies about the Occupiers”
Except, as has been proven, there actually were rapes and assaults. So there are no “lies”.
It is apparent that the real mission here is to run interference for Barack Obama by falsely attacking his critics and misatributing their arguments.
February 15, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Yes, there actually were rapes and assaults..some of them perpetrated against Occupiers, which bleating a$$holes like Breitbart conveniently ignore. As I explained when this movement started (and no one paid any attention to), street protests occupy (sic) a different world than the ’60s. Now when you choose a spot in the city to be heard, you’re in someone’s house because of the rampant homelessness in this country. Which, incidentally, is part of the OWS message.
The homeless population is a war zone of violence. If you’re going to move onto their turf, you’re going to absorb their problems. I personally think the encampments long outlived their usefulness, but I’m sick of hearing about the problems in them as solely a result of Occupiers being “bad people”. That’s bullsh!t from idiots who have no idea what they’re talking about, and no interest in learning.
February 15, 2012 at 2:31 pm
– and no interest in learning –
Yes, we’re all so ignorant of the greatness of OWS. Right.
Bottom-line, this is yet another example of tit-for-tat/”So’s your mother” politics. The Tea Party movement gets smeared as “racist” because of the actions, real or made-up, of a few. Therefor, we are compelled to point-out all that happens within the OWS-perimeter. Someone on our side gets nailed for a dopey “insensitive’ comment, so we have to make a big deal out of some idiot saying “chimichanga”. Turns us all into a bunch of damn middle-schoolers.
February 15, 2012 at 3:26 pm
I didn’t say anything about “greatness”, and I don’t appreciate words being put in my mouth. Your answer shows a complete disregard for what I actually said.
February 15, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Everything before you said “no interest in learning.” becomes moot because of that ridiculous statement. I need not say anymore because you are not interested in learning.
February 15, 2012 at 3:54 pm
^ You’re not interested because I’m a lib, which qualifies as irrelevant to you. I know how the game is played.
February 15, 2012 at 5:02 pm
Uh, you got stuck on my first sentence and ignored the rest, which is exactly what I expected. Nyah.
February 15, 2012 at 5:10 pm
I pointed out the part that misrepresented me. I don’t think OWS is “great”. I think they made their point months ago, and should pack up and go home. The overnight encampments were interesting for a short time, but the problems I addressed last year about moving in with the homeless are overshadowing everything else.
February 15, 2012 at 5:10 pm
The homeless population is a war zone of violence. If you’re going to move onto their turf, you’re going to absorb their problems
That, ladies and gentlemen, may just be the core argment. Conservatives believe in private property rights. Liberals don’t.
February 15, 2012 at 5:24 pm
OWS is a message about the disconnect between the powerbrokers and the masses. But yeah, property rights. Got it.
February 15, 2012 at 5:47 pm
OWS was like Obama himself. Everyone read into it (him) what they wanted it (him) to be. People still have too much emotion invested in it (him) to admit the end results was mutch ado about nothing.
February 15, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Income inequality and the vanishing middle class are a pretty big topic these days. I don’t call that “nothing”.
February 15, 2012 at 5:52 pm
OWS’s entire message is that they are entitled to some unspecified portion of whatever “the 1%” own. And why? Because they want it. They don’t believe that if people work and sacrifice, that they are allowed to keep what they have earned. They believe that everything is owned by the collective and should be doled out accordingly irrespective of who owns it currently.
Nobody “move[d] onto the homeless’s turf” because, by definition, the homeless don’t have any turf to begin with. The homeless took over the area because they thought they had the right to. Just like “the 99%” believe they have the right to take spoils from the 1%. They’re one and the same.
February 15, 2012 at 5:57 pm
Farris, that’s some dumbass rightwing pablum you’ve got cooking there. You are absolutely useless to a conversation that has anything to do with anything outside your myopic, compassionless world view.
February 15, 2012 at 6:21 pm
When you can’t argue the facts, let the vitriolic name-calling commence!
February 15, 2012 at 6:43 pm
There was little reality to the OWS squatters until the homeless began showing up.
February 15, 2012 at 6:49 pm
I don’t think Harris understands the difference between an adjective and a ‘name’. Imagine my surprise.
Hey Farris, lose a job and a home, then tell me about ‘choosing’ to live on a park bench.
February 15, 2012 at 6:57 pm
Hey joe, have someone steal a park bench from your front yard and then tell me that I’m not “compassionate” when they say I owe them a house.
Personally, I blame Spud. Were he here to threaten to lay down the law, there’d be 30% less snarking!
February 15, 2012 at 7:04 pm
I have no idea what you’re babbling about. You imply that homeless people are bums claiming private property, not victims of a sh!t economy. You’re wrong.
February 15, 2012 at 7:29 pm
Show me Whistler’s mother sitting on a park bench and I’ll show you an old lady off her rocker.
February 15, 2012 at 7:31 pm
^ That one never gets old.
February 15, 2012 at 7:44 pm
If you go back to my last post and read what follows, I rest my case.
With the exception of Al’s great joke.
February 15, 2012 at 7:46 pm
Did I sleep through testimony again? Damn.
February 15, 2012 at 7:50 pm
If you got back to any post that’s not mine, you’ll find an endless echo chamber.
February 15, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Head in sand doesn’t afford much one much echoing pleasure.
February 15, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Larry King and CNN are officially parting ways. I thought the quarterly specials were a stupid waste of his talent. He would have been better on a weekly interview show instead of a corny, once every three months special broadcast. Oh, well. Maybe he and Regis will do something together now that they both are out of their TV gigs.
February 15, 2012 at 8:40 pm
^ ^ Whatever I said. Wasn’t even any alcohol involved.
^ CNN won’t even mention his show any more, as if Piers Morgan has always sat in that chair.
February 15, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Whatever I said. Wasn’t even any alcohol involved.
Tell me about it. Everything I’ve typed today has a typo.
February 15, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Made sense to me, but that might say more about me..
February 15, 2012 at 10:52 pm
I’m sure that we’re all looking forward to Whitney Houston’s funeral this Saturday, since there will be ‘news’-cameras in attendance. Gee, I wonder if we’ll see any grieving people.
February 15, 2012 at 11:05 pm
Wait..there’s no public service, but it’ll be filmed? Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
February 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm
Who else thinks that flags at half-staff might be overdoing it?
February 15, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Are they really gonna do that? She was a singer, not an ex-President.
February 16, 2012 at 12:17 am
A week ago they were filling her glass and bagging on her voice. When she died, they couldn’t be bothered to maybe postpone the party at least until,her body was removed from the building. That one took awhile to sink in, and it’s pretty sickening. She’s been tabloid-fodder for ten years, and now she’s treated like a national treasure. It’s all pretty fcked up.
February 16, 2012 at 12:25 am
Like Chaka Khan said on Piers Morgan, all they had to do was say a prayer, have some dinner, and go home. No, they drank and danced and bleated “poor thing” at each other. It’s disgusting.
February 16, 2012 at 6:29 am
the wrath of Chaka Kahn.
February 16, 2012 at 6:37 am
“Whitney would have wanted the party to go on.”
That, of course, was the problem.
February 16, 2012 at 9:42 am
“Are they really gonna do that? She was a singer, not an ex-President.” – joe
According to the news, the governor of NJ has ordered the flags to be at half-staff. Crazy.
February 16, 2012 at 9:44 am
Eric Bolling stepped in it again this morning when he implied that Congresswoman Maxine Waters should ” step away from the crack pipe”. Even for F&F this was a bridge too far and Bolling quickly came back to say he was “only kidding”. Next should come the “if anyone was offended” non apology apology. After that I expect that a short suspension will be in order.
Bolling has a history of ‘odd’ remarks with a racial tinge but since this is FOX and not CNN or MSNBC I don’t see any lasting problems for Bolling.
February 16, 2012 at 9:50 am
I think that “Step away from the..” is becoming an unfortunately common expression. The tendency on Live television to say any stupid thing that pops into mind is more the issue. Mr B needs to either be recorded or replaced.
—
Suzanne Malveaux just said of Houston “Her voice was a national treasure”. Can we just stop already? That was a wee bit too “Nancy Grace” for my taste.
February 16, 2012 at 9:51 am
I find Waters offensive.
February 16, 2012 at 10:09 am
I think Bolling is a massive jerk, but he was responding to Waters calling him a ‘demon’. Self-cancelling.
February 16, 2012 at 10:11 am
I’m sorry, she called Boehner and Cantor demons. Same difference..Bolling quickly grabbed a very common phrase for “you’re losing it”. I don’t think he was playing a race card, he just picked a very bad week for that one.
February 16, 2012 at 10:12 am
“I find Waters offensive.”
it’s irrelevant how you or anyone feels about Waters.
If Bolling had made the comment about Obama all hell would have broken out; and justifiably so. I’m sorry but associating crack pipes with African American politicians, no matter how offensive they are to you, should not be permitted in cable news. Period.
February 16, 2012 at 10:17 am
Bolling was empored by the White House who told Hispanics to step away from the chimichanga.
But yeah, it’s Bolling that’s the monster.
February 16, 2012 at 10:21 am
Bolling should not be permitted on cable news until he stops portraying crap as the truth. He still insists Saddam had ties to 9/11, which is so ludicrous even George Bush fessed up that it was bollocks. Most of the hijackers were Saudi, and Bin Laden despised Saddam because he didn’t consider him a ‘real Muslim’. Eric Bolling is a liar.
February 16, 2012 at 10:22 am
“I think Bolling is a massive jerk, but he was responding to Waters calling him a ‘demon’. Self-cancelling.”
^^ Cable news hosts/ pundits don’t get to respond to name calling from politicians. They suck it up and move on. Boehner and Canter can speak for themselves.
Bolling has now succeeded in making Maxine Waters, and not Boehner & Canter, the victim and I’m pretty sure Roger Aile’s will not be pleased at that turn of events..
February 16, 2012 at 10:40 am
Stay classy, Cenk!
http://bigjournalism.com/jpollak/2012/02/15/uygur-admits-mistake-in-selectively-edited-breitbart-quote-tries-to-spin-breitbart-as-cpac-aggressor/
As fate would have it, in the same interview, Cenk continued to allege that Brietbart doctored the Shirley Sherrod videotape. “Glass Houses” and whatnot…
February 16, 2012 at 11:22 am
What is it with anchorbabes on CNN that they always have to have a pen in hand? Are they expecting a quiz?
February 16, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Cable news hosts/ pundits don’t get to respond to name calling from politicians.
Gosh that’s a strange standard.
When Newt Gingrich said, for example, that Obama was a “food stamp president” we had all sorts of cable pundits responding to the charge.
Politicians attack one another all the time and journalists respond back and forth over the name calling. Heck, it’s about half of what these shows spend their time on.
I can give lots more examples than the Gingrich one but that’s the first one that popped into my head.
February 16, 2012 at 1:54 pm
How the hell did the Republicans get stuck on birth control? I don’t think the administration is smart enough to have known they cuuld suck them right past ‘religious liberty’ into ‘aspirin between the knees’, and Darrell Issa holding an all-male panel on contraception. Rick Santorum is on tape claiming the pill is a license for promiscuity, and sex is for procreation! IN 2012!
February 16, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Sorry erich I should have been much clearer. They can respond to the politician’s outrageous remarks but not in the form of a personal attack on that politician, especially one that has racial overtones. My bad.
February 16, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Fritz is a demon.
February 16, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Pat leaves MSNBC as the blacklisters demanded:
http://www.creators.com/conservative/pat-buchanan.html
February 16, 2012 at 6:04 pm
Meanwhile scum runs amuck:
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/did-current-tv-bank-on-this_b65315
February 16, 2012 at 6:25 pm
-Eric Bolling-
On several occasions he’s made business-related comments that I didn’t agree with but later discovered to be not only correct but surprisingly insightful. Such has not been the case with any of his social issue or political commentaries that I’ve heard. Even when I agree with the premise, he often mangles the facts to the point of being unbelievable. He’s out of his element and I have no idea why they keep putting him in front of the camera for non-business related topics.
February 16, 2012 at 6:51 pm
He used to sit in for Beck on occasion. All I remember is that he looked as though he wandered in with a shadow and no makeup after running up the stairs.
February 16, 2012 at 7:01 pm
Whenever I see a Drudge link that says, “Dollar Gets No Respect”, I expect it to take me to… ICN.
February 16, 2012 at 7:06 pm
Dr Dangerfield. As if one wasn’t enough.
February 16, 2012 at 7:18 pm
He’s so over. Heh.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/gingrich-i-could-lose-georgia-20120216
February 16, 2012 at 8:13 pm
I won’t feel safe until September.
February 16, 2012 at 8:24 pm
How the hell did the Republicans get stuck on birth control?… Darrell Issa holding an all-male panel on contraception
The Republicans aren’t stuck on birth control, and the panel was on religious liberty and historical precedent. It’s about the limited power of government, not contraception.
February 16, 2012 at 8:46 pm
The msnbc people are seriously trying to make the Santorum supporter’s comments about aspirin into a controversy? What a bunch of wingnut losers. I heard that joke at baptist youth camp in Jr high.
February 16, 2012 at 8:53 pm
I think Krauthammer just agreed with me. They were talking about Michigan, and how Romney will do as he always does, carpet-bombing Santorum with ads. Except that Santorum isn’t Gingrich. He’s not a target-rich environment.
I’ve always thought that the whinging about money in politics was overstated, especially in the sense that you can’t necessarily destroy someone who’s relatively likable, and doesn’t have major guano in his background. Newt was never going to get far, fevered fantasies aside.
Rick Santorum is far from perfect, and may be far from electable, but the stuff that Romney is throwing at him is kinda small-ball, and has already been explained. He’s not Newt, and you can’t make him that. But you can make yourself look like a prick in the attempt.
February 16, 2012 at 8:55 pm
It’s about the limited power of government, not contraception.
Uh huh. While Rush rails about birth control being an excuse for “mindless sex day and night without consequences”. Bull. Sh!t. There’s a strain of anti-contraception running deep through the Republican Party that I was completely unaware of. Take a piece of advice from an armchair amature poltical strategist: You show your true Crazy after you win the election..
February 16, 2012 at 8:58 pm
– Rush –
Did he say that before or after he bought his Viagra?
February 16, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Politics be damned. Federal agency overreaching has to be contested.
February 16, 2012 at 9:06 pm
- Rush -
Four marriages, no kids. You do the math..
February 16, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Jon G. @ExJon
Foster Friess sounds like a 1950s local competitor to Dairy Queen.
February 16, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Greta has her moments. Might help that she’s old enough to remember when such opinions were more common.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/greta-van-susteren-holds-santorums-feet-to-the-fire-over-supporters-%E2%80%98aspirin-as-contraception%E2%80%99-remark/
February 16, 2012 at 10:30 pm
Watching Andrea Mitchell try not to react to that douchebag was hilarious: “Yes, idiot, I was there for ‘your day’. Any other nuggets of wisdom you’d like to fill my pretty little head with, or should I finish darning your socks..?”
February 17, 2012 at 10:22 am
It always amazes me what truly offends TV people.
June 9, 2012 at 12:25 am
Đổ mực máy Photocopy,Do muc may Photocopy…
[...]Blogus Interruptus… « Inside Cable News[...]…