Hypocrisy

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

If there is one party who can really step into a mess, it’s the Democratic party.

If there is one party who can exploit that mess, it’s the Republican party. The republicans have a viciousness to them, a ‘pit bull’ streak that finds an opening and goes in for the kill. And like any wild animal when cornered, the attack is bloody and savage. Just look at the attacks on Nancy Pelosi over the last couple of weeks.

“I think this is the most despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

“She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowist of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior.” -Newt Gingrich

Accusations of ‘viciously using partisanship’ from Newt Gingrich are not only comical but over the top,unabated, pure hypocrisy. Newt is the poster child for being the loudest one to complain, condemn and prosecute  someone else for doing exactly the same thing he was secretly doing.  As if his infidelity while his mission to attack Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky affair wasn’t proof enough of his hypocrisy, his problem of using tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals should have limited his ‘Pelosi dishonors Congress’ rhetoric. But, it didn’t.

Newt is old news though, an unimportant politically partisan pitbull hoping his hypocrisy has been forgiven. It hasn’t.  But what about newer more relevant GOP members?

“Lying to the Congress of the United States is a crime,” Boehner said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “And if the speaker is accusing the CIA and other intelligence officials of lying or misleading the Congress, then she should come forward with evidence and turn that over to the Justice Department so they can be prosecuted.”

He added: “And if that’s not the case, I think she ought to apologize to our intelligence professionals around the world.”

That’s right, Nancy Pelosi should apologize to the CIA from claiming that they have misinformed congress. It is a disparaging remark and like Boehner says, she needs to ‘put up or shut up’.

It doesn’t matter that Pelosi’s accusations that the CIA memo’s are misleading seem to be panning out or that even some Republicans agree that the briefing notes contain many errors, such as briefings that listed former Chairman Porter Goss as the head of committee when Rep. Pete Hoekstra had already taken over. Because Hoekstra says, those errors are meaningless

Of Course those errors are meaningless. It doesn’t matter that 2 separate briefings have a low-level staffer as  being in on the top-secret,code-word clearance briefings. It’s meaningless that this staffer says he was actually asked to leave, which would be expected since he  only  two walked members to the room. It doesn’t matter that this staffer,Paul Juola, has asked the CIA to “immediately correct this record.”

It doesn’t matter that former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham came out and said not only did the CIA hide details from him during his briefings, but that 3 of the 4 dates the CIA said they briefed Graham were in error

…he(Graham) asked agency officials to confirm how many times they briefed him on torture. They gave him four dates, but after Graham went through his personal records and disproved three of those dates, he said the agency admitted their mistake and confirmed that he had, in fact, received only one briefing.

When our intelligence agency says they briefed someone 4 times and they really only briefed them once, when they say the person who headed  the committee was someone who had already been replaced, when they say that they allowed a staffer in on a code-word clearance briefing, none of it is relevant, in fact it’s ‘meaningless’. But when you go out in public and say that the CIA is misleading congress, that disqualifies you as from continuing as speaker. Or so Newt Gingrich says.

“To have the person third in line to be president say that the CIA misleads us all the time is so utterly irresponsible and such an attack on the men and women who are risking their lives … that she disqualifies herself for being speaker of the House,”

Now, this has nothing to do with partisan attacks, Newt,Boehner and Hoekstra wouldn’t do that. No, they are truly outraged that someone would smear the CIA by claiming they have mislead congress on some issue…

Well, except when it’s Hoekstra, and the CIA has just destroyed torture video tapes that they were warned not to destroy. When that happens

…it’s important for Congress to hold this community accountable. This community did not tell — the CIA did not tell us about the existence of these tapes. They did not tell us that they were going to be destroyed. They need — there’s a Constitutional responsibility for them to keep Congress informed and they have not and we need to hold them accountable

Or so Mr. Hoekstra says.

It’s OK for Mr. Hoekstra to say the CIA  mislead Congress. Even better, when you are on Fox News being interviewed by Chris Wallace, it’s ok to get down right nasty on the CIA.

WALLACE: Congress man Hoekstra, Hayden appeared this week before your committee. Are you satisfied that over the years the CIA acted in good faith?

HOEKSTRA: No, I’m not. There are certain statements that might have been misleading to Congress as to exactly what existed. I think you’ve got a systemic problem here. I think the community is incomPetent. It is arrogant. And it has developed — it’s become political. This — you know, you take a look at wmd in iraq. They were wrong.

Hoekstra went even farther than just calling them arrogant,incompetant and saying that they have mislead congress , he also said

…you’ve got a community that’s incomPetent. They are arrogant and they are political, and they don’t believe that they are accountable to anybody. They don’t believe that they’re accountable to the president. They’ve clearly demonstrated through the tapes case that they don’t believe they are accountable to Congress. And when we are at war, that is a terrible position for the intelligence community to be. If they had done what they are supposed to do on the tapes, keep us informed, listen to the kind of recommendations that my colleague Jane Harman made to them, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion today. But because of their arrogance and their willingness to move independent, that’s it.

The CIA? they’re political? They don’t believe they are accountable the President much less Congress? They’re incompetent?  These are just a few of the things that are OK to say about the CIA, unless of course you’re Nancy Pelosi.

Quick question, if the CIA mislead Congress, destroyed evidence… are arrogant,political,incompetent and admittedly prone to briefing errors.. why exactly are we or the GOP taking anything the CIA says over Nancy Pelosi?

It wouldn’t be to get the stink of another political land-mine off of them would it?

“..when you say that the community is incompetent, I’m telling you I don’t have confidence in the community. You know, I have high confidence that the community continues to be broken and is not giving us as policymakers the information that we need to make good decisions.-HOEKSTRA

Hypocrisy

“She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowist of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior.” -Newt Gingrich

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

UPDATE

Yes, the CIA has lied to Congress and covered it up. I think Newt might be the one who should step down and go back into hiding, after apologizing to Pelosi of course…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Gingrich: ‘Absolute obligation’ to investigate Pelosi (cnn.com)
• Did the CIA lie about torture? (guardian.co.uk)
• Newt Gingrich: CIA Bully-Boy Since 1995 (firedoglake.com)

Conservative talk show  hosts out for ratings do..

Guns shouldn’t be taken from the people and banned.

Obama is a serious threat to Second Amendment liberties.

Gun-clubs with their own agenda should be banned.

The 2nd amendment is alive and well.

Gunmen Kills Three Pittsburgh Police Officers

A man opened fire on officers during a domestic disturbance call Saturday morning, killing three of them, a police official said.

Friends said 23 year-old Richard Poplawski feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

Three officers were killed.

Those who wrap themselves in the protection of the 1st amendment, while spreading unfounded rumors with headlines reading

URGENT ALERT – IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED

ANTI GUN BILLS ON THE MOVE – YOU MUST ACT NOW

or who twists the truth of the reemergence of sensible gun-control measure that has been around for over a decade and was only recently allowed to expire, which they described by saying

Obama was lying, and now gun rights may be dying.

instead of explaining the true measure…

The Assault Weapons Ban signed into law by President Clinton in 1994 banned 19 types of semi-automatic military-style guns and ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds.

will ignore their parts in any of this, the same way Nancy Grace ignores her part in the death of  mother.

I don’t know the reasons for spreading this kind of fear with this type of dangerous and inflammatory rhetoric, but as of today… I know the consequences of it.

Guns aren’t the problem here they never are, the people using them to commit crimes or pump up their ratings, thus increasing their paychecks or donor-rolls are the problem. Ignorance isn’t criminal, but spreading ignorance based on rumors and your own fears and bias should be. The 1st amendment doesn’t protect a person in crowded space yelling “FIRE!” but it’s a good thing for some of these liars that it does protect their rights to infect people with their money and ratings driven fear mongering.

In the above clip, at 6:33,  AG Holders assurances that there is no ban, no ban coming, no ban plan, no ban plan being discussed, that no one in the administration has any plans to interferer  with the 2nd amendment is answered with, “Agenda’s could change”.. Yes  and a frog could fly out of your ass tomorrow.

Guns are not a problem, but the 24 hour news cycle that has to fill their time with something… anything.. whether true,false or otherwise is a problem since they don’t care what they say as long as people are listening. Today, we mourn 3 officers killed in the line to duty by a deranged man who believed these talk show hosts when they told him President Obama was going to steal his guns. Today these commentators and  gun-clubs have blood on their hands, tomorrow it is up to us to decide if we want to make them accountable for it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Adam Winkler: The New Second Amendment: A Bark Worse Than Its Right (huffingtonpost.com)
• Steele Attacks Obama’s Assault Weapons Ban After Previously Calling Such Weapons ‘Overkill’ (thinkprogress.org)

Now the newsies want a government bailout.

Government aid could save U.S. newspapers, spark debate

Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.Nicastro represents Connecticut’s 79th assembly district, which includes Bristol, a city of about 61,000 people outside Hartford, the state capital. Its paper, The Bristol Press, may fold within days, along with The Herald in nearby New Britain.

That is because publisher Journal Register, in danger of being crushed under hundreds of millions of dollars of debt, says it cannot afford to keep them open anymore.

Nicastro and fellow legislators want the papers to survive, and petitioned the state government to do something about it. “The media is a vitally important part of America,” he said, particularly local papers that cover news ignored by big papers and television and radio stations.

To some experts, that sounds like a bailout, a word that resurfaced this year after the U.S. government agreed to give hundreds of billions of dollars to the automobile and financial sectors.

I can understand the sentiment. Without the media around to keep every aspect of this country, in fact all countries under a microscope things would get out of hand. We need the media around. Tobacco’s Jeff Wigand or Watergate’s “Deep Throat”, these sources would have had nowhere to go had the media not been there to take the story. Dick Cheney wouldn’t have been able to out Valerie Plame had Scooter Libby had no one to leak her identity to. But what happens to our impartial watch dog if it’s master is the very entity it’s supposed to be checking and balancing?

But let’s put that aside for the moment. I’m not too worried that the media would somehow become overly partisan in a government bailout. All you have to do is turn on Fox news, whose Sean Hannity has once again been chosen as the ‘misinformer of the year’ or look at MSNBC’s Chris Matthew’s tingling leg to see that boat has already sailed. There is a danger of course of all media in this country going to these extremes and a ‘Government funded media’ is a scary fucking thought, but I’m naive enough to hold out hope that there would be some kind of rebellion out there that would still exist to balance everything out.

Of course I’m talking about blogs here.

There is always going to be some argument as to whether “Blogs” are real news or not, but I’m not going to get into that arena today. Suffice it to say that I believe some are just as important as the Wall Street Journal or the Washington post. I think 10 years from now the majority of the readers out there will agree with me.

But, that’s not what I ‘blogging’ about today.

Should the Government bailout the media? No, and here’s why. It’s because of the media that we have some of the most worthless creatures ever to walk this planet. Abominations that are raised onto some kind of pedstal where they think they are entitled to any and all things their hearts desire. There are so many of these worthless pounds of seed out there that it’s hard to just pick one. So I am picking the one who is a Hack headline today.

Party girl Paris defends Australian shopping spree

American socialite Paris Hilton has declared herself a saviour who shops for the greater good in tight economic times. In Sydney to host an exclusive New Year’s dance party, the 27-year-old heir to the Hilton hotel fortune this week drew criticism for spending 5,560 Australian dollars (3,844 US dollars) in a 40-minute shopping spree.

Local charities accused her of callous excess but Hilton Wednesday defended the splurge.

“I’m in Australia, I think it’s important to help out, you know, the economy out here, everywhere in the world,” she told reporters, ahead of her New Year engagement.

“And what’s wrong with doing a little shopping? It’s New Year’s, I need a New Year’s dress.”

What reason on this planet is there for this person to be a headline on any reputable news source? In fact, other than the cover of The Weekly World News sharing the spotlight with “BatBoy” what reason does she have to be anywhere in the Mainstream Media. What accomplishment, other than her grandfather’s money, has she contributed to society that we need to follow her every move in the Mainstream Media?

I don’t mind Paris,Britany, Lindsey or any of the other showing up in the gossip rags. I enjoy watching the Olsen Twins waste away and can’t wait until a strong gust of wind removes them from my frontal lobe forever. But for the Mainstream Media to report on Paris’ expenditures is just too much to stomach. It’s also the reason why they should not get a Government bailout. The Government, my Government cannot be responsible for funding a story on who Paris Hilton is screwing now, how sheltered she is to the world around her that she spends $5k on a dress she’ll never wear again, the color of Brit’s new pubic hair and how many times Lindsey fell down drunk last night. If there was ever a true capitalistic,free-market item, Gossip is it.

Ray Bradbury said of his book, Fahrenheit 451,

This, despite the fact that reviews, critiques and essays over the decades say that is precisely what it is all about. Even Bradbury’s authorized biographer, Sam Weller, in The Bradbury Chronicles, refers to Fahrenheit 451 as a book about censorship.

Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.

“Television gives you the dates of Napoleon, but not who he was,” Bradbury says, summarizing TV’s content with a single word that he spits out as an epithet: “factoids.” He says this while sitting in a room dominated by a gigantic flat-panel television broadcasting the Fox News Channel, muted, factoids crawling across the bottom of the screen.

His fear in 1953 that television would kill books has, he says, been partially confirmed by television’s effect on substance in the news. The front page of that day’s L.A. Times reported on the weekend box-office receipts for the third in the Spider-Man series of movies, seeming to prove his point.

“Useless,” Bradbury says. “They stuff you with so much useless information, you feel full.” He bristles when others tell him what his stories mean, and once walked out of a class at UCLA where students insisted his book was about government censorship.

Yes Mr. Bradbury, we have suckled from the diseased whore for too long now. But we haven’t the willpower to walk away from the table so we have created vomitoriums so we can keep spreading our stupidity to every corner of the country. Paris’ $200,000 hot pink Bentley is more interesting than the 66% drops in the death toll in the war.

If the Mainstream media fails I will be sad. The loss of the great names of journalism will sting. But out of the ashes of their demise a new,more powerful Media will emerge to take the place of the lazy one we have now and new respected journalistic names and integrity will be brought back.

Allowing the banks to crumble was not a good idea, allowing the auto market to fail was not a good idea. Letting the media choke on it’s final tingle, it’s last ‘misinformation’, it’s last cooter shot? Well that… is a good purge.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cheney’s Role in Plame Outing Becomes a Little Clearer
• Broadcast Networks Pulling Full-Time Correspondents From Iraq

This from the Muche Forum today… It’s a post from a newbie named Dave

“Michelle Obama’s alleged use of the term “Whitie”?”

I guess there is a rumor out there that the GOP has a video of Michelle Obama at Jeremiah Wright’s church standing next to Louis Farrakhan and raving against ’whitey’.

HA!
HA!HA!HA!

I’ve said for weeks now that Jeremiah White will do Karl Rove’s job for him and release a video like this. I can only pray to the God that Obama took into his heart that this is true.

Let me say first, for full-disclosure purposes.. I am a Hillary supporter and I am pissed at the treatment she’s been given. It’s a sad day for a liberal when they have to acknowledge Fox News as the only Fair and Balanced news source on a Clinton. But I’ve accepted that and moved on. What I haven’t accepted, what I won’t accept is the blind faith the rest of the media is putting into their darling Obama.

Over the weekend Hillary won Puerto Rico by a 40 points. The headline that ran all weekend on that reclusive-hack’s opinion driven wanna-be-newsman webiste read The End! Well yes, of course anyone who keeps putting a 40 point victory up would indeed be the loser. Sounds implausible doesn’t it? In the last few primaries Hillary has lead by an overwhelming majority. Even in the 1st primaries her losses weren’t by huge landslides. And yet, because of the treatment she gets from hack bloggers and other MSM sources… she’s lost the race.

Here’s what I don’t get. Isn’t Matt Drudge a republican? Don’t both sides agree that he has a “a preference for Republican candidates” as stated in a Politico article out today?

So what is Drugde doing? I mean besides picking the Democrat Nominee. Make no mistake about it, this slime decides what is and what isn’t good for Hollywood movies and is now deciding what is and isn’t good for this country. But the question is why? If “his own reporting — have reflected a rightward tilt” then what exactly is his agenda? Has he been won over by the smooth talking Obama? Or is he picking the canidate that he knows is the only candiate that won’t get elected, in a time when there is no way the Democrats can lose.

Think about this. People are sick of Bush. They are sick of the lies and mistakes and they are tired of the crimes and cover-ups. This is an election where people would just go into the booth and check Democrat all the way down. It’s the election the Democrats can’t lose, with a candidate that can’t win, against the party that can’t possibly win, with a candidate they don’t even like who will win.

Yeah, take a hit of acid and let that simmer for a minute..

I hope this “whitey” video comes out in October. I don’t want to see it until then. I want Barrack to be up on his white pedestal when it all comes crashing down on him. Yes, I know that would mean McCain in the White House. But right now I want revenge for the media’s treatment of Hillary, the candidates whose last 30 years are well documented and whose records have been gone over with a Ken Starr comb.
I don’t wish harm upon America… and I think McCain will harm us. But I wish the death of the “Running Man/American Idol” media evolution. I understand that today with the 24 hr news cycle there is a need for new news. But when wannabe Howard Hughes types are the ones deciding what is and isn’t important. Something needs to break.

Barrack’s initial ” I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother “

Didn’t do it.

His friendship with Bill Ayers

Didn’t do it.

HIs 20 year friendhip with another Pastor, Michael Pfleger

Didn’t do it.

so maybe a video of Michelle standing next to Farrakhan… mimicking him, Pflger and Wright will do it. At the very least, maybe it will make people ask the question that has not been asked, Who is Barrack Obama and what does he stand for.

discussion