Guest-hosting The Lee Rodgers Show, Brian Sussman said: "I'm noticing this -- pictures of Sarah Palin. No getting around it: She's a babe. She really is an attractive woman. And the left loathes her for that." Sussman later challenged co-host Tom Benner to "show me one liberal, female politician who is a babe." Benner responded, "Yeah, I can't. I can't do it. I mean, all I think of is a frowsy -- frowning, annoyed, downturned." Sussman later called Rep. Barney Frank a "queen."
I think I'm dumber after reading this. This is one of the most rambling, petty, and unsubstantial pieces I've read in a while. I'm still trying to figure out what the F her point was. If I understand correctly, she hates the Clintons, is pissed at some professor from god knows when, and doesn't understand why homosexuals are being so damned impatient. My question: why the F do we care what you have to say? I literally cannot express my confusion with this piece.
O'Reilly sent his producer to ambush the writer outside his NYC home because the Fox News crew claimed Hertzberg took comments Newt Gingrich made about gays and used them out of context. The comments were first highlighted by MMA, and here's what Hertzberg's wrote.
The key to O'Reilly's otherwise soggy non-story may be the fact that the host claimed on-air that Hertzberg had refused to appear on the show to discuss the matter. "That's an outright lie," Hertzberg told the Politico's Michael Calderone. When Calderone contacted Fox News to find out when exactly O'Reilly had invited Hertzberg to appear on the show, the Fox flack did not respond.
Newsbusters is the online destination for conservative anxious for more (hourly) proof that the press has a liberal bias. On Monday, the theme was the press was too nice during the announcement of Hillary Clinton as SoS. ("No Raining on Obama's Parade, As Nets Fail to Remember Attacks on Hillary") And in general it's been that the press has been too nice to the Obama post-election. ("Walters Put Bush on Defense in 2001, But Tosses Softballs to Obama.")
You get the idea. Newsbusters posts a headline about a supposed press calamity and then explains what horrible newsroom crime against the GOP (or humanity) has been committed by the America's ocean of biased reporters.
But the item headlined "CBS Offers Tribute to Harvey Milk: 'A Rebel With A Cause'" caught our attention because Newsbusters never got around to complaining about anything in the CBS report. There was nothing factually wrong, at least not accoridng to Newsbusters. And there were no allegations of bias. Newsbusters didn't claim any relevent information had been left out of the CBS report.
Was the the only reason Newsbusters posted the item because Newsbusters was irked that CBS devoted time to a movie about a (liberal) gay guy. And if so, does that really qualify as media criticism?
P.S. We wouldn't want to be in the Newsbusters office the day this year's Academy Awards nominations are announced.
CNN's TJ Holmes (via Americablog):
eHarmony is expanding. Actually…they're being forced to expand.
You may have heard that the popular online dating site was sued by a gay man in New Jersey. He claimed the site discriminated because they wouldn't provide him with a same sex match.
can you now sue a steakhouse if they don't have chicken on the menu?
Now, here's a better question: Why would CNN pay someone to suggest that refusing to sell your product to a gay man is the same thing as not selling chicken to anyone?
The Media Research Center's Robert Knight, who is also a columnist for Townhall.com and Human Events, was quoted in The Washington Times as saying that the efforts of activists to lift the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military will lead to "a Pearl Harbor moment." Knight has previously compared the attacks on Pearl Harbor to the legalization of same-sex marriage in particular.
Radio host Jim Quinn claimed that heterosexual opponents of Proposition 8 are "guilty straights" and suggested that "gays never wanted to get married until ... about five years ago." In fact, same-sex couples have brought court cases to overturn bans on same-sex marriage for decades.
While discussing the campaign for Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage in California, Bill O'Reilly asserted that if states allow same-sex couples to marry they would be required, "under equal protection," to allow polygamous marriages. In fact, the California Supreme Court explicitly stated that its May 15 decision that California's ban on same-sex marriage violated the state's constitution did not extend to polygamous marriages.
Discussing the murder of Moses Cannon, a transgender woman, Minneapolis radio host Chris Baker suggested that "some of the blame lie[s] with the American media who enables this fraud" and who "push this false reality." He also stated: "I believe the media and the rest of the enablers out there, they have this guy's blood on their hands because they create this false sense of reality and they enable people who need serious psychological counseling."
Loading the player reg...
In a Newsweek article headlined "Is Obama the Antichrist?" senior editor Lisa Miller treated as newsworthy purported debate among some "conservative Christians" over whether President-elect Barack Obama is "the Antichrist." In doing so, she gave credibility to the views of RaptureReady.com editor and founder Todd Strandberg, who has, among other things, smeared gays and lesbians, Islam, progressives, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Discussing actions by individual protesters of Proposition 8, Newt Gingrich stated: "I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion."
Loading the player reg...
Discussing "children" on his radio show, Michael Savage stated: "I'm as good an expert as any. I have found in my life that most of the Ph.D. experts on children are either gay or crazy and were never married. Or if they were married, they either tried to kill their wife or were in rehab for a few years, and then came out and went into psychotherapy to find out why they killed, or attempted to kill. And then they washed it all away, and suddenly they're experts on childrearing."
On his Minneapolis radio show, Chris Baker repeatedly referred to Thomas Beatie, a pregnant transgender man, as a "mutilated lesbian" and called Beatie a "freak." Baker also stated: "If a lesbian gets pregnant, I'm fine with it. I'm OK. Just stop alternating reality and trying to force me to buy into your psychosis."
Hmm, the Mafia and Nixon, that's quite a portrait Time is painting.
To review, it tuns out the Gay Mafia is basically a group of wealthy and influential gay men, dubbed the Cabinet, who have teamed up to raise millions of dollars to give candidates running against anti-gay opponents, and to give to organizations and PAC's that are politically aligned with the men's agenda. So readers can rest easy about that.
But what about this new "Enemies List"? That sounds just as threatening as the Mafia.
The full headline to the Time piece by Alison Stateman reads, "What Happens If You're on the Gay "Enemies List."" The article is about the on-going protests in the wake of California's Prop 8 passage which outlaws gay marriage. Specifically, gay rights activists are targeting donors who gave money to the pro-Prop 8 initiative. The key quote:
"My goal was to make it socially unacceptable to give huge amounts of money to take away the rights of one particular group, a minority group," says Fred Karger, a retired political consultant and founder of Californians Against Hate. "I wanted to make the public aware of who these people are and how much they're giving and then they could make a decision as to whether or not they want to patronize their businesses."
That's pretty much it. Opponents of Prop 8 are upset it passed and are increasing their activism. So what's up with the foreboding "Enemies List" talk, which conjures a particularly dark period from the American past?
Please note that Time put "Enemies List" in its headline and put it in quotes. Also note that the phrase "Enemies List" does not appear anywhere in the article. Meaning, Time editors simply pulled that catch phrase out of the air and assigned to the gay community.
Suggestion to Time: Change the misleading headline.