"Tweety" opens a can of whoopass; Kevin James plays Sylvester

How about asking him an easier question. Like, well, "Define Appeasement, Sir." You could even have someone bring him a dictionary...

John, John, why persecuteth thou me?

Mike Savage needs a hug. He's clearly gotten all tense and irrational, though I should resist suggesting that he could benefit from some Hot Savage Love. I wouldn't wish to presume upon Dan Savage's sense of decency and propriety. (Dan Savage is the Liberal answer to Michael Savage and is therefore completely unsafe for work outside of Portland, Seattle and San Fransisco.)

Media Matters - Savage: "You're telling me there's no possibility of a conspiracy by the Democrats" to cause Roberts' seizure?: "Savage asked, 'Am I to believe there's no connection between Charles Schumer on Friday saying he would never appoint, or never, excuse me, approve another Bush appointment to the court, to any court? And then the chief justice suffers a so-called seizure two days later? You're telling me there's no possibility of a conspiracy by the Democrats to have caused this seizure in some manner?' He added: 'Tell me it's not possible, and I'll tell you you're a liar.'"

I should point out that it's pretty clever rhetoric, too. Can I definitely state it's impossible? Nope. I'm a pretty good rhetorician myself, but even I can't prove a negative.

I cannot prove that 9/11 was not a conspiracy. Actually, it had to be a conspiracy, the open question is "by whom and to what end?" But likewise, absent much relevant evidence to rule it out, I cannot prove it was not a conspiracy that included Bush and Cheney.

See how this works?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's just absence of evidence - and the only thing we can say for sure is "we don't know." And therefore, if we deny his claim as absurd, he actually can characterize it as dishonest. We can only honestly take bets on the likelihood of some possible causative factor. So I cannot HONESTLY rule out the possibility that John Roberts was fed something to trigger a seizure, any more, than, say, I can rule out that the seizure was caused by the stress of a troubled conscience or sheer, overwhelming cognitive dissonance.

I would have to say that stress of some type - either physical or mental - is more probable than, say, a liberal getting their hands on a drug or device that would trigger a seizure at a particular place and in a particularly convenient point in the news cycle.

I'd have to render it as being as likely an occurrence - I mean, in terms of predictability and certainty of causation - as Paul being struck down on the Road to Damascus.

Come to think of it, Paul, prior to his seizure, enjoyed a social role not entirely unlike that Roberts has played over the years. I suppose the only way to come to even a tentative speculation is to see what Roberts' rulings look like in the coming years.

But as for "Dr." Savage - Well, let's just say I smell the funk that comes from seeing the end of the gravy train in the near distance. Savage, like the rest of the remaining Right Wing noise machine, are a remaining fringe speaking to a an ever-diminishing fringe, with the general ratings of right-wing talk and tabloid formats plunging like stunned ducks.

If they manage to convince themselves of what they say enough to be convincing to their remaining audience, I presume it's either due to medication, or the lack of it. And in Savage's case, I think that, unlike Rush or O'Rielly, it's due to a clear absence of essential medication!

Yes, folks, marijuana (and to a lesser, but significant extent, Cuban seed and Dominican tobaccos) are appropriate herbal treatments for bilious humors, while alcohol is contraindicated.

So, as a caring gesture, why don't you send him a nice, big black cigar...

...and tell him to suck on it.

tag: Michael Savage, Dr. Savage, Savage Nation, Freudian References, Homophobia, Paranoid Fantasies, Right Wing Talk, Hate Speech, Hate Radio, Dan Savage, Penis Substitutes, Nielson Ratings, blogmockery, Ridicule

O'Rielly "less nuanced" than Father Charles Couglin

Bill O'Rielly makes me snicker uncontrollably whenever he says he's "fair and balanced" or refers to his show as "The No-Spin Zone." Fact is, he's a hack and a mouthpiece, anyone who'd ever seen him on the trash-tv show, "Hard Copy" knows that his journalistic standards are short of that tolerated by the "National Enquirer."

But it's nice to have real data to expose the lazy, lying slug for what he is, using actual data based on his actual content.

When the data show you to be "less nuanced" than Father Charles Coughlin, you are not "fair and balanced," you are in fact fairly unbalanced. Perhaps even in a clinical sense!

Content analysis of O'Reilly's rhetoric finds spin to be a 'factor': "Using analysis techniques first developed in the 1930s by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, Conway, Grabe and Grieves found that O'Reilly employed six of the seven propaganda devices nearly 13 times each minute in his editorials. His editorials also are presented on his Web site and in his newspaper columns.

The seven propaganda devices include:

• Name calling -- giving something a bad label to make the audience reject it without examining the evidence;
• Glittering generalities -- the opposite of name calling;
• Card stacking -- the selective use of facts and half-truths;
• Bandwagon -- appeals to the desire, common to most of us, to follow the crowd;
• Plain folks -- an attempt to convince an audience that they, and their ideas, are 'of the people';
• Transfer -- carries over the authority, sanction and prestige of something we respect or dispute to something the speaker would want us to accept; and
• Testimonials -- involving a respected (or disrespected) person endorsing or rejecting an idea or person.

The same techniques were used during the late 1930s to study another prominent voice in a war-era, Father Charles Coughlin. His sermons evolved into a darker message of anti-Semitism and fascism, and he became a defender of Hitler and Mussolini. In this study, O'Reilly is a heavier and less-nuanced user of the propaganda devices than Coughlin."

tag: Hate Speech, Hate Radio, conservative radio, Authoritarianism, integrety. Bill O'Rielly, Fair and Balanced

Limbaugh Jumps the Shark

Alternet wonders why Limbaugh hasn't been fired yet - apparently not understanding what "syndicated" means. But I do wonder how long it will take for people to realize he's about as funny and relevant as "Who's the Boss" re-runs.

This is a head-shaker. Imus gets canned for calling some college women basketball players "nappy-headed hos" and yet Rush Limbaugh plays "Barack The Magic Negro" on his show and he is still on the air?

And the story links to a video that is one long "coon joke" which makes me wonder another thing entirely: How stupid do you have to be to consider this either funny or informative?

If the best ammunition you can come up with against the policies of flaming liberals like Barak Obama and Al Sharpton is that they are (gasp) black, you ain't much use. Because, well, I got eyes, son. And whether their skin color matters to me or not, it's damn insulting that you think I think that's the ONLY thing that matters.

When the sum total of Conservatism has been reduced, on air, to "be afraid of the scary brown people" and "Trust George Bush because he's a good Christian White Man," I start recalling the awkward fact that George Wallace was a DEMOCRAT.

To add to your discomfort, here's a few more examples of what Conservative talk has become:



To think that thirty years ago, there were Conservatives on air like Ira Blue - and now all there is to represent the Conservative worldview are intellectual failures like Limbaugh, Imus, Boortz, Morgan and Coulter.

Good thing I'm a Libertarian already, or I'd have to become one just to save myself from the shame.

tag: Rush Limbaugh, jumped the shark, conservative radio, conservative commentary, , libertarian, bigotry, xenophobia, ethics, free speech, Liberalism, Barack Obama, Al Sharpton, bullying, prejudice

Attention, Bill O'Rielly and Melanie Morgan

tag: Media matters, Hot Talk, hate speech, KSFO, Fox News, Melanie Morgan, Bill O'Rielly

PSA: After Imus: What you can do

Press Release from freepress.net

The controversy over Don Imus' racist remarks goes far beyond one bigoted commentator. But getting rid of Imus won't fix the media problem.

Most of our TV and radio stations are owned by giant corporate conglomerates. They don't represent the views of most Americans -- and they make huge profits off the public airwaves.

What we need are more diverse, independent and local media owners. Yet right now less than 10% of TV and radio stations are owned by people of color or women.

But instead of addressing this national disgrace, the Federal Communications Commission is actually trying to let the largest companies buy up even more stations!

Tell the FCC: We Need More Diversity in the Media

What Imus said is just the tip of the iceberg. Scores of other TV and radio hosts regularly make racist and sexist comments. The best way to stop this race to the bottom is to change who's sitting at the top -- and making the decisions about who's behind the mic.

Today, according to one industry study, only 2.5% of radio stations have a person of color in the role of general manager, and only 4.4% have a racial or ethnic minority in the role of news director. The percentage of women in these jobs isn't much higher. No wonder shock jocks like Imus have been able to keep their jobs for so long.

Now is our chance to make a change. In 2003, we stopped the FCC from allowing more media concentration, when more than 3 million people took action to stop Big Media.

Tell Your Friends To Act

This time, we must not only stop further consolidation -- we must demand media ownership that reflects the diversity that makes our nation great.

Onward,

Robert McChesney
President
Free Press
www.freepress.net

Attn: Harry Reid. Fair elections with genuine debate are much easier when there is fair and equal media coverage. Just ask Jack Carter.

I should add that this is an important issue for real conservatives as well as liberals, because the representation of real, rational conservatism on the airwaves is even smaller than the liberal and progressive coverage, to the extent that most people think "conservatism" means being against abortion, gay rights, efforts toward energy independence (which for conservatives is a national security issue) and disbelief in climate change and it's potential impacts.

Barry Goldwater would disagree, probably in total. Nixon would differ on most if not all points. Neither would equate religious social conservatism with Republican or conservative values .

So let's get this done for everyone. It's infuriating to listen to people like Rush, Savage and Imus from a center-left perspective, but for a real conservative - and as a Lib, I share many conservative positions and views - listening to these idiots must be absolutely humiliating, realizing that such pinheads have more access to political speech than traditional economic and Constitutional Conservatives.

Or as they are referred to by Rush, "liberals."

tag: Conservatism, Conservative, Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Hate Speech, Liberalism, Liberty, Media, MSM, Hate Radio

Why Don Imus? Well, why the hell not?

I was listening to Randi Rhodes yesterday, talking about Don Imus's racist gaffe. She was taking a contrarian position - why him, instead of, say, Rush, who is just as offensive without being funny, or Mike Savage who's plainly talking to fellow bigots, or Hannedy, who's plainly talking to fellow stupid bigots. Why pick on the guy who's trying to be funny?

The wit and wisdom of Don Imus. - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine

On blacks:

"William Cohen, the Mandingo deal." (Former Defense Secretary Cohen's wife is African-American.)

"Wasn't in a woodpile, was he?" (Responding to news that former black militant H. Rap Brown, subsequently known as Abdullah Al-Amin, was found hiding in a shed in Alabama after exchanging gunfire with police. Imus is here alluding to the expression "nigger in the woodpile.")

"Knuckle-dragging moron." (Description of basketball player Patrick Ewing.)

"We all have 12-inch penises." (After being asked what he has in common with Nat Turner, Malcolm X, Minister Louis Farrakhan, Latrell Sprewell from the New York Knicks, and Al Sharpton.)

"Chest-thumping pimps." (Description of the New York Knicks.)

"A cleaning lady." (Reference to journalist Gwen Ifill, possibly out of pique that she wouldn't appear on his show. "I certainly don't know any black journalists who will," she wrote in the April 10 New York Times. The Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page used to appear, but after he made Imus pledge not to make offensive comments in the future, he was never asked back.)

On Jews:

"I remember when I first had [the Blind Boys of Alabama] on a few years ago, how the Jewish management at whatever, whoever we work for, CBS, or whatever it is, were bitching at me about it. […] I tried to put it in terms that these money-grubbing bastards could understand."

"Boner-nosed … beanie-wearing Jewboy." (Description of Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post, a frequent guest.)

On women:

"That buck-tooth witch Satan, Hillary Clinton." […] "I never admitted it when I went down there and got in all that big jam, insulting Bill Clinton and his fat ugly wife, Satan. Did I? Did I ever say I was sorry for that?"

On Native Americans:

"The guy from F-Troop, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell." (This is a reference to the zany Indian characters on the 1960s TV sitcom F-Troop. They had names like "Roaring Chicken," "Crazy Cat," and "Chief Wild Eagle.")

On Japanese:

"Old Kabuki's in a coma and the market's going up. […] How old is the boy? The battery's running down on that boy." (Reference to Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, who died the following week.)

On gays:

"I didn't know that Allan Bloom was coming in from the back end." (The homosexuality of the author of The Closing of the American Mind became widely known when Saul Bellow published Ravelstein, a novel whose protagonist was based on Bloom, who by then was deceased.)

"The enormously attractive [NBC political correspondent] Chip Reid, I can say without being accused of being some limp-wristed 'mo."

On the handicapped:

"Janet Reno's having a press conference. Ms. Reno, of course, has Parkinson's disease, has a noticeable tremor. […] I don't know how she gets that lipstick on (laughter) looking like a rodeo clown."

I fail to see the funny here. I don't listen to Imus, for the same reason I don't listen to Stern; I don't like feeling as if I need to floss my brain. And I consider this sort of mean-spirited "humor" to be inherently toxic, whatever the perspective, regardless of what "cause" is "served."

So, why Imus? Well, because the Rutger's Girls stepped in his form of "humor" and took it upon themselves to carve new shoes out of his reluctant hide.

I find that image funny.

Oh, and Randi, he's not the first. Spocko was the first (THIS year) to ram recordings of racist and hate-speech sideways up the noses of wingnut talk-jocks - and more importantly, their sponsors.

Don Imus, Randi Rhodes,

Oddly, KSFO flap continued without my attention

Spocko's Brain: Melanie Morgan of ABC Disney Radio Uses Parent's Grief to Sell Mattresses

Yesterday Melanie Morgan and ABC Disney Radio station cynically used the anger and grief of a dead soldier's parent to sell more Sleep Train mattresses, mortgages, carpet from Home Depot, cars from Mercedes Benz, pick-ups from Dodge, and fast food from Burger King and McDonald's (all current KSFO advertisers).

Picking it up just to add to their embarrassment, keyword-wise. Y'all read the original.

tag: KSFO, spocko, Melanie Morgan, Cindy Sheehan Stalking Posse

Beam us up, Spocko!

Revisiting the Law of Unintended Consequences

It's refreshing to know that this issue isn't being ignored simply because I haven't blogged about it for a few days. I admit that sounds arrogant as hell, but really, it's just thanksgiving that my unaccountable ability to shut down a discussion threads - something akin to a nun at an orgy - does not apply to the internet as a whole. At any rate, the far-right hate media, such as the far-too-common examples on KSFO are finding out what happens when their free speech is piped out of their comfy little call-screened ghetto.

A graphic summation of Hate Talk Radio 560 from YouTube - one of several possible examples to be found there.



Meanwhile, they continue their attempts to "blog." Melanie Morgan actually writes for World Net Daily, proving for sure that here ideas are not the result of some strange manifestation of Tourette's Syndrome. In Death by Liberal Activism, she takes on the Godless Liberal Hordes of the Weather Channel, dastardly advocates of that Liberal Chimera, Global Warning. I'm not quite sure what the title has to do with the topic, other than the usual - equating "death" with "Liberalism."

Project much, Mel?

And considering that even George Bush has accepted - kinda - the latest reports on global warming, it's a little silly for her to be continue beating a overheated horse. Silly, but apparently profitable.

She is proudly headlined as a World Net Daily Exclusive Columnist. I think we can let that observation stand, with all the dreadfully obvious conclusions left unstated.

Lets return to KSFO and the Not Ready For WorldNetDaily Players.

David Gold The most loquacious, and I grudgingly admit, not at all bad. I suspect he may be a real conservative, instead of the expected Rovian Tool Rabbi Daniel Lapin One entry, but a surprisingly good one. But then, he also blogs here Toward Tradition and here at rabbidaniellapin.com Welcome to my Blogroll, Reb Daniel!		Lee Rodgers One Entry: "INTERNET LIARS AND OTHER ASSORTED LOW-LIFE" We love you too, Lee! Officer Vic Has written nothing. Of course, given the quality of his spoken words, it's a blessing if he is, as I suspect, functionally illiterate.

So, two that WorldNetDaily wouldn't consider because they express individual, considered conservative opinions, and two that are - shall we say - sub-par even by WorldNetDaily standards. One made the cut, because of her mastery of that Rovian Rhetorical tool, innuendo. combined with a complete lack of that great Liberal value - any evident sense of proportion or of the absurd.

But all told, I'd have to say that I'm grudgingly impressed. I had expected the lineup to be all wing-nut, all the time, and this post to be yet another exercise in duck hunting with claymore mines.

As I've observed more than once: "It's not SUPPOSED to be this easy!"

Maybe - just maybe - there is hope for America, if otherwise sane and sensible Conservatives intelligently (and as far as I can tell, honestly) advocating their considered positions without slavish adherence to the ever-changing and never-conservative Administration line.

I should like to publicly ask both both Rabbi Lapin and David Gold to express their personal positions on fair use, copyright, and the reasonable consequences of speech in the public square at public expense.

If Lee Kelso, Officer Vic and Melanie Morgan are not a textbook example of The Tragedy of the Commons, I don't know what is. That link leads to a particularly good, well-balanced Wikipedia article, I should add.

Rabbi Lapin has written an excellent piece touching some of these issues already - (I Warned You that Ancient Jewish Wisdom Discouraged Investing in Sirius Satellite Radio,)
I hopes for an excellent discussion of the topic.

tag: KSFO, Hate Radio, Hate Speech, Fair Use, Spocko's Brain, YouTube, Broadcast Spectrum, FCC, Disney, ABC, Viacom, SLAPP Suits, Unintended Consequences

The Wrath of the Conned

NewsBusters busted for Complicity

Graphictruth Scoop - Apparently it takes a thief...
Spocko lost his hosting because of accusations of copyright violations. In the course of creating this post, I discovered that every image within the NewsBusters article that I checked was hotlinked, uncredited and that several are probable copyright violations without fair-use exception.

NewsBusters takes exception to the audioclip blogswarm, saying that various clips sent by Spocko to advertisers were "taken out of context."

NewsBusters does have a point. Context DOES affect meaning. But I and many others have wondered aloud what context would make the following excerpt acceptable.

"Now you start with the Sear's [sic] Diehard [sic] the battery cables connected to his testi*les and you entertain him with that for awhile [sic] and then you blow his bleeping head off. " [sic]

I thought I'd go to NewsBusters and see what they thought made it wrong for spocko to send that "out of context" clip of Lee Rodgers. NewsBusters provided the entire context of a clip/quote Spoko sent to an advertisor, exactly as you see below. And just for effect, they inserted some photos to help improve their reader's ability to put the whole thing into the appropriate context.

That’s Vulcan Illogical

Unfortunately, Spocko’s conspicuously brief transcript and audio link conveniently ignored and eluded the context of this discussion. Here is a more complete transcript of this segment:

Rodgers: You couldn’t make this up. This time he was breaking into cars. His name is Kevin Holder, he’s 41 years old. He’s been arrested 236 times. His crime history, his rap sheet is 43 pages long going back to 1980.

Now wouldn’t you think at some point, in what’s supposed to be common sense, middle-America, somebody would ask, “Why is this guy running around loose?” What kind of idiot judges have repeatedly set up situations where this guy could be back out on the street? Actually, in a common sense world every judge who has ever sentenced this guy to any kind of circumstance that would allow him to get out of jail, every one of those judges ought to be in prison for life.

Officer Vic: Sure, this is Montana.

Rodgers: This is what passes for law enforcement in the criminal justice system in the United States of America these days and it’s just, well it’s just disgusting.

Morgan: Clearly we need a three strikes law at a national level.

Rodgers: Yeah, some SOB like this, lock him up, throw away the key.

Morgan: Yeah.

Rodgers: Better yet, put a bullet between his eyes and get it over because he’s never going to be worth a damn, never going to be anything but a criminal anyway.

Morgan: Well, that’s a bit of a harsh judgment, Lee.

Rodgers: No it isn’t, no it isn’t. No, it’s only common sense. What does the guy do? He’s demonstrated two hundred some odd times where he’s been caught. This doesn’t even count all the times he’s gotten away with crimes. So what the hell is the point of letting some creep like this live? What is the point? Now you start with the Sears DieHard, the battery cables connected to his testicles, and you entertain him with that for a while, and then you blow his bleeping head off. Thank you very much.

Morgan: That’s what I like about you. You’re so temperate.

It’s a bit different when you find out that Rodgers and Morgan were discussing a felon that had been arrested 236 times, and were thereby using the Sears DieHard image to mock the justice and penal systems for his continued presence on the streets. Wouldn’t you agree?

Context is a wonderful thing, isn’t it?

Oh yeah. Since he's a criminal, it's apparently shameful and remarkable been tortured and then summarily executed = along with the judges who should have "Done Something." And just to make a vivid point of what our justice system should be doing to such persons, a photo of an Iraqi prisoner being "Stressed" at Abu Grab-ass is casually inserted.

This context doesn't help the case; Indeed, it makes it seem even more depraved.

NewsBusters is saying that it's perfectly OK to torture and abuse people, as long as they are BAD people. And how do we KNOW they are "bad people?" Because someone in a position of social authority - that is to say, someone like Lee Rodgers - says so.

Note that we have no idea what the arrests are for, but we know for sure that there's no more than two felonies. I'm not saying we are talking about a good citizen, and I'm not arguing that our system of justice comes up with outcomes that are just, fair or even reasonably predictable from ANY viewpoint of How Things Ought To Work.

But we have the rule of law and a system of justice in order to prevent vigilante action, because the people that tend to be vigilantes tend also to be racist xenophobes who hang strangers and give their buddies free passes for equally bad behavior. Kinda like NewsBusters.

With this one post, "NewsBusters" shows it's true colors as an apologist for the indefensible, rather than the media watchdog it claims to be.

That is a shame, by the way; Media Matters seems mainly to focus on the sins of the Right and there is definitely a need for a balancing viewpoint. But NewsBusters isn't fulfilling that need; it simply dismisses all critique of the Right as "Liberal Media Bias," no matter how accurate that criticism may be. That's not a service, it's an insult to our intelligence, not to mention the law.

Footnotes:
Blogswarm
Hate Has No Place on the Airwaves (Media Matters)

SCOOP!

In preparing this post for publication, I found that NewsBusters was hotlinking images: the Iraqi torturee image is here
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/e/ea/250px-Iraqis_tortured_wp-f.jpg
and the picture of Lee Rodgers, so stern and all authoritarian was discourtesy of the NYTimes.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/01/14/business/15radio1.190.jpg
On the rest of the page - cartoon of David Brock, stolen from
http://www.instapunk.com/images/David_Brock.jpg
Air America logo:
http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/brands/0014/6292/brand.gif
Bart Simpson:
http://www.cs.miami.edu/~tptp/Seminars/Wos-AoAR/Dunce.GIF

Somehow, I don't think hotlinking without attribution or permission to be a sterling example of journalistic integrity. Actually, it's both a potential copyright violation (though fair comment usages apply, of course) AND theft of bandwidth.

Ironic, considering how that "contextual correction" was to the effect that a pattern of criminality made it OK to hook someone's testicles up to a Sears Die-Hard and having a bit of fun before blowing their heads off.

I wonder aloud at this point if NewsBusters is compliant with the letter and spirit of a .org registrant. As they seem to maintain their own servers, direct complaints are likely to be futile, unless they come upon litigious letterheads, but servers have been blackholed for such things before. Bandwidth theft on such a blatantly large scale is an Internet Spanking Offense.

NOTICE: Access to .ORG WHOIS information is provided to assist persons in determining the contents of a domain name registration record in the Public Interest Registry registry database. The data in this record is provided by Public Interest Registry for informational purposes only, and Public Interest Registry does not guarantee its accuracy. This service is intended only for query-based access. You agree that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use this data to: (a) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission by e-mail, telephone, or facsimile of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations to entities other than the data recipient's own existing customers; or (b) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that send queries or data to the systems of Registry Operator or any ICANN-Accredited Registrar, except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or modify existing registrations. All rights reserved. Public Interest Registry reserves the right to modify these terms at any time. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy. Domain ID:D106563722-LROR Domain Name:NEWSBUSTERS.ORG Created On:08-Jun-2005 19:51:08 UTC Last Updated On:08-Aug-2005 03:51:01 UTC Expiration Date:08-Jun-2008 19:51:08 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:Network Solutions LLC (R63-LROR) Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED Registrant ID:28150426-NSI Registrant Name:Media Research Center Registrant Organization:Media Research Center Registrant Street1:325 S. Patrick Street Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City:Alexandria Registrant State/Province:VA Registrant Postal Code:22314 Registrant Country:US Registrant Phone:+1.70338339 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email:Mark@SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Admin ID:28150426-NSI Admin Name:Media Research Center Admin Organization:Media Research Center Admin Street1:325 S. Patrick Street Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City:Alexandria Admin State/Province:VA Admin Postal Code:22314 Admin Country:US Admin Phone:+1.70338339 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email:Mark@SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Tech ID:28150426-NSI Tech Name:Media Research Center Tech Organization:Media Research Center Tech Street1:325 S. Patrick Street Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City:Alexandria Tech State/Province:VA Tech Postal Code:22314 Tech Country:US Tech Phone:+1.70338339 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email:Mark@SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Name Server:NS2.SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Name Server:NS3.SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Name Server:NS1.SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Name Server:NS4.SPECIALSYSTEMS.NET Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server:

tag: Newsbusters, first amendment, KSFO, Lee Rodgers, Disney/ABC, viacom, Spocko, blogintegrety, blogswarm, hate talk, talk radio, fair use, Genital Torture, Stress Positions, Electrocution, authoritarianism

KSFO Apologist blogicalthought amuses

Teh boring… at Calling All Wingnuts:

Sometimes the comments are better than the posts: One Named blogicalthought alleges.

"5. Just weeks before the Media Reform Conference in Nashville, Tennessee, you begin to organize liberal bloggers, mainly “Eschatonians” or rather known as “Atriots” who blog for Duncan Black and David Brock of Media Matters, financed by George Soros, to “blogswarm” the issue."

Hm, it's ok by you if Cheney And Coors and Free Republic collude to get out the talking points, I presume. It's ok for KSFO to send out "astroturf" emails to their dittoheads before they spend three hours not apologizing. But I guess you feel guilty about that well-known reality, and how all the major players happen to have the same talking points at the same time.

Notice how often the first sin that evildoers accuse others of is the one they are most guilty of? Earlier allegations of corporate shilldom marked "presumably true, pending disproof."

As a matter of record, I do not blog "for" anyone. I can't even honestly and self-righteously say I've turned down offers in the name of intellectual honesty.

The readers of most leftward/anti authoritarian blogs realize that if the Sainted Clinton told us what to say - he'd cease to be sainted and become again tainted.

Not that Clinton, Kerry and others don't try to herd us independants with their astroturf appeals, but it sounds a heck of a lot more like respectful pleading, occasional begging and on particularly important occasions, hints of groveling are not unheard of.

Well, actually, to be fair, it's mostly cheerleading. At least with me, that's the sort of spam I get.. Atrios, on the other hand, may well be entertained with offers that I'd find tempting. But I'm blessed with a lower page-rank. A much, much lower page rank.

But on the liberal side, it's all very much, "Those are my people and I am their leader! Excuse me, I must follow them!"

The reason why all the lefty and centerist blogs are taking this from the same angle is because there is only one angle. Fair comment, good and legal. Disney/ABC, wrong, bad, possibly illegal, certainly stupid. All else - beside the point.

Nobody's arguing with the right for any damn-fool to say any damn-fool thing they care to. We do object to damn-foolishness being presented as fact, but the best response is more and more accurate free speech. Indeed, from a free speech perspective, KSFO is what you would call a "target-rich environment."

What we object to is the outrage and bullying as a response to them being held accountable in a tiny, tiny way for the legal and moral consequences of their exercise in free speech.

Calling it a "boycott" as if that were a bad thing is dumb. Boycotts are perfectly legitimate tactics, one dear to the Right. Various Right-wing groups call for boycotts all the time to punish media they disapprove of. Can we say "Dixie Chicks?" Ooo, I KNEW that we could!

If it HAD been a boycott, I would not object. It just happens that, factually speaking, Spocko made a very significant point of NOT calling for a boycott. Factually, it was a completely different tactic, and one that is obviously both more fair and probably more effective.

All anyone had to do was to read what Spocko actually said, and compare it with what Lee said to know that Lee is, in fact a lazy lyin' bastard who can't be bothered to do his homework and either too stupid or too far wrong to argue against the coming liberal hordes honestly.

Personally, whatever he called it, I didn't give a rat's ass. If corporate America has become too careless to review what they are associating their brands with, ain't no skin off my nose. I'm an unapologetic Libertarian and capitalist, but I'm not a FatCapitalist. The action (and the fun) of real Free Market Capitalism includes watching for such mis-steps - and capitalizing on them.

Yep, had I stumbled across such clips, they would have gone straight to undervalued competitors in the KSFO market. "What's in YOUR wallet?"

But Spocko is more charitable than I. He informed advertisers of what sort of programs were being associated with their brand. And guess what information comes out in the wash? Disney/ABC was MISREPRESENTING the content as being "family friendly." Maybe if it were the Manson Family...

They were lying to their client base, as a matter of corporate policy at some level, and the SLAPP suit against Spocko argues that it was at a higher, rather than at a lower one. Now, I dunno about what the news division at KSFO thinks (or ABC news for that matter,) but to ME, that's news, at least three bells worth. Because we call that "Theft by false pretenses."

While the winger blogs talk about "all but one" account returning to KSFO, that's based on a naked allegation BY KSFO talkers who are, as we have established, famous liars. I'm sure that statistic does not include those who have simply chosen to NOT renew ads, as opposed to pulling them. I'm sure it doesn't include those who said "sorry, but the results we got didn't meet our expectations."

MasterCard's decision - as well as all the others - probably has less to do with the content of the speech and far more with the demographics represented by the speakers. MasterCard (and other advertisors) want "family freindly" programming because families have good credit and are willing to use it. People who live in their parent's basements and call into Lee and Rush are not so likely to have good jobs and good credit. "How gullible do you have to be..." leads to other questions that eventually wander around to issues of unrecoverable debt. LIBERAL talkers and information providers? MUCH more attractive demographics.

I'd say it's likely that advertisers have shifted or are beginning to shift their buys toward Air America, because if the Democracy Now survey results are indicative of the same general demographic, then educated, White, Urban, upper-middle class professionals are much better credit risks than... well the sort that considers Lee Rodgers persuasive.

Miracle fat-burning pills and "get rich by spending in just 30 days" on the other hand, might just perform BETTER in Lee's demographic. You see, it's not about what's said, it's what sorta people listen.

Oh, and as for your non-sequiteur about Mike's "vulgarity" in holding up that infamous sign...

Vulgar, yes. And funny. Very, very funny; the very essence of a GraphicTruth. I've listened to Hannedy and he does indeed suck - and I'm comparing him to O'Rielly, Glenn Beck and other conservatives. Given how long that camera LINGERED, it's pretty clear that the rank and file working stiffs who have to suffer through his excruciating idiocy in order to cash a paycheck pretty much agree that Hannedy Sucks Ass.

And as the joke goes - not particularly well, either.

tag: blogicalthought, Lee Rodgers, Hate Speech, Hate Radio, famous liars, theft by false pretenses

Jacking a thread at Calling all Wingnuts

Teh boring… at Calling All Wingnuts:

Sometimes the comments are better than the posts: One Named blogicalthought alleges.

"5. Just weeks before the Media Reform Conference in Nashville, Tennessee, you begin to organize liberal bloggers, mainly “Eschatonians” or rather known as “Atriots” who blog for Duncan Black and David Brock of Media Matters, financed by George Soros, to “blogswarm” the issue."

Hm, it's ok by you if Cheney And Coors and Free Republic collude to get out the talking points, I presume. But I guess you feel guilty about that well-known reality, and how all the major players happen to have the same talking points at the same time.

Notice how often the first sin that evildoers accuse others of is the one they are most guilty of? Earlier allegations of corporate shilldom marked "presumably true, pending disproof."

The readers of most leftward/antiauthoritarian blogs realize that if the Sainted Clinton told us what to say - he'd cease to be sainted and become again tainted.

Not that Clinton, Kerry and others don't try to herd us independ, but it sounds a heck of a lot more like respectful pleading, occasional begging and on particularly important occasions, hints of groveling are not unheard of.

Well, actually, to be fair, it's mostly cheerleading. At least with me, that's the sort of spam I get.. Atrios, on the other hand, may well be entertained with quite intriguing offers.

But on the liberal side, it's all very much, "Those are my people and I am their leader! Excuse me, I must follow them!"

The reason why all the lefty blogs are taking this from the same angle is because there is only one angle. Fair comment, good and legal. Disney/ABC, wrong, bad, possibly illegal, certainly stupid. All else - beside the point.

Nobody's arguing with the right for any damn-fool to say any damn-fool thing they care to. We do object to damn-foolishness being presented as fact, but the best response is more and more accurate free speech. Indeed, from a free speech perspective, KSFO is what you would call a "target-rich environment."

Calling it a "boycott" as if that were a bad thing is dumb. Boycotts are perfectly legitimate tactics, one dear to the Right suggests using all the time to punish media they disapprove of. Can we say "Dixie Chicks?" Ooo, I KNEW that we could!

If it HAD been a boycott, I would not object. It just happens that, factually speaking, Spocko made a very significant point of NOT calling for a boycott. Factually, it was a completely different tactic, and one that is obviously both more fair and probably more effective.

All anyone had to do was to read what Spocko actually said, and compare it with what Lee said to know that Lee is, in fact a lazy lyin' bastard who can't be bothered to do his homework and either too stupid or too far wrong to argue against the coming liberal hordes honestly.

Personally, whatever he called it, I didn't give a rat's ass. If corporate America has become too careless to review what they are associating their brands with, ain't no skin off my nose. I'm an unapologetic Libertarian and capitalist, but I'm not a FatCapitalist. The action (and the fun) of real Free Market Capitalism includes watching for such mis-steps - and capitalizing on them.

Yep, had I stumbled across such clips, they would have gone straight to undervalued competitors in the KSFO market. "What's in YOUR wallet?"

But Spocko is more charitable than I. He informed advertisers of what sort of programs were being associated with their brand. And guess what information comes out in the wash? Disney/ABC was MISREPRESENTING the content as being "family friendly." Maybe if it were the Manson Family.

They were lying to their client base, as a matter of corporate policy at some level, and the SLAPP suit against Spocko argues that it was at a higher, rather than at a lower one. Now, I dunno about what the news division at KSFO thinks (or ABC news for that matter,) but to ME, that's news, at least three bells worth. Because we call that "Theft by false pretenses."

While the winger blogs talk about "all but one" account returning to KSFO, that's based on a naked allegation BY KSFO talkers who are, as we have established, famous liars. I'm sure that statistic does not include those who have simply chosen to NOT renew ads, as opposed to pulling them. I'm sure it doesn't include those who said "sorry, but the results we got didn't meet our expectations."

MasterCard's decision - as well as all the others - probably has less to do with the content of the speech and far more with the demographics represented by the speakers. MasterCard (and other advertisors) want "family freindly" programming because families have good credit and are willing to use it. People who live in their parent's basements and call into Lee and Rush - not so likely to have good jobs and good credit. "How gullible do you have to be..." leads to other questions that eventually wander around to issues of unrecoverable debt. LIBERAL talkers and information providers? MUCH more attractive demographics.

I'd say it's likely that advertisers have shifted or are beginning to shift their buys toward Air America, because if the Democracy Now are indicative of the same general demographic, then educated, White. Urban, upper-middle class professionals are much better credit risks than... well the sort that considers Lee Rodgers persuasive.

Miracle fat-burning pills and "become rich by spending in just 30 days" on the other hand, might just perform BETTER in Lee's demographic. You see, it's not about what's said, it's what sorta people listen.

Oh, and as for your non-sequiteur about Mike's "vulgarity" in holding up that infamous sign...

Vulgar, yes. And funny. Very, very funny; the very essence of a GraphicTruth. I've listened to Hannedy and he does indeed suck - and I'm comparing him to O'Rielly, Glenn Beck and other conservatives. Given how long that camera LINGERED, it's pretty clear that the rank and file working stiffs who have to suffer through his excruciating idiocy in order to cash a paycheck pretty much agree that Hannedy Sucks Ass.

And as the joke goes - not particularly well, either.

tag: blogicalthought, Lee Rodgers, Hate Speech, Hate Radio, famous liars, theft by false pretenses

Internet Liars: Project much, Lee?

Lee Rodgers of KSFO is now a blogger!

Furthermore, he's thrown down the gauntlet to all "lefty bloggers" to see if they can keep up with us. If you were hoping for an apology, or any evident understanding of the not-very-complicated first amendment issues Spocko's interaction with Disney has raised - don't hold your breath.

On the other hand, if Disney was hoping this would all just go away quietly - Don't hold your breath for that, either. The Mouse is gonna end up looking bad and smelling bad for some weeks now, and if EFF and Spocko have grounds for some sort of suit against Disney and the former ISP, ... this could last for YEARS.

"INTERNET LIARS AND OTHER ASSORTED LOW-LIFE": "message: Get used to it, 'cause you ain't heard NOTHIN' yet! I don't roll over and play dead for people whose agenda I'm convinced would destroy this nation. I've travelled the world and learned long ago that, with all its flaws, it works a helluva lot better than most of the world!"

Ok, Lee, here's my problem with that statement. First, the "liberal agenda" you speak of is something you and your colleagues pulled out of your collective asses. Seriously.

I am by no means a liberal. Words have meaning, dude, dude and dudette, so I try and use them as Webster and the Queen would agree. In other words, "liberal" is not the opposite of "right-thinking gun-toting American," any more than Conservative is the opposite of "socialist commie pinko faggot."

Classical Liberalism is in favor of large, interventionist government as a guarantor of social "reform" and propriety.

Liberals (save for the Neocon variety) tend to be well-meaning knowitalls who are reasonably sure that on the whole they know better than most people what's best for them, for the nation, and civilization as a whole.

What they do not know is that five times out of ten, that which is good for the collective is bad for any given individual to some degree. The other thing they do not realize is that "knowing better" is NOT the same as knowing enough to meddle with any expectation of a good outcome.

I don't believe in messing with folks, either 'for their own good' or in order to 'uphold family values.' I don't have the right to mess with YOUR family to uphold idea - although I could make a case for both just by taking you at your own words. Yep, by the things you say, I could make a real good case you are a likely abuser in private - and probably the victim of abues. So I have you coming and going.

Or on the other hand, I could just repect your wish to not deal with your own shit. Hell, as long as you are yelling at a mike instead of me, I'm cool with that. I figure people can choose their own poisons, be it Scotch, bile or Oxycontin. But on the other hand, don't expect me to support your habits either, when your share of the public airwaves could be better used for... oh... poetry reading, classical music or baseball.

And I understand that's what several sponsors felt. They didn't feel like having their good names associated with your mouth. That's their right, sir. Spocko didn't say they had to pull their accounts, he asked them if they WISHED to be associated. They did not.

I believe in minding my own business and letting my neighbor mind his - unless and until my neighbor yells for help. That way I avoid the mistake of "one size fits all" solutions, which are generally create more problems than solutions, and cost a lot more than just, say, handing five bucks to a beggar and giving HIM the responsibility for spending it wisely.

At the very worst, I've bought him a beer in a warm place for more than an hour and a reasonable portion of his daily caloric intake. I am choosing to make use of his self-interest to maximise the benefit of my choice to be charitable.

In other words, I'm a Libertarian. I put my faith in the broad ability of well informed and well educated people to take care of themselves most times, take care of each other if given access to resources and trusted with them, and to know when they have to grit their teeth and ask directly for support, either for themselves, or for a cause or a need. (To complain, sir, is to volunteer.)

In this case, my neighbor Spocko yelled for help, and a lot of people came a-runnin,' in support of him, the Constitution of these United States and the "fair use" provision of copyright law. You might consider it to be a first-amendment militia, defending our little electronic villiages against the giant stomping mouse that wishes to tax our "t", copyright our "m", and register "e" as a trademark.

Needless to say, I oppose this giant corporate attempt to preserve the profitablity of talk radio in your market by exploiting the ignorance of your advertisers, whom I assume to be unaware of your slant, and the ignorance of your viewers - who are plainly ignorant of most everything other than that.

For this, I'm sure you'll have some choice words. But then, people who speak truth bluntly, without regard for the tender feelings of those they legitimately criticise are often yelled at.

For expressing my views I've been called a socialist - which is absurd; a liberal, which is ignorant, and an idealist, which causes me to chuckle aloud in a particularly cynical and evil-sounding way.

What I trust is self-interest. Mine first and yours, and everyone else's, knowing that I'll be wrong in some cases - but far less often than not, and I'm not willing to spend money, time or attention on figuring out who deserves this or that. Life is too damn short.

So, why am I blogging about this? Indeed, why am I intruding into Lee's field, as a call in talk show host, Saturdays at 2PM PST (7PM Eastern, if my fingers aren't lying to me)?

Well, it's in MY self-interest. I'd like to be heard, I have got views, and as Lee has proved, you don't have to understand what you are talking about to get a gig as a talker. However, other skills ARE required. For an illustration of how rusty and unpracticed my skills compare with Lees... Click here. Lord have mercy on me, I sucked.

The difference between me and Lee? I understand how to get better, and getting better doesn't require that I choose between my purse or my concience. For Lee to compete, he's gotta lean left, because the Right is sewn up - and losing traffic.

Me, I don't gotta do anything but practice. And I owe a debt to Ira Blue, who's rolling in his grave at the embarrassment of having such a trio of cretins eroding the KGO family reputation.

So, Lee; welcome to the blogosphere. I have to confess that your writing is a lot better than my talking, so I think you have an actual chance. Of course, it's even more fun if you allow comments - that's where the challenge begins - and where the traffic comes from.

Anyway, Lee, I'm after your job, Metaphorically speaking. No way I'm moving to San Francisco; you can't smoke there. But I'll be in a paid radio gig a lot sooner than you replace anyone in the marketplace of ideas, I gotta tell ya. Sorry about that, but you really need to read some books and check out the footnotes.

My call in number - should you care to know - is {646) 652-4834. I'll be at your disposal every Saturday at 2pm, and I'm scheduled for 60 minutes.

tag: ridicule, Lee Kelso, KSFO, hate talkers, hate talk, hate speech, talk radio, fair use, copyright, ABC, Disney, Viacom

Regaring KSFO "HOT TALK" Hosts

"Eef ju are gonna shoot, shoot! Don' talk!" - The Good, The Bad and the Ugly.

One IS tempted to suggest that all such pointy-headed pea brains be encouraged to go put their pale white asses where their loud mouths are. On the other hand... maybe NOT such a good idea.

The Number is (646) 652-4337

I've just signed up with BlogTalkRadio to do a show this weekend. I'll be chatting and live blogging for at LEAST fifteen minutes about the whole KSFO mess. Who knows, maybe even one of the nutters from that show will call in and give me a piece of their minds. If, yanno, they can spare it.

Here's the details, so far.

I'll keep everyone posted. Meanwhile, add the call-in number to your mobile and while you are at it, the show's IM address, graphictruthdotcom on yahoo!

tag: KSFO ABC Disney, Hot Talk, culture war, SLAPP suits, spocko, spocko's brain

Mouse sez bring it on. Libs show up packin' glueboards.

This is one of those things I would ordinarily consider off my beat; blog wars and talk show wars are "Hard Copy" and "ET" material in my arrogant opinion, akin to gossip about whether or not Rosie and The Donald are really fighting or just hyping their respective ratings. But as the blogswarm spreads across the Internets, it's making navigation difficult in these here "tubes," One particular obstacle to navigation showed up in this comment thread on Echidne of the Snakes. unintentionally brought attention to issues vital to all bloggers - not just Libs, Lefties and Litigants.

It's a bit self-serving to reference a thread in which I gleefully participated... so let us just say that the consensus was that they just had to be a corporate shill. Considering the exact points (and the exact and particular bits of misinformation about "fair use" and "copyright,") I can't imagine what or who else they could be.

(I have yet to be visited by such a corporate shill. Just the odd spammer. I clearly need to work harder.)

Anyway, KSFO's response to all this was to pre-empt three hours of regular programming and devote it to Spocko-slamming. Their management referred to it as their "response."

I wonder how their advertisers feel about that hearty little "fuck you?"

Media Matters - KSFO's Morgan: "I wouldn't describe Friday's show as apologetic by any means"

Go read the Media Matters article for full - and I do mean EXHAUSTIVE context - in contrast to KSFO's blustering and whining about being "taken out of context."

One wonders what context would make it appropriate to require a caller to "call Mohamed a Whore," to refer to Barack Obama as a "Halfrican," or agree with a caller that all mosques in Syria should be blown up by cruise missiles when they are most likely to be full of praying Muslims?

Tell, me do, oh Disney/Viacom/ABC? Explain to us why this sort of speech is something that should not be brought to the attention of yo