Cokie and the Pussycats
You talk about your "liberal media."
Well, it struck again on This Whore with Cokie Roberts.
The subject was Bush's stem cell decision, and its political impact.
A quick run through the roundtable tells us everything we need to know.
Today's roundtable consists of Claire Shipman, George Will, George Stephanopolous,
and the most useless prostitute in a city of useless prostitutes, Cokie Roberts
Claire Shipman: This answers the gravitas question - Is Bush up to the job? - He sure is!
George Will: This was not a broken promise, and he did not make his decision based on politics.
Judas: This most certainly
was a great political victory for the president. The right-to-lifers
are happy and so is Christopher Reeve. Bush is an incredible genius.
Cokie: I'm a useless idiot who shouldn't
even be allowed an opinion, much less broadcasting
that brainless hump of pap I call "thinking," so I'll say something meaningless and stupid,
then giggle and uphold my reputation as the anus of ABC News.
So, what have we learned?
We learned that everyone on the panel - alllllllll the talking heads - from the right and the left agree
that President George W. Bush is smart, engaged and full of gravitas. He's that rarest of politician,
a man who always keeps his promises, who never breaks his word but still makes everybody happy.
That, and we learned that Cokie Roberts is useless and all-fluff. (How did she ever get that job?)
...and thank you for watching ABC News, trying be be more like Fox every day.
Subject: Maureen Dowd's Point
Her point was to JERK YOUR CHAIN !!!
Not your's specifically, Barfy; she probably doesn't even know you exist.
She should STILL be highly respected as a writer.
That was a superlative piece of mis-direction and irony !
You just can't stand to be manipulated, unless its Bill doin' it, huh ?
Pete, you're still kinda new, so I'll give you the benny of the doubt,
but do you think
there's a reason why I introduce that harpy hag with "She hates everybody?"
Her reason to exist, (same for Christopher Hutchins) is to be petty
and insulting to everyone.
That way, she never has to take a stand - ever - on anything. She insults Hillary one week,
Smirk the next, then Clinton, then Gore, then McCain, then Smirky, then Hillary again.
She rarely argues politics, it's always the personal attacks - never on the issues.
At the NY Whore Times, this is exactly the kind of journalism they like to pay for.
They give Pulitzer Prizes for "Best Personal Insults," these days.
She'll call Helms a caveman one week, then scream at NOW for being lying
lesbians the next.
That way, she never has to take a stand, never has to defend herself, never says whether
women's rights are on-track or if they're evolving too fast or not evolving fast enough.
She just knows that both sides are pure evil and that's a bunch of lying horseshit.
She hates everybody.
She hides what she's FOR.
Since she hates everybody, (or takes money to pretend) it creates a false world
when you can have it all, and I say that's cheating. She offers nothing but nag, nag, nag.
She's never happy - no matter what. She's the ultimate nightmare of a whining wife,
which is why I've suggested she and Hitchens marry, so they can complain each other to death.
I would enjoy attending that double funeral.
By the way,
next week when she calls Bush "the illiterate's Little Lord Fauntleroy,"
will you still claim, "She's highly respected as a writer?"
Will she still be "superlative" after she trashes your boy?
I need a tech person
Subject: NPR Prez Denies Pandering to GOP
Kevin Klose, President & CEO of NPR, appeared
on CSpan's "The Second Golden Age of Radio"
Saturday night. Someone called in to praise NPR's cultural programming, but RIPPED him for its
fawning 'coverage' of the Bush regime (I stood up and shouted "YESS!!!" at the TV.)
It was both funny and nauseating to see Mr. Klose
tapdance around that criticism.
He fumfered for a while, then offered the defense that, during the campaign, NPR gave both candidates
equal AMOUNTS of coverage - conveniently ignoring both the unfair tone of NPR's campaign coverage
AND its kowtowing to the regime after Generalissimo George's installation.
I'm encouraging my local public radio station
to abandon NPR news programming altogether.
Why would I want to pay for it if I can't TRUST it?
Doug, I'm with you, brother.
Too bad there aren't other radio sources, ones that aren't
afraid to criticize The Failure in Theif.
Too bad there are so many radio voices that are content to parrot Mr. Rove's message of the day.
Too bad there aren't more liberal/centrist voices in the right-wing cacophony.
The IQ story that won't quit.
Scranton in middle of international media hoax
by Rich Mates
Who is dumber: President George W. Bush or the British reporter who wrote a story
about him based on information attributed to a "Scranton, Pennsylvania, think tank"?
My money's on Smirk - big time.
Whenever the question is: "Who's dumber,
Smirk or ______?" ...bet on Smirk!
Your odds are pretty good if you take Smirk every time.
When the Appointed Tool gets near a microphone without a Cheney-approved
he says stuff like, "I want to go to Texas and talk to my cows."
If you Republicans want to convince us that Smirk has a brain, lock
him in a room where
he can't get any help from any of his daddy's friends, and give him a pencil and some paper
and ask him to write down how a bill becomes a law - then close the door.
If he wrote anything, ...even a wrong answer, ...I'd be impressed as hell.
Not so Happy Birthdays to...
Ben Affleck is 29 Rebecca Gayheart is 29 Lolita Swain is now 21
My good friend Ben Affleck (Star
Chart) is getting help for his birthday, so his next birthday
will be happier.
Gayheart is accused of killing a kid Pickles-style with her Jeep.
...and Swain, now that she's grown up, is no longer sexually desirable.
Remind me, there's an unwritten Affleck rant.
From: Paul Nations
Subject: Democratic Radio Response (or lack of)
This is the text of a message I posted to the Democrats.org site.
Today I was initially incensed that CNN had reported
on Bush's weekly radio
address and ignored the Democratic response. So, before I unloaded on them
for being so blatantly partisan I decided I'd check to make sure we had prepared
a weekly radio address. Surprise, surprise, surprise the Democratic party couldn't
be bothered to get off their pink tutu butts and use their equal time.
What the hell is going on with my party?
I'm mad as hell at you guys.
Bill Clinton would've never let a chance to respond to the other party go by.
Bush has had an excellent week in the media with his stem cell decision and
you guys sit on your hands?
I'm beginning to think that maybe we don't deserve
Paul, I'm with you.
I don't know why our side refuses to fight.
When you run for office, aren't you inherently promising to fight?
Why bother to go to DC, hire a staff, take up office space and cash a paycheck
if all you're going to do is ditto the opposition?
What's wrong with the Democratic party?
What are they afraid of?
by Jake Tapper at Salon
Can Sen. John Kerry, derided by his critics as an arrogant press
hog, do in 2004 what his fellow liberal Al Gore couldn't do?
Will Kerry be our next president?
Subject: Drew Carey
Why are we getting health reports about Drew Carey?
I've had absolutely no use for him since he was
on "Politically Incorrect"
and called our last legitimately-elected president a SOCIOPATH.
He got such a negative response from the audience
that he quickly tried
to cover his considerable ass by saying he thought ALL presidents are sociopaths.
That earned him a permanent spot on my "don't give a shit about" list.
Carey's not my favorite, and I've never seen a whole show of his,
but we like to watch that Behind the Scenes on VH-1, you know?
They said Carey was a really tortured bastard who's tried to kill himself
When I head he was "in the hospital and recovering" I thought he tried it a third time,
but it turns out it was his heart, getting a spliff, or whatever it's called,
so I thought of Smirk's brain's many heart attacks and it just jumped on the page.
Don't worry, I'm no fan of his.
They said as a multi-millionaire, he had his eyes fixed and no longer needs glasses
but he wears them because it helps him to look like a dork.
Worth a repeat
Subject: Chinese critique
Well, we ALL know why you take the stance you
do on the "spy-plane" incident.
You wanted a hostage crisis to beat "W" over the head with, ala Jimmy Carter.
Mr. Bush's brilliant handling of the situation
saved the parents of thes kids months
of anguish (as if you CARE about them, you just wanted a political hammer to wield,
your own analogy - - the big hammer) AND accomplished an end run around the baffled DNC, et al !
So, you don't think he's got any foreign policy smarts, huh ?
If Carter or especially Clinton had America down on her knees, begging the commies for forgiveness,
apologizing with "We're sorry" then "We're VERY sorry" then writing them a check for $34,000
for stealing our plane and imprisoning our "fighting men," handjobs like Barr and Burton would be
filing treason charges and impeachment papers. But you give Smirky a pass?
When they had our prisoners in North Vietnam, Nixon didn't beg.
When they grabbed the Mayaquez, Ford didn't beg.
When they grabbed our Iranian diplomats, Carter didn't beg.
When Saddam had our pilots, Bush didn't beg.
America only begs under President Weak & Stupid.
Why do you think it's "brilliant" to cave in and surrender?
To make it worse, these were SOLDIERS!
I can maybe understand caving to save a 7th-grade French glass that was hijacked
by some religio-crazies during a trip to Paris, but not our "fighting" men.
Were those men trained to surrender? Is that why we spent that money on defense?
Let me ask two numbered questions back at you:
If it's not worth risking the life of even one soldier,
why do we fund, train and maintain a military?
2. Wouldn't it be more "brilliant" to just surrender every time?
The Bushes of Hazard
Text should be sent inside the e-mail, pictures should be attachments.
If you send me anything inside an e-mail besides plain text,
I can't read it so you can save the time it would take to send it.
Similarly, if you send graphics INSIDE an e-mail I can see it,
but I can't print it unless I hit "view source"
and then scour the Internet for the source, but there's just not time unless it's toon of the month.
Let's get something straight
Someone sent me a web page inside the e-mail, so I can't use it or print
but I did take the time to transpose this paragraph:
"These are the same sort of yucky people who
bombed an aspirin factory in the Sudan
to get a scandal off the front pages, and continually strafe the cratered moonscape of Iraq
on the chance that they might hit a few more innocent civilians."
The second half of that paragraph demonstrates the hold on reality the
The idea that we're spending millions of dollars and risking doxens of planes and pilots
just to "hit a few more innocent civilians" is downright Fox-worthy,
but it brings up the opportunity to ask something.
Are there any sane people who claim Clinton intentionally bombed the aspirin factory?
That word is in red for a reason. I'm not asking if Rush or O'Reilly or Hannity said it.
I'm talking about someone who's respected. Does anyone believe that?
And if the answer is yes, could someone explain why our military would
follow crazy orders
to bomb an aspirin factory to help a president get his problems off the front page?
Are they saying our military would do anything they're told?
If they were told to drive tanks up Pennsylvania Avenue and shoot civilians, they would?
Is that what these people think?
And am I the only one who gives them more credit than that?
Don't write and explain that a soldier's job is to follow orders.
That would make the third Billy Jack movie factual and I couldn't handle that.
If you drove a tank or flew a jet and you had orders to murder innocent
in a totally innocent setting, wouldn't you resign your commission first?
In a peacetime setting, wouldn't you rather go AWOL than just murder for kicks?
This is like that horseshit
with the choppers and the four dead firefighters.
If I flew a chopper and they told me I couldn't grab enough water to save those firefighters
I'd do it anyway and I'd be happy to defend myself afterwards.
You don't murder innocent people because someone told you to.
So - I'm asking - are the military the mindless murderers that the aspirin
factory critics claim?
Or is this just another example of Rush and Fox News making shit up?
You Won't See on TV, Part Three
Dan Burton Scalps Taxpayers with "Fact-Finding" Junket
by Tamara Baker as seen on AMPOL
The latest in the parade of Republican scandals that will never make the nightly news
is the story of Dan Burton's sudden, taxpayer-financed interest in the German postal system.
I have a question: Who's money is that, Mr. Burton?
Click to get this graphic on mouse pads and beer wraps.
Subject: UNLESS I MISSED IT, I'D SAY YOU'RE A FLAMING LIBERAL
Your website peaked my interest by the very title of your site - Whores In The Media.
Hmm, you think I should change my title, then?
I'm thinking about changing it to bartcop.com - you like that better?
I thought I discovered a website that honestly
described the criminal media, and called them what they are.
But as I read a little further, it dawned on me that perhaps I was sucked in by a liberal.
Something tells me that happens to you a lot...
Your references to W as shrub in the article of
"Whore of the Week" painted you as being an evil,
homosexual communist liberal - the most vile of all deranged and twisted minds,
and clearly one who has sold his soul to satan (lower case no accident).
I like reading your stuff!
Want a weekly column?
I'll confess to the "evil."
If I was gay I wouldn't hide it.
Communist? Don't know the meaning of the word.
Liberal? Sure, to a degree, but hardly "flaming" as you charge.
And what happens if you type "satan" with a capital
Does he appear and suck you into something?
I'm going to try it.
I'll try it again, this time with all caps.
The liberal press of this country is a seething
den of sewer rats who have chosen to slither into their
respective bed's to support the likes of Clinton and other abominations to humanity and integrity.
I thought you were an exception who shown a light on their evil and called attention to it,
but apparently I was wrong.
The liberal press?
You mean the people who constantly run untrue, negative stories about our rightfully elected president,
but who never once ran a false or negative story about Bill Clinton in the last nine years?
That liberal press?
Maybe some night we could kick this topic around in a chat room.
Or is it easier to make silly charges then run away saying, "You're not worthy of my time...?"
Read the Previous Issue
It had everything.
Copyright © 2001,
Thanks for the fumble, Dude.