Jeremy Hooper says it best at Good As You : “Right now, someone is in Hell doing triple axels while dodging flying pigs.” You gotta wonder how this will fly with frequent AFA radio guest Tony Perkins. Subscribe to Joe.My.God. Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Joe. My. God. Discovery Date : 01/03/2011 17:21 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …
Jeremy Hooper says it best at Good As You : “Right now, someone is in Hell doing triple axels while dodging flying pigs.” You gotta wonder how this will fly with frequent AFA radio guest Tony Perkins. Subscribe to Joe.My.God. Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Joe. My. God. Discovery Date : 01/03/2011 17:21 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …
Jeremy Hooper says it best at Good As You : “Right now, someone is in Hell doing triple axels while dodging flying pigs.” You gotta wonder how this will fly with frequent AFA radio guest Tony Perkins. Subscribe to Joe.My.God. Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Joe. My. God. Discovery Date : 01/03/2011 17:21 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …
Mickey Rooney spoke out against elder abuse before a senate committee on aging on Wednesday. The 90-year-old actor says he’s been the victim of abuse at the hands of his own family. (March 2)
Continue reading …
Mickey Rooney spoke out against elder abuse before a senate committee on aging on Wednesday. The 90-year-old actor says he’s been the victim of abuse at the hands of his own family. (March 2)
Continue reading …Mickey Rooney spoke out against elder abuse before a senate committee on aging on Wednesday. The 90-year-old actor says he’s been the victim of abuse at the hands of his own family. (March 2)
Continue reading …Perhaps you’re familiar with Clarence Thomas, the Long-Dong-Silver-loving US Supreme Court Justice. With a new term recently beginning on The Court, he passed the five-year mark for not only saying nothing of value while hearing cases, but nothing at all. Yes, you read that correctly–while no US Supreme Court Justice in over two centuries has gone even a single term without speaking from the bench during arguments, Thomas has managed to do it for five in a row. To quote Stephen Colbert, “the man is a rock…in that he could be replaced by a rock and I’m not sure anyone would notice.” Sadly, it shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise that if someone were going to set this record, it would be Justice Thomas. He certainly never even approached being “the most qualified” person in the land to sit on the Supreme Court, as President George H.W. Bush, who nominated him to the High Court, said after offering his name. I’m quite sure that Bush didn’t even believe that himself, unless he was limiting the field of competition to Thomas, then-vice president Dan Quayle, and his namesake offspring. But if he was clearly unworthy then–and he was–he is now about as appropriate a judge as Newt Gingrich is a marriage counselor. While he doesn’t seem to even want to participate in his day job, Thomas certainly does engage in the kind of partisan politicking that is not only unseemly, but sets a terrible precedent in a democracy. And at least in theory, the judiciary is supposed to be impartial, and therefore above politics. Yet, in only the past few weeks, a number of embarrassing episodes have not only turned this legal tracheotomy into a punch line for late night comics, but have quite honestly raised questions about whether any fully-functioning democracy would allow him to continue rendering judgments so important in deciding not only the law, but values of our society. First, there was the fact that Thomas, whose wife has earned almost $700,000 for–as far as I can tell–being his wife, finds government disclosure forms so difficult to fill out that he accidentally put $0 where $700,000 was supposed to be under “spousal income.” That’s right, for a guy who is supposed to decide how to interpret our Constitution, apparently reporting the bounty his wife pulled in through the right-wing welfare system of think tank stipends and Tea Party activism is somewhat more difficult than making jokes about body hair and coca cola to co-workers of a female persuasion. As this is a family news outlet, you’re just going to have to go look up the rest yourself. But wait, there’s more! As reported over the past week, the good-government group Common Cause has caught ole Clarence in what those in the legal profession might call a “lie.” Thomas attended a meeting of wealthy corporate barons on the West Coast, not long before joining his fellow deluded, activist conservative judges in overturning roughly 100 years of settled law to claim that corporations should be able to buy and sell democracy on the free market, like equities or an Emmy. And as such, these corporate “people” can spend pretty much whatever they want on electioneering, a wonderful little valentine to a republic that is supposed to be defined by “one person, one vote”. The problem, of course, is those wealthy conservatives with whom Thomas ate pigs-in-a-blanket and likely fantasized about replacing the social safety net with breakaway glass stood to directly benefit from these changes to our law, contained in the infamous Citizens United case. So Thomas went ahead and lied about how much time he spent at that retreat held by the infamous Koch Brothers, the sugar daddies of the supposedly power-to-the-people Tea Party movement. While according the The New York Times, “a court spokeswoman said Justice Thomas had made a ‘brief drop-by’ at the event in Palm Springs, California, in January 2008 and had given a talk,” in that darn financial disclosure report that keeps getting him in trouble, Thomas reported that he was reimbursed by the right-wing Federalist Society for having spent “four days” at this very same event. Four days, or a few hours? You say tomato. I say tomahto. This is all on top of all the reasons he never should have made it to the Supreme Court in the first place, such as sexually harassing Anita Hill and apparently other young women who’ve come forward in the years since. Along these lines, a couple of interesting anecdotes were recently shared with me by famed attorney Guy Saperstein, who started the largest plaintiffs civil-rights law firm in America and successfully prosecuted the largest race, sex and age discrimination class actions in American history. Saperstein was co-counsel with Thomas for a race discrimination case against State Farm back in the 1980s, when he was representing private plaintiffs and Thomas was doing the same for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). While Saperstein, as was common practice, wanted to ask the judge for a hiring order, which would solve the problem in the future, Thomas did not. Ideology, then as now, trumped sound judgment. Saperstein also recalls attending the American Bar Association Convention in Florida, shortly after Thomas was nominated to the High Court. Saperstein walked into a reception late, and was called over by a group of the top defense lawyers in the country, whom he had befriended, even though they represented opposite sides in court. These men stood to benefit greatly if Thomas was sworn in, as they represented the kind of big business interests to which Thomas had sworn fealty. When they asked Saperstein what he thought of the nomination, he replied that he thought, “it was an insult to every competent lawyer in America.” He expected this notion to be met with an argument, but instead, every single member of this group agreed. Not only that, but to a man, they offered (in public no less) that not one of them would hire him to join their firms, so little did they think of his mind and abilities as a lawyer. Then Senate Judiciary Chairman and current Vice President Joe Biden, as well as other Democrats who allowed this man to become a member of the Supreme Court should be supremely embarrassed to this day (as should every Republican, but I won’t hold my breath on that). Yet, how about addressing this mistake? Thomas has shown no moral compass, judicial ethics, intellectual rigor or understanding of his duties. For these reasons, Clarence Thomas should be impeached. Follow Cliff Schecter On Twitter: @cliffschecter This was first published as a weekly column at Al Jazeera English
Continue reading …Perhaps you’re familiar with Clarence Thomas, the Long-Dong-Silver-loving US Supreme Court Justice. With a new term recently beginning on The Court, he passed the five-year mark for not only saying nothing of value while hearing cases, but nothing at all. Yes, you read that correctly–while no US Supreme Court Justice in over two centuries has gone even a single term without speaking from the bench during arguments, Thomas has managed to do it for five in a row. To quote Stephen Colbert, “the man is a rock…in that he could be replaced by a rock and I’m not sure anyone would notice.” Sadly, it shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise that if someone were going to set this record, it would be Justice Thomas. He certainly never even approached being “the most qualified” person in the land to sit on the Supreme Court, as President George H.W. Bush, who nominated him to the High Court, said after offering his name. I’m quite sure that Bush didn’t even believe that himself, unless he was limiting the field of competition to Thomas, then-vice president Dan Quayle, and his namesake offspring. But if he was clearly unworthy then–and he was–he is now about as appropriate a judge as Newt Gingrich is a marriage counselor. While he doesn’t seem to even want to participate in his day job, Thomas certainly does engage in the kind of partisan politicking that is not only unseemly, but sets a terrible precedent in a democracy. And at least in theory, the judiciary is supposed to be impartial, and therefore above politics. Yet, in only the past few weeks, a number of embarrassing episodes have not only turned this legal tracheotomy into a punch line for late night comics, but have quite honestly raised questions about whether any fully-functioning democracy would allow him to continue rendering judgments so important in deciding not only the law, but values of our society. First, there was the fact that Thomas, whose wife has earned almost $700,000 for–as far as I can tell–being his wife, finds government disclosure forms so difficult to fill out that he accidentally put $0 where $700,000 was supposed to be under “spousal income.” That’s right, for a guy who is supposed to decide how to interpret our Constitution, apparently reporting the bounty his wife pulled in through the right-wing welfare system of think tank stipends and Tea Party activism is somewhat more difficult than making jokes about body hair and coca cola to co-workers of a female persuasion. As this is a family news outlet, you’re just going to have to go look up the rest yourself. But wait, there’s more! As reported over the past week, the good-government group Common Cause has caught ole Clarence in what those in the legal profession might call a “lie.” Thomas attended a meeting of wealthy corporate barons on the West Coast, not long before joining his fellow deluded, activist conservative judges in overturning roughly 100 years of settled law to claim that corporations should be able to buy and sell democracy on the free market, like equities or an Emmy. And as such, these corporate “people” can spend pretty much whatever they want on electioneering, a wonderful little valentine to a republic that is supposed to be defined by “one person, one vote”. The problem, of course, is those wealthy conservatives with whom Thomas ate pigs-in-a-blanket and likely fantasized about replacing the social safety net with breakaway glass stood to directly benefit from these changes to our law, contained in the infamous Citizens United case. So Thomas went ahead and lied about how much time he spent at that retreat held by the infamous Koch Brothers, the sugar daddies of the supposedly power-to-the-people Tea Party movement. While according the The New York Times, “a court spokeswoman said Justice Thomas had made a ‘brief drop-by’ at the event in Palm Springs, California, in January 2008 and had given a talk,” in that darn financial disclosure report that keeps getting him in trouble, Thomas reported that he was reimbursed by the right-wing Federalist Society for having spent “four days” at this very same event. Four days, or a few hours? You say tomato. I say tomahto. This is all on top of all the reasons he never should have made it to the Supreme Court in the first place, such as sexually harassing Anita Hill and apparently other young women who’ve come forward in the years since. Along these lines, a couple of interesting anecdotes were recently shared with me by famed attorney Guy Saperstein, who started the largest plaintiffs civil-rights law firm in America and successfully prosecuted the largest race, sex and age discrimination class actions in American history. Saperstein was co-counsel with Thomas for a race discrimination case against State Farm back in the 1980s, when he was representing private plaintiffs and Thomas was doing the same for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). While Saperstein, as was common practice, wanted to ask the judge for a hiring order, which would solve the problem in the future, Thomas did not. Ideology, then as now, trumped sound judgment. Saperstein also recalls attending the American Bar Association Convention in Florida, shortly after Thomas was nominated to the High Court. Saperstein walked into a reception late, and was called over by a group of the top defense lawyers in the country, whom he had befriended, even though they represented opposite sides in court. These men stood to benefit greatly if Thomas was sworn in, as they represented the kind of big business interests to which Thomas had sworn fealty. When they asked Saperstein what he thought of the nomination, he replied that he thought, “it was an insult to every competent lawyer in America.” He expected this notion to be met with an argument, but instead, every single member of this group agreed. Not only that, but to a man, they offered (in public no less) that not one of them would hire him to join their firms, so little did they think of his mind and abilities as a lawyer. Then Senate Judiciary Chairman and current Vice President Joe Biden, as well as other Democrats who allowed this man to become a member of the Supreme Court should be supremely embarrassed to this day (as should every Republican, but I won’t hold my breath on that). Yet, how about addressing this mistake? Thomas has shown no moral compass, judicial ethics, intellectual rigor or understanding of his duties. For these reasons, Clarence Thomas should be impeached. Follow Cliff Schecter On Twitter: @cliffschecter This was first published as a weekly column at Al Jazeera English
Continue reading …Perhaps you’re familiar with Clarence Thomas, the Long-Dong-Silver-loving US Supreme Court Justice. With a new term recently beginning on The Court, he passed the five-year mark for not only saying nothing of value while hearing cases, but nothing at all. Yes, you read that correctly–while no US Supreme Court Justice in over two centuries has gone even a single term without speaking from the bench during arguments, Thomas has managed to do it for five in a row. To quote Stephen Colbert, “the man is a rock…in that he could be replaced by a rock and I’m not sure anyone would notice.” Sadly, it shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise that if someone were going to set this record, it would be Justice Thomas. He certainly never even approached being “the most qualified” person in the land to sit on the Supreme Court, as President George H.W. Bush, who nominated him to the High Court, said after offering his name. I’m quite sure that Bush didn’t even believe that himself, unless he was limiting the field of competition to Thomas, then-vice president Dan Quayle, and his namesake offspring. But if he was clearly unworthy then–and he was–he is now about as appropriate a judge as Newt Gingrich is a marriage counselor. While he doesn’t seem to even want to participate in his day job, Thomas certainly does engage in the kind of partisan politicking that is not only unseemly, but sets a terrible precedent in a democracy. And at least in theory, the judiciary is supposed to be impartial, and therefore above politics. Yet, in only the past few weeks, a number of embarrassing episodes have not only turned this legal tracheotomy into a punch line for late night comics, but have quite honestly raised questions about whether any fully-functioning democracy would allow him to continue rendering judgments so important in deciding not only the law, but values of our society. First, there was the fact that Thomas, whose wife has earned almost $700,000 for–as far as I can tell–being his wife, finds government disclosure forms so difficult to fill out that he accidentally put $0 where $700,000 was supposed to be under “spousal income.” That’s right, for a guy who is supposed to decide how to interpret our Constitution, apparently reporting the bounty his wife pulled in through the right-wing welfare system of think tank stipends and Tea Party activism is somewhat more difficult than making jokes about body hair and coca cola to co-workers of a female persuasion. As this is a family news outlet, you’re just going to have to go look up the rest yourself. But wait, there’s more! As reported over the past week, the good-government group Common Cause has caught ole Clarence in what those in the legal profession might call a “lie.” Thomas attended a meeting of wealthy corporate barons on the West Coast, not long before joining his fellow deluded, activist conservative judges in overturning roughly 100 years of settled law to claim that corporations should be able to buy and sell democracy on the free market, like equities or an Emmy. And as such, these corporate “people” can spend pretty much whatever they want on electioneering, a wonderful little valentine to a republic that is supposed to be defined by “one person, one vote”. The problem, of course, is those wealthy conservatives with whom Thomas ate pigs-in-a-blanket and likely fantasized about replacing the social safety net with breakaway glass stood to directly benefit from these changes to our law, contained in the infamous Citizens United case. So Thomas went ahead and lied about how much time he spent at that retreat held by the infamous Koch Brothers, the sugar daddies of the supposedly power-to-the-people Tea Party movement. While according the The New York Times, “a court spokeswoman said Justice Thomas had made a ‘brief drop-by’ at the event in Palm Springs, California, in January 2008 and had given a talk,” in that darn financial disclosure report that keeps getting him in trouble, Thomas reported that he was reimbursed by the right-wing Federalist Society for having spent “four days” at this very same event. Four days, or a few hours? You say tomato. I say tomahto. This is all on top of all the reasons he never should have made it to the Supreme Court in the first place, such as sexually harassing Anita Hill and apparently other young women who’ve come forward in the years since. Along these lines, a couple of interesting anecdotes were recently shared with me by famed attorney Guy Saperstein, who started the largest plaintiffs civil-rights law firm in America and successfully prosecuted the largest race, sex and age discrimination class actions in American history. Saperstein was co-counsel with Thomas for a race discrimination case against State Farm back in the 1980s, when he was representing private plaintiffs and Thomas was doing the same for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). While Saperstein, as was common practice, wanted to ask the judge for a hiring order, which would solve the problem in the future, Thomas did not. Ideology, then as now, trumped sound judgment. Saperstein also recalls attending the American Bar Association Convention in Florida, shortly after Thomas was nominated to the High Court. Saperstein walked into a reception late, and was called over by a group of the top defense lawyers in the country, whom he had befriended, even though they represented opposite sides in court. These men stood to benefit greatly if Thomas was sworn in, as they represented the kind of big business interests to which Thomas had sworn fealty. When they asked Saperstein what he thought of the nomination, he replied that he thought, “it was an insult to every competent lawyer in America.” He expected this notion to be met with an argument, but instead, every single member of this group agreed. Not only that, but to a man, they offered (in public no less) that not one of them would hire him to join their firms, so little did they think of his mind and abilities as a lawyer. Then Senate Judiciary Chairman and current Vice President Joe Biden, as well as other Democrats who allowed this man to become a member of the Supreme Court should be supremely embarrassed to this day (as should every Republican, but I won’t hold my breath on that). Yet, how about addressing this mistake? Thomas has shown no moral compass, judicial ethics, intellectual rigor or understanding of his duties. For these reasons, Clarence Thomas should be impeached. Follow Cliff Schecter On Twitter: @cliffschecter This was first published as a weekly column at Al Jazeera English
Continue reading …Huckabee Rips Media for Calling Him a Birther: ‘They Must Be Afraid I Can Beat Obama’
March 2, 2011 No Comment
As NewsBusters previously reported , advocacy media outlets such as MSNBC and the New York Times Tuesday cherry-picked comments by Mike Huckabee to make him look like a birther. On Wednesday, the former Arkansas governor went back on the Steve Malzberg radio show to address his accusors who he claimed are attacking him because they're afraid he “might end up getting some traction running for president and [beat] Barack Obama” (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): MIKE HUCKABEE, FORMER ARKANSAS GOVERNOR: Some of these guys don’t seem to be able to read, because if they would read my book, they would know exactly what I said and what I intended. I clearly said that I misspoke when I used the word Kenya instead of Indonesia. But, I’ve never seen the media so completely desirous to write their story before they even found out what was actually said. STEVE MALZBERG, HOST: Well, Governor, the thing here is, and let’s take the New York Times first. They were one of the first to call over here and wanted the interview sent to them. As far as I know, we sent them the interview. I gave a statement to a girl who said, “Okay, let me start writing down.” And I said, “This is a bunch of nonsense.” And then they, we sent them the interview, they did their story, and I’m holding the headline of the story in my hand, “Huckabee Questions Obama Birth Certificate.” Now, that’s insane because you said completely the opposite. And it’s not just me that heard. They heard it because I sent it to them. HUCKABEE: Well, it’s really inexplicable because I have been very clear. I’ve said it on “Good Morning America,” I’ve said it on C-SPAN. I’ve said it in front of a room full of a hundred reporters in Washington last week when I spoke at the National Press Club. There were plenty of reporters, both cameras as well as audio there to capture it. I’ve said it in spite of the fact that it isn’t necessarily something that a lot of conservatives want to hear. But I’ve said it because that’s what I believe. I’ve written it that way in my book. I’ve answered the question every time I’ve been asked. But they are determined to say that I said something that I did not say. I’m just simply beyond myself to explain how to get them to get it. […] It’s hard for me to understand. I mean, Obama can talk about visiting all 57 states, and that’s just, “Gee, he’s tired.” You know, I’m doing 30, 40 interviews a day on the book tour. I’m going from five in the morning till midnight every night. And clearly what I wrote was about his childhood in Indonesia, about his Kenyan father and grandfather who he says was tortured by the Brits during the Mau Mau revolution. All of that is spelled out. Indeed. As Britain's Sunday Times reported in December 2008: Barack Obama’s grandfather was imprisoned and brutally tortured by the British during the violent struggle for Kenyan independence, according to the Kenyan family of the US President-elect. Hussein Onyango Obama, Mr Obama’s paternal grandfather, became involved in the Kenyan independence movement while working as a cook for a British army officer after the war. He was arrested in 1949 and jailed for two years in a high-security prison where, according to his family, he was subjected to horrific violence to extract information about the growing insurgency. “The African warders were instructed by the white soldiers to whip him every morning and evening till he confessed,” said Sarah Onyango, Hussein Onyango’s third wife, the woman Mr Obama refers to as “Granny Sarah”. Mrs Onyango, 87, described how “white soldiers” visited the prison every two or three days to carry out “disciplinary action” on the inmates suspected of subversive activities. “He said they would sometimes squeeze his testicles with parallel metallic rods. They also pierced his nails and buttocks with a sharp pin, with his hands and legs tied together with his head facing down,” she said The alleged torture was said to have left Mr Onyango permanently scarred, and bitterly antiBritish. “That was the time we realised that the British were actually not friends but, instead, enemies,” Mrs Onyango said. “My husband had worked so diligently for them, only to be arrested and detained.” Mr Obama refers briefly to his grandfather’s imprisonment in his best-selling memoir, Dreams from My Father, but states that his grandfather was “found innocent” and held only for “more than six months”. This report was all the rage that month in 2008, even getting quoted by the far-left website the Huffington Post. As such, all Huckabee was citing in his book and repeated on Monday was established history of Obama’s family. Is this suddenly verboten? Was Arianna guilty of hate speech for mentioning Obama's Kenyan father and grandfather at her website? Or are only liberals allowed to bring this up? But I digress: HUCKABEE: I immediately corrected it and said, “Let me clarify.” I don’t think he ever grew up in Kenya. But he did spend part of his formative years in Indonesia. But he did have a Kenyan father and a Kenyan grandfather. So I believe he was born in Hawaii. Stop the tape. Huckabee just clearly stated, “I believe he was born in Hawaii.” Doesn't sound like he's either a birther or pandering to them, does it? He continued: HUCKABEE: I have no reason to think otherwise personally. Others do. I’ve made that clear. Somewhere in the midst of all this, I’m considered guilty of hate speech, incompetent to be president. It’s really one of those things where it must be that there are people in the media who are afraid that I might end up getting some traction running for president and beating Barack Obama. I can’t figure out any other reason that they would be so exorcized over a verbal gaffe that I have immediately not only acknowledged but corrected and am in print being very clear as to exactly what I meant. […] I’m surprised by Joe Scarborough. I’ve known Joe. He’s a friend, and frankly he’s the kind of guy I think would have picked up the phone or sent me an e-mail and said, “Did you mean this?” But, you know, it’s a, it’s a fun story for them to blow up, but I, I think it really shows the sad state of American journalism when people fail to do a little source checking. I’ve had people call my office, and even when my staff said, “It’s in his book – read it,” and gave them the page numbers, they still called back and said, “Well, does he believe that he was born in Indonesia?” Nobody’s ever said that. […] It’s one thing for the bloggers, people who really aren’t journalists but they’re just opinion makers. But when you have what used to be legitimate organizations like the Associated Press and the New York Times who can’t get it right, who can’t even read a simple book that was written so simply that they could understand it, then I do worry about the future of journalism in this country. Indeed. However, Huckabee could have added MSNBC's Chris Matthews to this list, as for the second night in a row, the “Hardball” host attacked the former Arkansas governor. He even lead with this so-called story: CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Leading off tonight: The Huckster. When Mike Huckabee's spokesman says Huckabee didn't mean to say President Obama grew up in Kenya, that he really meant to say he grew up in Indonesia, it's a lot to swallow. First of all, both assertions are wrong. The president grew up, if you will, in the United States. He went to the best prep school in Hawaii. Second, Huckabee mentioned British imperialism. Well, the Brits were in Kenya, not Indonesia. And the Mau Mau revolution, that also occurred in Kenya. No, Mike Huckabee just joined the long list of discredited Republicans spreading the bogus story that Barack Obama's presidency is somehow illegitimate because he`s some kind of foreigner, the right's favorite propaganda that won`t die. That`s our top story. Later, with guests David Corn of Mother Jones and Salon's Joan Walsh in the studio acting as willing accomplices, Matthews proved Huckabee's point that this is all about liberals fearing he could actually beat Obama: MATTHEWS: This guy, Huckabee — we ought to put it on. He's leading the Republican polls right now… JOAN WALSH, SALON: He's leading. MATTHEWS: … in our latest poll. WALSH: I know. MATTHEWS: He's not some character offstage we're beating up here tonight. He's some guy who may well be the Republican nominee for president. And he walks out there and starts talking like this in the world, I think it's going to shake the — there he is, 25 percent. If you needed any more proof this about assassinating a possible threat to Obama, here's how Matthews ended this segment: It's scary, and I hope the rest of the world is not paying attention to Mike Huckabee. But that wasn't enough, for Matthews concluded Wednesday's program by going after Huckabee again: Thank you for proving Huckabee's point, Mr. Matthews. You're obviously scared to death that someone is going to emerge and actually beat the man that gives you a thrill up your leg. As a result, since Huckabee is suddenly leading in the polls as the GOP's front-runner, Matthews, ever the good little Democrat shill, has to take the Arkansas governor on over a simple mistake the man has already acknowledged and apologized for. You see, only Democrats like Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are allowed to make gaffes. As this episode once again clearly demonstrates, Republicans aren't. Sad state of American journalism indeed.
Continue reading …