Category Archives: Media
We thought, here at ShadowDemocracy.org, that we would publish Ann Coulter’s long and infamous timeline of voter fraud crime, and how this two year trail of deceit has ultimately led to no conviction…only revealing more corruption at the highest levels. If you had any doubt that the political machine is at work in Florida, there won’t be after you read this…
2/15/06: Ann Coulter Commits Vote Fraud Felony…
Signs another person’s address to voter registration form and votes in the wrong precinct…
3/30/06: Ann Coulter Given 30 Days to Explain Vote Fraud Felony Allegation…
Palm Beach, FL election supervisor May refer charges to state attorney…
UPDATED: Property records show an ‘Ann H. Coulter’ owning a $1.8 Million House on Seabreeze Ave. in Palm Beach, Fl.
4/11/06: Ann Coulter’s Felonious Florida Voter Registration Application
GOP pundit Ann Coulter latest in a growing list of Republicans accused of fraud…and she may be guilty…
State, and county records show inconsistencies on voter registration form…
6/2/06: Ann Coulter ‘Lawyers Up’ to Face Felony Voter Fraud Charges
A Palm Beach paper reports GOP extremist pundit retains ‘Bush’ law firm to fight voter fraud allegations…
6/9/06: New Attorney Seeks Special Treatment for Coulter…
Letter from Coulter’s lawyer asks that all mail be sent to him instead of address where Coulter admits not living despite previously stating the opposite was true…
11/1/06: Ann Coulter Refuses to Testify regarding Voter Fraud in Florida…Case to be Turned Over to Prosecutor…
Coulter, a well documented rightwing extremist and hate-monger, refused to cooperate with authorities…
Palm Beach election supervisor having trouble bringing charges…
5/11/07: FBI Agent Who Interceded in Ann Coulter Voter Fraud Case Alleged to be Her Former Boyfriend…
A Palm Beach Paper says FBI agent attempted to clear Coulter…Conservative Coulter critic Borchers says her ’98-’99 boyfriend has been ‘Her personal FBI resource for her own purposes’…
8/2/07: Palm Beach Post: Florida Election Commission Investigating Ann Coulter’s Florida Voter Fraud
After her FBI boyfriend got her off the hook, will Jeb Bush’s FEC appointees do it again?
Two years after an initial ‘slam-dunk’ allegation of fraud, the Florida Election Commission rules that the two year statute of limitations on has run out…case closed. Check out more links here, here, here…
So what is the lesson kids?
Another Republican felon gets a pass, this time in friendly country, otherwise known as the Sunshine state. It just goes to show that in modern American politics, you can get away with just about anything, as long as you know who d&*k to suck, on…and off the camera. The evidence was obvious, the charges legitimate, and the crime real, but the likes of Ann Coulter, in all of here hate mongering extremist glory, has sunk to an all time low when no one thought it was possible. Even conservative bloggers have thrown her overboard.
What a disgrace.
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee has vaulted over all major GOP challengers to take a commanding lead in the race to win the Iowa caucuses, while Barack Obama continues to edge ahead of Hillary Clinton among Democrats likely to participate. This is according to a new NEWSWEEK poll.
The most dramatic result to come from the telephone based interview based on 1,408 registered Iowa voters on Dec. 5 and 6, is Huckabee’s emergence from no-wheres-ville in the GOP race into the front runner’s spot in just two months. Huckabee is an ordained Southern Baptist minister and now leads Romney by a two-to-one margin (told you the Mormon thing would kill him in the end), 39 percent to 17 percent, among likely GOP caucus-goers. In the last NEWSWEEK survey, conducted Sept. 26-27, Huckabee polled a only 6 percent to Romney’s 25 percent, which then led the field.
Huckabee has also opened up a wide margin over the next three leading candidates, who all show signs of fading like cheap paint in the Arizona sun. Rudy Giuliani, who dropped from 15 percent in the last survey to 9 percent in the current one; Fred Thompson, who fell from 16 percent to 10 percent; and John McCain, who slipped from 7 percent to 6 percent, are all looking up at Huckabee now.
The poll, which has an overall margin of error of 3 percent, also indicated that on the Republican as well as the Democratic side Iowa is increasingly becoming a two-person race. Among likely GOP caucus-goers, 57 percent name Huckabee as their first or second choice and 39 percent give Romney as their first or second choice. On this measure, Thompson is a distant third, with just 20 percent.
“You rarely see anything like Huckabee’s surge,” says Larry Hugick, who directed the polling for Princeton Survey Research Associates. Hugick added that the reason has as much to do with a leeriness of the other candidates among Republican voters as Huckabee’s folksy success on the stump. “He’s filling a vacuum,” Hugick said. “Nobody on the Republican side was getting strong support.”
Say what you will but Huckabee comes off genuine and articulate. I’ve blogged about this recently here…
Sure he might be construed as another Christian fundamentalist nut, but he’s a likeable Christian fundamentalist nut…and that may be enough in Iowa.
What people don’t seem to wrap their mind around is that America is thirsty for honesty from a President in any form, even if that President has some weird baggage. While evangelicals are carrying Huckabee in Iowa, it is the other 50% of plain old Republicans that are putting him over the top! Why? Because Romney looks too slick (and he’s a Mormon), Giuliani looks too much like Bush (wrong answer there), McCain is just plain crazy, and Thompson talks like he is just plain stupid.
The best analogy I can come up for Huckabee is that he’s Reagan, only holding a really big cross, like those guys who shout bible verses at you downtown on a Wednesday afternoon. Iowa voters appear to be willing to take the chance he won’t impale us on it.
Who would have thunk it?
I stumbled on some more recent gems…enjoy
“There are some similarities, of course (between Iraq and Vietnam). Death is terrible.” –George W. Bush, Tipp City, Ohio, April 19, 2007
“I’ve been in politics long enough to know that polls just go poof at times.” –George W. Bush, Tipp City, Ohio, April 19, 2007
“Suiciders are willing to kill innocent life in order to send the projection that this is an impossible mission.” –George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007
“And there is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I’m sorry it’s the case, and I’ll work hard to try to elevate it.” –George W. Bush, interview on National Public Radio, Jan. 29, 2007
“The best way to defeat the totalitarian of hate is with an ideology of hope — an ideology of hate — excuse me –with an ideology of hope.” –George W. Bush, Fort Benning, Ga., Jan. 11, 2007
“Either we’ll succeed, or we won’t succeed. And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not no violence.” –George W. Bush, on Iraq, Washington, D.C., May 2, 2007
“Information is moving — you know, nightly news is one way, of course, but it’s also moving through the blogosphere and through the Internets.” –George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., May 2, 2007
“I’m going to try to see if I can remember as much to make it sound like I’m smart on the subject.” –George W. Bush, answering a question about a possible flu pandemic, Cleveland, July 10, 2007
“You know, I guess I’m like any other political figure: Everybody wants to be loved.” –George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., July 12, 2007
“More than two decades later, it is hard to imagine the Revolutionary War coming out any other way.” –George W. Bush, Martinsburg, W. Va., July 4, 2007
“I heard somebody say, ‘Where’s (Nelson) Mandela?’ Well, Mandela’s dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas.” –George W. Bush, on the former South African president, who is still very much alive, Washington, D.C., Sept. 20, 2007
“Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for your introduction. Thank you for being such a fine host for the OPEC summit.” –George W. Bush, addressing Australian Prime Minister John Howard at the APEC Summit, Sept. 7, 207
“As John Howard accurately noted when he went to thank the Austrian troops there last year…” –George W. Bush, referring to Australian troops as “Austrian troops,” APEC Business Summit, Sept. 7, 2007
Thank you Mr. President.
After only three months of regular posting, our blog has achieved the 10,000+ hit mark! I just wanted to take a minute to thank all of our readers that are growing this blog at a rate of 100% per month! Look for new features and content in the coming months as we continue to strive toward our goal of becoming one of the top political blogs on the web.
A new Zogby Poll says Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton trails five top Republican presidential contenders in general election head-to-head match-ups. This, with the previously reported numbers on Obama, may be the electability issue coming home to roost for the Clinton campaign, as her national support from this past summer appears to have evaporated.
Clinton’s top Democratic rivals, in particular Barack Obama and John Edwards, both lead Republicans in hypothetical match-ups ahead of the Nov. 4, 2008, presidential election, according to the survey.
Clinton, a New York senator who has been at the top of the Democratic pack in national polls in the 2008 since June, however now, she trails Republican candidates Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, John McCain and Mike Huckabee by three to five percentage points in the direct matches.
Back in July, Clinton narrowly led McCain, and held a solid five-point lead over former New York Mayor Giuliani, a six-point lead over former Tennessee Sen. Thompson and a 10-point lead over former Massachusetts Gov. Romney.
Huckabee wasn’t even on the radar.
However, as she has wavered on immigration, the failed attempt to license illegal aliens in New York, and in nationally televised debates, her support has eroded…as it should.
America wants a truthful President and a person who leads from a pulpit of what is right, not what is right for the pollsters.
We’ve had eight years of dishonesty and back paddling. People are starving for integrity in the Oval Office. They want someone to bring our country back from the edge of the cliff that George Bush has led us to. America has raised the bar and apparently Hillary is having a tough time getting over it. These poll results come as other national polls show the race for the Democratic nomination tightening five weeks before the first contest in Iowa, which kicks off the state-by-state nomination battles in each party.
This is no way for the Clinton campaign to start on any level.
Many Democrats, including me on this blog and on my Internet radio show, have expressed concerns about the former first lady’s electability in a tight national race against Republicans. This survey slso showed Clinton not performing as well as Obama and Edwards among independents and younger voters – another ominous sign.
“The questions about her electability have always been there, but as we get close this suggests that is a problem,” Zogby said.
Obama, an Illinois senator, and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, both hold narrow leads over the Republican contenders in the hypothetical 2008 match-ups.
“It all points to a very competitive general election at a time when many people think the Democrats are going to win the White House,” Zogby said.
The poll consisted of 9,355 people had a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point. The interactive poll surveys individuals who have registered to take part in on-line polls.
Some have pointed out that the poll may be skewed, as Obama and Edwards supporters could be more active. However, several polls suggest the same trends and the data seems to be consistent.
I’ll say it again as I have been saying it for months…
Hillary Clinton is no lock for 2008 and in my opinion, she is not living up to her reputation as a tough campaigner. Her campaign is being run poorly and she almost sounds as though she believes the nomination is a coronation that has already been decided.
Not so Hillary…not so.
Democrats are looking for someone, anyone, with consistent positions on the issues and a solid platform that the Republicans cannot attack with a broadside shot and sink the whole ship! Hillary Clinton nor her campaign should be surprised at all that this is happening. People are beginning to pay attention as we get closer to Iowa and what they are discovering is that Hillary can’t make up her damn mind on just about anything.
I don’t know how much of a problem these numbers are this early, but if I was a betting man, I wouldn’t push all of my chips her way just yet.
Save the waffles for breakfast Hillary and choose your positions carefully, or Democratic caucus goers may choose them for you, in the form of Barack Obama.
Investigators at Frost Bank discovered that the stolen cards were being used to make $5 contributions to the Ron Paul presidential campaign, in an apparent attempt to test the cards, as previously posted on this blog. Frost Bank refunded money from nearly 100 customers and canceled all 500 of the credit cards that had been stolen from the bank. The Paul campaign has told news sources it has refunded all stolen funds back to the bank from the stolen cards, which amount to about $3,000, considerably more than the figure of $60.00 originally being tossed around and flippantly dismissed by Paul supporters.
Kerri Price, assistant director of communications for the Paul campaign, noted that the donations from the stolen cards represent “a very small percentage of money that was brought in.” She also stated that, “We don’t know anything about the criminals that did this.”
In fact…no one does.
The tactic of ‘test charging’ used by these criminals as confirmed by investigators, is a fairly common tactic among identity thieves, also previously noted on this blog.
Another Ron Paul spokesman, Jesse Benton, emphasized, “Ron Paul does not have anything to do with this.”
This is clearly the case, now that all facts have been presented and confirmed.
As I indicated in my last post and several times in the comment thread – no one ever accused Ron Paul or his campaign of being thieves. That is simply foolish. No serious presidential campaign would ever engage in such activity. But the question put forth in my last post on this issue still remains…who are these people and are any of them possibly inside or close to the Paul campaign? No one is explicitly or implicitly saying they are, but the question does need asking. Were they just fanatical, misguided supporters? Grass roots campaigns are virtually impossible to police, and as of today, no one knows how these thieves got these numbers, where they got them from, or why they were used to donate funds to Ron Paul. The Paul campaign claims they know nothing about these criminals, and I tend to believe them, but others aren’t so easily convinced.
One of the Frost Bank customers, Christine Horton, who had her I.D. stolen is quoted as saying, “He’s getting money, stolen money…Whether he’s affiliated with it or not, I have no clue. But it’s too fishy.”
Horton’s suspicion may be relevant.
Why steal credit card information and donate it to Ron Paul’s campaign? Is the status quo, pro big-government establishment, or perhaps another campaign, as suggested in the comment thread by Paul supporters, willing to commit fraud and be jailed for a felony simply to discredit Ron Paul – using stolen credit cards to do it? Is the anti-Ron Paul element that dedicated to pushing Ron Paul down by any means possible? Maybe so, but the whole ordeal seems odd to me.
Maybe the issue here is simply people not paying attention as usual. How many of the tens of thousands of donors actually check the URL carefully for accuracy before providing their credit card information to the Ron Paul campaign? Were these people duped into visiting a ‘phishing’ site by criminals and that is how their numbers were stolen? Do they have a person inside Frost bank? What assurance do any donors have that the Ron Paul campaign or any other presidential campaign for that matter, does not store credit card information in a database on someone’s laptop that could be stolen at anytime?
While the paul campaign has one of the most comprehensive privacy policies of any campaign and does scan its donation site with Hackersafe to ensure there are no intrusions, these aforementioned scenarios are all valid and open to discussion.
People must realize that presidential campaigns, and if you have ever worked on one you would know, are pretty loose knit operations. For instance, presidential campaigns are not subject to the same rigid credit card security regulations that online retailers like Wal-Mart.com or Borders.com are subject to. Those businesses must carry a substantial credit card security yoke to remain industry compliant. A political campaign site? Not so much. In fairness to the Paul campaign, this is not the first and certainly will not be the last incident of this kind in the world of political campaign contributions.
I only hope that the Ron Paul crowd knows what they are doing. That originally reported $60.00 that Ron Paul supporters were casually dismissing just days ago, morphed into $3000.00 pretty quickly, and could have evolved into something much larger still, given the right set of circumstances.
I remain steadfast in my advice. Be careful when donating to Ron Paul or any political campaign when using a credit card. PayPal, pre-paid debit cards, and money orders are valid and safer alternatives.
Want to be a part of a political blog that’s growing at a clip of 150% per month? If you’re going to post your ideas, post them where others will actually see them. Shadow Democracy is looking for contributors as we look to grow our readership even further. If you’re interested, please e-mail email@example.com.
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino assured reporters that the ‘staged’ news conference organized on Tuesday by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would not happen again, and said the White House would never employ such tactics at its own press briefings.
Isn’t the White House supposed to exercise oversight on FEMA Dana??? They are right? That’s what I always thought?
“It is not a practice that we would employ here at the White House or that we — we certainly don’t condone it,” said Perino.
According to a report published in the Washington Post, FEMA had instructed its own public relations staff to pose as reporters because no legitimate members of the media arrived in time for a hastily arranged briefing about the California wildfires – at least that’s the official story.
The deputy director of FEMA gave the reasoning.
“We had been getting mobbed with phone calls from reporters, and this was thrown together at the last minute,” a FEMA deputy director of public affairs told the Post. “We pulled questions from those we had been getting from reporters earlier in the day.”
Perino said FEMA alone was responsible for the decision to go ahead with the event.
“FEMA has issued an apology, saying that they had an error in judgment when they were attempting to get out a lot of information to reporters, who were asking for answers to a variety of questions in regard to the wildfires in California,” she said. “It’s not something I would have condoned. And they, I’m sure, will not do it again.”
FEMA Deputy Administrator Harvey Johnson, who fielded questions from the stand-in “reporters,” issued a statement today admitting an “error in judgment.”
“Our intent was to provide useful information and be responsive to the many questions we have received,” he said. “We are reviewing our press procedures and will make the changes necessary to ensure that all of our communications are straight forward and transparent.”
Hey Harvey…just a heads up for you guys…most competently runs government agencies simply issue a press release. You know – just let folks know what’s up? Did you really think that having fake reporters present was going to make things more convincing? What was the point? Were you guys trying to reinforce to the American people that FEMA is basically not capable of handling anything. If so you succeeded…again.
Among the questions Johnson answered from FEMA employees was a question about the agency’s performance during the fires:
Here’s the complete list of questions asked during the fake briefing available at MSNBC’s First Read. Given the fact that no one can be sure that the answers weren’t also fake, we took the liberty of translating…
QUESTION 1: What type of commodities are you pledging to California?
“So I think we’re well ahead of the requirement and we’ll be able to make sure that all the shelters that are stood up are, in fact, all sustained and have sufficient materials and quantities of commodities to make sure they meet the demand of the people who might seek shelter.”
Translation: More moldy formaldehyde trailers at once for the homeless serfs! Just rinse that Arkansas farm mud off of them and we’re good to go!
QUESTION 2: Sir, there are a number of reports that people weren’t heeding evacuation orders and that was hindering emergency responders. Can you speak a little to that, please?
“So I think you’re seeing more compliance and more conformance with expected norms of travel.”
Translation: Wildfire and the imminent threat of roasting to death in your bathtub tends to breed compliance. Fact is, we never assisted in evacuation at all.
QUESTION 3: Can you address a little bit what it means to have the president issue an emergency declaration, as opposed to a major disaster declaration? What does that mean for FEMA?
“As an emergency declaration, it allows us to provide — to open up the Stafford Act and to provide the full range of protective measures and all the things that they need now in order to address the fire, If the governor had asked for a major declaration, that would have talked about individual assistance and public assistance at greater levels. And at this point, the governor has not asked for that.”
Translation: All the shit we didn’t do for black Louisiana victims, we decided to do for white California victims. We learned from our mistakes.
QUESTION 4: Sir, we understand the secretary and the administrator of FEMA are on their way out there. What is their objective? And is there anyone else traveling with them?
“..all the key leaders who are directing this effort and demonstrating a partnership through their effort will be out there at San Diego this afternoon. So I think it’s a good demonstration of support, recognizing that our role is not to usurp the state but to support the state. And they’ll demonstrate that by their presence.”
Translation: Arnold knows we suck and threatened to break Chertoff’s arms if we pulled a Katrina, so we backed off.
[Off-camera voice asks for another question)
QUESTION 5: Are you happy with FEMA’s response, so far?
“I’m very happy with FEMA’s response so far. This is a FEMA and a federal government that’s leaning forward, not waiting to react. And you have to be pretty pleased to see that.”
Translation: Well, we couldn’t f%#k things up any worse than Katrina now could we?
[Staff voice off camera: Last question.]
QUESTION: What lessons learned from Katrina have been applied?
“I think what you’re really seeing here is the benefit of experience, the benefit of good leadership and the benefit of good partnership; none of which were present in Katrina.
“So, I think, as a nation, people should sit up and take notice that you have the worst wildfire season in history in California and look at how well the state and local governments are performing, look at how well we’re working together between state and federal partners.”
Translation: We learned a lot from Katrina. We learned that people need to eat and drink after 10 days, we learned that 50,000 people can’t share 10 bathrooms at the Superdome, we learned that Barbara Bush is out of touch and asked her not to hang around Qualcomm, and we learned not to park trailers in 12 inches of mud. Thank you.
Makes you proud to be an American doesn’t it?
A new nonpartisan news agency named ProPublica is about to start offering free of charge “investigative journalism” created with “moral force” to newspapers and other news sources around the country. So far the announcement has been met with wide support. The new agency is scheduled for start up in early 2008.
ProPublica is being funded by two left-wing billionaires responsible for funding other investigative groups such as the Center for Investigative Reporting. Because of this, of course, conservatives are already complaining that the new news agency will be ‘left-biased.’ One conservative blog, Publius’ Forum, squawks…
“Now, imagine how the MSM would be clicking tongues if a news agency were to be founded by a well-known conservative. Imagine how the MSM would be throwing around the word “bias” with abandon and how they would assume right off the bat that such a new news agency couldn’t possibly be a realnews source because the founder of it was a conservative. Would the opposite situation elicit such clucking? Would the MSM scoff at the claim of non-partisan reporting if a left-wing activist started a news agency?”
I don’t think we really need to examine that complaint for too long. Right-wing-nuts already have a well established biased news outlet. Maybe you have heard of it – it’s called News Corporation. You know, Fox News and all that unbiased coverage? If you want to check out any of the horse-s#&t that passes for investigative journalism and unbiased commentary, just visit Media Matters.
Conservatives have no basis for complaint here until ProPublica actually begins operations and proves themselves to be as ‘biased’ as conservatives claim. Until that fateful moment, I’m sure they will demonize the effort as they do with anything else that doesn’t strictly align with conservative talking points. The fact is, we desperately need a push for old style journalism in this country. We need to revive the kind of professionalism that was taken for granted and that now has been compromised by charlatans like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and the newsroom at FOX.
ProPublica describes itself on its website:
ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that will produce investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will focus exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We will do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.
A well-funded new nonprofit venture named ProPublica is out to revive the flagging practice of investigative journalism in American media.
The New York Times claims that ProPublica
“…will pitch each project to a newspaper or magazine (and occasionally to other media) where the group hopes the work will make the strongest impression. The plan is to do long-term projects, uncovering misdeeds in government, business and organizations.
Editor & Publisher quotes ProPublica news chief Paul Steiger, “My sense is that people are very optimistic. Just in conversations with people, high and low in the halls, I get the notion that folks are optimistic,” he says.
The hiring of Steiger, the former Wall Street Journal managing editor, also takes some wind out of conservative sails on the bias argument, as the WSJ is one of the most conservative papers in the country. Conservatives are also whining that Roger Ailes is constantly attacked because he is a conservative. What they fail to understand is that Ailes is not attacked because of his conservatism, he is attacked because he and his news arm are two-bit liars and that lying has been documented and criticized by liberals and conservatives alike! You can verify this in any newspaper of cable outlet – except FOX maybe.
Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch
Again Publius’ Forum…
“How is it that a conservative MUST interject his bias into his product, but it is automatically assumed that a pair of super rich, leftist activists will leave their bias completely out of their so-called news?”
It’s not that Ailes MUST interject biases, HE ALREADY HAS! ProPublica isn’t out of the gate yet and conservatives are already on them like chrome on a Cadillac. Give it up! You have nothing to base your complaints on! At least let them become a news agency before you spring to action! You guys will still have FOX which is little more than a high-school level prodiced right-wing propaganda instrument.
This project is well-intended, although the sources of it’s funding may raise some issues. However, if it’s good enough for Rupert Murdoch, it’s good enough for the lefties. I believe it is high time for some push back against amateur news outlets like FOX and others. Moreover, I do hope that the people backing and running this new agency will have the presence of mind to maintain high professional standards and not inadvertently give conservatives the media weapons they are looking for to delegitimize this much needed effort.
I say to ProPublica…Keep it real, but keep it fair…and I don’t mean FOX’s version of fair.
Microsoft is looking to close a deal to buy a 1.6% stake in Facebook for $240 million. Some projections had the deal as high as $1 Billion!
The deal has not been completely confirmed, but insiders have definitely heard that Steve Ballmer is close to completing a deal to counter Google in the social networking website market. Considering that Bill Gates is slowly ceding control to Ballmer and that his focus is in web services, it made sense to grab the most noteworthy social networking site available on the web.
What could happen long term? Unlike the Yahoo deal, Facebook actually fits into Microsoft’s portfolio, since they don’t have a social network. What Microsoft does have is Windows Live Spaces, the most popular blogging service on the planet, along with a million other web tools and interfaces which really makes this a marriage made in heaven. If the acquisition happens, Facebook would probably be combined with Microsoft’s ‘Live Spaces’ team, and the two services should become one. Live Spaces should become the blogging component of Facebook. Features of Facebook will probably also become full-fledged services with those of Live Spaces, like ‘Photo Sharing’. ‘Soapbox’ could be integrated with Facebook for video sharing, and Microsoft ‘Live Messenger’ has integration potential as well for messaging, notifications, etc. ‘Windows Live Search’ will probably be at the top of every Facebook page as well.
Curent owner of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg will undoubtedly use this influx of cash to finance a move to take the company public sometime next year. In the end…not a bad payday for a kid who started facebook in his college dorm room.
When is it going to stop? That is to say, when are television and radio outlets going to ban Ann Coulter? Hasn’t the insanity gone far enough and hasn’t this idiot offended enough people? There must be a point where a decision maker somewhere must look at Ann Coulter and realize that the point of diminishing returns has definitely been reached.
This time, Coulter fired at the Jews saying that they should be “perfected” by accepting Jesus and America would be better off if everyone was a Christian.
Perfected in the image of the Christian ideal? Since when are Christians representative of perfection? Most Christians I know are inflexible racists, much like Coulter. They claim they are peaceful and compassionate, yet more have been murdered in the name of Christ than for all other reasons combined through recorded history. In the modern era, Christians have demonstrated their perfection by burning churches, dragging people to death behind pick-up trucks, lynching innocent people simply because their skin color was incorrect, starting wars based on monstrous lies, and murdering abortion doctors. Evidently Coulter is too busy picking out the latest and greatest push-up bra for her next schizophrenic television appearance, rather than engaging in some light historical reading or looking at the paper once in a while.
A national Catholic organization also criticized Coulter’s remarks.
“I’m just dumbfounded that a Christian would even say this in America,” said Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United. Korzen also said it was “particularly dangerous” to be mixing religious conversion with discussions of what it means to be an American, and he said Coulter’s comments reminded him of John McCain referring to the US as a “Christian nation.”
This is not what the founding fathers wanted, no matter how many times fundamentalist Christians try to ram it down our throats. Anyone who has read American history knows better. The problem is I think most conservatives don’t read at all.
“I don’t believe I read anything in the constitution about Jesus Christ dying for our sins,” Korzen said, and he is right. Much like other lunatics, including Ron Paul, Coulter believes that this nation is inextricably tied to Christianity and that all other denominations are basically inferior, irrelevant, or criminal in their purpose. These fools have conveniently forgotten that the fundamental reason why this continent was settled by Western Europeans was a direct result of religious persecution in their home countries! These comments by Coulter simply reinforce her ignorance and unbridled hubris.
“We just want Jews to be perfected, as they say,” Coulter said.
Speaking to Donny Deutsch, on the magazine show, The Big Idea, she went on to say, “I don’t want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean, Rev. Jerry Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is ‘Christ died for our sins,'” Coulter said. “We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.”
I’m having trouble just following that statement based on Coulter’s incoherence. Is she saying that Jews must follow Christian doctrine while their alive? She said she believes that Jews go to heaven anyways, so why are they less ‘perfect’ again?
Another Catholic group blasted Coulter’s remarks, saying they “show profound ignorance of both religion and American history.” “Ms. Coulter embarrasses Christians with her arrogance and insensitivity,” said Alexia Kelley, Executive Director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, and she does not speak for those Christians and Jews who struggle together every day for justice and the common good.”
Ann Coulter’s latest insensitive, ignorant and racist comments are indicative of the latent lack of intelligence that plagues all fundamental Christians. Most thinking people are reasonably familiar with American history as it encompasses politics, science, culture, and war, along with the internal dynamic of tolerance that has kept this country peaceful and free for over 200 years. This continual attack by Coulter and other zealots who anoint themselves as the ‘perfect’ and the righteous, as well as experts in the area of Western Judeo-Christian values, are the very same people who are working to destroy the fabric of tolerance within our culture. Much the same way they accuse liberals of being secular humanists, who try to use the education system and the media to destroy Christian values, Coulter and the Christian posse of the ignorant, have a goal of transforming America through its education system, by taking control of colleges, textbook publishers and the media, with the help of conservative state legislatures and the Bush administration. This is evident in a recent push by some Southern school districts to supplement or replace Darwinian teachings with curriculum referred to as ‘Intelligent Design’, and a vote just days ago by the FCC to further relax restrictions on monopolization of media markets by gigantic conservative corporate interests – many of whom are these same racist Christians.
Christians are deliberately trying to put a strangle hold on our culture by brainwashing youth and destroying their sense of cultural and religious tolerance. They are people who fervently believe, with a religious zeal, in a radically different worldview than the one in which average Americans believe, and one in which this nation was founded and which has underpinned every bit of its moral and economic success.
This is a cultural war between the informed and the ignorant. Coulter’s view is based on faith in a divine creator, and a moral imperative to love and obey Christian doctrine at all costs, even if that means burning the American village to acheive that.
The other view is based on rejection of hatred and ignorance along with tolerance for the views and beliefs of others. People who follow this other world view do not pray on the desperate, not not kill those who disagree with their religious or philosophical views, are not racists, and attempt to advance American culture through mutual understanding, instead of trying to impose the often bizarre and violent teaching of the bible upon us.
In my opinion, Jesus would be embarrassed and appalled by Ann Coulter.