I've Been Thinking About This For Awhile

I sometimes dread going into the Netflix documentary listings because of the number of food documentaries that are there.  Not that I have anything against food documentaries in general, but it's just that it seems like the goal of a lot of these filmmakers is just simply to bash the big business of food.  Whether it's over genetically modified food or fast food or whatever grievance they have about the food industry, it basically almost always ends with the same message -- either it's to just simply bash the industry or to get people to eat organic.

So far, the only real documentary that I've seen on the subject that I've liked is "Fat Head" (which I reviewed in my last post).  I watched "Supersize Me" when it came out on video, and thought it was entertaining enough as a piece of fiction.. Most of these documentaries I looked at the description adn it turned me off.

Penn and Teller have had some decent shows on the topic of food. The "Eat This!" episode tackles not only diets but also GM food and food snobbery.  And the "Organic Food" episode tackles the idea that organic food is better for us.

But all this talk about food and the politics behind it just got me thinking about doing my own documentary on the subject.  As much as I liked "Fat Head," it's still advocating a particular diet (something close to Atkins, which I plan on starting soon).  What I would like to look at is the industry of food politics. You have so many documentaries and shows on the subject, what is the ultimate goal? And are they really changing minds?

I think I would have to figure out financing on a project and resources before starting.  But it would be interesting.

I've Been Holding Back These Past 10 Days

Since the shooting in Tucson of Gabrielle Giffords and 14 other people, I've wanted to make some kind of comment on it.  But something's been stopping me.

I don't mean the usual "I'm too busy with school to comment" thing that I've been going through the past few months. Which I have -- I'm scheduled to turn in my portfolio and have my teaching certification follow soon after that.  I mean, as much as I send my sympathy out to the victims of the shooting and their families, I've been having a hard time putting into words what I've been feeling about what's been going on in the past week-plus that we've been experiencing. Not about the event itself, but the aftermath.

How would you feel if your values were attacked on a regular basis by a bunch of people who call themselves "journalists?"

Since the shooting, we've experienced a wave of hate from the leftist media that, right from the gate, decided to use this tragedy as a way to attack those on the right, reflecting their own hate onto those of us who don't think the way they do.  There's been times during this whole thing that I've wanted to pull my hair out over this because of how these people want to characterize the right, but I was afraid that I would end up bald before I could teach in a classroom.

Through numerous tragedies, there's often a call to not rush to judgements.  For some reason, before the dust could even settle the liberals watching the news assumed that the gunman had to be a Tea Party member or at least someone in the right wing because Giffords was a Democrat.  And despite the details coming out that the shooter, 22 year old Jared Lee Loughner, was just a kid with a possible undiagnosed mental illness, the liberals would not let go of their idea that this kid had to be a conservative.

They tried to blame a "crosshairs" map that SarahPAC (Sarah Palin's Political Action Committee) had released last year prior to the November election which had Giffords district targeted. It failed because the Democrats had their own "target" map, and liberal gadflys Daily KOS had their own "target" list which also featured Giffords.  They tried to blame political rhetoric from talk radio hosts such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, despite the revelation that Loughner didn't listen to talk radio or watch the news according to a friend.  And despite all the finger pointing in the direction of the right, it's becoming more and more clear that the shooter had no real political agenda but was a sick person that needed help.

I'm at the point where I can't stand listening to liberals anymore.  Because it depresses me.

There are times where I take politics personally.  This is one of those times, because I feel like that my views are being attacked because of something a lone idiot did.

I know that I'm not planning on sitting down and taking it.  I plan to fight.  I will not let the liberal elites knock me down.  I will stand and defend myself and my views.  I refuse to believe that anything I say can cause someone to be violent.  Words may have meaning, but they don't have magic powers.  Those who act on those words in a violent way are deranged, and would be set off if someone said the word "pancake" to them.  Would we have to ban pancakes in fear that someone would act violently?

I needed to get this all off my chest.  It's been weighing heavy on my heart this entire time.  I don't like the idea of being accused of something that is wrong based on my ideology.  And it's been tough going online and reading the stories from those who hate what I stand for.  Well, guess what? I'm not backing down.  And you shouldn't, either.

The School You Go To Does Not Make You Any Smarter Or Better Than Anyone Else

You would think that would be common sense, but some people apparently didn't get that memo.

I don't know at what point Michael Medved went from reviewing movies to having his own column, but I felt like if I didn't comment on this stupidity that I was going to explode.

His whole argument in the column is that people should stop harping on people's education in the political arena. However, who he argues for in this case is not for us average monkeys who couldn't afford to go to an Ivy League school, but for those who go to Ivy League schools who are considered "elitist" in their attitudes towards us peasants.

Former White House speechwriter David Frum (another Canadian-born U.S. citizen with Ivy League credentials) makes the interesting point that "American populism has almost always concentrated its anger against the educated rather than the wealthy." He classifies contemporary politics as "a class struggle between those with more education than money against those with more money than education."

Medved misses the point, though.  You are not "elitist" based on your education.  You are "elitist" based on your attitudes towards having that education. Those who graduated from these schools who work in politics tend to make it a point that they graduated from these fancy schools as if it impresses the general population.  They're downright snobby about it, actually.  And the press plays into it by making it seem important that they graduated from these schools.  But all it does prove is that you paid a lot of money for a degree

In fact, with this article Medved makes my point very clearly. He graduated from Yale University, and has that condescending tone that some people who graduate from these Ivy League schools have towards those who don't have the same education that he had.

To get into my own educational background, I have a Bachelor of Arts degree from Keene State College in Film Studies, and am finishing up my coursework to obtain a Masters of Education degree in English Education from Plymouth State University.  I chose to go to KSC because it was the only school that I knew of at the time that had the film program that I was looking for, while I chose PSU primarily because of distance after I got married, but also because their Masters program had the English program that I was looking for.

So why should someone look their nose down at me just because my degrees aren't as "fancy" as theirs?  So what if I didn't go to Harvard or Yale or any of these other Ivy League schools?  I still obtained an education. And I'm not the type to look down at those who decided not to go on to college.  It isn't for everyone.

So to Medved, I say this.  If some of those who graduated from Ivy League schools weren't so snobby about it, you wouldn't be called "elitist."  It's the attitude that makes you that way, not the degree you obtained.

Helen Thomas Is Retiring Effective Immediately

I'm sure EVERYONE has been following this story since Drudge Report brought attention to it.

Helen Thomas has been a newspaper reporter for a very, VERY long time. She has been a White House Correspondent for just as long. In 2000, she retired from being a reporter, but still remained a columnist. So in honor of her time as a White House Correspondent, Thomas has been given a chair up front and center in the press room.

Well, it's known that Thomas was also very, very, very liberal. And in later years she made no bones about letting this be known. She also has expressed an opinion on one occasion or another about the Israel/Palestinian conflict (which prompted former press secretary Tony Snow, during the GWBush years, to jokingly tell Thomas during a briefing that she was expressing the "Hezbollah view").

Well, over the past few days, the following video has been floating around and gone viral. It was taken last month at a White House event.



Some of the right wing blogs, including Hot Air, didn't think anything would happen to Thomas because of this. She's 89, after all. Would this just god own as the ranting of an old woman who's been in the business way too long, or would she actually suffer some consequences?

Well, let's see:

-- She's been condemned by newspapers and programs all over the US.
-- Her former writing partner has said he won't work with her anymore.
-- A Maryland high school has asked her not to speak at their graduation.
-- Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has called her remarks "Offensive and reprehensible."
-- Her agency dumped her.

And soon after Gibbs' remarks -- Thomas has announced her "retirement" effective immediately.

Hey, what do you know? Actions DO have consequences!

May 20th is "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day!"

This was started by Dan Savage, got picked up by Michael Moynihan, and now everyone is promoting it.

So here's the deal.  I plan on drawing my own depiction of Muhammad (don't expect anything resembling anything artist quality -- I'm a writer, not an artist), and am inviting all three of you who read this blog to have your own depictions, as well.  I'll be accepting pictures until May 18th at scooppc11 at yahoo dot com, and make sure to put in the subject line "Muhammad."

Rep. Nick Levasseur (D-umbass)

Considering how much of an anime fan I am, I had to post about how ignorant this comment was.

Rep. Nick Levasseur (D-Manchester) made a comment on Facebook about anime and the Japanese in general that can be seen as rather xenophobic. Let WMUR-TV enlighten you in this clip. (h/t FARK.com)



Everyone all together:



Now, even as an otaku (anime and manga fan), there are some aspects of Japanese culture that still kind of have me shaking my head. But this was an incredibly stupid thing to say. Because we know that if a Republican had said it there would be calls for his job.

Olbermann The Patron Saint Of Bad Mothers

Actually, this is pretty funny.

The ad is for a product called FloTV. It's a little portable TV that you can take anywhere. In the ad, the mother and her kids are calmly eating dinner when the mother notices the time is shortly before 6PM. She suddenly pours flour on the table, splashes milk into the kids' face, and dump the kids' things all over the place. When the husband comes home, she sighs and says to him, "I just need an hour." Then she goes off and watches her FloTV.

At NewsBusters, they point out that the show that she's watching when the ad is aired on MSNBC is Keith Olbermann. (When I originally saw the ad, she was watching football.) I'm guessing it's a deal they made with the company in regards to the advertising, but I think it's funny that they would use Bathtub Boy in the ad.

How Quickly We Forget

I don't know how many of you have read the blog Little Green Footballs (not linking due to an AOS Moron policy to not give the blog any more traffic), but it started becoming popular among righties when writer Charles Johnson discovered that the documents that Dan Rather used in his news report on George W. Bush's wartime service were faked.

Johnson is an atheist. Nothing wrong with that, except that when the discussion on his blog turned to evolution vs. creationism his idea of debate was to ban anyone who posted in favor of creationism.

I kept him in the blog roll for awhile, but finally decided not to link to him because he had started leaning more towards the left. And it was becoming apparent that his personal views were adjusting to fit those of the people he most wanted to play with at any given time.

Johnson came out as a lefty earlier this week, which was basically just making it official -- it's like coming out as gay to your friends, chances are most of them knew already, you were just confirming it.

Anyway, in his apparent need to go "full lefty," Johnson has a post up on his site today about climate change. (Screenshots taken from Weasel Zippers)


Note the first line: "A few years ago, I used to doubt there really were climate change denialists..."


Apparently, he has a very short memory -- as far back as 2007, he was one of them.

How quickly we forget, huh, Johnson?

And Unlike Other Reviewers, I'm Actually Going To Read The Book

Today is my birthday. No, I'm not telling you how old I am.

Hubby just got me a great birthday gift.

It'll probably be a little bit before I read it -- I'm currently on the third book of the Southern Vampire Mystery series at the moment, plus I'm going to have some stuff to start reading after that. But once I'm able to, this one is the next book I'm definitely going to be reading.

Shooting in Washington State

You can read more about this here, although I'm sure every news station has talked about it by now.

What's becoming more interesting in this, however, is that the suspect in the case has a long, LONG rap sheet in Washington State and Arkansas. His record stands out for the number of red flags that his behavior would be a danger to the public, including the fact that one of those times he managed to avoid jail time, it was because then Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee gave him clemency with no explanation.

I got to meet Huckabee in 2007 during my reporting days at a house party when he was running for president (Only politician that I ever met that was not only on time for his own event, but a couple of minutes early). I had thought about voting for him, too, until I dug deeper into his immigration record. Now? No chance. This is his "Willie Horton" moment.

The Wilding of Sarah Palin

Robin of Berkeley at American Thinker had a very insightful article posted on Tuesday that I just got wind of today (h/t Patterico). And I think it is 100% true.

The most pertinent part:

What finally woke me up were the utterances of "bitch," "witch," and "monster" toward Hillary Clinton and her supporters early last year. I was shocked into reality: the trash-talk wasn't coming from conservatives, but from male and female liberals.

I finally beheld what my eyes had refused to see: that leftists are Mr. and Ms. Misogyny. Neither the males nor the females care a whit about women.

Women are continually sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. If under radical Islam women are enshrouded and stoned and beheaded, so be it.

My other epiphanies: those ponytailed guys were marching for abortion rights not because they cherished women's reproductive freedom, but to keep women available for free and easy sex.

And the eagerness for women to make good money? If women work hard, leftist men don't have to.

Then along came Sarah, and the attacks became particularly heinous. And I realized something even more chilling about the Left. Leftists not only sacrifice and disrespect women, but it's far worse: many are perpetuators.

The Left's behavior towards Palin is not politics as usual. By their laser-focus on her body and her sexuality, leftists are defiling her.

They are wilding her. And they do this with the full knowledge and complicity of the White House.

The Left has declared war on Palin because she threatens their existence. Liberals need women dependent and scared so that women, like blacks, will vote Democrat.

Read the whole thing.

Breaking ACORN News: The San Diego Document Drop

Despite what someone wrote in my comments on my last ACORN post, yes, this is important news. I know we don't have an ACORN office in New Hampshire, but that doesn't make this any less interesting.

Andrew Breitbart, owner of the Big Government website and a licensed private investigator, is working on a breaking story where he has been watching the San Diego offices and noticed an unusual way of dumping unwanted documents just before they had investigators raid their offices in October.

My telling of what's going on will not do it justice. Just click over there and read it for yourself.

SNL: Obama in China

This was too funny. Just watch.

ACORN Updates

I haven't been able to post much on this recently (although until the next term starts I'll probably have some time to do so). So here are just some brief updates on the story.

-- The Los Angeles Tapes are up. And Breitbart has a great strategy for releasing these -- you would have thought that their spokesperson would have shut up by now. In this case, someone actually refused to help them with this situation. But the first person they talk to offers to help them do research even after hearing what they plan to do.

-- Breitbart: Investigate ACORN or we'll release more tapes closer to the 2010 election.

A Response To A Comment At Another Forum

One of the great things about having a blog is the fact that you can control the conversation when needed, and in my case I can explain my point much better than I can in a comment.

As you might expect, the whole issue with Doug Lambert's leaving his various positions over a comment he made over the weekend has made some big news. And I've already stated my own opinions on my feelings on that. And I've also stated that I felt that the target of his tirade, NH Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley, should apologize for the things he's said in the past that went WAY beyond anything that Lambert said.

Well, the comments section over at Granite Grok is getting a little hectic because the liberals and Democrats (but I repeat myself) are wanting Lambert's head on a pike. Even though he's already apologized and he's stepped down from most of his positions.

Anyway, the one thing I keep pointing out is that Buckley is no angel himself. Which seems to irritate these people who are trying their best to defend him. One person over on the comments section, "Landon Bryce," has apparently decided that I'm his target after I responded to the following comment.

Thanks, Doug, for writing something which sounds more like an actual apology. Skip was wise not to allow comments in his very bigoted defense of you. What you did was not "dumb"-- as you properly say here, it was hateful. Neither Skip nor you think gay people deserve to be treated as human. If you did, you would not work to make sure we do not the same rights you do. If Skip did not agree with the substance of your comments, he would consider that people have a right to legitimate anger when you call them faggots and wish them dead. He would have offered his own apology, not gone out of his way to take yours back.

He went after "Judy" on the site, and I showed him where to get the answer he seeked. Then he comes after me with this. (Edited for this blog)

Mike Walsh does not think calling someone a ****** and saying you hope a gay man dies soon is treating gays as subhuman. Mike, Doug said that a gay, black performer should should choke to death on a chicken bone or a piece of watermelon. It is a statement of fact to call him a hate-filled bigot, isn't it? Or, at the very least, a legitmate interpretation of his actions? Lori Ingham thinks the word "******" is equal to the word "thug." She also things [sic] a death wish is equal to an expression of solidarity ("we've all lost things.") I think most people probably would not agree. Can anyone point to anything Ray Buckley has done that actually approaches Doug Lambert's level of offensiveness?

My response:

You think someone calling someone's son a "thing" is showing "solidarity?" You need more help than what I can give you. And apparently you didn't watch the accompanying video. Any of those things would have gotten anyone else in serious trouble. And I have a bigger issue with the fact that Buckley, even knowing the connotation of the term "teabagger", still uses the term in public. And I'm still trying to find the source, but he made fun of an opponent in an election for being straight. What kind of tolerance does it show that he shows hatred for someone because of their sexual orientation (irony alarms going off)? Doug has apologized already. I want Buckley to do the same thing.

His response (which I only just saw becasue I was taking care of my son):

Lori, I think we've all made equivalent slips of the tongue to Buckley's is saying "thing." Do you think he intended it to be unkind? Yes, the video is vulgar, but I do not know very many people who have not made flip comments about something Hitler should have done. The term "teabagger" was not chosen by Buckley, or any liberal. It comes directly from the signs carried by protesters at the first tea party protest. I actually think your criticism would be fair if teabagger were not in general use by liberals: Buckley is not to blame for popularizing the term, he's just followed a dumb trend. When someone has been called a teabagger, then beaten to death, I will agree that it might be a term as hateful as "******." A couple of people have claimed that Buckley has made fun of people for being straight. I'd love to see what they are referring to, but I'm not sure why they're so upset about this. Gay people worry about being made fun of because it is often a precurser to violence or a sign that the mocker believes we should not be treated equally. Straight people would have a reason to be upset with Buckley for making fun of them if they were unable to hold hands in public or if states passed laws that limit their participation in society.

Just so he doesn't think I'm ignoring him on this point, I'm going to answer his points one by one on this.

Lori, I think we've all made equivalent slips of the tongue to Buckley's is saying "thing." Do you think he intended it to be unkind?

Yes, I do. If you go to the story at This Ain't Hell, you'll get the whole incident. The comment about "We've all lost things" was just the tip of the iceberg.


Yes, the video is vulgar, but I do not know very many people who have not made flip comments about something Hitler should have done.

I would think you would know the first rule of the internet -- once you invoke Hitler into an argument, it becomes moot. But what do you think of the fact that he picks his nose then says "**** America?"


The term "teabagger" was not chosen by Buckley, or any liberal. It comes directly from the signs carried by protesters at the first tea party protest.

Can you show me the pictures of these signs from the first tea party protests? Because no one I know uses this term.

I actually think your criticism would be fair if teabagger were not in general use by liberals: Buckley is not to blame for popularizing the term, he's just followed a dumb trend. When someone has been called a teabagger, then beaten to death, I will agree that it might be a term as hateful as "******."

He might not have originated the term, but he sure as hell isn't doing anything to practice what he preaches about "tolerance." And people have been beaten in protests -- one incident involved a black man who was selling tea party items during a protest by SEIU thugs. And recently some anti-illegal immigration protestors were beaten by pro-immigration protesters in Florida.

A couple of people have claimed that Buckley has made fun of people for being straight. I'd love to see what they are referring to, but I'm not sure why they're so upset about this. Gay people worry about being made fun of because it is often a precurser to violence or a sign that the mocker believes we should not be treated equally. Straight people would have a reason to be upset with Buckley for making fun of them if they were unable to hold hands in public or if states passed laws that limit their participation in society.

Again, the issue is that Buckley is no angel, although people like you are treating him as if he is faultless in this. There's also a hell of a lot more information that I can use in my arguments, but I don't because it would make me sound petty (and nothing was proven). So I'm trying to stick to the facts of what can be proven.

Calling All...Well, Everyone, Really...

I'm looking for a particular piece of information so I can verify it.

Who out there knows about an alleged (I say "alleged" because I don't know when it happened, but I think it happened in Manchester) incident involving Ray Buckley and someone he was running against? I don't know which office he was running for at the time or anything beyond that, but I know that it involved flyers that Buckley was allegedly handing out or campaign material or something where he was attacking his opponent for being straight.

If anyone can get me that information, let me know.

In the meantime, here's a lesson in tolerance from your favorite show and mine, "South Park." (NSFW)

The Death Camp of Tolerance

GraniteGrok: Doug Lambert Has Resigned

Because of an incident that happened over the weekend, Granite Grok writer Doug Lambert has resigned from writing for Granite Grok for an indeterminate amount of time.

On top of that, Meet The New Press will no longer be on the air, and he's lost his column with the Laconia Daily Sun.

From his statement:

I plan on spending my time in prayer and reflection, looking inward to the unhealthy malice in my heart, for which I will ultimately have to face my Maker , begging for His undeserved mercy.

One last point-- and then I ask for peace and privacy in this matter. In addition to those listed in my original apology statement, I owe my great friend Skip Murphy the most sincerest of apologies for all that has resulted from my inexcusable actions. Through no fault of his, all that has been built with great effort and heartache is now mostly all gone. In an instant. Like that…

Let this be a lesson to those who harbor such hatred as I have demonstrated—think about it. We must love EVERYBODY as we do ourselves. And all the world is a camera. There is no hiding anymore.

I engaged in a WHOLE lot of free speech around here. With that, comes responsibility. Use it wisely.

I wish you all the best, Doug. In God's Word, all things are possible.

Ray Buckley's Greatest Hits

Last night, I wrote a post defending Doug Lambert of Granite Grok for an incident that happened after "Meet The New Press" yesterday that he has since apologized for.

Unfortunately, when something like this happens to a conservative, the other side wants blood because, to them, it reinforces the stereotype they had already put on us.

As horrible as Doug's words were, though, I wonder -- how often does the other side have to apologize for despicable things they've said?

Answer: very rarely, if at all.

Let's take a random person. Say....oh...New Hampshire Democrat Party chairman Ray Buckley.

Has he ever apologized for the following things that he's said?

"We've all lost things." -- said to a Gold Star Mother after a congressional debate.

“You are going to see significant push back on these thugs.” -- what he called Tea Party protesters. He's also been known to use the term "teabaggers" when addressing tea partiers.

And here is a video of his "greatest hits." (warning: Language)



The part about "Hitler should have bombed it" regarding the Hague after his trip there? Priceless!

Buckley has not apologized for any of these things, and he hasn't been called out on it, either. And he's the head of the NH Democratic Party. He actually holds a position of power within the state.

So I'm calling him out. When is he going to apologize for the things he's said?

Defending a Friend

I've been gone all day today on a birthday trip for my stepdaughter to the Ben and Jerry's Factory in Vermont, so I am only just getting wind of the following story. If you want to know what he said, click on the link because I'm not going to repeat it here.

Doug did apologize on Granite Grok earlier today.

On something like that, he's going to get hammered, which he rightly should. But he's also getting hammered on his apology, which many on the left are seeing as "crocodile tears."

I know Doug. I think he let some frustrations get the best of him and he went into overdrive. In his heart of hearts, I honestly don't think that he meant what he said, and I think his apology was sincere.

Before people start jumping down my throat, however, let me explain something to you guys. I have gay friends. I could never see myself using that term to describe them (and I don't). We have an understanding -- they know that I disagree with them, and they have the right to disagree with me. Just because I'm defending Doug in this case doesn't mean I approve of the use of the term, no matter how much Ray Buckley may piss him off at any point in time (and Buckley has a way of doing that). Buckley can act like a despicable human being when he wants to (and he has on many, many occasions), but I personally wouldn't stoop to that kind of name-calling.

So What Does The President Watch When His Party's In Trouble?

Correction: Fox News misreported what had happened -- Gibbs was referencing the movie to explain why Obama didn't pay attention to the returns, not that he watched the movie last night. He's still the worst press secretary ever, though.

Last night was a big victory for Republicans. Although Doug Hoffman didn't win in NY-23, the fact that he got as much of the vote as he did sends a message that we don't want the wishy-washy members of the party around -- that is, those members who call themselves Republicans but are, in fact, really Democrat Lite.

But Republicans did win some decent victories in other big areas -- Virginia and New Jersey are the most notable.

So what was President Obama doing while the candidates he endorsed were losing their positions?

Watching a documentary about himself.

How do we know this? Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said so. Can we just say, for the record, that Gibbs is the worst press secretary in my lifetime? Did he think that little tidbit would make Obama look better for not watching the election results last night?

But besides that, is Barack Obama the modern equivalent of Narcissus or what?