Maybe This Is Hypocritical But…

April 1, 2009

I consider myself technologically up-to-date, but this is further than I want to go with my “techno-hipness”.  I’m talking about Twitter.

Now, I’m not going to bother explaining this here, as I feel this video expresses my feelings completely.

Now, I’m only saying this is possibly hypocrtical because as I see it, isn’t blogging similar?  I’m here, typing out my thoughts and feelings on various topics to those of you who read.  Some of you might add this site to your favorites and are therefore “following”  me like you would with Twitter.

I guess really the difference is that I can make much longer posts on a blog, whereas Twitter is limited to 140 characters (I believe).  Furthermore, like the video says, Twitter is mainly used for updating people on your current activities/thoughts, not for writing lengthy political analysis or long angry rants.

Perhaps if I started posting my current thoughts/activities, this site would see a lot more updates.  Then again, I’m trying to reach a larger audience here, and is anyone really that interested in what I’m eating for lunch, or happen to be thinking at any moment in time?  Trust me, you don’t want to get into my head, it’s painfully boring in there.


The tried and true liberal defense against criticism; play the race card.

October 10, 2008

Given enough time and effort, I could write an entire flow-diagram to tell you exactly how liberals will react in given situations. Earlier this week I posted a link to a Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Mary Mitchell. In her short article she called for the censurship of Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin. For a refresher…

Palin’s pit-bull mentality has not only set a negative tone, but a dangerous one. She should be censured.

(Emphasis mine)

Rush Limbaugh also read her short column and discussed it on his show. Fortunately, an exact transcript of what he said on his show is available, even to non-members of his site. I make a lengthy quote simply because what Mr. Limbaugh is saying is right-on.

Mary Mitchell, a wuss, wimp columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times says that Sarah Palin should be censured. She says that “Sarah Palin should apologize to the Obama campaign and the American people for her role in bringing out the worst in her supporters.” This is laughable. Come on, Mary. Grow up. This is the big leagues. How about the people in your party? I know you’re a Democrat, Mary Mitchell. You can’t deny it, all you liberal media people are Democrats. What about the incitement of this whole country that you and your fellow journalists have engaged in along with the Democrat Party? You have gendered up hate for this president. You have ginned up a despise for the US military. You have sought to convince the American people their country is worthless and sinking into an abyss. You have been doing it for six years. And you dare say Sarah Palin should be censured for bringing out the worst in her supporters. How about the worst in your readers that you bring out, Mary Mitchell?

Mitchell decided to write a very long response to Mr. Limbaugh. Not surprisingly, her entire rebuttal was an assault on Limbaugh and his “white privilege”. There’s so much here, you really should read her entire response, just to get the full experience of her hate and spite towards Rush Limbaugh.

When you step on a pig’s tail, it squeals. Rush Limbaugh is a squealer.

And why is he squealing? Because John McCain and Sarah Palin are losing ground in a contest that they thought was theirs.

And they are losing it to a black man.

Of course, Limbaugh won’t say that. Instead, on Thursday he spent his time berating me for saying Palin needs to apologize for inciting crowds that hurled racial epithets at black members of the press.

So much to cover, so much to cover, and this is only the beginning of her rant…

Read the rest of this entry »


Amy Jacobsen files lawsuit

July 8, 2008

If anyone is reading this who is not a Chicago resident, this will be new to you. Most Chicagoans however, probably remember something around Independence Day of last year involving Amy Jacobson, then a reporter for WMAQ-Ch. 5. Apparently she’s now filed a lawsuit against the company that caught her in a questionable act.

The former WMAQ-Ch. 5 reporter is seeking more than $1 million in damages from WBBM-Ch. 2 parent CBS, Channel 2 boss Joe Ahern and others, complaining that a tape it aired of her in bathing attire at the home of a potential news source in July 2007 subjected Jacobson to “enormous public humiliation and disgrace.”

Jacobson wound up losing her TV job and, eventually, her home, according to the suit filed Monday in Cook County by attorney Kathleen Zellner on behalf of Jacobson, husband Jaime Anglada and their two children, all of whom alleged to have “suffered from observing the devastating effects on the person they love most.”

What had happened is Jacobson took her kids over to the home of Craig Stebic. I can’t find a suitable back-article after 5 minutes of searching so here’s a quick synopsis.

The Craig Stebic case isn’t all that different from the Drew Peterson situation. Stebic’s wife was missing for two months and reportedly he invited Jacobson over for a “pool party”. Jacobson had been working on this story and decided to accept the invitation. She then was caught on video by a competing news station. Her actions were decried as unethical and was then fired from her job at WMAQ.

Now you’re all caught up.

There’s a big debate over whether or not her firing was fitting or an error by WMAQ. Frankly, I can’t find enough back articles to confirm this, but if my memory is still good, I remember there being a slew of incidents of “questionable judgement” throughout her coverage of this story. Accusations of extramarital affairs and starting an actual relationship with Stebic, but don’t quote me on that.

Regardless, I did laugh when I saw this cited in Peterson’s lawsuit.

Jacobson’s lawsuit cites an episode of NBC’s “Law & Order” in which Lara Flynn Boyle played an ambitious reporter having an affair with a murder suspect. Apart from Boyle wearing a swimsuit and towel similar to Jacobson’s, the episode’s premise was far removed from anything that happened in Plainfield.

CORRECTION: I had incorrectly stated that Jacobson was suing her former employer. She is actually suing the company that caught her on video tape, a rival station.