Archive for hypocrite

Rush Limbaugh gets owned by LA Times reader

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Rush Limbaugh Gives A Speech In Michigan

Today's Los Angeles Times letter to the editor, because our voices matter:

Re "Pulling a story out of thin air," Opinion, March 20

Meghan Daum's column on media coverage of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 raised one point, and somewhat surprisingly so: At the beginning of her column, she noted Rush Limbaugh's complaint about newscasters who "don't know beans about even why an airplane flies" but offer speculation on the vaguest of premises.

I agree. It's sort of like radio show hosts with little or no formal education offering in-depth, "intellectual" political analyses on Supreme Court opinions, election demographics, foreign policy and more.

Lynn Robert Fairbanks

Diamond Bar

Pot. Kettle. Doesn't know beans.

Lim-bah!

snap15

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Christie - Between A Rock And A Hard Place

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Pinocchio

We've probably all been called upon over the years to make some sort of toast, or speech or even give our recommendation to someone who we didn't exactly feel deserved the praise. We sucked it up and made the endorsement with our noses pinched shut. But most likely there wasn't any harm in saying the nice, kind, carefully chosen words because it was a gesture, not a ringing endorsement. You most likely found something you have in common with the person receiving your kudos and focused on that.

Well, Governor Chris Christie watched his Pinocchio nose shoot into oversize when he was called upon to give Steve Lonegan, the New Jersey candidate for the senate, an endorsement. BTW, this is the same Steve Lonegan that Christie ran against in 2008 and lambasted over and over again as unworthy, outrageous and out of touch. Hmm. Now he's got Christie's endorsements.

Makes you wonder if Christie vetoed gay conversion therapy but secretly signed a bill making party conversion politics therapy, valid. First success story is Christie -- he doesn't believe a word of what he's saying.

Don't Believe A Word I Say

There was no way for Christie to avoid a tainting on this one. If he didn't give an endorsement, his Republican party opponents for the 2016 run would say he wasn't strong enough to come out in favor of their party's nominee. He lacks GOP conviction.

And if he came out with an endorsement, it would be used against him by everyone who doesn't agree with what Lonegan stands for. So what do Lonegan, and by default Christie, stand for? Watch this fine Lawrence O'Donnell segment from The Last Word.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

No Hurricane Sandy aid, no compassion or health insurance for pre-existing conditions, (cancer -- Lonegan: "not my problem"), anti-choice, anti-planned parenthood, anti-marriage equality, and anti-family leave, and anti gun control. There's your check-list. This is what both men stand for -- one is going to lose, the other is going to win. And by large margins. So what do you make of the fickle state of New Jersey?

Christie has taken more than one hit on his size, and perhaps that's unfair. But surely, if the good governor could drop everything he's doing to go to his son's high school baseball team, there must have been some other pressing state matter that could have called him away so he didn't have to make the clown of himself that he did with his endorsement.

So now you have to ask yourself, would you have done this, or if you were going to lie anyway, couldn't you have fabricated an excuse not to be available for this lie-fest?

Sadly, Christie is so far ahead in the polls in NJ, it won't hurt him in his governor's race. But when it comes time for the GOP primaries, you know the name Lonegan and the governor's endorsement will come up many a times. He's in that purgatory -- he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't (support Steve Lonegan) -- with the gift that will keep on giving.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Top UK cardinal accused of "inappropriate" and "intimate" behavior with priests. #FamilyValues

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
Via adammclane.com

Via adammclane.com

You've heard of Rock the Vote, you've heard of rock the boat, but have you heard of rock the church?

WaPo:

LONDON— On the same day as his last public blessing Sunday, Pope Benedict XVI confronted the threat of a fresh scandal within the church hierarchy, with Vatican officials informing him of new allegations that Britain’s most senior Roman Catholic cleric had engaged in inappropriate behavior with priests.

In Britain, the accusations against Cardinal Keith O’Brienhead of the church in Scotland and one of this nation’s most strident opponents of gay rights—were already escalating into a national controversy. The controversy revolved around a report first published Saturday night on the Web site of Britain’s Observer newspaper, saying that four men – three current and one former priest — had denounced O’Brien earlier this month for engaging in “inappropriate” and “intimate” behavior. Through a spokesman, O’Brien denied the charges and was said he was seeking legal counsel. [...]

[O]ne of the alleged victims claimed O’Brien had instigated a “relationship” with him in the 1980s that resulted in the need for long-term counseling. Another of the men said O’Brien had initiated “inappropriate contact” during nightly prayers, according to the paper.

O’Bigot O'Brien has referred to marriage equality as a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right” and has let it be known that he thinks gays are immoral.

But "inappropriate, intimate" behavior with men of the cloth works for him. During prayer time. Got it.

family values my asshypocrite definition smaller

And don't get me started on Roger Mahony.

UPDATE: O'Brien resigned.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

2002 VIDEO: Hypocrite Paul Ryan supported economic stimulus under Bush

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

2002:

2012:

More at Think Progress.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Why Didn't Rick Santorum Denounce the Immoral Epidemic of Child Abuse in the Catholic Church?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Your Daily Dose of BuzzFlash at Truthout, via my pal Mark Karlin:

But behind Rick Santorum's religious sanctimony lies a church that has many moral challenges to confront.  As BuzzFlash at Truthout reader Chet Kulis recounts, Santorum was confronted by Chicago talk show host  Bruce Dumont Sunday night (the Illinois primary is Tuesday). Dumont "asked Santorum how he would grade the Catholic Church's handling of sex abuse by priests. Santorum said he it was not his business to grade the Catholic Church."

Dumont also asked Penn State grad Santorum, "If we were to replace 'Barack Obama' [in terms of Santorum's accusations that Obama is "soft on porn"] with the name 'Joe Paterno,' could we say that Joe Paterno seemed to be favoring a child rapist over the Penn State football program?"  

To which an incensed Santorum, who had initially expressed support for Paterno in 2011 (although eventually supported his firing), responded: "That's sort of an insulting question. It's a ridiculous question, Sir, and I'm not going to answer it. You're welcome to ask a question. That doesn't mean I'm going to answer absurd questions."

As for refusing to denounce the international epidemic of child abuse among priests in the Catholic Church, Santorum justified his silence on the issue by ironically declaring, "My job.... [is] it to talk about what I'd do as president of the United States ... I am concerned about protecting children."

That's not a moral leader; that's an enabler of vile and unforgivable violations of the youngest among us.

Please read the whole post here.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"[T]heir irrational hatred of Pres. Obama has driven them to such extremes that they are increasingly not recognizable as a party"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

From Forbes, a post titled, "Plaintiff In Landmark Anti-Obamacare Lawsuit Bankrupted By Medical Bills-You And I Pick Up Her Tab":

The thing is, among the debts listed in the bankruptcy filing are $4500 worth of medical bills—obligations that, presumably, would have largely been paid had Mary chosen to purchase health insurance, something she will be required to do come 2014 when the insurance mandate of the healthcare reform law kicks in. [...]

As it turns out, Mary Brown, the named plaintiff in the case that seeks to bring Obamacare to an end, is the poster child for why the mandates in the ACA are so completely necessary.

Here's the link to the L.A. Times article on the same woman.

Today's L.A. Times letters to the editor, because our voices matter:

Healthcare foe spreads the pain

Re "Key healthcare law foe went bankrupt — with medical bills," March 9

How appropriate that Mary Brown, claiming government's intrusion into personal freedom in a lawsuit over the healthcare law, used a governmental option to stick the taxpayers with all of her debts.

Instead of her boisterous claims of righteousness that she "always pays her medical bills" and "I'm not fighting just for me," she could have indeed taken the high road and excluded those medical bills from her bankruptcy.

I for one wish she would stop "fighting for me" and accept the healthcare law — so I wouldn't have to pick up the tab for her medical bills.

Blair Caugherty

Palm Desert

***

And Brown stiffed all of us for more than $4,500 in unpaid medical bills.

Where is the outrage from the Republicans over the complete and total irresponsibility of this person deliberately refusing to pay for medical coverage and expecting all of us to pay for her bills?

Personal responsibility used to be the foundational bulwark of Republicans' ideology, but their irrational hatred of President Obama has driven them to such extremes that they are increasingly not recognizable as a party that stands for anything other than intolerant social issues and wacky economic theories.

Where are the party's leaders?

James B. Parsons

Canyon Lake

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Video- 60 Minutes: Eric Cantor freaks out over Reagan raising taxes

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

According to Steve, it starts at 10:19 if you don't want to subject yourself to the whole thing.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare