Roger Ailes
Quitters Never Win


Saturday, March 26, 2005  

What's L. Brent Bozell Tossing Off To?

Introducing a new regular feature, sponsored by Kleenex brand tissues and Vaseline.

"The entire second half of the show was devoted to showing and then re-showing the four lesbian hot-tub bikini scenes."

posted by Roger | | 7:23 PM
 

The Hypocrisy Of A Texan Bug-Chaser

The tiny toxic Texan was an enemy of American capitalism... at least before his associates began soliciting illegal campaign contributions from its practitioners:

The case thrust Congressman DeLay into decidedly unfamiliar territory -- the list of plaintiffs on the front page of a civil complaint. He is an outspoken defender of business against what he calls the crippling effects of "predatory, self-serving litigation."

The DeLay family litigation sought unspecified compensation for, among other things, the dead father's "physical pain and suffering, mental anguish and trauma," and the mother's grief, sorrow and loss of companionship.

Their lawsuit also alleged violations of the Texas product liability law.

...

Rep. DeLay, who since has taken a leading role promoting congressional tort reform, wants to rein in trial lawyers to protect American business from what he calls "frivolous, parasitic lawsuits" that raise insurance premiums and "kill jobs."

In September, he expressed something less than warm sentiment for attorneys when he took the floor of the House to condemn trial lawyers who, he said, "get fat off the pain (of plaintiffs and off) the hard work (of defendants)."

...

The case was resolved in 1993 with payment of an undisclosed sum of about $250,000, according to sources familiar with an out of court settlement. DeLay signed over his share of any proceeds to his mother, said DeLay aides.

Three years later, DeLay cosponsored a bill specifically designed to override state laws on product liability such as the one cited in his family's lawsuit. The legislation provided sweeping exemptions for sellers of such products.

The story would make me have a great deal of sympathy for DeLay, if it wasn't for all the crap he's pulled since then.

Update (3/27):

Welcome Malkinthropes!

I commend you for clicking on the link, which is the beginning of all wisdom. You may be a little disoriented at first, as you won't recognize the surroundings.

While you're visiting, I hope you'll click through to these fine links as well:

David Neiwert

Professors Eric Muller and Greg Robinson

Thomas B.

My own bad self

You can thank me later.

And may the Easter Bunny have mercy on your eggs.

(A special thank you to Auguste at MalkinWatch for pointing this out.)

posted by Roger | | 7:04 PM
 

The Culture Of Life: Some Exceptions Apply

It's okay. They didn't worship the Risen Christ.

WASHINGTON, March 25 - Despite recommendations by Army investigators, commanders have decided not to prosecute 17 American soldiers implicated in the deaths of three prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004, according to a new accounting released Friday by the Army.

Investigators had recommended that all 17 soldiers be charged in the cases, according to the accounting by the Army Criminal Investigation Command. The charges included murder, conspiracy and negligent homicide. While none of the 17 will face any prosecution, one received a letter of reprimand and another was discharged after the investigations.

To date, the military has taken steps toward prosecuting some three dozen soldiers in connection with a total of 28 confirmed or suspected homicides of detainees. The total number of such deaths is believed to be between 28 and 31.

posted by Roger | | 6:43 PM
 

Brain death. Who knew it was contagious?

New York Times Bestselling Books

HARDCOVER FICTION
Top 5 at a Glance

1. HONEYMOON, by James Patterson and Howard Roughan
2. THE RISING, by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins
3. IMPOSSIBLE, by Danielle Steel
4. THE BROKER, by John Grisham
5. THE DA VINCI CODE, by Dan Brown

HARDCOVER NONFICTION
Top 5 at a Glance

1. BLOOD BROTHER, by Anne Bird
2. BLINK, by Malcolm Gladwell
3. A DEADLY GAME, by Catherine Crier with Cole Thompson
4. PLAN B, by Anne Lamott
5. JUICED, by Jose Canseco

HARDCOVER ADVICE
Top 5 at a Glance

1. YOUR BEST LIFE NOW, by Joel Osteen
2. FRENCH WOMEN DON'T GET FAT, by Mireille Guiliano
3. THE PURPOSE-DRIVEN LIFE, by Rick Warren
4. THE MONEY BOOK, by Suze Orman
5. THE SOUTH BEACH DIET, by Arthur Agatston

posted by Roger | | 7:29 AM


Friday, March 25, 2005  

Audience Participation

Here's a Tech Central Station column that's chock full of phony premises, logical fallacies, intellectual dishonesty, anti-intellectual dishonesty, old skool dishonest dishonesty, fabrication, projection, paranoia, hallucination and drivel. The thesis: The liberal "MSM" and the Democratic Party are going to conspire to change the law in order to destroy bloggers, oh yes they will, just you wait and see! This guy makes Michael Barone look honest and rational.

I don't have time at present to write more, but feel free to have at this chump in comments.

posted by Roger | | 8:41 AM


Thursday, March 24, 2005  

Roger's Programming Notes

I have mixed feelings about Jerry Springer's radio program, scheduled to debut on Air America Radio next month. As Springer hasn't snorted Oxycontin, sexually harassed a subordinate, started a dodgy charity, committed felonies on behalf a sitting president or sold weapons to a theocratic dictatorship for personal profit, his qualifications for hosting an AM radio show seem somewhat lacking.

On the other hand, I have great hopes this will lead to wider glory and fortune for Pandagon.net's Jesse Taylor, who blogs for Springer's show. (The other) Roger Ailes got his start producing Mike Douglas's talk show, so who knows what could happen.

posted by Roger | | 10:06 PM
 

The Wall Street Journal has published a story about right-wing radio racist Don Imus and his purported charity ranch:

Mr. Imus and his wife, Deirdre, opened the 4,000-acre ranch, nestled in the mesa country of northern New Mexico, in 1999 to help sick children. Dubbed the "Cowboy Taj Mahal" by locals, the complex has a 14,000-square-foot adobe mansion, swimming pool, billiard hall, herds of longhorn cattle, buffalo and sheep, and a replica of an 1880s mining town. Its stated mission is to give "children with severe illnesses an opportunity to experience the life of an American cowboy."

...

The inquiry follows a ruling in 2000 by the San Miguel County, N.M., assessor's office that the ranch shouldn't be granted a full tax exemption from local property taxes. In its decision, the county said that since the ranch hosts kids for only part of the year, and portions of the ranch are used for personal housing, only 55 percent of the ranch is exempt from property taxes. Imus complied with the ruling. The ranch retains its federal tax-exempt status.

...

It has five bedrooms for the children, a library, dining hall and great room complete with a Steinway grand piano. The Imuses' master-bedroom suite, positioned according to Chinese feng shui principles, features a screened-in sleeping porch overlooking a mesa and an outdoor shower designed to look like Aztec ruins.

...

The sessions can be tough: Staff say that during the summer, children sometimes work in 100-degree heat pulling weeds and shoveling horse muck. There are no televisions, videogames or CD players for the kids, and their day starts with chores at 6 a.m.

Deadwood meets Neverland, minus the f-word. Actually, it sounds more like a plantation than the historical West. I can't imagine anything a dying kid would enjoy less than cleaning up an elderly Republican's shit.

I'm sure NBC will be all over this.

posted by Roger | | 9:11 PM


Wednesday, March 23, 2005  

The Boob's Tube

In light of recent events in the news, Midget Mickey Kaus has resumed obsessing over the thought that someone will pull the plug -- or the feeding tube -- on him.

Well, they always say that your family knows you better than anyone else.

posted by Roger | | 9:21 PM
 

Rush Limbaugh Claims Another Victim

The unrestrained hedonism of "Rush" Limbaugh has claimed yet another victim. It's a proven fact that the simple folk emulate the self-destructive antics of celebrities whose lives are endlessly glamorized by the mainstream media. And so another young and productive Republican falls prey to the Limbaugh drug culture:

Republican media adviser R. Gregory Stevens, who was found dead in the Beverly Hills, Calif., home of actress Carrie Fisher on Feb. 26, died of an overdose of cocaine and the painkiller OxyContin, according to the Los Angeles County coroner's office.

A spokeswoman at the coroner's office read to The Washington Times portions of the report, which was completed Friday.

"Cocaine and OxyContin," the spokeswoman said when asked by phone what was the cause of death. When asked specifically whether there was a drug overdose, she said "yes."
...

Mr. Stevens, 42, was an associate with the powerhouse Washington lobbying firm Barbour Griffith & Rogers and had traveled to Los Angeles to attend the Academy Awards.

...

Mr. Stevens, with strong ties to the Hollywood entertainment community, served as the head of the Bush-Cheney Entertainment Task Force for President Bush's recent inaugural. Barbour Griffith & Rogers, one of the co-founders of which was chairman of the Republican National Committee, held a memorial service for Mr. Stevens earlier this month.

This young man was led astray by the thought that he could abuse hillbilly heroin without legal consequences and only slightly noticeable brain damage, like his broacast hero, Big Pharma. One can only wonder as to which public figure led Stevens to believe he could snort coke without consequences.

posted by Roger | | 9:02 PM


Monday, March 21, 2005  

Untrustworthy

Michael Barone, author of "Big Dickhead's Almanack," claims to have spotted a new political trend.

Examining the political map of America, as I am obliged to do as I write the chapters of "The Almanac of American Politics 2006," reveals a previously unidentified segment of the American electorate, one which has been growing for some years now but has reached a critical mass and become a major force in one of our two great political parties: the trustfunder left.

A major force, you say?

Who are the trustfunders? People with enough money not to have to work for a living, or not to have to work very hard. People who can live more or less wherever they want. The "nomadic affluent," as demographic analyst Joel Kotkin calls them.

So you're talking about people who have trust funds, then?

These people tend to be very liberal politically. Aware that they have done nothing to earn their money, they feel a certain sense of guilt. At the elite private or public high schools they attend, and even more at their colleges and universities, they are propagandized about the evils of capitalism and globalization, and the virtues of environmentalism and pacifism. Patriotism is equated with Hiterlism.

Tell us more, Michael. How many people in this country live in nomadic affluence from the proceeds of a trust? And what percentage of those folks are guilty leftists?

Their loyalties, as Samuel Huntington explains in "Who Are We?," are not national, but transnational -- they are citizens of the world with contempt for those who feel chills up their spines when they hear "The Star Spangled Banner." They are taught to have contempt for the economic contribution they make to their country as investors and to feel guilty if they make no other contribution. Their penance is that they must vote left.

Yes, yes. They hate America. We get it. Now give us some facts about these people and the political power they wield.

Where can you find trustfunders? Not scattered randomly around the country, but heavily concentrated in certain areas. Places with kicky restaurants, places tolerant of alternative lifestyles, places with lots of art galleries and organic food stores and Starbucks competitors. The heaviest concentration is in the San Francisco Bay area, which, Kotkin says, has the largest percentage of trustfunders of any major metro area in the country.

Okay, you know where they live. So then you must know how many of them there are. Give us some facts, man.

The Bay area stands out in stark relief on the political map. It voted 70 percent to 29 percent for John Kerry in 2004, up from the 64 percent to 30 percent margin it cast for Al Gore in 2000. Without the Bay area's 1.15 million-vote margin for Kerry, California would have come within 82,000 votes of voting for George W. Bush.

So how many of those Bay Area voters are trustfunders? All of them? Two of them? Spit it out!

Trustfunders stand out even more vividly when you look at the political map of the Rocky Mountain states. In Idaho and Wyoming, each state's wealthiest county was also the only county to vote for John Kerry: Blaine County, Idaho (Sun Valley), where Kerry stayed at his wife's imported Cotswold farmhouse on his much photographed skiing and snowboarding vacation, and Teton County, Wyo. (Jackson Hole), where Dick Cheney has a house and where Bill Clinton took a pre-election holiday after his pollster Dick Morris reported that a trip to the mountains focus-grouped better than Martha's Vineyard.
You have no idea how many there are, do you, Barone? You're just talking out of your ass. Admit it.

Speaking of Martha's Vineyard, it voted 73 percent for Kerry, and nearby Nantucket, where Kerry's wife has another house, voted 63 percent for him -- indeed, Nantucket was one of only three of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties that did not vote for George W. Bush. Massachusetts Catholics gave their fellow Massachusetts Catholic Kerry only 51 percent of their votes, but he won 77 percent in Boston, 85 percent in Cambridge, and 69 percent and 73 percent in trustfunder-heavy Hampshire and Berkshire Counties in the western mountains.
You worthless git. You don't know how many trust fund beneficiaries there are in this country and you don't know how they voted.

Where Democrats had a good year in 2004 they owed much to trustfunders. In Colorado, they captured a Senate and a House seat and both houses of the legislature. Their political base in that state is increasingly not the oppressed proletariat of Denver, but the trustfunder-heavy counties that contain Aspen (68 percent for Kerry), Telluride (72 percent) and Boulder (66 percent).
So people who live off the interest of inherited wealth are not only the base of the Democratic party in Colorado, they control the outcome of that state's elections? Tell me, Mike, how many trustfunders are there in Pitkin, San Miguel and Boulder Counties, and how did they vote? And how did those who earned their wealth vote?

You can see the trustfunders' imprint as well in New York. In 56 of the state's 62 counties, the Republican popular vote margin increased or the Democratic margin fell between 2000 and 2004. Five of the six counties that moved away from George W. Bush are trustfunder havens: New York (Manhattan), Ulster (Woodstock), Columbia (trendy Hudson River country), Otsego (Cooperstown) and Tompkins (Cornell University).

Now you're saying that the number of Democratic votes increased because the number of trust fund beneficiaries increased in those counties in the last four years? Do you have any fucking idea what you're talking about?

The political map shows the trustfunders' impact. So, I suspect, would an analysis of the sources of the vast amounts of money that flowed in through the Internet first to Howard Dean and then to John Kerry and to outfits like moveon.org.

I suspect that an analysis of Michael Barone's hard drive would reveal numerous files containing nude photos of Cal Thomas and John Leo. And I've got just as much evidence for my suspicion as does Barone.

The good news for Democrats is that they have found a new source of votes and money. The bad news is that an important part of their core constituency has the characteristic that the British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin ascribed to the press, "power without responsibility, the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages."

Now that's just moronic.

I'll admit that Barone knows more about the intersection of inherited wealth and Democratic politics than I do, since I didn't marry into a family of wealthy San Francisco Democrats. And Barone certainly knows about not working very hard, as this column proves. But being a freeloader and an intellectual lightweight doesn't make Barone on expert on those topics.

posted by Roger | | 9:34 PM
 

Meet Your Liberal Media: We Go To War With The Lies We Have, Not The Truth Our Readers Expect Edition

Speaking of journalists who expect others to do their work for them, ladies and gentleman, I give you Judith "F'ing" Miller:

Meanwhile, ever since the fall of Baghdad in 2002, Miller has faced bitter accusations from both her peers and the public: they charge that in the run-up to the Iraq war, she was tricked by -- or worse, colluded with -- other confidential sources and the Bush administration into writing articles that strongly indicated Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. No WMDs have been found, and critics have been baying for Miller's blood for the past two years.

Miller's position, as she repeated several times during the Berkeley event and during an interview earlier that day for KQED "Forum," is "You go with what you've got." She was referring both to her WMD sources and the questionable whistle-blowers she is protecting, but it's a statement her critics ought to keep in mind. Miller may be an imperfect martyr for the First Amendment cause, but with 15 other journalists battling a secrecy-loving government over their own confidential sources, you go with what you've got. [WTF? Miller's sources were the secrecy- and dishonesty-loving government - Roger.]

...

In May of last year the New York Times published what many considered a belated mea culpa for its Iraq coverage. Although the paper did not name Miller, it included references to several of her stories that relied on Chalabi or other Iraqi exiles and unnamed intelligence sources. (Slate journalist Jack Shafer undertook an excoriating look at Miller's articles in 2003 and has since dogged her in several additional pieces.)

...

Miller argues that if she was duped by her unnamed sources, so was the Bush administration -- and she's not apologizing for believing there were WMDs in Iraq until the president does....

Ultimately, Miller said, she "wrote the best assessment that I could based on the information that I had." She attempted to tie the controversy over her WMD reporting to her current struggle by saying that she had heard after the fact -- after she returned from being embedded with an infantry division in Iraq -- that there had been people who had reservations about the WMD intelligence she was receiving.

"I wish they had come forward at the time to express those reservations," she said. "To me, this case that I am now involved in emphasizes the importance of getting as many people as possible to come forward with a dissenting view, or allegations of wrongdoing."

So -- if we accept Miller's dubious premise that she was an innocent dupe -- when Miller's unnamed sources told her that WMDs existed, it was up to persons who knew the WMDs didn't exist to correct Miller's ignorance. Presumably these contrarians were supposed to know what she was going to write before she wrote it, track her down, and refute the assertions of sources whose identities she wouldn't disclose. It wasn't her job to corroborate the claims of her sources or seek out knowledgeable others who might contradict their claims, or to inform readers of her sources' possible motives for -- and history of -- lying.

Also note Miller's claim that "if she was duped by her unnamed sources, so was the Bush administration...." Is she claiming that that sources who duped her weren't in the Administration (though of course she often quoted unnamed Administration sources), and that the Bush Administration was also duped by her sources? Does the "if" signify that she believes WMD exist but still haven't been found?

Don't worry, Judy. We don't want your apology. The self-destruction of your credibility is thanks enough.

posted by Roger | | 6:52 AM


Sunday, March 20, 2005  

A Very Special Request From Pumpkinhead

Dear Reader,

Two years ago, I wrote a book [sic] about my father: Big Russ and Me: Father and Son, Lessons of Life. I have now decided to put together a new book in which a wide variety of sons and daughters will have a chance to write about their fathers. I would like to invite you to be part of this exciting new project, and to spread the word among your friends.

What am I looking for? Stories, lessons, advice or even a favorite saying that made your father special. Feel free to send me a vivid memory, a funny anecdote, or the story of your father's special accomplishment. Maybe he taught you an important lesson -- either with words or by example -- about work, love, kindness, friendship, integrity, faith, or anything else. You could also send me a letter of appreciation that you sent to your father, or a letter you wish you had written. It can even be a eulogy -- or anything else that seems appropriate. What I really care about [sic] is that you wrote it.

....I'm not looking for professional writing, but for stories and lessons that useful [sic], original, moving, inspiring, or just plain funny.

...

It would be easiest if you sent me an e-mail letter at MyDad@BigRussandMe.com in the form of a double-spaced Word document that comes as an attachment, but if you'd rather mail it the old-fashioned way, that's fine, too.

...

There will be no payment if your letter is used. Instead, I will be making a contribution to The Boys and Girls Club in the name of all the contributors. If I am able to use your letter, I will also be sending you an autographed copy of the book, which is scheduled for Father's Day, 2006....

Many thanks [sic],

Tim Russert

Typical Republican. He didn't write the first one, why should he write this one?

I think I'll write about the time I gave my dad a copy Big Russ and Me and he threw it at my head.

For added amusement, some scary Pumpkinheadshots: one two.

posted by Roger | | 8:37 PM
 

Edward Pig has a good report on how the Bush Administration is frustrating the efforts of Judicial Watch to get documents concerning the Clinton Administration, not for the benefit of the former administration, but to keep its own conduct under wraps.

Key point:

[I]n late 2001, Bush established the new and constitutionally questionable guideline which states that the documents of any past president may only be released to the public with the express consent of that president (if still alive) and the current president. The redactions on the documents pertaining to Clinton's pardons is just one manifestation of this policy.

Of course, the wingnuts don't need documents to bash Democrats and Democratic administrations; they just invent facts. This executive order simply keeps Bush's own misconduct (and that of his father) under wraps until Bush is beyond the jurisdiction of the courts.

posted by Roger | | 10:24 AM
 

Jesus Saves, Wolf Swallows

On CNN's Late Edition just now, Wolf Blitzer twice screeched "Can (or will) Washington save Terri Schiavo?"

As anyone who has read anything other than dishonest right-wing propaganda about the matter knows, Ms. Schiavo did not want to be kept alive under the circumstances she is now in. That fact was determined by a court, the determination was affirmed on appeal and all appeals contesting that determination were exhausted. The laws and procedures set forth by the State of Florida for determining such matters were all followed.

The only things "Washington" is interested in saving are Tom DeLay's corrupt ass and the Republican control of Congress and the White House.

Blitzer has no excuse.

posted by Roger | | 9:03 AM
Contact Roger
Complaints?
The Who Sell Out
Roger Goes Postal
Disclaimer
Enemies List
Stale and Tired