thanks for the coverage, knew I could find more of the same here

Be the Media¿

Wars raging. Nuclear power plant melting down. People stealing copper gutters in Urbana cuz the economy's so decimated. Another travesty of an election certified as legit in Wisconsin. Tornadoes killing people in Massachusetts now.

Sorry, no time for any of that.

Gotta watch American Idol. After that all my time will be taken up being scandalized by a picture of a penis in underwear.

How old am I?

What's wrong with this picture?

Brad, do you think pictures might wake the public up? Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) sais he WISHED that people cared about the wars, but that they didn't. He visits VA hospitals regularly and writes letters to the families of those killed.

Jones said his hospital visits shocked him - today when a man or woman has half their body blown away (from the waist) that our technology saves them. No legs, no pelvis, no genitals, nothing from the waist down.

Jones voted for the war but soon regretted it.

We have such a neat sanitized war - no upsetting pictures of dead children or their families, no pictures of our maimed troops. All nice and tidy.

And our MSM busy with crap.

Well said Brad.

My heart goes out to the families and I honor them. That said, it is a volunteer army. It was their choice to take up arms There are less honorable ways to die, like in. A senseless car wreck for example.

Now if you wish to contrast the deaths gone unreported to a congressman who has been lieing to us for the last few days, well, I guess a congressman who might arguably be considered a predator based on his acts sholuld be shoved to page six and is not important to democracy...the reason the soldiers died...for democracy.

I think a lot of people care Brad. And I think it's irresponsible and uncaring of you to put the blame on a mother and father in Ohio, or Michigan, or wherever these poor folks who've lost their child lives:

"Five American families are, today, having the worst days of their lives, thanks to their wilingness to allow their child to participate in a pointless war."

As far as Anthony Weiner's weiner, I could care less. It's a distraction and unfortunately the American people seem to like bright shiny distractions. As does the Brad Blog. You might want to check your archived files.. just search for oh, hiking the Appalachian trail. Or Dr. Laura, or even better search for Tea Party or Sarah Palin. See, you post garbage too while troops are dying. Oooops...

Joyce asked:

Brad, do you think pictures might wake the public up?

I do. If we covered the wars like all the grown up nations of the world covered them, I suspect we would have been out of both of them long ago.

And Rep. Jones (R-NC) is a great hero in my estimation. Thanks for reminding me of him. Perhaps I should see if I can get him on the Malloy Show next week (which I'm guest hosting again for 4 days beginning a week from Thursday...just FYI.)

Davey Crocket said @ 5:

My heart goes out to the families and I honor them. That said, it is a volunteer army. It was their choice to take up arms

So, volunteering to serve one's country, to obey the orders of its Commander-in-Chief who lies about a cause for war leads to having your head blown off, or being paralyzed for life, that's your own fault, because you volunteered (presumably to be lied to and put your life on the line for that lie). Got it.

Now if you wish to contrast the deaths gone unreported to a congressman who has been lieing to us for the last few days, well, I guess a congressman who might arguably be considered a predator based on his acts sholuld be shoved to page six and is not important to democracy...the reason the soldiers died...for democracy.

Why was that Congressman forced to answer these questions --- with either a lie or the truth --- in the first place? What evidence do you have that he was "a predator"? Why does that Congressman owe "the truth" to anybody about his private life, if he did not break any laws and was not hypocritical by acting one way in his public life (say, using Big Government to take away the right for people to marry each other under the guise of "protecting marriage") while disrespecting his own marriage (like, for example, Vitter, Ensign, Craig et al)?

Why is that any of our business?

I'm conservative enough that I believe in freedom, liberty, equal rights for all and government staying the hell out of our private lives if we're not harming anyone else. You?

WingNutSteve said @ 6:

I think it's irresponsible and uncaring of you to put the blame on a mother and father in Ohio, or Michigan, or wherever these poor folks who've lost their child lives:

"Five American families are, today, having the worst days of their lives, thanks to their wilingness to allow their child to participate in a pointless war."

I'm fairly certain that if you misinterpreted that comment, you did so on purpose. Nonetheless, I'll change the word "willingness" to "generosity" above, just so there can be no possibility of misinterpretion, even by those who might cynically wish to do so.

the American people seem to like bright shiny distractions. As does the Brad Blog. You might want to check your archived files.. just search for oh, hiking the Appalachian trail. Or Dr. Laura, or even better search for Tea Party or Sarah Palin. See, you post garbage too while troops are dying. Oooops...

Sorry, while I'm not familiar with the specific stories you are referring to here at The BRAD BLOG (feel free to leave an URL to one of them and I'll do my best to consider it in the light you are attempting to shade them), someone, like Sanford, who advocates taking rights from my fellow citizens, while abusing them in his own life is more than fair game. Same is true for Dr. Laura, the Tea Party and Palin. In fact, where I have something to offer to the story not generally available elsewhere, I see it as my duty to offer it.

If you have a specific story, however, that you would like to offer a critique about, feel free to put it forward and I'm happy to give your criticism a look.

P.S. I'm not the MSM, I do not get paid, I do not have the resources that they do, and yet I have done everything in my power (sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing) to do the right thing for both my nation and my constitutionally-privileged non-paid profession in the bargain. I'm proud of this blog's record in having done so, even where anybody is welcome to argue otherwise. But can you honestly say the same thing about the American corporate media at this point? Really? Seriously?

Really? No. The media are a bunch of collective garbage.

As to the stories, no I don't have a specific one. They are too numerous to count. And I'm not going to go search for URL's when you have them at your fingertips. Bottom line, I bet you claim to be a journalist.. in fact your bio on this page says you are a journalist. So should should practice what you preach.

And while I'm on the subject of you practicing what you preach I'd like to give you a big well done on the Wisconsin story. It's sad that this can occur and most Americans don't seem to know anything about it. WTF....

What "rights" do Sanford, Dr. Laura, Palin, or the tea party want to take away from our citizens?

WingNutSteve said @ 10:

As to the stories, no I don't have a specific one. They are too numerous to count.

Try counting to one. I believe putting forward one example to bolster your fairly serious charge would be the right thing to do. But that's up to you.

Bottom line, I bet you claim to be a journalist.. in fact your bio on this page says you are a journalist. So should should practice what you preach.

I do. Feel free to demonstrate otherwise. I might even agree with you, as mentioned, in any particular example that you'd like to bring forward. But if you are not willing to do so, it's a pretty reprehensible, slimy little charge to make.

And while I'm on the subject of you practicing what you preach I'd like to give you a big well done on the Wisconsin story. It's sad that this can occur and most Americans don't seem to know anything about it. WTF....

Thank you.

Mark Sanford - https://bradblog.com/?p=7252

Dr. Laura - https://bradblog.com/?p=7992

WingNutSteve asked @ 11:

What "rights" do Sanford, Dr. Laura, Palin, or the tea party want to take away from our citizens?

The right to equal protection under the law. Specifically, in this case, the same right that the majority of our citizens have to marry the consenting adult of their choice. You know, the right that conservatives such as the George W. Bush's solicitor general Ted Olsen, and the conservative Supreme Court justices in Massachusetts, California and elsewhere have all agree upon.

sanford and palin - https://bradblog.com/?p=7289

I mean really, it's not hard to find an anti-(insert republican politician/organization/pundit name here) on this blog. Which are all distractions from the real issues of the day.

As far as gay marriage, it'll be legal soon IMO, which granted isn't helpful to those who wish to marry now. Some politicians vote and take stances on issues based on their constituents, and regrettably, base decisions on their chances of reelection. Obama is against gay marriage, at least publicly, as are many other prominent democrats. As are the American people who have never approved a vote for gay marriage anywhere.. ever

That's not saying it's a correct position, because IMO it's not. It is what it is..

Thanks for keeping these deaths on the front page. With 1% of the country bearing 100% of the burdens of these wars, I wonder who cares about the numbers of casualties in these wars.

I spent this past Memorial Day at Arlington National Cemetery at Section 60 where my son and nearly 700 casualties from Iraq & Afghanistan are buried. As I stood before my son's headstone, even after 7 years, it is just wrong to see his name engraved in stone.

And today 5 more families will start the journey as Gold Star families. It is a journey I would wish on no one, because their lives will never, ever get better; they will only get different.

I do wonder what the number of casualties will be that will cause Americans to say ENOUGH! Because we surely have not reached that number yet.

Karen... {{{{{{hugs}}}}}}

Bless you for your loss Karen.

Americans said enough with the 2008 elections. The powers that be did not hear.

Think of those innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
But Who Cares?
As long as there is no draft the wars of choice will continue .Congress members invest their personal wealth in companies that profit from the endless war ,so endless war they will allow.

I do believe the U$ might be on the wrong track...

Thanks for the link to the Dr. Laura story, Steve. Looks like she got trolled by Jade. Robert Byrd used the term on nat TV and his career was not ended (double standard). Anyway the DL story is insignificant compared to a congressman who happily lies about his "private life." public officials do not have private lies--a practical reality.

I wonder if there is another subplot going on here: bloggerwars!

5 US troops killed today , who cares?

I do. I also care about over a million Iraquis who have been killed. Twice that number who had to leave their homes. I care about the children who will be born deformed in the middle east from our weaponry.

That said, a young man recently got into a lot of trouble in my community, close to the Canadian border in upper state Maine. Very poor area. A friend of the family said he was trying to get his life together, he was going to Iraq.

I asked her if he was getting his life together by killing people. She said he wanted to go to college.

What kind of govt. do we have that supports killing people who happen to live on top of oil..or near by? And now in our own country in the gulf states who happened to live near oil. They are sick and dying.

We need to stop paying taxes which only supports death and dying. Or supporting corporations which are killing our precious Mother Earth, fish and animals. They are all sacred. So are we. We deserve better than the govt. we have.

If anyone can point to a single human on this planet who is NOT flawed, I'd be interested in seeing where they're pointing. If the requirement for being in public office is to NOT be flawed than no one should/would be in public office.

We shouldn't be dwelling(obsessing) on our human flaws so much. We should be paying more attention to the relative merit of our IDEAS.

All human flaws are not equivalent. Lying about your fantasy life does not equal lying to get the country into war. One deserves(but doesn't get)a hell of a lot more attention than the other.

My sense is that in other, older countries, the private lives of public officials are much less of a concern. We are a juvenile teenage nation in age and that's how we act.

Rachel Maddow spent most(all?)of last night's show on Andrew Weiner's troubles, their meaning, their implication. And missed the boat, in my estimation.

A more useful examination would take a good hard look at our culture and ask different questions: 1. why are variations on this sex theme such a common occurrence and does it matter? 2. why are so many people looking for SOMETHING sexual outside of marriage.? 3. how does our behavior in this regard both in the acts themselves and our responses to them compare to other countries?
4. what is the influence of using sex to sell everything from ice tea, toothpaste, cars, and cell phones on our worldview? 5. is there a relationship between using sex to sell everything under the sun and our acting out of various sexual fantasies?

That's for starters. Last night's Rachel Maddow show did precious little to examine any of these types of questions. Silence about what matters only helps validate our dysfunctional non-sensical choices.

On subject after subject we are not talking about what matters.

People on both sides of the aisle love to pay lip service to "taking responsibility". But by never talking about what's really going on; never making the connections between cause and effect in the war on terror, the nature of our economy and the current economic suffering, hurricanes in Massachusetts, etc., we as a nation have precious little collective consciousness about what truly taking responsibity would even LOOK like.

Bradblog is one of the rare places one can look to get a clue.

[Ed Note: Commercial spam. Deleted.]

As if it takes its cue from The BRAD BLOG, this morning Los Angeles Times underscored the central premise of this piece.

Weiner's underwear made the front page.

The deaths of five American soldiers in Iraq appeared on page three. The latter article makes no mention of the fact that the deaths of those five soldiers is a direct result of the Bush regime's fraudulent WMD scam or of the extent to which the corporate media, as well as Fox "News," not only failed to come close to exposing the scam but actually acted a cheerleaders as the Bush regime launched its imperial war of aggression in order to make the world safe for the oil cartel bottom line.

David, if one of my employees cheats on his wife (private life), he will have no compunction to cheat on me (as his public employer). The part of soul that justifies the act cannot differentiate between public and private. It is driven by pure self interest with no regard for the fundamental importance of truth. Wiener appears to lie when it served his self interest. He may be a good legislator--I do not know. As for his character...it is flawed.

If Weiner had admitted to the pix immediately, he would have been protected by his party (Barney and friends). As it turns, Nancy may be turning on him. Kudos to Nancy.

No one is questioning, Davey Crocket @29, whether Weiner's actions reflect a "flaw" in his character.

But this piece is about "priorities."

No one died either because of Weiner's tweet showing his underwear or because, out of embarrassment, he initially lied about it.

But, as Brad poignantly noted, "6,069 U.S. troops [have been] killed in wars begun, but still not ended, by war criminals who have faced no consequences for their dishonest actions in illegally and dishonestly and recklessly waging wars with our blood and treasure in the name of this country."

That does not even begin to touch what may have been more than one million Iraqi civilians who have perished, the additional millions who were forced into exile, or, per Nobel Prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz, a three trillion dollar price tag that, along with the deregulation of Wall Street and outsourcing, has destroyed the U.S. economy.

The vast majority of those still serving in Congress have refused to go along with resolutions co-sponsored by Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul to cut-off funding for these imperial wars of aggression. Had they done so with respect to Iraq, those five soldiers who just perished would be home safe.

Yet, it appears, Davey Crocket, that you are untroubled by the "flaw" in the character of those whose lies have produced such massive death and destruction. You make no mention of the "character flaw" of the members of Congress who refused to put an end to the madness.

Have you no sense of proportion, Mr. Crocket?

The evolution from left to right has had an impact both on peace, and on peace of mind.

Ernest, there are several threads spawned in this discussion. My comment to David specifically addressed the public/private contrast in the context of telling a lie.

As to the war in Iraq, I agree that it was begun under false pretenses. I too am saddened by the lives lost. It is my hope that the history books will show that good things came from the effort even though it began for the wrong reason.

As to headlines, they are much like "The Landscape with the Fall of Icarus" so one cannot base the value of one story vs. another solely on extreme issues. The newspaper will cover graffiti on the water tower as well as the deadly four-car accident on I-10.

I think your "culture" questions are interesting but would spawn yet another thread here.

For me, the bottom line is this: the story of the war deaths is an important one and should be covered. The story of Weiner's lies is also important and should be covered. Brad seemed to imply that one should be covered and the other not. As to how much ink should be devoted to each...I do not know.

Davey Crockett @29 re:

"...if one of my employees cheats on his wife (private life), he will have no compunction to cheat on me (as his public employer). The part of soul that justifies the act cannot differentiate between public and private."

1. So you think it's your job/right as an employer to monitor/dictate your employees private lives? Really? Where do you draw the line, if anywhere, if that is the case? Doesn't what they eat, how long they sleep, what TV shows they watch, how many children they have, etc. also influence their job performance? even perhaps their honesty? Does their continued employment by you depend on whether you approve of all those life choices, also?

2. Your assertion concerning the soul not being able to differentiate between private and public life is an interesting one. Is that something you just KNOW? Have there been any scientific studies to back up your assertion that you could refer us to? How is one to determine the merit/lack of merit of such a statement?

3. Have you been completely emotionally, intellectually, factually honest in all of your dealings in all of your relationships? Cuz if you haven't(which would put you in company with the rest of us), if you have in fact "cheated" the truth, how should we judge you? What would a judgment consistent with the one you're meting out for Weiner look like, applied to you?

4. I would argue that if the actions Weiner catalogued are the extent of his "cheating", it does not qualify as "cheating". It's more like aduly play/fantasy. Certainly a topic worthy of conversation between his wife and him, but nobody else's business.

WingNutSteve highlighted these articles:

sanford and palin - https://bradblog.com/?p=7289
Dr. Laura - https://bradblog.com/?p=7992
Mark Sanford - https://bradblog.com/?p=7252

Thank you for pointing to some of the specific stories you have objections to here in response to my asking for specifics, in reply to your charges that we "post garbage".

For simplicity purposes, let's just start with your favorite choice of three stories you linked above that you believe to be "garbage".

Please pick one, tell me what you believe the story is about, and why you believe it to be "garbage," and we can go from there. Thanks!

(BTW, as to your response to my support of the conservative principle of equal protection under the law for all as per the U.S. Constitution, yes, Obama is, shamefully against such equal protection in regard to marriage equality, as I have highlighted many times. As to votes of support for or against such Constitutional rights at the ballot box, we do not vote on rights. That's why they are enumerated in the Constitution, so as to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. I'm quite certain there were decades upon end in this nation when slavery would have been approved in state after state in this country, even after it had specifically been made unconstitutional by name. Basic human rights are not determined by popular opinion, so I'm not sure what you are hoping to suggest by making those two points in response to my condemnation of the hypocrisy of public officials who would legislate away right from others, even as they disrespect those same rights in their own personal life.)

Davey Crockett said @ 24:

Thanks for the link to the Dr. Laura story, Steve. Looks like she got trolled by Jade. Robert Byrd used the term on nat TV and his career was not ended (double standard).

Dr. Laura did not get "trolled" by anyone. She is not a victim of anyone, other than her own stupidity, as you are hoping to portray her. You may want to actually listen to the call to see how Jade had called in for advise, before Dr. Laura went off on her obnoxious "n-word" rant.

Furthermore, Dr. Laura's career was not "ended". She chose to take herself off the public airwaves in favor of going to satellite where there is even less oversight. She was not fired nor pushed out of her job on the public airwaves, she removed herself from the position.

Robert Byrd was condemned, just as Dr. Laura was, for his use of that word.

Anyway the DL story is insignificant compared to a congressman who happily lies about his "private life." public officials do not have private lies--a practical reality.

Wrong. Public officials are very much human beings with private lives, even as they serve as they are public servants.

I have no particular problem with what they do in their private lives, so long as they don't break any laws or violate the rights of others. If they choose to behave hypocritically in their private lives, I have no problem pointing out that hypocrisy.

But lying about sex --- when you have no responsibility to the tax payers to tell them anything about your private (legal) sex life --- is little more than a political witch hunt. The focus that has been given to this matter by the MSM, during one of the most troubled periods in this nation is a national embarrassment.

Davey Crocket said @ 32:

The story of Weiner's lies is also important and should be covered.

Why?

David,

"1. So you think it's your job/right as an employer to monitor/dictate your employees private lives? Really?"

I did not say that. Please read what I said...carefully. I do not believe it.

"Is that something you just KNOW?"

Yes

"Have you been completely emotionally, intellectually, factually honest in all of your dealings in all of your relationships?"

Telling the truth was ingrained in me at a very early age. I have told very few lies. I have made other character weaknesses, but I do not lie. When confronted with a lie I have told, I repent immediately. I do not tell additional lies.

"I would argue that if the actions Weiner catalogued are the extent of his "cheating", it does not qualify as "cheating""

Again, please read what I said. Never said he cheated. I don't believe he cheated--have no evidence of it.

For the record, as well as a strong aversion to telling lies, I have a strong aversion to cheating. I have never cheated on my wife.

Brad,

"Furthermore, Dr. Laura's career was not "ended"."

I simply read the post from your blog. Here is the headline:

"'N-Word' Rant Ends Dr. Laura's 30-Year Radio Career"

I did not listen to the exchange with DL, I just read the post.

"Wrong."

Nope, in the 21st century it is virtually impossible. However, in the case of Weiner, he could have said "no comment" and that would have been his firewall but he chose to speak to the public and tell lies. At that point the firewall was breached.

John Edwards is another case in point of a public liar. Calling him a liar is actually quite charitable considering what he has done in his "private life."

I do not expect our public officials to be perfect...that would be impossible and unreasonable. I believe there should be a firewall to protect their private life (except in the case of Sarah Palin, of course...she has no right to a private life). If they fail in some way, and they are caught, I simply expect them to respond truthfully. Then everyone can decide on their own if the infraction (as it were) is sufficiently egregious to dissuade them from giving their vote of confidence. But without the truth, we lack the data to make an informed decision.

I don't "object" to any of the stories Brad. I pointed them out to you to illustrate the FACT that you dedicate significant time and space on your blog site to highlight tabloid type indiscretions of many people. The fact that you say who cares about Mr. Weiner, while condemning others for activity which is none of our business (if Sanders cheated on his wife why is it our business?) contradicts your oft stated "it's not about right vs. left, it's about right vs. wrong".

As far as the gay marriage thing, I have already agreed with you on that and used as an example the opinion of the American people to make my point that sometimes change takes time. Do you think slavery would have ended when it did if the vast majority of Americans supported slavery? Sad to say that the answer of course is "no". So, you choose to argue with someone who agrees with you and try to "score points" for what?

Davey Crocket said @ 38:

in the case of Weiner, he could have said "no comment" and that would have been his firewall but he chose to speak to the public and tell lies. At that point the firewall was breached.

I see. So you actually think the story would have gone away had he said "no comment"? Seriously?

Furthermore, while you can try to argue 'it's a worthy story' because he lied about his private sex life, what was the excuse that Breitbart had to run it prior to Weiner lying about it (once someone had published his private photo)?

John Edwards is another case in point of a public liar. Calling him a liar is actually quite charitable considering what he has done in his "private life."

He is/was a liar about his private sexual life and, far more importantly, chose to commit what some believe is a crime in covering it up. So your point is what exactly?

I do not expect our public officials to be perfect...that would be impossible and unreasonable. I believe there should be a firewall to protect their private life (except in the case of Sarah Palin, of course...she has no right to a private life).

I appreciate that you're being sarcastic there, but what aspects of Palin's life have been inappropriately broached by the MSM?

If they fail in some way, and they are caught, I simply expect them to respond truthfully. Then everyone can decide on their own if the infraction (as it were) is sufficiently egregious to dissuade them from giving their vote of confidence. But without the truth, we lack the data to make an informed decision.

What right do we have to have "the truth" about their private life when it affects no one but them and has no public interest in revealing hypocrisy, etc?

BTW, what is your real name and home address?

WingnutSteve said @ 39:

I don't "object" to any of the stories Brad.

Fair enough. I retract. Rather, you described those stories as "garbage", said I "posted" such stories here in quantities that "are too numerous to count" and challenged my "claim to be a journalist" who does not "practice what you preach."

In all, those are serious charges, so I politely asked you to justify and support them, which I think is fair.

I pointed them out to you to illustrate the FACT that you dedicate significant time and space on your blog site to highlight tabloid type indiscretions of many people.

And, again, I'm asking you for specifics. You highlighted/linked to three of our stories (two written by me), which presumably represent samples of the "too numerous to count" "garbage" stories we've published here. That's fine. So I asked you to "Please pick one, tell me what you believe the story is about, and why you believe it to be 'garbage,' and we can go from there."

Seems a fair request given the serious criticism you've leveled at stories published here that are "too numerous to count", don't you think?

So I renew the request for you to "Please pick one, tell me what you believe the story is about, and why you believe it to be 'garbage'". Thanks!

The fact that you say who cares about Mr. Weiner, while condemning others for activity which is none of our business (if Sanders cheated on his wife why is it our business?) contradicts your oft stated "it's not about right vs. left, it's about right vs. wrong".

Fair enough question. Gov. Sanders used state resources (security, cars and, I think, air travel) to disappear, then to have his government-paid staff lie about it on his behalf, without following the appropriate procedures for notifying the state, media, his Lt. Governor, etc. about his whereabouts. Had their been a state emergency, he would not have been able to fulfill his duty in handling it.

Moreover, there was great concern at the time for his safety, as some had feared he had disappeared entirely, which is why I was reporting it at all originally (on the Mike Malloy Show, not here) and why, once we learned he was fine, and just lying to his staff, having them lie for him, using state resources to carry out and cover up the affair, we reported that he was okay, and explained what had happened.

As if that's not enough reason to report the story (which I probably wouldn't have here at all, had I not already discussed the first part of the story for the two days when there was serious concern about his whereabouts on the radio) he was also positioning himself as a contender to be the GOP's 2012 Presidential candidate which, as I'm sure you appreciate, leads to a much higher level of scrutiny than for any other Joe Blow, or even state or federal representative.

And if all of that is not enough, and it's plenty, Sanford also used his platform to rally against allowing equal rights for others, under the contention of "protecting marriage", denying others of the right to marry, even as he was disrespecting his own.

And more still! You'll note the originally story was incredibly brief, simply bringing listeners up to date with what I'd previously covered on the radio when he was missing and there was concern about his wherabouts. The rest of the story, more than half of it, was about Fox "News'" failure, yet again, in reporting a scandalized Republican as a Democrat. You may have noticed that much of what we cover here at The BRAD BLOG, including the original story you are commenting on, is meant to highlight the failures of the mainstream corporate media. Fox's failure (or purposeful abuse of the public trust) fits precisely into that mission.

So, need to reply to any of that? Or just feel like explaining why you believe the other two stories you highlighted were "garbage" that run counter to my practicing what I preach?

As far as the gay marriage thing, I have already agreed with you on that and used as an example the opinion of the American people to make my point that sometimes change takes time. Do you think slavery would have ended when it did if the vast majority of Americans supported slavery? Sad to say that the answer of course is "no". So, you choose to argue with someone who agrees with you and try to "score points" for what?

You used two different (three?) comments to make the case that the American people have not yet voted in favor of marriage equality at the ballot box, as if that has anything to do with whether or not their should be equal protection for all under the law as per the Constitution. I replied to you to remind you that their votes have absolutely nothing to do with that basic right. Not trying to "score points". Simply trying to set the record straight here to counter the misleading information you offered (as many who oppose equal protection for all do, which I appreciate that you say you do not), if that's okay with you.

"BTW, what is your real name and home address? "

Huh?

Davey Crockett @37

I believe I am reading you carefully. Perhaps I'm again not precise enough in my questions. When I read--

"...if one of my employees cheats on his wife (private life), he will have no compunction to cheat on me (as his public employer). The part of soul that justifies the act cannot differentiate between public and private."--

I thought the implication was some version of "off with his head" for such a transgression. Wasn't completely sure if that's what you meant, so I asked. As that seemed to me what you were suggesting I followed up with how that would play out and further questions.

But if that's not what you think, not the implications you're making, my mistake. But then it is unclear to me what you are getting at.

You say you have told very few lies. How do you know this isn't true of Anthony Weiner? What if this IS his first? He did finally repent and tell the truth. And he did it in front of a whole country. Have you ever been that forthright in the face of tidal waves of vilification that were sure to follow? He even went so far as to apologize to Breitbart, which was a little much, I thought.

I was taught at a very early age not to lie, also. I, too, have told very few, but I fuck up plenty in other ways.

I also learned to try not to throw stones.

I also learned how easy/common it is to make other people into "others". I try hard not to do that. I think it's important to object out loud when others do. Hence, my remarks to you.

You sound like you believe yourself to be noble and good and above reproach. You tell very few lies and cop to them immediately when confronted.(You don't mention what you do if you are not confronted. Are there such instances? What do you do then?)It sounds to me as if you are saying that next to you Weiner is contemptible. I'm uncomfortable with that. Who knows what sort of skeletons a close examination of your closet might reveal?

For me there's is a lot that Weiner has done that is heroic. Precious few of those types in Congress. Vilification and condemnation because of this mess seems in appropriate to me, to say the least. This mess is a culturally dysfunctional manufactured one, in my opinion. It's weird, hypocritical, and smacks of the puritan in a world bubbling over with vile daily transgressions against our fellow humans and the natural world.

I've also learned that sweating the small stuff is ill-advised. For me, Weiner's mistakes fall into that category.

Finally, it occurred to me when I was young that it is vitally important to try to understand where other people are coming from. It's about love, which I would define, in part, as really taking the time to feel or understand another's motives. Whenever possible to put the accent on compassion and restoration of harmony rather than blame and punishment. A path marked by harmony, understanding, and compassion, I believe, is more likely to promote/encourage the connections rather than the differences that exist between all of us. This, in turn, seems to me more likely to lead us to a path of redemption and harmony with ourselves and the natural world than our current one of blame and punishment.

David,

Excellent post.

I will clarify the areas you point out (or at least try).

Employee cheating on his wife:
I have not probed the lives of my reports (when I had them...). But such indiscretions are quite often evident in the environments where I have worked. First, I am always saddened--especially where children are affected. Second, I wonder if the person is telling me the truth when he/she is essentially lying to his/her spouse. I have not fired the person or publicly condemned the person, but a lingering question is planted in my brain. That is all.

Anthony Weiner:
I know very little about him. This may be his only tranche of lies. If the stories are correct, the incident posted by Brad is not an isolated one. That worries me. Then he lied about it. That worries me more. Should I tell my son, "Hey boy, I hope you grow to be a congressman like Mr. Weiner?"

I am not throwing stones at Mr. Weiner, but I am making a value judgement based on the known "apparent" facts.

I believe Mr. Weiner sponsored or proposed legislation against internet sexual predators. Again, that bothers me.

Sainthood:
No, I am not up for sainthood. Talk to my wife ROFL! Quite often I am too quick to judge, which I suppose, has bearing on this discussion! I am not a patient person either. I do hold truth very high on my list of obligations. When I have lied and was not confronted, I was very unhappy with myself. There were some instances where I confessed on my own. I am sure there are others where I did not.

Skeletons:
We all have skeletons...some little...some big. I do not wish to dig into Weiner's entire life. He managed to expose some of it to the public and we can only deal with what we know. I never said Weiner was contemptible but I will say that his actions were. I can hate the sin and love the sinner.

Heroes:
Most of our heroes are/were in harms way, not in congress--on either side of the aisle. Weiner may have done some heroic things--I do not know. I happily credit him for the good things then.

Sweating the small stuff:
Yes, I agree with you. In relative terms, this is a minor blip. But it is important. While it may not have the gravity of a loved one lost in battle, it still deserves some attention. Trent Lott's comment that got him in trouble was simply trivial but the world rose up against him and he paid. Bob Packwood pinched the butt of one of his aids in en elevator (as best I can recall) and he got pummeled.

Compassion:
Yes, very nice close. I believe the same way, pretty much. When raising a child, sometimes you must judge and punish. Not because you hate the child, but because you love him. This is not a great metaphor in the Weiner case, but the point being that there is a role for judgement and punishment...and forgiveness.

Again...nice post--your points are well taken.

Davey Crockett,

Thanks for the response.

For you and anyone else interested in this discussion, here's Glenn Greenwald's take on this business. For my money(and he makes very clear at the end that he is NOT an Anthony Weiner fan) Greenwald nails it.
http://www.salon.com/new.../06/07/weiner/index.html

Hope that link works. I don't always do 'em right.

Davey Crocket @ 42

"BTW, what is your real name and home address? "

Huh?

You heard me. I'd also appreciate your answers to the other questions I asked you in my response @ 40 as well.

Thanks!

As usual, Wing Nut Steve misses the mark by a country mile. He suggests my article, 'N-Word' Rant Ends Dr. Laura's 30-Year Radio Career was an example of "tabloid" journalism.

Apparently, Wing Nut Steve has either failed to read or failed to digest Hate Speech and the Process of Dehumanization --- a process which, historically, has led to widespread atrocities and even genocide.

It is the process of dehumanization which underscored the dangers of the blatant racism displayed by "Doctor" Laura during the fateful broadcast that brought her sorry radio career to an appropriate end.

During that broadcast, Schlessinger (whose Ph.D. in physiology did not qualify her to give psychological advice during her program) castigated an African American woman (“Jade”) who had called in to complain about her white husband’s silence in the face of racist remarks made by his white friends and family. During the contentious colloquy, "Doctor" Laura dropped the N-bomb 11 times.

Here are some points I noted in the article.

Like most racists, Schlessinger is the last to recognize her own racism. She apparently saw nothing wrong in suggesting that African-Americans “voted for Obama simply because he was half black. It didn’t matter what he was going to do in office.”

One wonders how the likes of “Doctor” Laura would respond if someone suggested that she voted for John McCain only because he was white and that “it didn’t matter what [McCain] was going to do in office."

"Doctor" Laura's "don't NAACP me" is a gratuitous smear of one of this nation's most esteemed civil rights organizations, the representation of which launched the career of one of the finest justices to ever sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, Thurgood Marshall.

That you cannot see the difference between reporting on the wide-spread revulsion experienced by the public in response to "Doctor" Laura's racist remarks and the corporate media tabloid-like frenzy over underwear on twitter says a great deal more about you, Wing Nut Steve, than it does about the content of my prior article.

Nah, I didn't miss anything Ernie. Even Jeannie Dean commented on one of the Dr. Laura "stories" that it's getting old to which Brad sheepishly agreed after offering a few lame excuses and then you came in and offered your extremist views that a bunch of middle age white folks are fascist, etc.

Hell, it's Brads blog and he can write whatever the hell he wants. I made my point, and I'll still drop in and read his excellent coverage of the debacle we call elections today.

Well, thank you for your non-reply, reply WingNutSteve.

But then I didn't think I'd get back logic or reason from you.

Meanwhile there is this story from Los Angeles Times demonstrating why it is important to confront racism the moment it rears its ugly head. Curious, though, that you see confronting racism as an "extremist view."

That you would place higher importance on an ill-advised rant by a radio "doctor" trying to make a point, which you gleefully took out of context, than on an elected public official repeatedly lying to his constituents and to the public in general says a great deal about you Ernie.

wingnutsteve--

In my opinion, all too often, you frame your arguments in a way that distorts almost beyond recognition the reality of what was said either in the exchange of the moment or in an article you've referred to.

For me this repeatedly breaks a basic rule of an honest exchange--accurately representing the opposing position.

On the same hand, you do this with extreme attitude.

It may not matter to you in the slightest but for me these characteristics/habits of your style make you less and less credible.

It's not that no one cares, just that it's not politically expedient to remind people that we are in two wars. The media would announce daily the death toll of US Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, but when we changed presidents they stopped. Does anyone ask why? NO
People are still complaining about the injustices in bringing us to these wars, but do not mention that THIS president said as a campain promise that he would pull us out of both unjust wars. Yet US Soldiers are still dyint. Again, does anyone ask why? NO.
Injustice is injustice, whether you agree with the person's pollitics or not.

WingNutSteve's ("WNS") claim @50 that I took "Doctor" Laura's racist rant "out of context," merely underscores that he never actually read my original piece. Had he actually read the piece, he would have found the "text" of the exchange between the good "Doctor" and "Jade" and the complete audio.

Only an extreme right-wing ideologue would dare attempt to spin "Doctor" Laura's hateful racism into an "ill-advised rant."

I wonder, WNS, did you bother to link to the Los Angeles Times article I provided which discusses a Sept. 1919 letter from Adolf Hitler which calls for the "uncompromising removal of the Jews altogether"?

Any objective observer who is aware of the process of dehumanization would understand the importance of openly confronting racism. Not our WNS. According to his comment @48, the mere fact that I described the racist rant that brought the radio career of a hate-monger like "Doctor" Laura to an end makes me an "extremist."

What's next, WNS? Are you going to suggest that I'm an extremist because I wrote an article about how some of your right wing heroes, like Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh, may have crossed the legal line between advocacy and incitement in calling for the assassination of Julian Assange? (Perhaps for including them, though I suspect WNS would have no problem with my including VP Joe Biden in the piece.)

Odd how many people there are in 21st Century America whose definition of appropriate journalism depends on whether the Left or the Right is being skewered.

A Los Angeles Times article about Adolph Hitler has nothing to do with Dr. Laura or with Anthony Weiner. Or even his weiner for that matter.

I do not consider Sarah Palin a hero, or even a credible presidential hopeful. IMO she cost the GOP the election in 2008. The only good she provides is that many people like you expend tons of energy trying to tear her down, she's very effective in that role. As is Rush Limbaugh who is a bigoted idiot. I'm sure it makes you feel good to toss out accusations like that of which you know nothing, and it really doesn't hurt me so have at it.

Only an extreme right-wing ideologue would dare attempt to spin "Doctor" Laura's hateful racism into an "ill-advised rant." Wrong again bucco, that's a direct quote from our hero Brad.

https://bradblog.com/?cat=271

There's the link.

"Last night Ernie Canning noted Dr. Laura's cutting and running from her 30-year career in radio after an ill-advised rant in which she used the "n-word" repeatedly and made even far more offensive comments to boot."

There's the quote.

Odd how many people there are in 21st Century America whose definition of appropriate journalism depends on whether the Left or the Right is being skewered.

WingnutSteve & Ernest -

Alright, alright, break it up you two. (Or don't.)

Just a few quick points since it appears my visit to the Science Center over the weekend may be taking me down today (kids! germs! Blah!) and all I really want to do is go to sleep...

1) Dr. Laura's rant did not end up ending her career, as has been asserted here several times (and in our original article on her rant), as she eventually decided to move to satellite radio. Though, at the time we reported her rant as ending her career, that was the apparent truth. It certainly ended her career on broadcast radio, by her own choice.

2) I'm too sickish to look it up, but I believe Steve when he says I described it as an "ill-advised rant". That sounds like me. If so, I was either being understatedly ironic, or not. (For the record, Ernie's opinions need not be, nor are they always, the same as mine on any particular issue. And yes, Lara's rant revealed appalling racism. Which is much better than what SHE revealed in her own incredibly graphic pictures some years ago which did NOT end her career for some reason.)

3) Ernie did not take Dr. Laura's rant out of context.

4) I originally asked you for an URL to support your contention that we post "garbage" here which defies my own call for the MSM to do actual journalism. You posted 3 links finally (thanks). One of which (Sanford) I responded to by pointing out the news value. You did not offer objections to my assertions. The next (Dr. Laura) has been discussed here, and would seem to be of obvious news value, whether or not you agree with Ernie's assessment of it, since it resulted in the 3rd most popular voice on the public airwaves leaving those airwaves after an obnoxious fit of public racism (over our public airwaves.) So you wanna try again with the third piece? The one that deals with Palin? If so, as requested originally, please let me know what you think the story is about and why it is "garbage".

5) Steve said: "Odd how many people there are in 21st Century America whose definition of appropriate journalism depends on whether the Left or the Right is being skewered." I think that's a very fair point to make. That said, I do not believe you've supported it in regard to our news judgment here. Yet. Feel free to have at it again though!

https://bradblog.com/?cat=271

That's the story where even Jeannie Dean complained about all the "wing nut rubber worm chomping" at this site (and she said at others too, to be fair to you)

It's kinda stupid for me to continue this since you get to decide what's news and what isn't. Fair enough, it's your blog site and hey, one mans garbage is another mans treasure.

Hope you're feeling better. I'll be a good little wing nut now. Time to check Fox News and sarahpalinforpresident.com ...

Aw, Jeezus. Did I have to be invoked, here? Was just catching up on OTHER news in the outside world (nothing matters to me right now but Wisconsin. I do not give a flying crapping rat about anything else right now - it is the only news I'm living.)

Wingnut, I appreciate you. I do. I think you offer valuable insights into the hive-mind of libertarian / Republican thought, and the fact that you stick around here, and OCCASIONALLY give Brad his due (once every 100 posts? And no, I don't have LINKS to back up the ratio, just a hunch) - so there's that.

I have 515 pro-active, wonderful citizen volunteers who are all fighting a front line battle in WI I wouldn't dare to describe to you - you wouldn't believe me and I don't have the time to debate it all with you. It's SO tiresome, WNS!
GOOD GOD, you're tiresome.

That said, being sacked with 80 hour weeks right now on behalf of WI voters, forgive me if I don't have time to ready the thread right now you're conveniently using to parse Brad (and Ernests' and Dave L's) excellent responses to you in light of your astoundingly obtuse comments in THIS thread.

NO ONE READING THIS THREAD will have any trouble understanding where your arguments are falling down...*must be why you're bringing up an old thread*...you read desperate, WNS; but, you normally do, if I may be as honest with you as you seem to want to be with those of us here, as if we're somehow pitched against you and your causes.

We're NOT. That should be crystal clear to you by now...

...which makes you a GIGANTIC waste of time, no matter how much I feel you sometimes close to the edge of understanding.

And your comments about WI moved me, give me more hope for you than I should have in light of your disaster'ous hit ratio. You've been batted around good, here, friend...yet you don't seem to glean the greater good! Some kind of stubborn are you.

I'm guessing (and hoping) you've missed me, and that's why I'm getting this bizarro world WingNutSteve shout out. Glad to know you're longing for my wit; my swift spank that tells you a) you're a mess and b) I like you well enough to tell you that...

...Because I'm about to collapse from exhaustion after 8 weeks of 24/7 helping Brad and Ernest help us in WISCONSIN, I'm going to decline to allow you to distract me from better efforts, tonight.

Too busy trying to figure out how we can get clean(ish) recall elections in WI for July along with 512 interested, fiery citizen activists across the country...so, apologies that I don't have my usual time to give you all the loving masochism you so richly deserve. That said, I can't resist you, WNS; can't "quit you." (Yes, that was a GAY reference, if you didn't know. And I'm guessing you didn't.)

I'll say this: yes, I'm sure I felt that Dr. L, sick lil' twister she is (who I listened to for YEARS for jokes, btw. Well, I DID until she became so antiquated no one at comedy clubs knew who she was, anymore) should not be eating up Brad's precious attentions, which are needed elsewhere. I think, and I'm only quoting from a distant memory of the thread, that I said, "Stupid is the only way we're collectively facing, Brad!" in protest of the coverage that was being mined all over the MSM, in addition to his article.

I think I mentioned in that thread (again, from memory) that I count on him to focus on the REAL stories, not 24/7 Palin / Dr L hooey...which is what we're enduring now (This bus n' Truck Paul Revere retardation? In spite of - HELLO - STOLEN SC ELECTION IN WI!?! Oh, and Anthony Weiner's Wang?!)

Well, it's enough to make a hardened, salty gal like me snap her cap just from the juxtapositions of absurdity inherent...and I'M A COMEDIAN fer CHRISSAKES!) usually make a good living off the circus carnie zoo.

I think that's PROBABLY the idea behind my thoughts in the link you're providing (and diverting) us with. That was probably the sentiment I was expressing, that you're now twisting out of context like you have wont to do, as my Lasagna would comment, "from Magic Thinking"...

Wow. Is he ever being gracious. MAGIC THINKING? I'd call it something else...

This is the very center point of THIS article, the very point I was making - which you (go figure) MISSED (again) - and are now linking to as a pathetic attempt to back your senseless ramblings. WNS, this only makes you seem RIDICULOUS to all the fine, sentient readers of The Brad Blog (of all parties, btw) for proposing I was ever pointing out anything but what he has so eloquently articulated in this article.

This IS the real news. This article is it. The WAR. War Dead is the story, a grieving mother posts here (xoxo, btw!) and you still don't seem to get it! I guess some people really need to see a giant beauty of a tweeted tube-dick to really get upset about stuff.

So, to negate your silliness, slap you around some more, because you need it SO badly - and from so many of us trying to do important things that should (and seem to) matter to you on SOME subconscious level - like PROTECTING THE VOTE of ALL AMERICANS...

I say to you, Wing Nut Steve - CUT IT OUT.

(OT, but in the spirit of returning the thread away from WNS - punishment glutton and self-flagellation fettishist like some character out of a Dan Brown novel - I have been meaning to post to MOLLY and DAVID LASAGNA for quite some time: THANK YOU BOTH (et al., including ZAPKITTY, ERNEST and DREDD). I've been too busy to comment here, of late, but have been reading BradBlog, as is my eternal habit, every. single. day. Your respective posts have meant the world to me. Thank you for TRYING to create a DIGG account, and for your support when I was most frenzied, exhausted, and sad. You made me feel *so* much better about it all.)

I don't think anyone should blame the soldiers or their families for signing up for a 'war of choice'. They wanted to serve their country and were led to believe, with much sentiment and rhetoric, that they would be fighting for a just and noble cause.

Hey Jeannie,
Nice to read you, again, sweetie.(My version of that great, simple line from Avatar--I read you.)

I'm glad some of my words helped. I was hoping so.

Two things.

1. I would like you and Brad to take of yourselves and rest up a little. Thank you. Just my own personal selfish(or shellfish)desires.

2. I have just weaned(for the most part) myself(will we be able to use that word now without someone thinking we're making an allusion to something other than its actual meaning?)from the okcupid internet dating site. Went on in early January. My first venturing into those strange waters. I'd just like to say that between virtual worlds, THIS one feels so much more real to me. This one feels more substantive. This one feels more nurturing.

Thanks again, beloved Bradblogdinians.

http://patterico.com/201...o-underage-girls-part-3/

Private life...no bother

the republicans want to do that to the democrat congressman, but what about these people? http://www.republicanoffenders.com/

Buh bye... This is what's known as draining the swamp