Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Beware the LESBIANS!

O'Reilly Factor warns of vast underground network of violent lesbians.
(Better than a vast public network of fanatic, rabble-rousing media-types, I guess)

O'Reilly, you glorious bastard. You make this easier every day. I don't need to say too much about this one because it's so utterly ridiculous, but there are three things I want to point out:

1: The video clips they show of the supposedly 'violent lesbian attacks' are nothing of the sort. As far as I've been able to tell from looking around at various editorials and comments about the videos, the videos are presented without the correct context and played over the statements by Fox's "expert" to make it look worse.
The video of the street attack is, I think, video of an event you can read about here and here. No doubt, the attack on the man was excessive. The women deserved to be punished, at least to some extent, but the man was by no means an innocent bystander that was attacked for no reason by a lesbian street gang.
The other video clip of the fight at the beach was, as far as I can tell, a fight between two girls over a GUY that escalated into a full on brawl. I'm not sure how a fight over a guy equates to lesbian street gang attack, but if you figure it out, let me know. The video can be found on YouTube, I'd assume by typing any combination of the words 'girl' 'fight' and 'beach'.

2: The Pink Pistols are neither a lesbian street gang nor an underground network of any kind. Their mission, as stated on their website, is promoting "the legal, safe, and responsible use of firearms for self-defense of the sexual-minority community." Now, I am not particularly fond of guns or of many organizations that are fond of them, but that's no reason to let O'Reilly's guest's misinformed (or poorly worded, as the case may be) statement reflect on them in a negative way.

3: Fox's 'expert', according to the blog Unfit to Print, is not quite what he appears... or is that exactly what he appears, and not quite as he'd like to appear? From their site:

"after checking out this “detective’s” website —
Rod007.com, no joke — his, um, credibility as a crack investigator is a little dubious. Rod only claims to have served “several years” as a homicide investigator and fraud investigator. Not five or ten or twenty, but “several” years. One of his other claims to legitimacy as a crime expert is his experience working in “corporate security and safety management” at Boston Market (a McDonalds chain), which kinda sounds like “security guard.” And his “what people are saying” page is mostly made up of praise from other Fox reporters."

I would encourage you to read the blog's full writeup on the story, as it also has interesting details about the other attack described in the O'Reilly piece, as well as more information about the supposed "GTO" lesbian violence gang.

Labels: , , ,

Fun with American Bureaucracy!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cia_leak_trial

Are you kidding me?

I have neither the time nor the patience to write a lot about this, but the things that piss me off most are the fact that:

1) Bush even said, "...a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable" and then went ahead and did away with his punishment. What the hell is the point of a jury trial, a judge's sentence and the appeals system then? I thought we had a court system set up to handle these sorts of issues. Apparently not.

2) The judge who handed down the sentence is a Bush appointee and made it very clear that the sentence was handed down with the 'overwhelming' evidence against Libby clearly in mind. I just don't get it.

Bush is trying to argue that even though Libby has been freed from having to serve any time in prison, his punishment is still strong because "he will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant and private citizen will be long-lasting." Sorry, George, but a $250,000 fine doesn't mean jack to a career politician.

Maybe I'm just flying off the handle, but this seems like a big pile of grade-A bullshit.

Labels: , ,