Pissed off rantings from a middle class adolescent.

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Bill O'Reilly is Fair and Balanced

Bill O'Reilly decided to bless us again with his "fair and balanced" political reports by telling the tale of a Vermont judge who believe in getting help for sick people (Christ, no!). Let's see what Mr. O has to say:

"Ralph Page is a problem. The 35-year old Vermont man has twice been convicted of drunk driving, and now faces charges of theft and assaulting his girlfriend. He's a typical low-level offender who shuffles around causing trouble and clogging up the justice system.
On January 17th, Page ambled into Judge Patricia Zimmerman's courtroom to answer charges that he punched a woman in the face. Apparently, Page did not like hearing the charges against him and screamed out "this is effing bull----." That annoyed Judge Zimmerman, who promptly found Page in contempt of court and sentenced him to 60 days in a Vermont jail. " - O'Reilly

Nothing wrong with that, but listen to this:

"That 60-day sentence is the same amount of jail time another Vermont judge, Edward Cashman, awarded 34-year-old Mark Hulett. But it is here where the Vermont justice system collapses. Incredibly, Hulett pled guilty to a variety of felony sexual assault charges against a six-year-old girl. Over a period of four years, Hulett, a friend of the girl's mother, confessed to raping the child in her own home. It was a methodical and brutal series of actions on Hulett's part, and it has devastated an innocent little girl.

But when it came time to sentence Hulett, Judge Cashman suspended all but 60 days of a potential life prison stretch, because Cashman wanted Hulett to get "treatment." At sentencing, the Judge said: "I keep telling prosecutors, and they won't hear me, that punishment is not enough." " - O'Reilly

Ok, so through that muddled thing, we can deter that Bill has the story down. Now, let's move on.

"So here's justice in the state of Vermont: Cursing at a judge merits the same prison time as repeatedly raping a six-year-old girl. If Hulett had committed the same crime in Florida, he would now be serving 25-to-life in the penitentiary because that state has passed mandatory minimum sentences for felony battery on children. But Vermont has no such minimums. So Mark Hulett, child rapist, is set to walk free on March 4th. The philosophy of our nation is "equal justice under the law." Obviously, the abused little girl and her family did not get justice by any measure. Clear-thinking people understand that true justice requires that the punishment fit the crime." -O'Reilly

What the hell, Bill? What happened to your "Fair and Balanced" journalism? It seems to me that you're throwing some opinions in there, and not only that, you ass, but you're throwing in Conservative opinions. How balanced is that? Tool.

"But Judge Cashman does not understand that. His sympathies are with the rapist, and he did not even attempt to hide that fact." - O'Reilly

In a recent article, Bill makes it clear that he supports the Christian viewpoints, yet he is one of the worst people to carry out Christ's teachings of forgiveness. In Bill O'Reilly's perfect world, all criminals, no matter how small the felony, are executed on site.

"Because of Cashman's outrageous sentence, you would think Vermonters would be calling for his gavel and robe.
You would think. But you'd be wrong. " - O'Reilly

Yeah, suprisingly, not all Americans, or Vermonters, for that matter, agree with the bull you spew.

"Vermont's shameful story is being played out in other places as well. But it is in this tiny state, the second-least-populated behind Wyoming, that a horrendous violation of human rights is taking place. " - O'Reilly

Violation of human rights? Bill, how the hell can you even say that, considering the stuff you support. If that man was denied medical treatment and locked up forever, like you would have it, then that would be a violation of human rights. But no, god forbid you stand up for the underdog. Go fuck yourself, Bill.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Pat Robertson is an Idiot.

I opened up CNN's website today to see a beautiful headline: "Robertson Apologizes to Sharon's Son." Not that I give a shit about Ariel Sharon or his son, but it was great to see Pat knocked off his hateful, religously extremist pantheon of greed.

If you're wondering what Patty was apologizing over, it was a comment he made about Ariel Sharon after Sharon fell into a stroke. Robertson, on January 5th, with his show "The 700 Club" (Cranky homophobes moping, basically) said:

"Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the EU, the United Nations or the United States of America. God says, 'This land belongs to me, and you'd better leave it alone.' " - Pat Roberstonb

Oh thanks for the input, Pat. I think I might have missed that part of the Bible last time I flipped through it.

Roberston, however, did apologize on the 700 Club, by saying this:

"I ask your forgiveness and the forgiveness of the people of Israel for saying what was clearly insensitive at the time." - Robertson

If Israel would have came back with a "Fuck you, Mr. Roberston" or even a "Shove it" I would have dropped everything bad I hold against them and love them. But alas, Israel pussed out and went with:

"Israel respects Rev. Robertson and accepts his apology, which reflects his true friendship and support for the state of Israel," - Ambassador Daniel Ayalon

Geeze, you could have at least keyed his car up.

Anyways, on to my problem with Israel: It belongs to the Palestinians. They had the land and then one day the Jews forced them out. The country of Israel need to be removed and converted back to Palestine, and the US needs to stop backing Israel.

I'm going to go before someone says I'm anti-semetic.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Oh Bill...

I want all of you to go out and read Bill O'Reilly's newest article on the "Culture Wars." It's great, because Bill tries to make a slanted article sound "fair and balanced" (wow, where have I heard that phrase before?) and fails horribly. Now keep in mind, I run a liberal blog, so I'm not trying to sound balanced, but I do believe I'm fair. Anyways, here's a snippet from Bill's rant.

"Even though the war on terror dominates the headlines, the culture war in America is almost as intense. On one side you have traditionalists, people who believe the country was well founded, does mostly good things, and has become the most powerful nation on earth by adhering to Judeo-Christian principles like generosity, justice, and self-sacrifice.
On the other side of the culture war are the secular-progressives who believe that the USA is fundamentally a flawed country, which has caused considerable misery both within and outside our borders. The S-P's want drastic change and a new direction for America.
" - O'Reilly

Wow, Bill I wonder what side you're on?

I'm going to play translator and tell you what he meant to say:

Traditionalists - People who believe that the President Bush is near God and that America can only be bettered by forcing their religion on everyone. In their perfect world, all the gays have been murdered in a bloody, "holy" genocide and abortion has been put to an end by brave abortion clinic bombers, who combat the evil of "killing" unborn fetuses by killing people. Huh. Oh, and did I mention Muslims being shot in the streets?

"S-P's" - The false devils in O'Reilly's eyes, the Secular-Progressives want a country based on a First Amendment (you know, that one thing that the Washington dude wrote and George Bush pissed on) and freedom from having any religion forced on them. Evil!

"The two most intense issues in the culture war right now are how to deal with terrorism, and what role spirituality should play in the public arena. The S-P's want little or no public displays of God or religion. That's what drove the attacks on Christmas images and traditions--knock down the big Christian holiday, and the secularists achieve a big victory." - O'Reilly

Oh, I'm terribly sorry Bill for not wanting a Jesus statue in front of a courthouse and a Christian prayer in my school, but let's turn this around: I don't see you supporting any people trying to throw out their Islamic religion. Why not Billy? Got something against Muslims? Nazi.

I find it funny how Bill blames the Christmas attacks on us. Hah! A few companies merely say "Happy Holidays" and O'Reilly and his bitches jump at it and blame it on the liberals, claiming it's an attack on "Traditional American values," like war and religious rape. Sir, just because you get pissy over the wording of a holiday salutation, doesn't mean you need to scream.

"On the terror front, traditionalists largely want aggressive action to wipe out the "evildoers," and if lraq is the battlefield, then so be it.
Secular-progressives are appalled by the Iraq war and generally believe the USA has no right to act unilaterally to hunt down terrorists or their enablers." - O'Reilly

I really like how O'Reilly throws out the "...believe the USA has no right to act unilaterally to hunt down terrorists." It shows his disgust in people who are against attacking an innocent country. Sorry Bill! I guess we don't fit your tradilionist view of murdering the innocent!

And then Bill turns his article into an overview of a his appearence on the Letterman Show. Here is describing it:

"We also found common ground on the terrific performance of the U.S. military. " - O'Reilly

Haha, good one, Bill.

"But then Cindy Sheehan came up. Uh-oh. Dave, as well as many in the entertainment community, feels that Ms. Sheehan should not be criticized. He believes she is above reproach because her son Casey was killed in Iraq. I do not see it that way, so sparks flew. My contention is that Ms. Sheehan is entitled to grieve and dissent in any way she wants, but her grief is being exploited by far-left elements. And when Ms. Sheehan told Mark Knoller, a correspondent for CBS radio, that the terrorists in Iraq were "freedom fighters," she insulted thousands of other Americans who lost loved ones in Iraq. Simply put, terrorists who blow up civilians, women and children are not freedom fighters in any sense. They are murderers and I called Mr. Letterman on Sheehan's support of them." - O'Reilly

Let's take a look at what Ms. Sheehan said in reality:

"Um, no, because it’s not true. You know, Iraq was no threat to the United States of America until we invaded. I mean, they’re not even a threat to the United States of America. Iraq was not involved in 9/11. Iraq was not a terrorist state. But now that we have decimated the country, the borders are open. Freedom fighters from other, countries are going in. And they have created more terrorism by going to an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country. The terrorism is growing. And people who never thought of being car bombers or suicide bombers are now doing it because they want the United States of America out of their, out of their country." - Cindy Sheehan

Well that's interesting. She never once called Iraqi insurgents "freedom fighters." She called foreign bodies freedom fighters. And to an extent, she's right. The U.S. is an invading country and people will try to get them out no matter what it takes. Evil, eh? Yes, Bill, I agreed. They are terrorists, just like the Americans in the Revolutionary War.

Well, that's enough ridicule for Bill today. Besides, I'm sure I'll be back when that jackass writes another article.