Tag Archives: politics

Helen Thomas to be Honored by American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

Disgraced White House correspondent Helen Thomas is having a gala thrown for her in November by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee :   This announcement comes a few days after the Council on American-Islamic Relations proudly proclaimed that it would be giving Thomas a lifetime achievement award at its annual fundraising banquet in October. The Committee’s online invitation reads, “Join ADC for an evening to celebrate a woman with a lifetime of courage: The Great Helen Thomas”:   Take a look at the sponsorship levels:   According to Politico, these events are sparking understandable anger in the Jewish community: Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants, immediately blasted the two appearances. “The decision to honor Helen Thomas is a disgrace and a moral taint on the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee,” Steinberg said in a statement to POLITICO. “Holocaust survivors and their families were deeply shocked by Helen Thomas’ comments. Her monstrous call for Jews to go back to the places where we were gassed and burned were profoundly anti-American words of hate.” The two organizations should understand that American values are at stake here,” Steinberg added. “We would be as horrified as they would be if some bigot demanded that Muslim-Americans get out of this country.” Indeed. For those that have forgotten: Now, just three months after making these disgusting remarks , she’s being honored, and people might actually spend $50,000 to have their names proudly associated with her? And people are worried about so-called Islamophobia in this country? Has the entire nation gone mad? 

See the original post here:
Helen Thomas to be Honored by American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

President Obama and Sarah Palin Featured in New Archie Comic

Following this month’s introduction of its first openly gay character, Archie Comics will feature President Obama and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin in December. “No doubt a part of the long-running comic’s new push toward more real-world relevance, Obama and Palin’s appearance will mirror Riverdale High’s student council elections in two upcoming Archie issues,” reported Time magazine’s NewsFeed blog Tuesday. According to ArchieComics.com, the plot lines are riveting: Archie #616: “Campaign Pain” Part 1:   President Barack Obama and famed politician Sarah Palin get involved as Student Government campaigns spiral out of control at Riverdale High! The race between Archie and Reggie gets hot as campaign chaos reaches to the top, forcing an impromptu visit from these big-name politicos, who get pulled into the fray! Part 2:   When President Obama and famed politician Sarah Palin arrive, Riverdale becomes the center of a national crisis! Archie and Reggie have each claimed support from one of these political powerhouses, but they don’t! Now Riverdale is in chaos and when the Secret Service gets involved it only gets worse! Can’t you just feel the excitement?

Read more:
President Obama and Sarah Palin Featured in New Archie Comic

Cramer Credits CNBC-Obama Infomercial for 146-Point Dow Jones Rally

Someone’s a little full of the power of his network apparently.  On Sept. 20, CNBC hosted a so-called “town hall” meeting on its network about President Barack Obama and how his administration is dealing with business issues. Obama took some criticism from participants and observers said the president was playing defense. However, CNBC’s “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer had a different take on the made-for-television event. According to Cramer, Obama’s appearance was a net-positive for the stock market. “Do you know why this market went up and stayed up today, with the Dow voting 146 points, S&P rising one-and-a-half percent?” Cramer said on his Sept. 20 broadcast . “Because today during the fantastic CNBC-hosted town hall with El Presidente, we got the ultimate confirmation that we are seeing a new and improved more pro-business President Obama! And that’s change the market can believe in.” Cramer had earlier in the day pronounced the town hall a “win” for Obama and the stock market , but he backtracked somewhat by saying it wasn’t what Obama said. Instead, he explained it was what Obama didn’t say. “All right, Obama didn’t cause this rally, but he allowed it to happen,” Cramer said. “In the past, the class-warrior Obama would have stopped this move in its tracks. The new happy-warrior Obama – well, let’s just say he has learned how to get out of the market’s way. Yet I know for a fact that many of you don’t want to believe yourselves and lots of people shorted the stock market ahead of the town hall. They were betting that Obama would send the market down like he has for so long. Wrong.” Cramer also noted the criticism he received from the “blogosphere” over his remarks, calling it evidence people were aware of his proclamation.  “I know many of you don’t believe in the benign Obama because of the firestorm of criticism I’ve received in the blogosphere for suggesting that the president has changed his tune,” Cramer continued. “I’ve been taking just an enormous amount of heat for this.” While Cramer is self-congratulating his network’s Obama-featured town hall, some analysts credited stronger homebuilder data and other signs the recession is over for the sharp rise in the market.

View original post here:
Cramer Credits CNBC-Obama Infomercial for 146-Point Dow Jones Rally

Nutty Professor Pleads for Extinction of All Carnivorous Animals

Better enjoy the Lion King while you can. Flipper could also be gone soon. If a certain nutty professor has his way, all lions, dolphins, as well as all other carnivorous animals on this planet would be selected for controlled extinction for the “high crime” of eating meat and causing suffering in other animals. I kid you not. In a long, rambling, seemingly endless opinion piece in the New York Times that comes off like a bizarre mixture of Dr. Strangelove and Professor Irwin Corey , Rutgers philosphy professor Jeff McMahan makes the case for playing God in the animal kingdom because of his assertion that God was flawed for allowing animal suffering in the wild: Viewed from a distance, the natural world often presents a vista of sublime, majestic placidity. Yet beneath the foliage and hidden from the distant eye, a vast, unceasing slaughter rages. Wherever there is animal life, predators are stalking, chasing, capturing, killing, and devouring their prey. Agonized suffering and violent death are ubiquitous and continuous … … Suppose that we could arrange the gradual extinction of carnivorous species, replacing them with new herbivorous ones.  Or suppose that we could intervene genetically, so that currently carnivorous species would gradually evolve into herbivorous ones, thereby fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy.  If we could bring about the end of predation by one or the other of these means at little cost to ourselves, ought we to do it? For the nutty professor from Rutgers, the answer to the latter question would be “yes.”  The big question your humble correspondent has is why the New York Times allowed this insanity to be published in their newspaper. The only answer I could come up with is that an editor at the Times must hate Professor McMahan so much that he decided to allow the Nutty Professor to unwittingly subject himself to public humiliation and ridicule. For another example of professorial nuttiness, check out this assertion from McMahan that we must play God…in order to correct God’s “flaw” in allowing innocent animals to suffer from the attacks of carnivorous species: The continuous, incalculable suffering of animals is also an important though largely neglected element in the traditional theological “problem of evil” ─ the problem of reconciling the existence of evil with the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent god. The suffering of animals is particularly challenging because it is not amenable to the familiar palliative explanations of human suffering. Animals are assumed not to have free will and thus to be unable either to choose evil or deserve to suffer it. Neither are they assumed to have immortal souls; hence there can be no expectation that they will be compensated for their suffering in a celestial afterlife. Nor do they appear to be conspicuously elevated or ennobled by the final suffering they endure in a predator’s jaws. Theologians have had enough trouble explaining to their human flocks why a loving god permits them to suffer; but their labors will not be over even if they are finally able to justify the ways of God to man. For God must answer to animals as well. And here is the Nutty Professor fantasizing about playing God: If I had been in a position to design and create a world, I would have tried to arrange for all conscious individuals to be able to survive without tormenting and killing other conscious individuals.   McMahan concludes his voluminous piece with a final fit of supreme nuttiness: Here, then, is where matters stand thus far.  It would be good to prevent the vast suffering and countless violent deaths caused by predation.  There is therefore one reason to think that it would be instrumentally good if  predatory animal species were to become extinct and be replaced by new herbivorous species, provided that this could occur without ecological upheaval involving more harm than would be prevented by the end of predation.  The claim that existing animal species are sacred or irreplaceable is subverted by the moral irrelevance of the criteria for individuating animal species.  I am therefore inclined to embrace the heretical conclusion that we have reason to desire the extinction of all carnivorous species, and I await the usual fate of heretics when this article is opened to comment. Trust me, no animal in the wild has ever suffered as much as I did by reading Professor McMahan’s insanity in its entirety. So would that give me the right to call for the extinction of a certain Nutty Professor?

View original post here:
Nutty Professor Pleads for Extinction of All Carnivorous Animals

Open Thread: ‘I’m Exhausted of Defending You’

Yesterday’s viral video star pours her discontent out on Obama during a town hall. Thoughts?

Read the original post:
Open Thread: ‘I’m Exhausted of Defending You’

CBS Befuddled by How Tea Party Candidates Have Survived Despite Their ‘Unusual Assertions’

ABC, CBS and NBC all ran full stories Monday night on how an old video clip showed Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell talking about how, as a high-schooler, she had “dabbled into witchcraft.” CBS, however, used O’Donnell to pivot to marveling at how other Tea Party-affiliated Senate candidates remain viable despite what CBS considers exotic views.   “Christine O’Donnell’s witchcraft comments may have spooked some Republican leaders,” Nancy Cordes related on the CBS Evening News, “but her fellow Tea Party Senate candidates are living prove that unusual assertions are not necessarily campaign killers.” Cordes elaborated with some contestable summaries of positions expressed: Take Kentucky’s Rand Paul who questioned the historic civil rights act, but is still tied with the Democrat in a recent poll. Nevada’s Sharron Angle is neck and neck with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, even after she advocated an armed insurrection against the government. And Utah attorney Mike Lee is crushing his Democratic rival even though Lee favors dismantling Social Security and eliminating unemployment benefits. Priorities he shares with Alaska’s Joe Miller. Katie Couric set up the story: “Republicans were counting on picking up a Democratic Senate seat in Delaware. That is until Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell won the GOP nomination. Will her past statements about, among other things, witchcraft, come back to haunt her?” On ABC’s World News, Jonathan Karl finally delivered a broadcast network mention of reasoning that should be “haunting” O’Donnell’s Democratic opponent: And O’Donnell isn’t the only one haunted by past statements. Politico obtained this article, “The Making of a Bearded Marxist,” where the Democratic candidate, Chris Coons, wrote in his college paper that “my own favorite beliefs in the miracles of free enterprise and the boundless opportunities to be had in America might be largely untrue.” Not surprisingly, Coons says he won’t make an issue out of old comments. Unsaid: Politico “obtained this article,” from the Amherst College student newspaper, back in May. Politico’s May 3 headline: “ Coons took ‘bearded Marxist’ turn .” It took four months for someone at a network to care. (An oddity: Every network — cable and broadcast — but CBS managed to obtain a good quality version of the 1999 Politically Incorrect clip played by Bill Maher on his HBO show on Friday night, even if just from a recording of the HBO program which has been re-run several times by the pay-cable channel. CBS, in contrast, played a low quality clip, with awful audio, lifted from a Web video on the left-wing Think Progress site.) Friday night : “CBS Dishonestly Touts ‘Non-Partisan Watchdog’ Group’s Quest for a ‘Criminal Investigation’ of Christine O’Donnell” The piece on the Monday, September 20 CBS Evening News: KATIE COURIC: Republicans were counting on picking up a Democratic Senate seat in Delaware. That is until Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell won the GOP nomination. Will her past statements about, among other things, witchcraft, come back to haunt her? Congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes reads the tea leaves. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL, ON POLITICALLY INCORRECT IN 1999: Because I dabbled into witchcraft, I hung around people who were doing these things. NANCY CORDES: Christine O’Donnell’s witchcraft comments may have spooked some Republican leaders. KARL ROVE: She’s got to deal with it and explain it. CORDES: But her fellow Tea Party Senate candidates are living prove that unusual assertions are not necessarily campaign killers. RAND PAUL: Watch out, here we come. CORDES: Take Kentucky’s Rand Paul who questioned the historic civil rights act, but is still tied with the Democrat in a recent poll. Nevada’s Sharron Angle is neck and neck with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, even after she advocated an armed insurrection against the government. LAURA MYERS, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: Senator Reid still is not very popular in Nevada because a lot of people blame the bad economy on him. CORDES: And Utah attorney Mike Lee is crushing his Democratic rival even though Lee favors dismantling Social Security and eliminating unemployment benefits. Priorities he shares with Alaska’s Joe Miller. LARRY SABATO, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: Here’s the difference: Delaware is a Democratic state and those other Tea Party states are either competitive purple or Republican red. CORDES: Back in Delaware, supporters of Christine O’Donnell- O’DONNELL ON POLITICALLY INCORRECT: One of my favorite first dates was with a witch on a satanic altar and I didn’t know it. CORDES: -say they’re not fazed by the latest skeleton in her closet. MAN: I’m going to vote for people on what they’re running on, not what they did 20 years ago because I’d never get elected myself if that happened. CORDES: O’Donnell was a frequent guest on comedian Bill Maher’s program back in the 1990s and he plans to release more colorful clips like that one. For now, she’s laughing off the threat saying, “Hey, Bill wanted ratings, I gave them to him.” Katie?

Read the original post:
CBS Befuddled by How Tea Party Candidates Have Survived Despite Their ‘Unusual Assertions’

AP Headline on O’Donnell ‘Seeking’ Establishment GOP Help Doesn’t Match Content

I suspect that headline writers at the Associated Press would be pleased as punch if readers stopped at their capsulization of Randall Chase’s story and didn’t read it. The headline at the AP’s main site currently reads: “Surprise Del. primary winner seeks GOP support.” Perhaps they’re hoping that Christine O’Donnell’s Tea Party base will be disappointed at the impression the headline gives, namely that O’Donnell is going to the Republican Party establishment for help, and in the process presumably compromising sensible conservative principles. Well, that hope naively assumes that informed readers trust the factual basis of AP headlines. If they trust AP headlines as much as the rest of the press’s and Big Three TV networks’ output, that’s mostly not true (i.e., only 25% have a great deal of trust). Chase’s report makes it pretty clear that a lot of heavy hitters and strategists in the GOP are actually coming to her: Some members of a GOP establishment that once shunned tea party favorite Christine O’Donnell are getting behind her now that she has won the Republican Senate primary, offering help in the form of cash and experienced staffers. A young spokeswoman who has been thinking of going back to college is no longer handling media calls. Instead, reporters are referred to a public relations firm run by longtime GOP operative Craig Shirley, who has done communications work for the Republican National Committee and a political action committee that spent $14 million to help re-elect Ronald Reagan. O’Donnell is also getting help from Tom Sullivan, a health care industry executive who worked for the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee in 1990 and later as a political consultant, with clients such as former Republican congressman Dick Armey. … But some experienced hands with Washington ties are pitching in, and contributors have poured in more than $2 million to fund her November contest against Democratic county executive Chris Coons. Sullivan said Monday that the campaign recently brought some big guns on board to help with fundraising, though he declined to identify them. If there’s any evidence that O’Donnell has been “seeking” establishment support, it’s not present in any of the excerpted paragraphs, and it’s at best only vaguely hinted at in the rest of Chase’s piece. Instead, it’s pretty clear for the most part she has people joining her. Headline spinners at the AP can’t change that. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Originally posted here:
AP Headline on O’Donnell ‘Seeking’ Establishment GOP Help Doesn’t Match Content

UNION: MSNBC Calls for Fashion Industry ‘Norma Rae’

MSNBC is very upset about one “highly-unregulated industry” and its “questionable and even abusive” working conditions. What industry? Coal mining or perhaps sewage treatment? No. Keli Goff, an author and political analyst who has a “Daily Rant” on MSNBC’s “Dylan Ratigan Show,” was complaining about the working conditions of models. That’s right, models. The people paid to walk down runways in designer clothing and be photographed for magazines and advertisements that as Goff put it, essentially are “paid for being beautiful.” Every industry has its own problems and accidents, but is the modeling industry really a “human rights” issue as MSNBC would have its viewers believe? Goff detailed “disturbing” complaints from models and promoted regulation and unionization of the industry. She even called for a “home-grown supermodel” to become the “Norma Rae of the fashion industry.” “Union! As Norma Rae said,” Goff declared. Norma Rae was a movie starring Sallie Field about a minimum-wage cotton mill worker, based on the life of an actual textile worker who battled to unionize her mill. But some of the conditions Goff mentioned cannot compare to the tough working conditions of many other industries. She complained about the lack of health insurance and worker’s comp for a model that had been burned by a photographers’ bulb, but didn’t mention whether or not the model could afford her own health care. According to San Diego Model Management, in most markets models make an hourly rate of $150 and usually have minimum number of hours (3-4) for print modeling. In bigger markets like New York City ” it’s not unusual for a model to make 5 or 6 thousand a day ,” the company’s website states. True, there are agency fees but the models definitely aren’t exactly scraping by on minimum wage. But it was the obsession with too thin models that really upset Goff and prompted her call for regulation of the U.S. fashion industry. “After being discovered walking down the street, [Gerren] Taylor walked in her first fashion show at the age of 12 and was strutting for high profile designers like Tommy Hilfiger by age 13. Her career however was over by age 14, having been told she’d become ‘too obese’ for runways. Taylor’s measurements: Six feet tall and a size 4,” Goff said. Goff continued: “Taylor’s story reinforces a reason the fashion industry needs regulation. Fashion’s developed a sick obsession with looking sickly thin in recent years.” Certainly, many designers are obsessed with thin but that problem shouldn’t be solved by regulation. Designers are in a business, and they sell a product. So if their product, in this case clothing promoted by very thin women, won’t sell, then they’ll have to change or lose business. Despite Goff’s support for Madrid and London regulations about size and age of models, the U.S. government should not be in the business of telling designers what size models they can hire to show off their clothing lines. Additionally, Goff cited concern about the fact that many models work long before they turn 18, but she didn’t mention anything in her “rant” about parental responsibility or involvement. It wasn’t until Dylan Ratigan asked about parents in his final question that she said they have often “relinquished” [control] and there isn’t much oversight “in the field.” Perhaps, Goff should have complained about the lack of parental involvement and called on models’ parents to be in control of protection their children instead of asking for the government to step in as nanny.

Read the original post:
UNION: MSNBC Calls for Fashion Industry ‘Norma Rae’

Newsweek’s Stuart Taylor a Bit Misleading in Article on Court Challenge to ObamaCare

“The justices have not struck down a major piece of legislation, let alone a president’s signature initiative, as beyond Congress’s power to regulate commerce in some 75 years.” That’s how Newsweek’s Stuart Taylor Jr. today all but argued that, political ideology of the Supreme Court’s majority aside, a Supreme Court decision declaring unconstitutional the “individual mandate” of ObamaCare is quite unlikely. But while Taylor may be right  that no signature presidential initiative post-New Deal has been declared unconstitutional by the Court on the grounds that it violated the interstate commerce clause, he neglected to mention there are two key cases in the past 15 years where the Supreme Court did set outer limits to Congress’s exploitation of the commerce clause as a fountain of federal power. In 1995, a 5-justice majority in U.S. v. Lopez struck down a provision of the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 that made it a federal crime to possess a firearm in a school zone. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote for the Court that “the possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have such a substantial effect on interstate commerce….  Nor is it an essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity, in which the regulatory scheme could be undercut unless the intrastate activity were regulated.” What’s more, Rehnquist noted (emphasis mine), “To uphold the Government’s contention that 922(q) is justified because firearms possession in a local school zone does indeed substantially affect interstate commerce would require this Court to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police power of the sort held only by the States.” In other words, if the Court had accepted the government’s rationale in Lopez, it would paved the way to destroy what is supposed to be an enumerated, limited federal power into a broader “police power” that is reserved for the several states of the Union.  Similar arguments regarding ObamaCare are certain to be made before the Supreme Court should the case get that far. Five years later in United States v. Morrison , the Rehnquist Court drew on the precedent in Lopez to strike down a portion of the federal Violence Against Women Act — legislation championed by current Vice President and then-Delaware Senator Joe Biden — on the grounds that it was an improper application of the interstate commerce clause. Wrote Rehnquist for the Court (emphasis mine): The Constitution requires a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local , and there is no better example of the police power , which the Founders undeniably left reposed in the States and denied the central government, than the suppression of violent crime and vindication of its victims. Congress therefore may not regulate noneconomic, violent criminal conduct based solely on the conduct’s aggregate effect on interstate commerce. Both Lopez and Morrison were 5-to-4 cases, but they are relevant case law for the question of whether the ObamaCare individual mandate violates the interstate commerce clause by jury-rigging it into a police power-granting clause for Congress.

More here:
Newsweek’s Stuart Taylor a Bit Misleading in Article on Court Challenge to ObamaCare

Joy Behar Trashes Christine O’Donnell: ‘A Witch Who Doesn’t Masturbate’

Comedian Joy Behar seemed to enjoy herself as she muckraked through exotic comments made by Republican Delaware U.S. Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell over a decade ago, refusing to leave them out of a serious discussion about O’Donnell’s candidacy. She even threw Sarah Palin into the mix. O’Donnell, in a 1999 appearance on Bill Maher’s “Politically Incorrect,” said that she “dabbled into witchcraft” in high school but never joined a coven. Behar lambasted O’Donnell, calling her “crazy” and wondering why she was running for office. “I think it shows you how crazy the girl is, doesn’t it?” Behar asked incredulously. “How many crazy people do we have to have in office?” Behar labeled O’Donnell as a “witch who doesn’t masturbate.” Meanwhile, the show’s token conservative Elisabeth Hasselbeck countered that if O’Donnell is under the gun for such comments, then President Obama should have been scrutinized more closely over his pastor of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Even veteran liberal journalist and ‘View’ co-host Barbara Walters dismissed the notion of serious discussion of O’Donnell’s comments from 10 or 20 years ago, and argued that her current views on social issues should be scrutinized. Yet Behar couldn’t let the “witch” comment go, suddenly taking a conservative stance on Satan worship. “Dabbling is not an acceptable word, when you’re into witchcraft and Satanism,” the liberal show host preached. When Hasselbeck replied to one criticism that O’Donnell is “unique,” Behar quipped “Unique or eunuch?” Walters soon closed the debate, saying that “whether 20 years ago [O’Donnell] did this or she did that – I mean, it makes for juicy headlines, but it really is unimportant.” It still wasn’t enough for Behar, who wanted to throw Sarah Palin in with the dubious comments. “But you know, isn’t it interesting that Sarah Palin backs her up, and one of the reasons she got elected is because Sarah did those robo-calls to make sure that she got elected,” Behar seriously pointed out. “And if I recall, wasn’t Sarah exorcised in Alaska by a preacher one time? She believes in exorcism. These two are into it together. Talk about a coven. This is a coven!” Hasselbeck dismissed the absurdity of Behar’s logic. “Welcome to the politics of someone backing someone else. It’s certainly not a coven. It’s radical to say something like that.” A partial transcript of the segment, which aired on September 20 at 11:06 a.m. EDT, is as follows: BARBARA WALTERS: Republican Delaware Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell – her past came back to haunt her over the weekend, and she defended herself against comments she made back in 1999 on Bill Maher’s old show called “Politically Correct.” (Video Clip) CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: (On “Politically Incorrect”) I dabbled into witchcraft. I never joined a coven. One of my first dates with a witch was on a Satanic altar, and I didn’t know it. O’DONNELL: (Recently) I was in high school. How many of you didn’t hang out with questionable folks in high school? But no, there’s been no witchcraft since. If there was, Karl Rove would be a supporter now. (End Video Clip) (…) SHERRI SHEPHERD: But I think – you know, in this respect, because she says she’s a conservative Christian, and the basis for being a Christian is you might have a former life – you let that go, and you don’t do it anymore. (…) ELISABETH HASSELBECK: Do you think it’s valid to then question this? Do you think this is even a valid thing to look at, that Bill’s throwing out here on his show? JOY BEHAR: I think it shows you how crazy the girl is, doesn’t it? How many crazy people do we have to have in office? HASSELBECK: Well let’s start with this. In fairness, Joy, if we’re going to investigate past religious affiliations or dabbles or high school trips here and there, why then wasn’t Billy-boy over here so interested in where President Obama was for 20 years at Rev. Wright’s church, so much so that – (Crosstalk) SHEPHERD: Nobody let that go with him. HASSELBECK: They absolutely brushed it under the rug. In fairness, in fairness – if they’re going to dig into this, they should then open that up too. BEHAR: Well here’s a girl who says that, you know, she didn’t masturbate – she doesn’t believe in masturbating, either. And she wants to make public policy about other people’s sex lives. She’s a witch who doesn’t masturbate, who has never had premarital sex. Why is she running for office? HASSELBECK: Why do you call her a girl, but anyone who’s powerful a woman? You can’t just toss her off as a girl – BEHAR: You can call me a girl anytime you want, honey. HASSELBECK: No, that’s not right. BEHAR: I love being called a girl. SHEPHERD: But are you saying that anything that anybody does back in high school should be held against them as an adult? What did you do in high school, Joy, that you might not want to talk about? HASSELBECK: What about 20 years in a row? What about 20 years listening to a man who hates this country?  (…) BEHAR: Dabbling is not an acceptable word, when you’re into witchcraft and Satanism. HASSELBECK: She wasn’t into it. She went on a date with a guy who was at an altar. BEHAR: She said she had – she did a Satanic ritual at an altar. HASSELBECK: What about 20 years straight, calling someone your mentor, who then goes on to produce hatemongering across the country. 20 years, he’s – (…) WALTERS: When you discuss past positions – and she’s a very conservative candidate, she’s a Tea Party candidate –  the fact that she’s now a candidate – were something that’s surprising. Okay, so we’re giving special attention. She has other views, I think, that she’s – SHEPHERD: Against masturbation – HASSELBECK: She’s unique. WALTERS: She doesn’t think that – BEHAR: Unique, or eunuch? WALTERS: Let me finish, okay? She doesn’t think that using condoms – that using condoms could combat AIDS. She has other points of view, and a conservative point of view – I think those are the things, if you want to discuss them, you discuss them. This has to be thought of in future voting and whatever her philosophy is. (Crosstalk) But whether 20 years ago she did this or she did that – I mean, it makes for juicy headlines, but it really is unimportant. BEHAR: But you know, isn’t it interesting that Sarah Palin backs her up, and one of the reasons she got elected is because Sarah did those robo-calls to make sure that she got elected. And if I recall, wasn’t Sarah exorcised in Alaska by a preacher one time. She believes in exorcism. These two are into it together. HASSELBECK: Does she currently believe in exorcism? BEHAR: Talk about a coven. This is a coven! HASSELBECK: You know what, though? Joy, welcome to the politics of someone backing someone else. It’s certainly not a coven. It’s radical to say something like that.

See original here:
Joy Behar Trashes Christine O’Donnell: ‘A Witch Who Doesn’t Masturbate’