Tag Archives: words

HuffPo Asks, ‘Women of the Tea Party: Who Are You, and What Do You Want?’

What a funny but telling title, the sort of question asked only in war zones or when spotting aliens. Had I received that query in person I would have responded in kind, “Who goes there, friend or foe?” But in this case I was pretty sure I already knew, given the news outlet from whence the question came. And sure enough, I wasn’t long into reading the piece when learning the answer was clearly foe, with malicious intent. The writer was liberal feminist Peggy Drexler , assistant prof of psychology at Cornell Medical School , who wondered if the Tea Party women will come the liberal feminist way on social issues: But it’s fair to assume there aren’t many coming out of this base who will champion issues like gay marriage, choice, and single parent families. Gay marriage and choice are clearly high on Sarah Palin’s list of American evils. Single parent families get a pass for obvious reasons. But as Colleen Campbell [writes]… single mothers are “strong enough and smart enough”… to “handle an unplanned pregnancy”, while continuing to pursue education and a career. In other words: when the going gets tough, the tough keep the baby. So my question to the women of the Tea Party is this. If you take back America from the forces of big government, big spending and big taxes, do you plan to share it with the teenage girl who is unprepared to raise a child, with the gay couple who want the simple right to marry, and with families who may not fit your own definitions? Well, duh, Peggy, isn’t that why the Tea Party germinated in the 1st place? In opposition to your ideology? I’ll leave it to others to handle the homosexual issue, but I’ll address Peggy’s abortion concerns. So hey, Peggy, back at you, how are you currently helping “the teenage girl who is unprepared to raise a child” by any other way than recommending she kill it? Are you saying the value of a person is dependent on affordability or convenience? What do you want us to do with you when you’re a crabby old senile feminist? Are you pro-choice for your future phase of life? As a matter of fact, Peggy, there are over 3,000 pregnancy care centers throughout the United States already helping teenage girls financially, physically, and educationally – free of charge, during pregnancy and long after, funded by donations. We also adopt and provide foster care. That as compared to 1,000 abortion mills that charge $350 to $2k and up per. Yes, Tea Party women believe women are uniquely maternal. You mention the term “momma grizzlies” in your piece, so you understand our perspective that women should be encouraged to protect their children, not kill them, as you believe. We believe in the equal right to life of all females, Peggy. You don’t. Since you support abortion, you support killing females. Furthermore, you certainly know abortion is used specifically to target females for eradication. What are you doing about that, Peggy? Actually, can you do anything about that? I’ll answer that. No. Since preborns are not human in your book, you can’t say anything about this form of sexism without exposing yourself as a big fat lying liberal feminist hypocrite. But back to the title of your piece. Its arrogance makes me laugh. You still think you’re queens of the hill.

Visit link:
HuffPo Asks, ‘Women of the Tea Party: Who Are You, and What Do You Want?’

Linkin Park Bring A Thousand Suns To Life In New York

Band plays first show in nearly two years hours after new album hit stores. By James Montgomery Linkin Park’s Chester Bennington performs at Best Buy Theater on Tuesday Photo: Cory Schwartz/ Getty Images Over the past few months, or really, years, Linkin Park fans have been subjected to an unending stream of talk that the band’s new album would be a departure from their hard-riffing roots, instead forging heady, darn-near conceptual new territory from which there was no return. Early reviews of A Thousand Suns only seemed to confirm all that chatter, and it appeared that the Linkin Park of old was gone forever, that the once-snarling Dobermans had been replaced with a group of bespectacled Mr. Peabodys . And this was not good. But those fears can be put to rest. Because on Tuesday night — hours after that new album, A Thousand Suns, hit stores — Linkin Park played their first show in nearly two years (or, as Chester Bennington put it, “two f—ing years”) at the Best Buy Theater in New York. And though the tickets for the show prominently displayed the new album’s name, there was little of its calculated, claustrophobic conceptualism on display. Rather, this was a balls-out rock show, with some rapping and electronic frippery thrown in for additional impact. Or, in other words, it was just like a Linkin Park show of old. In fact, the band played just a handful of tracks from A Thousand Suns, peppering them in throughout a hit-packed, pummeling set. They opened with “The Requiem,” the first track on the album, which featured Mike Shinoda and DJ Joseph Hahn lit in moody silhouette, the former hunched over a synthesizer, repeating — in robo-coated vocals — the de facto mantra of Suns (“God bless us everyone/ We’re a broken people living under loaded gun”) with the latter providing ethereal harmonies. That washed into the sampled Robert Oppenheimer speech from the album, and then, the band now at full force, LP backtracked gloriously, hammering through older tracks like “New Divide,” “Faint,” “No More Sorrow” and “Given Up.” Those were met with thunderous cheers and a sea of fists thrust skyward, and with enough goodwill built up, the band worked the second Suns track into the set, the booming, rattling “Wretches and Kings,” which saw Shinoda and Bennington trade vocals and had the audience nodding along to the gut-punching beat. After a quick “thank you” — their first words to the audience all night — LP threw themselves into “Numb,” and then slowed things down exponentially with another new tune, “Iridescent,” which built slowly and solemnly on a Shinoda-played piano line and was met with a mixture of rapt attention and angry indifference, though most of that came from the tank-top-and-backward-ball-cap aggro set (and, it should be noted, the song climaxed pretty amazingly, with the band going five-wide on the chorus and the guitars soaring to the ceiling). The rest of the set played out in much that same fashion: The older stuff pummeled, peaked and powered (“Numb,” “Bleed It Out,” “In the End”), the new songs soared and stuttered and, yes, slightly mystified (“Burning in the Skies,” “Waiting for the End”), and it was pretty clear that A Thousand Suns was probably going to take a while to win some of the fans over. But, as Shinoda told MTV News last weekend, that’s sort of the point, really. And, perhaps to soothe those still hoping for a return to their Hybrid Theory days, Linkin Park opened their encore with current single “The Catalyst,” which, on this night, was cranked to the max and actually featured a good deal of chugging guitars (Bennington sang the hell out of it too). And then they closed with “What I’ve Done,” the first single off their last album that ticked off fans, Minutes to Midnight. And it’s worth noting that, in the three years since it was released, something rather amazing has happened to the song: It’s become a fan favorite, ranking right up there with their earlier, snarling stuff. There probably wasn’t intent behind the decision to close with it, but it’s not too hard to make the logical leap: Give the new songs time too, and see what happens. Patience is a virtue, after all. Related Photos Linkin Park Perform At Best Buy Theater In New York City Related Artists Linkin Park

Visit link:
Linkin Park Bring A Thousand Suns To Life In New York

Center for Responsive Politics: Journalists Give to Dems Over GOP By Nearly 2 to 1 Margin

Outrage over political donations by Fox News’s parent company News Corp. always seemed like a bit of a stretch when it implied that those contributions affected Fox’s political coverage. Many news media outlets are owned by larger companies. Those companies’ activities don’t ipso facto affect news coverage at their media subsidiaries. So when NewsBusters pointed out that 88 percent of political donations from employees of the three TV news networks went to Democrats, it was really just to note the double standard at work (surely, numerous employees have nothing to do with the news operations). New data revealed by the Center for Responsive Politics, however, suggests a real bias at play. According to Meghan Wilson, who writes for the Center’s site OpenSecrets.org, 65 percent of donations from 235 self-identified journalists have gone to Democrats this cycle. Wilson reported (h/t ): Hayes is one of 235 people who identified themselves on government documents as journalists, or as working for news organizations, who together have donated more than $469,900 to federal political candidates, committees and parties during the 2010 election cycle, a Center for Responsive Politics analysis indicates. People identifying themselves as working for hard news outlets such as the Washington Post, the New York Times, the New York Post, News Corp., Vanity Fair and Reuters are among the listed donors. Also listed are employees from outlets offering lighter fare — ESPN, Vogue — or community news. Some have donated thousands of dollars. The average contribution per person identified is eight times Hayes’ amount, and because of some big-spending media professionals, that number is slightly skewed upwards — with the median amount donated coming in at $500. Sixty-five percent of all identified donations went to Democrats, the Center’s research indicates. Unlike either the News Corp. “controversy” or the numbers concerning network employees, these donation figures demonstrate a clear political slant among those who actually report the news. In other words, if you “follow the money,” as many Fox-haters are wont to do, it leads to a clear liberal bias among the nation’s most prominent journalists.

Read the original here:
Center for Responsive Politics: Journalists Give to Dems Over GOP By Nearly 2 to 1 Margin

President Obama Urges Students To ‘Get Schooled’

‘The farther you go in school, the farther you’ll go in life,’ he says during his annual back-to-school speech. By Gil Kaufman President Barack Obama shakes hands with students at the Julia R. Masterman Laboratory and Demonstration School in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on Tuesday Photo: Tim Sloan/ AFP/ Getty Images President Barack Obama gave the second “back-to-school” speech of his presidency on Tuesday (September 14), and his message was very clear. “Nobody gets to write your destiny but you,” he told the students at Julia R. Masterman Laboratory and Demonstration School in Philadelphia. “Your future is in your hands. Your life is what you make of it. And nothing — absolutely nothing — is beyond your reach. So long as you’re willing to dream big. So long as you’re willing to work hard. So long as you’re willing to stay focused on your education.” That hope-filled exhortation to the National Blue Ribbon School, one of the best in Philly due to its students’ high achievement, was aimed both at the kids and the parents, teachers and school leaders who help the students perform at a high level. The president described how he and his wife, first lady Michelle Obama, have been preparing their children Sasha and Malia for school over the past few weeks and how the Masterman kids are probably lamenting the end of summer, even as they get excited about new possibilities. “I’m sure there will be times in the months ahead when you’re staying up late cramming for a test, or dragging yourselves out of bed on a rainy morning, and wondering if it’s all worth it,” he said, adding that he also suspected they were nervous about how the recession and the ongoing war in Afghanistan were forcing them to “act a lot older” to be strong for their families. “Let me tell you, there is no question about it. Nothing will have as great an impact on your success in life as your education.” He said he understood that some of the students are worried about their futures and whether they will achieve their dreams. Which is why he promised them that education is more important than ever. “More and more, the kinds of opportunities that are open to you will be determined by how far you go in school,” he said. “In other words, the farther you go in school, the farther you’ll go in life. And at a time when other countries are competing with us like never before; when students around the world are working harder than ever, and doing better than ever; your success in school will also help determine America’s success in the 21st century.” Obama, who admitted he wasn’t always the best student, said it will take a group effort from parents, politicians, students and teachers working their hardest to transform those educational aspirations into reality. “That’s what we have to do for you. That’s our responsibility,” he said. “That’s our job. But here’s your job. Showing up to school on time. Paying attention in class. Doing your homework. Studying for exams. Staying out of trouble. That kind of discipline and drive — that kind of hard work — is absolutely essential for success.” Stay tuned to MTV News for more information about how you can get the president to speak at your commencement celebration at the end of this school year.

Read the rest here:
President Obama Urges Students To ‘Get Schooled’

Maddow Guest Harris-Lacewell Suggests ‘Crazy Uncle’ Biden Spout Off and Obama Pretend to Disagree

Hope and change, meet business as usual. Princeton professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell unveiled this curious possible strategy for Democrats heading into the midterms when she appeared on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC show Sept. 8 — MADDOW: One last last question on the specifics here. The president himself is planning to be very visible from all accounts, multiple campaign events, the first planned press conference in a long while. Is he still the Democrats’ best campaign asset or do Democrats need somebody else out there who can throw sharper barbs than a sitting president is really allowed to? Followed by Harris-Lacewell responding, as if hearing the question from Maddow for the first time — HARRIS-LACEWELL: You know, look, I love to see President Obama out there. He loves giving the speeches, he’s a great campaigner, we know that. But I have to say, one of the reasons I was a big supporter of Joe Biden for the vice presidential position is because I always thought that Biden could provide a real asset in a moment like this. Look, don’t get me wrong but Joe Biden has a sort of a reputation for being Crazy Joe and one of the best things about your crazy uncle at a family reunion is that he says the one completely honest thing that everybody’s thinking, that none of the people with an actual filter will in fact say. So, I’m a big fan of kind of deploying the Crazy Uncle Joe strategy. Send Vice President Biden out there, let him kind of get tough, let him say things that are somewhat outrageous and then, you know, let President Obama do his typical strategy of reaching across the aisle and, you know, he’ll look and say oh come on, Joe, that may have gone too far. But I’m a big fan of, let’s get Crazy Joe out there. MADDOW (beaming with approval, as if for the first time she’s heard this): The Crazy Uncle Joe strategy, TM, Melissa Harris-Lacewell. HARRIS-LACEWELL: Why not?! (laughs) MADDOW: Very good. I want the T-shirt franchise on that! What the heck, Harris-Lacewell guffaws, oblivious to the inherent dishonesty of her suggestion. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t this the sort of thing Obama vowed to campaign against , back when a grasping, credulous portion of the electorate considered him an agent of genuine change?  In other words, Biden could act as ventriloquist dummy, saying what Obama seemingly can’t but actually is. Why not? (slap knee here) No one will see through that.

See original here:
Maddow Guest Harris-Lacewell Suggests ‘Crazy Uncle’ Biden Spout Off and Obama Pretend to Disagree

There Already Was A Ground-Zero Mosque — On The 17th Floor Of The World Trade Center

It turns out there was a Muslim prayer room on the 17th floor of the south tower of the World Trade Center, where Americans and other traveling Muslims prayed every day. On September 11th, 2001, when a handful of terrorists flew planes into the towers, some of the folks who used the room evacuated in time. Others probably didn't. In other words, there already was a “ground zero mosque”–used by Muslim Americans who were murdered just like everyone else. So isn't it time we stopped framing this discussion as “us versus them”? Samuel Freedman has more on the prayer room at the NYT > ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/nyregion/11religion.html?hp ) added by: toyotabedzrock

Never Forget – But Have We?

Never forget. Those are the two most prevalent words uttered or typed on this tragically historic day.  Never.  Forget. For many, September 11, 2001, was a day that will forever be seared into the minds of those who were witness.  On that day, the nation was awoken by a harsh reality that some people want nothing more than to destroy our freedom, our way of life.  It was a day that 19 hijackers, four airplanes, two towers, and one deranged ideology brought the threat of terrorism to the forefront in our country. But a mere nine years after 9/11, has the leadership of this nation, both administrative and media related, already forgotten? Yesterday, on the eve of the anniversary of 9/11, the President of the United States of America had the tone deaf audacity to ignore the concept of time and place, choosing to defend the building of the Ground Zero victory mosque.  In his news conference, President Obama said that the proposed New York City mosque has run up against the “extraordinary sensitivities around 9/11.”  In other words, he hears the sensitivities, he simply does not care.  Obama elaborates: “As somebody who relies heavily on my Christian faith in my job, I understand the passions that religious faith can raise.  But I’m also respectful that people of different faiths can practice their religion, even if they don’t subscribe to the exact same notions that I do…” This demonstrates Obama’s willingness to cling to the concept that the mosque controversy is based on freedom of religion.  It is not.  Controversy surrounding this building has nothing to do with religious tolerance.  Muslims are not being prohibited from practicing their religion.  They are simply being asked to display a sense of decency by building the mosque in an area not directly involved in such an emotional event for our nation; away from the site where thousands of lives ended in a declaration of war from radical Islam. Americans overwhelmingly oppose this project, because they understand common sense and decency.  It appears our president does not.  And on the eve of 9/11, Obama wasted a major opportunity to stand up and actually play the role of a leader.  To stand up and say, ‘I’m with the American people, not against them .’  Essentially, to start acting like a President.  Instead, he chose to lecture Americans on the legal right for Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to build his mosque.  Unfortunately Mr. President, part of your job is to guide a country still healing from the emotional scars of 9/11.  You’re not teaching Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago anymore.  You’re no longer a community organizer. Most of us remember 9/11 a little differently than our liberal leaders.  We remember being attacked on that day.  We remember watching over 3,000 of our friends and family dying that day.  We remember the screams of the heroes on Flight 93, the screams of women and men, mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, who desperately made an attempt to take back a plane scheduled for a suicide mission which surely would have killed many more. Yet the President would prefer to stand up for the rights of an imam with questionable motives, planning to build a mosque practically on the gravesite of those killed on 9/11.  This isn’t the only example however, of a forgotten tragedy. In 2003, this same imam of current fame, Abdul Rauf, said in the midst of a training session with the FBI that “the U.S. response to the Sept. 11 attacks could be considered a jihad.” Along those same lines, Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek recently penned a steaming column in which he claimed the American response to 9/11 was an overreaction. Zakaria claims that, “September 11 was a shock to the American psyche and the American system. As a result, we overreacted.” Susan Crawford , Convening Authority for the Guantanamo military commissions, claimed in 2009 that some prisoners complicit in the murder of over 3,000 people were (gasp) tortured, and what she discovered in that job left her aghast. What torture tactics left her aghast? Standing naked in front of a female agent; Strip searches; Insults to the detainee’s mother and sister; Threatened (not attacked) with a dog; Forced to wear a woman’s bra; Having a thong placed on the head during interrogation. The BBC portrayed two inmates at Guantanamo Bay, one of whom had confessed to attending an Islamist training camp where he learned how to operate an AK-47, as a real-life Harold and Kumar, innocently sightseeing and smoking dope. Both the media and the administration spent a great deal of effort in trying to portray Nidal Malik Hasan , a man who had contact with radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, carried a business card with the acronym SoA (Soldier of Allah), shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’, and subsequently murdered 13 soldiers and an unborn child, as anything but a terrorist. This is but a short list that calls to question the liberal administration and liberal media’s remembrance of 9/11.  Imagine being privy to the knowledge of the above referenced events just days after the actual attack.  You would say that it would be impossible.  It would be impossible, because it would mean that we had forgotten.  Have we? Crossposted at The Mental Recession

Read the original:
Never Forget – But Have We?

Can 30 Seconds To Mars Upset Lady Gaga For Video Of The Year?

Jared Leto recounts creating epic ‘Kings and Queens’ video. By James Montgomery 30 Seconds To Mars Photo: MTV News Like pretty much everything they do, 30 Seconds To Mars’ “Kings and Queens” video was very much a labor of love — and absolute, over-the-top insanity. Filmed over the course of several (very long) nights in greater Los Angeles , in locations that ran the gamut from Jared Leto’s house to the iconic Santa Monica Pier, it features an army of bike-riding extras, a fire-breathing clown, a galloping stallion, a screaming eagle and enough magic-hour footage to give Roger Deakins pause (look it up). Oh, and of course, Leto directed it all, and he and his 30STM-mates do all of their own stunts. Quite simply, it’s the kind of big, ballsy rock video that (sadly) doesn’t get made all that often these days. And, perhaps in recognition of that — and everything that went into its creation — “Kings and Queens” has been nominated for four awards at the 2010 MTV Video Music Awards , including Best Rock Video and the night’s biggest prize: Video of the Year. Leto was also nominated for Best Direction, and “Kings” picked up a nod for Best Art Direction. It’s an impressive haul — almost more than any artist not named Lady Gaga or Eminem — but Leto and company aren’t letting it go to their heads. Quite the opposite, in fact. “I was completely blown away. It was so unexpected that my first reaction was, ‘Holy f—ing sh–!’ ” Leto told MTV News last month , after learning of 30STM’s nominations. “We had no idea this was the way these things worked. It was the furthest thing from our minds. And then someone sent me the list of artists we’re nominated with, and we couldn’t believe that either. It really is exciting.” In other words, 30 Seconds To Mars still consider themselves to be VMA underdogs — even with their legion of loyal fans (the Echelon) voting early and often to put them over the top. And that scruffy spirit is part of what makes “Kings and Queens” so memorable. It is most definitely a massive thing, but it’s a spiritual endeavor, too: a celebration of a band, their fans and an unyielding sense of purpose. “There’s a sense of community in the song, there’s a feeling of atmosphere and a bit of a dream, as well … there’s something about the song and the intent that matches the visuals as well,” Leto said of the video . “It was exciting to have ownership of these public spaces, to reclaim ownership, and to ride down both sides of the street.” And that sense of self-empowerment is evident in several scenes: the silhouetted image of cyclists climbing a hill unencumbered, the epic “Circle of Death” bike stunt filmed at the intersection of Hollywood Boulevard and Highland Avenue, the blink-and-you-miss-it shot of a man, face covered, tossing a bouquet of flowers (an homage to street artist Banksy). The message, it seems, is clear: There is might in masses, a freedom in unity and strength in conviction. And all it takes to harness any of it is will. So though they may consider themselves the underdogs, there’s a very real possibility that, come Sunday, 30 Seconds to Mars may shock the world and knock off heavyweights like Gaga and Em for Video of the Year. If there is a movement under way, “Kings And Queens” may very well be the visual representation of it. Even if the band does go home empty-handed, Leto probably won’t be all that upset. After all, just getting “Kings and Queens” made was an effort of Herculean proportions. But thanks to all his effort, he now has a lifetime of memories, which is sort of the point of 30 Seconds to Mars’ grand ambitions in the first place. “From the beginning, this was an adventure, because when you hop on a bicycle and ride through the city streets at night, you revert to this nostalgic state,” he said. “You’re flooded with youth and ambition. “So we were really happy to have done this, and to have shared that spirit with everyone who took part,” he continued. “And just the other day, I was driving by Hollywood and Highland, and I had this flashback to when we shut it down and rode down it with a gang of hundreds of people. I’ll never drive down it again without remembering that.” The 27th annual MTV Video Music Awards will be broadcast live from the Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles on Sunday. The party starts with MTV News’ VMA Pre-Show at 8 p.m., followed by the main event at 9 p.m. ET/PT. Fans can go to VMA.MTV.com (or text VMA to 97979 if they are Verizon subscribers) to vote for Best New Artist from now through Sunday. Related Videos VMA 2010 Exposed Live From The 2010 Video Music Awards Revealed: MTV Video Music Awards MTV News Extended Play: 30 Seconds To Mars

More here:
Can 30 Seconds To Mars Upset Lady Gaga For Video Of The Year?

Why Alcohol Is Good For You

It's one of those medical anomalies that nobody can really explain: Longitudinal studies have consistently shown that people who don't consume any alcohol at all tend to die before people who do. At first glance, this makes little sense. Why would ingesting a psychoactive toxin that increases our risk of cancer, dementia and liver disease lengthen our lifespan? Well, the anomaly has just gotten more anomalous: A new study, published in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, followed 1,824 participants between the ages of 55 and 65. Once again, the researchers found that abstaining from alcohol increases the risk of dying, even when you exclude former alcoholics who have now quit. (The thinking is that ex-drinkers might distort the data, since they've already pickled their organs.) While 69 percent of the abstainers died during the twenty-year time span of the study, only 41 percent of moderate drinks passed away. (Moderate drinkers were also 23 percent less likely to die than light drinkers.) But here's the really weird data point: Heavy drinkers also live longer than abstainers. (Only 61 percent of heavy drinkers died during the study.) In other words, consuming disturbingly large amounts of alcohol seems to be better than drinking none at all. added by: 02yamahaR1

Santorum’s Google Trouble a Warning to Conservatives in Internet Age

Here’s a delightful little story from the Sept./Oct. issue of Mother Jones, the far-left political magazine. It’s called “Rick Santorum’s Anal Sex Problem,” and, with its helpful creative artwork, it’s not something you want to read over lunch. Thanks to the efforts of a vindictive liberal writer, anyone Googling conservative former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is fairly likely to get an unpleasant surprise. Among the top three results will probably be a nauseatingly offensive website based on making “Santorum” a “sexual neologism,” according to Mother Jones’ Stephanie Mencimer. Back in 2003, Santorum expressed a traditional Catholic view on the issue of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Then talking in general about “orientations” always excluded from understandings of marriage, he included pedophilia and bestiality along with homosexuality. “The ensuing controversy,” wrote Mencimer, “prompted syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage, who’s gay, to start a contest, soliciting reader suggestions for slang terms to “memorialize the scandal.” Having selected the nastiest entry, “Savage launched a website, and a meme was born.” Once launched, the smear site “eventually it eclipsed Santorum’s own campaign site in search results; some observers even suggested it may have contributed to Santorum’s crushing 18-point defeat in his 2006 campaign against Bob Casey,” Mencimer wrote. Whether that’s the case or not, the damaging site remains, and remains a problem for Santorum’s future political aspirations. The site “hasn’t been updated for years,” but it still comes up high in the Google results. It’s been linked to over 13,000 times “compared with only 5,000 for Santorum’s own, real site, America’s Foundation,” according to the article. Mencimer talked to Internet PR and search engine experts who called the site “devastating” and said Santorum should “consider buying paid search results for his name.’ The article claims that Santorum “would very much like to be president.” If so, Savage, not content to let his website do its passive work, threatens to “‘sic my flying monkeys on him’ – in other words, mobilize bloggers to start posting and linking to his site again.” Mencimer explained that “Savage has not forgiven Santorum for his seven-year-old comments: ‘Rick would have prevented me and my partner from being able to adopt my son,’ he points out.” And that would be a shame, not to raise a child in an environment where differing opinions are met with vitriolic and gross scatological personal attacks. Why, he might not grow up to be a tolerant liberal.

Original post:
Santorum’s Google Trouble a Warning to Conservatives in Internet Age