WaPo draws bigots’ attention with strange blurb on Glen Beck Rally

I was about to shut down today when I saw a blurb about Glenn Beck's rally in The Washington Post.

It’s hard for a thinking person to take The Washington Post seriously. I never link to the paper although I will cite it when I absolutely have to. There was the Obama salon—Politico said the WaPo publisher was going to sell access to White House officials, congressmen and even WaPo minions who write the daily dithering leftwingers love to read and cite.

Then there was the Journolist scandal—most political class media were afraid to report it because they had people on the list. The Journolist founder whose name I forget was some leftwing reporter who worked at WaPo and kept running his list. Democrat supporters gathered at the list like Holy Rollers gather at the river only the Journolist faithful were baptized in the blood of progressive politics and propaganda.

There’s more but we’ve only got so much time. I really did mean to get out of my office early today.

But then I saw the blurb about the Glenn Beck Rally—the proper name for it is ‘Restoring Honor.’

Naturally leftwing and Democrat allied readers pulled out their keyboards to publish allegations of racism, race-baiting and every other vile thing under the sun because if it’s one thing a so-called Progressive hates it’s anyone who happens to disagree with him.

WaPo blurbed the rally with a precaution—“With Glenn Beck's Saturday rally, it's best to be wary of estimates.” This statement was followed by an (in my opinion) inflated estimate of a demonstration best described as an amnesty rally for illegal aliens. Here’s the double irony—‘Restoring Honor’ hasn’t even happened yet. WaPo apparently wants to nix estimates before the crowd convenes. Typical of current reportage, I suppose.

Coincidentally I saw a header about employees at old-time TV networks coughing up campaign donations for President Barack Obama during the 2008 election. The Washington Examiner said, “Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.”

I reported on Democrat sympathizers in media two years ago after concluding media were acting as Democrat groupies.

US media is entitled to whatever position they prefer of course. But I think it’s safe to say that all those ‘nastyisms’ people fling at Fox News stem from their frustration over the fact there is one network leftwingistas don’t control.

I’m not upset by that. Main Street is a whole lot smarter than the political elitists assume.

But when I read the vicious remarks at WaPo by readers of that publication—when I saw the level of spitefulness and pejoratives displayed by people who, if they could, would silence the voices of those who disagreed with them, I realized exactly how unbalanced—perhaps even unwell—so many of those people are.

Are Democrats proud of their political offspring? Because on their worst day, the most rabid right wingers don’t sink that low.

A final thought—those readers who post vile accusations and profane insults on sites like WaPo are part of the Democrat brand. Remember that when you head to the polls November 2.

Comments

[GET REAL LADY]

if it’s one thing a so-called Progressive hates it’s anyone who happens to disagree with him.

ARE YOU ON DRUGS? Progessives welcome disagreement, but not disagreement based on falsified information devoid of facts and based in fear. And that's what you are peddling. FEAR. If you didn't have liberals to bash and demonize, your argument would collapse. You've been sold a crock of crap and the corporations who are funding this are USING YOU FOR THEIR OWN ECONOMIC AIMS.

Try to write one column where you don't demonize Democrats. I'll bet you can't do it. And that's because you traffic in the politics of fear. In fact, you won't even have the guts to publish this comment because you couldn't handle it when I disagreed with you over Roger Stone's competency. You deleted the comments unfavorable to you and left up the comment favorable to you. AND THEN you accuse progressives to disliking disagreement. You are as disingenuous as they come.

[GET REAL LADY]

A final thought—those readers who post vile accusations and profane insults on sites like WaPo are part of the Democrat brand. Remember that when you head to the polls November 2.

Oh was that for me Kate? Did your feelings get hurt when I called you a loudmouth? Yes, loudmouth is vile and profane and you're such a victim!!!

[GET REAL LADY]

But when I read the vicious remarks at WaPo by readers of that publication—when I saw the level of spitefulness and pejoratives displayed by people who, if they could, would silence the voices of those who disagreed with them, I realized exactly how unbalanced—perhaps even unwell—so many of those people are.

This is exactly what you're doing Kay. You silenced me because I disagreed with you to which you will respond it is because I called you a loudmouth. But then you removed the comments unfavorable to you and left the ones favorable to you. It doesn't get anymore hypocritical than that honey.

You know nothing about the people who post comments at the WaPo but you'd like to lump them all in and label them the lunatic left. More fear fear fear.

[Kay B. Day, Editor]

I censored your comments because they contributed nothing to the discussion and you resorted, like many of your fellow Progressives, to name-calling.

I will do so again if you resort to calling me names.

And somehow I don't think anyone could silence someone with a mouth as large as yours.

[Dirty Hippie]

Resorted to name calling? Are you that fragile? Here's your boy:

[Kay B. Day, Editor]

Dirty Hippie, or whoever, deleted your link.

I could care less who anyone sleeps with, marries or whatevers. The page you link to is ONV.