Oh, Yahoo News, You Suck So Much.

I have had a Yahoo email for years, it's my first email and it's limitless, so it's unbelievably full of crap, mostly. It is and has been my main email, though.

What that means is that I suffer through the home page on a daily basis with the unbelievably bad choices of liberal bullcrap stories and editorial choices they are so filled with.

Yes, I said "unbelievably" twice. However, it's totally believable, as they do it on a daily basis. Today's example is pretty egregious:

As soon as I saw the little blurb, I thought I was seeing things, I mean, I liked him as a presidential candidate (remember when the Republicans had 2 black male candidates and the Dems were all white?) and didn't recall that part of his career. (yes, yes, I now know that was a Trump nickname for him, so shouldn't they have capitalized it if that's what they were going for? Of course not, they wanted to minimize his credentials)

It's in a prominent part of the Yahoo homepage as well, top stories and all:

I mean, they are getting roasted in the comments, but Libs don't read the comments, they only read the headlines and think they know it all. I mean, it's not like he was the Director of the Kansas City Fed or anything (narrator: He was, in the 90s).

Hey, journalists, this is why people don't like you. You are either the ones doing this crap or you let this crap happen.

Bad Headline? You Be The Judge.

Talk about anthropomorphism:

This from Yahoo!'s home page when I went to check my emails (and grab a scale photo for my other blog).

Seriously? "Menacing behavior?"

Ugh.

Once A Weiner, Always A Weiner.

Let's start with me showing some restraint...a nephew of a sweet friend of mine from years ago was part of a team that won a fricking Sundance award for their documentary on serial reprobate Anthony Weiner, and I'm not going to ask on Facebook how they are all dealing with this latest news that the rest of us were right all along and HE IS A SCUMBAG!!!!

He's at it again. I am sick of the apologists. He has been able to continue being a predator because of the Democrat party and his connections to Hilary Clinton. Sick. Read the story, see how this girl actually admired him. Pathetic. Her father allowed this because he didn't want to mess with her already fragile mental state? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. People putting politicians on pedestals allows this mentality, this idol worship, this cult of personality. It sickens me.

I wrote what I think was an exceptional short post about this asshole a few years ago.... I linked it last time his name came up, because he's a SERIAL SCUMBAG.

What I find most disturbing is that the parents of the High School girls that are a part of all of this willingly parroted the Weiner Talking Points, same as given to the former porn star.

Politics over morals and family, I guess. Disgusting. Yet, it happens every time. Chandra Levy's family loved Gary Condit who, while not a murderer, was involved inappropriately with their daughter. Monica Lewinski's parents just looooved Bill Clinton (well, at first). Yuck.

Wonder what those parents are saying today?

Let's see who defends him this time.

Have I Mentioned That Journalism Is Dead?

Journalism is dead, especially in my city.

Case in point: someone on Facebook, I think, linked to an article that they agreed with (I assume) about changing a street name here in Cincinnati. Why? T'was named after a horrible segregationist racist Vice President!!!!  The horror!

Original letter to the editor: It's time to dump Calhoun Street

Calhoun Street was named after John C. Calhoun, a two-time vice president of the United States (under John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson), a U.S. senator from South Carolina, and a staunch supporter of slavery and states' rights. He is credited by many with having started the Civil War, even though he died in 1850.

Your say: Submit a letter to the editor

I have wondered how a major city in a free state came to name a street after such a man, who had zero local ties. Quick searches of Google reveal that in 1828, a city in Illinois changed its name from Calhoun to Springfield; a bike shop in Minnesota is changing its name from Calhoun Bikes and op-eds are being published in the Post and Courier (Charleston, South Carolina) suggesting that it rename its Calhoun Street.

The realignment of Taft Road and Calhoun Street in the middle of the last century has presented a great opportunity to fairly easily drop "Calhoun" in favor of native son, President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft.

As an added bonus, it would be a great opportunity to more publicly feature the statue of Taft that now stands outside the University of Cincinnati's College of Law at the current corner of Calhoun and Clifton Avenue.

The time to do this is now.

Jack Martin, Clifton Heights

I, ever trusting my instincts, thought "BS' and tried in vain to locate some research online that either corroborated or refuted the claim. The comments were, of course, hilarious and frustratingly stupid, but there was some back and forth about who the namesake actually was.

Then, when attempting another web search for truth, I found that the paper finally, after the fact was informed that the writer WAS WRONG!

Editor's note, 9:20 a.m. Monday: Kevin Grace, head of archives and rare books at the University of Cincinnati, says the letter writer is incorrect: "There's no historical evidence at all for it being named for John C. Calhoun. There is some evidence that it was named for a Revolutionary War pensioner named Calhoun who was allocated a parcel of land that abutted the McMillan subdivison." Military veterans were often given the opportunity to buy land, Grace said. The street on the south border of the UC campus was called Calhoun before John C. Calhoun came into prominence, he said.

I was not shocked, after all, why would the have place a few phone calls to actual historians to be sure BEFORE they published the editorial letter, right? Crazy! Actually perform journalism? Ha!

Why Journalism is Dying In a Job Description

You want to know why print journalism is dying in the USA? Here's a job description I came across today, bold, underline, and italics are my emphases:

Cincinnati.com and The Enquirer are searching for a Community Press Content Coach to join our newsroom.

As Community Press Content Coach:

• 100% of your work is focused on the 25-45 audience.
• You work with reporters to identify the watchdog questions that will help readers make smart choices for their communities and get to the bottom of their questions.  You ensure the reporter uses public records and the best sources to be authoritative.
• You ensure watchdog stories deliver clear findings that are unique in the community.
• You identify stories that are best told through emotional narrative and coach reporters to develop the characters and places  relatable to the 25-45 audience.
• You ensure that the Community Press/Recorder reporters collaborate well with Enquirer rpeorters. They should share tips, sources, and report stories together to ensure all Enquirer Media readers get the best and most relevant content.
• You plan for mobile first to determine the best storytelling approach and what assets the reporter must gather to produce content that is complete, authoritative and shareable.
• You deliver to the planner on time, to ensure our products are interesting every day and the reporter/photographer can build a following.
• You ensure each content creator is the news leader in their field. They are competitive; they rarely get beat.
• You can demonstrate ways that you coach reporters to help them be successful.

You report to: the Editor

I like that the idea is an "emotional narrative" because that's what news is all about, right? Emotion. Not facts, thoughts, actions, noooooooo. It must be "relatable" and "shareable" so the reporters don't "get beat" and can "build a following."

That's fantastic. Oh, and let's not forget the typo, "rpeorters" in the text. Wow.

I thought the person that did these things was called an "editor" not a "Content Coach." Welcome to the new age, I guess.


Remember, this is the company (Gannett) that just reorganized (eliminated) a pile of positions, and asked experienced journalists to re-apply for their jobs in an effort to get them out of the organization. Award-winning long-term writers. If you want to work in this field, you are nuts. I wouldn't bring any personal items to your desk, so you can carry everything out when it's your turn to get "re-organized."

Weiner, again?

Here's what I had to say last time.

What. A. Dbag.

Lies and Death

I started a discussion on Facebook by posting this Reuters story. Well, folks, for me, this is the place for this, not Facebook. I know nobody reads this, so my audience is larger there, but I will write more openly here.... :) There's a link in my profile there, right?

Anyway, there is no excuse for what the President did and said about Benghazi, and now we know that they knew all along it was a direct terror attack yet lied and misrepresented for 10 days (right? 10? 14?).

A Facebook friend tried to minimize it, saying "it was a crazy, chaotic time, a lot of information was coming in, all of it contradictory...." Sorry, that's just not true. They had a live video feed from a drone and did nothing for 7 hours. 4 Americans died. They knew and did nothing, then lied about it (Obama, Carney, Rice, and Clinton) for weeks, and lied during 2 debates. Lied.

 Derek Hunter at the NY Daily News has harsh words, and I agree with every one of them.

Let me say again what I've said before: when you know something isn't true and you say it anyway, that's a lie. Every intelligence agency on the planet said Weapons of Mass Destruction, so when Bush said it, and when Powell said it, with photos, it wasn't a lie.

This is what a lie looks like, liberal progressive Democrats: your guys talking.

Brief Weiner Thoughts

What I find most disturbing is that the parents of the High School girls that are a part of all of this willingly parroted the Weiner Talking Points, same as given to the former porn star.

Politics over morals and family, I guess. Disgusting. Yet, it happens every time. Chandra Levy's family loved Gary Condit who, while not a murderer, was involved inappropriately with their daughter. Monica Lewinski's parents just looooved Bill Clinton (well, at first). Yuck.

Wonder what those parents are saying today?



here's the longer version submitted to the Graph:

One observation about the Rep. Weiner scandal that I have yet to hear anyone else make, and one that disturbs me the most is the behavior of the parents of the High School-age girls involved in the initial release of information.
As was covered in great detail, to his credit, by Tommy Christopher at Mediaite, Andrew Breitbart didn't start this, but Christopher got everything else wrong because he believes in Weiner, just like the parents of these girls, the girls, and the rest of the media. Piers Morgan, interviewing Ann Coulter on his show on June 7th, showed the bias and proved her points when he said without irony that the reason the MSM was doing stories about hacking Twitter rather than investigating Weiner's claims was because Weiner was "believable" in his statements. This symptom of 'politics first' is frightening to me as an American, as a parent, and as a thinking human! (good luck finding the video, CNN didn't post that part of the show).
Read these statements from Christopher's article from the girls and the parents, and compare them to what emails with former porn star Ginger Lee say about Wiener's attempts to quell the story.
"When Rep Weiner followed my daughter the one and only message he sent her was welcoming her to his twitter followers and suggested he go to his website for more information. My husband and I were delighted with this message as it furthered our daughter’s interest in learning about government. We were very grateful to Rep Weiner for this and saw nothing wrong or inappropriate with this message.
This was the one and only message that Rep Weiner sent our daughter. Our daughter sent a message thanking Rep Weiner for following her and thanking him for the welcome message. This was the one and only message our daughter sent to Rep Weiner.
We would also like to express our disgust at the harassment of Rep Weiner and hope that everyone remembers this man did nothing wrong.
And concerning a certain adult actress, we would like to add that this girl did nothing wrong. If you actually read her blog it is about politics and chronic illness. My husband and I read it together with our daughter."
"I followed Rep. Weiner with the permission of my parents. I sent a request to Rep Weiner using his WEINER YES hashtag and he followed me back. He sent me one welcome direct message that said to visit his webpage. I sent him a message thanking him.
Rep Weiner never tried to contact me beyond his welcome message.
Rep Weiner is a good person and it’s so mean what everyone is attacking him without any proof."
Emails from Weiner suggest Ginger Lee say this:

"The key is to have a short, thought out statement that tackles the top line questions and then refer people back to it. Have a couple of iterations of: 'This is silly. Like so many others, I follow Rep. Weiner on Twitter. I don't know him and have never met him. He briefly followed me and sent me a dm saying thank you for the follow. That's it.'" and:
"I have nothing to do with the situation involving Rep Weiner. I follow his twitter feed. And for a brief time he followed me. Much has been made of the fact that I have posted about my admiration for Rep Weiner and his politics. All I can say about that is that I'm a fan of his. Rep. Weiner sent me one short direct message thanking me for following him. I have never met Rep. Weiner and he has never sent me anything innappopriate (sic) ..."
So, it seems clear to me, at least, that words were given to all the players here by Weiner or his people. What this tells me is that we have yet another set of Democrat parents willing to sacrifice the truth, theirs and their daughters' credibility for a skeezy congressman that they "admire" and think "has done nothing wrong." Does anyone else remember all the support the parents of Chandra Levy gave Gary Condit, even though, while not a murderer, he had been engaged in an inappropriate relationship with her? Monica Lewinsky's parents?
While it is much more rampant among liberals, this cult of personality isn't just for Democrats, either, as Lisa Baron says about sleeping with Republicans in her new book "The Life of the Party,"
"'To be able to say, 'I'm with the such-and-such campaign,' or 'I work for Senator So-and-So' is to us political junkies what "I’m with the band" is to Pamela Des Barres."
I can't speak for you, but this all disgusts me.

Death of Journalism

Well, plenty more indications that journalism is dying and why. Funny enough, this knowledge is accompanied by a prominent "journalist" writing a piece stating that Journalism is too important to die, or be for profit. That's right, folks, newspapers, news, should be 401-c non-profit. That's enough to prove the guy's a nutroot.

Funny enough, there are examples of news organizations making money. That, of course, is immaterial to the argument. Fox News is the devil, after all, even if Britt Hume and Chris Wallace have more jouranlistic gravitas than, say, all the ex-Clinton hacks on the major networks (can you say Stephanopoulos?).

The major media got punk'd over the Chamber of Commerce's fake support of Cap & Trade, and were busted on it. They lied about Rush Limbaugh for the express purpose of derailing his Rams investment opportunity and slammed their fellow Juan Williams for pointing out the lie. I love Charles Krauthammer's take: CNN fact-checked a SNL skit, but not the Limbaugh false quotes.

Welcome to the end of American journalism, let's hope its replacement actually does its job so it can stay around.