Not Even The World Of Sports Is Safe From THEM!
First it was 2nd rate country girls...now...THIS!?!?
By haystack Posted in Miscellanea — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Is there nothing sacred anymore? Can't at least ONE media venue be safe from the swamp gas?
First, of course, in a long line of losers there was the Dixie Twits.
There have been the Penns, the Sarandons, and the ever-exciting Streisands to keep me up at night WAITING to hear they finally boarded a plane with a one-way ticket to Venezuela.
There has been every manner and form within the so-called entertainment world to step forward, rattle their little bully-pulpits to throngs of half-empty heads, and rail against SOMETHING, ANYTHING, in the name of "protest", "activism", or "progressivism". I have adapted.
THIS, however goes too far - and that it is a Texan causes my hair to spontaneously combust.
More below the fold...
That people like Bill Maher would make headlines suggesting Vice President Cheney's death would save lives is not surprising. That Ann Coulter would make headlines making a fool of herself with her own "shock-jock-esque" antics is also not surprising.
That it would be a headline that Coulter's antics got more play than Maher's is also standard fare. The last straw for me, however, is when Sportscasters decide to chime in. Is there no decency left? And just why in Sam Hill would a Texas Sports Show Host be piping off that Maher might have a point?
Well, he is actually a "former" sports show host, and apparently has found his new calling.
NOW he's doing local San Antonio talk radio, and apparently this allows his Blue Dog democrat ways to shine. A flavor of his opinion on the HPV vaccine Mr. Brylcream Perry plans to force on us-both to receive AND to pay for with no opportunity to express an opinion on the matter:
Over the last week, controversy has raged over Governor Perry’s request that all 6’Th grade girls should have access to a vaccine that could very well save their lives. A vaccine to protect women from most types of Cervical Cancer. I guarantee this, if this fight was about boys and the possible avoidance of Testicular Cancer. There would be no debate, because “boys will be boys”. The deal would already be done. All 6'TH grade boys would be in line already, even if they didn't know why.
[...]
STOPPING A FORM CANCER IN WOMEN BEFORE IT STARTS! Yes HPV is an STD. Yes the word SEX is involved. Yes a big Pharmaceutical Company really wants us to use their product, Gardasil as the possible cure. As my brother put so eloquently put it, "name a candidate for State or National office that hasn’t received money from Pharmaceutical Companies". They are big business. That’s what all big businesses do. This time, and I know it’s rare, Merck is right. They have even announced they will stop their lobbying efforts to use their Gardasil vaccine, because their involvement as the manufacturer evidently clouds the minds of the already thick headed. Isn’t it time we shut the Conservatives up. How many prayers and actions do they have to say and do against us before we shut them up? You don’t want to give your child access to the HPV vaccine, fine. You put a bullet in the gun that is cancer and hope it doesn’t “accidentally” fire off in ten years. How dare they fight to deny our children access to a possible life saving preemptive strike? Their argument about cost is as foolish as their belief that all kids will just say “no” to all the bad things in the world. I think we should all look to ex-convict G. Gordon Liddy for guidance. He called the vaccine a “slut shot”.That should sum things up for us normal people.
How much is one woman’s life worth?
God knows we put enough money into killing people, and we should.
The very least we can do is sink a few dollars into saving lives.
I feel better now. This helps me understand why this guy is quoted in a Fox News piece moderately agreeing that Maher has a point while suggesting Coulter is "intellectual chewing gum ... a lady in a dress who likes to spit out things that cause a little bit of unrest, and she'll go away for a while. She'll crawl back in her hole and we'll hear from her in about six months."
It is pure coincidence that Fox quotes this man of San Antonio obscurity AND that his radio station is WOAI (owned by Fox). It is completely unrelated that his former life in the sports show business was in the Fox Sports Radio Network. Don't be paranoid, silly.
Enjoy his comments on Maher:
"Unfortunately some of that comment is true."
"If Dick Cheney wasn't in office today, I don't think there'd be as many people dead today. Apart from that, we have to realize that too many people think they have a right to say whatever they want. But they forget that there's a privilege that goes along with that right. Bill Maher likes to stretch that envelope. He likes to see how far he can go. This time he went too far," he said.
I defy anyone getting away with that were it to be said by a Republican about a Democrat.
This man, Thompson, makes me sick. Maher already did. Thompson gives "recovering" (or former) sports casters a bad name.
He gives Texans a bad name.
« Today is worthy of celebration — Comments (7) | Moving On — Comments (72) »
Not Even The World Of Sports Is Safe From THEM! 6 Comments (0 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
So, the message I'm getting is: "How dare anyone oppose any opportunity available to save the lives of children." I'll bet he's pro-choice, though, isn't he? So he's outraged that conservatives are opposed to this vaccination program that was slipped in the back door without an opportunity for debate, but he probably sees no issue with killing defenseless unborn children by the thousands. Am I right?
I would have to agree by saying that, for starters, conservatives are angry with the vaccine program due to its lack of public debate. But on the other hand, the amount of funding that would be funneled into such a program would be a heavy burden on taxpayer's finances. Not wanting to sound overly harsh, if these young girls grow up and willingly become uncaring and promiscuous in their sexual activities, I'm certainly not going to support a government program to make sure they don't catch an STD. I think the fact that many girls do such a thing today is terrible, but who is the government to pry into their lives and make sure they stay safe.
As for the other intelligent comment concerning Dick Cheney, who exactly are the dead people he is referring to? I take it to mean the losses in the armed forces due to the war in Iraq. Blaming Cheney for their deaths, however, is unreasonable. Those incredibly brave men and women put their lives on the line for this country. When they enlisted, they knew what they could be getting into, yet they courageously chose to go ahead anyway. Their deaths are no one's fault except the Iraqi insurgents who brutally murdered them. Blaming Dick Cheney is just another left-wing excuse to place the blame on the Democrats instead of the terrorists.
Even if you are, it's irrelevant to his debate except as an ad-hominem attack (the debate fails in other ways). Actually, it would seem that your argument should strengthen your support for the program, since one of its benefits is a definite value for life.
I didn't say I necessarily oppose the vaccination program. At this point, as a citizen of Texas and the mother of a young daughter, I am mainly incensed about the fact that it was never brought up for public education and debate--it was just foisted on us by gubernatorial fiat. I actually haven't made a decision about the program yet, as I'm still reading up on the cost-benefit analysis. It's looking so far like it's not a cost-effective program for the taxpayers, and it's probably not justifiable under the usual criteria for government-mandated vaccinations (i.e. major threat to public health through easy communicability, high mortality rate, etc.). Regardless, it certainly would have been nice to be able to learn about this before being required by executive order to pay untold millions of dollars to initiate such a program, though.
As for my abortion point, I was simply trying to point out the sports commentator's probable hypocrisy. The thrust of haystack's post, after all, was to point out how this sports commentator had no business spouting off about this particular topic. Pointing out the guy's hypocrisy was meant to reinforce this idea--the guy's a sports commentator who didn't think very deeply about what he was saying before he said it (just like most celebs who spout off on politics in inappropriate venues).

The story I see is -
"Anger on Display Among Conservative PAC Audience"
With a nice quote from Erick. Not what you were intending though, I wot.