1.31.2012

Rick Santorum visits The Dana Show

Today on The Dana Show (which was moved to 12-3PM CST as of yesterday in St. Louis), 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum visited Dana Loesch's radio program. Loesch was mentioning that she was looking for the non-Romney candidate to be the Conservative standard-bearer to the base. Santorum spoke primarily about the economy and economic issues. He said that "two-parent families [man and woman] are declining to where it is dangerously close to losing a majority of American families" and mentions that the "role of the family is important to the economy." Santorum has decided to support right-to-work if he was the President, but was against it in the past. He also claimed that "Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are undermining the effort to repeal  'Obamacare.'" He also stated that he was a "grassroots candidate."



From the 01.31.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:



Yesterday, for the 1st time since the controversial and highly offensive "I'd drop trou and do it too" comment regarding the US Marines Urination Scandal, Loesch was back on CNN.

1.14.2012

More on the fallout of Dana Loesch's "I'd Drop Trou" Scandal

This evening, we have more news to report on Dana Loesch's "I'd Drop Trou and Do It Too"  comment. Real Time With Bill Maher host and Fauxgressive Bill Maher (of which Loesch was a guest on twice) agrees with Loesch's violent assessment on the US Marines peeing on dead Taliban corpses.

NY Daily News's Aliyah Shahid:


Bill Maher wants to know what all the fuss is about.
The liberal, HBO comedian argued the outrage over video purportedly depicting four U.S. Marines urinating on the corpses of Taliban fighters, is being blown out of proportion.
Maher called the incident "distasteful" Friday on his "Real Time" show, but added, "A dead body is just, you know a f------ body that's dead and it just doesn't bother me."
He also went on to say Americans have committed worse offenses, like torture, and said it depended "what the people they were pissing on did."
"If they were real Taliban, if they were people who burned down girls' schools, and, you know, do honor rapes and throw acid in people's faces, I'm not that upset about pissing on them," he said.
Maher's criticism echo CNN contributor and conservative radio hostDana Loesch, who saluted the Marines on her show, even adding that would have been willing to join them.
"Can someone explain to me if there is supposed to be a scandal that someone pees on the corpse of a Taliban fighter -- someone who as part of an organization murdered over 3,000 Americans," she said on her show. "I'd drop trou and do it too. That's me, though…Come on people this is a war." 

From the 01.13.2012 edition of HBO's Real Time With Bill Maher:


Then, biased as hell Jim Hoft of The Gateway Pundit defender her insensitive remarks about the US Marines Urination Scandal.

The media wants us to cuddle with the terrorists. To reach out and hug the Taliban. To find common ground with the Islamist killer.Not Dana Loesch.
Congratulations Dana!Thank you for your clarity.

No, Mr. Hoft, we should NOT be congratulating Dana Loesch, but condemning her instead.


News Corpse::

Nevertheless, CNN contributor Dana Loesch (who is also a Tea Party leader and the editor-in-chief of Andrew Breitbart’s BigJournalism) took to the air to exacerbate the offense and defend the soldiers saying…
“Now we have a bunch of progressives that are talking smack about our military because there were marines caught urinating on corpses, Taliban corpses. Can someone explain to me if there’s supposed to be a scandal that someone pees on the corpse of a Taliban fighter? Someone who, as part of an organization, murdered over 3,000 Americans? I’d drop trou and do it too. That’s me though. I want a million cool points for these guys.” 
The subsequent controversy erupting from Loesch’s offensive remarks has generated a secondary controversy centered on the appropriate role of news analysts and the lines drawn for decency and civil discourse. Loesch, in a tacit acknowledgement that her comments crossed the line, sought to defend herself by claiming that she was not condoning the Marines, but ridiculing the media response. But the dishonesty of that excuse is apparent just by re-reading her statement. She explicitly says that she would do the same thing the Marines did and praises them for being “cool.” If that isn’t condoning the behavior, what is?
Loesch’s web site, BigJournalism has gone to work to absolve her sins, not by demonstrating that her comments were appropriate, but by attacking anyone who criticized her. They started with Politico, a news operation started by unabashed conservative journalists, and tagged them as leftists because of their article that merely reported that the controversy exists. John Nolte, editor-in-chief of Breitbart’s BigHollywood, desperately stretched to imply a bias by Politico because the article included this: 
“I’ve reached out to CNN to ask for their response to Loesch’s comments, andwhether or not it will have any impact on her role at CNN.” Nolte’s emphasis.Riehl’s evidence is an article by Media Matters that correctly observes that Loesch’s comments were Too Extreme For Rush Limbaugh. Riehl disputes that assessment mainly by changing the subject. He utterly ignores the fact that Limbaugh, with reference to the Marines, said explicitly that“There’s no defense of this.” But Riehl peels away from that fact to post a rambling quote from Tea Party Republican Allen West that also advocates punishing the Marines and says outright that “The Marines were wrong.” It appears that the fixation is on Riehl’s part to avoid the reality that the behavior of these particular soldiers was indefensible to almost everyone but Loesch. 
As for Loesch, her own defense that she published on BigJournalism was an incoherent jumble of phony patriotism and self-aggrandizement. Her primary argument was that…
“There is a difference in advocating for the Marines to break the law, which I didn’t do, and defending them from overly-dramatic hysteria.”
It is, however, perfectly appropriate to question news analysts who engage in a dialogue that advocates unlawful acts in the conduct of a war. CNN should take the responsible steps to review incidents wherein contributors bring disrepute to their network. But I don’t anticipate that they will. 
The current head of CNN, Ken Jautz, is the hack who gave Glenn Beck his first job on television. He also recently hired Beck associate Will Cain. These two uber-rightists share the air with CNN contributor Erick Erickson, who called former Supreme Court Justice David Souter a “goat-fucking child molester.” And it was under Jautz that CNN partnered with the corrupt AstroTurf PR firm, Tea Party Express, to host a GOP debate.
The hard-right turn that CNN has taken has landed them squarely in third place. And that decline is due in large part to people like Loesch. The American people are not looking for this kind of substanceless, bombastic, hate-speech from their news sources. They can get that from Fox News. And if anyone’s job should be in jeoprady, it is the person at the helm, Ken Jautz.



She's an idiot.

UPDATE: Loesch was disinvited (largely due to her offensive remarks) from an Illinois Policy Institute meeting in O'Fallon, Illinois yesterday. Maybe her comments were too extreme for them, but apparently not for CNN and her home station KFTK.
Petition for CNN to fire Dana Loesch: http://www.change.org/petitions/cnn-fire-dana-loesch




1.13.2012

CNN's own colleagues condemn Loesch's vile remarks

Today, we found out that even some of CNN's own colleagues (and Rush Limbaugh) think fellow tasteless paid "contributor" Dana Loesch's classless rant regarding the US Marines Urination Scandal on yesterday's The Dana Show was over the line.

Media Matters' Joe Strupp:

Several CNN on-air journalists are criticizing Dana Loesch's recent comments supporting the U.S. Marines who allegedly urinated on the dead bodies of Taliban forces.
Loesch, a CNN contributor, made the comments during her radio show Thursday. Among other things, Loesch said of the incident: "I'd drop trou and do it too." 
Such views brought sharp criticism from some CNN on-air reporters.
"I can't imagine someone really thinking that, it is so outrageous," said one CNN reporter who requested anonymity. "I think she is trying to garner attention to herself, and that is sad. If that is what she truly believes, she has issues. If you look at that video, I don't care who you are, your stomach should turn. 
"The problem with these contributors is they aren't under the same guidelines journalists are, and CNN journalists are. We have very clear ways of doing business. When you have these people we bring in to spice up our airwaves, it is going to happen. It is concerning, obviously."
Another regular CNN journalist added: "I am of the school of thought, 'Why aren't we putting people who are knowledgeable on the air?' I'll just say 'Ewww.' I think it's in poor taste." 
A third CNN journalist who has been reporting on the story said Loesch is misguided in thinking that defending the Marines' alleged actions amount to being supportive of the military.
"If she is thinking that she is somehow supporting the military, any source in the military will tell you she is not," the journalist said. "It is so distasteful for the military. It is a black eye. Clearly, everyone I've talked to said that is not acceptable."
At least one regular CNN political contributor took issue with the comments and with CNN's handling of Loesch and other right-wing contributors:
"What's interesting is how the kid gloves are applied to outlandish comments made by the likes of Erick Erickson or Dana Loesch and how it has a negative impact on the CNN brand," said the contributor, who also requested anonymity. "There really is no pushback or no real conversation that says, 'Look, you make these kinds of comments or you write these kinds of wild, crazy stuff, that's just not what we're about.' It simply doesn't happen. I think there is fear of saying anything to them because they are Tea Party folks, and there has been a clear effort on the part of our political team to court that whole Tea Party thought process, if you will."

This afternoon on her radio show, she responded back to her critics, in her usual snide and harshly inappropriate way:

CNN's Dana Loesch responded to the growing controversy surrounding her comments dismissing outrage over video apparently showing U.S. Marines urinating on dead bodies by saying that her critics "felt as though these Marines should be bowing to the Taliban ... just like this administration does." 

Loesch tried to explain her comments:
The reaction to what these Marines did is disproportionate to the actual offense: beyond disproportionate. They'll be dealt with it. Get over it. And that was my entire point.
That was far from Loesch's "entire point." In fact, she went on to say that the individuals shown in the video should be awarded "a million cool points" and went on question whether "there's supposed to be a scandal that someone pees on the corpse of a Taliban fighter" and bragged, "I'd drop trou and do it, too."
Loesch's comments were widely condemned throughout the day Friday, leading her to lash out at her critics with the suggestion that they sided with the Taliban:
I think the progressives felt as though that these Marines should be bowing to the Taliban, and every other combatant, and every other foreign entity just like this administration does. So my whole point was to say that your whole reaction was ridiculous.
From the 01.13.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show: 
       

CNN's own Roland Martin condmens Loesch hard:


CNN contributor and conservative radio host Dana Loesch said on her radio show that she not only thinks the Marines who urinated on dead Taliban soldiers are cool, but she’d be willing to join them. 
After playing a news clip describing the video, Loesch said, “I’d drop trou and do it too. That’s me, though. I want a million cool points for these guys.” She wondered why there was any kind of scandal surrounding the incident.


Her vile and disgustingly coarse comments regarding the US Marines urinating on dead Taliban corpses have been widely condemnedincluding me.

Dear Dana Loesch, YOU better owe a damn apology to the US Marines, or you can kiss your CNN job goodbye!







If any more news breaks on this, it will be posted here.

More coverage here:
http://justinspoliticalcorner.tumblr.com/tagged/Dana-Loesch
http://danabusted.blogspot.com/2012/01/on-big-journalism-loesch-made-shoddy.html
http://danabusted.blogspot.com/2012/01/loeschs-blatant-islamophobia-strikes.html

On Big Journalism, Loesch made a shoddy defense of her offensive statement about the Marines yesterday

Yesterday on this site, I wrote about the incident in question, which CNN "contributor" Dana Loesch made very offensive statements regarding the US Marines urination scandal.

Yesterday's blogpost on this site here:

More violent rhetoric from KFTK 97.1 FM right-wing extremist Islamophobic radio host Dana Loesch, as she misleadingly declared onThe Dana Show today that "the Progressives/Liberals are outraged that Taliban corpses are urinated on, while the 'Liberal press' ignores OWS Protestors urinating on cop cars." She stated that "I have no problem with it."



From the 01.12.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
       

Transcript:
LOESCH: All right, we got some cool points to get into, and then we are going to get some of your calls in as well. It's 'cause I've had a lot of caffeine. It's snowing here, folks. Cool points, we play audio and we award out points based upon its level of heinousness or awesomeness. All right, play audio sound bite two. And we're, I'm sure, going to be talking about this in the second hour as well.
Marines were -- there's a -- now, we have a bunch of progressives that are talking smack about our military because there were Marines caught urinating on corpses -- Taliban corpses. Listen:

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER [audio clip]: The U.S. Military is investigating a video showing what appears to be troops urinating on the dead bodies of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. The footage of what seems to be U.S. Marines has been uploaded to several sites including video sharing site YouTube. The film could be another blow for America after previous scandals like the abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib --

LOESCH: OK, stop this right here. Stop this right here.
Can someone explain to me if there's supposed to be a scandal that someone pees on the corpse of a Taliban fighter? Someone who was -- as part of an organization murdered over 3,000Americans? I'd drop trou and do it, too. That's me, though. I want a million cool points for these guys. Is that harsh to say?
Come on, people. This is a war.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Cool points.

LOESCH: What do you think this is? What do people think this is? I am totally not politically correct, I told you this. What -- do you think that we're going to sit down and have tea?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it's nothing compared to what happened in the prison in Iraq. That's different, completely different from when this -- 

LOESCH: Completely different story.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Completely different.

LOESCH: Yeah. Completely different story.  So they urinated on the corpse of a dead Taliban member, a dead terrorist.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And why did they film it?

LOESCH: They urinated on a  -- I don't know why. I don't get that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why?

LOESCH: I don't get that. But, sorry, that -- I don't -- do I have a problem with that as a citizen of the United States? No, I don't. Sorry, I don't. So, moving on. There's the end of that controversy right there. [The Dana Show, 1/12/12]



From the 01.12.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
       

Transcript:

LOESCH: My whole entire point is that these individuals -- like they're using this example as an issue to wage against our military and our war -- or, no our military and our soldiers, period -- to make our military look like a bunch of murderers and a bunch of bad people. Look what -- no, no, no, no, no. That's not going to be used as an example to make our military look bad. I mean, this is -- that's what it is.

They're saying, Oh, look, this is our military. We've told you before how they're uneducated, and stupid, and everything else, you've heard callers call into this show that say, oh, the reason they go in the military is because they can't get a job anywhere else. It's infuriating. It's insulting. And I'm not going to let that be used as an excuse. I mean, that's just -- and we can agree to disagree on it. They're dead terrorists. I could care less.

They are dead terrorists. These are people who have -- are part of a group who murdered over 3,000 Americans, some of them children, some of them expectant mothers. I will not show courtesy. So, you know, throw them over the cliff into the ocean. I don't care. But I don't think that these soldiers, these Marines, who are on video doing this, the military can handle it how the military wants to handle it.
But I'm not going to join into the chorus of going after these individuals and using them as -- to paint the military as bad and all that.

These Taliban have done more to the United States than this video, and people are trying to act as though somehow what terrorism has done to this country is equal to any offense that could be caused from the video. That is stupid. I'm not even going to bother giving you more in-depth analysis other than to say it's stupid. [The Dana Show, 1/12/12]





Today, on her Big Journalism blogpost, she defended her controversial words and blamed the
"Liberal/Progressive media for spinning my words as offensive, when what I said was the truth."

Yesterday on my radio show I discussed the topic of the Marines videotaping themselves urinating on dead Taliban fighters. The usual mob of progressive haters started campaigning on Twitter and complaining to CNN.


The first source of “outrage” was “Nicole Gennette,” a liberal sockpuppet on Twitter who has adopted the name of one of Anthony Weiner’s alleged love interests–and who is likely a man anyway. Yet Mediaite dutifully quoted him/her.

Politico this morning attempted to elevate the trumped-up controversy over my remarks to a serious journalistic story, and didn’t bother reaching out to me for comment prior to publishing. It’s the kind of hit job Politico does best–and likely payback for all the times their journalistic malpractice has been pointed out here.
There is a difference in advocating for the Marines to break the law, which I didn’t do, and defending them from overly-dramatic hysteria. I was using absurdity to highlight absurdity. It’s absurd to desecrate corpses but it’s not wrong to hate terrorists who are trying to kill our troops–and us. And I’m not in uniform–so I am free to express what a lot of Americans feel about the controversy, even if it makes some pony-tailed academics feel uncomfortable.

The progressive left chose to include CNN in their attack because they don’t like that the network–any network–features conservative voices and have been throwing everything at the wall to get me removed since the very beginning.
My entire point of the past two days was to highlight the absurd reaction from militant troop-bashers to these Marines. In my Twitter timeline yesterday progressives called our military “killers, kids, barbaric trash, murderers …” The only time soldiers are celebrated by the left is when they engage in protests like OWS. The rest of the time they’re demonized. They get the red carpet rolled out for them, too.

The disproportionate anger on the part of progressives is fueled by their dislike of our military. That what this proves. The left is attacking me so they can give the Obama administration a pass–unlike what they did with Bush and Abu Ghraib. Like it or not, I’ll stand up for our troops no matter which president is in charge.



Nicole Gennette (@NicoleGennette) is NOT a "Liberal sockpuppet", you moron! That's typical for a despicable far-right smear merchant like Loesch to say.



Oxycontin Smuggler Rush Limbaugh, of all people, though Loesch's remarks are too extreme.

CNN contributor Dana Loesch is under fire for comments she made on her radio show dismissing outrage over video that appears to show members of the United States Marine Corps urinating on dead bodies that early reports have identified as Afghans, saying that she would "drop trou and do it, too." Loesch's comments are so extreme, they put her out on a fringe where even Rush Limbaugh won't go.
From the 01.13.2012 edition of Premiere Radio Network's The Rush Limbaugh Show:



When Rushbo thinks you went too far, you're in Psycho Talk land.


Politico's Dylan Byers on Loesch's statements:


CNN political analyst Dana Loesch celebrated the U.S. Marines who appear to have urinated on the bodies of dead Taliban members during her radio show on Thursday.
"Now we have a bunch of progressives that are talking smack about our military because there were marines caught urinating on corpses, Taliban corpses," Loesch said during her radio program on FM News Talk 97.1. "Can someone explain to me if there's supposed to be a scandal that someone pees on the corpse of a Taliban fighter? Someone who, as part of an organization, murdered over 3,000 Americans? I'd drop trou and do it too. That's me though. I want a million cool points for these guys. Is that harsh to say? Come on people, this is a war. What do people think this is?"
Loesch's comments were first noted by St. Louis Activist Hub, a website for progressive activists. Official audio of Loesch's remarks is also available on her show page, beginning four and a half minutes prior to the end of part one of Thursday's show.
CNN, which has looked to bring in voices from across the political spectrum, also prides itself on being positioned in the center of the more ideologically driven Fox and MSNBC networks.
I've reached out to CNN to ask for their response to Loesch's comments, and whether or not it will have any impact on her role at CNN. Updates here if and when I hear back.



CNN issues a statement on Loesch's remarks, via Huffington Post Media:



UPDATE: CNN released a statement about Loesch's comments on Friday:
“CNN contributors are commentators who express a wide range of viewpoints—on and off of CNN—that often provoke strong agreement or disagreement. Their viewpoints are their own.”





Union-hater Loesch falsely blames unions for Hostess' possible bankruptcy

Massively insane liar and union-hater Dana Loesch misleadingly blames unions (typical for her) for Hostess Brands's possible bankruptcy and taking away her precious Twinkies. Her biased Big "Journalism" article contains lots of falsehoods and no facts as always.

I’m from Ozark country and it is against the law for any home south of Rolla to have a Twinkie-less pantry. Alright, so maybe not “against the law,” but I’ve yet to see a pantry without one. All my kin abided by this unspoken rule. Because of my history with the snack cake, I was dismayed, to say the least, when news hit that Hostess was trying to stave off bankruptcy. I was further dismayed that they sort of obfuscated the reason why.


I’m sorry, but I call BS.
You’re Hostess. It’s not difficult to sell creme-filled heaven snacks and America isn’t exactly eating healthier. If anything, America is eating leaner because the price of everything has increased eleventy-fold because the cost of energy is passed to us, the consumers. Now for the truth: this is what Hostess cited as the real reason behind their move against bankruptcy.

Higher energy and labor costs. Likely promises made to union bosses that the company is unable to keep because inflated wages and inflated energy prices are eating profits and everyone knows wages and sustainability come from profits.

USA Today finally adds further down the page:
Additionally, Hostess employees are unionized while most of its competitors aren’t. As a result, Hostess has high pension and medical benefit costs.
Until you reached the middle of the story and put two and two together, you’d have figured that the company is tanking due to eating habits.

Dear Ms. Loesch, unions are not to blame for the possible bankruptcy of Hostess Brands, you nimrod.


Who else joins in on the pile-on against unionization? AFA's leading nutjob Bryan Fischeron Twitter, joined in on the chorus of blaming Hostess Brands's unionization for their possible bankruptcy.





Now, the real facts about Hostess's possible bankruptcy, the facts that Loesch, Fischer, and the other anti-union hacks don't tell you:

USA Today:
NEW YORK (AP) – Just like many Americans, the maker of Twinkies, Sno Balls and Wonder Bread is trying to lose the fat. 

Hostess Brands is hoping to take a bite out of its high costs as it heads back into bankruptcy protection for the second time in less than a decade. Hostess has enough cash to keep stores stocked with its Ding DongsHo Hos and other snacks for now. But longer term, the 87-year-old company has a bigger problem: health-conscious Americans favor yogurt and energy bars over the dessert cakes and white bread they devoured 30 years ago. 

"The iconic status of Twinkies is partly this perception that there's nothing real in it," said Ken Albala, professor of history at the University of the Pacific, in Stockton, Calif., who specializes in food history. "It's this cake filled with an unidentifiable sugary cream filling that never goes bad."

Hostess has other problems, too.

In Hostess' Chapter 11 filing on Wednesday, the company said its rivals have combined and expanded their reach, heightening competition in the snack space. Hostess' competitors range from Bimbo Bakeries, which makes Entenmann's baked goods, and McKee Foods, which make Little Debbie snack cakes. It also faces competition from larger food makers like Sara Lee and Kraft Inc.

Additionally, Hostess employees are unionized while most of its competitors aren't. As a result, Hostess has high pension and medical benefit costs. The company has 19,000 employees and operates in 48 states.

Hostess did not announce layoffs but spokesman Lance Ignon said Wednesday that the company will make future decisions "in the best interest of the company."

CEO Brian Driscoll said the Hostess is working to reach a consensual agreement with its unions to modify its collective bargaining agreements. Hostess also hopes to modernize its systems, fleets and plants to keep pace with customer needs.

"This company has tremendous potential if we can remove the barriers to success," Driscoll said.

The Teamsters Union, which represents about 7,500 of Hostess' delivery drivers and merchandisers, said in a statement on Wednesday that it is also committed to working toward a solution.

The company's filing comes just two years after its predecessor emerged from bankruptcy proceedings. That company, called Interstate Bakeries and based in Kansas City, Mo., filed for bankruptcy protection in 2004 and changed its name to Hostess Brands after it emerged in 2009.




CNN Money's Aaron Smith::

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Rest easy, Twinkie lovers: Hostess Brands, the storied American manufacturer of snack cakes, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Wednesday, but said it will continue to churn out Ho Hos, Ding Dongs and other iconic products.
"Throughout the proceeding, we're going to operate business as normal," said Hostess spokesman Erik Halvorson. "They'll keep making Twinkies."

The company, based in Irving, Texas, filed for Chapter 11 protection in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York. But Halvorson said the company does not plan to lay off any of its employees or close any plants. So the CupCakes and Sno Balls will keep on coming.
The company has about 19,000 full-time and part-time employees, including 10,413 hourly workers and 8,436 salaried workers, according to a court filing. About 83% of the employees are union members.

The company said that it pays about $63.2 million to its employees per pay period, and that it currently owes them $21 million for services rendered.
In its bankruptcy filing, the privately held company said that it owes more than $1 billion to creditors. The debt is spread out among a vast number of creditors -- between 50,000 and 100,000, the company said. 

Interstate Brands was formerly known as Interstate Bakeries. That subsidiary filed for bankruptcy in 2005, emerging from Chapter 11 in 2009. Layoffs occurred during that time and even since 2009, said Halvorson.
The job reductions took a toll on company morale, according to bankruptcy documents filed by Hostess on Wednesday.
"The employees have been witness to the closing or sale of several operations within the debtors' business as well as company-wide layoffs or reductions in force," the document said. "The increased pressures on the employees, together with layoffs and general concern about the welfare of the debtors, have led to a decline in employee morale." 




1.12.2012

Loesch's blatant Islamophobia strikes again by cheering on the urination of Taliban corpses

More violent rhetoric from KFTK 97.1 FM right-wing extremist Islamophobic radio host Dana Loesch, as she misleadingly declared on The Dana Show today that "the Progressives/Liberals are outraged that Taliban corpses are urinated on, while the 'Liberal press' ignores OWS Protestors urinating on cop cars." She stated that "I have no problem with it."


From the 01.12.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:



Adam Shriver at the St. Louis Activist Hub has more on Loesch's venom:
CNN "political analyst" Dana Loesch, on the other hand, apparently doesn't care at all if these actions were directly working against the mission of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan; instead, she cheered for it to fuel the unhinged Muslim hatred that has become a staple of modern day right-wing media. On her show, she gave the marines in question "one million cool points" and said that she would "drop trow" and "do it too." She ended by saying: "Do I have a problem with that as a citizen of the United States? No, I don't."



Loesch's rhetoric echoes that of rabid Islamophobe Atlas Shrugged blogger Geller's ridiculously offensive tripe regarding the Marines' urination of Taliban corpses.


Hamas-tied CAIR, once again sides with jihadists against the US military. Always. Apparently they are a  "Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization" for jihadists and Taliban and Al-Shabaab, Hamas, Hezb'allah, et al).
CAIR has whipped itself up into an Islamic frenzy because  a video surfaced that appears to show US Marines combat gear urinating on several dead jihadis.
I love these Marines. Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.
Ms. Pamela Geller, YOU are the one that's the lunatic, not CAIR.

Here are the REAL facts (NOT the propaganda from the likes of Loesch and Geller) about the shameful act of corpse urination by some members of the US Marines.
ThinkProgress Security:
video that surfaced Wednesday that allegedly depicts a group of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan urinating on corpses that they called “dead Taliban” could complicate nascent peace talks in the decade-long war there. The act portrayed on the video faceduniversal condemnation from the military, politicians, and the Afghan president Hamid Karzai.
With the U.S. expected to begin talks soon with the Afghan Taliban insurgency, all parties were quick to distance themselves from the act. The Marines said in a statement that the actions “are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps.” In a separate statement, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a criminal probe was being launched and added:

This disrespectful act is inexplicable and not in keeping with the high moral standards we expect of coalition forces.
ISAF strongly condemns the actions depicted in the video, which appear to have been conducted by a small group of U.S. individuals, who apparently are no longer serving in Afghanistan.

Not everyone, however, was saddened by the events. Anti-Muslim activist Pam Geller wrote in favor of the incident. “I love these Marines,” she said, adding, “Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.” A former Republican National Committee researcher tweeted wondering, “this is a story?” He added: “I could care less. Liberal media at work.” Michael Goldfarb, a neoconseravtive Republican operative (a former McCain campaign spokesman), lobbyist and, as of recently, chairman of a new conservative online media ventureretweeted the comments from the RNC researcher.



Al Jazeera English:

The US Marine Corps says it will investigate a video posted on the internet which appears to show US soldiers in Afghanistan urinating on corpses.
In a statement issued on Wednesday after the footage came to light, the corps said the matter would be fully investigated.
"While we have not yet verified the origin or authenticity of this video, the actions portrayed are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the marines in our corps," the statement said.
John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said: "Regardless of the circumstances or who is in the video, this is... egregious, disgusting behavior, unacceptable for anyone in uniform.
"It turned my stomach," he added.
The video, which was first posted on the Live Leak website, shows four men in military uniforms urinating on three bloodied bodies on the ground, apparently aware that they were being filmed.
One of them jokes: "Have a nice day, buddy." The other makes a lewd joke about a shower.
The multinational security force in Afghanistan, ISAF, as well as the country's government, strongly condemned the actions portrayed in the video.

'Trained to spread horror'In a statement, the Taliban said the incident was "against all international human rights" but "not the only example of the horrific actions that the Americans have done in Afghanistan".
"American soldiers are trained to spread horror and this is one of the examples," the Taliban said.
However, the group's statement added that the incident would not affect negotiations with the US after US officials said Washington would send an envoy to Afghanistan to prepare the ground for direct peace talks.
About 20,000 marines are deployed in Afghanistan, mostly in Kandahar and Helmand provinces in the south of the war-ravaged country.

The video could aggravate anti-US sentiment in Afghanistan after a decade of a war that has seen other cases of abuse.
The US military has been prosecuting soldiers from its army's 5th Stryker Brigade on charges of murdering unarmed Afghan civilians while deployed in 2010 in Kandahar province.
In that case, photographs published last March by two magazines - Der Spiegel and Rolling Stone - showed soldiers posing with the bloodied corpse of an Afghan boy they had just killed.
A Muslim civil rights group in the US condemned the alleged desecration of corpses in a letter to Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary.
"Any guilty parties must be punished to the full extent allowed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and by relevant American laws," the Council on American-Islamic Relations said in the letter, a copy of which was sent to media organisations.



Memo to the people that are cheering it on: DO NOT urinate on ANYBODY's dead corpses. It is sick, disrespectful, and offensive to  do it.


This type of rhetoric is reason enough for Emmis execs to suspend and/or fire her, but since her station's manager is a hardcore Republican, it won't happen..



1.11.2012

KFTK's The Dana Show moves from 2-4PM to Noon-3PM, effective January 30th

Starting on Monday, January 30th, Dana Loesch of the Gateway "Grassroots" Initiative's The Dana Show on KFTK will have a new time slot, expanding to three hours. The first two hours are head-to-head against Rush Limbaugh's The Rush Limbaugh Program on KMOX 1120 AM and the 3rd against local Dittohead Mark Reardon. Premiere's The Laura Ingraham Show (currently airing from Noon to 2PM, has been removed from KFTK's Schedule. The Dave Glover Show gets expanded from 3 hours to 4, and starts right after The Dana Show. The post-Glover lineup, Allman In The Morning, and The Glenn Beck Program's spots stay intact.



Starting January 30th, Dana Loesch, host of "The Dana Show" will move to three big hours from noon to 3pm, bringing you all the hottest and biggest developments from the political scene. At 3pm, Dave Glover will take over the microphone as his show, "The Dave Glover Show" expands to four big hours in drive-time keeping you laughing and informed on your commute home.
The new weekday schedule will be as follows:
Allman in the Morning  5am-9amGlenn Beck  9am-12nThe Dana Show  12n-3pmThe Dave Glover Show  3pm-7pmSean Hannity  7pm-9pmMichael Savage  9pm-11pmThe Mark Levin Show  11pm-2amRed Eye Radio  2am-4amThe Wall Street Journal This Morning  4am-5am

In Indianapolis, on WIBC, they will air the last hour of The Dana Show, at 3PM EST/2PM CST, instead of the first hour that currently airs.

What does that mean? Another hour of Loesch's outrageous fabricationsoutlandish claims, and blatant lies perpetrating on her inane hate-filled radio show.

1.10.2012

Obama Derangement Syndrome Alert: Dana Loesch baselessly declares "MSM complicit in keeping the 2009 Halloween Bash a secret"

More Obama Derangement Syndrome and phony "journalism" from Breitbart toady and CNN "Contributor" Dana Loesch, as she wrote yesterday in Big Journalism falsely accusing the "mainstream media" of "being complicit in the coverup of the 2009 White House Halloween Bash":


The Obamas threw an epic Halloween bash in 2009 and we’re only just now discovering how over-the-top the bash was — and how complicit media was in keeping the White House’s secret. After all, White House staff was “concerned” that the extravagant bash would appear tone-deaf to unemployed Americans, hundreds of thousands of whom are leaving the workforce entirely as new jobs are scarce and businesses are stretched thin. But is the story what it seems?


The White House has thrown so many over-the top parties and the First Lady has come under fire from the President’s advisers for her expensive tastes, so the initial reaction to hearing of yet another extravagant White House party is anger. But was the Halloween bash like the other White House parties? Was it like the party with Paul McCartney that the Obamas enjoyed while the Gulf struggled with an oil spill? Or the party the White House threw when America had its credit rating downgraded?

If media reports are to be believed, the Halloween bash was “staged“/thrown by Tim Burton and Johnny Depp. Security for the event would cost the public, but (I assume) comparatively no more than the cost of the annual Easter egg roll or other observances.
The point of the question isn’t to excuse the Obamas’ past irresponsibility in presentation; they lead one of the most tone-deaf administrations (Camelot style in a Carter economy, after all). The point is that this event, from my understanding, was for, and attended predominately by, military members and their families. This party is easier to justify, and features a better guest list, than the previous devil-may-care variety. I don’t want to discourage Hollywood from doing something nice for our soldiers when 99% of the movies they make about them portray them as monsters. The last time Johnny Depp dabbled in politics he called the country a “big dumb puppy.” A good deed like footing the bill (assumedly sans Secret Service, other security) for a bash thrown in honor of military families deserves some positive reinforcement by way of kudos, if this report is true.
There is still the pesky question of why the White House and media in attendance kept all of this quiet.
The White House press corps was allowed to report on more modest festivities earlier that day for Washington-area school children, but did not release details of the more glamorous festivities that occurred later for what was the Obamas’ first Halloween in office in 2009.

The blame will be put on you — instead of where it belongs: on an administration that has thrown, at the public’s expense, so many parties, taken so many vacations, and has been so decidedly opaque (for the most “transparent administration ever”). The White House owns the expectation is has created by precedence. Hollywood directors, actors, and their deeds are irrelevant to the discussion, but they will be used as deflection and later, an ally.
Who else owns the expectation? The media. The public has to play the guessing game, citizen journalists have to assume the responsibility of hunting down fact, because MSM either cannot or will not themselves.
Loesch's article is just more falsehood-based Obama-hating red meat to her readers.

Of course, it is just your standard misplaced lies about "Obama spending money foolishly while Bush spent it wisely" perpetrated by the right-wing media liars club. They also scream about vacations taken by either Barack and/or Michelle Obama, while ignoring Ronald Reagan's, both Bush 41 and Bush 43's, and even Bill Clinton's vacations. In fact, Bush 43 took more vacations than Obama has ever done. They also attack the First Lady Michelle for being what a typical First Lady's job is. Answer to all these asinine personal attacks on the Obama Family: the fact that they are Black, intelligent, and members of the Democratic Party.


The Huffington Post reported in 2010 that other Presidents prior to Obama have also done Halloween parties at the White House:


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama on Saturday doled out presidential M&Ms and dried fruit mixes to more than 2,000 trick-or-treaters, marking their Halloween at a White House event partly aimed at honoring military families.
Dressed as superheroes, pirates, fairies and skeletons, the kids came in with their parents from Maryland, Virginia and Washington D.C., lining up at the orange lit White House.
The Obamas smiled, chatted and passed out cellophane goody bags that were also filled with a sweet dough butter cookie made by White House pastry chef Bill Yosses and a National Park Foundation Ranger activity book. Mrs. Obama wore furry cat ears and a leopard-patterned top.
Over the years, the winter holidays have been the ones to get the full treatment at the White House, with Christmas trees and tinsel all around.

The Obamas are not the first, though, to show Halloween spirit.
President George H.W. Bush and first lady Barbara Bush hosted 500 children on Halloween in 1989, loading them up with fun loot but also teaching them about the dangers of drugs. The kids came decked out in costumes; some Secret Service agents came dressed as clowns.
In the Clintons' first year in the White House, the Great Pumpkin returned. A huge orange jack-o'-lantern was formed around the front entrance to the White House, with the front door to the mansion serving as the middle tooth. The first couple's daughter, Chelsea, was 13 at the time and the house was stuffed with pumpkins.
During the Nixon administration, first daughter Tricia hosted parties for underprivileged children, according to the White House Historical Association. And plenty of other first families got festive for Halloween.
No telling what kind of goblins might pop up this year, although stories of ghosts – especially Abraham Lincoln's – are woven into White House history.


A Reuters article from October 31st, 2009 has what really happened:

The White House glowed pumpkin orange on Saturday when the Obama family turned 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue into Halloween central, complete with a giant stuffed spider dangling from a web above its front door.
More than 2,000 local area children and their families were invited for the traditional trick-or-treat event. 
The Obamas spent about 30 minutes handing out cellophane bagfulls of boxed red, white and blue M&M’s. The boxes bore the presidential seal. Also tucked in was a home-baked orange-glazed cookie and, in a nod to Michelle Obama’s efforts to promote healthy food, dried apricots and cranberries.
The president didn’t wear a costume for his first Halloween in the White House. Michelle Obama went as a cat woman, complete with leopard-print top and furry ears on a headband. Daughters Malia and Sasha were there for the fun, but were not stuck with any candy line duties.
The scene was worthy of a Hollywood extravaganza. Bubble machines blanketed the North Portico, the ceremonial entrance to the White House. Pumpkins, some carved and candle lighted, lined the marble steps. Behind Obama stood a white-helmeted storm trooper character from “Star Wars,” along with the film’s Chewbacca, the hairy, apelike “wookie.”  
CNN, which is Loesch's current employer, also has more details (article published on Halloween 2009):

WASHINGTON (CNN)– President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama are celebrating their first Halloween at the White House by inviting Washington area students and military families to trick or treat.
According to the White House, up to 2,000 kids between the ages of 6 and 14 years old are expected on the grounds of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Saturday evening.

Just a couple days ago, The Huffington Post reported that the Obama Adminstration held an Alice In Wonderland-themed party in 2009.


President Obama threw a star-studded, "Alice In Wonderland"-themed Halloween party at the White House in 2009, New York Times correspondent Jodi Kantor writes in her new book, "The Obamas."The party, parts of which were posted on the White House website and reported by Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet, saw the State Dining Room transformed into a Tim Burton-inspired fantasyland. It resembled the world of the filmmaker's impending Disney-distributed adaptation of the famous Lewis Carroll story, which was released in March 2010.

Kantor writes (via the NY Post) that Burton made up the room "in his signature creepy-comic style... He had turned the room into the Mad Hatter's tea party, with a long table set with antique-looking linens, enormous stuffed animals in chairs, and tiered serving plates with treats like bone-shaped meringue cookies... Fruit punch was served in blood vials at the bar. Burton's own Mad Hatter, the actor Johnny Depp, presided over the scene in full costume, standing up on a table to welcome everyone in character."
George Lucas, the book says, sent over the original Chewbacca costume for the occasion. Kantor also writes that the President and First Lady's daughters, Malia and Sasha, and their friends were entertained with a magic show in the East Room.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this item said that the White House attempted to keep the appearance of Burton and Depp from the press. Their attendance was reported at the time by a Tennessee paper and a Depp fan website.


Why does CNN continue to put this massive liar on the air?