Loesch falsely claimed that "he denies the existence of widespread 'voter fraud.'" (approx 1:20)
O'Keefe says that the "'mainstream media' will never love us." (approx. 2:20)
Loesch falsely states that "the 'mainstream media' and the Democrats' narratives claim that no voter fraud exists, but it's been proven wrong by you, O'Keefe." (approx. 3:10)
O'Keefe: "my exposés have been effective to the point that state legislatures are passing voter ID laws." (approx. 4:00)
O'Keefe blames the "establishment for covering up the problems." (approx. 4:40)
Loesch and O'Keefe bash Sharpton and the Dems for telling the truth about "voter ID" laws. (approx. 5:50)
Loesch baselessly accuses "Eric Holder and the DOJ of refusing to uphold voter integrity." (approx. 7:00)
Loesch falsely peddles the non-truth that "Voter IDs help voters, not suppress the voters." (approx. 7:30)
O'Keefe: "I think the people will stand behind us on this one." (approx. 8:28)
Loesch: "If the DOJ, Eric Holder, and the Democrats will go after O'Keefe, then wouldn't it compromise their inability to do their jobs." (approx. 9:10)
Loesch: "O'Keefe scored a victory right out of the gate with this." Nope, he LOST right out of the gate, as usual. (approx. 10:40)
The real Eric Holder is right, and people like O'Keefe and Loesch are lying liars.
From the 04.09.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
James O’Keefe and his supporters think that he’s scored big today. See, not long ago, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized laws that require people wishing to vote to bring photo I.D. with them; he called those laws “a solution in search of a problem,” and said “there is no statistical proof that vote fraud is a big concern in this country.” So one of O’Keefe’s colleagues—a white man who looks considerably younger than the Attorney General—went to went to Holder’s polling place for the recent primary in Washington, D.C., and claimed to be Holder. The punch line, of course, is that he was given no trouble, and welcomed to vote. (He never went through with it and actually committed the voter fraud, presumably because someone’s giving them legal advice not to.)
James O’Keefe and his supporters think that he’s scored big today. See, not long ago, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized laws that require people wishing to vote to bring photo I.D. with them; he called those laws “a solution in search of a problem,” and said “there is no statistical proof that vote fraud is a big concern in this country.” So one of O’Keefe’s colleagues—a white man who looks considerably younger than the Attorney General—went to went to Holder’s polling place for the recent primary in Washington, D.C., and claimed to be Holder. The punch line, of course, is that he was given no trouble, and welcomed to vote. (He never went through with it and actually committed the voter fraud, presumably because someone’s giving them legal advice not to.)
Well, no. Shapiro and O’Keefe and the rest don’t know when voter fraud takes place, if indeed it does, because they don’t do the work necessary to find out. O’Keefe may be lionized as an investigative journalist, but he’s not one, and he never has been. He takes the easy, flashy way out: his videos don’t prove that malfeasance is happening; they prove that it could, maybe. (Taking the same trick and repeating it over and over again, which is basically what O’Keefe did with this latest video, part of a series of such work, doesn’t help.) Investigative journalism—the real thing, the kind that discovers the dirt people are actually doing, rather than that they could potentially do—is hard work, and it can be boring. You want to expose systematic voter fraud? Get a bunch of records, pore through them for a few hundred hours.
James O'Keefe's Project Veritas has unveiled the latest chapter in its ongoing "voter fraud investigation": a video that purports to show a young man nearly obtaining the ballot of Attorney General Eric Holder. Like O'Keefe's past "voter fraud" videos, however, this video fails to show actual voter fraud being committed, and it doesn't prove the existence of a widespread conspiracy to throw an election. That's because both are extremely rare.
The video shows the man entering a polling place in Washington, D.C., then cuts to the man asking a poll worker, "Do you have an Eric Holder?" After the O'Keefe associate confirms Holder's address, which is censored, the poll worker offers him the voter roll and says, "Please sign your name there." The fake Eric Holder then says he left his ID in the car and leaves.
This video doesn't prove any of these things. What it shows is a man coming close to committing a serious crime. But even if the man had fraudulently cast a vote under Eric Holder's name, D.C. and federal laws provide a number of protections against fraudulent votes.
First of all, if the imposter had fraudulently cast Holder's ballot, and the real Eric Holder then had shown up to vote and been told his name was already crossed off the list, the real Holder almost certainly could have still voted. Under the Help America Vote Act of 2002, any voter who is told by an "election official" that he or she is "not eligible to vote" must be allowed to "cast a provisional ballot."
In spite of all this evidence, however, right-wing media routinely drum up phony or baseless cases of voter fraud, which they then use to rally support for restrictive voter ID laws.
Today Coca Cola sided with reported 9-11 truther and cop-killer supporter Van Jones and the group he co-founded, Color of Change. CoC cyber-bullied Coca Cola, Walmart, and other companies for supporting voter integrity via their membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council. Via the Washington Examiner:
Officials from another party-backed group, Color of Change, kicked off a boycott of Coke and other financial backers of the American Legislative Exchange Council which supports new voter ID laws. Other supporters include Walmart and Koch Industries. The boycott call started with a tweet (@CocaCola is helping undermine voting rights. Tell them to stop) and a webpage. The group also has tied the Council to the Trayvon Martin shooting case.
If requiring an ID to vote is racist, I would like for Color of Change to explain to me how requiring an ID to cash a check, purchase alcohol, cigaretters, reserve a hotel room, rent a car, enter into the very Department of Justice building, operate a motor vehicle, buy a home, et al. isn't racist -- and if they are consistent and believe that it is, explain why they haven't protested any of these things.
Who's doing the cyber-bullying now? It certainly is NOT Van Jones or Color of Change, but Loesch and the rest of the RWNJ brigade that's doing it. And the "Voter ID" laws (really voter suppression laws) are indeed targeted at groups likely to vote Democratic, such as African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, the poor, college students, and the disabled.
Here are the actual facts from Think Progress, not the ones that Loesch made up to lie on purpose:
Prompted by a petition campaign by the progressive advocacy group Color of Change, Coca-Cola has pulled its support from ALEC, a right-wing corporate-funded front group which has been pushing voter restriction efforts around the country. The company released this statement moments ago:
The Coca-Cola Company has elected to discontinue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our Company and industry.
Here's some great ideas to piss off Loesch: Go buy Coca-Cola products and any other products that don't cave into right-wing extremists.
It looks like Dana Loesch is still defending the right-wing smearsagainstSandra Fluke and blaming the Democrats for it. Her blogpost at Big "Journalism" today falsely accused the Democratic Party of dragging out the Limbaugh-Fluke controversy for their own gain.
It's the story that won't go away, the tactic Democrats keep dragging out and inflating with with artificial indignation to secure relevance. They do it because their presidential incumbent needs not just one political identity card -- he needs the whole deck. The administration's attempt to malign Rush Limbaugh and their collusion with MMfA to censor conservatives on the airwaves failed miserably, yet a bogeyman is still needed. Dutiful Hillary Clinton is trotted out to push the dead nontroversy, again. (And progressives insist that conservatives won't stop talking about it?) Clinton's time as the long-suffering silent spouse to her philandering Presidential husband has not blunted her appetite one iota for using women to push an agenda, as indicated by her recent interview with Andrea Mitchell.
I don't particularly dig the language progressives use to describe conservative women. I didn't, and wouldn't, call for them to be censored over it however, because I'm not a pretend First Amendment supporter like these latter day fascists in Slutgate. What is objectionable is their complete double-standard on respect for women. It's not a War On Women unless progressives can claim some sort of offense for their female base. They ignore the actual War On Women -- the War On Conservative Women. For a group that fights for sex, drugs, and free expression, progressives sure do cop the Puritan sensibility pretty quick after a few "sluts." It's comical, transparent, and utterly square.
No, Dana, the REAL War On Women is being waged by people on the right, including you and Michelle Malkin. And it's YOU that's being the fascist, NOT Fluke, Clinton, MMFA, or the left.
On twitter, Oyxcontin-smuggling sexist Rush Limbaugh praised Loesch's blogpost on Big Journalism:
@DLoesch gets it right… Hillary Clinton coordinating with @mmfa to rile up the base and distract from Obama's failure. eib.tw/HbFbrz
— Rush Limbaugh (@rushlimbaugh) April 3, 2012
On the other hand, 2008 Democratic Presidential candidate (who lost to current President Obama) and former First Lady (now currently Secretary of Defense) Hillary Clinton and her daughter Chelsea have defended Fluke from Limbaugh's attacks against her (and by extension, all Democratic-leaning women).
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Monday called the controversial comments Rush Limbaugh made about Sandra Fluke in February a “verbal assault.” But she also said she was encouraged by the public rebuke of the radio host.
Rush Limbaugh was uncharacteristically quiet today after Chelsea Clinton recounted how the conservative talk show host appeared to make fun her looks by comparing her to a dog when she was 13-years-old.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, had harsh word for Limbaugh when reminded of the incident saying, “We’re better than that.”
Chelsea Clinton spoke last week about Limbaugh’s comments while on a panel about women involved in politics. The former first daughter made the comments while defending Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke who had been ridiculed last month by Limbaugh as a “slut” and a “prostitute” for testifying before Congress in support of a government mandate requiring health insurance to cover contraception.
“She and I actually have something in common,” Chelsea Clinton said. “We’ve both have been attacked by Rush Limbaugh.”
“Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” Limbaugh said on his television show before showing an image of the young Clinton.
From the 03.28.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Transcript:
Caller: "I want to talk about-- I do not wish to happen. Do you think all the hatred from the media and the discontent coming out of Florida with the event of Trayvon Martin. Do you think that the media and the African-American people want a race war? Am I out of line by saying that they really want it to happen?"
LOESCH: "I think..."
Caller: "...think that they want to see it happen?"
LOESCH: "Yeah, I think that some progressives, like the New Black Panther Party, definitely sounds like they kind of like they do."
[...]
"Brian, I appreciate your call. I think that they want it-- progressives need it as a tool, they need it as a distraction. Those are the people who scream loudest about injustices to minority communities. These are also the same people who pass policies that present the greatest offense to minority communities. They complain-- progressives complain about the lack of jobs in certain depressed areas, but what are they doing to bring jobs to those areas?"
It was in response to my piece published last night on the media's choice to ignore the death threats against Rush Limbaugh by way of progressives's newest anthem, "Kill Rush."
Boehlert was too quick to spin without actually checking the facts. What's that date? March 6? Considering Facebook doesn't post the current year date, it's March 6 of this year, meaning just a couple of weeks ago.
Eric was wrong on two counts: the song was posted to Youtube in 2011, NOT in 2010. Also, did you see that at the bottom?
They went back and tagged "Sandra Fluke" on their video. Boehlert's spin is that the video was posted in 2010 (it wasn't) and that it isn't in response to Limbaugh (they made it so).
The song was originally recorded in 2010, not 2011 or later. Yet another pathetic example of Boehlert Derangement Syndrome displayed by Loesch.
Boehlert, on twitter, took down Loesch's distortion of the dates:
Myspace is still around for bands like the ironically named Detente, oh, excuse me, DÉTENTE (ne faut pas oublier l'accent Français!). A quick scan of their Facebook profile shows they formed around when I was in kindergarten, got a touch of secondhand glory by opening for bigger bands (like Megadeth) in those groups's infancy, and then those bands went on to actually, you know, write good music and sell records. Bands like this are why people hate metal, most of which is structurally complex and difficult to play well. DÉTENTE has scored the most attention they'll ever receive in their lives (sadly, none of it will translate to album sales) because of a song they've written called "Kill Rush."
Yet another right-wing moron, The Admiral at the Lake Minnetonka Liberty blog, suggested that all the members of Détente should be dead.
Yup. I am calling for the demise of all members of the shitty metal band calledDetente. Oh yeah, I’m “dead” serious. Just as serious as they are for calling for Rush Limbaugh to be killed. They even wrote and performed a song advocating it. Well, what goes around comes around.
Funny thing about the left, Detente will be excused for exorcising their 1st Amendment rights, I will probably be labeled a hater, dangerous, an advocator of violence, hell, I might even get a knock on the door from the police or FBI. But when the left does it, “that’s different.” Well you know what? It’s not different. It’s time for us to take off the kid gloves and slap those leftist bitches in to submission. I’ve had enough of their crap, it’s time for pricks like this to pay the piper.
And how about those leftist jackasses at Facebook and YouTube? Whenever some whiney leftist complains, the content is taken down and the user is banned. But as long as a leftist does it, it’s okay. Including advocating murdering someone. Hypocrisy and double-standards, that’s all the left is.
Typical far-right bully this blogger is by wanting to kill people for having the audacity to criticize Rush Limbaugh.
Yet another day in the office for Breitbart.com hacks like Dana Loesch, Dan Riehl, Lee Stranahan, and others to lead the Media Matters Derangement Syndrome attacks. One of Loesch's henchmen, Dan Riehl, blogged in Big Journalism and falsely accuses "MMFA of assaulting Dana Loesch's right to free speech."
If there's anything shameful in what only antisemitic Media Matters apparently still feels is an ongoing Sandra Fluke debate, it's the way antisemitic Media Matters continues it's un-American, Soros-funded war on free speech in America.
While they may be especially focused on coming for the Jews in certain areas, anyone on the Right is ultimately fair game for the crew at antisemitic Media Matters. As far as they're concerned, antisemitism is just fine, but if one dares speak out against a leftist policy of Barack Obama's, all bets are off and they will lie and stretch any truth to silence you.
Antisemitic Media Matters posts an audio clip of Dana Loesch's FM radio show. Listening to it, Dana talks about many associated topics. In between she discusses the left's war on religion by attempting to force the Catholic church to purchase and distribute birth control. That's the heart of the matter and little more. Among several other related remarks, Loesch suggests House Speaker John Boehner "just got out of the tanning bed, he's a little bit dizzy," going on to ask if Boehner is "an agent for Obama." Now, are we supposed to take that literally, as Media Matters would suddenly like us to with regard to pretty typical talk radio comments on Sandra Fluke? No, of course not.
What Media Matters is actually engaged in is a grossly un-American hate campaign to silence critics of the Left, Media Matters itself and Barack Obama. Such campaigns are as dirty and malignant and un-American as one might find on the Internet, or elsewhere. They deserve to be condemned, marginalized, if not wholly ignored, and little more. It's that they always come in a purely political context that makes them as pathetic, as they are un-American. If Media Matters, a reportedly bizarre and erratic David Brock and Eric Boehlert had their way, only those who agree with them would be allowed to speak in America. Now, back to your bunker, boys - and take merry little band of paid storm trooper hacks along with you.
No, Mr. Riehl, Loesch's "free speech" hasn't been assaulted because MMFA was right to call her out onherconstantattacksagainstSandra Fluke. And for the 10,000th time, Eric Boehlert and MMFA are NOT "Anti-Semitic."
MMFA:
Amid the controversy over Rush Limbaugh's misogynistic attacks on Sandra Fluke, CNN contributor Dana Loesch has aggressively pursued the right-wing campaign to bully the Georgetown law student. After announcing that she would call Fluke "whatever I want," Loesch has called Fluke a "nympho" and used her radio show and posts at Big Journalism to claim that Fluke "embarrass[ed] herself and her sex by ... discussing about how she has a huge inability to control her sexual urges."
From KFTK's The Dana Show:
Fluke Also Testified About The Need For Access To Contraceptive Medicine After A Woman Was Raped.
From Fluke's testimony:
One student told us that she knew birth control wasn't covered, and she assumed that's how Georgetown's insurance handled all of women's sexual healthcare, so when she was raped, she didn't go to the doctor even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn't going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman's reproductive health. As one student put it, "this policy communicates to female students that our school doesn't understand our needs." These are not feelings that male fellow students experience. And they're not burdens that male students must shoulder. [Fluke testimony via Media Matters, 2/23/12]
For the truth about Sandra Fluke's testimony, click here
Loesch Falsely Accused Fluke Of "Discussing About How She Has A Huge Inability To Control Her Sexual Urges." Loesch addressed the controversy surrounding Limbaugh's misogynistic attacks on Fluke during the March 7 edition of her radio show, saying:
LOESCH: As the mother of sons, if I had a daughter who decided to embarrass herself and her sex by going before members of Congress on national television and discussing about how she has a huge inability to control her sexual urges, and thus needs a bailout, she needs individuals to pay higher insurance premiums so she can have free contraception at her university at which she is going by way of public funds apparently, that would to me would be more embarrassing than the act of what she's doing being called out for what it is listed as in the dictionary. That's just the hard truth of the matter. Back in the days when women acted better in public, and they didn't go and discuss about how they had an absolute insatiable sexual appetite that needs a thousand dollars a year in order to prevent pregnancy, people did that because there was a consequence to talking about your sex life to such an extent publicly on national television. And apparently all those inhibitions are out the window. Nothing is sacred anymore and thus nothing is attractive or alluring, because everything is trashy, and I think Fluke's testimony before members of Congress has contributed to that. [KFTK, The Dana Show, 3/7/12]
Loesch: Fluke Was "Embarrassing Herself Before Congress By Testifying That She Simply Cannot Stop Getting It On." In a March 2 Big Journalism post Loesch wrote:
More have admonished Limbaugh's description of Sandra Fluke than admonished a 30 year-old woman embarrassing herself before congress by testifying that she simply cannot stop getting it on and her inability to control her urges constitutes infringing upon everyone else for a bailout. [Big Journalism, 3/2/12]
Loesch: Fluke "Wants To Be Able To Be As Promiscuous As She Wants To Be." During the March 2 edition her radio show, Loesch responded to a caller who said that Fluke should "change her career and go work at the Mustang Ranch out there in Vegas," and said:
LOESCH: Oh my gosh. That could be -- you know, I'm telling you, she's worried about money apparently instead of going and asking for the government. But see that's -- and, Mike, I appreciate your call -- it comes down because she doesn't want to have to pay her own bills, because she's an independent woman. She's an independent woman like that Destiny's Child song, but she doesn't want to take care of all of her own business, because that's what independent women do. Independent women expect the government, which is characterized as the old cartoon Uncle Sam, to take care of their financial needs. She wants to be able to be as promiscuous as she wants to be, and all of the accoutrements that go along with that, she wants those to be financed by the government, because that's what independent women do. [KFTK, The Dana Show, 3/2/12]
Loesch: Fluke Is "Doing It More Than She's Studying In Law School. ... They Act Like They're Nymphos."
On her radio show, Loesch said of Fluke: "She's doing it more than she's studying in law school. Is that why our -- is that why law sucks lately? Is that why we're having such a problem in our courts?" Loesch also said, "They act like they're nymphos. That's what they act like." [KFTK, The Dana Show, 2/28/12]
His book correctly explained how Fixed Noise exploited their gullible viewers (or at least a decent portion of their viewership) into believing that "Barack Obama is a Muslim."
Mackenzie Weiniger at Politico:
President Barack Obama blamed Fox News for his political woes in a private meeting with labor leaders in 2010, saying he was “losing white males” who tune into the cable outlet and “hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7,” according to journalist David Corn’s new book, “Showdown.”
Corn writes that after the midterm elections, Obama told labor leaders in December 2010 that he held Fox partly responsible for him “losing white males.”
“…Fed by Fox News, they hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7, and it begins to seep in…The Republicans have been at this for 40 years. They have new resources, but the strategy is old,” Corn recounted Obama as saying.
Sean Hannity addressed Obama’s reference to Fox News on his radio show Monday, saying it “sounds like the president is very angry behind the scenes, very angry.”
And, Hannity said, he wasn’t surprised Obama decided to pin the blame on Fox. “Now this is a guy who claims he never watches cable news and then he’s making this broad sweeping statement that’s false,” Hannity said. “You always have Fox and talk radio to fall back on when all else fails,” Hannity added.
Bret Baier, the host of Fixed Noise's Special Report,misleadingly stated that "there were no examples of our hosts saying Barack Obama is a 'Muslim.'" Totally false, as several FNC/FBN personalities (including Baier and his program) have questioned Obama's faith and alleged that he was a "Muslim", a "fake Christian," or even "[Godless] atheist."
Here are at least a few examples of FNC/FBN commentators disparaging Obama's religion:
Special Report On Obama: "Islam Or Isn't He?"
During a June 2009 segment, Special Report aired a quote by Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough, in which he talked about how Obama "experienced Islam on three continents" and spent part of his childhood in Indonesia with a Muslim father. Special Report included this question above the quote: "Islam Or Isn't He?" [Fox News, Special Report with Bret Baier, 6/3/09]
On Fox, Donald Trump Claimed Obama's Birth Certificate "Maybe ... Says He Is A Muslim."
On The O'Reilly Factor, frequent guest Donald Trump said:
TRUMP: Listen, I have a birth certificate. I have my birth certificate. And in fact, they said the one I gave yesterday wasn't good enough. So I actually got the one from the Health Department, which is the perfect one. Because they were saying the one I gave yesterday wasn't good enough, so I got the other. People have birth certificates. He doesn't have a birth certificate. He may have one but there's something on that, maybe religion, maybe it says he is a Muslim. I don't know. Maybe he doesn't want that. Or he may not have one. But I will tell you this. If he wasn't born in this country, it's one of the great scams of all time. [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 3/30/11]
Fox Hosted "Conservative Comedian" Who Claimed Obama Is "Faking" Being Christian.
Fox & Friends hosted "conservative comedian" Brad Stine, who said of the president: "If Santorum doesn't want to question his Christianity, I will, because he's not really part of that." Stine continued, "why can't Obama be slammed for faking [Christianity]?" [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 2/20/12]
On Fox, Lars Larson Claimed Obama "Bows Down To Leaders Of ... Muslim Countries And Then He Disses Easter In His Own Country."
On Fox News' America Live, guest host Shannon Bream stated: "The president and White House often seem very frustrated about these polling numbers that come out that show a significant amount of Americans question the president's faith and wonder whether he's truly Muslim, even though he says again and again he is a Christian." She then asked: "So is it fair for the White House to take a little heat that he didn't step up and be more vocal on Easter?" Radio host Lars Larson stated that Obama "is paying more attention" to Muslim holidays.
Fox Nation Promoted Coulter's Claim That Obama Is An Atheist.
On September 1, 2010, Fox Nation promoted a column by Ann Coulter claiming that Obama is an atheist, using the headline: "Obama Is Not A Muslim, But...." [Fox Nation, 9/1/10]
Fox & Friends Pushed False Smear That Obama Attended A "Madrassa." On the January 19, 2007, editions of Fox & Friends First and Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade, along with co-hosts Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson, spent several segments advancing a false report that then-Sen. Barack Obama was raised a Muslim and attended a madrassa, or Islamic school, as a child in Indonesia. At one point, Doocy asked: "When people find out this stuff, they're going to go, 'Why didn't anybody ever mention that that man right there was raised as -- spent the first decade of his life raised by his Muslim father as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa?' " [Fox News, Fox & Friends Firstand Fox & Friends, 1/19/07]
From the 03.19.2012 edition of FNC's Special Report With Bret Baier:
Enter hack Dana Loesch: At her Big Journalism blog, she says Corn's assertions are "misleading and distracting from the fact that the Obama and Dems are failures."
I sense a feeling of spagetti-noodle strategy from Axelrod and Plouffe. They've thrown a number of possible bogeyman into the realm of public discourse to see what would stick. It was Bush, then Palin, then Fox News, then the tea party, then the phantom "War On Women," then Palin again, now we're back to Fox and the race card. The only people who cared about Barack Obama's ethnicity during the campaign was the Barack Obama campaign.
They're doing it again with Corn because every other tactic they've tried to distract the public from the disastrous results of Obama's leadership have utterly failed. The class warfare failed, the trumped-up "War On Women" is a failure, and polls are numerous in echoing the public's lack of confidence in his capability to deal with the economy or gas prices. No one cares. Corn's book would have been a tired cliché during the campaign; released now just makes it all the more comedically desperate.
Ms. Loesch, you have lost this round to David Corn, and he's more truthful than you.
I've been following the story of Michael John Kobulnicky, a reported former tea partier who stands accused of rape:
Lemon Grove resident Michael John Kobulnicky, 50, a leader in the San Diego Tea Party and former regional director of the Southern California Conservative Party, is under arrest for allegedly kidnapping and raping a local woman on Fiesta Island.
“He dragged her out of the car and sexually assaulted her pretty brutally,” San Diego Police Lt. Andra Brown told ECM news partner 10 News in late February, shortly after the February 25 assault occurred.
He is charged with rape, kidnapping, and forcible sex with a foreign object. Evidence includes surveillance video shot at a local convenience store shortly before the kidnapping occurred. Kobulnicky is being held without bail pending arraignment on Monday.
Some progressive talking heads seem gleeful at the misery of Kobulnicky's alleged victim. Progressive media has stopped short of crowing over it; I guess I missed the part where they condemned the over 300 counts of criminality and violence from OWS before pointing fingers. Additionally, how can Occupiers possibly recognize this as rape when they've spent the past six months denying the documented rapes that happened in their own encampments? Even now they're focused on denying the lastest Occupy rape in New Haven.
May I be frank? If Kobulnicky is proven guilty of crime with which he is charged, let the bastard rot.
Whether or not Kobulnicky is a tea partier is irrelevant because tea partiers condemn all rape regardless.
Another member of the Loesch/Breitbart Axis of Evil, Lee Stranahan, baselessly accuses OWS protestors of "asking for violence with police."
The Occupy Movement sprung back into public view last night the only way they knew how--by staging a violent clash with police on the streets. Like a spoiled child who has learned that throwing a temper tantrum is the only way to get attention, the movement used the confluence of the six-month anniversary of the start of Occupy Wall Street and the intoxicated party atmosphere of St. Patrick’s Day to launch an attempted re-taking of Zuccotti Park. The move was predictable because Occupy had openly discussed a few weeks ago that they needed more ‘direct actions’ as way to refill their dwindling financial coffers.
This is the Occupy Business Plan: antagonizing the police is good for business and will be supported by the media. And, unfortunately, the Obama administration. And spring hasn't even started yet.
