Yesterday saw the debut of the new Breitbart page, Breitbart California . However, right out of the gate, Breitbart California stirred up a ruckus with the roll out. The site’s graphic street art depicting House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s face photoshopped onto a bikini-clad woman on hands and knees, with tongue hanging out and blood red lips, has possibly distracted readers from the written content, especially now as several prominent women have publicly voiced their objections to the depiction. Some would say the depiction deserves protesting. Others would say Breitbart California handed the opposition a golden opportunity to use to their advantage. War on women anyone? From Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz , “To say the least, the Breitbart News ad is foul, offensive, and disrespectful to all women. It is a disgusting new low and would be reprehensible against any woman – regardless of party. It’s no wonder the Republicans are having problems appealing to women. If GOP leaders are serious about their rebrand, then both their elected and Party leadership should condemn this outrageous behavior, call on Breitbart News to immediately remove the ad, and not continue to use this website as a forum for their views.” She also called on the site to remove the offensive image. Jon Fleishman, the site’s California politics editor, wasn’t having it, “I think the likelihood of that is zero. It’s light-hearted satire.” Like beauty, satire may be in the eye of the beholder. He also gave a glimpse into the mission of the Breitbart California site, “The launch of Breitbart California represents some much-needed reinforcements in the ongoing battle against the institutional left in California. Popular blogger Ann Althouse posted today that she agrees with Ana Marie Cox’s tweet , “The people at Breitbart appear to have gone insane.” And the Washington Post reports that Nancy Pelosi had this to say , “So tasteless, that… I mean, is it even worthy of a question. It’s so undignified.” Breitbart California pointed out that this satirizing of political figures is nothing new. And, if anything, recent history has proven that it only matters when those being ‘satirized’ are of a certain political persuasion: -When making an appearance on Jimmy Fallon’s Late Night, the house band introduced Michelle Bachmann by playing the song “ Lyin’- Ass Bitch “. Breitbart California notes that there was no cry of protest from either Wasserman Schultz or Pelosi. -And when Bill Maher referred to Sarah Palin as a “dumb twat”, there was, again, no outcry from either Wasserman Schultz or Pelosi. They cite several more crude examples of conservative women being publicly degraded – with no outcry with from either Wasserman Schultz or Pelosi. While I understand the point they are attempting to make, one wonders, if Breitbart California’s goal is to lend support and give voice to Californians fighting the raging battle against the institutional left, is justifying their decision with a cocky, Look, you never made a stink when it was our side being degraded, so it’s okay if we do it to you now, the best way to go? And, does resisting the urge to wrestle in the mud and instead choosing to maintain a high-bar standard, give more power and standing to those on this side of the battle? Residents of the state fighting this battle certainly need strong voices , and Breitbart California will no doubt be an influential one. Hopefully, in their quest, Breitbart California won’t turn away any readers with this debut decision. –Dana
See original here:
Just admit you got owned and move on. Via Newsbusters: During the 2008 presidential campaign, GOP Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin made what has turned out to be a prescient remark about the relevance of a U.S. president’s resolve and its potential impact on Russia’s posture with the old Soviet Union’s satellite states. She observed: “After the Russian […]
On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Allysen Efferson are joined by Nancy French to discuss her work with Sarah Palin, Olympian Shawn Johnson and the life of a ghost writer.
See more here:
Nancy French on Sarah Palin and Ghost Writing
Happy Birthday Gov. Palin
This is a complete shock to everybody except for Republicans: Q: Are there any basic rules for what works and what doesn’t politically? A: Republicans are easier for us than Democrats. Democrats tend to take it personally; Republicans think it’s funny. I’m not confident that this is true of Democrats generally, but I believe it is true of more partisan Democrats, which describes most Democrat politicians. I doubt Michaels would make it up. It’s not like he or his fellow travelers are conservatives, after all. Speaking of which, here is another part of Michael’s interview that I do think he is making up: [W]e’ve never been agenda people. Our job—and it sounds too grand to say and none of us ever say it—is speaking truth to power. I’m registered as an Independent, not because everything that we do would be undermined if we were partisan—Jon Stewart has that role. Us? Theoretically, whoever it is in power, we’re against them. Oh yeah? Then — FLASHBACK WARNING — how do you explain this ? This article has a more complete quote from this Chevy Chase interview, for readers who don’t watch videos — or who just want more context for the eye-opening quotes in the video: CNN: Let’s go back to ’76. Chevy Chase: It was Gerald Ford that was president but hadn’t been elected and was running again and I just … CNN: Some people say he was an accidental president and you made him accident prone. Chase: Actually, he was accident prone and he was a sweet man, a terrific man, became good friends later, and a relatively good athlete in college too … but he just tripped over things a lot. … You know, after a while, you just start writing the jokes and start doing it. So it’s not that I can imitate him so much that I can do a lot of physical comedy, and I just made it, I just went after him. And I certainly, obviously my leanings were Democratic and they wanted Carter in and I wanted [Ford] out and I figured look, we’re reaching millions of people every weekend, why not do it. CNN: You mean to tell me in the back of your mind you were thinking, hey I want Carter … Chase: Oh, yeah. CNN: And I’m going to make him look bad. Chase: Oh yeah. CNN: Wow. Chase: What do you think they’re doing now, you think they’re just doing this because Sarah’s funny? No, I think that the show is very much more Democratic and liberal-oriented, that they are obviously more for Barack Obama. [In the '70s], out of the Nixon era, and it was not unlikely that I might go that direction.* Sure, Ford was in power, but Chase makes it clear: he didn’t attack Ford because Ford was in power. He attacked Ford because Chase and the rest of the SNL writers leaned Democrat and he (and they) wanted the Democrat to win. It’s that simple. And they still do. Lorne is lying because he can’t tell the truth while he’s still there. There is, by contrast, no reason Chevy Chase would be lying about this. He’s not. Michaels’s declaration against interest (Republicans have a better sense of humor) is the truth. His self-serving claim that the show doesn’t play political favorites is bull. Of course, SNL barely matters these days, although it may have hurt Sarah Palin. The Jon Stewarts and Stephen Colberts have the pull that SNL had in the 70′s when it didn’t suck all the time. But until conservatives can come up with the conservative alternative to the Jon Stewarts and Stephen Colberts, we’re going to keep losing young people. Thanks to Larry Elder . * I altered the quoted transcript in two places where I could hear a difference between the video above and the quote given: 1) Chase says “they” (not “I”) wanted Carter in, and 2) the reporter says “Wow” after he clarifies that he felt the same way. The quote above reflects the accurate transcript in these places instead of the article’s inaccurate one.