The Garland experiment

First, allow me to introduce you to Dana Loesch, circa 2010:

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

Two things are shocking about this video.  One... man, Dana.  Did your stylist use the crooked bowl?  Two... Mellissa Harris-Perry?  In this case, Harris-Lacewell, but seeing her without the braids is pretty weird.  It's a classic.

I listened to Friday's show, and the second hour was... weird.  I mean, the argument she gives is basically, everyone needs to draw Mohammed cartoons, because creeping Sharia.  Here's the problem with that.  It isn't a very tolerant Christian thing to do. 

The hour started out with a clip of Bill O'Reilly interviewing Franklin Graham, and Graham is spot on when he states that it is legally fine, but probably not the right thing spiritually.  Dana tries to nullify his vast years of experience by quoting 1 Timothy 4-12.  While Dana is correct her age should not be a factor here, she falls a little short on the rest of the scripture.

Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity.

 If Dana is the example, that's a religion I don't wish to follow, for obvious reasons.  In speech, she disparages people because they don't believe as she does.  She conducts herself with segments like Mailbag of Hate (bragging that people that hate her fill her pockets with cash, some off which she brags that she gives to the church, assuring her reward here on earth).  While she shows love for many things, love for much of her fellow man is up for debate.  She obviously has faith, however misguided it may be.  And purity... well, I won't get into that.

If you wish to listen, follow this link.

My opinion?  They have every right to draw Mohammed cartoons. Go for it, have fun. In my opinion, the next thing they need to expose is how violent black people get when you call them the "N" word. It's the same principle, is it not?

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

A wise person once said this:

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

...[T]he bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate.

That wise person?  Dana Loesch, in the video I posted above.  And if you take out the language about the left and right, you get this:

[T]he bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe. [T]he difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people ... like to sit here and portray that the fringe  ... represent the whole ... and that's not accurate.

Now that's a Dana I can get behind.  And Dana, don't get too down on Dana circa 2010.  Just remember 1 Timothy 4:12.  Don't hate because she's young.  Although if you hate on her because of her haircut, I'm behind you.

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.ZJPA3MNy.dpuf

ut the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

But the bottom line too is we know that with any large group of people, you are going to have people who are on the fringe on both sides but the difference that I'm seeing is that a lot of people on the left like to sit here and portray that the fringe on the right represent the whole of the right and that's not accurate. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/03/29/chris-matthews-gets-schooled-tea-partier#sthash.6sP4V6GW.dpuf

You do the math, $50k a person is a bunk figure

MotherJones Tries The Economic Angle To Advance Gun Control

The best-case scenario described by the CBO would result in 'between 24 million and 27 million' fewer Americans being uninsured in 2025, compared to the year before the Affordable Care Act took effect.

Pulling that off will cost Uncle Sam about $1.35 trillion – or $50,000 per head.

Where's the hand-wringing over that cost?

The hand-wringing for that cost is non-existent, because the cost itself is also non-existent. The problem with your analysis is that the report, "address[es] only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA and do not reflect all of the act’s budgetary effects." In other words, there are other sources of revenue, like the medical device tax, and cost cutting measures that aren't included that bring the cost way down.

There is one other gotcha here. The Mother Jones article bases it's $700 per person, PER YEAR. The $50,000 you claim here is over ten years. And since the benefits are being seen by more than just those that were uninsured, you can't just use them in your calculations.

Our problem isn't guns. Our problem is gangs. Our problem is a breakdown in the home. Our problem is that many are not raised with a respect for life.

My big question is, how do we know this? There are no studies out there proving this. That's because there is no funding for such research. And due to nothing but pure politics, the CDC can't even study the medical effects of gun violence.

I explore all of this -- with a thorough denunking -- in my book, Hands Off My Gun.

Glad you mentioned your book, because I have some questions. Can you tell me again how Southern (conservative) Democrats disarmed a man who already had an arsenal of guns? And tell me also how the concealed carry permit he was denied in one state would have saved him from a sniper that killed him in another? That man was Martin Luther King. And it was the denial of that permit that made him realize his peace movement didn't need guns.

If that is the kind of denunking [sic] you do in your book, I'm not highly impressed.

Update! Sorry, now you are 15th.

#6 on Politico's list of righties. Thanks for the tip, listener Alina! http://politi.co/1FGKMSg

Sorry Dana. Now that they include TV Journalists, you are 15th.

Not to mention that you don't even make the top 35 in total, while none other than Mellissa Harris-Perry is #27.  Wahhh, wahhhhhh...

What this does say is that when it comes to Twitter reach, Liberals pretty much dominate.

Dana loses it over Obama comment, then proves his point for him.

Obama, during an Easter prayer breakfast, veered off subject, and said something that got all the right in a tizzy.  And as usual, Dana doesn't disappoint. This is chopped up audio from Wednesday, April 8th, hour two.  Enjoy!

ABC57 reporter did not ask pizza parlor about catering a wedding

Audio starts at about 21 minutes

I had a good weekend.  I had a lot to do, and while I did it, I burned through all my podcasts.  Since I still had too many chores around the house, I needed something more to listen too.  Enter Dana.  Yeah, I've fallen off the wagon.  I used to love Dana, but I took a break over Football season (Fantasy Focus takes precedence) and never got back into listening to her. 

Good thing I took the time.  The whole narrative was that the reporter went down there and baited Memories Pizza with the question on whether they would cater a wedding.  Problem is, in an interview with Dana the owners blow the whole thing up.  It would have been great to see the look on Dana's face.  Not that it stops Dana from continuing the lie the rest of Thursday and Friday's show.

Bumper Music: Lisa Bevill -- No Condemnation

Not because it's good bumper music, but because it fits Dana's narrative this week.  No condemnation for those who are in Christ.  Now, if those who are are in Christ could stop condemning others, then maybe we can take them seriously.

Reporters, pizza places, and lots and lots of hypocrites.

Dana, On Pizza Truthers

A local reporter was sent to small towns around her smallish city of South Bend, Indiana (part if a larger region of Michiana that still isn't big enough to have a VHF station) to gauge reaction of local businesses to a new law.  Well, let me preface that, with I believe.  I believe the local reporter was just looking for opinions, not sent out to incriminate someone.

What happened when she got to Walkerton, Indiana was happenstance.  It was probably quite clear walking into Memories Pizza that she may get some interesting quotes, as the law was about religious freedom, and the proprietors were unabashedly Christian.  She asked the questions, and the owners gave the answers.  In her story she correctly reported what was said.  That Memories Pizza wouldn't discriminate if someone came in for a slice, or some ice cream, but they would not cater a gay wedding.

The backlash against this local reporter is just as shocking.  The story instead goes that she was sent out and went out looking for just this certain quote.  She goaded these poor people in a small town pizza joint to say what they said (although almost in the same breath they say these people were standing up for their rights!)  She was liberal scum, a journalistic hack.

The people at the pizza parlor received death threats, bad Yelp reviews, and someone bought a web address and made website making it look like Memories Pizza was the gayest place in the world.  What of the reporter?  You do not hear of her fate in conservative media, do you?  She, too has received death threats.  At this time, I have not seen a GoFundMe page for her pain.  I have not seen any liberal talk shows saying people who have threatened that local reporter with violence are the same as ISIS. And I also have not seen any sort of apology from right wing talk shows for inciting such violence.  Dana knows first hand how such things happen, she should be the first to defend this local reporter.

The way I understand it, a Dana Show contributor started a GoFundMe page in the middle of a controversy for people they had never met in the middle of an interview with them. One of the important tenants of journalism is know the answer to your question before you ask it.  Oh, wait.. maybe that's law.  Still, there are a lot of what ifs to worry about.

What if the owners of Memories Pizza declined the money?

What if nobody gave?

What if people gave too much?

Oh, wait.  They did give too much.  The goal started at $25 thousand, but when that goal came and went quickly, they upped it to $200 thousand.  What was a fund to help out a pizza joint that may have to close for a week or two until this storm blows over, help fix up the place, and maybe buy that web address, wound up being a pile of money you'd get if you were a lottery winner.  What was once helpful, now may become a burden.  Why not stop when the first goal was reached?  The second?

If I were the owners of Memories pizza, I'd be thinking twice about taking that money.  If I am going to take such a stand for God, I'd have to side with the Bible on the fact that the love of money is the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10).  Not to mention all the people whose lives were ruined by excessive money. It was good of Dana to get a financial planner.  They give good advice:

Past winners of mega-lottery drawings and financial planners have some more sound advice: Stick to a budget, invest wisely, learn to say no and be prepared to lose friends while riding an emotional roller-coaster of joy, anxiety, guilt and distrust.

Maybe the Bible knows what it is talking about here. This is money that is going to change the lives of this family forever.  Quite possibly, in a way this family did not want, and did not ask for.  Did Dana think about that before starting this GoFundMe campaign?  It would be hard for me to turn down money like that, but I would probably pass.  GoFundYourself, Dana.

I have seen conservative Christians doing something else the Bible tells them to guard against.  They point to the fact that giving so much shows how good Christians are compared to the heathen Liberals.  Except the bible says this is not right in the eyes of God.  You are getting your reward right here, instead of in heaven.  Dana will not point out this to anyone, however.  Nothing hypocritical here... move along.


There is no story in a poor local reporter just doing her job.  Dana will pass.  There is no possibility for fundraising, because there is no outrage for threatening a reporter no matter how cute she may be.  She is not standing up for her Christian rights, so she doesn't matter to anyone on the right.  Really, there is nothing to see here. It would be funny if it were not so sad.