I just spent my first $25 in my check card account to help Sir Rudy Giuliani.

So Mitt, you are my second choice.  Nothing against Mitt but no nonbinding resolutions for this blogger - I am going to put my $$$ where my mouth is and my ears are.

"The Republican Party makes its contribution when it gives freedom to more people" - Sir Rudolph Giuliani, CPAC 2007.

Oh for the…Are they serious?  Sadly, yes.  Filed under "idiots" for obvious reasons.

The organization that oversees high school sports in Washington is considering more specific rules for fans that could ban booing and offensive chants.

The Washington Interscholastic Activities Association is drafting guidelines to crack down on negative conduct.

I can understand banning physical threats and violence. But booing?  Since when is team loyalty a crime?  Since when is school spirit bad?

The association director blames rude fans for the dwindling number of people who want to be coaches and officials.

Oh, Puuuuuleeze!

He says the guidelines will remind fans to cheer for their team, not against the other.

The penalty is still secret (OK, I made it up) but rumor says that the first violation will result in a stern lecture that makes understand that you made the other team feel really bad.

During her speach at CPAC, Right Wing bomb thrower Ann Coulter called John Edwards…

Well it does not really matter what she called him, let me just say it was offensive and highly inappropriate.  The point of this post is not to point that out but rather to point out the reaction from commentators on the blog where I first read about it.  Playing Possum recently came out of hibernation to write about the vast right wings over reaction to comments left on the Huffington Post when the majority of comments expressed regret that the Taliban freedom fighters failed to assasinate Vice President Cheney.

I thought I would see how the right responds when one of its own makes an out of bounds comment.  On the blog Ace 'O Spades, (CONTENT WARNING) which according to the potty mouth poll that media star LSU pointed out the other day, is the most profane of all conservative blogs, the early comments by my count were 12 that had a problem with Ann Coulter and / or what she said, 6 that expressed a pro Ann point of view and the rest of the comments were not about Ann, mainly replying to previous comments.

Roy Spencer is a principal research scientist for University of Alabama in Huntsville. In the past, he served as Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Dr. Spencer is the recipient of NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement. - Wikipedia

Rae Rasmussen is an internationally-known atmospheric chemist. Together with his late wife, a physical chemist, he developed and manufactured the atmospheric sampling apparatus presently in use on a global basis.

These and many others discount any significant human causation in regard to global warming. Of course, they can be conveniently ignored.  Their views constitute the real "Inconvenient Truth".  Can't have that, now can we?

Cross posting this here for Possum, who is the posterchild of potty mouth. 

Most conservative bloggers would answer "yes", something I have long maintained as well.  And when you couple that with their tendency to threats and hate speech, such as the Dick Cheney Death Wish craze, ( See this post…) it paints a fairly clear picture.

And many would say who cares, it's free speech, right?  Of course.  And profanity is not a necessary component of rudeness either.  Is an insult given in a profanity free way any less an insult? 

But excessive profanity is distracting.  It clouds the substance of a debate with an emotional response, quite often.  And personally, I think excessive use is childish.   It is usually coupled with ad hominem attacks which are also fairly juvenile.

Newsbuckit decided to answer the question of who is the worst potty mouth:

Hat tip to Peter Chattaway.

Figures.  You have to hand to to them, they will milk this non story for every penny. (Make that Million)

Plame film in works at Warner Bros.

Studio sets movie about CIA leak scandal

Warner Bros. is developing a feature on the lives of Valerie Plame and Ambassador Joseph Wilson, the married couple drawn into a D.C. firestorm.

Plame's status as a CIA agent was revealed by White House officials allegedly out to discredit her husband after he wrote a 2003 New York Times op-ed piece saying that the Bush administration had manipulated intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Yep, that's the story we all came to love.  The fact that Wilson was a partisan hack who violated state department confidentiality and lied to the CIA has nothing to do with it any more then the fact that Plame cherry picked her husband for this mission.

File this under "seriously?"

Yep, seriously.  When it comes to global warming, the media is too balanced.

The story starts here:

Gore says media miss climate message-  Journalists have leaned toward balance at expense of consensus data, he says

Back in Tennessee on Tuesday, Gore told a crowd of about 50 people at the U.S. Media Ethics Summit II that the presentation's single most provocative slide was one that contrasts results of two long-term studies. A 10-year University of California study found that essentially zero percent of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists, whereas, another study found that 53 percent of mainstream newspaper articles disagreed the global warming premise.

I have no doubt that is accurate as far as it goes.  I have a few notes though.  First he did not say ALL  peer-reviewed scientific journal articles disagreed that global warming exists.   He said that essentially all of them did.  Two things.  How many, what percent is the basis for "essentially?  What ratio?