Roland Martin’s CNN Suspension: Has GLAAD Become A Bullying Organization?

Mediaite.com:

On Wednesday, CNN decided to suspend Roland Martin for his “offensive” tweets regarding David Beckham’s underwear ad for H&M. One such tweet read: “If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham’s H&M underwear ad, smack the ish out of him! #superbowl.” In a written statement, CNN went on to say, “Language that demeans is inconsistent with the values and culture of our organization, and is not tolerated. We have been giving careful consideration to this matter, and Roland will not be appearing on our air for the time being.” The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) advocated for Martin’s dismissal shortly after the tweets went viral.


I don’t support the suspension, but I do see how the tweets could be taken out of context and seemingly support gay bashing. I have disagreed with Martin before, actually a few times. We have grown used to respectfully disagreeing with one another, and that’s something our society could use more of. Let me say this: there is no excuse for advocating violence against anyone, particularly homosexuals, at any time. And it’s not surprising that Martin’s irreverent sense of humor and off-the-cuff style of tweeting could be easily taken out of context. He frequently jokes about violence, but that’s far from advocating it. To wit, Roland’s Cookout Rules, which detail how cookouts are “conducted at his house”: “If your kid gets out of line, check ‘em before I do. My house, my rules. Ass whippings are bountiful if they start disrespecting adults.”


Martin wasn’t advocating violence to gays any more than he was to children. But a cursory look at a random tweet plucked out of a long conversation can easily be misconstrued. And while one may not find him funny (after all, he’s not a professional comedian), that doesn’t mean his brand of comedy is offensive, or, worse, worthy of character assassination. Martin has consistently and fervently spoken out against sexism, racism, homophobia, and trashy reality TV shows that reinforce negative and demeaning stereotypes.


It wasn’t until Martin offered a second (and some say more sincere) apology that GLAAD did what they should have done in the first place: offered to meet with him. Why rely solely on tweets to determine whether a man should lose his job without first hearing him out? There was no reason for that.


GLAAD Doesn’t Practice What it Preaches


Look, I get it. GLAAD is fully focused on helping to rid our society of the type of homophobic, violent, and misogynistic remarks that have contributed to an environment where gay teens are cajoled, bullied, and are “three times more likely to be depressed than their heterosexual counterparts.” We should all commend them for their diligence in such matters. No child should have to live in fear, and no parent should raise a child thinking it’s okay to instill such fear in someone else.


So it’s unfortunate that some of those same violent and misogynistic remarks that GLAAD fights valiantly to scrub from networks big and small are sometimes welcomed by GLAAD — depending on whom the remarks are directed toward and who is saying them.


In April a blog by the name of JoeMyGod won GLAAD Media’s ‘outstanding blog’ award. Run by Joe Jervis, the blog is well-known for comparing conservatives to Nazis and having misogynistic comments littered in its comments with no hint of a moderator. Commenters rarely one-up Jervis himself, the epitome of civility:


“One thing about the kapo bootlickers at GOProud, we alway$ know where their prioritie$ lie,” Jarvis wrote in regard to GOProud’s support of the extension of the Bush tax cuts. The Daily Caller notes that “[d]uring World War II “Kapos” were concentration camp prisoners who worked inside the camps on behalf of the Nazis. Jarvis often tags articles about gay Conservatives with the word ‘kapo’….”


It’s unfortunate but understandable that GLAAD can’t rid these horrible words from our society. But the least they could do is choose to not honor someone who spouts them on a regular basis. That much I think they can accomplish.


H&M Wasn’t Courting Men


Never mind the fact that the David Beckham ad in question wasn’t directed toward men. Dream Hampton, a prolific journalist, noted that 83% of social media mentions regarding the ad were made by women. This wasn’t because men forgot to tweet that night. Research by a British retailer found something not too surprising: men traditionally buy their own underwear from age 19-23, from age 24 to 33 their underwear shopping decreases tremendously, and when they hit age 44 it’s nearly nonexistent. All this to say what an H&M marketing intern could tell you: H&M was going after female shoppers, plain and simple.


GLAAD is a Bully


Even Hollywood, typically very supportive of GLAAD, has begun to tire of their antics.


In October GLAAD began a “call to action” asking its members to petition Universal and director Ron Howard because at one point in the movie The Dilemma, Vince Vaughn’s character calls electric cars “gay.” Howard refused to pull the scene, responding: “I don’t strip my films of everything that I might personally find inappropriate. It is a slight moment in The Dilemma meant to demonstrate an aspect of our lead character’s personality, and we never expected it to represent our intentions or the point of view of the movie or those of us who made it.”


When Bruno, a satirical film about a flamboyant gay journalist, came out GLAAD’s senior director of media programs said, “Sacha Baron Cohen’s well-meaning attempt at satire is problematic in many places and outright offensive in others.” Meanwhile Elton John agreed to sing a part in the movie and Aaron Hicklin, editor of Out, a gay and lesbian lifestyle magazine, said of the film: “[it does] something hugely important, which is showing that people’s attitudes can turn on a dime when they realize you’re gay.”


See, GLAAD’s problem is that they have become a victim of their own success. Instead of focusing on how they can organically change minds and influence our culture to become more accepting of the LGBT community (a very worthy mission), they’re too busy overusing their influence to boycott, censor films, and have folks suspended and fired. What do these suspensions and firings accomplish? Who is benefited by such actions aside from GLAAD being able to claim another head on their Wall of Shame?


Just for the record, GLAAD, this rebuke isn’t based on your views; it’s based on your lack of principles.

RELATED: Bill O’Reilly: Karma May Have Caught Up With CNN’s Roland Martin

RELATED: CNN’s suspension of Roland Martin is a teachable moment

Rick Santorum Says ‘Other Types of Emotions’ Could Preclude Women In Combat

WaPo.com:

For a candidate with virtually no staff and who tends to talk off the cuff, Rick Santorum has been nearly gaffe-free. However, this evening might have been his first, and it comes at a time when he is trying to convince voters he is more than “just” a social conservative.


When asked about the Pentagon’s plan to allow women to serve in some combat roles, Santorum told CNN’s John King: “I want to create every opportunity for women to be able to serve this country . . . but I do have concerns about women in front-line combat.


“I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat,” Santorum added. “And I think that’s not in the best interests of men, women or the mission.”


Such remarks may please some social conservatives who were never that keen on women serving in the military, but this may not sit well with women who work, sometimes in male-dominated jobs.

RELATED: Rick Santorum’s Campaign Expects ‘Second Million Dollar Day’

Gay Mafia Claims Another Victim: Race-Baiter Roland Martin Suspended By CNN For "Offensive" Super Bowl Tweets

Mediaite.com:

On the heels (but not too closely on the heels) of Monday’s call by GLAAD that CNN analyst Roland Martin be fired for tweets he made during Sunday’s Super Bowl, the network has announced that Martin has been suspended. Martin initially explained the tweets, which GLAAD said encouraged violence against gay people, as tweaking soccer fans, but the network disagrees. In a statement released minutes ago, CNN says “Roland Martin’s tweets were regrettable and offensive. Language that demeans is inconsistent with the values and culture of our organization, and is not tolerated. We have been giving careful consideration to this matter, and Roland will not be appearing on our air for the time being.”


Martin, who spent Sunday evening live-Tweeting the game and several commercials, made a remark about an H&M commercial for David Beckham‘s line of men’s underwear. The ad, for those who missed it, features close-ups of the soccer player clad only in a pair of briefs.


“If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham’s H&M underwear ad,” Martin Tweeted, “smack the ish out of him!”


Martin insisted he was taking a jab at soccer fans, not the gay community.


On Monday, Martin published a statement on the matter on his website:


Fam, let me address the issue that some in the LGBT community have raised regarding some of my Super Bowl tweets yesterday.


I made several cracks about soccer as I do all the time. I was not referring to sexuality directly or indirectly regarding the David Beckham ad, and I’m sorry folks took it otherwise.


It was meant to be a deliberately over the top and sarcastic crack about soccer; I do not advocate violence of any kind against anyone gay, or not. As anyone who follows me on Twitter knows, anytime soccer comes up during football season it’s another chance for me to take a playful shot at soccer, nothing more.


At this time, the duration of Martin’s suspension is unknown.

This is too funny. Roland "Race-Baiter King" Martin is now officially a "homophobe" after CNN suspended him today for tweets deemed "offensive" by a high-level group within the Gay Mafia (i.e. GLAAD). Of course, the all-too-delicious irony for conservatives here is that Martin is a notorious race-baiter and Obama apologist who regularly blames any and all criticism towards Barack Obama as being "RACIST!!!" But now Martin's getting his just desserts, being branded a "homophobe" by the morally bankrupt, but powerful, white, gay mafia that rules the Left. The same gay mafia that killed black actor Isaiah Washington's career back in 2007 for using the word "faggot" in an interview and the same gay mafia that will take down any black liberal who dares to step across the line and hurt a gay, white man's feelings. Shame on CNN for caving to a secular group on what really amounts to political-correction nonsense, but Roland "Race-Baiter King" Martin gets no sympathy for now knowing what it feels like to be criticized for something you aren't.

In the meantime, score another victory for the Gay Mafia!

George Will Quote of the Day!

"This is not about women’s health. This is about providing 300,000 abortions a year. Planned Parenthood cleverly cast this saying, ‘We are in the mammogram business.’ They’re not in the mammogram business — they are in the referral of mammograms. This showed two extraordinary things, George. First, the American left cares about ending wars and they care about poverty and they care about the environment, but they really care about — when they’re not perfunctory — is when you touch abortions. And historians will marvel that American liberalism in the first part of the 21^st century is defined as defense of abortion.”

- conservative pundit George Will on last week’s decision, and subsequent reversal, by the Susan G. Komen Foundation to take funding away from Planned Parenthood

Liberal On Liberal Violence: GLAAD Demands CNN Fire Roland Martin Over David Beckham Tweet

Delicious irony: race card king Roland Martin gets a taste of his own PC-medicine from teh gheys:

The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has called out columnist and CNN contributor Roland Martin for a Tweet he sent during last night’s Super Bowl.


Martin, who spent Sunday evening live-Tweeting the game and several commercials, made a remark about an H&M commercial for David Beckham‘s line of men’s underwear. The ad, for those who missed it, features close-ups of the soccer player clad only in a pair of briefs.


“If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham’s H&M underwear ad,” Martin Tweeted, “smack the ish out of him!”


Martin insisted he was taking a jab at soccer fans, not the gay community.


Today, Martin published a statement on the matter on his website:


Fam, let me address the issue that some in the LGBT community have raised regarding some of my Super Bowl tweets yesterday.


I made several cracks about soccer as I do all the time. I was not referring to sexuality directly or indirectly regarding the David Beckham ad, and I’m sorry folks took it otherwise.


It was meant to be a deliberately over the top and sarcastic crack about soccer; I do not advocate violence of any kind against anyone gay, or not. As anyone who follows me on Twitter knows, anytime soccer comes up during football season it’s another chance for me to take a playful shot at soccer, nothing more.


GLAAD, meanwhile, has published a report titled “Enough is Enough: Tell CNN to Fire Roland Martin,” in which the group says that, not only is Martin’s Tweet certainly homophobic, it is also part of a larger pattern of behavior:


Roland Martin has never compared being a soccer fan to being an alcoholic, the way he has compared being gay to being an alcoholic. Roland Martin has never bragged that his wife has led men and women away from the “soccer lifestyle,” the way he claims she has with gay people. Roland Martin has never defended jokes about parents stabbing soccer-playing children, the way he defended jokes about parents stabbing gay children.


Based on this history, this doesn’t seem like a playful jab at what Martin considers an inferior sport.


It seems like a jab at what Martin considers an inferior community of people.


One piece of evidence GLAAD offers is a Tweet Martin made earlier on Sunday: “Who the hell was that New England Patriot they just showed in a head to toe pink suit?” he’d written. “Oh, he needs a visit from #teamwhipdatass”

I can recall the last time a black celebrity took on the angry gays and he lost...bigtime. Roland better make sure he remembers that and stays in check in the future, after all conservatives know that it's teh gheys that run the liberal plantation.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 2/6/12

Romney Again Turns Attention To Obama After Nevada Win

Upcoming States Could Serve As Bulkhead For GOP Candidates Fighting Romney

Santorum: Obama Most Anti-Religion President in History

Tim Tebow Open To Future In Politics

Yes, Legos For Girls (The Folly Of Feminist Griping)

Media Unrelenting In Their Efforts To Cover For Obama, Blame GOP Challengers

Liberal Echo Chamber Howls at Planned Parenthood Controversy; Networks Can't Find Komen Supporters

NPR Hails 'Legendary' Drag Queen for 'Wisdom Watch' Segment on When Boys Can Wear Dresses

Box-checking Obama in a Liberal Cocoon

Gingrich’s Temperament A Major Stumbling Block for GOP Voters

Obama Sycophant Karen Hunter Criticizes Jodi Cantor Over Obama Book She Never Read

Mediaite.com:

On Saturday mornings’s Up with Chris Hayes, journalist and MSNBC contributor Karen Hunter challenged The New York Times‘ Jodi Kantor over her motivation for writing the buzzed-about tome The Obamas. Hunter leveled a highly-charged criticism at Kantor, mentioning her “seven figure” payday, and wondering “What was your motivation for doing it?”


Kantor’s response seemed to be leading to a crackling exchange, but host Chris Hayes swooped in and changed the subject.


Upon publication last month, The Obamas dominated the news cycle on the strength of a few anecdotes that captured the media’s imagination, which resulted in some pushback from the White House, and from Mrs. Obama. While Hayes and Salon‘s Joan Walsh each said they had read the book, and that the First Lady comes off sympathetically, the bits that he media focused on painted a picture of dissension between the East and West Wings. The White House line has generally been that these anecdotes have been blown out of proportion, without proper context, and don’t properly represent the truth.


As with previous books about this White House, discussion in the media has often turned to the ways in which authors can polish up the mundane in order to hype book sales, and perhaps justify their time and expense.


This seemed to be on Karen Hunter’s mind when she engaged Kantor. “I haven’t read the book,” she began, adding “No disrespect, don’t plan on reading it, but as the only publisher on this set, I also understand kind of the pressures to produce — you got seven figures for this. You got a lot of money to write this book, which means that you had to deliver certain things that I, quite frankly, don’t think you could have, you know, given the amount of money that you were offered to do this book.”


“What was your motivation,” Hunter continued, “if you didn’t have personal interviews with the President or the First Lady, to produce something called The Obamas, which was an in-depth look at this power couple, what was your motivation for doing it?


Kantor began by explaining that she’s been on the Obama beat for five years, that she had the cooperation of the White House (more on that from Jay Carney here), and that “the entire book was fact checked with its sources and cross-checked with other people in the White House. Nobody has challenged the reporting in the book. Nobody has come forward to say, Michelle Obama didn’t do that, she didn’t have that dispute.”


Hunter interjected, “But there is a tone.”


“Excuse me,” Kantor scolded. “Please let me finish. I think that, first of all, you never do your work as a reporter based on how much you’re being paid for it.”


That statement elicited a laugh from Hunter.


“Whether you’re being paid a lot or a little, you always try to ascertain the same standards of fairness and accuracy.”

It's no secret that liberals can't stand any criticism of their dear High Lord and Master Barack Obama. Even if the criticism is legitimate (such as on scandals like Fast & Furious, the epic failure of Solyndra and continued record-high unemployment), liberals will either dismiss the criticism as biased or even worse paint the critique as "RACIST!!!" It's who they are and their obsession with protecting Barry at any cost so he can get re-elected is something that's rooted in their DNA. So Karen Hunter, a longtime black liberal, Obamabot and book publisher criticizing a Jodi Kantor for writing a tome, that she admits to have never reading, because fellow liberals feel that it doesn't flatter The One enough? No irony there. None at all. Especially on the "Obama's Re-election Campaign Network" aka MSNBC.

Failed "American Idol" Judge Ellen DeGeneres Hired As JCPenney Spokeswoman

It's no secret that morally bankrupt social liberals and gay activists love Ellen DeGeneres, a now "gay" woman who gets off on turning normally heterosexual women into lesbians (both ex-girlfriend Anne Heche, who has returned to having sex with men and current "wife" Portia de Rossi both had longterm relationship with men before hooking up with Ellen. DeGeneres, a longtime average-at-best comedian and actress, has used her chosen sexuality, love from the biased, liberal media and a passive-aggressive wit (that speaks to her narcissism) to achieve super-stardom despite having little talent to match it. And in a corrupt business where female comedians struggle mightily to achieve a quarter of the fame and fortune DeGeneres has, it's a shame that despite her many fails (including, most recently, a short stint on "American Idol" that the Left would like for everyone to forget about) that DeGeneres continues to sucker people into hiring her for major gigs:

Supporters are rallying to counter a conservative group's campaign urging JC Penney to fire Ellen DeGeneres as a spokeswoman because she is openly gay.


They are showing their support for the popular talk show host, named spokeswoman for the department store chain last week, online and through social media.


Shortly after the American Family Association's One Million Moms group launched its campaign against DeGeneres, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination launched a "Stand Up for Ellen" website; within 17 hours, more than 10,000 people signed an online petition supporting DeGeneres and JC Penney's choice. An unscientific poll in the Los Angeles Times showed that 96 percent of readers support DeGeneres.


They also expressed their outrage on Twitter. A sample tweet on Thursday protesting the campaign reads: "Dear One Million Moms "a family values group", spend more time loving your families instead of perpetuating hate."


Also read: One Million Moms to JC Penney: Ellen's Gay -- Fire Her


The AFA's "One Million Moms," a project made up of an undetermined number of mothers, is urging people to call JC Penney headquarters and demand that the Texas-based department store chain ditch DeGeneres because the Cover Girl model, former American Express spokeswoman, Peoples Choice Award winner and New York Times bestselling author is gay.


So far, it hasn't happened.


DeGeneres, incidentally, is a former JC Penney sales clerk.

Think GOP Infighting Is Ugly? Check Out The Democrats…Of 2008

Great post by John Wilson at Mediate today just to remind everyone that it's not just Republicans who get into nasty battles during primary season:

Now that the attacks have sharpened between GOP candidates, many in the media are lamenting (or outwardly championing for Democrats’ sake) the possibility Republicans will cannibalize one another and leave the nominee just a political carcass that a DNC intern could lead President Obama to victory over. Not quite.


This kind of infighting — even with negativity making up a record 95% of the ads shown leading up to the Florida primary — isn’t new to presidential politics. It was worse four years ago, which is apparently too long a time for some folks to remember what the Democratic presidential primary looked like. So here’s a reminder: Hillary Clinton didn’t just get into the muck of linking the ‘70s era terrorist organization Weather Underground with then-candidate Barack Obama, she also drew a “direct” link between Obama, Bill Ayers, and 9/11, saying during a debate:


“If I’m not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn’t done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died.”


Ayers was never convicted of any crime, however he was a member of the Weather Underground group, who did accept responsibility for detonating a number of bombs in government buildings. Clinton was referring to comments Ayers made in response to regretting his violent past:


“I don’t regret setting bombs…I feel we didn’t do enough.”


Reckless, especially in the midst of 9/11? Definitely. Somehow reflective of Ayers’ relationship with Obama? Not in the least. The Washington Post fact-checked the connection between Obama and Ayers and found what Obama had stated repeatedly: aside from serving as board members of an organization together and Ayers hosting a fundraiser, they had no real relationship. Clinton was so shortsighted in her utilization of this attack that she opened herself up to a weltering retort:


“Did Hillary Clinton believe that it had been appropriate in 2001 for President Bill Clinton to have pardoned two members of the Weather Underground as he left office?,” journalist David Corn asked Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director at the time.


Clinton didn’t stop her attacks at Weather Underground, though. When it came to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy, she sidestepped it at first to avoid appearing opportunistic, and out of fear of angering black voters. But she wasn’t out of it for long. When she spoke with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial board in late March, as the race was heating up and the general consensus was she could actually lose, she didn’t have any qualms saying, “He would not have been my pastor. You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.” And just in case that wasn’t a big enough hint as to how Clinton perceived Rev. Wright’s sermons, she threw in another zinger: “You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that.”


And remember this was the race that brought the term “superdelegate” into the nation’s lexicon — “designated members of Congress, governors and distinguished party leaders” who are free to change their minds on which candidate to support. Had Clinton not suspended her campaign in June (bowing to pressure from dons of the party), the superdelegates would probably have decided who the Democratic nominee was at the party convention in August, just three months before the general election. Primary voters be damned.

Joe Scarborough: The Way The Mainstream Media Covered For Obama’s Negative Ads Is ‘Shameful’

Mediaite.com:

The Morning Joe crew took a look at the fallout from — and the benefits of — using negative ad campaigns in presidential elections. The panelists agreed that Mitt Romney‘s success in the Florida primary was tied to his decision to “hit back” against Newt Gingrich‘s slew of negative campaign ads, both with his own ads and during debates.


Host Joe Scarborough was quick to remind everyone that, back in 2008, Barack Obama launched his own barrage of ultimately successful negative campaign ads:


I don’t know a lot of candidates that wouldn’t rather win ugly than lose pretty. Jon Huntsman lost pretty. Mitt Romney, this past week, won ugly. But, that’s…. I mean, Barack Obama won ugly in 2008; he ran more negative ads than anybody else in the history of television. He ran so many negative ads that he actually swung ahead of John McCain on the question of who do you trust more on taxes. ‘Cause remember the grainy, negative, false, misleading ads that he ran over and over again. [...] I mean, these negative ads worked.


Later, Mika Brzezinski noted that the President had sat himself in the driver’s seat of a sports car at the DC auto show, “as he should.” “I’m not trying to be smug,” she added.


Scarborough got a laugh out of that before turning to panelist Donny Deutsch. “Well, there’s no need to be smug,” Scarborough said. “This is going to be a tough, long campaign. But, Donny Deutsch, the man in the driver’s seat right there ran more negative ads — 30-second ads, 4 years ago — than any candidate in history.”


“The only difference,” he added, “between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney is the mainstream media — every network, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post — they all covered for him. Nobody wrote that story because they all wanted him to him. It was shameful the way they covered for him.”


Deutsch, meanwhile, felt we should retire the term “negative ads.”


“Why?” asked Scarborough. “Because I attached it to Barack Obama?”


Brzezinski, all the while, kept trying to get Scarborough to answer a question about whether the President is “literally and figuratively in the driver’s seat.”


“No!” he said, finally.

RELATED: Obama campaign: Romney won Florida on negative ads

Obama Money Advantage Disappearing, Top Obama Fundraisers Come From Hollywood, Media

NationalJournal.com:

Every presidential election, there's a new development that changes the nature of campaigns that one party, often the one out of power, takes advantage of. In 2008, it was the Obama team's impressive use of social media to connect with new young voters and expand the electorate. In 2004, it was the Bush campaign's savvy use of micro-targeting technologies to identify narrow slices of the electorate, and get them to show up and vote Republican.


This year, it's the Republicans' adept and aggressive use of super PACs to even the financial playing field, blunting the often-massive money advantages that an incumbent president has at his disposal. With the emergence of American Crossroads, Crossroads GPS and Restore Our Future, a well-stocked Romney super PAC, the Obama fundraising juggernaut no longer looks so imposing. If Romney is the Republican nominee, he won't be overwhelmed with a wave of negative advertising, and will have the resources to fight back.


Take a look at the end-of-year numbers.


The Obama campaign ended the year with $81.8 million cash-on hand - a very strong total. But the outside Democratic groups, especially the party's newly-created super PACs, haven't given him much in the way of reinforcements. The Democratic National Committee has $12.6 million cash-on-hand to assist. But Priorities USA banked a meager $1.5 million, receiving money from just 42 individual donors in the last six months. The party's congressional super PACs -- Majority PAC and House Majority PAC -- also didn't bank much, $1.3 million and $1.17 million, respectively.


Meanwhile, the Romney campaign ended the year with $19.9 million in the bank, far less than the president's cash haul. But when you add in the outside groups, he's about at even strength. Romney's super PAC, Restore Our Future, banked $23.6 million at the end of the year, thanks to funding from venture capitalists aligned with Romney. American Crossroads, which is poised to play an outsized role in the presidential race, ended the year with $15.6 million cash-on-hand. And the RNC ended the year with more cash-on-hand than the DNC, banking $20 million. All told, that adds up to $79.1 million - and it doesn't include the cash-on-hand from Crossroads GPS, which doesn't file with the Federal Election Commission. But based on Crossroads' announced fundraising totals, it's logical to assume that they have around $15 million on-hand.


That brings the combined Obama and Democratic outside group totals to $98.3 million cash-on-hand, with the GOP groups tallying $94.1 million. Take out the Democratic groups strictly devoted to congressional activities, and it's a virtual financial tie. With labor and environmental groups poised to help Obama's re-election, Democrats still could hold a narrow edge. But it's hardly the cash advantage that would allow Team Obama to run negative advertising uncontested against Romney, without an aggressive response.


It's a far cry from the vision of a billion-dollar Obama re-election campaign bankroll that Democratic strategists are now downplaying. And it shows that the amount of time Democrats spent complaining and attacking the liberalized campaign finance laws before the 2010 midterms would have been better spent preparing for an infrastructure utilizing super PACs to their advantage. Priorities USA, headed by former White House spokesman Bill Burton, hasn't yet shown it can compete with American Crossroads so far -- and time is running short.


President Obama has built up an imposing fundraising infrastructure. But thanks to the rise of the super PACs, it might not be enough to hold any kind of fundraising advantage in 2012.

RELATED: Top Obama fundraisers come from Hollywood, media

NY Mag Editor Admits On National TV He Never Reported John Kerry's Income Tax Rate in 2004

Newsbusters.org:

The ridiculous media hypocrisy concerning all the fuss over Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's wealth and income tax rate was perfectly demonstrated on MSNBC's Morning Joe Monday.


After claiming that Romney's "tax issue is not remotely" past him, John Heilemann, the National Affairs editor for New York magazine, admitted that he never reported John Kerry's income tax rate during the 2004 campaign


And there it is. What else do you need to know about the state of today's media?


Kerry's low income tax rate was not an issue for them in 2004.


But despite the immutable fact that Romney pays more in federal income taxes as a percentage of Adjusted Gross Income than 97 percent of the nation including Kerry, people like Heilemann - who totally ignored Kerry's lower tax rate in 2004 - are going to pound on this issue as long as Romney is in the race.


As NewsBusters has been reporting for months, the media are going to do anything to get Barack Obama reelected.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 1/30/12

Florida Polls Show Romney Retaining Lead; Tea Party vs. Establishment

Police Arrest About 300 Occupy Oakland Protesters

Finally, An Actual Hearing On Eligibility

Paul Ryan: Senate Democrats Haven’t Passed a Budget in 1005 Days

Starbucks: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage ‘Is Core to Who We Are and What We Value’

NBC Asks Romney To Remove News Material From Ad

Islamic Parents Found Guilty Of Murdering Daughters

Multimillionaire Chris Matthews: Is Mitt Romney 'Just Too Damn Rich?'

Marco Rubio A Star, But Unlikely VP Pick

Pipeline Politics Derails More than Jobs

Earth Hasn't Warmed In 15 Years

U.S. Drones Patrolling Its Skies Provoke Outrage in Iraq

NYC Teacher Making $100K In Rubber Room Refuses To Retire

Sarah Palin Defends Gingrich: Establishment Fears Him Because He Leads ‘Rage Against The Machine’

Mediaite.com:

Last night, Herman Cain officially threw his support behind Newt Gingrich. Fox News covered the breaking news, and Sarah Palin was on to not just react to the endorsement, but to explain her Facebook post that Ronald Reagan would be “ashamed” of how Republicans are acting, and to defend Newt Gingrich against the attacks being leveled against him by Mitt Romney and other Republicans.


Judge Jeanine Pirro asked Palin to explain what she meant in her remark about the late Republican president. Palin noted that Reagan was never one to shy away from criticizing other Republicans, but she argued the former president never engaged in “the politics of personal destruction” that she believes has engulfed much of the 2012 campaign. She credited Gingrich with being the first to pledge to take the high road, but because of the “negative, rewritten history” being thrown out there against him, she said it makes sense for Gingrich to hit back. She also called out the Republican establishment for lining up against Gingrich in a concerted effort to keep him from winning the nomination.


However, Palin thought it better for the vetting process to be carried out this early on between the candidates so that by the time the eventual nominee faces President Obama, there will be no “October surprise” to deal with. She also bucked conventional wisdom by suggesting the race will continue on beyond Florida, and said the media should put more focus on Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, the latter of whom she gave some words of praise for.


Despite his many years of service in Washington, Palin argued he was the outsider candidate because of how mobilized the establishment has been against him. She admitted she’d rather have a candidate who will “rage against the machine” as opposed to one who won’t challenge the status quo. “If for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote Newt. Annoy a liberal, vote Newt.”


But what about Gingrich’s ambition to establish a colony on the moon? Palin ardently supported it, connecting his statement to JFK’s call for space exploration decades ago. And as a fiscal conservative, she thought this was a valuable funding opportunity for the United States.


But for all her positive comments about Gingrich (she said towards the end of the interview that Gingrich could “clobber” Obama), Palin did not make an official endorsement in the race. Pirro tried to push her towards one, but Palin just stated she wants the process to continue before she makes any decisions.

RELATED: Does Sarah Palin Want Obama Re-elected?

Herman Cain Endorses Newt Gingrich for President

MSNBC.com:

Former presidential candidate Herman Cain, who last week endorsed "the American people," announced his support on Saturday of another entity -- this time a Republican hoping to win the White House.


"I hereby officially and enthusiastically endorse Newt Gingrich for president of the United States," Cain said at a GOP fundraiser.


Speaking to supporters on the day he left the race last month, the former head of Godfather's Pizza said he would be making an endorsement. But at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in South Carolina last week, he announced that his official endorsement would be of "we the people."


While Cain publicly promoted his endorsement last week, the one he made Saturday night came with little warning. The announcement was a surprise to Gingrich staff, and the traveling press who most frequently cover the former House speaker were not in attendance after boycotting the price the campaign was charging for chartered flights.


"There are many reasons, but one of the biggest reasons is that I know that Speaker Gingrich is a patriot. Speaker Gingrich is not afraid of bold ideas, and I also know that Speaker Gingrich is running for president and going through this sausage grinder," said Cain. "I know what this sausage grinder is all about. I know that he is going through this sausage grinder because he cares about the future of the United States of America."


Cain abandoned his presidential bid amongst accusations from women claiming he sexually harassed them while heading the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s. Describing the accusations as false attacks from the media and rivals, Cain's campaign sought to slog through the scandal. That was until a Georgia woman went public claiming to have had an affair with the former businessman for more than a decade.


On Dec. 2, Cain returned to his Atlanta home to meet with his wife and discuss the future of his candidacy. The next day he suspended his campaign.

RELATED: Fine Whine: Gingrich Campaign Accuses Romney Camp Of Packing Debate Audience

Angela McGlowan: ‘That’s What Liberals Do – They Do Race-Baiting And Class Warfare’

MediaTakeout.com:

On Friday morning’s Fox and Friends, during a lively segment, Fox News analyst Angela McGlowan had some tough words for President Obama and other liberal policymakers’ political rhetoric in invoking taxing the rich in the lead-up to the 2012 elections. “That’s what Liberals do,” McGlowan exclaimed. “They do race-baiting and class warfare.”


Host Gretchen Carlson asked McGlowen which political party Independent voters would support in 2012.


“It’s whoever can give them solutions,” McGlowen surmised. “Independents are solutions oriented. What can you do to create a more prosperous America for me? What can you do to help my children live the American dream? And I’m sorry to say, as a registered Republican, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich aren’t doing it that well in fighting with each other over tax policy, or who did what with whom with Freddie and Fannie. People want results, Gretchen, I thought it was so great when you brought up earlier that you have the State of the Union address and no one talked really about policy or Barack Obama until towards the end of the debate.”


Democratic political commentator Jehmu Greene said she surprisingly agreed with McGlowen, saying that Independent voters were fair game. “You have audiences that are booing gay veterans, that are cheering on old people without health insurance and you have these candidates on the stage denying science. These are all things that they’re going to make independent voters say ‘Whoa! Wait a second.’ I mean, they are up for grabs. We’ve seen a lot of shifts and a lot of shifts from being registered Democrats in that historic election in 2008 and now they’re independents so Obama has a challenge to get them back into our camp.”

CBC Chairman Emanueal Cleaver: African Americans Would ‘March on the White House’ If Obama Wasn’t Black

TheDailyCaller.com:

Rep. Emanueal Cleaver — the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus – told The Daily Caller that African Americans won’t “march on the White House” over the high unemployment rate in the black community because President Barack Obama is black.


Following his appearance at Republican Rep. Allen West’s Black Conservative Forum, Cleaver elaborated on his past comments about Obama’s image in the African American community, saying, “The point I was making is that black people hold the president in such high esteem, that they would not dare march on the White House even though unemployment is at 15 percent and higher and if there was a white president we would do that because we’ve had white presidents since George Washington.”


Cleaver continued, “The point was that if we had anybody else in the White House, with this level of unemployment, that you know, you would see a lot more African Americans, African American organizations and retro organizations speaking out against it. But because he is revered, you know, he gets I guess the benefit of, you know, understanding that the situation was terrible when he came in. So, we’re not doing that.”


The Missouri Democrat told TheDC that he personally resisted a proposed Annual Legislative Conference (ALC) “prayer” demonstration at the White House.


“I was resistant to a group of individuals who wanted to lock arms, surround the White House, with several thousand people during the ALC this past October and pray. I resisted it because I thought if we did that it would be interpreted as some kind of assault on the president, which I was not willing to launch,” he said.

Lesbian Actress Cynthia Nixon Says Being Gay Was Her "Choice"

One word...wow:

As shocking as Cynthia Nixon's bald-headed debut was on Tuesday morning's "Live with Kelly," her remarks about her homosexuality in a recent New York Times magazine article proved to be far more inflammatory.


The former "Sex and the City" actress appeared on the morning talk show sans her trademark ginger locks, a look she's adopted for her upcoming role in Broadway play "Wit" about an ovarian cancer patient.


But it was her decision to refer to her homosexuality as a "choice" that really has shocked fans and an angry LGBT community talking.


"For me, it is a choice," Nixon told the Times of her sexual orientation. "I understand that for many people it's not, but for me it's a choice, and you don't get to define my gayness for me.


"I say it doesn't matter if we flew here or we swam here. It matters that we are here and we are one group and let us stop trying to make a litmus test for who is considered gay and who is not."


Nixon, 45, is currently engaged to longtime partner Christine Marinoni, but was previously linked to her old college sweetheart, Daniel Mozes, before the pair split in 2003.

It's no secret that morally bankrupt social liberals and their gay activist pals need to state that homosexuality is not a choice (despite there being no credible proof to this great lie), as saying that you were "born this way" provides teh gheys with the tools they need to create and gain "civil rights". And while many other folks (including celebrities) have made the same factual claim to choosing gayness, it has to hurt the gay crowd tremendously to hear someone like Nixon (who has been heavily involved in the gay community since she "came out" some years ago) admit that it was her choice to be in a sexual relationship with a woman. But Nixon's right. Sexual behavior is an act, nothing more, nothing less. And while most homosexuals only identify themselves by who they sleep with, clearly Nixon (who besides being a lesbo is also a mother, an actress and has been in several relationships with men) doesn't buy the ludicrous idea that it took till her 40's to "discover" that she's gay. And while Nixon's choice to be gay is still despicable and sinful, good for her for speaking the truth to the bullies to in immoral masses that call themselves "gay activists".

Rep. Allen West: Yes, Obama Is The Food Stamp President

Mediaite.com:

Col. Allen West, a Republican congressman from Florida, joined Fox & Friends Monday morning to talk about his state’s upcoming GOP primary, Congressional doings, and the President’s shortcomings.


Host Brian Kilmeade began the interview by asking West what Newt Gingrich had to do to win the primary in Florida. West suggested that the candidates channel Ronald Reagan, and ask the people if they’re better off now than they were three years ago.


“Start drawing the contrast with major economic factors,” West suggested, “like gas prices, a gallon of milk, even a carton of eggs. Things that the American people can understand.”


Kilmeade then asked about “race code” being used between Gingrich and Juan Williams at the GOP debate last week in South Carolina. He asked West if he heard the same thing, as an African-American.


There is no race code. It’s a fact. Since President Obama has been in the oval office, you’ve seen a 41% increase in food stamp recipients in the United States of America. We have a President that is making more Americans victims than victors.

RELATED: Rep. Allen West: Yes, the president is the food stamp president

Politiks As Usual: In The News 1/23/12

Gabrielle Giffords Will Resign To Focus On Her Recovery

Newt Gingrich Pushes For Campaign Cash

Religious Liberty: The Latest Target of Obamacare

John Boehner: State of Union Speech May Be `Pathetic

Miss America Contestant Tepid About Occupy Wall Street, Loses Competition

Obama Administration Says No to Oil, Yes to Biofuels

Planned Parenthood Tries To Cash In On Mrs. Tebow's Choice To Pass On Abortion

Maureen Dowd: Obama Is 'Maddeningly Naïve' - His Presidency Has 'All the Joy of a Root Canal'

MSNBC's Bashir Superimposes Republican Candidates In Front Of Confederate Flag

Rick Santorum: No Pressure to Quit Race

GOP Race Is Now A Tossup

Penn State Coach Joe Paterno Passes Away