Michael Ryan Admits Tea Baggers are Gullible/Stupid

Re: "Truth just isn't in the cards," from the April 30th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Mary Schorsch very cleverly was handing out red, white, and blue cards at Augusta's latest tea party asking the tea baggers to fill out a form saying they want to discontinue their Social Security, Medicare, etc. because they were socialist programs.

One of the reasons Mr. Ryan takes issue with this is because the cards are in a patriotic color. As if only conservatives are allowed to use patriotic colors.

Mr. Ryan felt it necessary to warn Tea Baggers not to fill out the card. This is an inadvertent admission that Tea Baggers are gullible and stupid.

***********************************************************************************

Below the above mentioned mess, we have another column from Michelle Malkin, another reliable shithead.

She claims that the Mexican government bars foreigners if the "equilibrium of national demographics" is upset.

This is nonsense. The Mexican government happily welcomes any rich white people from the U.S. who want to retire there and spend money.

I can't believe any newspaper prints her ridiculous columns.

************************************************************************************

Mr. Ryan won a homeboy award issued by the Augusta Rotary Club. Something named after some Augusta Chronicle editorialist who probably wrote anti-desegragation columns for 30 years.

I didn't know plagiarism wins awards.

On this blog I've documented 4 cases of Mr. Ryan's plagiarism.

See: 1. The Drudge Report
2. An anonymous chain email.
3. Kathryn Lopez of the National Review
4. Glenn Beck

Mr. Ryan is now an award winning plagiarist.

In Principle Michael Ryan Agrees--Welfare Recipients=Stray Animals

Re: "Murphy Brown Gives Birth Again," from the January 26th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Michael Ryan writes that S.C. Lt. Governor, Andre Bauer, in principle is right--welfare recipients are the equivalent of stray animals. Mr. Ryan only laments Mr. Bauer's wording of the issue. I don't know how many diplomatic ways there are to say that poor people=stray dogs and cats, but the truth came out and that's what conservatives think of less fortunate human beings.

If there is any issue which clearly demonstrates the lack of logic in conservative thought, this is it. Conservatives falsely believe welfare causes a cycle of dependency. How can this be? There is a 5 year lifetime limit on federal welfare. It's therefore impossible for a woman to live on welfare her entire life as many conservatives believe. Moreover, men without children are not even eligible for federal welfare. There is no evidence that children of welfare mothers are more likely to turn to welfare themselves when they grow up. The mother of Sarah Jessica Parker, the actress from Sex and the City, was on welfare. Yet, her daughter became a successful actress.

What do conservatives think? That poor women get pregnant out of wedlock on purpose so they can collect welfare and food stamps and live in public housing. Those aren't exactly get rich schemes. Conservatives must think poor women say, "Oh yeah, I'm going to get knocked up so I can barely scrape by on welfare."

Conservatives are stooges because they think people want to be poor on purpose so they can live off the government. Nobody wants to be poor.

The reality is this: If you are going to have a free market, capitalist society, there are going to be poor people. You can be humane and have a government that takes care of the have-nots, or you can have armed revolution when poor people get fed up with starvation. I vote for the former and lots of it--we should have greater welfare benefits (including generous job training and education) than we have now.

***********************************************************************************

Re: "A gaping blindspot," from the January 23rd edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

This one is laughable. Mr. Ryan claims the media turns a blind eye to the Tea Party movement and the John Edwards' scandal. If so, how do we even know about it. His claim just doesn't make sense. If the media ignored it, as he claims, we wouldn't know about these things.

Re: "Running out of options," from the same edition.

Mr. Ryan is correct when he notes polls show people are overwhelmingly against the health care plan. But I was listening to NPR the other day and the radio announcer cited a poll (I don't know which one) that showed the health care plan with just 40% support compared to 51% opposition. But when people were told what was actually in the plan, support jumped up to 73%.

This demonstrates that much of the opposition to the plan is based on ignorance.

***********************************************************************************

Re: "A seismic correction from the January 21st edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

Conservative pundits and panicky democrats are making far too much out of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts senatorial election. He was a handsome man who looked like a Kennedy, and he ran a clever advertisement comparing himself to J.F.K. He satisfied the Kennedy fetish that Massachusetts voters seem to have. (Remember they re-elected Ted after Chappaquidick, an event that would have wiped out any other politician's career.)

I know this is cynical, and there are many people who do vote based on ideology, but just as many vote on looks and personality, and that's the main reason why Brown won. I can't think of a single good looking candidate who ever lost to a non-incumbent ugly candidate in any race. I know there are some. Maybe somebody can give some examples in response to this blog, but I just can't think of any.

This does hurt the democrats. Though they still have big majorities in both houses of congress, they act as if they're in the minority. What a bunch of wimps. They should simply do away with that silly antiquated filibuster rule, but this would require guts--something democrats have absolutely none of.

************************************************************************************

In the above mentioned edition we have crazy nut of the week letter from Paul Rosenthal who states that Obama wants the economy to fail on purpose so he can install a Marxist system. Someone forgot to give this guy his thorazine.

***********************************************************************************

Re: "Nancy Antoinette," from the January 18th edition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

It's really galling when conservatives such as Mr. Ryan claim the republicans are the party of the common man. This criticism of Nancy Pelosi is not fair. Congressmen have the right to go on junkets to obtain information about the world. Mr. Ryan criticizes her for not revealing how much her trip cost. She probably doesn't know. Some secretary handles it. Mr. Ryan cites Jack Cafferty who also criticizes Ms. Pelosi for this. Jack Cafferty is a stupid populist ass who wants to get people fired up about nothing.

**********************************************************************************

Note: I again submitted a letter to the Augusta Chronicle. It was about an issue I discussed in my last blog--Mr. Ryan's plagiarism of an article written by Ms. Lopez in which she misquoted Martha Coakley and came up with the dubious conclusion that Ms. Coakley stated catholics were unfit to work in emergency rooms. In my letter I didn't use the word plagiarism. I simply wrote it was an astonishing coincidence that he came up with the same misquote and same dubious conclusion.

Nevertheless, they didn't publish my letter (after 8 days, so I assume they won't). This proves that they're aware of Mr. Ryan's plagiarisms and evidentally approve of them.

More Plagiarism from Michael Ryan

Re: "Then the race got kookier," from the January 16th addition of the Augusta Chronicle editorial page.

We can add Kathryn Lopez, a columnist for the National Review, as another source that Michael Ryan plagiarizes.

Ms. Lopez deliberately misquoted Massachusetts senatorial candidate, Martha Coakley, to make it sound as if she was prejudiced against catholics.

Ms. Coakley was being interviewed by radio host, Ken Pittman. They were discussing a Massachusetts state law that provides emergency contraception for rape victims in emergency rooms. Because catholics are against birth control of any kind, this could pose a moral dilemma for them. Martha Coakley's opponent, Scott Brown, sponsored an amendment to this law that would have the state pay for transfers to hospitals where medical workers who don't oppose birth control would provide the treatment.

Ms. Lopez misquoted what Ms. Coakley said when discussing this issue. She wrote that Ms. Coakley said "The law says people are allowed to have that (referring to religious freedom). You can have religious freedom, but you probably shouldn't work in an emergency room." Then she made the leap that Ms. Coakley claimed that catholics shouldn't work in emergency rooms.

This is the part Ms. Lopez left out, according to Jamison Foser (www.mediamatters.org/blog/201001150015), "If you refuse to provide legal medical services to rape victims, you probably shouldn't work in an emergency room."

In Michael Ryan's column, he repeated the same misquotation and also claimed, as Ms. Lopez did, that Ms. Coakley saw catholics as unqualified to work in emergency rooms.

So unless, Mr. Ryan independently thought to deliberately misquote Ms. Coakley and to use the misquotation to smear her with being anti-catholic, than he is guilty of plagiarism.

Anybody out there think he thought of this smear independently?

***********************************************************************************

Today's editorial, "Obama's freshmen failure," was predictably unfair.

I think it's too early for history to judge whether Obama's first year was a failure or a success, and the whole idea of giving a letter grade to a president is a little silly. Nevertheless, most of the criticisms in this editorial are rehashed accounts of Mr. Ryan's hysterical opposition to political points of view he disagrees with.

I'm not going to discuss each and every one. Instead, I'd like to point out the most unfair criticism in this column. Mr. Ryan writes, "he (Obama) has failed to pass any major legislation, amazingly despite solid Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress."

There are two reasons for this and they have nothing to do with Obama.

1. Republican obstructionism
2. Conservative democrats who are also on the take from big corporations and oppose even minor reforms.

Considering the control big corporations have over Congress, it's amazing an reform beneficial to the people ever passes, but it looks likely at least some form of weak health care reform will pass soon.