re: Korny Night Football

Dear Bristol. Enough already.

Tony Kornheiser has got to be the dimmest bulb ever, and I mean EVER to populate the broadcast booth on Monday Night. Even Pat Summerall on his second fifth of bourbon is more compelling and informative than this sports hack.

Can you please send him back to Bristol University for some remedial Football 101 so he doesn't have to annoy us and Joe Theisman with 3 hours of stupid questions preceeded by the phrase "I don't know anything about football?!" I mean, he's like the chick who's acting like the third wheel and embarrassing her boyfriend in front of the guys!

I'm still trying to figure out why you would break up the greatest booth in NFL football and bring in someone who thinks he's Howard Cosell, when he's so clearly just another in a series of lackluster third parties which prompted Al Michaels and John Madden to say "we're fine, thanks."

Kornheiser thinks he's setting the stage with his pedantic sililoquy's, when in reality, he's just marking time until the next commercial break. You've got Boomer in the bullpen. He's there every week anyway, so for Lombardi's sake, make the call!

I should be watching my Cowboys battling the New York Football Giants right now. But instead, I have to log on and point out that while Bosephus is asking "Are you ready for some football," Tony Kornheiser so clearly isn't.

re: Another Golden Opportunity

With Tampa Bay's upset of the "Iggles" today, once again, the planets are aligning. Once again, Big D has the opportunity, with a win against a division rival, to take sole possession of 1st place in the NFC East or drop to 2nd best in the standings.

But this won't be an easy road to hoe as you go up against division rival, the New YOrk Football Giants, a Manning at Quarterback, and a beloved running back who has announced his retirement at the end of the season. Will it prompt the Giants to rally around him for one last moment in the sun? Can Manning 3.0 live up to his older brother's on-going legacy?

Can T.O. keep concentrating on football and less on the lime light which so easily follows him? Can Drew have yet another great passing game or will be hesitant in getting rid of the ball and end up on his back? Can Vandyland split the uprights like the #13 of old? And can the spirit of Doomsday continue to possess the defense when it truly matters.

I'm betting it can. And being at home, with the 12th man behind you, I'm hoping you thing you can as well. It didn't help the last time. But what's past is prologue.
The planet's are aligning ... and the brass ring is sitting there saying ... I'm yours and yours alone.

All you have to do is take it.

My Dear Friend Tony,

I've always liked your blog, most of the time I don't agree with it. But when I saw your comments about NBCs editing God out of Veggie Tales, the series, I had to reply.

Before you casually state that Phil Vischer "lost his company to bankruptcy," you might want to take the time to read Vischer's long, sad tale on how he lost Big Idea, to gain perspective on it.

Here's Vischer's POV about it:

"As I mentioned in my prior post, I'm not at all happy with the edits. I didn't know I'd need to make them when I agreed to produce the show, and I considered dropping out when I found out just how much would need to be removed. I decided to continue primarily as a favor to Classic Media and my friends at Big Idea, who would have been in a major pickle if I had abandoned the project just a few weeks before the first air date. (We didn't find out about the need for the cuts until early August, about two weeks before delivering the first episode.) So did Classic Media or Big Idea sell out? Not really, I don't think, because the depth of the cuts came as a surprise to them as well. Apparently one department at NBC was telling them one thing, and then, once they were committed to delivering the show, another department told them something completely different. They could have pulled VeggieTales from the deal at that point and swapped some other show (like Lassie or something else from Classic's library), but they thought the exposure for Bob and Larry was worth it. Would I have made the same decision? I'm not sure. That's a tough call. When a general market distributor promised in 1994 to take VeggieTales into Wal-Mart if we would remove God from the show, I declined. The increased exposure wasn't worth the loss of the show's primary purpose - teaching kids about God. (At the end of the day VeggieTales isn't a show about 'values', it's a show about God.)

So is this any different? Yes, sort of, because the edited shows won't end up on store shelves. There won't be two different versions of each VeggieTales video - one with God, and one without. These shows will only air on NBC, Telemundo and Pax (now called "Ion"), and as soon as they're done with them, I'm hoping Big Idea will put them back the way they should be. Was it a 'sell-out' to do this deal? Ultimately you'll have to make that call."

If this is the case, then I'm fairly okay with the edits NBC made. If kids love Veggie Tales, their parents will go buy the videos and find the real message - the message that made VT one of the most successful children's video series' in history.

Vischer still writes episodes and voices several of the characters. And was approached specifically to create the new opening for the show. So he is most definitely involved in the creative vision of this long running series. So to say that he no "longer controls anything about Veggie Tales" isn't entirely accurate, Tony, and I'm surprised you wouldn't have found that out.

I also want to point out that Christians are also fans of the original Veggie Tales series. If Star Wars fans get up and complain that Lucas made Guido shoot first instead of Han, is it beyond the pale for fans of Veggie Tales to complain about the editing out of the very soul of one of their beloved series?

And as far as NBC worrying about parents calling to complain about religious messages to their kids, what is so upsetting about the phrase "God loves you special and he loves you very much!" And it's not like there isn't precedence for using the "G" word on network Television. I didn't see Les Monves scream the sky is falling over TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL. In fact, he was probably praising the lord all the way to the bank over the ratings. So much so he green lit "Joan of Arcadia."

And if that doesn't suffice, I submit the tired old liberal counter argument when Christians complain about TV content - your TV has an on/off button, use it.

ps = Aaron Sorkin's anti-Christian bigotry can be read about on my blog http://www.crazy-christians.blogspot.com. Studio 60 isn't the first time Sorkin has used a whipping stick on the faithful.

re: freedom of speech, expression, blah, blah, blah

Dear YouTubers. I see that even Hollywood professional filmmakers get flagged for being conservative. You have orchestrated, either from YouTube itself, or the left leaning members, to censor David Zucker's North Korea Video as "inappropriate." It seems, that the flagging system is member based. Each member can flag any video with an inappropriate flag and I guess once it gets enough of them, the system sends it to the red light district.

What I'm curious about is, what reason was used by the membership, or what reason is YouTube hiding behind, to flag this film as off limits?

I went over to the Assasination of the President video on YouTube, which curiously hasn't been relegated to YouTube's redlight district, and saw that there's a "flag as inappropriate" option for a member to give feedback. YouTube then asks the member to choose a reason to justify such action:



So, let's go down the list, shall we?

"Pornography or obscenity." Well, I don't see any flesh shown (thank God, since it's Madelline Albright there), nor sexual acts between any character in Zucker's film.

"Mature content (over 18) only." Again, nothing there that would even be borderline. There's no harsh language. No graphic violence. No adult themes. Just good, ole fashioned satire - at the very least the kind that the characters of Aaron Sorkin's fantasy sketch dramedy hide behind in "Studio 60 On the Sunset Strip."

"Illegal acts." Certainly, nobody breaks the law in this video. Unless you consider Kim Jong Il's deliberate and expected violation of this Carter/Clinton Agreement which gave him the tools to do so isn't cricket. Ironically, the Assasination of the President video, which shows a dramatic crime of murder fits this description more than anything in Zucker's video. But doesn't isn't considered "inappropriate."

Surely it's "Graphic violence." Nope. No "blood, gore or veins in the teeth," as anti-war icon Arlo Guthrie is famous for singing in Alice's Restaurant. Again, the Assasination video shows more violence, but doesn't get the flag.

The only one left is the race card ... "Racially, or ethnically offensive content." And from what I can see, showing the white female Secretary of State acting as Kim Jong Il's "stepnfetchit," wouldn't be offensive to anyone who isn't of that particular ethnic persuasion.

So, I'm at a loss for words. And I need your help. Here's the video to watch.



Please explain where in the video, did Zucker break the TOS for YouTube? Out of all the reasons you can give to flag it, which one even comes close?

Either YouTube is doing it themselves and hiding behind their TOS to accomplish this agenda, or there’s an organized, liberal, “Freeper-esque” movement to flag conservative videos so they get censored and a blind eye is being turned.

Either. Both. Doesn't really matter. It only proves that to a liberal, freedom of speech is a principle that is only paid lip service unless it serves an agenda.

So, the wife has gotten me hooked on several reality shows over the years. From "Survivor" to The Amazing Race, to the surprise guilty pleasure of the summer, the historically themed "Treasure Hunters."

But now it's this great show on Animal Planet called MEERKAT MANOR.

What's Meerkat Manor you say? Well, USA Today calls it a "Cross Wild Kingdom with Dynasty." It follows the lives of a pack of meerkats called "The Whiskers" and it's more compelling and entertaining as any hypocritical, star-bloated TV dramedy.

And one thing is certain ... I'm worried about Shakespeare. (caution, potential spoiler, so don't click unless ...!)

re: CENSOR SOMEONE.
Dear YouTube. When I heard from Michelle Malkin that YouTube has chosen to flag content from conservative youtube members as being "inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community" I couldn't believe it. But there it is in black, white, red and blue.

Seriously. YouTube. You think that conservatives who wish to post videos to refute political claims and propagandistic postings is on par with PORN like AMERICAN HARDCORE? Kindly explain to me how the group "BUSH SUCKS" receives no such restriction.

Now, you may have a perfectly good reason why videos such as "Ann Coulter: Clinton's Meltdown; 2008 Presidential Race," "liberal lunacy...," or "Bill Clinton's Meltdown on Fox" should be kept in the red light district along with "Dog Porn," but what confuses me is how "Jenna Jameson's Confessions" on VH-1 does not?

I'm sure it's an oversight that will be remedied as soon as the conservative side of the blogsphere creates a frenzy to the point where you realize it. Because god forbid (can I say God here?) YouTube be branded with the "C" word.

UPDATE: According to my friend Icestar, You have a peer ranking system. If that's the case, you have a flaw in it that allows for a misuse of the system to censor stifle free speech. The question is, will You do anything about it or turn a blind eye?

re: Who are you and what have you done with our Senator?

Senator Frist. I have to be honest that I was aghast with your declaration that we can't defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan so we should all just "get along?" The Senate Majority in time of war says "if we can't beat em, join em" in time of war?

I give that a collosal "Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot." Who are you? This isn't the kind of talk we need to have when the world is at war on terror and when our party is at war in the upcoming elections with a party that wants to cut and run. What your saying is their kind of talk, not ours. I've gotta be honest here, Doctor Frist, you're tenure as Majority Leader has been so bizarely sub-par that it makes me long for the days of Tent Lott's Southern manner.

And it's statements like that which won't help our boys in the field, the war on terror, or the upcoming mid-term elections. And as I've said time and time again - you can certainly kiss your dreams of the White House goodbye with that one.

Now if we can only figure out a way to get you out of the leadership. Course, with statements like this, that may come in November.

re: Let he who is without sin ...

To my liberal friends who think they can gain political traction on the Foley Page Scandal. First off, let me say that if former Congressman Foley hadn't resigned, he should've been tossed out his ear with his pension seized. On top of that, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, with his new page being some brute named Dennis who's doing 25-life in the big house.

That being said, I'm noticing that many of my liberal friends think they have more mud to sling as the election comes. They are jumping with glee pointing more fingers at the GOP and screaming "the party of bad morals," "corruption" yada yada yada.

Well, let me remind you, my dear liberal friends, that if we set the Wayback Machine to 1983, we find an unapologetic Democrat guilty of doing the same thing. And who got away with it. At least the Republican in that case expressed some remorse. Your democrat turned his back on the hallowed halls which he served his constituents and thumbed his nose at the censure.

Then, there's the fact that Congressman Barney Frank had a prostitution ring run from his own apartment by his boyfriend. Right under his very nose. Frank also used his station to fix 33 tickets for his boyfriend, getting a congressional reprimand in the process.


Since 1974, the number of Democrats accused of sexual misconduct while in office reaches thirteen. To be fair, nine republicans have also had trouble keeping their zipper up. But nearly all of these occured on the watch of the majority party - DEMOCRATS, and in nearly every case, nothing was done.

And we all remember what the definition of "is" is.

So, before you start tossing stones our way, before you think that you can drag Speak Hastert down as well, think about the fact that glass houses break rather nicely when you live in them.

UPDATE: It seems there's more to this "October Surprise" than meets the eye. Is this another Wellstone Funeral moment? As we learn more, it sure seems like it.