The Fact So Many Love Her Is Just Extra Gravy

Oh boy.

First it was the scientists. Then it was Newsweek Magazine. And now it's The L.A. Times, but, still this crazy bitch doesn't listen. She helped bring about the era of "Hope & Change", but - more than any conservative on the planet - it's she who refuses to change the most. Listen:

Dear Ms. Winfrey:

I get it.

I understand why you have so many guests on your show offering advice about health. I'm not a fan of alternative medicine, but I know sensationalism sells. Stuff that stands up to scientific scrutiny often lacks the pizazz that makes for scintillating television.

And just because I'm not into aligning my chi or awakening my Tony Robbins giant within doesn't mean other people don't have the right to seek alternatives to modern medicine. I know you are interested in presenting the millions of people who watch "Oprah" with different options.

However, I'm concerned that some of the people you have had as guests on your show and highlighted on your website may have led you astray when it comes to your own battles with weight, a topic about which you've been admirably frank. For instance, it might be a good idea to get advice from a doctor who doesn't say things like many women develop thyroid problems due to "an energy blockage in the throat region" that develops over "a lifetime of 'swallowing' words one is aching to say," as your frequent guest Dr. Christiane Northrup writes in her book, "The Wisdom of Menopause," which you discussed and endorsed on your show.

You're not known for swallowing words, are you?

You seem to have an affinity for the Law of Attraction — the idea that your thoughts "are sent out into the universe" and "magnetically attract" your desires, as Rhonda Byrne explains in her bestselling book "The Secret" and discussed on your show — but I don't think you believe that you can achieve your ideal weight just by thinking about it.

Shut up, bitch. This is Oprah Winfrey we're talking about. She believes in any damned thing that can be pawned off on her gullible followers for a buck.

To paraphrase George W. Bush, that's what a cult leader does.

There's no point in trying to reason with her. She's rich and you ain't, and that's the only metric that anyone in the world has given a damn about for the last 25 years:

Fuck that lady who got killed following Oprah's advice.

Fuck that girl who got raped by going to Oprah's school (wait - that didn't exactly come out right. Whatever: Oprah said it probably wouldn't have happened if she had spent more time interviewing the staff and less time picking out the sheets and curtains - well, yeah.)

Fuck all the relationships she's destroyed by promoting negative feminist "spiritual" bullshit with no point but to make charlatans rich.

Fuck everything, because nothing else matters except she's rich and you ain't, and that's the only metric that anyone in the world has given a damn about for the last 25 years.

Stupid thinking person. Leave Oprah alone so she can make enough money that, after she finally finishes taking you NewAge idiots for a ride, she can continue stuffing her fat face in peace.

Jeez.

Sounds Like He Had Some Really Bad Monitors

I have to say, at this point, there's something emotionally honest about a musician named Sparklehorse shooting himself - after working with a producer of the song "Crazy" (Danger Mouse) and a spokesperson for the even-crazier Transcendental Meditation cult (David Lynch) - only to have The Los Angeles Times file it all away under the heading of ENTERTAINMENT.

I Wouldn't Have Picked It Up If I Could Help It

"She knew he was married, of course. But Woods told her she was his only girlfriend, Allred said. 'A woman ought to be able to believe a man when he tells her that.'..."

-- Gerrick D. Kennedy, blogging about lawyer Gloria Allred's controversial defense of Veronica Siwik-Daniels, "a former porn actress who said she had a three-year relationship" with Tiger Woods - and catching Allred making one of the stupidest comments I've read all day - a statement almost as stupid as her client's hope to break up another woman's marriage, before letting her scheming lawyer try portraying that betrayal as a feminist act, in The Los Angeles Times.

Tell Me Lies (Tell Me Sweet Little Lies)

"I wonder what would happen if a religious group sold 'miracles' with the vague promise that there was a scientific basis for it.

The mystery is why,...junk medicine has become so popular, so much so that that there are now five NHS-funded homeopathic hospitals (yes, taking precious money away from liposuctions for the morbidly obese). As my boss Damian Thompson pointed out in his excellent (grovel) book Counterknowledge, homeopathy is just one part of a trend for irrational belief, from junk history to creationism to conspiracy theories, all of them far more widely held now than they were a generation or two ago.

It’s probably not enough to argue the Chestertonian point that the decline of organised religion has led to paradoxical irrationality, 'misinformation packaged as fact', although there is an element of truth in it (organised religions do at least have mechanisms for dealing with phoneys). Part of the reason that increasing numbers seem to reject western medicine – mankind’s greatest legacy, as anyone who has attended a birth will attest – has to be the wider anti-Westernism in the air, especially coming from the education system, where even established medical and scientific facts are presented as merely 'subjective',...."

-- Ed West, putting two-and-two together - something that's also becoming increasingly difficult for many these days - though math is math, and we've supposedly moved waaaay past beliefs from the days of The Telegraph.

"At one recent session on the Berkeley campus, Scheer (who became the resident leftist columnist for the Los Angeles Times after leaving Ramparts) assured the audience that Ramparts not only smashed retrograde national taboos but 'had very high standards. No question we were putting out as good a journal as anyone in the country. . . . We were edited by professionals, it had to be well written, fact-checked. And the fact is that we did not screw up. I can’t think of a major error.'

Readers can learn from the book, for example, that [Warren] Hinckle indulged every crackpot conspiracy theorist on the JFK assassination. Early in 1967, Ramparts published staff member David Welsh’s claim that there were three assassins in Dallas in 1963. Our resident ex–FBI agent, Bill Turner, then wrote two articles supporting New Orleans DA Jim Garrison’s theory that Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA agent controlled by conspirators deep within the U.S. government. 'Very high standards,' indeed."

-- Sol Stern, giving us another view of how we've got the pop history we now live with - Oliver Stone's paranoid JFK comes to mind as a film influenced by Ramparts's outlook - that we seemingly can't get away from, without the likes of The City Journal.

"[Stephen] Bassett tracks mainstream news coverage of alien-related material. His firm, Paradigm Research Group, has found that the number of English-language articles mentioning the topic increased nearly sixfold between 2006 and 2008—and when we spoke, 2009 was on a record-setting pace. His tally doesn’t include the tabloids, he adds, or recent coverage on CNN, Fox News, ABC, the Discovery Channel, the History Channel, the Learning Channel, and, of course, the Sci-Fi Channel. From ghost hunters and UFO hunters to alien autopsies and secret societies, the schedules of previously sober TV stations now resemble a giant nightly X-Conference."

-- Timothy Lavin, reflecting on George Norry's Coast To Coast, AM - America's much-loved, late-night paranormal gabfest - and what it has in common with the deceptively-titled, Ramparts-influenced, "mainstream" media of today, in The Atlantic.

Let's Not Pretend To Pretend It's Not Pretending

"A clerk at a Christian bookstore in Simi Valley was arrested on suspicion of peeping after Simi Valley police found a video camera hidden in a bathroom at the store, authorities said today."

-- Andrew Blankstein, reminding us we're all sinners - so some of us will try to get away with any damn thing - and so, there's nothing short of supernatural powers that anyone can do to stop it, or The Los Angeles Times.

This Would Be Great (If Recycling Did Any Good)

"Recycling is a religion for Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates"

-- Maria L. La Ganga, on Berkeley, California's top eco-believer - in the cause of manipulating, and/or forcing, others into a worthless activity that accomplishes nothing - making him one of the West's most visible examples of waste, in The Los Angeles Times.

This is Your No-Bullshit Education

"You do outstanding things here and you'll be treated outstanding. You act like a fool and you'll be treated like one."

-- Ben Chavis, owner of Oakland, California's back-to-basics American Indian Public Charter school, in an inspirational hallway message for their high-achieving kids (seriously) and just so you know - for those who think we're too "negative" and always against something - this made us happy enough to say: you should definitely read about them in The Los Angeles Times.

Does Anyone Just Call Lying "Lying" Anymore?

"This is the story of an ambitious new administration running up against reality at home and abroad."

-- William A. Galston, kind of admitting Obama ran "on" delusional bullshit during the election - while, now that he's won, he's "running up against reality" - which is, remarkably, still being studiously avoided in The Los Angeles Times.

Apparently, The Ocean Levels Are The Same, Too (He Said He Would Fix All That Soon,...)

"Apparently, the Obama election will not instantly rehabilitate the U.S."

-- The Editors, making it pretty clear they ate the brown acid, at The Los Angeles Times.

You Can Use His Bones To Pick Your Teeth

"We want to know whom Mayor Villaraigosa [above] is dating, and we want to see her picture. And if John Edwards visits his mistress at the Beverly Hilton and gets chased into a bathroom by National Enquirer reporters--hey, you know, maybe that's a story! (The LAT didn't think so.)  By covering politics in a way that got at least a few hundred thousand readers to pay attention, you could take the first, big step toward changing the apathetic culture of Southern California (the culture that lets Democratic interest groups fill the void and call the shots). ..."

-- Mickey Kaus, encouraging media vultures to "feast" on the environmentally friendly, PC, left-wing, arrogant - and all while being totally clueless - L.A. Times, over at Slate.com.

Bogus: NewAge, Democrats, And The L.A. Times

"Democrats had the votes, just not enough to provide political cover. So they offered a dishonest spin: that they simply didn’t have the votes.

And the L.A. Times was happy to repeat this false spin to readers."

-- Patterico, catching my hometown paper in another of it's many (blame the Republicans) lies, which he always does with Patterico's Pontifications.

The Media Is Now Committing Suicide

"We're not a video service."

— Doyle McManus (above) the Los Angeles Times's Washington bureau chief, on a secretly held videotape of Barack Obama at a 2003 party with Palestinian rights advocate and Israel critic Rashid Khalidi, in the Washington Post.

Thumb your nose at your betters, give a hand to:

Confirmed: The L.A. Times WILL Lie To You

“The L.A. Times desperately wanted to avoid this damaging story, dressed up its desires in media-diligence drag (we were told not to comment until the paper’s reporters were through looking into the matter), and as a result was beaten and humiliated in its own backyard.”

— Tim Cavanaugh, an ex-L.A. Times employee, on coverage of the John Edwards Affair the paper kept denying it was hiding - without fooling anybody - and especially not Deceiver

And which raises the questions: who was being "damaged"? Who did the L.A. Times think it was protecting? My bet:

"O-Ba-Ma! O-Ba-Ma! O-Ba-Ma!"

As A Matter Of Fact, Being Ignorant Helps

"Ignorance is no hindrance at Lourdes."

-- Susan Spano, capturing the essence of the 150th anniversary of Bernadette seeing visions of angels - Ignorance is no hindrance for France - or, apparently, for the Los Angeles Times.

Hitting All The Right (NewAge) Buttons

"'The X-Files’ is equal to God.”

-- David Duchovny, when asked what the cult hit is "all about," in the Los Angeles Times

The article continues with these other typical NewAge observations:

“My initial response — and I still hold this to be true — is that it takes the place of some of the functions of a church in a small town: A place where people come together, ostensibly to worship something."

Duchovny said that he has come to view the most loyal fans of the show as celebrants of self, not of celebrity."

Well, fancy that.

Be Yourself - Not A New Wager

In case no one's noticed, the tone of this blog has gotten decidedly harsher, and that's intentional:

The site is called The Macho Response.

Not The Metrosexual Response.

Nor the I'm Not Sure What I Think So I'm Gonna Have A Kinda Wishy-Washy Moment thing.

I do know what I think, and there ought to be somewhere people can go to read someone who knows what they think, and will say it - openly and unadorned - with the swearing included and everything. TMR is NOT part of some super-sensitive new wage world order. As a matter of fact, it's the new wage order that's made me so harsh. I think the interests and sensitivities of people who believe in such things are obnoxious and harmful - just as I think belief, itself, is. Here, such people and attitudes get no quarter.

Here, I can read a NYT analysis bumper:

In his testimony, Gen. David H. Petraeus proposed an American troop presence in Iraq that would be longer and larger than what many Democrats have advocated.

And you can read exactly what I was thinking when I read it:

Who gives a fuck "what many Democrats have advocated"? Why does the NYT's war analysis always have to be a side-by-side comparison with what the Democrats - and the Democrats alone - want? The Democrats were against the war from the beginning - but have been on the losing side of every debate about it - so who cares? How about a side-by-side comparison to just what's in our national interest and leave the fucking loser Democrats out of the whole conversation already? Oh, yea - it's the NYT - and they're against the war too. So Republicans don't exist - until they win the latest debate - and then they're bad guys for winning the debate because the NYT was feeding the public a bunch of crap the NYT framed deceptively. Is that what the NYT calls being fair? Objective? Hardly, though I wish they were - but they ain't - and I know it. So I don't have to be fair, with them, either. Fuck the NYT. That's what they get for trying to take advantage of this black American's good nature,...

And so on.

TMR isn't a place for being polite. (Neither is the liberal denialism blog and nobody complains about their wimpy asses.) And why should every discussion be projected through the lens of people who lose every debate, usually, because they're making no sense? The celebrities, who starve themselves to death 'for health' or the people who want to control the minds of others into silence - because of their sensitivity? Fuck 'em all. TMR is where you get Red Meat. Vegans need not apply.

The LA Times has a lead article on Freegans - dumpster divers - why?

Is it such an important topic - a dumpster diving subculture - that it needs to lead?

Maybe it's because Freegans "do not want to depend on businesses that they believe waste resources, harm the environment or allow unfair labor practices." Well, great - and why should I give a damn about what they "believe"? Beliefs aren't worth shit but newspapers, today, seem enthralled by them. I know new wagers are.

These Freegans are stupid worry-warts, with an open agenda; they "hope it leads people to push their own limits and quit spending." Fuck them. We're in a war, and the LA Times is hanging out with dumpster divers - that should tell you everything you need to know about my hometown paper these days.

They've also got another lead story with this bumper:

Imagine Bush in jail stripes.

No - imagine the LA Times in jail stripes. Losers. It's no wonder journalism is looked down on today - it's not "reporting" but "indoctrination" into a new wage viewpoint - and it's gonna stop, because I ain't biting. Let the papers keep losing money, they'll learn: I'll get my news online, or by dumpster diving for the paper, because I "hope it leads people to push their own limits and quit spending" for this crap.

When news sources decide to aggressively dig into new wage operations and attitudes - and how they've harmed us - maybe I'll change, but until then, they can kiss this news junkie's money and support goodbye.

The Daily Mail:

The lead stories are on Britney Spears (tears) Anne Robinson (she's got "a new look") Posh Spice (seen puffy-eyed) and Sharon Osbourne (more tears) and this is fucking news how?

The only Daily Mail story getting major play, that comes even close to being news, is the Madeleine McCann saga.

Who runs today's news outlets? They're all new wagers. So called "progressives" who wouldn't know "news" to save their lives - and, considering all news sources are losing money, we're probably watching them die. Here's The Mail's war bumper:

Bush's top general dashes hopes of early Iraq retreat.

More "hopes" and "beliefs". When did we enter the new wage la-la land of hopes and beliefs? What happened to "facts" and "evidence"? Are the Daily Mail's editors children? Maybe Harry Potter is running things? Where is the fucking NEWS?

A dose of vitamin D could add years to your life.

"Could"? Or could not. Whatever. A so-called "reporter" getting hit over the head, by an angry news reader, can end his/her life, assholes, no matter how much vitamin D they took. I swear, they'd deserve it.

I gotta go:

I don't need this shit, and you don't either.

What you need is: