My Direct Democracy is asking Wisconsin's Russ Feingold to deliver it's convention keynote. It's convention keynote? It's an astrology outfit!!!! Now why doesn't anyone treat them like an astrology outfit? Why aren't they even recognized as an astrology outfit?
What in the Hell do we have a news media in this country for?
So, yesterday was a big day around here: thanks to everyone who called and said "You were right." It means a lot. Now make a donation.
I followed yesterday's events closely; watched John Edwards on ABC (good job Bob Woodruff) and had a chance to sleep on it, and here's what I think today:
The MSM is hopeless.
Everyone knows their coverage of the John Edwards affair is done to get rid of the story. (I know it, anyway.) Released on a Friday, first day of the Olympics, blah, blah, blah.
Um, I'm standing right here, guys. I can see you.
"They lied in a way that made the people who were telling the truth look like the real liars. They lied in a way that turned their supporters into attack dogs."
-- Lee Stranahan, commenting on both John and Elizabeth Edwards - but just as easily on the big news media's lie of omission - for The Huffington Post
Slate's Mickey Kaus wrote five reasons why the MSM should've ran with this story a long time ago. While I respect the work Mickey Kaus has done, I most humbly disagree. There are many more reasons to pursue this story than I can count because it's got all the elements necessary to tell the story of our time - the story that identifies and unravels exactly what ails this country: the sway of NewAge beliefs.
"I believed deeply in the Elizabeth-John love story, even as I distrusted Edwards as a politician (shifty trial lawyer that he seemed to be). When the Enquirer story broke, I shot back at others' knee-jerk judgments, choosing to believe that a couple staring down a bleak future, wrestling with a grim prognosis (a couple who knows the agony of losing a son, no less), might make an unconventional sexual arrangement. And yet, what strikes me about today's revelation is how conventional it seems to be: just another hotel bump-and-grind, another thirsty ego desperate to be slaked. The ugliest part for me is Edwards' defensive claim that it all happened while Elizabeth's cancer was in remission.
Honestly, having watched the "Nightline" segment, I feel nothing but sadness -- for everyone, including me, for having watched it so salaciously. Yuck."
-- Sarah Hepola, a Broadsheet contributor, commenting on Salon.com
"Even as I distrusted Edwards as a politician,...I shot back at others' knee-jerk judgments." Defending the sordid private lives of politicians is a trope of the media - that's why The Enquirer beat them. Come on, this is about much more than John Edwards getting some, and Sarah's comment proves it. People John Edwards doesn't even know are having arguments, choosing sides, telling lies, and getting hurt.
"Back in September 2007, we reported that the videos, which Hunter had been paid to produce for Edwards' One America Committee, had gone mysteriously missing. Perhaps even more curious: no one seemed to claim ownership. Staffers for Edwards, who by then was in the throes of the primary, said they had no access to the film: four shorts on the Senator's efforts to promote the eradication of poverty. Meanwhile, the film company, Midline Groove Productions, said the videos were the product of the campaign. Not only that, they were for some reason prohibited from even discussing the content."
Sam Stein, on what at first appeared to be a mystery, for The Huffington Post
In comparison to what's surrounding this event, John Edwards is the most insignificant thing about this story. Why? Because with knick-names like "Silkypony," and "The Breck Girl," he was apparently the last person to notice his narcissism.
"Their initial interaction occurred outside the hotel, when Hunter approached the former Senator on the sidewalk and showered him with flattery."
But how was John Edwards allowed, in the mediasphere, to dismiss his critics so easily? The Cult of Obama? Anybody heard of it? We've seen the phenomena, where's the investigation? Or is everyone working too feverishly to tell another story - a lie - and appear to be be "open-minded"? It took you over ten months to start covering John Edwards-with-a-fruitcake, how long must we wait for The Obama Cult story? What did we just see? Could you tell it? Or would it be too much like an amateur artist trying to hold a mirror and paint a self-portrait for the first time?
"As for you, Miss Hunter? Even if all your dreams one day come true, life as the second Mrs. de Winter is going to look pleasant by comparison."
Stretch your journalistic/commentator wings a little bit more and - since it takes two to tango - focus on Lisa Druck a little bit, the "former yoga instructor who had become actively involved in somewhat fringy spiritual escapades." As news people, you should be going where the action is anyway, and lets face it: all the action is on her side of the aisle. That's where the NewAge is most pronounced (Bob McGovern, Margaret Sweet, Jerome Armstrong) the already-complicated life of "crazy" Lisa Druck's baby begins - born to one of two politically-powerful married men - all this notoriety the result of NewAge beliefs many in the "news" business share.
That's why the media's excuses for not covering the story ring so hollow to me. This struck a nerve no one's mentioning. Everyone involved in this story is a media figure. Even Lisa Druck is that most vocal of entities today, an actress. And while Elizabeth Edwards may have been called smart, and John Edwards may have been called brilliant, Lisa Druck was allowed the luxury to call herself enlightened. And who can blame her? I don't know about you, but it sure seems to me the media's been pointing us down the road to self-appointed enlightenment for a while now! Anybody care to do an expose' on that phenomena and it's many possible consequences for American journalism?
What's up with that black NewAge talk show host backing Obama without serious questions from the media? And the fawning over the both of them? Do you think that makes me trust you? Is the news business better? Is the newspaper business better? Screw the internet's influence, what about you? Are you feeling the love? Are you getting my money? I used to subscribe to five papers, you idiots! Now I laugh as you suffer. That's how NewAge works: everything's backwards.
"In the three national campaigns he has run - two for the Democratic presidential nomination and one as the party's vice presidential nominee - John Edwards won a grand total of one contest -- the South Carolina primary in 2004. But amazingly, he managed to emerge from each losing effort with his political standing not only unharmed, but actually enhanced."
-- Steve Kornacki, looking through the right lens, while writing for the New York Observer
Getting to the point: are you doing your job? The National Inquirer beat you. [Big up to the National Inquirer] Do you even know what your job is anymore? You say you didn't print their scoop because The National Inquirer prints a lot of things that aren't true. Are they alone in that? Here's a story, about a psychic for rich NewAger's dogs, that I got from the New York Times. How credible are they after running that? About as credible as John Edwards - because the article is pure Lisa Druck. The dog-psychic story even starts with a yoga student. Then it's on her way to fame and fortune being "actively involved in somewhat fringy spiritual escapades" and a puff piece in the NYT. My, my. How far does the stupidity go?
"11/06/2004: Original sources notes reported that an anonymous source obtained the time of 7:02 AM from an anonymous Edwards staffer. In addition Leslie Astar Walker wrote via e-mail to PT dated 1/30/2004: "I just met his mother tonight and she said (in no uncertain terms) that it's 7:02 AM." On November 4, 2004, PT talked with Sat Siri Khalsa who says that she attended a political rally in which she was able to slip a note to Elizabeth Edwards asking for the candidates’ birth times. Sat Siri says Elizabeth Edwards smiled, walked over to the candidates and came back with the note on which Mrs. Edwards had written that John Kerry was born between midnight and 1 AM and that John Edwards was born at 7:23 AM."
MoveOn.org has an astrologer, Jerome Armstrong (who also runs My Direct Democracy, where Lisa Druck dropped her first denials of an affair with Edwards.) Do you think it would be good journalism to let the netroots know their ambitions are being fueled by silly occult beliefs - like astrology - and George Soros's money? I guess not, since you haven't done it, and what am I to make of Andrew Sullivan's comment, wondering if he's the only one not surprised that Barack Obama "is a Leo"? Is it any surprise that I read such things and ask myself the same question ("Who are these people?") so many are asking after discovering the NewAge Lisa Druck and the equally-narcissistic John Edwards slept around on his cancer-stricken wife? I don't think so. Andrew Sullivan is a part of the whole. The idiocy of regularly subjecting NewAge thinking on the rest of us without challenge.
The media has helped create a world of lies that they refuse to back away from. They strive for balance when there's no call for it, and (as the outlandish Obama coverage attests) they openly promote their own NewAge pet causes, to the exclusion of common sense. Policy questions have been turned into moral crusades, without serious debate or investigation, and their champions - losers one and all - crowned as kings. Unlike the rest of us - who are the mere viewers or victims of John, Lisa, Andrew, Barack, Oprah, Rosie, The New York Times, and the rest of the mediasphere's dalliances - you don't see you live in Alice In Wonderland, chasing logic from place to place.
John Edwards and Lisa Druck? Ha! That's nothing - here's your story in crisis:
"The birth certificate of a child who a tabloid newspaper claims is linked to former Sen. John Edwards doesn't identify a father.
The certificate, obtained by The Charlotte Observer today, shows Frances Quinn Hunter was born Feb. 27, more than two months after an Edwards aide claimed to be the father. Andrew Young, a former Edwards campaign finance director, claimed paternity in a statement from his lawyer posted at the political blog mydd.com.
The girl was born at Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, Calif., to Rielle Jaya James Druck, also known as Rielle Hunter. Hunter, 44, was a videographer on Edwards' presidential campaign last year.
Asked Thursday why no father was listed on the birth certificate, Hunter's attorney, Robert Gordon of New York, said, 'A lot of women do that.' Reminded that he and Hunter had publicly revealed the father's identity two months earlier to the National Enquirer, Gordon said, "That's a personal matter between them."
Gordon declined to comment further."
-- Lisa Zagaroli and Lorenzo Perez, following this NewAge nonsense to it's natural NewAge conclusion, over at The News And Observer
I don't think I have to remind regular readers that mydd.com stands for "My Direct Democracy" and it's run by "noted astrologer Jerome Armstrong" who is down with The Daily Kos, home of the netroots movement that's been attempting - through Barack Obama, who is already backed by the very-NewAge Oprah Winfrey - to push America as far to the Left as possible. Rielle Hunter, of course, is a big NewAger as well.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it looks like the damaging and demoralizing forces of occult NewAge spirituality are, finally, running head-on into the very-real wall of American politics and, if handled correctly, will break wide-open for all to see.
And, if so, there'll be a new, post-racial, black man that everyone's gonna have to start talking to,...but I ain't naming no names.
O.K.? Granted, it's still just a rumor, but since she's a New Ager - with that unmistakable cultish gleam in her eye - there's no way to take anything Rielle Hunter says as truth; especially her denials about the affair (through "astrologer" Jerome Armstrong's political blog, My Direct Democracy) when she apparently already knew was pregnant and who the baby daddy was. (Hair, people, look at the hair!) She's even changed her name from Lisa Druck!!!
Look, New Agers believe in a world of "duality" - a self-described "grey area" where everyone else's concept of "right" and "wrong" doesn't exist or is to be usurped - allowing themselves the freedom to betray others (especially those close to them) with impunity. Yes, even a cancer-striken wife. All very feminist. (You go, Girl! Sistas are REALLY doing it for themselves!) It's Oprah's "the ends justify the means", spiritually ruthless, way-of-life. Listen to this:
Sure, and Bill Clinton never slept with that woman, while "that woman" is positive she slept with him. "Completely professional"? Hello! You're pregnant, Rielle!!! And the only choice, regarding who's the father, are both married men working for the Edwards campaign. "Completely professional"? In her New Age mind, that has to mean she - and whoever she was determined to do it with - did it standing up.
If this story continues to grow, like the baby, then it goes without saying that John Edwards is cooked. Though I had no intention of voting for him, I'm hoping it's not true for the sake of his wife and family. I hope the story being told - that New Age Rielle slept with another married man in the Edwards campaign - isn't true either. I hope the truth is all sweetness and light - a virgin birth! - and, oh, just listen to silly ol' me rattling on.
But my New Age "spidey sense" is tingling:
Rielle Hunter's beliefs drive her to be easier than most - and more than capable of targeting someone married - because, you understand, she's above all that. And no other American man, next to Little Richard, preens as much as John Edwards.
But why would the Edwards campaign hire a flake, like Rielle Hunter, to work on his video? This "wannabe actress who by her own admission was a drug-using New York party girl in the '80s" had a website. (It's since been pulled down) Didn't the campaign check it? All the woo-woo crap, like that written on the photo above, didn't make them run in the opposite direction? It just doesn't make sense at the presidential level. But, hey, nothing involving New Agers does, at first, I guess.
While looking for Rielle Hunter's denial - she's the woman John Edwards is supposed to be sleeping with - I found it, with a mention on Slate.com that "noted astrologer Jerome Armstrong" had it. Who is Jerome Armstrong? I didn't know either. He runs something called My Direct Democracy, that I also didn't know about. He seems to be a part of The Daily Kos crew. (That's Markos, above - the Daily Kos founder) Then I found something called the Riehl World View that said this - and read all of it:
"The genesis for the Netroots movement stems from a fixation on, first the stockmarket, then astrology, and it only found politics, probably, when it was barred from engaging in a previous financial fascination that ultimately led to real trouble with the SEC. Just read this quote from the new wizard, who some think is pre-destined to lead the Democrats to the promised land.
Stuart Riddle says: As Saturn turns direct, I'm reminded of the significance of Saturn in Gemini for the United States. Louise McWhirter wrote about this in her seminal text, Astrology and Stock Market Forcasting (New York: AFI Publishers, 1977; originally published in 1938). She confirmed the potential for conflict in the form of domestic and foreign wars during this transit: "Saturn has never passed through Gemini during the past 72 years without bringing a financial depression, financial panic, or war" (p. 92). *TMA Editors note: The last two Saturn-in-gemini periods coincided with the Vietnam War (1971-73) and World War II (1942-44). Saturn visits Gemini again from April 20th, 2001 - June 2003 (It also made a breif(sic) station from Aug 11th - Sept 16th in 2000, foreshadowing the bulk of the transit to come).
Ten years from now, the Democratic Party will have fully broadened its election strategy beyond the battleground mentality that dominates strategic thinking today. Democrats will be a national party, leaving no uncontested race anywhere in the nation, and will have rebuilt a party infrastructure down to the precinct everywhere in the nation. The Democrats will have regained their majority status as the governing party, and the mapchanger approach to elections will have been the reason.
Astrologer Jerome Armstrong notes that Ixion and Quaoar are following close in Pluto's wake in early Sagittarius, and connects the rise of the political version of religious fundamentalism with the astronomical exploration of the Kuiper Belt in 1992. He cites incidences as disparate as the rise of Osama bin Laden onto the world stage and the Republican Revolution of 1994, fueled by Christian fundamentalist voters and culminating now with all three branches of government in Republican control. In addition, he cites the ascendance of political Hinduism in India in 1996 with the election of the BJP. One might add to this list the emergence of Conservative majorities in Israel and the UK. [The author wishes to acknowledge the help and inspiration provided by astrologer and author Jerome Armstrong of AstroWorld.mydd.com for information and links regarding Varuna and Trans-Neptunians which have been vital to the preparation of this article.]
MyDD didn't have anything to do with democracy, direct, personal, or otherwise when it started out as an astrological tabloid, forcasting the ups and downs of the stock market based upon the stars."
My Direct Democracy is asking Wisconsin's Russ Feingold to deliver it's convention keynote. It's convention keynote? It's an astrology outfit!!!! Now why doesn't anyone treat them like an astrology outfit? Why aren't they even recognized as an astrology outfit?
So, yesterday was a big day around here: thanks to everyone who called and said "You were right." It means a lot. Now make a donation.
Everyone knows their coverage of the John Edwards affair is done to get rid of the story. (I know it, anyway.) Released on a Friday, first day of the Olympics, blah, blah, blah. 
"They lied in a way that made the people who were telling the truth look like the real liars. They lied in a way that turned their supporters into attack dogs."
Slate's Mickey Kaus wrote five reasons why the MSM should've ran with this story a long time ago. While I respect the work Mickey Kaus has done, I most humbly disagree. There are many more reasons to pursue this story than I can count because it's got all the elements necessary to tell the story of our time - the story that identifies and unravels exactly what ails this country: the sway of NewAge beliefs. 
"Back in September 2007, we reported that the videos, which Hunter had been paid to produce for Edwards' One America Committee, had gone mysteriously missing. Perhaps even more curious: no one seemed to claim ownership. Staffers for Edwards, who by then was in the throes of the primary, said they had no access to the film: four shorts on the Senator's efforts to promote the eradication of poverty. Meanwhile, the film company, Midline Groove Productions, said the videos were the product of the campaign. Not only that, they were for some reason prohibited from even discussing the content."
In comparison to what's surrounding this event, John Edwards is the most insignificant thing about this story. Why? Because with knick-names like "Silkypony," and "The Breck Girl," he was apparently the last person to notice his narcissism. 
But how was John Edwards allowed, in the mediasphere, to dismiss his critics so easily? The Cult of Obama? Anybody heard of it? We've seen the phenomena, where's the investigation? Or is everyone working too feverishly to tell another story - a lie - and appear to be be "open-minded"? It took you over ten months to start covering John Edwards-with-a-fruitcake, how long must we wait for The Obama Cult story? What did we just see? Could you tell it? Or would it be too much like an amateur artist trying to hold a mirror and paint a self-portrait for the first time?
"As for you, Miss Hunter? Even if all your dreams one day come true, life as the second Mrs. de Winter is going to look pleasant by comparison."
Stretch your journalistic/commentator wings a little bit more and - since it takes two to tango - focus on Lisa Druck a little bit, the "former yoga instructor who had become actively involved in somewhat fringy spiritual escapades." As news people, you should be going where the action is anyway, and lets face it: all the action is on her side of the aisle. That's where the NewAge is most pronounced (Bob McGovern, Margaret Sweet, Jerome Armstrong) the already-complicated life of "crazy" Lisa Druck's baby begins - born to one of two politically-powerful married men - all this notoriety the result of NewAge beliefs many in the "news" business share. 
That's why the media's excuses for not covering the story ring so hollow to me. This struck a nerve no one's mentioning. Everyone involved in this story is a media figure. Even Lisa Druck is that most vocal of entities today, an actress. And while Elizabeth Edwards may have been called smart, and John Edwards may have been called brilliant, Lisa Druck was allowed the luxury to call herself enlightened. And who can blame her? I don't know about you, but it sure seems to me the media's been pointing us down the road to self-appointed enlightenment for a while now! Anybody care to do an expose' on that phenomena and it's many possible consequences for American journalism?
What's up with that black NewAge talk show host backing Obama without serious questions from the media? And the fawning over the both of them? Do you think that makes me trust you? Is the news business better? Is the newspaper business better? Screw the internet's influence, what about you? Are you feeling the love? Are you getting my money? I used to subscribe to five papers, you idiots! Now I laugh as you suffer. That's how NewAge works: everything's backwards.
MoveOn.org has an astrologer, Jerome Armstrong (who also runs My Direct Democracy, where Lisa Druck dropped her first denials of an affair with Edwards.) Do you think it would be good journalism to let the netroots know their ambitions are being fueled by silly occult beliefs - like astrology - and George Soros's money? I guess not, since you haven't done it, and what am I to make of Andrew Sullivan's comment, wondering if he's the only one not surprised that Barack Obama "is a Leo"? Is it any surprise that I read such things and ask myself the same question ("Who are these people?") so many are asking after discovering the NewAge Lisa Druck and the equally-narcissistic John Edwards slept around on his cancer-stricken wife? I don't think so. Andrew Sullivan is a part of the whole. The idiocy of regularly subjecting NewAge thinking on the rest of us without challenge. 
The media has helped create a world of lies that they refuse to back away from. They strive for balance when there's no call for it, and (as the outlandish Obama coverage attests) they openly promote their own NewAge pet causes, to the exclusion of common sense. Policy questions have been turned into moral crusades, without serious debate or investigation, and their champions - losers one and all - crowned as kings. Unlike the rest of us - who are the mere viewers or victims of John, Lisa, Andrew, Barack, Oprah, Rosie, The New York Times, and the rest of the mediasphere's dalliances - you don't see you live in Alice In Wonderland, chasing logic from place to place. 
John Edwards and Lisa Druck? Ha! That's nothing - here's your story in crisis:
This is getting weird (as anything involving New Agers/Pagans and sex usually is):
Woo-Boy:
"The genesis for the Netroots movement stems from a fixation on, first the stockmarket, then astrology, and it only found politics, probably, when it was barred from engaging in a previous financial fascination that ultimately led to real trouble with the SEC. Just read this quote from the new wizard, who some think is pre-destined to lead the Democrats to the promised land.
By Jerome Armstrong (above)
