If he said it was because of travel plans, so be it. Why should anyone doubt his word? : ))))))))

If he said it was because of travel plans, so be it. Why should anyone doubt his word? : ))))))))

If Jerome Corsi said the sky was blue, I would doubt his word because he is a known liar.

Sorry, forgot the f?x.

I'm sure the WITH patrol will be here shortly.

I do confess to curiousity as to why he didn't show suddenly. I confess to a small bit of morbid curiousity about this.

Same here. Yet again, he could have had to change his "travel" plans (it's not like he has been proven to be a liar or anything before, oh, no, wait, I'm thinking of someone else).

I'm more than interested to see if and when he does decide to go onto the show. I mean, he wouldn't want to let his fan base down now would he?

I'm also waiting for the right wing "free speech" patrol to roll in here and claim something about liberals stifling Corsi's free speech, or something to that effect.

Let's see if they still want to back Coursey after they read this...

courtesy of C&L, BTW...

those that back Corsi are actually not so smitten with McCain.

Saying that he cancelled because of travel plans furthers the conservative agenda. It doesn't discuss the issues surrounding him planning on appearing on this hatemonger site.

"Saying that he cancelled because of travel plans furthers the conservative agenda"

Huh? 

when the facts challenge his assertions he must go into hiding until the storm blows away and people forget.

wolf,

Just like saying vacation time in Hawaii furthers the liberal agenda?  

Just like saying that vacationing in Hawaii is some sort of negative among Americans because it seems "foreign" and "exotic".

Is that the phrasing you intended? 

Sorry, I misread that.  What was supposed to "blow over" during the vacation, exactly?  I don't I've even heard conservatives suggest that a vacation was inappropriate before.

Brab,

I was simply making light of BB's comment by example.  Corsi's change in travel plans no more furthers the conservative agenda than Obama's vacation plans furthers a 'liberal' agenda.

In a similar vein, AA's contribution adds nothing to this conversation other than a feeble attempt to derail a thread.

I think the point is that he needs to be held accountable for his associations here, because it speaks to his credibility in a major way.  Would you disagree?

If you don't, can you see how letting a high-profile Obama critic off the hook for this furthers a conservative agenda, since it fails to put his credibility into serious question as it should be? 

Brab,

By taking into account Corsi's associations in order to acertain his credibility you are making the same argument that Obama critics are taking with Obama and his associations with Rev. Wright, and Ayers.   

While there are differences, they do not work in Obama's faver. Appearing on a radio show is no where near the same level of association as being a parishioner for 20 years in Rev. Wright's black liberation theology church and nowhere near the association between Obama and Ayers when Obama started his political career from Ayers house. 

If it is good for the Corsi goose, it is good for the Obamagander.  :-)  

I anticipated that response.

The first problem with that is that there are other benefits to associating with Wright.  You don't have to agree with everything he says to get something out of his services.  That's a matter of personal religion.  The second, and larger, problem is that there's simply no comparison between the controversies here.  If Wright spent his sermons saying "kill whitey!" then it would be unacceptable for anyone to associate with him at all. 

So why would anyone want to go on a "pro-white" program if they didn't have at least some sympathy with that sentiment?  To convince bigots not to vote for a black man?  To profit from racism?

And besides this, Obama did break any ties with Wright.  So then Corsi should make a similar statement either accepting or denouncing these people.

As for Ayers, I'm not sure how strong of a connection there really is there.

AA really has this thing about Ayers.  He might be the ONLY person in the country that even cares about this lie.

AA will soon be Sran Hannity's only remaining listener.  They'll phone each other and call each other "great Americans"....

:-)

I don't I've even heard conservatives suggest that a vacation was inappropriate before.

If they did, they would be forced to admit that it was inappropriate for George W. Bush to spend the month of August 2001 at the Crawford Pig Farm instead of paying attention to the security briefings and trying to prevent the 9/11 attacks.  (Unless he was in on them.....)

What Corsi is doing is a disappearing act. Obama is not hiding in hawaii, that is his birth place. Nice try though.

Wolf,

Although I do not follow Corsi and have no interest in his travel plans, aren't you being a bit assumptive in claiming that he is going into hiding simply because he decided not to appear on this radio show?  

I'll agree because one does not a conspiracy make. Two or more will be a better indication.

Although I do not follow Corsi and have no interest in his travel plans, aren't you being a bit assumptive in claiming that he is going into hiding simply because he decided not to appear on this radio show?

Has Corsi appeared on ANY radio or TV shows in the past few days?  None that I've noticed.  Which leads to the logical conclusion that he wasn't expecting the rough treatment he's getting from some in the media this time around and has gone into hiding until things cool off.....

"Saying that he cancelled because of travel plans furthers the conservative agenda"... by SueBottleBlondie

 

"Huh?"...by Tommy

Tommy, I'll see your "Huh?" & raise you one "WTF?"

Can't wait till SueBottleBlondie gets back here to explain just what the hell she's going off on here.

Let me see...Corsi cancelled an appearance because of travel plans. Ok. And? Why is this all so vexing to MMFA? And more importantly, how does this cancellation translate to Conservative mis-information or promoting an Conservative agenda?

Maybe the guy will re-schedule. Maybe he won't [I'll bet he does, it's a friendly venue for him.] But whether he does or not does not seem to meet MMFA's usual criteria. 

Friendly venue or not, I bet he won't reschedule.  I think it became apparent to him and his people that such an appearance would damage his already shaky credibility very badly.

I think it's very reasonable to speculate on this cancellation.  It reeks of damage control.

I think you're right.  These bigots are just too hot to handle even for Corsi, most likely he figured he cut his losses with them.  It's pretty obvious.

Bill,

If he'd cancelled an appearance on Meet The Press, or Hardball, or any FOX program etc, I'd be speculating too. But this particular radio program seems right up his ally. Another words, friendly.

Either way, I still fail to see why MMFA is highlighting his cancellation here, unless they are suggesting that they are somehow responsible for him opting out.

And if that were the case, why not just acknowledge that?

The way it's presented here is tad unclear as to how this fits MMFA stated mission.

To play off of what I said earlier, what if Obama was scheduled on a radio program where the host advocated "killing Whitey"?  Would a last-minute cancellation be the end of it, or would people want to know more?

And yes, I know Corsi isn't running for President, but it's a matter of public perception for either of them.

Brab,

I really don't know much about this radio program [other than what I've read here]. Are they advocates for killing Blacks?

Again, this particular venue seems a friendly one for Corsi. It's pro-White, & certainly would welcome an author bashing a Black candidate.

Corsi may have cancelled for purely legitimate reasons. Hey I've no problem with anyone speculating. Personally it wouldn't shock me if MMFA & others critical of his book may be forcing him to lay low for the present.

But BottleBlondie claimed this cancellation furthered a Conservative agenda. I just don't see how. And that was my original point.

"I really don't know much about this radio program [other than what I've read here]. Are they advocates for killing Blacks?"

You can't substitute "white" for "black" when talking about this sort of thing.  For instance, "white power" is not equivalent to "black power", because the former is about maintaining power and the latter is about gaining equality.  So it wouldn't make any sense for me to say a "pro-black" show, since there's nothing inherently racist about that.  Since "pro-white" is about disdain for black people based on the color of their skin, I have to raise the bar on the other side to make it clear it's about hatred of white people.  Otherwise it wouldn't work.

I don't think Bottleblonde phrased herself well, but you were questioning the item in itself.  The merit of the article should be clear whether Bottleblonde expressed it clearly or not. 

I was questioning BottleBlondies claim that Corsi's cancellation constituted Conservative information.

And I also asked how Corsi cancelling an appearance on a program friendly to his cause was either Conservative mis-information or furthered a Conservative agenda.

This thread really says nothing other than Corsi cancelled an appearance.

MMFA & others can speculate why, but I still wonder why this is even here...if one were to apply MMFA mission statement it's a weak thread.

J,

It was my point of contention as well.  Why Brab went off about pro white power and pro black equality is really unclear, since neither you nor I addressed that at all.

I talked about "pro-white" vs. "pro-black" because Jeter suggested that the program would have to advocate killing black people for my comparison to be valid.  It wouldn't.  If you actually read my post, I quoted what he said, which should have explained the purpose to you.

Brab,

According to your definition can there ever be a black racist?  

Yes, but "pro-black" doesn't cover it.  Someone who thinks white people are inferior would be a racist.

What about someone who thinks white people should be separate but equal?

A black person who thinks that white people should be separate but equal?  That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.  Even if they thought it would actually work, I'd still have to wonder why they would want to be separate.  A white person who advocates segregation advocates racism because white people have the societal advantage to begin with.  It would never be "equal" because the black schools and neighborhoods would never catch up.

You dodged it by saying it would never happen. That's not an answer.

No, I didn't say it wouldn't ever happen.

"That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.  Even if they thought it would actually work, I'd still have to wonder why they would want to be separate."

You're speaking theoretically as far as I can tell, and so I am as well.  What black people actually advocate "separate but equal"?  And I would have to wonder why they would want to be separate.  I don't know what part of that sentence is unclear to you. 

Dodge #2.  

Now you're just being an ass.  What am I supposedly dodging?  Please explain.

".....Someone who thinks white people are inferior would be a racist"...... brabantio / Monday August 18, 2008 3:40:25 PM EDT

"What about someone who thinks white people should be separate but equal?..... tommy / Monday August 18, 2008 3:42:50 PM EDT

If you don't want to answer, then don't.  Calling me names doesn't cut it. 

Yes, from what I've posted it's quite clear that I understood the question.  What am I supposedly dodging?  I would have to wonder why they would want to be separate.  That means I don't see a valid reason for it.  Therefore, that seems racist.  This really shouldn't have to be spelled out for you.

"Therefore, that seems racist"

Then we agree, I don't know why you had to qualify it with so many disclaimers when it was a simple yes or no....

Because, Tommy, the world isn't as black and white, cut and dried as you'd like it to be...

I was trying to make sure I understood what you were talking about, but I covered both possibilities from the start.

Even if you couldn't understand that one phrase, you should ask about the specific phrase instead of accusing me of dodging the question.  I'm never afraid to answer questions here, never have been and never will be.

Dodge #2. 

Brab,

Has there not been a black separatist movement in the U.S.? 

You tell me.  I'm not very likely to agree with that sort of group.

Look up Marcus Garvey. 

Am I misreading this, or did he want black people to have their own country outside of America, like he wanted black people to all get up and move away?  That would be crazy, but it's not what Tommy was talking about.  "Separate but equal" means within one country, otherwise the word "equal" makes no sense whatsoever.

Jeter suggested that the program would have to advocate killing black people for my comparison to be valid

No way Brab. I simply asked the question because I didn't know much about the program. I figured since YOU brought up killing Whiteys that maybe this particular program was in that same vain, but towards Blacks.

Kindly do not twist my words or meaning again.

If it didn't invalidate the comparison, then you could have just answered the question.  What difference would it make to that?

"And I'm still waiting for someone to explain how this cancellation has anything to do with a Conservative agenda or mis-information"

Good luck, we haven't had that explained to us and that was our only point.  Instead we got a lecture on pro white vs pro black?  And I get accused of thread distractions and derailments.  Go figure....... 

Jeter, The above was in response to you.

Tommy,

I wasn't sure where Brab was going either but he occasionally goes off in a direction that detours from one's original point.

Like I wrote earlier, IF this guy Corsi had cancelled an appearance on Meet The Press or some other equally well known venue, then I'd figure for certain that he had chickened out.

But this particular radio program is a friendly setting for him. So maybe he simply cancelled for a legitimate reason.

MMFA's questions seem like just weak speculating.

And I'm still waiting for someone to explain how this cancellation has anything to do with a Conservative agenda or mis-information.

Again, if Obama were scheduled on the show I described and canceled at the last minute, would that be the end of the story?

Of course not, and so Corsi's cancellation isn't the end of the story here, either.  It raises valid questions. 

Brab,

Your comparison makes no sense. Obama would never schedule an appearance on the type of program you suggested. He's not stupid.

Corsi cancelling an appearance on a program very friendly towards him hardly merits intense speculation. Or any at all.

Had it been Meet The Press or Hardball etc, then MMFA might have a point.

Otherwise this thread is weak.

What?  A black show of any nature would be friendly to Obama.  Why the hell not?

And you could say the same thing for Corsi booking himself onto this show.  Of course it's stupid.  What does he get from it, exactly?

I don't know why it's so difficult for you to answer a simple question. 

Brab the show you suggested Obama would appear on was this [YOUR WORDS] :

 

To play off of what I said earlier, what if Obama was scheduled on a radio program where the host advocated "killing Whitey"? 

So you think Obama would be scheduled to appear on THAT type of program????

Brab your posts are heading into twilight zone mode.

Go bother Tommy. 

Sorry Tommy ;-)

No point in him bothering me, I had the same thought as you, Jeter.  Made no sense......

Tommy,

If you or I posted a ridiculous hypothetical, Brab would be screaming it made no sense because it was ridiculous.

But Brab does it, & we're supposed to treat it seriously.

Brab's quest to win every point, no matter how weak his argument, has become comical

Tell me. His entire analogy was ridiculous.  Corsi is a discredited author out to sell books.  Obama is a presidential candidate.  No comparison. Then he went on to take the comparison to some "kill whitey" silliness to make some point.  Again, an extreme "twilight zone" moment as you said.  And he wonders why it made no sense and was completely invalid from the get-go.

What's ridiculous about it?  It's assuming that Obama has a different character.

By this standard pretty much any hypothetical is ridiculous, simply because it's hypothetical.  "Obama said blah blah...if McCain had said that he'd be tarred in the press".  Well, McCain didn't say it, did he?  He wouldn't say it, would he?  So the hypothetical would be "ridiculous". 

Hypotheticals are not ridiculous if they meet the "common sense" barometer.  Hypotheticals are ridiculous if they are taken to some extreme, improbable place and then argued from that vantage point.  If you can't see the difference perhaps you should refrain from using them.

Racism is extreme to start, right?  So I don't know how it's possible to avoid an extreme scenario here.

Jeter's argument is idiotic.  The fact that Obama wouldn't do something doesn't invalidate a hypothetical regarding what would happen if he did.  All hypotheticals would be worthless then.  The only thing that can be done is to demonstrate how an answer to the question is meaningless because it doesn't correspond to the current situation.  That sure seems like what he was doing with his "kill black people" response, but it didn't qualify for reasons I stated.  Pointing out that Corsi is an author doesn't help either, because there's nothing in that difference that makes it acceptable for him to associate with racists.  It still affects his credibility, and it's not going to magically go away because of the cancellation.

Jeter made no argument, his only point, as was mine, was questioning Sue's idiotic assertion that Corsi's travel plans furthered some conservative agenda and that is why MMFA put this thread here.

As of this writing, that has never been explained.  

No, Jeter is clearly arguing that the hypothetical is invalid because Obama wouldn't actually appear on such a radio program.  Are you going to try to parse the meaning of "argument" now, or what?

I understood very clearly the point Jeter was making, he simply questioned the same statement of Sue's that I did, that's all.  Just because your sole purpose was to incite an argument and you couldn't, you introduced a ridiculous hypothetical about "killing whiteys" and hoped Jeter would take the bait.  He didn't. He called it what it was and rightly pointed out how you tried to put words into his mouth.  You got pissed.  And keeping at it makes you look foolish.

Thank you Tommy.

You did a better job of explaining that than I could have done.

Brab threw in a ridiculous hypothetical meant to change the subject. It made no sense, & wasn't worth arguing about.

Now I'm still waiting for someone to explain why Corsi cancelling an appearance on a program very friendly to him deserves scrutiny.

Again for the common sense impaired, had he cancelled out on Meet The Press, Hardball or any other better known venue, then MMFA would have a valid reason to speculate.

Otherwise, as it stands, this entire topic/thread is weak.

The sole purpose was to show that there are still valid questions to be asked despite the last-minute cancellation.  Now it's just plain wrong to pursue a point around here because it's inciting an argument, or something.

I didn't put any words in anyone's mouth.  Do you realize that Jeter's supposed to be offended about my saying that he was trying to invalidate the hypothetical while all both of you have been trying to do is invalidate the hypothetical?  What's he supposed to be upset about, exactly?  Apparently you didn't notice that he didn't explain himself regarding that.

Are you operating on one brain cell today?

You present a ridiculous hypothetical about Obama appearing on some make believe Black radio station that rants about killing Whitey. Since that isn't even plausible, I didn't give it any credence.

My question to you had zip to do with your hypothetical [because it was so unrealistic it wasn't worth diddley squat] OTHER than to ask you specifically about the program Corsi was supposed to appear on. I told you I didn't know much about that show, other than it was Pro White, which I had read here.

I asked you a simple question. Did you know if this Pro-White station advocated violence/killing of Blacks.

Your hypothetical wasn't worth sh#t, but since you brought up killing, I figured you knew more about this Cesspool program than I did. Apparently I gave you too much credit. You only brought up killing to throw out some farfetched stupid hypothetical that would never occur.

If you can't prove your points honestly, please don't waste my time anymore.

"Are you operating on one brain cell today?"

Did I "touch a nerve", as Tommy would say?

"You present a ridiculous hypothetical about Obama appearing on some make believe Black radio station that rants about killing Whitey. Since that isn't even plausible, I didn't give it any credence."

It didn't need "credence" because I wasn't claiming it was likely to happen.  It doesn't have to be plausible to be a valid hypothetical. 

"My question to you had zip to do with your hypothetical [because it was so unrealistic it wasn't worth diddley squat] OTHER than to ask you specifically about the program Corsi was supposed to appear on. I told you I didn't know much about that show, other than it was Pro White, which I had read here...I asked you a simple question. Did you know if this Pro-White station advocated violence/killing of Blacks...Your hypothetical wasn't worth sh#t, but since you brought up killing, I figured you knew more about this Cesspool program than I did. Apparently I gave you too much credit. You only brought up killing to throw out some farfetched stupid hypothetical that would never occur."

Let's review what was said before:

"Jeter suggested that the program would have to advocate killing black people for my comparison to be valid"

...which you denied, and denied again in this post.  And also in this post:

"Apparently I gave you too much credit. You only brought up killing to throw out some farfetched stupid hypothetical that would never occur"

You didn't ask the question as a suggestion that the comparison might be invalid, but when you got an answer to your question, that showed you that you gave me "too much credit" and that the hypothetical was "farfetched".  And when you asked the question, you had already made the determination that the hypothetical was unrealistic, but then the validity of what I said hinged on my answer.  So you found an answer that you already had determined.  Brilliant work.

I'm so sorry that I took your question as actually being relevant to the point I was making, instead of assuming that it had no bearing on anything whatsoever.  I also should have assumed that you had already dismissed the hypothetical even though you didn't make any indication of that and also asked a question which was directly related to the nature of the hypothetical.  Mea culpa.

"If you can't prove your points honestly, please don't waste my time anymore."

Right, so posing a hypothetical which would not ever occur is dishonest, because hypotheticals are really just predictions in disguise.  That is good to know.  I've learned so much from you today, and I can't tell you how grateful I am.

Seriously, not as if I owe you any concessions here, but I could also pose the hypothetical as "what if a black man running for President was booked on a show where the hosts espoused hatred for white people as a whole?"  Now, that wouldn't bring up killing, but it still seems unlikely that you would respond to that either because that would never occur, since that would be stupid of that candidate.  Since you've essentially dismissed the notion of hypotheticals as a concept, don't pretend as if bringing up "killing whitey" makes any difference.  That is dishonest.

You're over analyzing this to death Brab. Jeter and Tommy began by asking how Corsi going on vacation furthers a conservative agenda. It's unbelievable how you have been able to circumvent the discussion of that question. You seem like a very smart person, much smarter than myself and I don't deny that, but these tangents you go on in an attempt to explain why you are right and everyone else is wrong are unecessary. You took this discussion on a path of tangled intellectual garble, reminiscent of some college kid stoned to death discussing the meaning of life. Here's some advice from someone who is obviously beneath your intellectual capabilities, "Keep it simple; as simple as posible, but no simpler." - Albert Einstein   

I addressed the original question of what Bottleblonde said.  I don't think it was well-phrased, and I understand the confusion there.

After that, I pointed out why the MMfA item is valid.  I dared to use a hypothetical question, which Jeter didn't want to answer for some inexplicable reason.  So far I'm not seeing anything I've done wrong, have you?   I'm on topic and I'm using a well-known and accepted rhetorical device.

Jeter then asks a question which certainly seems to be aimed at the legitimacy of the hypothetical.  I explain the reason for the exaggeration, which goes without any serious dispute.   Then I'm somehow misrepresenting Jeter to point out the obvious nature of what he said, while the vile nature of this "misrepresentation" remains a mystery.  Was that really an unfair assessment on my part?  If not, what have I done wrong up to this point?

And now, Jeter directly contradicts himself trying to explain his nonsense, while insulting me and also accusing me of being dishonest.  The contradiction proves that I wasn't putting words in his mouth, and I'm showing how if anyone is being dishonest here, it's Jeter.

So what exactly did I do wrong here?  Is your message that if I'm making a point, if I explain what I'm saying, that Jeter and Tommy can make unwarranted accusations and insults against me and I'm supposed to let that slide?

Tell me why you think that's fair.  Please.  I'm dying to hear your purely objective and unbiased rationale for this.

Correction:I did talk about the item first, then made the comment about Bottleblonde.  Jeter was talking about MMfA's item in general, though.

While I'm at it, let's look at my original response:"To play off of what I said earlier, what if Obama was scheduled on a radio program where the host advocated "killing Whitey"?  Would a last-minute cancellation be the end of it, or would people want to know more?...And yes, I know Corsi isn't running for President, but it's a matter of public perception for either of them."

That seems simple enough, right?  I sure didn't see what was complicated about it.

Uh hum....snore....uh huh....snore....uh huh.....snore.

In other words, you have nothing except for a need to defend your buddies.  What a shocker.

Obama never would have scheduled an appearance on a Black radio program that called for the killing of Whitey in the first place, so your hypothetical is ridiculous & I'm not surprised that Chris fell asleep reading more of your blather.

Give it up Brab. You are making less & less sense with every post.

Maybe you need a vacation.

Yes, it was a hypothetical.  A hypothetical doesn't have to be likely to happen.

To clue you in, your insistence otherwise isn't making me look stupid.

It is absurd.  Brab says that hypotheticals don't have to plausible....huh? So he invents some extreme, unthinkable one and then tries to shift the argument from the actual point, to his impossible hypothetical, and then demands we all follow him down loopy lane. 

Yet he props himself up here all the time as the arbiter of truth, fairness and honesty, always ready to stomp out hypocrisy wherever he sniffs it out.  He should stick to monitoring his own behavior.

The hypothetical was directly related to the point of the item.  There was no "shift" from the main argument, unlike a discussion of "separate but equal".

And yes, hypotheticals do not have to be plausible.  There's no "would that really happen?" test involved. 

If your argument is strong enough you don't have to invent an impossible hypothetical to make your point.  Hypotheticals need to be reasonable assumptions, not pie-in-the-sky outlandish extremes meant to mask nonexistant and weak arguments, which is what yours was.

Can you provide a definition of "hypothetical" that supports your contention?

You're the one who doesn't understand them, not me.  

Compelling!

Also, why is the argument that Corsi's cancellation still leaves valid questions to be answered so absurd?  None of you have even taken a shot at addressing that, strangely enough.

I didn't say I think he would be.  Do I have to post the dictionary definition of the word "if"?   Obviously it would be stupid, and it would be a huge red flag to everyone who doesn't agree with that program's viewpoint, just as it should be for Corsi.

But I'll bear this in mind the next time you or Tommy pose a hypothetical question, of course. 

What seems suspicious to me, and most of you have either blazed past this part, or have seemingly ignored it, is that Corsi's agent cancelled his appearance on the radio program minutes before Corsi was set to go on the air.  I've had travel plans change last minute, but to handle it like this - well, it's just suspicious.

And the fact that he's been on the program before leaves me wondering about Corsi as well.  If he's not a racist, why doesn't he denounce it?  You righties were screaming for Obama to denounce his "racist pals".  Why not Corsi?  I know, Corsi isn't running for prez.  We all know that, but we also know that Corsi has published a scathing book about Obama - a book whose "facts" have been successfully countered and debunked.

Putting it all together, it looks like the Cons are doing some damage control, as one poster above mentioned.

I think MMFA is probably at least partially responsible for the cancellation by virtue of having helped publicize the racist nature of the radio program he was going to guest on.  They're tooting their own horns a bit and I don't think it's unreasonable to do so.

They're tooting their own horns a bit and I don't think it's unreasonable to do so.

I don't either. But why not just come out & say so? They've done that before.

The way this thread is presented does not clearly state why it's here.

 

 

                                                         TOOT

The way it's presented here is tad unclear as to how this fits MMFA stated mission.

The was I see it, Jeter, MMFA's mission is to root out conservative misinformation.  Jerome Corsi is conservative misinformation personified.

i am sure someone told him about Media matters and he decided it is better to protect what is left of his PhD ( Phony Diploma ???? )

I think this is MMFA's way of playing tit-for-tat using Corsi's own tactics.

In much the same way that Corsi says, "all we have is his word," when condemning Obama for not proving concrete proof that he stopped getting high, MMFA appears to be condemning Corsi for providing only "his word" instead of concrete proof that his cancellation was due to travel plans.

As much as much as I enjoy seeing Corsi exposed for what he is, I've got one foot on the deck of the WITH Patrol boat this time.  

 

Might be interesting to have that guy from the Enquirer, who followed Edwards around,  to find out where Corsi is during that time slot /

But, the fact remains that Corsi is a known, and flagrant liar. So we do have some background information to conflate with him to wonder if he's actually telling the truth as to "why" he couldn't make it onto the KKK-radio show.

So we do have some background information to conflate with him to wonder if he's actually telling the truth as to "why" he couldn't make it onto the KKK-radio show.

Maybe Corsi couldn't get his sheets back from the cleaners in time.....

:-)

I have seen his travel plans..

but...

they looked photo-shopped to me. 

lulz for you

In other breaking news...

In a potentially ominous sign for the presumptive Democratic nominee, a new poll shows Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) trailing far behind G.O.P. standard bearer Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) among voters who identify themselves as racists.

Pundits and pollsters alike have wondered about the role racists might play in the 2008 presidential contest, but the new survey released today was the first concrete attempt to take the pulse of this key voting bloc.

The poll, conducted by Duh Magazine, suggests that Mr. Obama faces an uphill battle in his effort to win the votes of dyed-in-the-wool bigots.

"We wanted to know, why isn't Barack Obama closing the deal among racists?" said Charles Plugh, editor-in-chief of Duh. "The answer seems to be, because he's black."

In a head-to-head match-up, likely bigots chose Sen. McCain over Sen. Obama by a margin of one thousand to one, with a majority of racists saying they "strongly disagree" with Sen. Obama's decision not to be white.

Asked under what conditions they would conceivably vote for a black presidential candidate, 95% of racists responded, "Only if he was running against someone from a group I hated even more, such as Arabs."

Duh editor Plugh says the poll indicates that Sen. Obama "has his work cut out for him" if he is going to make up lost ground among racists.

"Sen. Obama made a choice at the beginning of this campaign to run as a black man," Mr. Plugh said. "He could change his position on that, but racists might see that as too little, too late."

Andy Borowitz is a comedian and writer whose work appears in The New Yorker and The New York Times, and at his award-winning humor site, BorowitzReport.com. He hosts "Countdown to the Election, with special guests Joy Behar (The View) and Jeffrey Toobin (CNN, bestselling author of "The Nine") at the 92nd Street Y in NYC on October 22 at 8 PM. Student tickets half-price. For tickets go to 92y.org.

Funny stuff, snoop...lol

The sad part is...this is exactly the kind of reporting that fills up the airtime on most cable news shows. 

"Corsi, who had confirmed his appearance on today's Political Cesspool broadcast even after the recent media firestorm erupted, had his publicist send us an email canceling his appearance, which we received only a few minutes before his segment was scheduled to start. This is the only information we received, in the subject line: we need to cancel for tonight travel plans have changed."

So Corsi was on his way to the station, when suddenly a flight was booked for an hour later or so.  How else do you change travel plans a few minutes before you're supposed to be on the air?  If you knew you had to cancel earlier, wouldn't you generally let the program know earlier?  It's pretty odd either way.

It's pretty odd either way.

So is Jerome Corsi.  :-)

It is laughable that MMFA takes so much time to chronicle the travels of Corsi, who's book they have tried to dismiss.

All this blather made me curious so I went looking.

According to their website, "The Political Cesspool" is a three hours show on Sunday afternoons. They only broadcast on one local radio station in  Memphis.

I doubt anyone outside of Sunday afternoon radio listeners in the Memphis area would even know about this program if it were not for Media Matters. 

Next we'll be seeing MMFA taking on someone passing out flyers. :-) 

Wow.

That makes it even worse.  If the program is so little-known, then that gives him even less reason to go on it.  He's not getting a great deal of publicity out of it, so why go?  Aren't there larger, more mainstream places he could be?  That only suggests that the only reason he's on the show is because he agrees with the "pro-white" position, which damages his credibility immensely.

How many of your toes did you shoot off with that single post?

Brab,

You are assuming that I am arguing that Corsi is not a racist while you and MMFA are arguing he is because he was to appear on this local, Sunday afternoon, radio show.

I have no idea as to Corsi's views on race so you needn't worry about my extremities. All those little piggies are still firmly attached and enjoying their association with the rest of my anatomy. :-)

I am not making the argument either way regarding Corsi's postion with regards to race. I am just laughing at the hyperbole surrounding this non-event cancellation with an unknown, (up to now,) local radio show. 

I could care less when an where Corsi appears on his book selling tour.  You guys are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. It is fun watching everyone get so exorcised about it.

MMFA has become a caricature of itself.  Maybe they should be looking down at their feet. I don't know how they can sink much lower. 

It's nice to see what Tommy drives to work in

Why is it making a mountain of a molehill if he books himself on a little-known racist program?  Isn't it still racist?

That would seem to be the point, since it damages Corsi's credibility.  And what's more, pointing out the limited range of the program only highlights how it should be noted here and other places, since otherwise who's going to know he was ever on the show?

If you aren't a racist, then the problems of associating with racists shouldn't have to be explained to you.

If a liberal were doing it, it would be front page news.

We all know the drill...

That's why we have the right-wing apologists here, with their WITH posts, deflections and thread derailments. 

Case in point how when you talk about republicans being racist, they want to bring up Robert Byrd EVERY SINGLE TIME.

But liberals aren't doing it.  Do you think they would?  What a ridiculous  sort of hypothetical that relies on a premise not matched by reality.  Try to make your hypotheticals match up to the circumstances that are actually taking place, such as "If Obama was running for President..."

Thanks!

Yours truly,

Tommy's clubhouse, Inc. 

 -- It doesn't have to be plausible to be a valid hypothetical. -- brabantio

nuff said? 

There's nothing about the nature of a hypothetical question that relies on plausibility.  Can you demonstrate otherwise? 

 -- Next we'll be seeing MMFA taking on someone passing out flyers -- AA

Now that's funny...I don't care who you are.

You and snoop are bringing some good stuff today...always a good antidote for having to wade through the posts of those bitterly clinging to their rage. 

Weren't you wingnuts drooling a few days ago about Corsi's book being #1 on the NY Times bestseller list, denying it was due to bulk sales, and stroking yourselves about the publicity he was getting?

Now that he's apparently slinking back into his wormhole, he's the same as a guy passing out flyers?

You guys are a barrel of monkeys.

I wasn't...I didn't...I don't care...anything else you want to fabricate?

Sorry, Wesley, I didn't mean that you specifically were posting about it. You're going along with dismissing Corsi as the equivalent of a guy passing out flyers.

Are you aware that his book has been getting a lot of publicity on TV and radio, and is being touted as a bestseller and a serious work, despite being exposed as very shoddy and inaccurate?

I'm not going along with anything...just thought the "passing out" fliers was funny. In fact, it struck me that the one passing out fliers was the radio program.

I'm fully aware of the controversy and the publicity surrounding Corsi's book. I have no plans to read it...thanks in part to mmfa's book reports.

Corsi, Hannity, Oblermann...to name a few that hold no interest for me. 

'Calm after the Storm' flyer
The 'Calm after the Storm' flyer was designed to promote events celebrating World Mental Health Day at the National Maritime Museum.

Perhaps Corsi decided he needed to visit a professional?  Thus his change in travel plans.

Or, maybe he remembers this little tidbit from 2004:

Despite constant denials, the Bush-Cheney campaign today was busted coordinating with the "Swift Boat Veterans for Bush" in their smear campaign against John Kerry. The following press release was issued this afternoon by the Florida Democratic Party.

"Bush Campaign Caught Promoting "Swift Boat Vets for Truth"

 

Why didn't he do the show over the phone? It was radio . Since when do you need to be there?

Good point - it's Con damage control...

Corsi cannot be associated with a racist radio program.  The Cons have enough problems without Corsi f*$king it up for them even more.

It is pleasing to see these facts being brought into the open, and I can't believe Mr. Corsi was not outed in 2004.  Another good sign that the progressive community has finally grown teeth.

MMFA says the same thing day after day about anyone is not a liberal.  They need something to wake them up.  And that thing will be when NOBAMA loses in November.

MMFA says the same thing day after day about anyone is not a liberal. 

LOL

Yet here YOU are AGAIN.</