Baldwin stars on one of the lowest-rated “cultural phenoms” (according to the dishonest entertainment media) on television, regularly insults a large segment of the customers (those who are not hypocritical wacko leftists), and just as regularly acts like a jerk in public.

Why would any company interested in creating goodwill want this guy as the face of their product?

AP:

Alec Baldwin’s antics aboard an American Airlines flight have gotten him grounded as a spokesman for a New York-based supermarket chain.

A spokeswoman for Wegmans Food Markets tells Rochester media outlets that the company pulled television ads featuring Baldwin after some customers complained about his behavior that resulted in his being booted from a Dec. 6 flight at Los Angeles International Airport.

Baldwin was removed from the New York-bound plane for refusing to turn off his cellphone.

The TV spots were filmed for the 2010 holiday season. The commercials were supposed to run again for three weeks last month but were pulled a week early after Baldwin’s airline dustup.

I’m looking at you, Capitol One.

A solid summer lineup helped studios catch up to 2010, but ticket sales flattened again in the fall and have remained sluggish right into what was expected to be a terrific holiday season.

The result: projected domestic revenues for the year of $10.15 billion, down 4 percent from 2010’s, according to box-office tracker Hollywood.com. Taking higher ticket prices into account, movie attendance is off even more, with an estimated 1.275 billion tickets sold, a 4.8 percent decline and the smallest movie audience since 1995, when admissions totaled 1.26 billion.

“There were a lot of high-profile movies that just ended up being a little less than were hoped for,” said Chris Aronson, head of distribution for 20th Century Fox, whose sequel “ Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked” has been part of an under-achieving lineup of family films for the holidays. “The fall was pretty dismal. There just weren’t any real breakaway, wide-appeal films.” …

Hollywood is left right where it was 12 months ago, finishing the year quietly and looking ahead to a promising lineup to turn its fortunes around next year.

Even more so than 2011’s schedule once looked, the 2012 film list looks colossal. Among the highlights: the superhero tales “The Dark Knight Rises,” ”The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Avengers“; the latest in the animated franchises “Ice Age” and “Madagascar,” along with “Brave,” the new adventure from animation master Pixar; Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones’ “Men in Black 3“; Daniel Craig’s new James Bond thriller “Skyfall”; Johnny Depp’s vampire story “Dark Shadows”; Ridley Scott’s “Prometheus,” a cousin to his sci-fi classic “Alien“; and Peter Jackson’s “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” the first in a two-part prequel to his “Lord of the Rings” films.

That’s just a small sampling of 2012’s big-screen titles, which also include 3-D reissues of “Titanic,” ”Finding Nemo,” ”Beauty and the Beast” and “Star Wars: Episode I — The Phantom Menace.”

Looking ahead, there’s good reason for optimism in Hollywood. Looking back, though, the past year spells caution.

“I’m not prepared to be Chicken Little yet, but if the films coming in 2012 can’t reverse this trend, then I think we need to reevaluate our expectations,” said Hollywood.com analyst Paul Dergarabedian.

Full story here.

From the Associated Press:

NEW YORK — A frequent contributor to a jihadist website has threatened David Letterman, urging Muslim followers to “cut the tongue” of the late-night host because of a joke the comic made on his CBS show.

The Site Monitoring Service, a private intelligence organization that watches online activity, said Wednesday that the threat was posted a day earlier on the shumukh al-Islam forum, a popular Internet destination for radical Muslims.

Jihadist didn’t like his joke…

The contributor, who identified himself as Umar al-Basrawi, was reacting to what he said Letterman did after the U.S. military announced on June 5 that a drone strike in Pakistan had killed al-Qaida leader Ilyas Kashmiri.

Al-Basrawi wrote that Letterman had made reference to both Osama bin Laden and Kashmiri and said that Letterman had “put his hand on his neck and demonstrated the way of slaughter.”

“Is there not among you a Sayyid Nosair al-Mairi … to cut the tongue of this lowly Jew and shut it forever?” Al-Basrawi wrote, referring to El Sayyid Nosair, who was convicted of the 1990 killing of Jewish Defense League founder Meir Kahane. Letterman is not Jewish.

Al-Basrawi, which is likely to be an alias, has made some 1,200 postings to the Muslim website, said Adam Raisman, an analyst for the Site Monitoring Service. The private firm, part of the Site Intelligence Group, provides information to government and commercial clients on what jihadists are saying on the Internet and traditional media. Raisman said the online forum is often used by al-Qaida.

Muslim extremist groups in the past few months have increased calls for people to take violent action against certain targets in the West, he said.

“The concern is that there is someone who will read it, agree with it and say, ‘I want to be the Sayyid Nosair of 2011 and kill David Letterman,’” Raisman said.

The FBI is also looking into the threat, said Jim Margolin, spokesman for the bureau’s New York office. “We take every potential threat seriously,” he said.

Neither CBS nor a Letterman spokesman, Tom Keaney, would comment on the threat. CBS would not make available a transcript of Letterman’s monologue on the killing of Kashmiri.

Letterman has been the target of criminal threats in the past. A former CBS News producer was jailed for trying to extort $2 million from Letterman in 2009 by threatening to expose the host’s sexual dalliances with members of his staff. A former painter at Letterman’s ranch in Montana was jailed following a 2005 plot to kidnap the TV funnyman’s nanny and son.

A radical Muslim group last year warned the creators of “South Park” that they could face violent retribution for depicting the prophet Muhammad in a bear suit on the Comedy Central cartoon. Author Salman Rushdie spent years in hiding after Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini urged he be killed for blasphemy after writing the book “The Satanic Verses.”

Filmmaker Theo van Gogh was killed on an Amsterdam street in 2004 by a Dutch Muslim angered by his film “Submission,” a fictional study of abused Muslim women.

Vanity Fair:

One of the biggest surprises in the book is that, in 1980, you had to convince interviewers you were not just following George’s direction. Obviously no one thinks that today. What was the biggest argument you and George had over a particular scene?

There was really only one disagreement. It was the Carbon Freeze scene when Princess Leia says, “I love you.” Han Solo’s response in the script was, “I love you, too.” I shot the line and it just didn’t seem right for the character of Han Solo. So we worked on the scene on the set. We kept trying different things and couldn’t get the right line. We were into the lunch break and I said to Harrison try it again and just do whatever comes to mind. That is when Harrison said the line, “I know.” After the take, I said to my assistant director, David Tomblin, “It’s a wrap.” David looked at me in disbelief and said something like, “Hold on, we just went to overtime. You’re not happy with that, are you?” And I said, yes, it’s the perfect Han Solo remark, and so we went to lunch. George saw the first cut and said, “Wait a minute, wait a minute. That’s not the line in the script.” I said ““I love you, too’ was not Han Solo.” Han Solo was a rebel. George felt that the audience would laugh. And I said, that’s wonderful, he is probably going to his death for all they know. We sat in the room and he thought about it. He then asked me, “Did you shoot the line in the script?” I said yes. So we agreed that we would do two preview screenings once the film was cut and set to music with the line in and then with the line out. At the first preview in San Francisco, the house broke up after Han Solo said I know. When the film was over, people came up and said that is the most wonderful line and it worked. So George decided not to have the second screening.

George was the best producer I ever worked with. He left me alone and only came to England a few times. I told George at one point that I was behind schedule, not that it was anyone’s fault, but because it was so complex. Many of the special effects that were done on set often did not work at all. His answer was, “Keep doing what you are doing. Just keep shooting.” This was the greatest thing for a director to hear from a producer.

Much more here.

His piece focuses on religion, of course, – but not Islam, Christianity or even my favorite, “the universal life force of the Grand Unicorn.”

His all powerful religion? Tolerance.

Of course, for him, tolerance can only play one way. As Yanks we must kneel before the alter of acceptance, while everyone else uses us as a footrest.

I mean, I doubt Breed would MENTION tolerance to the mosque developers. Instead, true to the predictable mind grazing on hysterical cliches, he hearkens back to the witch trials – the most overused example of intolerance ever – and one that probably deserved it. I mean, witches suck.

Breed then quotes a reverend who says this is all due to a “dominant religious lens factor” – meaning, i guess, when one group thinks their religion is better than others.

He knows this, since he’s a wiccan minister, a practitioner of a cult populated by veiny spinsters with cats. I guess the writer wouldn’t find an imam tolerant enough to grant him an interview.

Or maybe he didn’t look.

After all, it would be a sign of intolerance to question the intolerant, especially when their intolerance is protected by tolerance!

Instead, focus on us. We’re nice people. We won’t kill you.

But look, intolerance is not the issue. Think about your pal who can have any girl he wants, but chooses to go after the girl dating you. There, tolerance, doesn’t enter the equation. Being a jerk, does.

And that’s what this is all about. Tolerance now serves as a condom for jerks seeking protection from their own jerkiness.

I’d use it myself, but they don’t make one in my size.

And if you disagree with me, you’re a racist homophobe who owes me thirty bucks.

Tonight:

Remi Spencer!

Michael Gallagher!

Regi Hamm!

fun, fun, fun!

While Paterson wasn’t against a mosque just a few blocks from where thousands died, he realized it might be good for everyone involved “to see something else worked out.”

Well, the developers rejected the offer outright. According to AP, they told the Gov that they were fine where they are. Paterson then wondered why the developer didn’t even bother to “hear what we are actually talking about?”

And so I return to that tweet I received from the Mosque-teers earlier this week. When I asked them if they would welcome my new Islamic gay bar (the most popular name by the way, is “Outfidels”) next to their center, they wrote:

You’re free to open whatever you like. If you won’t consider the sensibilities of Muslims, you’re not going to build dialog.

And so, eariler, I tried to build dialogue. I tweeted them all day, asking them why they rejected Paterson – and offered them a spot on Redeye.

They evaded the question – and, in the spirit of communication and tolerance – turned down my show. Their reasoning: I wouldn’t engage in “dialogue.”

So, by asking them to come on the show, and talk about the mosque, I was not engaging in “dialogue.” And by refusing to come on the show, they were.

And here again you see where, when it comes to the mosque, tolerance is a one-way street. We tolerate them. They hate us.

But look, I don’t want taxpayers subsidizing this move anyway. But because they’re staying put – my bar is too. I’ve even decided to go two steps further.

I’m adding a Ladie’s Night.

But also, a badass stereo system featuring the world’s most powerful sub-woofer: the Eminent Tech TRW 17.

Gizmodo says the frequency approaches that of “jet engines, nuclear explosions and plate tectonics.”

Imagine how Bronski Beat is gunna sound like through that!

(runaway runaway runaway!)

Anyway, it cost like 13 grand, but it’s worth it.

And if you disagree with me, you’re a racist homophobe who won’t give me back my Erasure records.

Tonight:

John Moody

Angela McGlowan

Jesse Joyce

A finger stabs overhead as the conservative online publisher declares Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., a racist. An arm lances outward as he decries Republican leaders as apologists. Voice rising, Breitbart pledges $10,000, then $20,000, then $100,000 for the United Negro College Fund if proof is found to corroborate claims of racial name-calling during tea party protests on Capitol Hill.

“They decided to play lowball, hardball tactics,” Breitbart seethes. “Well, we’re going to have to play it right back at them.”

You could argue he has done just that.

Two weeks ago, Breitbart posted an edited video that left the impression that Shirley Sherrod, then a little-known black federal employee, was racist. Within days she was out of a job, the doctored tape (whose source Breitbart will not name) proved wildly misleading, and President Barack Obama was on the phone with her trying to make things right.

Sherrod says she plans to file a lawsuit against Breitbart, and he’s being blamed for committing the same online sins that he says are endemic in the U.S. media: political bias and lack of fairness. But despite calls, even from some conservatives, for Breitbart to apologize to Sherrod, he has done nothing of the sort.

“What would warrant an apology?” he told CNN. “I’m not the one that threw her under the bus.”

Love or hate him, you can’t avoid Breitbart on cable TV these days. But who is this 41-year-old father of four from Los Angeles, who has emerged as one of the most incendiary figures from the Beltway to Hollywood, a minor-league Limbaugh who mixes shock-jock calculation, conservative credo and answer-to-no-one swagger? Who is this icon of the smash-mouth politics that divide America?

___

Breitbart vaguely resembles a younger version of the actor Carroll O’Connor, with gray hair and pale blue eyes. He has the kind of build that suggests he’s not averse to polishing off his kids’ leftovers.

In the quiet of his Los Angeles living room, where the California sunshine floods through skylights and toys occupy corners, Breitbart is practiced and polite. Dressed in a blue blazer, jeans and button-down shirt, he’s nothing like the combative partisan seen hissy-fitting on YouTube clips.

Kids’ artwork is taped to the walls, and he chats amiably with his wife about dinner and a visit from his in-laws. There’s a large-screen TV and pool table, and a book on see-through houses rests nearby.

Breitbart talks about his views with the zeal of the convert that he is. A personality ago, he was a cookie-cutter Hollywood liberal. But his passion for his brand of conservative politics is shot through with the keen business sense of an up-and-coming media mogul: He knows that what he says sells.

As with the Sherrod video, he is skilled at finding issues that push conservative buttons while at the same time pulling Internet traffic to his websites, driving up advertising rates. He’s a man with an agenda, and it’s as much business as politics.

“I’m committed to the destruction of the old media guard,” Breitbart has said. “And it’s a very good business model.”

He did not speak with Sherrod before the clipped video went up, and he says he was unaware of the complete speech at the time. By his account, he posted the clip to expose racism within the NAACP, which last month passed a resolution condemning what it said were racist elements within the tea party. He wrote that the 1986 video shows “nodding approval” in the crowd to Sherrod’s remarks, which he sees as evidence of bigotry.

It’s not the first time he’s been involved in a controversy over edited tapes. Last year, one of Breitbart’s websites debuted the hidden-camera sting videos made by James O’Keefe III and Hannah Giles that brought down the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. Giles posed as a prostitute, and the videos show ACORN staffers offering advice on taxes and other issues. Critics said the heavily edited tapes shaped a deceptive narrative, a charge Breitbart denies.

He relishes his public role as provocateur. He told reporters from the stage of a tea party convention in February, “It’s not your business model that sucks, it’s you that sucks.” And this on Sen. Edward Kennedy’s death: “If you can’t say something nice about a person, then say mean things about them instead,” Breitbart wrote. “Especially if they are unapologetic manslaughterers.”

Breitbart’s home turf is a colony of conservative websites anchored to news aggregator Breitbart.com, which gets more than 2 million visitors each month. He’s a regular on Fox News, and has a book on the way.

News cycle by news cycle, fact by fact, Breitbart uses his websites and public appearances to challenge what he perceives as liberal bias in the media, academia and Hollywood, the broad forces that shape American lives. His loudmouthed style is a radical departure from conservative voices of the past, like William F. Buckley Jr.

“I do what I do because the mainstream media chooses not to do it,” he says. “The game of the left controlling the narrative … is ending.”

And yet a centerpiece of the Breitbart operation is, in effect, a handshake with the devil, as he sees it: the mainstream media. His most popular site, Breitbart.com, showcases content he buys from The Associated Press and other mainstream news organizations. It was launched under the motto: “Just the news.”

Breitbart TV, another grab-bag, rounds up video clips.

From there it’s a hard right turn, and it’s clear after a few clicks Breitbart isn’t promoting an impartial media. A quartet of sister sites offer conservative analysis, commentary and blog posts that pass judgment on news stories or delve into other topics of the day—a sort of online bulletin board for conservatives. There’s Big Journalism, Big Hollywood, Big Peace and Big Government. (He uses the modifier “Big” to mock the media slang Big Tobacco and Big Oil).

Some past headlines, “NY Times admires Taliban,” “Who really needs a journalism degree?” and “Left Admits Racism Charges Against Tea Parties a Tactic, Not a Truth.”

Not surprisingly, the left sees Breitbart as another entertainer-pundit on the fringes of journalism, where facts are disposable and attitude trumps intellect.

“I call it thuggery in the national discourse,” says Democratic strategist Karen Finney, a Clinton White House veteran “It’s damaging to our country.”

But his take-no-prisoners approach goes down well with conservatives who feel their political leaders have been too hesitant, too timid. Breitbart “intends to offend the other side,” says Republican strategist Jonathan Wilcox, who teaches a course on politics and celebrity at the University of Southern California. He’s “an oppositional figure at an oppositional time.”

___

Breitbart’s personality is reminiscent of the manic, stop-and-go driving in his hometown of Los Angeles, and right now we’re at stop.

When asked what he does other than pounding a laptop or hanging out with tea partiers, he has to pause. He’s a devoted Los Angeles Dodgers fan, and has traveled the country to cheer on his favorite team. He spends a lot of time with his in-laws at their home in Venice, near the beach, and a getaway usually means a meal with the kids at California Pizza Kitchen.

“When you have four kids … unless you have the television on it’s pure mayhem,” he says. “It’s just pure chaos.”

Larry Solov, his business partner and lifelong friend, says the blogger has two speeds: lighthearted jokester and fiery culture warrior.

“They flip back and forth,” Solov quips. “And there is not that much in between.”

Breitbart is part of a small cluster of Hollywood conservatives that includes comedian Dennis Miller and Joel Surnow. While he told tea partiers in Nevada that he’s not rich, he doesn’t live like Joe the Plumber either—a Range Rover is parked in his driveway, and the neatly-tended homes in his hillside neighborhood go for more than $1 million.

When Breitbart tells his story, it can feel rehearsed, a tale told many times. He’s quick to needle the teenager and young man he once was, talking about his journey from college party boy and lapsed music critic to 21st century Internet mogul, as he’s been called by talk-radio host Laura Ingraham.

He grew up in an affluent bubble in the Brentwood section of Los Angeles (home to Arnold Schwarzenegger and Harrison Ford), not far from where he lives today with his children and wife Susie, the daughter of actor Orson Bean.

The son of a restaurateur, he attended private school and emerged liberal. Politics was just a word.

That began to change at Tulane University in New Orleans, where Breitbart partied and mustered average grades but was exposed to a grittier version of America. In a city long troubled by crime and poverty, he started thinking about social problems and “the Great Society trash can,” a reference to welfare programs in the 1960s.

A defining moment came as he watched the 1991 Senate hearings on Clarence Thomas’ nomination to the Supreme Court. Breitbart grew indignant as Democratic senators grilled the nominee, in his view unfairly; he believed the allegations of inappropriate behavior leveled at Thomas paled in comparison to Kennedy’s Chappaquiddick scandal. Breitbart considered the media, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Organization for Women complicit in what he saw.

“I went in expecting to root against Clarence Thomas and I came out doubting the Democratic Party and liberalism,” he says.

He eventually changed his party registration to Republican and never looked back. He wrote recently on an Atlantic magazine website that there was a time when he read the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, British music magazines and what he called his Bible, satirical Spy magazine, but those habits died with the Internet. Now, his reading tastes lean right.

All that would be just personal footnote if he hadn’t met Web pioneer Matt Drudge of Drudge Report repute in the mid-1990s. Breitbart became his long-serving underling. He was also there during the formative days of the Huffington Post.

In interviews, Breitbart usually refuses to talk about Drudge, who is known for fiercely guarding his privacy (and didn’t respond to AP requests for an interview), but he does say this: “I owe him everything.”

“If he had been left of center, he would have been on the cover of Rolling Stone and Wired and Vanity Fair a million times,” Breitbart says. “My greatest takeaway from Matt Drudge … was his sense of individualism, to follow your path. And so, Drudge is Drudge and I’m me.”

___

Breitbart’s talk of new media revolution is as much throwback as innovation. The confrontational right-left voices in today’s national dialogue recall newspapers of the 18th and 19th centuries, which had little use for milquetoast neutrality.

“When you have a more open, competitive landscape, you need to do something to differentiate yourself. One way is to have a point of view,” says Rich Gordon, director of digital innovation at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism.

Is it journalism?

“It’s a different brand of journalism than I grew up with in the 20th century,” Gordon says. “We seem to be going back to the future.”

Breitbart rattles off ideas for more than a dozen interlinked sites and blogs, some of which he says could launch later this year: Big Education would take on teacher unions and political correctness in schools; Big Tolerance, to “show that blacks, gays, Hispanics, Jews, are not all of one progressive mindset.”

Solov, his business partner and friend, considers the company’s finances private and wouldn’t say if it turned a profit last year. Breitbart says advertising pays for a small staff—Internet traffic to his site gets a big boost from his old friend Drudge, whose site links stories to Breitbart’s online turf.

There are those who think Breitbart’s future is in the Beltway culture he despises. One reader posted this, “Andrew for president 2012.”

Breitbart looks momentarily bemused when asked if he harbors political ambition.

“I’m less of a senator than I am a pied piper or Johnny Appleseed,” Breitbart says. “Being a senator would diminish my power.”

The AP’s Colleen “Breathless” Barry:

George Clooney radiates cool on witness stand

It’s no wonder the Italian businessmen claimed George Clooney was behind their fashion line — the actor knows how to wow an audience whether he’s on the red carpet or the witness stand.

Maintaining his trademark aura of cool, Clooney delivered a few wisecracks Friday as he testified against three defendants accused of co-opting his name with the goal of launching a fashion line.

The appearance of the star, who maintains a villa on nearby Lake Como but is rarely seen here in public, sent the normally staid courthouse into full celebrity tilt. Clooney had to push his way through a wall of cameras into the courtroom, saying “scusa, scusa,” — “Excuse me” in Italian — and warning “Don’t crush my lawyers.”

Throngs of fans packed the tiny courtroom. The judge repeatedly told spectators to be quiet and tossed out one woman who snapped a photo of Clooney.

The 49-year-old actor wore a navy blue suit, crisp white shirt and red-spotted blue tie as he addressed the court through an interpreter, throwing in occasional words in Italian and apologizing for his lack of fluency.

More vaporous reporting here.

Take a look-see, for yourself, see.

Yes, the AP headline reads: “NY car bomb suspect cooperates, but motive mystery.”

Yeah it’s only a mystery if you’re in the media, and really stupid. Everyone else pretty much understands why the terrorist left a fuel bomb in an area filled with families.

He hates us. He hate our country, our culture. He wants you dead.

But the media – an entity full of fragile egos and bubble-encased boobs – just can’t see that. In fact, it’s kinda awesome how huge and gaping their blind spot toward radical Islamic fundamentalism is. If only there could be other motives for the mayhem, so they’d never having to place blame on anything (except America, of course).

So I thought I’d help them out, and find motives the media could be comfortable with.

So why did Faisal Shahzad try to blow up Time Square?

-Obviously, Global Warming. The increasing temperature forced him to jog at night, and he found the sunlight oppressive. Plus, it made his beard itch.

-Wall Street greed. Faisal had just seen “Capitalism: A Love Story,” became enraged, but got lost and ended up in the theater district. Better luck next time.

-Bill Ayers never returned his sweatpants after that weekend in Catalina. Sure, it was a great time, but those sweatpants had sentimental value.

-Lenscrafters was completely out of the Rachel Maddow collection. So he had to settle for a David Shuster knockoff.

-The latest incarnation of “The Lion King” was unoriginal and passionless. Worse, it didn’t reflect the damage George Bush did to the world the way “American Idiot” did.

-They’re building a Wal-Mart down the road, and their affordable prices deeply offended his “mom and pop” sensibilities.

-Norman Mailer doesn’t blog nearly as much on the Huffington Post as he used to.

-The electrolysis didn’t work on his pubes.

-The lack of diversity in the workplace is disgusting – well, except for MSNBC. They get a pass because their hearts are in the right place.

-That same sex marriage won’t lead to the option of marrying a goat.

- That George Clooney didn’t find anyone at the end of “Up in the Air.” Although I suppose – he did find himself.

And..

-Those evil tea partiers made of mockery of Islam with their delightful bacon and egg salad sandwiches.

I’ll stop there, because it really is the tea partier’s fault–for they created the climate of hate that only encouraged Shazhad’s actions In fact – I’d say the car bomb was a direct result of the tea partiers, the new Arizona immigration bill, Rush Limbaugh, offshore drilling, and of course, Fox News.

Because all that stuff is evil. Unlike, you know, real evil.

Should be a delightful showcase of intelligent talent on this here show!

We’ve got..

comedian Joe Devito

all around entertainer Steven Crowder!

the delightful and beautiful Brooke Goldstein

and finally, Gail Lebowitz, from Sunset Daze!

So in a recent AP column, Michael Blood says it’s up to Andrew Breitbart to prove that Tea Partiers didn’t yell the N-word in Washington last Sunday.

He writes:

“Conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart disputed accounts that tea party activists in Washington shouted racial epithets at black members of Congress amid the health care debate, although he didn’t provide any evidence.”

“Although he didn’t provide any evidence.”

Okay, this would be funny if it wasn’t so slimy.

I mean, first of all – The burden of proof is on the person making the accusation. And get this: Breitbart put up 100 grand, to be donated to the United Negro College Fund – if anyone provided evidence. So far, nothing – which is why the AP writer, is left grasping for brain cells.

Look, this debate is basic: it’s small government vs. big government. So how cowardly do folks like Blood and Frank Rich have to be that they can’t man up and defend their love for collectivism? The only reason they scream race, is because that debate scares them. They know a racial accusation prevents dialogue, because such a harmful charge far outweighs any benefits of winning an argument.

But next time someone says it’s about race, Simply say, “Is that all you got?” and then ask them these five questions:

1. How could adding 32 million people to the health rolls SAVE us money?
2. How is hiring 14,000 new IRS Agents to enforce this NOT an expansion of government?
3. How can you be considered a “child” for the sake of health care until you are 26 years old?
4. How is forcing everyone to buy something constitutional?
5. How could there be no tort reform in this?

If they respond “you’re just asking that because he’s black,” then respond with, “you’re just saying it because I’m hot.”

Then take their wallet.

Say you’re “spreading the wealth around.” 

A stellar lineup!

Jim Norton!

S.E. Cupp!

Stephen Kruiser!

and Mike Baker as our guest ombudsman!

Plus, global warming skeptic Phelim McAleer, producer of “Not Evil Just Wrong.”