Category Archives: S.E. Cupp
After a lot of difficulty and maneuvering I got a ticket for the full event at Right Online, which was sold out this year.
So Friday morning, my family* packed up and headed to Las Vegas.
The conference was held at The Venetian, which is apparently the only non-union business on the La Vegas Strip. Which made it ideal for a meeting of conservatives.
Anyway, I got to the Venetian in time to get registered and get my copy of Culture of Corruption signed by Michelle Malkin.
The Andrew Breitbart Tribute Reception was extremely moving with dozens of stories about Breitbart’s life and how he had affected the lives of those he worked with over the years. In fact, stories about Breitbart were brought up in almost every speech.
It made me incredibly sad to see how many people he had affected in his 43 short years and the fact that I never had to chance to meet him.
I can’t even begin to describe the awesomeness of the speeches at this event or how much they affected me. So I’ll simply include the videos and encourage you to listen to them.
I hope to also implement some of the ideas I got in the breakout sessions, where I heard a lot about making a blog successful and building an audience. Including the possibility of doing a roundtable podcast with other conservative voices and covering more of my city and state local politics.
To the speeches.
Andrew Marcus, Breitbart Tribute
Former Governor Sarah Palin
Michelle Malkin on June 15th
Michelle Malkin on June 16th
Congressman Joe Heck
Who I got to take a photo with.
*They wanted to go on vacation and Las Vegas seemed like a good choice.
If any of my dear readers will also be at this conference then please let me know. It would be great to have someone to eat lunch with on Saturday.
I will be back on Monday with stories and photos of the weekend…well maybe not photos and maybe only carefully edited stories. After all, what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.
In any case, I hope to return with all sorts of new tips and tricks for gaining a bigger readership and utilizing social media in a far more efficient manner than I have been. All taught by some of my favorite conservative commentators, such as Michelle Malkin and S.E. Cupp.
Republican war on what? Sorry, I can’t hear you over this liberal union employee beating an effigy of Nikki Haley.
We hear a lot about the “Republican War on Women” in which Republicans are supposedly trying to take away women’s birth control, our right to work, our right to have sex, our right to drive, our right to have bank accounts, our right to get divorces…
Oh wait, sorry, I got distracted by thoughts of the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood for a second.
Which is apparently what Liberals thinks we are.* Regardless of the fact that, outside of the religious right and Santorum (who no legitimate conservative listens too), no one in the Republican party wants to do anything of the kind.
But this post isn’t about that. I do have a couple of fantastic articles, by a very smart lady, about the ridiculousness of the “Republican War on Women”, but I don’t feel like addressing the issue again when she has done so already.
The really outrageous issue here is that, while Liberals are screaming about the War on Women being perpetrated by Conservatives, the Liberals are setting records for heinous activities toward women, both conservative and in general…and the “unbiased” media aren’t saying a word.
S.E. Cupp, a well known and fantastic conservative writer** and political commentator, was depicted in Hustler with an altered photo of herself, with a penis in her mouth. The page was titled “What would S.E. Cupp look like with a d*ck in her mouth?” along with this paragraph.
S.E. Cupp is a lovely young lady who read too much Ayn Rand in high school and ended up joining the dark side. Cupp, an author and media commentator who often shows up on Fox News programs, is undeniably cute. But her hotness is diminished when she espouses dumb ideas like defunding Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the method pictured here is Ms. Cupp’s suggestion for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.
(via article on The Blaze)
Now, admittedly, the page also contained a disclaimer that the picture was fake and had been photoshopped, but that isn’t the issue.
Where is the outcry at this horribly treatment of a female commentator? There was certainly outcry enough over the Sandra Fluke incident? Can you imagine the outcry if this had been a photo of Nancy Pelosi or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz? S.E. certainly doesn’t feel any outcry on that level will come to her aid.
Cupp essentially laughed off the idea of any feminist organizations coming to her defense.
“The National Organization for Women, NOW, will not come out and say liberal women deserve more respect than conservative women and we are not going to defend conservative women. They’re not going to admit to that but let me tell you that is exactly how they feel,” she said.
Despite the storm of controversy that erupted after Rush Limbaugh called Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke a “slut” on the radio, Cupp predicted she wouldn’t get the same reaction, even when “clearly by anyone’s standards this is worse.”
Despite the fact that she was “horrified and disgusted” by the image, S.E. Cupp complimented Hustler on one thing.
Cupp said she had to commend Hustler for their “honesty” in the image’s accompanying sidebar.
“S.E. Cupp is lovely, she’s smart, she’s fine but she happens be a crazy conservative who is pro-life and wants to defund Planned Parenthood and for that she deserves the phallus in her mouth — that is essentially what they’re saying and I have to commend that as being incredibly honest,” Cupp said.
She added, “They have uncomplicated this belief system that my political views, my being pro-life, my political views make this kind of behavior OK. It justifies it and I essentially deserve it. That is honesty and I have never seen it before.”
Michelle Malkin, another super sexy conservative writer and political commentator***, wrote an article on her blog about the situation as well, referencing a 4 year old article that she wrote called “The Four Stages of Conservative Female Abuse” of which I have experienced all four, even in my relatively small contribution to the conservative female (and gay) writing pool.
While the previous repulsive story was going on, another repulsive, if not as explicit, event was going on in South Carolina where the, now retired, head of the local chapter of the AFL-CIO, Donna DeWitt, was applying a baseball bat to Governor Nikki Haley’s face…well a photo of her face on a pinata. As this was going on, DeWitt’s fellow union minions were shouting in the background “Hit her again! Whack her again!”
Oh yes, liberals really respect women.
For all the shouting about equal pay for women in the workplace, it’s a bit disturbing that neither Nancy Pelosi nor Barack Obama is putting their money where their mouth is.
Despite the 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, odd reports are coming out that Nancy Pelosi’s female staff are being paid significantly less than the men on her staff.
According to publicly available salary data at the website Legistorm, Pelosi’s female employees earned an average annual salary of $96,394 in fiscal year 2011. Male employees earned $123,000 on average, a difference of 27.6 percent.
The gap is even larger if calculated using the median salaries for men and women. For Pelosi’s female employees, the median annual salary was $93,320 in 2011, compared to $130,455 for male employees—a difference of $37,135, or 40 percent.
Pelosi’s entire staff—men and women—earned an average annual salary of $108,150 and a median salary of $114,662. By both measures, women made considerably less.
Pelosi’s response to questions about this strangely unequal situation with female staffers in the Senate was the she couldn’t comment on it and that the senate was “another world”.
Oh give me a break Pelosi, could you be more full of shit?****
On top of that, it appears that the White House has a similar issue with pay for their female employees.
Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show.
According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).
- Free Beacon (via Hotair.com)
Whose war on women? I couldn’t hear you over the sound of your raging hypocrisy.
*Despite the fact that their lord and savoir, Obama, is considering getting into bed with both those organizations in some way. Because the Taliban was all warm and fluffy before Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood just got $1.5 Billion from Obama because they love equality for women. That was sarcasm…could you tell?
**Who I may or may not have harbored a major crush on for years. Apologies to my girlfriend, it’s not serious…
***I’m not objectifying them…I hope. Though it might be a bit weird if Malkin sees this before I have a chance to potentially meet her in a week or two in Las Vegas.
****Could that be anymore of a Friends reference?
“Actually, sweety-pie, if a statement is blatantly satirical (as mine was) then it’s not defamation. So, piss off. “
Yeah, so that happened on twitter tonight. It was a response to me calling out a guy who goes by the handle “amazingatheist” (a real credit to Atheists, I’m sure the non-assholes ones that respect women really love you.) when he posted something that was clearly libel and was not blatantly satirical, as he obviously does not like Andrew Breitbart (who the original comment was aimed at), the comment contained no hint that it was meant satirically, and his twitter is not a satirical twitter page. Therefore, as I said, libel.
After he called me sweety-pie, which isn’t something I would put up with anyone calling me, let alone some liberal idiot on a twitter page, I told him not to talk down to me by using such language in reference to me. At which point he preceded to call me “snuggle-bug” and “sugarplum”. I actually felt like I needed to take a shower after that. I mean…eww.
What’s worse is that someone called this guy witty!
Uh, what? Vulgar libel against an active political commentator, misogynistic debating practices, and creepiness equals clever now? I seemed to have missed that definition of wittiness.
This isn’t the first time this has happened to me when debating liberals. It isn’t the first time I’ve seen it happen to others. Michelle Malkin and SE Cupp are both regularly attacked with misogynistic and racist rhetoric.
And then let’s start with the blatant anti-semitism that is all over the place at the Occupy Wall Street protests and the Liberal political agenda in general.
As for homophobia. How about this video here, where an occupy wall street protestor (I thought they were all liberal, equality is good, love everyone except the rich, types?) calls the man making the video a faggot. Or the post I wrote detailing how I found the President’s decision that, suddenly, when gay marriage came up…that state’s rights became a big deal for him…and how I found that a bit fishy. Or this attempt to push gay people into seeing homophobia as the same thing as Islamophobia…I mean, really?
And it goes on and on and on.
May I remind those that have forgotten, or educate those who were never taught, of something important. Which party was it that opposed the abolition of slavery? That’s right, the Democrats. Which president was it who, when elected, opposed Women’s suffrage…and, in fact, opposed it until it became unpopular to do so? That’s right, Democrat Woodrow Wilson. All these stories about Democrats paving the way toward social change…they really aren’t true. They talk a big talk these days, they subsidize a lot of federal aid which keeps people “on the dole” as the Brits say, but they don’t really walk the walk.
I mean, when I feel less vicitimized by my mother’s distaste for my homosexuality than I do by the gay liberal’s hatred for my being a gay conservative…clearly something is rotten in the state of Denmark. For a party of acceptance, I see more hate, insults, and vitriol from political liberals than I do from political conservatives.
Feel free to leave more instances of misogyny, racism, and homophobia from the left in the comments below. I can hardly keep up with the whole of the internet.
We cover a lot of topics and a lot of time line in my Journalism class. In the last class I attended we talked about several editors of major “penny-press” newspapers from the mid to late 19th century. One of these editors was a man named Henry Raymond, his newspaper…The New York Times.
Raymond ran a different sort of paper than many of the other Penny Presses at that time, many of the other papers were very partisan…not to any particular political group, but to the views of the individual editors. Horace Greeley for instance, a man whose paper was so popular that, in the mid-west, it was “next to the Bible” in importance, refused to cover criminal cases or the theater…because he believed such things were immoral and would corrupt the morals of his readers.
Raymond wrote about everything. He favored, as my teacher’s power-point said, “fair, careful, accurate reporting, especially foreign news.” He was non-partisan and dispassionate about politics and news in general. In his own politics he was sometimes conservative, sometimes radical, but always a champion of the public good and a supporter of the constitution.
Editorially, Raymond sought a niche between Greeley’s open partisanship and Bennett’s party-neutrality. In the first issue of the Times Raymond announced his purpose to write in temperate and measured language and to get into a passion as rarely as possible. “There are few things in this world which it is worthwhile to get angry about; and they are just the things anger will not improve.” In controversy he meant to avoid abusive language. His editorials were generally cautious, impersonal, and finished in form.
Raymond’s moderation was evident during the period after President Lincoln’s election and before his nomination. He wrote Alabama secessionist William L. Yancey: “We shall stand on the Constitution which our fathers made. We shall not make a new one, nor shall we permit any human power to destroy the one….We seek no war — we shall wage no war except in defense of the constitution and against its foes. But we have a country and a constitutional government. We know its worth to us and to mankind, and in case of necessity we are ready to test its strength.”
- From wikipedia (Yeah, yeah, I know…)
What would Henry Raymond think of the modern version of his penny-press newspaper today?
I’m a big fan of partisan blogs and editorials, I read S.E.Cupp, Michelle Malkin, Dirty Sex and Politics, and The Conservative New Ager. I watch O’Reilly and Red Eye and listen to Glenn Beck.
But I know they are partisan, I realize that and I do my best to hear the other side of the issue as well. I also realize that, while what they may report on may be rooted in factual events, it is heavily colored by their personal opinions and it is not journalism.
What you expect to get from The New York Times is Journalism, objective, fact based, rooted in reality, terms defined, and biases removed. Henry Raymond strove for that, even while he strove to support his country…or his country’s constitution (which these days can be two different things sadly).
Henry Raymond is likely spinning in his grave these days with ever partisan article that rolls of the presses at that his, once bi-partisan and factual, newspaper. What a shame…