Tuesday, May 15, 2007

"Rudy's New Low" Completely Plagiarized from Salon.com 'Can "The Bulletin" ever come up with an original thought'

Low and behold, will The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman ever give credit to pre-published articles in his liberal rag.

This time Ladyman takes his cue from Salon.com and their piece "A new low for Giuliani," which looks a lot like Ladyman's copied "Rudy’s New Low: Giulani Attacks Dems to Cover Up his 9/11 Mistakes." Now I know that all liberals think alike, but this is a little ridiculous.

In even reviewing the tripe that was posted, I asked my myself, "when it comes to criticizing Democrats, will liberals eat their own?" I mean, you will never read of Ladyman writing (or plagiarizing for that fact) about Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson and the FBI investigating him for his hiding of $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer from some scandal. You won't read of Nevada Democrat Senator "Dingy" Harry Reid and his very questionable land deals, or Jack Murtha and his abscam fame, or Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein, and their crafting of legislation specifically designed to benefit their husband's businesses.

No, with liberals, it's all about "macaca" and "Mark Foley" and that stupid part of the electorate that believes anything the liberal media tells them.

But you will never read any of that by the hand of Montgomery County liberal Propaganda Minister Mike Ladyman. He does not take into account liberal indiscretions; only the few Conservative ones. Mike lies to me and you just as he lied to his grade school friends about not having any cookies to share at lunchtime. If anyone is "selling out" America -- it's Mike Ladyman.

Come to think of it, with Mike Ladyman or his staff, they've probably never have come up with an original thought in their lives to present to their readers, seeing as I've already come up with another example of them copying a piece to their wordprocessor, and this time not even modifying it to at least try and pass it off as their own.

The story in Media Matters titled "MSNBC discussed Giuliani's attack on Democrats over terrorism, did not question Giuliani's own record on terrorism," may or may not have started it all, but Salon.com finished it, and Ladyman copied it given his readers the idea that he came up with it himself. If it was me being copied, I know I would be pissed. My stuff has been republished before, and the proper notations made.

So what's the big deal about what The Bulletin is doing. The deal is, whether it's Mark Williams or Ladyman, they are not being honest in their work, or their intentions in regards to the reader. It's incredible how liberal Democrats still seek to destroy President Bush with their rhetoric, but when true history is finally written (free of today's liberal spin machine), he will be regarded as a great President.

The first GOP debate was about the liberal moderators and not about the Republican candidates. I would have loved for one of the candidates to say "pardon me, is President Bush in this race, or are we going to talk about the future of this great country." At least the GOP candidates had the guts to go on a leftist cable network for their debate. Of course, Ladyman won't tell you that the Democrat presidential candidates fear of Fox News forced them to refuse to go on the top cable news network for a debate for fear of getting some hardball questions.

One thing is clear about a Democrat 2008 White House victory. If they win, they will have won by using propaganda. They will not have been able to tell the truth about their agenda for fear of being scorned and laughed at.

You can already see signs from the 2006 elections. Of course, for the last two weeks of the election, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were totally out of sight. The Democrats ran Conservative candidates in the House and Senate, and they basicly had no theme for the election. No catch-phrase to propel them to victory. The liberals won on virtually nothing -- hot air if you will. Would you think the Democrats had won if they sent out the message, that they are sending out today. The message of "we want to lose in Iraq," and we are going to stop funding this war because we think you will still vote for us -- you dopes.

Yes, a liberal 2008 White House victory will definitely scream to al-Qaeda and the rest of the world that the United States is a weak country, weaker than we have ever been by electing a woman or black Democrat President. Now that doesn't make me a racist, I would still vote for a Conservative woman or black GOP nominee, but electing Mrs. Bill Clinton or Barack Obama -- PLEASE!!

Look, the words "nuclear terrorism" are slowly making their way to the forefront of our society. And our appeasement to terrorism, and not to mention, appeasing nuclear or soon to be nuclear nations such as North Korea and Iran, and if the lessons of World War II are not heeded, then we are all screwed.

Keep it up liberals. Continue to avoid the lessons that brought about WWII, and you will bring about our destruction by the hands those terrorists who believe in God more than you, and are more than willing to die for their God more than you are willing to die for you God(s) -- Bill Clinton, for the Blacks, and Barack Obama, for guilty white interlopers like Mike Ladyman.