LOL
I’m gay – and have many gay friends….and we have NEVER, EVER considered Levi to be a “gay icon”
Dumb and overhyped, yes…but an icon….no.

What a complete and utter idiot to be trotted out on television! Her guest Levi Johnston is no brainiac, either.

NewsBusters — Joy Behar and Andrew Sullivan Attack Sarah Palin: Is Trig Her Son?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/12/08/joy-behar-andrew-sullivan-trig-really-sarah-palins-baby

I am still baffled as to why anyone cares what this idiot says or does. His ENTIRE claim to fame is getting a teenager pregnant and then abandoning her and the child. In almost every other such case, the media would be screaming for his head. But, since he fits the current anti-Palin genre, he is somehow a hero?

No, he is a reprehensible, irresponsible person that has now officially abandoned a child. And Behar applauds him? Sullivan applauds him? Seriously.

I am not a fan of Palin’s at all, but I feel badly that the person that left her with a fatherless grandchild is somehow accepted.

(Note: It does not matter whose daughter this moron treated that badly. His behavior is what us somewhat civilized thinking people call disgusting.)

Al Gore is extremely upset right now. Levi has the hockey-stick pointed in the incorrect direction.

I, too, have never heard that Levi is a gay icon. That would be a compliment, in fact. If this interview is any indication, maybe the icon for lethargic losers? Although he is much more believable than Palin, for sure.

I watch Rachel Maddow. I’ve never seen Behar’s show but, from the previous list of guests it’s clear that I’m not missing much. I’d heard that she had that transvestite Ann Coulter on but, Joe the Plumber? Orly Taitz? This show sounds more like that garbage they feature on faux news. I’ll take the Rhodes Scholar over the tabloid, trash tv. I couldn’t care less about some hillbilly sperm donor.

More power to Levi Johnston. Going to join this fan-page on Facebook.

If Mediate had a Comment of the Day Award I would definitely nominate this:

” MartiniShark says:
December 8, 2009 at 11:35 am

Al Gore is extremely upset right now. Levi has the hockey-stick pointed in the incorrect direction.”

Oh well, I’ll do the next best thing and toast you with an Absolut on the rocks! :)

Joy Behar continued her string of news-making guests since her HLN show’s launch (Bill Maher, Ann Coulter, Joe the Plumber, Orly Taitz to name a few), adding Levi Johnston to the list last night.

How sad is it that we consider “Levi Johnston” to be a “news-making guest.” Actually… how sad is it that ANY of those people are considered “news-making guests?” I don’t know if they’re really “news-makers” as much as they are “television makers.” It’s not news… it’s just television.

Keeva says:
December 8, 2009 at 11:28 am

No, he is a reprehensible, irresponsible person that has now officially abandoned a child. And Behar applauds him? Sullivan applauds him? Seriously.

Everything takes a backseat when it comes to bashing Palin. Parental responsibility isn’t as important as attacking someone they disagree with politically. And that is truly sad.

I’d really like M, or any Levi support to let us know why that isn’t an issue for them.

roxsteady wrote:

I watch Rachel Maddow. I’ve never seen Behar’s show but, from the previous list of guests it’s clear that I’m not missing much. I’d heard that she had that transvestite Ann Coulter on but,

WHOA! WHOA! WHOA! Hold a cotton pickin’ minute!

You watch Rachel Maddow….and you call COULTER a “transvestite?”

Click here.

I’m Not Blue wrote:

Everything takes a backseat when it comes to bashing Palin. Parental responsibility isn’t as important as attacking someone they disagree with politically. And that is truly sad.

I’d really like M, or any Levi support to let us know why that isn’t an issue for them.

As I posted on Oprah.com after the Palin interview(among the incredible volume of Sarah-hatred) when someone expressed hope that Levi had more bean$ to $pill:

….Sigh….

It’s absolutely amazing to me the way women who call themselves feminists flip-flop their principles along party lines.

The history is long. When Republican Senator Robert Packwood was accused of sexual harassment of the women on his staff, Democrat females demanded public hearings targeting him after the release of thousands of pages of his diary, in which he memorialized details of his encounters with them. The special prosecutor assigned to comb through Packwood’s diary? Kenneth Starr. Even though public hearings did not commence, everybody got to see what most of what Packwood did and said about those women, thanks to Starr. Packwood resigned in disgrace in 1995.

Now, fast forward to 1997. Former Arkansas secretary Paula Jones had previously filed a sexual harassment suit alleging that President Clinton, while Governor of Arkansas, dropped trou and asked her to (ahem) do a certain type of job. Clinton fought the suit all the way to the Supreme Court, and lost. In 1997, he is reluctantly deposed by Jones’ lawyers, who ask if he’s been sexual with the White House women. “No,” he lies, and is contradicted by audio evidence implying he’s been getting that certain type of job done by Monica Lewinsky. A perjury investigation begins as a result.

Who’s in charge of the Lewinsky investigation? Again, Kenneth Starr. He held grand jury hearings featuring testimony from Lewinsky herself about all the jobs she did for Clinton in the Oval Office. Some are pressing for public release of the investigation. But this time, Democrat women are dead set against it — “It’s none of our business,” “he has a right to privacy,” “it’s only sex,” “everybody lies about sex,” etc. On top of that, they sometimes suggested that there might be something wrong with Lewinsky for saying that she even did those jobs.

On March 22, 1998, feminist pioneer Gloria Steinem even wrote an editorial in the New York Times (“Feminists and the Clinton Question”) in which she implied that every male boss got one free shot at exposing himself to his female underlings before it’s called “harassment.” (Don’t bother searching the Times’ website to find that editorial — they have removed it. But if you search hard enough, you’ll find it elsewhere.)

Which, finally, brings us to today. We have a handsome but unskilled young man who gets his girlfriend — whose mother is famous — “in trouble.” They have plans to marry, but those plans fall through. Rather than maintain a cordial relationship with his ex, he leaps at offers to possibly make a lot of money if he would trash her family publicly. He tries to parlay his ex’s family’s fame into a showbiz career for himself, and moves to Southern California, 3,500 miles away from his infant son.

Under normal circumstances, one would think a feminist — especially a feminist with a teenage daughter — would recoil to be associated with such a cad. But … the famous almost-mother-in-law is a famous conservative woman. That changes everything. Now, rather than seeing him as pathetic, they hang on every little indignity he inflicts on his ex’s family, hoping that someday, he will drop a figurative nuclear bomb on her family, devastating them into lifelong shame.

Why do they wish this to happen? I can’t even begin to understand.

“Ladies?”

@ImNotBlue: Must be Tuesday. We agree again. The left will abandon any and all principles to go after Palin.

As I have said, I am no fan of Palin, but it is totally disgusting the way so called feminists turned on a successful woman simply because she had the independence to speak her mind. And honoring the loser that got her daughter pregnant and ran away is simply unacceptable.

LNSmithee says:
December 8, 2009 at 2:37 pm

There is no denying that the feminist movement, for all its previous good, has become just another political action committee… advocating one-sided politics, instead of right-headed politics that help women. Disappointing at best.

Martini: LOL at your hockeystick comment — perfect.

As for CNN HLN and Joy…..having Levi on is a waste of time; I’ll bet her numbers won’t be so hot when the ratings come out.

INB: No doubt – NOW has been a completely worthless organization for years; never defending conservative women from the outrageous sexist attacks they suffer. Their silence on the attacks against Palin and her children was and is despicable. They are the NOLW.

“Why do they wish this to happen? I can’t even begin to understand.

“Ladies?””

You have certainly made a powerful directly on point argument that I agree with completely.

As for the explanation I do have a theory that might explain it.

I think feminism is at its foundation just another movement and/or coordinated organizations that have been formed to replace the mostly discredited Communism and Marxism. They all share a common objective, which is for them, as intellectually and morally superior beings, to order and control society for all we yahoos.

Feminism, animal rights, multiculturalism, anthropological global warming, the violent anti-war movements etc all have similar goals and SOME (NB: I said SOME) methods in common to the two most destructive philosophies that modern man has endured, National Socialism and Communism.

As for this particular example with Feminism’s reactions switching violently from inconsistency to inconsistency I am reminded of the American Nazis and Communists who were like whirling dervishes reacting to the dance played by Hitler and Stalin pre WWII. They have no absolute guiding principle except that which furthers their ultimate goal.

That is the only thing that explains such schizophrenic behavior for me.

What do you think? My idea has some merit or am I just paranoid?

I can’t tell if your sarcastic or being serious, Grammie.

Kinda hilarious just recently for jokes I wrote like a stereotypical teabagger in a Facebook group, as I was trying to be sarcastic. Several private messages later I came to the realization that you can’t be sarcastic or parody something that already is a self-parody.

@Grammie, @ TfT

*CLINK

I’m all with TfT.
Watching Levi is a waste of time.
Now, watching Glenn is time well spent!

TinaFromTampa says:
December 8, 2009 at 9:11 pm

Almost like time spent going from site to site stalking someone one, NotSoAnonymous? Kinda like that use of time?

You tell me… you’re the expert…

NotsoAnonymous (posing here as TinafromTampa): Hey stalker – go back to TVNewser where your stalking and inane commentary is appreciated.

Maybe you should go back to TVNewser.