Media Matters whining about Beck jokin’ on Malia

Awww, the poor dears at Media Matters are whining about Glenn Beck mocking Malia Obama for her quote, “Daddy, did you fix the oil leak yet?” 

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy? Daddy? Daddy, did you plug the hole yet? Daddy?

PAT GRAY (co-host): (imitating Obama) No I didn’t, honey.

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy, I know you’re better than [unintelligible]

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Mm-hmm, big country.

BECK: (imitating Malia) And I was wondering if you’ve plugged that hole yet.

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Honey, not yet.

BECK: (imitating Malia) Why not, daddy? But daddy–

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Not time yet, honey. Hasn’t done enough damage.

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Not enough damage yet, honey.

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah?

BECK: (imitating Malia) Why do you hate black people so much?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) I’m part white, honey.

BECK: (imitating Malia) What?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) What?

BECK: (imitating Malia) What’d you say?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Excuse me?

BECK: (laughing) This is such a ridiculous — this is such a ridiculous thing that his daughter– (imitating Malia) Daddy?

GRAY: It’s so stupid.

BECK: How old is his daughter? Like, thirteen?

GRAY: Well, one of them’s, I think, thirteen, one’s eleven, or something.

BECK: “Did you plug the hole yet, daddy?” Is that’s their — that’s the level of their education, that they’re coming to — they’re coming to daddy and saying ‘Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?’ ” Plug the hole!

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yes, I was doing some deep-sea diving yesterday, and–

BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy?

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah, mm-hmm, mm-hmm, I was doing–

BECK: (imitating Malia) Why–

GRAY: (imitating Obama) Yeah, honey, I’m–

BECK (imitating Malia) Why, why, why, why, do you still let the polar bears die? Daddy, why do you still let Sarah Palin destroy the environment? Why are — Daddy, why don’t you just put her in some sort of camp?

Personally, I think it is funny as hell.  And I think it is open to discussion because it was in the news lately.  If the Obamas don’t want Malia mocked, they should not quote her to the press.  I don’t know how the quote became news, but Glenn Beck did not make it news, he just commented on it.  Sadly, Glenn Beck later apologized.  I (hopefully) would have said screw you.  You liberals can dish it out, but you can’t take it. 

The joke about ARod “knowing” in the Biblical sense Palin’s underage daughter was not funny.  Just showing up at a ball park to watch a game does not make a kid “fair game” for criticism or jokes.  But conveying a kid’s private question to her daddy to some reporter does make what the kid said fair game.  The point of what she said was to make the President look better.  

And no, I won’t link to Media Matters.  They suck.

John Doe

24 responses to “Media Matters whining about Beck jokin’ on Malia

  1. I’m not a conservative or liberal, but no, it’s not acceptable, or “funny as Hell” for that moron Glenn Beck or anyone to mock an 11-year-old kid. Certainly no more funny than the A-Rod, Jr. Palin joke, which also was out of line. Consistency would gain you more credibility.

  2. I’m “consistent”, you just aren’t intelligent enough to follow my logic. I believe that when a President makes their kid an issue, and uses the kid as a prop to make himself look better, the President is inviting criticism. You can’t allow Presidents to smack hell out of their opponents by using their little kid, and then cry don’t hit the little kid that I was smacking you with.

    Sarah Palin didn’t make her daughter an issue. Her daughter just went to a baseball game, AFTER Palin was even running or in office. Palin’s not running for office. If the kids campaign for the parent, you sure as hell can–AND SHOULD–smack them when they get out of line.

    Sure, you could quibble that I don’t follow my own rules, if you say that bringing up the 11 yr old was not him politicing. But you would be a stupid idiot if you said such a thing (hey, it’s been a long week, and I’m not feeling diplomatic). Obama brought out what she supposedly said to make him look like a great family man, with an adoring child who thinks he can save the world. It was pure politics. And if he doesn’t like it, maybe next time he will keep what she tells him in private to himself.

  3. Lipton T. Bagg

    I went to Rick’s site. An eleven year old could make a better argument. Typical hate-filled, diatribe fueled Fiberal (Rick: Fibber+Liberal equals Fiberal – wanted to make sure you had the aptitude to follow.)

    All I could do is laugh…

    -LTB

  4. Boy, you guys touchy much? Why so jumpy? Is this one of those circle jerks disguised as a blog? Why invite comments if you’re going to be so touchy? Or do you only want comments in agreement? I just followed a link over here. Never know what’s lurking I guess.

    JD, I think I said that I disapproved of both cases. I didn’t say that I approved of Obama bringing up his daughter. In fact, I think it was stupid. I said that Glenn Beck is a moron, which isn’t really all that controversial. No need to be so thin skinned. Why jump to name calling?

    T. Bagg…you got a way with words! Your handle seems like a good description (fiberal! I get it!) Wow! You found your way to my site? All by yourself? Sounds like you’re really getting the hang of this internet stuff! Now make sure when you do laugh that you remove your teeth first so you don’t drop and break them. Those things are like three months pay to replace dude. I bet you’re one of those Jesus-on-Sunday, love-thy-neighbor conservatives aren’t you? The kind that give idiots a bad name. Is that why you hide behind the anonymous handle? Or is it simply that I bagged on Glenn Beck that’s got your panties all bunched? Sorry, but Glenn Beck is a simple-minded moron. And I admit to thinking that anyone who plans his day around watching or recording him so as not to miss a single episode, is also a simple-minded moron. I can understand if that hits a little close to home.

  5. I dunno Rick. Here’s one I can’t back you up on . They’re right. Upon hearing of the spill, Obama should have immediately jumped into Marine One, donned his Speedo, fins and snorkeling mask and proceeded to dive and plug that darn hole with chewing-gum. (an American brand, preferably) C’mon Rick, Reagan woulda/coulda done it.

    (???As I’m aware that you can’t fix stupid, I’m guilty of having no clue as to what this blog is about???)

  6. Who says you can’t fix stupid? Stupid is a frame of mind. You just have to change your perspective.

    For fiberals, that means pulling their heads out of their nether regions.

  7. (Dave…see above…. he’s saying that you’re lying and filled with hate and at the same time says that you have your head in your ass. No doubt he also doesn’t get the irony in that.)

  8. You quoted him. OK, I’ll amend to cover all of the possibilities:

    (Dave…see above…. he’s saying that [you’re, we’re, I’m] lying and filled with hate and at the same time says that you have your head in your ass. No doubt he also doesn’t get the irony in that.)

    So the “head in the ass” stuff is playful banter? Not hate? Got it. (Keep the left arm straight on the back swing.)

  9. Hmmm…your friend Dave said;” you can’t fix stupid” and I said;” you can fix stupid”. Evidently, I was wrong.😉

    (Left arm was as straight as an old guy can make it…240 yard drive straight down the middle.)

  10. I’ve got a solid excuse, what with my public school upbringing and all!

    As for the swing…I dunno…Ive seen a solid tendency to slice.😉

  11. Rick, the chopper has arrived. We’re ready to air-lift you out of this site! Just grab the ring my friend! Dammit Rick!! Grab the ring!!!

  12. Rick, no, this IS NOT a circle jerk. We love it when liberals come here. But when you call somebody else a moron (Glen Beck) then it automatically becomes fair game that I can call you an idiot. See how it works? You don’t call anybody names, I won’t call you names.

    I applaud your consistency. There is too much out there of only attacking the other side. I certainly am not as consistent as I would like, but if you will look at my previous posts about McCain or VA Gov McDonnell you will see me attacking Republican elected officials in a vigorous manner.

    But I don’t see any consistency at your blog, except you consistently attacking Republicans/conservatives. Don’t you EVER take issue with what Democrats/liberals do?

  13. OK, JD, so along with Glenn Beck, I think Joe Biden is a moron. Am I still fair game, or does that only extend to Fox News employees?

    As for you labeling me a liberal, you’d likely be very surprised at my politics. I’ve been called liberal, conservative and everything on either side. If you looked more closely at my blog, you’d have seen that I take on our stupid drug war (is that a liberal position or a conservative position?) Either way, and from either side, they’ve all screwed it up. I’ve taken on Catholic clergy who allow their priests and others to systematically rape children. Conservative? Liberal? I pick up idiotic things happening in Alabama, or the idiot congressman who preaches family values and gets caught boning his staffer and point them out (didn’t see those on your site). Makes me a liberal? OK. Immigration…I don’t think that the Arizona law would hold up Constitutionally (see below), and want the issue to at least convince the Feds that they need to do their jobs. Liberal? Whatever. I don’t think you could call anything there inconsistent. I’ve only been at it for a short time. I’ll make a point to post something moronic from the other side. However, as you pointed out you were inconsistent within your own blog. I appreciate you being open to seeing that. You sound very reasonable there. And I admit to not looking back at earlier postings, so point taken.

    I’ve been voting for over 30 years, and have voted for one Democrat in that whole time at any level. I worked for a conservative Republican’s US Senate campaign twice to try to rid the nation of Barbara Boxer. Wasn’t called a liberal, but had lots of other names hurled at me. I’ve not always voted for the Republican, because generally, there’s not a whole hell of a lot of difference (reference the GW Bush years). I cannot stomach the liberals for always having better things to do with my money. We are being bankrupted. I cannot stomach the conservatives (like Beck and Palin and Fox) because of their complete sell out to all things Christian. That is a real danger that we face. I want to be left alone economically and socially. I want the government to adhere to strict Constitutional guidelines. Neither “side” has done crap towards this. All we do is call each other names. Does that make me liberal in your view? OK. One thing is for certain, the approach that many on the right take…demonizing anyone who disagrees, insisting on shoving Christianity down our throats (a topic for another day) borderline racism (relax, not you, but you know what I’m talking about) — those tactics will not ultimately win. You drive many people away. Calm down. Say it with a smile. Display a little humility. Obama isn’t the Devil. He’s not some foreign agent, or closet Muslim. He’s just wrong. Simple. I could listen to that. I (and many others) find myself defending the guy, not because I necessarily agree with him, but because I don’t want to be aligned with the insane arguments coming from the other side (Glenn Beck).

    Oh, and sorry, but Beck is a class I moron. But so is Olberman.

  14. Good, you CORRECTLY believe that there are morons and idiots on both sides of the isle. Big deal. Now let’s deal with your double standard that it is okay for you to call others morons, but that you object when I call you one.

    C-O-N-S-I-S-T-E-N-C-Y.

    And yeah, you might not be a liberal, but a quick look at your blog shows that you bash conservatives and leave liberals the hell alone. I’d say I have you pegged, whether others agree with me or not.

    But I’ll bite. Show me an issue or two on which you believe in the conservative side of the issue. Even if you are a liberal, I don’t care. You are welcome here. We like all sides, because sometimes even liberals get one right. 😉

  15. I didn’t call you a moron. Why are you so defensive towards a boob like Glenn Beck? It’s quite a different thing to call you a name, but a dolt like Beck invites it. And yes, Keith Olberman is a mental midget also. C-O-N-S-I-S-T-E-N-C-Y
    Are you some sort of blogosphere body guard for the guy or something? Actually, your comments in the original post are far more inconsistent than anything I’ve said. And besides Beck and the morons in Alabama and Indiana, what conservatives have I bashed? Hell, One of my earlier ones took on Lindsey Lohan. I generally discuss positions on issues. Maybe not Fox News material, but much more relevant than whether you feel the need to defend Glenn Beck.

    You’re on. I don’t get to post as often as I like due to a busy schedule these days, I’ll make it a point to point out some BS on the left. I’ll visit to make sure that I let you know.🙂 I think I pointed out a position or two in my previous reply here. Problem is, too many of the issues that I used to consider were conservative have been abandoned by today’s supposed conservatives. Remember when Reagan wanted to get rid of the Department of Education? GW Bush and his crew show up and expand federal spending on education to obscene levels. What IS a conservative issue any more? Maybe that’s part of the problem.

    And finally, it indeed is OK for me to call a public person a moron. It’s not the same as you doing the same. There is a difference. You and your blog partner started that. I’ll agree to come by and visit so long as it doesn’t devolve into that. Not interested. Deal?

  16. One other observation on your site JD…yours isn’t exactly the example of balanced criticism. I went back many pages before I could find a criticism of a Republican. In fact, you called Connie Mack a mental midget. While b your rules that qualifies as a reason to call you names, I’d instead refer you to my blog to point out why I think the Arizona law is a bad idea. Not because of being a fan of illegal immigration, only a “mental midget” would take that position, but because the Constitution itself says that matters of naturalization and control of our borders are the responsibility of the Federal Government. It appears that I’m more of a strict Constitutionalist than you are. Does that make you or me more liberal? The good thing about the law is that it appears to have gotten their attention on the issue in DC, I’m sure you’ll agree.

    Cheers.

    • Rick, the constitutionality of the Arizona law will be settled in the courts, I’m sure. But don’t be too sure that it will be to the fed’s favor as there is precedent for the states to enforce some immigration laws. Such as the recent Ninth Circuit’s decision that upheld the Arizona law requiring E-verify before hiring and the fact the state could suspend a business’ license for hiring an undocumented worker.

      What this all boils down to is the lack of effort by the government to enforce laws that have been on the books for decades. I’m not just picking on the Obama administration, GWB, GHB and Clinton as well as Reagan and Carter probably share some blame too.

      The illegal immigration apologists obviously don’t really have a dog in this hunt, other than they are just parroting the leftist mantra. If a person has had personal experience with the facts about illegal immigration, then perhaps they wouldn’t be so quick to jump on the amnesty band wagon. When you lose your job to an undocumented worker, or you’re self-employed and find you can’t compete because illegal immigrants bid jobs at 30 cents on the dollar, way below FMV, then you might feel a bit differently. ( you see, illegal immigrants don’t pay premiums for W.Comp Ins or General Liability Ins like We/I have to so they don’t have the overhead to worry about.)

      The Arizona law SB 1070 is an extension of federal law that simply states if a person is stopped for a lawful reason, the police have a duty to ascertain the person’s citizenship. We have license checks all the time, the police checking for drunk driving proof of insurance, ect. We have to show our license and vehicle registration as well as proof of insurance. Are illegal immigrants driving on our roads and highways exempt from this requirement? I think not.

      • MRguy, we agree fully, except I would submit that we should all hope that the courts rule against this, as we would all agree that we can’t have 50 states running their own immigration policies. This is a two-edged sword. I live in California. We’d likely have Arizona, with its immigration policies sitting right next to the first sanctuary state. Who knows what New Mexico would do. I think we’d all pretty much know how Texas would handle it. You’d have a checkerboard border with all kinds of differing laws. A real mess. You get the idea.

        You are absolutely correct, all previous administrations have fumbled the ball on this issue, although, when researching the subject, I was surprised to see that since Obama was elected, arrests and deportations are up significantly (since the Bush years), border agents have doubled, and violent crime in Arizona continues to drop….to 30 year lows in fact. The crime rate continues a trend that was certainly in place going back several administrations. Somehow, El Paso — right across the wall from the most dangerous city in the world, Juarez — is something like the 2nd safest city in the US with a population over 500,000. Go figure.

        I fully agree on the need for the Feds to at last get a handle on this issue. I fear, however, the 50-states “on their own” situation that just can’t be good. That’s what the Arizona law ultimately will do I hope. Get them to commit to solving this issue. With the addition of the National Guard troops, it looks like there’s at least SOME attention being paid to the issue. Hopefully, there’ll be much more. And…as I advocate in my blogs, we need to deal with the drug problem differently. We all know that prohibition doesn’t work. Never will. A real sea-change in attitudes is needed there.

        • Rick,

          If the federal government refuses to do it’s job, ie. enforcing immigration laws, then what are the states to do? All Arizona did was write their law to “mirror” the Federal Law. When their police officers make a lawful stop, they’re required to ask for identification, proof of insurance and vehicle registration, just like they would ask of you or me if we were pulled over for some kind of traffic infraction. If they find out that the people in the vehicle are in our country illegally, they then have to arrest them. It’s very simple.

          And I believe other states that are contemplating will follow Arizona’s lead in writing their laws to “mirror” federal law.

          I don’t know what good National Guard troops can do. They are unarmed and can’t make arrests.

          I agree with you that drug prohibition doesn’t work, but you will never get the Feds to change the laws on it. The cost of incarcerating drug offenders falls mainly on the individual states. The Fed makes a lot of money off of confiscation of personal property and fines.

          I too lived in California, but I wised up and moved.😉 way back in 1975 when I was a young adult.

          Regards, Mike

          • It is a tough issue Mike. But it’s like saying “if the police won’t do their jobs, then the citizens will have to take matters into their own hands” regarding fighting crime. You can see the slippery slope of state-by-state vigilantism if this were to get too out of control. As I stated, I hope that the National Guard deployment is, if nothing else, an indication that finally this has gotten the attention of the federal government, and that they’ll at last do their job. Otherwise, I guarantee you that other states will begin doing similar things. Not all of the laws will mirror the federal laws, which will be the beginning of a real mess. Issues like this have a way of splitting the states. Hell, it already has, what with the boycotts and all. It’s a mess in progress.

            As for California…spread the word! Personally, I’d like for fewer people to keep coming here! It’s getting to crowded as it is. I’ve been all over the country, and can’t think of a place that I’d rather be. I have my own little piece of paradise. Of course, come retirement time, I’ll likely move on. Too damned expensive overall to live here on a fixed income! Lots of golf courses though!

            Best, Rick

            • Rick,

              Used to walk Torrey Pines with my Dad when I was a kid. No golf carts. Then we’d go and watch the gliders take of from the cliffs over the beaches of La Jolla.

              If and when this administration does anything about illegal immigration, it’s going to be in the form of amnesty. People like Al Sharpton have dropped their Black constituency like a hot potato and are on the amnesty band wagon. That’s a potential 12 million to 30 million new voters the progressives are counting on to keep themselves in power. And like I said before, if there is a “whiff” of amnesty in the air, our southern borders will look like the Los Angeles freeway at rush hour with people trying to get across to grab their piece of the pie.

              I know why Caldorone excoriated Arizonians over their new law. Half of Mexico’s income comes from their compatriots sending their money home. Of course, they may be changing their tune after this new amendment is added to Mexico’s tax code;

              According to the amendment made to paragraph ‘a’ in the first clause of Article 9 of the Código Fiscal de la Federación in México, the money transfers that Mexicans send to their country would be subject to federal taxation

              For example, this means that out of the $13.3 billion dollars that were sent last year to México, 35 percent ($4.6 billion) — more or less the tax owed — would have to be paid to the government.

              Migrants are up in arms over this as well as a resolution passed by the Oklahoma state legislature to tax foreign money transfers emanating from their state. Oklahoma has decided they’re tired of seeing their tax revenue going out of their state and our country.

              I still maintain that it is patently unfair to the folks that choose to immigrate to America the right way and have to wait in line to do it. Amnesty should be fought tooth and nail.

              Solutions have been brought forward such as giving out work permits and special I.D. cards with the caveat that this solution WILL NOT lead to citizenship and the right to vote, but will allow legal workers to get driver’s licenses and auto insurance. The only problem I see with this solution is that it could lead to national I.D. cards for everyone and I am dead set against that.

              Regards, Mike

  17. Rick, I have no problem calling people a moron, or being called a moron. IF I had a problem with it, I wouldn’t call anybody a moron, even “public figures.” I feel you should treat people the way you expect to be treated, even if they are “public figures” who aren’t there to defend themselves. I see it as cowardly to attack those who aren’t there to defend themselves, while being polite to those who are there to defend themselves. This is an area where you and I disagree. Since you seemed to have no problem calling others names, I did not think that you would be bothered if I call you names. Now that we are clear on that, I won’t call you names if you do not call ANYBODY else names.

    Heck, we welcome all points of view here, so long as people actually use arguments and facts and reason. You seem like a nice guy so you are very welcome here! I realize that we are not the most balanced in our points of view as all of our writers are conservative to varying degrees. I’m looking to get a more liberal perspective if you are interested in contributing as a writer, let me know. But we are rough when we disagree, so you gotta have tough skin. 😉

    • Well we’ll have to agree to disagree a bit on the name calling thing. I do put public figures, officials, etc. into a different category. If they are employed by me through my tax dollars, I feel that I’ve got the right, and if they are in the business of swaying public opinion via the airwaves, I also feel they are in a different category. I was on the air myself for about 8 years. My first show was a lead-in to Rush Limbaugh for a station group in Central California. Later, I was syndicated on about 97 stations around the country. Name calling came with the territory. Now that I’m a “civilian”, I think it’s much more productive to try to discuss things on the merits of the issues. Now, Beck and others do their fair share of name calling, you’d agree. They invite criticism. Hell, they thrive on it.

      I’d love to be able to bring some balance and clear thinking😉 to your site. Tell me how. I appreciate the offer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s