Sunday, July 29, 2007

Filipino Prisoners Do Michael Jackon's Thriller

Unfortunately, the person who owns this video has made a request to youtube to turn off embedding of this video (which means that you cant watch it here on this blog.). You will have to go to youtube to watch it:

website statistics

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Speaking of Phony Bush Quotes (and a Lying Liberal)

Below, I write about columnist Les Payne using phony Bush quotes.

This liberal blogger opens his July 24 post with a quote from Joseph Goebbels ("If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."). Unfortunately for the liberal blogger, he serves as an example of that.

He goes on to quote:

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

""I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02"

UPDATE: File this one under "Lying Liberals". The liberal author of the above mentioned blog post claims to have REMEMBERED Bush saying those two phony quotes!

"imdougandirule said...

Phunny, I remember when he said both of those. But nice try.

So, who is this "imdougandirule" guy?

His Blogger profile reveals:

Age: 35
Gender: Male
Astrological Sign: Cancer
Zodiac Year: Rat
Industry: Architecture
Occupation: Designer
Location: La Mesa : California : United States

A Designer in the field of Architecture. Sounds like an upstanding member of society. Problem is that he lies for his liberalism.

Now what was that Goebbels quote again that the liberal provided us with? Oh yeah: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

Isn't it rich....

website statistics

Sunday, July 22, 2007

NY Newsday Columnist Les Payne Uses Phony Bush Quotes

According to Les Payne, liberal columnist of the New York newspaper, Newsday ("While Bush rests, bin Laden plots", July 15, 2007):

"It has been 2,130 days, however, since the president declared on Sept. 13, 2001, that "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our No. 1 priority and we will not rest until we find him."

And then Les goes on to say:

"Someone, the record will show, painted the face of Saddam Hussein on Bush's wanted poster and threw the marshal off the trail. "I don't know where bin Laden is," he said a year after deputizing himself. "I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." Even as bin Laden harassed him with videotaped taunts, Bush declared himself "truly not that concerned about him," turning his beady eyes toward Baghdad."

Of course, Bush said neither.

Fictitious Bush Quote

What Payne got right were these quotes: "don't know where bin Laden is", "truly not that concerned about him" (although those quotes are strung together as if it were one sentence, and other words that Bush did not say are added to it).

To put those quotes in context, from a March 2002 Press conference:

Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of --

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom.

Labels: , , , , , ,

website statistics

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

A Lying Liberal Attorney (And His Media Enablers)

Chicago Sun-Times: Turning Big Dem Contributor into 'Staunch Republican'

By Warner Todd Huston | July 17, 2007 - 02:10 ET

Why is it that every time the MSM writes a story about a supposedly "staunch Republican" who is vocally supporting the opposing Party, we have to wonder of its veracity? Maybe it's because there always seems to be a few little problems with the claim of "staunchness" on the part of the MSM's favored Party hopper du jour? And in this case, the Chicago Sun-Times story titled "GOP lawyer sold on Dems" by Jennifer Hunter, we have no better assurances than we ever do that the claimed "staunch Republican" is either very "staunch" or very "Republican."

Sun-Times writer Hunter dug up a supposedly "staunch Republican" named Jim Ronca, a trial lawyer from Pennsylvania. Mr. Ronca, claims Hunter, is "certain of one thing: He is not going to vote Republican in the 2008 presidential election."

But there is more than that. He also says he'll financially support Democrats, and he makes this announcement as if this is somehow an earth shattering rebuke to the GOP, or so the Sun-Times wishes us to believe.

"I'm not only going to vote Democratic, I'm going to financially support the Democrats," Ronca said after a luncheon forum of the American Association for Justice, featuring Gov. Bill Richardson, Sen. Barack Obama, former Sen. John Edwards, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Joe Biden. "The Republicans in Washington are an embarrassment."

Well.... he told them, eh?

So this "staunch Republican" is now going to financially support the Democrats? This seems an about face for a Republican, doesn't it?

Unfortunately for the Sun-Times' attempt to make Ronca seem the dyed-in-the-wool Republican, Mr. Ronca has a long, long history of being a Republican who financially supports Democrats. In fact, a quick review of his public donation record proves that he almost never gives to a Republican at all. Out of the 10 candidates he's donated to, only two of them were Republicans... and one of those was Arlen Spector who hardly counts as a Republican in the first place! (One of the candidates he donated to I could not quickly identify the party affiliation. If anyone knows what party Bruce Bradley was in I'd appreciate the info.)

Some "staunch Republican" Ronca turns out to be!

Here are some of his political donations:

James R. Ronca
Schmidt, Ronca and Kramer

$1,000 Harris Wofford (Democrat, PA) 6/22/1994
$250 Charles Oberly (Democrat, PA) 10/3/1994
$500 Edward Kennedy (Democrat, MA) 11/16/1995
$250 Stewart Greenleaf (Republican, PA) 12/29/1999
$250 Patrick Casey (Democrat, PA) 6/3/2000
$500 Ron Klink (Democrat, PA) 6/13/2000
$500 Ron Klink (Democrat, PA) 9/15/2000
$500 Arlen Specter (Republican, PA) 11/5/2001
$500 Allyson Schwartz (Democrat, PA) 3/30/2004
$2,000 John Kerry (Democrat, MA) 5/27/2004
$500 Allyson Schwartz (Democrat, PA) 8/23/2005
$1,000 Bob Casey (Democrat, PA) 9/13/2006
$500 Bob Casey (Democrat, PA) 9/30/2005
$500 Bruce Bradley (?) 9/5/2006

Wow, thousands to Democrats, and pennies to the GOP. You know, the Party he is supposed to be a "staunch" member of?

Now, one might say that since Rona is a lawyer in Pennsylvania, he would have to support quite a few Democrats. After all, he is surrounded by them in Harrisburg and Philadelphia, right? All right, that might be a fair question. But that does not answer to why he has donated to a Massachusetts leftist (Teddy Kennedy) and supported the horribly leftist presidential candidate for the 2004 presidential election (John Kerry)? Maybe his support of local Democrats can be explained away, but not his support for lions of the left outside his state.

How many "staunch Republicans" do YOU know who would donate to Teddy Kennedy? I'd lay odds that such a creature is far and few between.

So, the claims that Jim Ronca is a "staunch Republican" doesn't hold much water and neither does the Sun-Times' story!

My last question is also a curiosity. We see these stories of so-called Republicans who are jumping ship to support the Dems all the time. Why is it that the MSM never sees fit to publish a story where Dems are jumping ship to go with the GOP? Did they get so discouraged with the Reagan Democrat that they vowed never to write such a story again?

It would seem so.



Chicago Sun-Times: Turning Big Dem Contributor into 'Staunch Republican'

GOP lawyer sold on Dems (Sun Times writer transforms major Dem donor into staunch Republican)

And another Newsbusters thread on the same Jennifer Hunter

Chicago Sun-Times Touts ‘Republicans’ for Obama

website statistics

Saturday, July 14, 2007

More Lying Liberals

This is an old post (Dec. 2000), I know. But I just love exposing lying liberals. I have written about this in a previous post. Why Do Liberals Lie?

Rush Limbaugh was incredibly vicious about Chelsea. I used to watch his TV show while working a graveyard shift in 1992-93, and on one program, he pulled out a photo and called her "the White House dog." What kind of person does that to a kid in her early teens?

As for Jenna (not Janna not Jeena) Bush, I don't see where people are getting the idea that she's a dim bulb based on this fairy tale.
posted by rcade at 6:27 AM on December 22

The idiot liberal doesnt know that he gave himself away as the liar he is. Giving a phony description of events (a description he no doubt saw somewhere on the internet) and then lying about having watched it himself.

By the way, I believe that "rcade" at metafilter is Rogers Cadenhead who has in 2003 made the same claim again on his site:

Shortly after Bill Clinton took office, Limbaugh had a short-lived syndicated TV show. In a widely reported incident that I viewed personally, he talked about Socks the cat and then asked his audience, "did you know there's a White House dog?" For his punchline, Limbaugh showed a photo of a 12-year-old Chelsea Clinton.

It takes a special breed of jerk to go after the under-age child of a politician who was new to the national spotlight and not participating publicly in any political events. To expose her to ridicule for her looks, at what is easily the most awkward stage of adolescence, is completely indefensible.

Although the remark was immediately condemned, it took Limbaugh 10 years to have the decency to apologize, telling Hillary Clinton in December 2002 that he regretted making "a personal attack upon an innocent girl."

Of course, had he seen it as he claimed, he would have seen that Rush did apologize for the incident in question.

And "rcade" changes the details within the story:

March 2001:

I don't think it's reasonable for the Bushes to expect their daughters to receive the same hands-off treatment Chelsea did from everyone but the unctious Rush Limbaugh, who called her "the White House dog" in 1992 on his TV show.

Chelsea was 12 in 1992. These women are adults in college. If Chelsea was photographed falling down drunk today (or just falling down), I think the tabloid press would have a field day with it.

posted by rcade at 10:46 AM on March 9

But then in July 2001 he says:

Limbaugh once described a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton as "the family dog." Any abuse he gets as a result of being horizontally disproportionate is well-deserved.

posted to MetaFilter by rcade at 10:23 AM on July 16, 2001

Amazing how Chelsea was 12, then 13.

And this from Lionel Rolfe on "The American Reporter" (cached on google):

Limbaugh never was a very appetizing guy. He started out in radio as a "shock jock" - in the tree-heavy small-town environment of California's state capital, Sacramento. That was way back in the '80s. He would trade insults with his listeners - nothing overtly political, in those days. All very hokey and small town. He was a very mean spirited guy - the kind of guy who you'd expect to kick a cripple, and a lot of his political spiel is the equivalent of that. Nonetheless, his blustery style proved a perfect match for his Right-wing politics. So much so that he got rich when his spiel hit national radio in the 1990s. He adopted the politics of greed and mean.

He got off to a good start by calling Amy Carter, daughter of President Jimmy Carter, "the most unattractive presidential daughter" in the history of the country. But that was just a warmup. When Chelsea Clinton came along, he turned into some strange sort of stalker and he really outdid himself. When Chelsea was 16, he did a gag on his television show with the Clinton's White House dog, clearly meant to say what a dog she was. Ha. Ha.

And this:

Now, my dear neo-conservatives, how about recalling the truly disgusting things said about Chelsea Clinton when she was just beginning her adolescent years? (Rush Limbaugh called her "The White House Dog" on November 6, 1992, when she was TWELVE) Are you willing to take ownership for that, just as you are demanding liberals take ownership for cheap shots against the Bush children?

How about recalling something that did happen?

And this:

"Limbaugh plays hardball partisan politics, and like so many of his fellow pundits, he sticks pretty close to the conservative party line, hacking it up with the best of em. He played a particularly dirty game during the Clinton years, taking aim not only at Bill Clinton, but at the entire Clinton family.
Apparently, as vicious as his smear campaign was, it wasn't vicious enough unless he attacked a unwitting child, showing a picture of 13-year-old Chelsea on his television show, and announcing it was a photograph of "the White House dog."


Now I suppose if I hadn't called them drunken sluts (which is untrue because they are) and instead called them the "white house dogs" you would have been all fine with that!

Posted by Redneckville at 2007-07-02 02:33 PM

"Oops" is right. Try reading the transcript of what really happened.

website statistics

Friday, July 13, 2007

Arch Hall, Jr. in The Choppers (1961)

An Arch Hall, Jr. Drive In JD Classic! The Choppers! (1961). Arch plays the head of a gang of teen kids who strip cars for it's parts.

Also see, Arch Hall, Jr. and Ray Dennis Steckler Reunion

Labels: , , ,

website statistics

Friday, July 06, 2007

Hitler Gets Banned By Microsoft (From Xbox Live)

Hitler Gets Banned (His Ultimate Downfall)

website statistics

Thursday, July 05, 2007

Arch Hall, Jr. and Ray Dennis Steckler Reunion

Other Side Cinema Producers Meet With Arch Hall, Jr., Ray Dennis Steckler

by Mark Terry Number 250

(Vol. 6, No. 1). This edition is for the week of January 3--9, 2005

Other Side Cinema first film in California will be shooting at the end of January. The film is the short super hero comedy "Hooligan's Valley" which shows tribute to the classic Drive-in B Movies of the late 50s and 60s.

From left: Ray Dennis Steckler, Vito Trabucco, Mark Terry, Arch Hall, Jr.

L-to-R: Ray Dennis Steckler and Arch Hall, Jr.

Vito Trabucco and I started the group back in 2002 with our now cult feature "B-Movie: The Shooting of Farmhouse Massacre" a mockumentary poking fun at how poor the B Horror movie market is today. Since that time the group as evolved adding members such as producers, Shelby McIntyre, Lenny Lenox, and editor, Travis Stoffs.

In creating "Hooligan's Valley" writer, Vito Trabucco, wanted to get permission to use the classic song "Twist Fever" from the Arch Hall Jr. movie "Wild Guitar." (1962) The problem for me as a producer is where to begin for a movie that is over 40 years old.

After a three month search and going through a who's who list of Fairway Films members I finally got a hold of Arch Hall Jr. and scheduled a New Year's Day meeting with Arch in Las Vegas. The meeting was more of a reunion as I coordinated the meeting with Las Vegas local Ray Dennis Steckler. Which marked the first time the two had met since the shooting of "Wild Guitar."

Many interesting stories were told including where Arch knocked out Steckler's back teeth in the on screen fight they had at the end of "Wild Guitar." In addition, talks have begun for future projects involving Arch, Steckler, and Other Side Cinema.

Other Side Cinema would like to thank Tom Weaver and Michael Gingold of Fangoria, Elizabeth Snyder and Alan O'Day for all their help in making this possible.

"Hooligan's Valley" is set to shoot in late January and then will play film festivals through out the country. Please visit for more information.

For those who don't know who Arch Hall, Jr. and Ray Dennis Steckler are, google it. I'm just too tired to go into any lengthy explanations. :-)

Also see, Arch Hall, Jr. in The Choppers (1961)

Labels: , , , , ,

website statistics

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Trying To Sneak In To See The 1984 flick "Police Academy"

I sat through "Where The Boys Are" five times. Unfortunately it wasnt the original 1960 film (which is a good one), but the crappy 1984 remake produced by Allan Carr (who also produced one of my favorite films of all time, "Grease").

At the time I was going to the movies at least once a week with my friend. I'd take the bus into his neighborhood, and most of the time we'd go to one of the movie theaters near him (occasionally we went to a theater outside his neighborhood, because sometimes certain flicks werent playing near where he lived).

Now, we were both big time movie buffs. On the weekends we tried to see everything that was newly released, regardless of the quality. Usually I would arrive at his apartment before we would head off to the theater. But this time we agreed to meet in the theater, and we agreed to see the movie remake of Where The Boys Are. I arrived at the theater, bought my ticket and went inside to see the film. The first show came and went and my friend didnt show up. So I began to sit through it a second time. During the second showing, I went downstairs to the lobby area (the movie theater had 4 screens. Two downstairs and two upstairs) to use the pay phone to call up my friend to see what was holding him up. I called him and as it turned out, he decided not to come to the theater at all.

I was pretty disappointed, and was making my mind up to go home when I noticed that in one of the theaters downstairs, there was CONSTANT and EXPLOSIVE laughter coming from the audience. The movie they were watching was the first "Police Academy" film. Judging from that audience laughter alone, it was clear that the movie they were watching was a thousand times better and funnier than the dreck I just saw.

So, instead of going home, I decided to see Police Academy. Problem was that I had no money for another ticket. Nothing except for my bus fare home. So, I decided to try to sneak in to see Police Academy. Problem with that is the theater management seemed to sense that it being such a popular film, the other theater patrons like me might be tempted to sneak in, so they stationed a female usher, an old biddy in her 50s-60s, right at the entrance of the theater. Everytime someone would try to walk in, she would stop them and ask to see their ticket stubs to make sure that they bought a ticket for that particular movie. (The other three theaters they left completely unguarded)

I decided to stick around with the thought that she couldnt stand there forever. Sooner or later she would have to leave her station for one reason or the other. Naturally, I just couldnt stand there in the lobby all afternoon long waiting for that. I would draw too much attention to myself. So I went back upstairs to Where The Boys are, watched the rest of it till it ended, went downstairs with the rest of the audience, saw that the old usher was STILL there, guarding Police Academy from being seen by people who didnt buy a ticket. I stood there in the lobby and watched the Police Academy audience file out after that movie ended, and the old woman usher still stood there.

I went back upstairs to wait for the third show of Where The Boys Are to start. After a few minutes of the movie, I went back downstairs to see if the old usher was still there. Yep, she was. All throughout the third showing, every so often I'd go downstairs to check to see if that old biddy of an usher finally left the Police Acadmey entrance unguarded. Nope, she stood her ground. So, I stayed through the 4th and 5th showing of Where The Boys Are, doing the same through both showings: Going downstairs every so often to see if I could sneak into Police Academy. Not a chance. That old woman usher stuck to her post like a Marine on guard duty. After the 5th showing of Where The Boys are (and the final showing for the day), Police Academy ended pretty much at the same time. So, now I was forced to leave the movie theater as it was closing for the evening.

And as I exited the theater to go home, I looked over my shoulder to see if she was still there. Sure enough she was. (As if anyone was going to try to sneak in now). The last thing I saw of the theater as I was walking out was that old woman standing her ground, practically daring anyone to slip by her.

I told my friend about the explosive laughter coming from that part of the theater, and the part about me trying to sneak in, the usher on guard, etc. His response was that "we gotta see that movie". So a couple weeks later me and my friend did get to see Police Academy in that very same theater, and guess what? That SAME old lady usher was guarding that very same movie! She asked to see our ticket stubs (yes, which we paid for), we showed them to her and she let us in. We liked the movie so much, we stayed to see it a second time.

Labels: ,

website statistics

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?