This from the infamous AMC .
Friday, October 31, 2008
Salon's Max Blumenthal Smears Zennie, Having Smeared Sarah Palin's Friend Steve Stoll
If you regularly check out my blogs or videos, you may remember my interview with Steve Stoll, who was presented in a Salon website article on "Sarah Palin's Right Wing Mentors " as a member of the John Birch Society.
Well, when I created a blog post with the Salon article as a base , Stoll saw it on Google and -- having pretty much had it with this Salon article getting repeated all over the place online (just Google "Steve Stoll palin ") -- contacted me. After some back and forth, Stoll agreed to talk to me via video -- I agreed to give Stoll a platform to present his case.
In doing so, Stoll got to clear his name, which was pretty much dragged through the mud in the article. First, he's not a member of the John Birch Society and is a Barack Obama supporter. He's not the weird guy that Max and his co-writer David Neiwart painted him as. Stoll's mentioned all over the place in the article, as if they talked to him.
They never did.
So I was happy to make the video. And Steve was happy too. But then today, I have this public comment exchange with an "mblumenthal" -- Max Blumenthal...Which Max starts off with this:
And on that matter, I am happy to present you with an equal time on video. But also it's good to think about it from Steve's point of view. I think the story would have been just as powerful without him.
Stoll misleads and the ever-credulous Zenni enables. I left numerous messages for Stoll, giving him to opportunity to respond to John Stein's allegations. He never called back. My co-author, David Neiwert, not only called Stoll at least ten times, he appeared at his home to query him. Stoll never called back or came to the door. We reported Stein's allegations as allegations, not facts. Stoll, meanwhile, hid from the light of day. Further, he won't address his sabotage of John Cooper and Stein.
Moreover, I guess you have to throw me into the "Chris Matthews" category because he was able to "draw out" Michelle Bachmann and let her fall on her own sword; such is the power of video. It's a different medium. I did draw out Steve. Those words are his. I'm proud of that. Also I Steve mentioned that you called him.
"Stoll misleads and the ever-credulous Zenni enables." -- it also reads as if you have formed a view of Steve without meeting or knowing him. That's not good at all. I've talked to many people on my video who's views I do not agree with. But I give them a platform so that we can be informed. You imply that you did not attack Stoll's character, then turn around and do so. Geez, man.
Here's my point: Max -- in this exchange -- seemed to me to have a kind of axe to grind regarding Steve Stoll. Max says he wasn't trying to smear him, then goes right ahead and does that in the public comments. Moreover, if you look at the article, it does not report Stoll as "perhaps" or "maybe" having done something, it's written as if it was fact.
I offered Max the chance to allow me to video his point of view.
I'm still waiting Max.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
NFL EXPANSION-Will there ever be another team in Los Angeles?
NFL EXPANSION-Will there ever be another team in Los Angeles?
By Dr. Bill Chachkes-managing partner Football Reporters Online
You can be sure that at one of the next few owners meetings, the subject of expansion will come up again. There is just too much money to be made, and too many fans to attract not to consider expansion. Why some owners complain the expansion would “dilute” the product is beyond me. The NFL is About two things: Making money and entertaining it’s fans, in that order.
Let’s look back for a bit. That last time there was true expansion was 1995, when Carolina and Jacksonville came into the NFL to bring the total of teams to 30. I don’t count the Houston Texans because they were replacing a franchise that moved (the Oilers) to Tennessee and became the Titans, Just like the return of the Cleveland Browns in the early part of the new century replacing the original Browns after they moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens. So there is your brief history up to now.
Oddly enough, the second largest television market in America still does not have a team, Los Angeles. The Rams moved to St. Louis when it’s owner complained to the league and the commissioner that they could not make money in L.A. with an outdated stadium (the coliseum was built for the 1932 olympic games). The owners begrudgingly agreed to allow the move. So the question remains” will Pro Football ever return to L.A.? There have been whispers in recent years of different investment groups who claim to be interested, but nothing has ever come to fruition. A second stumbling block has been Raiders owner Al Davis claims of infringement on his territory. Last time I looked at a map, Oakland was about 500 miles north of Los Angeles. Sorry Mr. Davis, but when you moved back to Oakland, you lost the right to make that complaint.
Other Investment groups have stated that without a new stadium project in place or at least major upgrades to the current venue. With the tightening economic troubles, monetary support from the local government will be minimal if at all. So it turns into a case of “Who” will step forward to lead an investment group. California’s “Governator” has said that a “replacement” franchise is important for the continued growth of the Greater L.A. area. A new team could draw 2 Billion dollars of new income to the local economy. By contrast, the return of The Browns generated nearly 1 billion dollars to the local Ohio economy, and it continues to grow.
Balance that with the cost of buying into the NFL (Dan Snyder paid 800 million to the Cooke family for the Redskins, currently they are worth nearly 1.5 billion) and you have an instant formula for success.
The NFL however, never rushes into anything. As a business, they desire to expand two cities at a time. If California get’s it’s 4th team back in L.A., where will the other team go?? San Antonio? Salt Lake City? Las Vegas? Portland? With the sagging economy needing a fix, could any of those cities really support an NFL team? Well, Vegas could, and San Antonio might, but the others are doubtful. The fans sure want more teams, and so do the players and coaches, because it would mean more jobs. But with the end of the current CBA just on the horizon, expansion just might be on hold for the time being.
By Dr. Bill Chachkes-managing partner Football Reporters Online
You can be sure that at one of the next few owners meetings, the subject of expansion will come up again. There is just too much money to be made, and too many fans to attract not to consider expansion. Why some owners complain the expansion would “dilute” the product is beyond me. The NFL is About two things: Making money and entertaining it’s fans, in that order.
Let’s look back for a bit. That last time there was true expansion was 1995, when Carolina and Jacksonville came into the NFL to bring the total of teams to 30. I don’t count the Houston Texans because they were replacing a franchise that moved (the Oilers) to Tennessee and became the Titans, Just like the return of the Cleveland Browns in the early part of the new century replacing the original Browns after they moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens. So there is your brief history up to now.
Oddly enough, the second largest television market in America still does not have a team, Los Angeles. The Rams moved to St. Louis when it’s owner complained to the league and the commissioner that they could not make money in L.A. with an outdated stadium (the coliseum was built for the 1932 olympic games). The owners begrudgingly agreed to allow the move. So the question remains” will Pro Football ever return to L.A.? There have been whispers in recent years of different investment groups who claim to be interested, but nothing has ever come to fruition. A second stumbling block has been Raiders owner Al Davis claims of infringement on his territory. Last time I looked at a map, Oakland was about 500 miles north of Los Angeles. Sorry Mr. Davis, but when you moved back to Oakland, you lost the right to make that complaint.
Other Investment groups have stated that without a new stadium project in place or at least major upgrades to the current venue. With the tightening economic troubles, monetary support from the local government will be minimal if at all. So it turns into a case of “Who” will step forward to lead an investment group. California’s “Governator” has said that a “replacement” franchise is important for the continued growth of the Greater L.A. area. A new team could draw 2 Billion dollars of new income to the local economy. By contrast, the return of The Browns generated nearly 1 billion dollars to the local Ohio economy, and it continues to grow.
Balance that with the cost of buying into the NFL (Dan Snyder paid 800 million to the Cooke family for the Redskins, currently they are worth nearly 1.5 billion) and you have an instant formula for success.
The NFL however, never rushes into anything. As a business, they desire to expand two cities at a time. If California get’s it’s 4th team back in L.A., where will the other team go?? San Antonio? Salt Lake City? Las Vegas? Portland? With the sagging economy needing a fix, could any of those cities really support an NFL team? Well, Vegas could, and San Antonio might, but the others are doubtful. The fans sure want more teams, and so do the players and coaches, because it would mean more jobs. But with the end of the current CBA just on the horizon, expansion just might be on hold for the time being.
A quick question for MN Senator Norm Coleman
Norm, my friend, if you don't answer this before election day it's going to look like you're worried the answer would ruin any hope you have of re-election. Don't you want to get this out of the way before your debate Sunday night?One quick answer, Senator? How do you respond to allegations that Nasser Kazeminy funneled a lot of cash to your wife? Do you realize that pretending you can't hear the question makes people think you know there's a real basis to the lawsuit?
OK, you're right; there was more than one question there.
109-Year-Old Daughter of a Slave Casts Vote for Obama
Amanda Jones, 109, the daughter of a man born into slavery, has lived a life long enough to touch three centuries. And after voting consistently as a Democrat for 70 years, she has voted early for the country's first black presidential nominee.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
No On 8 v. Yes On 8 Oakland Culture War Update Video
This is an update of my first video on a clash between supporters of state Prop 8 and those opposing it. I went back to the same MacArthur and Lakeshore corner featured in the first video.
Barack Obama : American Stories, American Solutions
This is the "informercial" which I watch and had to say I was moved by it. It was less about Barack Obama than it was about different people in America and their common stories. It wasn't what I expected; much better. But I was looking for Barney Smith. Remember him? He was the man who, at the Democratic National Convention, said "They've got a plan to help Smith Barney, but what about Barney Smith?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)