Archive for February, 2013


Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Ever since the horrific Newtown incident, there have been many conversations about guns and gun control, the 2nd Amendment, and how best to prevent a similar tragedy. And oftentimes, the discussions get pretty darned heated. There are some gun owners out there who are VERY passionate about guns. A little too passionate, at times… as if there is something deeper going on there… some of the folks seem to think that taking their gun away is the equivalent of, well… stealing their wife or girlfriend.

Or, it’s the equivalent of taking their manhood away. LITERALLY taking it away, as in being castrated.

In perhaps one of the most unintentionally honest statements ever made, especially by a politician, Illinois state Representative Jim Sacia (R) compared individuals having their guns taken away to being castrated.

Sacia was attempting to form an analogy when he made the egregious statement. He represents a rural part of Illinois, so he was griping about Chicago politicians and citizens who are trying to pass a bill that would eliminate assault weapons, which he asserted would be unfair to the rest of Illinois.

“Here is the problem in Illinois,” he said on the House floor. “I love you folks in Chicago. You’re the ones that have the problem, you have a runaway gun problem. Don’t blame the rest of us. This isn’t about Democrats, it’s not about Republicans. It’s because Chicago wants a warm fuzzy. ‘Let’s pass a bill that will eliminate assault rifles.’ Last year there were more people killed with hammers than with assault rifles.” He continued,

Here’s an analogy folks, I ask you to think of this. You folks in Chicago want me to get castrated because your families are having too many kids. It spells out exactly what is happening here. You want us to get rid of guns.

When another lawmaker accused Sacia of being out of order, the Illinois Republican insisted it was an analogy, explaining:

“If you’re having too many kids, you want me to get castrated. That was an analogy to show how silly this is.”

Apparently, Sacia made the same logical error that many other gun lovers make – that “banning assault rifles” means “ban ALL guns!”

At any rate, we’re glad that someone in the public spotlight has finally admitted that guns and manhood are linked together.

See the video in all of its hilarity below.

Story is located here

Why is the recovery so anemic? Obama needs to take on 2 Republican lies

Tuesday, February 26th, 2013

The White House must directly rebut the two big lies that fuel the Republican assault – and that have fueled it since the showdown over the debt ceiling in the summer of 2011.

The first big lie is austerity economics – the claim that the budget deficit is the nation’s biggest economic problem now, responsible for the anemic recovery.

Wrong. The problem is too few jobs, lousy wages, and slow growth. Cutting the budget deficit anytime soon makes the problem worse because it reduces overall demand. As a result, the economy will slow or fall into recession – which enlarges the deficit in proportion. You want proof? Look at what austerity economics has done to Europe.

The second big lie is trickle-down economics – the claim that we get more jobs and growth if corporations and the rich have more money because they’re the job creators, and job growth would be hurt if their taxes were hiked.

Wrong. The real job creators are the broad middle class and everyone who aspires to join it. Their purchases keep economy going.

As inequality continues to widen, and income and wealth become ever more concentrated at the top, the rest don’t have the purchasing power they need to boost the economy. That’s the underlying reason why the recovery continues to be so anemic.

Story is located here

What if buying a gun had the restrictions that abortions have been handed lately

Tuesday, February 26th, 2013
From the Stephanie Miller Facebook page-
From Listener Judi (Had lots of requests to post this):

Gun owners keep saying you can’t compare driving & insuring a car to gun ownership and I agree.

Gun ownership is a constitutionally protected right, but so is my right to an abortion! In state after state my constitutional right to an abortion is being severely restricted. So why can’t we impose those same restrictions on gun owners in sta

tes that choose to do so?

1. There will be only one place in the state where you can buy a gun.

2. Once you arrive at the state’s one gun store, you will be required to walk past a gauntlet of anti-gun protesters.

3. Once inside, you will fill out all the paperwork which includes every detail of your personal information and then wait 72 hours “to think about your decision” before actually being allowed to purchase the gun.

3. You will be shown a graphic video of people of all ages who have been injured or killed by gunshot wounds while having a state licensed agent explain to you the dangers of guns along with the statistics for gun injury and deaths.

4. You will submit to a mental health “sonogram”, otherwise known as an evaluation.

5. Finally, when you return in 72 hours, you will again walk past the gauntlet of anti-gun protesters when you arrive to pick up your gun and again when you leave with your gun.

6. you will submit to rules 1-5, EVERY TIME you want to purchase a gun.

From the Stephanie Miller radio show.

Geraldo Rivera could be the least insane nut at FOX News…could be

Monday, February 11th, 2013

Fox News Channel hosts Eric Bolling and Geraldo Rivera went at it on Friday morning on Fox & Friends over what appropriate action the federal government should take to limit future incidence of gun violence. The two battled over the impact gun ownership has on crime, the appropriateness of allowing semi-automatic weapons in private hands, and how logical it was for supporter of the Second Amendment justify gun ownership on the grounds that they are protecting themselves from a future tyrannical government.

Rivera said he thought there would be some reform after the Newtown massacre, but he thinks it is unlikely that assault-style weapon would be banned — although, he would support such a ban.

Bolling took issue with the term “assault-style,” saying that he had to distinguish between semi and fully automatic. Rivera made the point that semi-automatic weapons were just as deadly as machine guns and that he was not making that distinction.

Rivera said he “would debate” whether there is a personal right in the constitution to ban semi-automatic weapons.

“You realize what you’re saying,” Bolling said.

“You don’t hunt with an AR-15,” Rivera replied.

Alisyn Camerota referenced a graphic which showed the violent crime rate decreasing inversely with gun ownership over the last twenty years. Rivera agreed, saying that the solutions he is advocating for are merely an attempt to keep guns “out of the hands of nut jobs.”

Bolling and Rivera exploded again when Rivera said that he found it ironic that individuals who claim to be patriots are so deeply suspicious of their government that they feel the need to arm themselves against it.

Rivera went on to say that there is no study suggesting that gun ownership results in a safer society. Bolling again referenced the graphic from earlier, saying the correlation between decreasing crime and gun ownership is clear.

“Do you agree that crazy people shouldn’t have access to guns,” Rivera asked pointedly.

“Absolutely,” Bolling replied. “Arming people with — sane people — with handguns and rifles, makes the community a lot more safe.”

Video is located here

Why the GOP is and will continue to be the party of white people

Monday, February 11th, 2013

ith Barack Obama sworn in for a second term—the first president in either party since Ronald Reagan to be elected twice with popular majorities—the GOP is in jeopardy, the gravest since 1964, of ceasing to be a national party. The civil rights pageantry of the inauguration—Abraham Lincoln’s Bible and Martin Luther King’s, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s swearing in of Joe Biden, Beyoncé’s slinky glamor, the verses read by the gay Cuban poet Richard Blanco—seemed not just an assertion of Democratic solidarity, but also a reminder of the GOP’s ever-narrowing identity and of how long it has been in the making.

“Who needs Manhattan when we can get the electoral votes of eleven Southern states?” Kevin Phillips, the prophet of “the emerging Republican majority,” asked in 1968, when he was piecing together Richard Nixon’s electoral map. The eleven states, he meant, of the Old Confederacy. “Put those together with the Farm Belt and the Rocky Mountains, and we don’t need the big cities. We don’t even want them. Sure, Hubert [Humphrey] will carry Riverside Drive in November. La-de-dah. What will he do in Oklahoma?”

Forty-five years later, the GOP safely has Oklahoma, and Dixie, too. But Phillips’s Sunbelt strategy was built for a different time, and a different America. Many have noted Mitt Romney’s failure to collect a single vote in 91 precincts in New York City and 59 precincts in Philadelphia. More telling is his defeat in eleven more of the nation’s 15 largest cities. Not just Chicago and Columbus, but also Indianapolis, San Diego, Houston, even Dallas—this last a reason the GOP fears that, within a generation Texas will become a swing state. Remove Texas from the vast, lightly populated Republican expanse west of the Mississippi, and the remaining 13 states yield fewer electoral votes than the West Coast triad of California, Oregon, and Washington. If those trends continue, the GOP could find itself unable to count on a single state that has as many as 20 electoral votes.

It won’t do to blame it all on Romney. No doubt he was a weak candidate, but he was the best the party could muster, as the GOP’s leaders insisted till the end, many of them convinced he would win, possibly in a landslide. Neither can Romney be blamed for the party’s whiter-shade-of-pale legislative Rotary Club: the four Republicans among the record 20 women in the Senate, the absence of Republicans among the 42 African Americans in the House (and the GOP’s absence as well among the six new members who are openly gay or lesbian). These are remarkable totals in a two-party system, and they reflect not only a failure of strategy or “outreach,” but also a history of long-standing indifference, at times outright hostility, to the nation’s diverse constituencies—blacks, women, Latinos, Asians, gays.

But that history, with its repeated instances of racialist political strategy dating back many decades, only partially accounts for the party’s electoral woes. The true problem, as yet unaddressed by any Republican standard-bearer, originates in the ideology of modern conservatism. When the intellectual authors of the modern right created its doctrines in the 1950s, they drew on nineteenth-century political thought, borrowing explicitly from the great apologists for slavery, above all, the intellectually fierce South Carolinian John C. Calhoun. This is not to say conservatives today share Calhoun’s ideas about race. It is to say instead that the Calhoun revival, based on his complex theories of constitutional democracy, became the justification for conservative politicians to resist, ignore, or even overturn the will of the electoral majority.

Story is located here

Ronald Reagan supported gun restrictions

Sunday, February 10th, 2013

“I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”

~Ronald Reagan, at his birthday celebration in 1989.

Story is located here

Guns don’t kill people…kinda.

Friday, February 8th, 2013

They’re right…guns don’t kill people. In fact, bullets actually don’t kill people either.

Hell, even when you combine the two, they can’t kill anyone..unless someone uses them.

The same can be said for grenades, tomahawk missiles, nuclear weapons, battleships, torpedoes, rocket launchers. Guess we should all have easy access to these as well, right?

Because the stance from these all or nothing gun advocates is essentially… the tool isn’t the problem, people are the problem. Why “punish” people who obey the law because of a few that don’t.

Well, unless you people have the magic secret that has finally solved the issue of violence within the human species, especially towards one another, then it’s probably more sensible to focus on limiting the access to tools which increase the likelihood of violence, rather than making it easier for those who wish to use them maliciously to actually gain access.

Now, if you want to say our Second Amendment gives us right to own any “arms” we want, well then you have to believe our First Amendment should have no limitations as well. You would then have to support the right for anyone to scream “bomb” in an airport or on an airplane. After all, it’s freedom of speech, right? Clearly stated in our First Amendment.

Or maybe we just need to use common sense with some of these issues, rather than using arguments that make good bumper stickers.

Story is located here

Separate but Equal is a FRAUD

Thursday, February 7th, 2013

England approved Gay Marriage. 

Video is located here

Power of prayer flunks an unusual test

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

In the largest study of its kind, researchers found that having people pray for heart bypass surgery patients had no effect on their recovery. In fact, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications.

  1. Researchers emphasized that their work can’t address whether God exists or answers prayers made on another’s behalf. The study can only look for an effect from prayers offered as part of the research, they said.

They also said they had no explanation for the higher complication rate in patients who knew they were being prayed for, in comparison to patients who only knew it was possible prayers were being said for them.

Critics said the question of God’s reaction to prayers simply can’t be explored by scientific study.

The work, which followed about 1,800 patients at six medical centers, was financed by the Templeton Foundation, which supports research into science and religion. It will appear in the American Heart Journal.

Story is located here

Here is Some Legitimate Science on Pregnancy and Rape

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

Unfortunately, it is rather normal to be a survivor of sexual assault if you are female. One out of six women in the United States have been the victim of rape or attempted rape, and that is using a rather tight definition that does not include many kinds of assault victims can experience. 64,080 women were raped in the US between 2004-2005. Sixty four thousand and eighty. That’s tens of thousands, not just thousands. In one sample of college-aged men, one in sixteen men admitted to raping women they either knew were too intoxicated to give consent, or they used physical force. Among these men who readily admitted to rape but had never been arrested or convicted, they committed an average of six rapes each and proudly described their sexual exploits to the interviewer (Lisak and Miller 2002).

How frequently do raped women get pregnant? It would seem from Akin’s comment that this is a very rare occurrence. However, current evidence suggests it is the same as the pregnancy rate for a single act of intercourse. Ergo, pregnancy from rape occurs as frequently as pregnancy from consensual sex.

A lot of people are citing the Holmes et al (1996) paper that found a 5% pregnancy rate among rape survivors from 12 to 45 years of age. This is a great study that performed several telephone interviews with 4008 participants over three years to determine rates of rape (413 individuals experienced 616 completed rapes, a lifetime incidence of over 13% in this sample) and rates of pregnancy from rape (20 were reported from 19 individuals, or 5%).

In a separate study, Wilcox et al (2001) draw from their amazing prospective dataset from the 1980s where they asked women who were trying to conceive to collect urine every day. They were able to detect hormones, and thus pregnancies and fetal losses, because of these daily urine collections. Work on this dataset from Wilcox, Baird, and others represents the gold standard for our understanding of early pregnancy, fetal loss, and the timing of implantation in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. In this paper, the authors are able to show what the possible pregnancy rates are for a given day in the menstrual cycle, taking into account the normal variation many women experience in the length of their cycle and timing of ovulation:

Story is located here

A Westboro Baptist Church member….a FAMILY member leaves the flock for failure of logic by the cult.

Wednesday, February 6th, 2013

 “My doubts started with a conversation I had with David Abitbol,” she says. Megan met David, an Israeli web developer who’s part of the team behind the blog Jewlicious, on Twitter. “I would ask him questions about Judaism, and he would ask me questions about church doctrine. One day, he asked a specific question about one of our signs—‘Death Penalty for Fags’—and I was arguing for the church’s position, that it was a Levitical punishment and as completely appropriate now as it was then. He said, ‘But Jesus said’—and I thought it was funny he was quoting Jesus—‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’ And then he connected it to another member of the church who had done something that, according to the Old Testament, was also punishable by death. I realized that if the death penalty was instituted for anysin, you completely cut off the opportunity to repent. And that’s what Jesus was talking about.”

To some, this story might seem simple—even overly so. But we all have moments of epiphany, when things that are plate-glass clear to others but opaque to us suddenly become apparent. This was, for Megan, one of those moments, and this window led to another and another and another. Over the subsequent weeks and months, “I tried to put it aside. I decided I wasn’t going to hold that sign, ‘Death Penalty for Fags.’” (She had, for the most part, preferred the gentler, much less offensive “Mourn for Your Sins” or “God Hates Your Idols” anyway.)

What “seemed like a small thing at the time,” she says, snowballed. She started to question another Westboro sign, “Fags can’t repent.” “It seemed misleading and dishonest. Anybody can repent if God gives them repentance, according to the church. But this one thing—it gives the impression that homosexuality is an unforgivable sin,” she says. “It didn’t make sense. It seemed a wrong message for us to be sending. It’s like saying, ‘You’re doomed! Bye!’ and gives no hope for salvation.”

She kept trying to conquer the doubts. Westboro teaches that one cannot trust his or her feelings. They’re unreliable. Human nature “is inherently sinful and inherently completelysinful,” Megan explains. “All that’s trustworthy is the Bible. And if you have a feeling or a thought that’s against the church’s interpretations of the Bible, then it’s a feeling or a thought against God himself.”

This, of course, assumes that the church’s teachings and God’s feelings are one and the same. And this, of course, assumes that the church’s interpretation of the Bible is infallible, that this much-debated document handed down over the centuries has, in 2013, been processed and understood correctly only by a small band of believers in Topeka. “Now?” Megan says. “That sounds crazy to me.”

In December, she went to a public library in Lawrence, Kansas. She was looking through books on philosophy and religion, and it struck her that people had devoted their entire lives to studying these questions of how to live and what is right and wrong. “The idea that only WBC had the right answer seemed crazy,” she says. “It just seemed impossible.”

Story is located here

Native American Shuts Down Anti-Illegal Immigrant Protest: ‘Y’all Are All Illegal!!!’

Tuesday, February 5th, 2013

Pushing a toddler in a stroller, a rightfully irritated self-identified Native American began yelling at the group, saying:

“Y’all f*cking illegal. You’re all illegal. You’re all illegal!

“We didn’t invite none of you here!

“We’re the only native Americans here.

“That’s right. We’re the only native Americans here. Y’all are all illegal. We didn’t invite none of you! We didn’t invite none of you here. Get on, get on, get on with your bogus arguments.”

Visibly shaken, an unfortunate protestor quickly found himself in the cross hairs of the unexpected lesson when the Native American turned his attention toward his diminutive flag and now-increasingly inappropriate sign:

We should have put that sign up when you son of the b*tches came!”

“That [the flag] represents blood, that represents blood spilled by Native Americans protecting this land from the invaders. Yeah, that’s right, you don’t want to hear the G*d damn truth! Get on, b*tch! All the Native Americans you killed, you plant your houses here. That’s the truth.”

Video is located here

Is inequality killing us? New report shows that shorter lives and poorer health will ultimately harm the US economy

Tuesday, February 5th, 2013

What do high Gini coefficients and diabetes, regressive taxation and cardiovascular disease, and low minimum wages and respiratory ailments have to do with each other? More than most people—even physicians and economists—may think.

It’s not news that economic inequality in the United States has sharply increased during the last 30 years. It’s also not news that super-sized soft drinks, the easy availability of assault weapons, and the lack of health insurance for 49 million people are tragically cutting many American lives short.

What could be big news is that inequality in the United States may be a factor contributing to Americans’ poorer health, especially compared to Western Europeans, Japanese, Canadians, and Australians. According to a massive new report by the National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, “U.S. Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health,” the United States ranks dead last among 17 rich countries in life expectancy and at or near the bottom in nine key health indicators, ranging from infant mortality, obesity, and heart disease to homicides, chronic lung diseases, and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

Story is located here

FOX NEWS says Alabama hostage taker had a “bunker”, patrolled his property with a flashlight and gun and listened to Conservative radio a lot

Monday, February 4th, 2013

This guy sounds like what Glenn Beck describes…..

Neighbors described Dykes as a man who once beat a dog to death with a lead pipe, threatened to shoot children for setting foot on his property, and patrolled his yard at night with a flashlight and a firearm. Michael Creel said Dykes had an adult daughter, but the two lost touch years ago.

The Dykes property has a white trailer which, according to Creel, Dykes said he bought from FEMA after it was used to house evacuees from Hurricane Katrina. The property also has a steel shipping container — like those on container ships — in which Dykes stores tools and supplies.

Next to the container is the underground bunker where authorities say Dykes is holed up with the 5-year-old. Neighbors say that the bunker has a pipe so Dykes could hear people coming near his driveway. Authorities have been using the ventilation pipe to communicate with him.

Michael Creel said Dykes kept to himself and listened a lot to conservative talk radio.

“He was very into what’s going on with the nation and the politics and all the laws being made. The things he didn’t agree with, he would ventilate,” he said.

James Arrington, police chief of the neighboring town of Pinckard, put it differently.

“He’s against the government, starting with Obama on down,” he said.

Morris Dees of Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, a group that tracks hate crimes, said Dykes was not on the group’s radar.

Although the fatal shootings in December at a school in Newtown, Conn., are still on everyone’s mind, Dees said he doesn’t think Dykes was trying to be a copycat.

“Probably not. He had a whole bus load full of kids, and he could have walked up there and shot the whole crowd of them,” he said.

“I think he’s just a really angry and bitter guy with some anger management issues,” Dees said. “He is just against everything — the government and his neighbors.”

The mother of the 5-year-old boy is ‘hanging on by a thread,’ said a local politician who visited the woman.

State Rep. Steve Clouse, who represents the Midland City area, said the mother told him that the boy has Asperger’s syndrome as well as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD.

Residents are praying for the safe return of the boy.

“The community is real concerned,” said Fred McNab, mayor of Pinckard, Ala. “You can tell by the food that’s been carried over there to the church. It’s just devastating. We want it to come to a resolution. We want to save that little child.”

Story is located here

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Monday, February 4th, 2013

In 10 of the past 12 quarters, total government spending and investment has fallen, dragging down the Obama economy. That’s in large part because state and local cutbacks have been so severe, but it’s also because federal spending and investment has, on the whole, been falling since 2010.

That made me curious: How does government spending and investment during Obama’s first term compare to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush’s first terms? … Whereas total government spending dropped in 10 out of the 16 quarters that comprised Obama’s first term, it rose in 13 out of Reagan’s first 16 quarters, and 13 out of Bush’s first 16 quarters.

Or, to put it differently, over Obama’s first term, falling government spending and investment snipped, on average, .11 percentage points of GDP off of (annualized) quarterly growth. During Reagan’s first term, it added .68 percentage points, and during Bush’s first term, it added .52 percentage points.

…these graphs simply establish a basic fact about Obama’s term: While deficits have indeed been high, government spending and investment has been falling since 2010. This is, in recent presidential administrations, a simply unprecedented response to a recession. Just for fun, I took Obama’s GDP growth, netted out the effect of government spending and investment, and then added the total government spending and investment numbers — which include state and local government — from Reagan’s first term. The result is a significantly better economy, with growth since 2010 averaging 3.2 percent rather than 2.4 percent.

Story is located here

Dangerous gun myths

Monday, February 4th, 2013

But there is a more fundamental problem with the idea that guns actually protect the hearth and home. Guns rarely get used that way. In the 1990s, a team headed by Arthur Kellermann of Emory University looked at all injuries involving guns kept in the home in Memphis, Seattle and Galveston, Tex. They found that these weapons were fired far more often in accidents, criminal assaults, homicides or suicide attempts than in self-defense. For every instance in which a gun in the home was shot in self-defense, there were seven criminal assaults or homicides, four accidental shootings, and 11 attempted or successful suicides.

The cost-benefit balance of having a gun in the home is especially negative for women, according to a 2011 review by David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Far from making women safer, a gun in the home is “a particularly strong risk factor” for female homicides and the intimidation of women.

In domestic violence situations, the risk of homicide for women increased eightfold when the abuser had access to firearms, according to a study published in The American Journal of Public Health in 2003. Further, there was “no clear evidence” that victims’ access to a gun reduced their risk of being killed. Another 2003 study, by Douglas Wiebe of the University of Pennsylvania, found that females living with a gun in the home were 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than females with no gun at home.

Regulating guns, on the other hand, can reduce that risk. An analysis by Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that in states that required a background check for every handgun sale, women were killed by intimate partners at a much lower rate. Senator Patrick Leahy, the Judiciary Committee chairman, has used this fact to press the case for universal background checks, to make sure that domestic abusers legally prohibited from having guns cannot get them.

As for the children whose safety Ms. Trotter professes to be so concerned about, guns in the home greatly increase the risk of youth suicides. That is why the American Academy of Pediatrics has long urged parents to remove guns from their homes.

The idea that guns are essential to home defense and women’s safety is a myth. It should not be allowed to block the new gun controls that the country so obviously needs.

Story is located here

A Debunking of Pseudo-Historian David Barton’s Book on the Second Amendment

Sunday, February 3rd, 2013

Barton gives no source for his story about those gun-toting kids of the 1850s saving their teacher, making that story impossible to fact check, but many of the other things he’s been saying can be checked. This is because they’re based on quotes that can be found in his 2000 book, The Second Amendment: Preserving the Inalienable Right of Individual Self-Protection, which, of course, contains a plethora of those footnotes he’s famous for.

Barton begins his book with the typical arguments — the all-or-nothing argument that people who support gun control laws think that only the police and the military should be able to have guns, and the argument that any laws whatsoever regulating an individual’s right to own guns are unconstitutional.

Barton divides the historical quotes he uses in his book into four chapters — I. Early Legal Commentaries, II. Views of the Founding Fathers, III. Early Legislative Acts, and IV. State Constitutions — saying:

Story is located here

Bill Maher- the Right Wing talkers are CON MEN and FRAUD PERPETRATORS on Gullible people

Saturday, February 2nd, 2013

Friday night during “New Rules” on Real Time with Bill Maher, Maher exposed right-wing pundits for the schemes that they use to pull in an audience and rake in millions of dollars. He warned liberals not to get too excited about the departure of Sarah Palin from Fox News because she’s now open to doing whatever scheme she wants under no contract but herself. Explaining himself, Maher singled out Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh in particular.

Maher described when Beck left Fox News he took his ”patented brand of apocalyptic race baiting” online where he was able to charge $9.95/month to those who subscribed earning him upwards of $80M last year alone.

Story is located here