Davis wrote a semi-autobiographical NOVEL. FYI: a novel is a work of fiction! In this regard, Davis’s book is like Samuel Clemens “Roughing It,” in that they were both written under pseudonyms that were also fictional characters in their stories. According to Wikipedia:

“Samuel Clemens wrote autobiographical novels under the pseudonym “Mark Twain,” including “Roughing It,” which “follows the travels of young Mark Twain through the Wild West during the years 1861–1867. After a brief stint as a Confederate cavalry militiaman, he joined his brother Orion Clemens, who had been appointed Secretary of the Nevada Territory, on a stagecoach journey west. Twain consulted his brother’s diary to refresh his memory and borrowed heavily from his active imagination for many stories in the novel.”

In both cases authors used pseudonyms to publish autobiographical novels that were “fictionalized but still based upon actual occurrences.” In both cases these novels presented fictionalized adventures of their pseudonymous characters.

Does anyone claim that the adventures of “Mark Twain” literally occurred in the life of Samuel Clemens, because “Mark Twain” said they happened? If not, then why should anyone claim that the adventures of Bob Greene literally occurred in the life of Frank Marshall Davis, because “Bob Greene” said they happened? Fair weather principles indicate bias.

If there is any fault in this analysis, please advise. Thanks!

“Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.”
– Abraham Lincoln

Reihl is referred to as a right-wing hack because that’s what he is. All by himself. Because he makes a bad joke doesn’t mean that “the right” is a bunch of assholes, even though he is in some sense part of “the right”.

http://michellemalkin.com/

doing the reporting about voter fraud that the MSM won’t do.

African Americans comprise a relatively small minority in this country. They were subject to centuries of viscous racism, which lasted until fairly recently–a black man in his 60 today experienced segregation and the civil rights movement as an adult. And they’re still underrepresented in most of our powerful institutions–Barack Obama, AFAIK, is the only sitting US senator who is black, there are less than half a dozen black CEOs in Fortune 500 companies, etc.

The GOP, on the other hand, represents roughly half the country, has owned the white house for the last 8 years, and until recently, also had control of congress. During this time, they’ve started 2 wars, appointed 2 justices to SCOTUS, spent a couple trillion dollars, and danced around the notion that they have the right to indefinitely detain and possibly even torture American citizens.

So yeah, I’ll leave it to you to figure out which of these groups receives “political protection” and which perhaps actually should.

When that Seinfeld guy “Kramer” went off on a black heckler, that made the news.

But Bernhard. yawn.

Why?

Oh, I know why. The first was an attack on a politically protected class. The second is ok because “conservatives” are not politically protected. And the sideswipe of blacks (how else can you describe Bernhards suggesting Palin would get gang-raped in Harlem as anything other than a racist smear?), well thats OK in this case because the ultimate target is a “conservative”.

Finally,

Matt D sure proves my point.

I’m not going to indulge you in this much, but I will say…

1) I’m not sure why it is that the entirety of “the left” is obligated to condemn the rantings of a has-been performance artist like Bernhard.

2) As for “the left” condemning people, I’m pretty sure that both the Clintons, Geraldine Ferraro, Joe Biden, Jerimiah Wright, and Bill Ayers have all been roundly chastised for their dumb statements and/or possibly racist statements.

3) If Malkin gets accused of being a racist, it’s probably because she’s a xenophobic jingoist who wrote a fucking book defending WWII internment camps.

THIS is considered comedy to America’s authoritarian Right. Remember folks, these are the same “tough guys” that claim they will save us from terrorists, gangsters and drug dealers! But in the next breath, they make light of a possible case of child sex abuse. I believe Bill O’Reily at one point theorized that a victim of a kidnapping/molestation in Missouri may have “liked it,” so perhaps these nuts aren’t the crime fighters they claim to be. Instead they are encouraging the stigma attached to sex abuse that I thought was fading in our more “enlightened” times. Heroes one and all!

My point was that the left claims Michelle engages in hate speech when she is not even while ignoring actual hate speech from Bernhard.

It IS the “left” that is IGNORING the viscious hate speech (amply demonstrated by Bernhard) that has been going on for the past 8 years, while now decrying of course as RAAAAACIST! any criticism of BO.

It seems the “left” only thinks its “hate speech” if its uttered by the “right” (Malkin, etc etc), even when its not even “hate speech”. The “left” (including the BO campaign, the Clinton campaign, the Democratic Party etc) hasn’t seen fit to condemn a single person like Bernhard, even those who are a little better known, for anything. All the while “left” has been visciously attacking Bush, Rice, now Palin with the most egregious smears and personal attacks.

Yet a comment like that above by Riehle (and I have no idea who he is) is somehow worthy of note. Admittedly, it is Radley’s comment, so perhaps he thinks Riehle is worthy of note. My comment is by no means reflected at him.

Rather it is directed at the response to the post such as -

“Truly, their hypocrisy knows no bounds.” by Danno49 above, obviously referring to the “right”, as Radley refers to Riehle as a “right-wing hack”.

Excuse me while I choke on the REAL hypocrisy, served up daily by the “left”.

No, its not “the left” doing anything. It’s Bernhard, all by herself.
“The left” or “the right” don’t do anything and I am sick of people saying so. Individuals on one side or the other say all kinds of crazy things, but that is all it is, individuals saying things. There is no central committee of the left or right getting together and deciding what kind of horrible nonsense they are going to say this week.

Well, I mean more like, what is the actual joke Riehl is making. I understand he’s trying to make one, I just don’t get it. I mean, if Obama pronounced Pakistan as Pack It, Stan, okay, maybe there’s a buggery joke there. But he pronounces it Pocky Stahn, doesn’t he? So what’s the joke?

No Matt you are not. I caught the humor in it as well. Reihl is seemingly poking the Enquirer in the eye with a stick, not attempting to bash “the one”. Joyner and Henley seem to be acting as if it’s all true and jumping onto the PC wagon of talking heads on any 24/7 news channel.

I get into this with my brother all the time. Any time I criticize his hero, Bill O’Reilly, he reacts with something about Keith Olbermann, as if the mere existence of Keith Olbermann excuses O’Reilly’s bullshit. I think Olbermann is an arrogant, smug, sanctimonious prick; that doesn’t mean I support Bill O’Reilly, whom I find to be a lying, whiny douchebag.

I’m envious of those of you who’ve never heard of Riehl. He’s featured regularly on Fox News, but then again, so is Debbie Schlussel, who is another reprehensible human being.

Other than a part inThe King of Comedy (a sadly overlooked Scorsese film), being one of the voices in Shogun Assassin and dipping her tongue into Madonna’s stench trench 20 years ago, Sandra Bernhard hasn’t done anything worthy of the public’s attention… except give Michelle Malkin something to whine about.

Maybe if Malkin does enough investigation, she can turn up some damning comments by the actor who played Skippy on Family Ties…

How exactly is the media ignoring Sandra Bernhardt equivalent to Obama having bodies in his house? I didn’t even know Sandra Bernhardt was still alive. Why should anything she says be of any import? She wasn’t funny when she was mildly well known, why should she be reported on when she is less funny and less known?

Maybe we should dig up the corpse of Fatty Arbuckle and ask if he’d rape Michelle Obama, if he says yes and the press chooses to cover the fact that Fatty Arbuckle’s corpse can talk instead of the fact that he’d be willing to rape Michelle Obama your gentle sensibilities will be soothed by the elimination of the double standard of ignoring inconsequential events.

We have a story here that of Radley says -

“There are now suggestions that the man may have molested Obama. I don’t have much to say on the story itself. If true, it’s awful.”

Obama has never claimed he was molested. So, we really don’t have a story now do we?

But Bernhards “jokes” are just “over the line”?

Give me a break. What a double standard.

I swear, if we found 2 bodies in a freezer in BO’s house 40% of the population would still vote for him and the press would ignore the story.