And now the song that we all need when liberals give us their holier than thou BS(Sung to the tune of Dixie)

The Harvey Weinstein Liberal Pervado song or :  Look Away

Oh, Way out West in Hollywood City,
Harvey Weinstein liked ’em oh so pretty
Look away, look away, look away Liberal Land.

For 30 years he set upon ’em,
Promised them roles that led to Oscars,
Look away, look away, look away liberal Land.

But Democrats got millions, Hooray! Hooray!
For progressive causes he came through
He ponied up, so they let him screw.
away, away, so they could do what’s best
look away, look away, What’s one girl more or less?

♫ Planned Parenthood it had a gala
& Harvey was their favorite fella
They Looked away, Looked away Looked away
Liberal Land ♫ 

♫ He sat with Hillary, ole Bill’s striker
next to him, Harvey was a piker
They looked away, looked away looked away
Liberal land 

 So liberal men feared nothing,
Hooray! Hooray!
Old Bill & Harvey got a pass
So Conyers dropped Trou and Franken grabbed ass
All day, all day, without media oversight
They looked away, away, Because they voted right. 

 ♫ So silence was the media rule
As long has Hollywood came through
Look away, look away, look away, media land

  Talk Magazine got Harvey’s adoption
And press they got their own script options
and Looked away! Looked away! Looked away!
media Land.   

  They killed off any story
each day, each day
They kept out of the public eye
The foibles of these liberal guys
Away away, there would not be a peep
No one would say, that these guys were all creeps  

♫ Before them all there was ole Ted
Who left that lady cold and dead
Look away, look away , look away liberal land
To not one was a question posed
(Though they all sat with Charlie Rose)
Look away look away look away liberal land 

♫ Then Trump won the election
No Way! No Way!
And just like that the dam it broke
Where once was silence victims spoke
away away, all of it was exposed
each day, each day another story broke 

 At CBS worked Charlie Rose
Who liked to take off all his clothes
Look away, look away look away liberal land.
At the NYT There was no rush
To part ways with their man Glenn Thrush
Look away look away look away liberal land  

At NBC was Halpren
No way, no way
And once all of the stories blew
We found that everybody knew
All day, all day, The press had no regrets
They dared not say, they had their own secrets 

♫S o when media or libs do lecture
That they stand as all girls protectors
Turn away, turn away, turn away from liberal land
Note they cared not for a women’s plight
With predators checks and votes in sight
Go away, go away go away liberal band 

 ♫ And feminists stayed silent, just say, just say
You tell them all where they can go
If on you they try to impose
Away away, back to their devil den.
Away Away You won’t be fooled again 


I know I left out plenty of liberal donors et/ all from the lyric but this song is already long enough as it is.

Via JohnWiskeyman.Wordpress.com

Brock:  And those are the facts, Madam Chairman. 
Mena:  Does that conclude the evidence? 
4th Doctor: Evidence? Evidence? You couldn’t hang a hat on that. 

Doctor Who  The Leisure Hive 1980

PM James Hacker: Nobody knows it’s not true. Press statements aren’t made under oath

Yes Prime Minister A Victory for Democracy 1986

Harry Faversham: One moment, sir. Your famous account of Balaclava’s not accurate, you know.
General Burroughs: Not –
Harry Faversham: Not accurate, sir.
General Burroughs: Not accurate?
Harry Faversham: No, sir.

The Four Feathers 1939

One of the smartest sayings I’ve ever heard was this: There are three sides to every story, your side, my side and the truth.

There is how you remember events, how I remember events and how events actually took place. Sometimes we get them right, sometimes we get them wrong. Sometimes a particular piece of an event stands in our memory, other times over the years they get embellished from repeated retelling and human nature being what it is, such stories as they change never tend to make us look worse they always tend to make you either look better or make yourself the object of pity.

The best example I can think of this is the classic and slightly comic, scene from the ending of the classic 1939 move the Four Feathers (the start of which I quoted above) where Harry Faversham, to eliminate the final feather of cowardice given to him, corrects the General’s record on the story hehas been repeatedly telling all through the film:

Harry Faversham:  Let me recall the position. Out of the way, Peter. Here are the Russians, behind the walnuts. Guns. Guns. Guns. Here’s the British Infantry. The thin red line. [dips finger in the red wine and draws a line on the table] Here’s the commander in chief. [places an apple on the table] And here are you… [puts a pineapple down on the table] at the head of the old 68th, correct?
General Burroughs:  Absolutely.
Harry Faversham:  You were riding a horse called Caesar, which my father sold you… because, fine horseman though he was, he could never hold him himself.
General Burroughs:  Quite right. Quite right.
Harry Faversham:  Then, according to your story, you said… “The 68th will move forward. “
General Burroughs:  Quite right. Quite right.
Harry Faversham:  Yes, sir. The trouble is, you never said it.
General Burroughs:  – Ne –
Harry Faversham:  You never said it, sir.
General Burroughs:   Never said it?
Harry Faversham: No, sir. You never had time. At that moment, my father told me, Caesar – uh, Caesar – Caesar… [puts a spoon under the Pineapple ] startled by a stray bullet, took the bit between his teeth… and dashed straight at the Russian lines. Away went Caesar, away went you, away went the 68th…away went the commander in chief, away went everybody… and another magnificent mistake was added to an already magnificent record. But nobody ever said, “The 68th will move forward. ” Unless it was the horse. Come on, sir. Own up.
General Burroughs: Well, well, well, well, after all these years, it’s rather difficult to remember all the details… but… confound the boy!
I shall never be able to tell that story again!

Harry Faversham:  [Turns to the General’s daughter] Ethne, your feather.

This is why body cameras are such a good idea for police, as it gives an accurate (if occasionally incomplete) sequence of events without favor to either the police officer or the suspect (the later being the reason why the left, having insisted on them for year suddenly as a problem with them).

And that brings us to the difference between the allegations against Roy Moore and Al Frankwn, Bill Clinton, John Conyers and Harvey Weinstein.

With Charlie Rose we have an apology.  With Al Franken, we have photographic evidence and an apology.  With Harvey Weinstein we have decades of large cash settlements, with representative John Conyers we have investigations and settlements paid out.  In all those cases there were admissions of guilt or payments to settle claims made.

That leaves Bill Clinton who repeatedly denied what was going on until two things took place:  He was forced under oath when Paula Jones launched her sexual harassment suit, and the physical evidence of the semen stained blue dress was produced.  Confronted with these two things Bill Clinton came at least partially clean.

So in other words in all of the cases above we have one or more of the following:

  1.  An admission of guilt
  2.  Settlements paid
  3.  Investigations by a competent body
  4.  Physical evidence of wrongdoing
  5.   Accusations made under oath.

What do we have in the Roy Moore case?  None of these things.  No admission of guilt, no settlements paid to accusers, no investigations made by a competent body.  The entire body of physical evidence is an old yearbook signature that the lawyer of the claimant not only refuses to release for examination but admits she has not even asked her client if she saw Mr. Moore sign said book,

As for accusations, we have plenty of people saying all kinds of things from the Icky to the criminal but all of these statements have one thing in common.

None of them are part of a complaint to the authorities,  none of them have been made as part of a civil suit, none of them have been made as responses to investigations in progress or as testimony before a competent body.

Or put simply none of them have been made under oath.  Nobody from the man claiming they had to watch Moore near cheerleaders to the woman making the accusation of assault at age 14 have been willing as of this writing to make such claims under oath either in the form of a civil or criminal complaint or as sworn testimony concerning them.

They have no hesitation to tell all kinds of narratives to the press or on TV, but not if there is the slightest hint of legal jeopardy from perjury or even the much smaller crime of filing a false police report or the slightest chance that said narrative would be challenged by cross examination or evidence to counter it.

Now as I’ve repeatedly said, if Roy Moore is lying I think he should be toast, even if it means the temporary loss of a senate seat in Alabama (after all the if the GOP won’t pass the bills they promised with 52 votes being down to 51 won’t make much of a difference).   On this point I differ with some of my friends on the right. Furthermore it is not out of the realm of possibility that one of those five conditions might be met concerning Roy Moore before election day.

But until I see that happen I will not only continue to support Moore’s campaign for the senate but will call out the dishonorable left/media for lumping Roy Moore with the increasing numbers of proven reprobates from the Harvey Weinstein left based on ephemera.

Update: Linked by old friend Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit, and by the folks at Canon 212 who I would ask to pray for me. Thanks much both of you.


If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

There is, apparently, more to this crime than it would seem, and it may sound like a hollow defense, but in Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.

Tom Shales

Yesterday yet another Hollywood a-lister became a casualty in Hollywood’s sudden reversal in the culture war since the election of Donald Trump:

Actor Anthony Rapp: Kevin Spacey Made A Sexual Advance Toward Me When I Was 14
The Star Trek: Discovery actor says women speaking out about sexual misconduct in the entertainment industry has compelled him to come forward about the Oscar winner.

Stacy put out a tweet to try to defuse the issue fast:

He also played the coming out as Gay card which might not have the oomph it once did.

As I’ve noted before none of these things take place if Trump is not elected but as we see the latest statement from a Hollywood A lister apologizing for something that apparently everyone knew about but wouldn’t talk about until the Trump era, the dam could have broken years ago.  After all remember Dylan Farrow?

What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.

So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?

Ask yourselves why during the Obama years none of those folks who knew about Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacy backed her up or choose that moment to speak out?

Update:  Apparently the MSM hss decided that one high profile A list democrat friend of the Clintons in Hollywood being exposed as an abuser is enough:

Media Downplays Kevin Spacey Child Molestation Allegation, Focus On Sexuality in Headlines

Why on earth would reuters, People, the New York Daily News and ABC choose to lead with Spacey’s orientation and not the accusations against him, let me give you a clue

If only he was a catholic priest I suspect the focus’ of those pieces would have been quite different.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

I think that a photo of a sinkhole captures the mood of this topic.

by baldilocks

… than Harvey Weinstein? Yes, it’s possible.

The flurry of sexual harassment and assault allegations against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein confirms an unsettling truth that deep down we already knew. There’s a reason “casting couch” has become a grotesquely ubiquitous term. We have long quietly assumed that big-time movie producers exploit their power to sexually exploit women. We should have heeded the warning signs. The smoke has been there for a long time. Of course the faint plumes were evidence of a fire raging, a fire we both did not imagine and yet knew was burning.

An overload of metaphors, but you get the idea. Heck, I knew about this a long time ago. But, the abyss is much deeper and darker.

In 2011, former child star Corey Feldman warned that pedophilia in Hollywood was “the big secret” and “the number one problem.” Feldman alleged that he was abused and that his friend was raped on a movie set at the age of 11. But he didn’t just talk about instances of abuse. In a later interview, he described a system whereby young children were groomed by powerful older men who formed an organized network, with “publicists” providing cover. He would “love to name names,” but feared the legal risks, he said.

Precisely such an organized system for grooming and abusing children is described by a documentary; one molester described in the film pleaded no contest to two counts of child molestation, but the rest of the network has never been named, let alone investigated or charged. The title of the documentary? An Open Secret.

I’m about half-way through the documentary right now – recommended to me on the advice of a friend.

Most of us know that there are unspeakably hideous things going on in this world, but because the perpetrators of these things hide themselves so well, it’s easy to ignore the dirt, even if the slime is part of the financial foundation of a city.

But no one is surprised. We saw how often child stars became screwed-up adults and wondered who screwed them (up).  The words of Corey Haim and of Elijah Wood were just confirmation.

Meanwhile, Harvey Weinstein has completed his “sex addiction” therapy. I don’t even want to know what that entails, but I’d say that he addressed the wrong addiction.

He’s addicted to power and pride and if pride and power could be snorted or shot up, he would have been doing that and so would all the others.

Too bad they can’t. A lot more people would be able to sleep at night.

(Thanks to Dave Perkins)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

dtg at work
As a rule anything that Don Surber writes interests me but this piece concerning Senator Robert Menendez and underage hookers…

Democratic Senator Robert Menendez is on trial for taking bribes from a Florida eye doctor, who committed $105 million in Medicare fraud.

Among the payoffs to Menendez were trips to the Dominican Republic, where he may have slept with underage hookers, federal prosecutors said.

I am not saying he is guilty, but he is a supporter of Hillary — just as perverts like Bil Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Tony Weiner are.

…brought back a few memories.

It reminded me of this piece at DaTechGuy blog in 2012:

Any person who thinks democrat women who still kneel and worship at the altar of Bill Clinton are going to care about Bob Menendez paying for sex from women in the Dominican Republic has not paid attention to the Democrat party and where they have gone in the last 15 years.

I have no doubt as long as Mendenez votes the way Ms. Ledbetter and the media wants she and they will have absolutely no problem with any thing he does with any woman.

And this one from January 2013

I suspect this was the strategy of Senator Robert Melendez as he appeared on ABC’s THIS WEEK two days after news of the FBI investigation of a sexual scandal involving underage Dominican Hookers broke.

Alas for the Senator ABC News’ Martha  Raddatz totally foiled that strategy by cleverly choosing to refuse to ask a single question on the subject 

oh and this one also from Jan 2013

The senator’s alleged underpayment of these young ladies apparently was an effort to limit the degree of their victimhood.

Furthermore his continued silence on the matter in the face of a FBI investigation is clearly an effort by the senator to keep the embarrassment of these young ladies victim status away from the national press

and this from March of the same year:

CNN in fact didn’t touch the story until they could spend twenty minutes attacking it. At the Washington Post the Sunday of CPAC a long story defending Menendez appeared. The very suggestion that these outlets would be part of a conspiracy to frame Menendez when they’ve done their best to ignore the guilty pleas in New Jersey concerning dirty money is so laughable it’s a wonder anyone would make them.

Or rather it would be laughable to anyone who knows how US media is.

Plus one from 2015 noting why Menendez was suddenly of interest to a Democrat partisan “Justice” department

Menendez was defending Israel and expressing suspicion of Iran long before this month.  The Kirk Menendez Amendment putting sanctions on Iran dates from 2011 Why were his speeches and critiques not enough to cause a break?

That’s actually easy. He wasn’t expendable then.

Before Barack Obama’s re-election in 2012 a high profile hispanic was vital. Before the 2014 with the prospect of control of the senate hanging by a single seat, every person with a “D” next to their name was vital.

And even a few weeks ago with the first test of the Democrats ability to shake down Mitch McConnell & John Boehner it was vital to make sure there was party unity.

But now that all the elections are over, now that the amnesty money is secure and now that the Democrat party knows that 41 united democrats can bend Republican leaders like a yoga instructor Robert Menendez becomes expendable.

And this final retrospective piece from 2015 noting Stacy McCain’s coverage

While some like Robert Stacy McCain covered the scandal in some depth, it being 2013 a year the democrats still hoped to keep the Senate Gavel in Harry Reid’s hands and Martha Raddatz being Martha Raddatz didn’t find the War on underage Women theme newsworthy enough to ask Senator Menendez about it:

and drawing this conclusion:

The Mainstream media first priority is, and will always be serving the needs of the Obama administration in particular and the Democrat party in general.  No story from the Planned parenthood protests to crime involving people with the wrong perp victim racial or religious mix is going to be considered national news if it contrary to any liberal meme.

Or put let’s put it another way.  If Robert Menendez had been a Republican when this story broke in 2012 the media and the left would have forced his resignation the fact that five years later a solid newsman like Don Surber is still writing about this story concerning Menendez as a sitting senator tells you that just because the left is running from Harvey Weinstein the protect Democrats at all costs meme is still going strong.

Oh and always trust content from DaTechGuyblog


Normally you would see my tip jar pitch here and while I would encourage to at all times to hit said jar I’d like to pitch the GoFundme campaign of old friend conservative journalist Warner Todd Huston or rather his son whose campaign to raise money to replace his father’s car that was torched by “parties unknown” is, as of this writing,  still six grand short

Of course if you want to do that and still hit DaTipJar




Or subscribe


Choose a Subscription level



or buy my book

I’m fine with that too.

There has been a lot written about the silence of various people on the Harvey Weinstein business but there is one point that nobody seems to be interested in making.

Harvey Weinstein was a powerful man, he was a connected man. He knew Hollywood actors, journalists and pols. He had decades of success in the industry and became a powerhouse within it.

As a producer it is very likely that he was aware of all kinds of issues concerning his films, concerning stars, concerning journalists that might have an impact on his bottom line. It’s also very likely that he not only had such info on journalists and pols but might have even enabled such people in activities that they might not want made public.

This is my opinion the reason for the current silence by some and the long history of silence by others

So let me end this short post with an obvious question:

At what point does it become more profitable to Weinstein to share this three decades of info with the public than to keep silent now that everyone his going after him?

It is the answer to that question that terrifies hollywood most of all.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

An interesting followup to yesterday’s post suggesting that if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 Harvey Weinstein would not today be exposed as the man he has been for years.

Two days ago just as I arrived for work Red Sox left fielder Andrew Benintendi hit a two run homer off of Astro Ace Justin Verlander making his first relief appearance ever giving the Sox a 3-2 lead in the bottom of the fifth of game 4 of their series. I walked in smiling and when I told my lead the score, at he confidently predicted an Astro win so we bet a candy bar on the result.

Yesterday I was running late and found myself, thanks to Houston’s late comeback rushing into Shaw’s in Leominster to buy the bar to pay off that bet. I found myself stuck in a line behind a woman who was visiting her daughter who had just had her first child. The conversation in the line and with the cashier was Trump vs Mexico. At this point I interjected, “Well consider this, if Donald Trump isn’t elected there is no way that Harvey Weinstein is exposed by the NYT as he was a vital ally and fund raiser for Hillary Clinton.” The cashier agreed that this was true but the woman ahead of me had a slightly different take, while she agreed with my premise she stated quite emphatically: “Still isn’t worth it.”

Given that Mr. Weinstein preyed on woman (which she was) I found that opinion interesting and as I was leaving it hit me that not only would her daughter be of the age that Weinstein would go after but there is no reason to believe that if that new grandchild of hers wanted a career in movies a Harvey Weinstein or someone like him, would in 15-18 years be making the same demands on her if she wanted to get ahead in the business.

This is how crazy the left has become, a liberal women so dislikes Trump that she would have been willing to not only let Weinstein’s crime be unexposed and unpunished but would have been OK with him being allowed to obtain new victims for the sake of keeping him Trump of the White House.

So for those who you Hate Trump but are outraged over Weinstein I have two questions for you:

Would the price of Weinstein never being exposed have been worth it to you if it meant Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the first question is yes: At what number of new women victimized by Mr. Weinstein would that price become too high?

I think these two question really give this story the perspective it deserves don’t you and I’d love to see a roving reporter asking these question to a bunch of women’s studies majors at liberal universities across the nation wouldn’t you?

I’ll give the last word to Thomas Wictor


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia
An important point needs to be made concerning the continuing exposure of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual crimes and the finger pointing of leftists over the wall of silence.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected none of this would have come out.

Do you think for one moment that the NYT which had killed the Weinstein story once already would have dared to move forward knowing that a friend an ally of Mr. Weinstein was in the White House, running the justice department etc etc etc. Would they have dared to expose a story that would have crippled a Hillary Presidency?

I think not.

Every single woman who now has the courage to come forward about Weinstein owes Donald Trump the man they hate, the man they demonized, the man they did all they could to defeat, a huge thank you because without his election there is no Times story and they do not have the ability to openly say the truth about Weinstein.

And I submit and suggest that every one of us in the new media on the right should remind them of this fact every single day.

Update:
A question for the Hollywood left and feminists: Even if it meant that Harvey Weinstein was not exposed and would still preying on women do you still wish Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 instead of Trump and why?


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

That’s what we all do when we sin in any way. We go to confession with a firm purpose of amendment and start over with God’s help.

Fr. Z

An important point to make concerning Weinstein / Murphy et/al

Harvey Weinstein and his enablers who knew what was going on have at the very least been a cads and at worst has violated the law.  Furthermore his very pubic backing actions as a champion of liberal women’s causes ring hollow given his actions.  The various fallouts from these actions, financial, legal and social that will him and those who enabled him all are on them and are not unjust.

Congressman Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania finds himself in a similar situation in terms of reputation.  One the one hand portraying himself and running as a champion of the pro life cause while pushing abortion on his mistress when she turned up pregnant.  Murphy is of course not facing any criminal jeopardy as these actions are not unlawful but he has been forced to resign as his voter base is rightly disgusted at this immoral behavior.

However that is only half of the equation.

In eternal terms Mr. Weinstein’s and his enablers sins and former Congressman Murphy’s are in the same boat.  They have sinned but Jesus Christ has paid the price for them said sins thus they are subject to the ,  same binding and loosing power of the Church that Christ granted his disciples.

If Mr. Weinstein and/or Congressman Murphy has actual constriction for their sins and possess a sincere purpose of amending their ways, they can repair the break between them and God and through the ministry of the church be absolved of those sins, meaning that while they might be subject to criminal, civil or social penalties here on earth the’d be on the right track eternally.

That’s the great thing about the church regardless of the nature of man, we can always get another chance, if we’re willing to ask.

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia

At first glance it’s looks like the Harvey Weinstein story, from a journalistic standpoint  seems more and more like the John Edwards Story, where liberal journalists were uninterested in telling a story that might harm their allies

An explosive scandal had been kept out of the press for months at a time when the man at the center of it was an important player in national politics. Why? Young thought it was because the Edwards camp so tightly controlled information that journalists weren’t able to find sources to corroborate the Enquirer’s reporting. Perhaps that was part of it. But the fact was, many editors and reporters just didn’t want to tell the story. They admired Elizabeth Edwards. They saw no good in exposing John Edwards’ sordid acts.

Journalists saw no good in exposing the sordid acts of a former, senator, vice presidential and presidential candidate.

And while there is certainly a bit of that in the Weinstein story the more I think about it the more it seems that this was all about capitalism in the Tina Brown vein.

About five years ago I did a series of piece of Tina Brown at Newsweek and Salon and her ability to coax millions out of liberals for magazine empires that never seemed to make a buck:

Unless I’m missing something all that happened is an attractive blond managed to convince some man into spending a lot of money to stake her in a business, she used said business to enhance her reputation and when she proved unable to succeed in it dumped it on the first sucker willing to take it off her hands.

It looked a lot like liberal were willing to throw away money to advance liberalism 

Alas, there’s only one Tina and probably lots of would-be media moguls out there with millions of dollars to throw away on glitzy media operations. Send me an e-mail and we’ll do lunch.

But if you decide instead to hit Vegas and blow your millions on blackjack and hookers, I’ll understand.

A while back a few of us thought that if liberals were willing to play angels to advance liberalism conservatives should think about it too:

Jimmie has calculated — and I agree with his calculations — that you could run a pretty spiffy little conservative New Media operation for $500,000 a year if you knew what you were doing. But the problem is connecting (a) people with $500,000 to (b) people who know what they’re doing in terms of online news.

If you grant that Jimmie and I are correct about this estimate, do the math yourself: For the $4 million that the permatanned RINO Charlie Crist collected during that single three-month span of 2009, you could fund eight spiffy little New Media operations for a year (or four such operations for two years). And FEC contribution limits do not apply to people making “investments” in news operations, so that the rich Republicans would not be restricted in their generosity toward New Media, as they are toward political candidates.

Soros has figured this out. Rich Republicans have not.

…figuring it would be a better investment than say 15-30 mil on  Luther Strange

But all the arguments that folks like us were a better investment than a Tina Brown presumed that the motive for such investments were to advance ideas rather than sheer capitalism.  For the establishment a guy like Strange was an investment in keeping the gravy train, a very capitalistic motive and as Stacy McCain noted yesterday the whole “liberal angel” thing with Weinstein seems to be all about capitalism too. (emphasis mine)

Rebecca Traister of New York magazine recounts her own confrontation with Weinstein’s violent abusive behavior — her called her an epithet and shoved her boyfriend down the steps at a party in 2000. She tries to explain why Weinstein’s behavior was never previously reported, including the fact that “there were so many journalists on his payroll, working as consultants on movie projects, or screenwriters, or for his magazine.” Talk magazine, with Tina Brown as editor, was published 1999-2002: “The cover story of the debut issue was an interview with Hillary Clinton.” In less than three years, Talk lost an estimated $50 million. This was simply another aspect of Weinstein’s power. He was willing to throw away money on a slick magazine with a big-name editor in order to buy influence among journalists. And guess what? It worked. Contrary to their own smug opinions of themselves, the journalistic elite aren’t the most ethical people on the planet.

That fifty million makes a whole lot more sense now.  Apparently this wasn’t a question of spending money as a “liberal angel” helping the cause of women, gays  and the left, it was paying the price for being a “lecherous devil” buying off journalists who readily decided their silence  was worth it for the job, the office, the prestige, the access , the parties etc etc etc all the while telling themselves they were fighting to save the world from the evil conservatives who were trying to oppress women et/al.

This was sheer unadulterated Capitalism and apparently Mr. Weinstein got his money’s worth for decades.

Update: accidently put a gallery from a previous post at the bottom and fixed two sentences with redundant words.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)