Well, I haven't ranted in a while...
EDIT: All right, so I got less angry and change my list up a little bit. It's amazing what sleep during finals week will do to one. I took off Rick Reilly, Trent Lott, Chuck Colson, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, and Tom DeLay. I also gave credit to a few good of Goldberg's decent picks. I also added a few more that Goldberg idiotically victimized.
I think I’ve been pretty respectful lately. I’ve been pretty soft-spoken in terms of politics. Sure I'm reading the New York Times daily. And cringing. But in terms of my Xanga etiquette, I’m not pointing out the obvious mess that is going on in Iraq right now. I’m not freaking out that Israel is posing to attack Iran. I'm disheartened, but not yelling, "REVOLUTION" at the Austrialian violence that targets Arabs (and I'm still growing my beard as best as my boy face can).
And most importantly, I still find hope because there are good, honest gentlemen like Harold Pinter in the world today. Thank God for them. But you know what pisses me off? Do you know at what point, I stop being silent, and I stop being "polite"? It's when some washed up, excuse for a journalist, with an unfortunate amount of political leverage calls the men and women that I admire, men and women who are screwing up America.
I know I'm about five months late on this one, but the man that I am describing is Bernard Goldberg. His wrote the entirely irrelevant books about a liberal bias in the media: "Bias" and "Arrogance". And has recently, last July, written a book called "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37)". Now, before I go on, I found the title of the book pretty amusing. It's clever and kind of daring. Perhaps he should've put himself at #37. That would've been amusing, I think.
In some ways, I should see how he victimizes among the best people in the United States as a good thing. In fact, I would kill to be on his list. If he felt that I was threatening his idea of what America should be so much so that he would include me on an arrogant, out-of-context, and ignorant list--I would be honored. But that's me.
Before I continue this rant, don't assume that I disagree with all the people on Mr. Goldberg's list. For example, Rick and Kathy Hilton rank at 100, and these corporate fat cats have given birth to a women who feels like getting objectified is an honor. It's just gross. I also find including a women like Barbara Streisand (91) or an artist like Eminem (58) pretty amusing, if inaccurate. Now, I don't have any kind words about Ms. Streisand. But as an avid music-listener, I can honestly say, that a man like Eminem has done much less damage to the music industry than a band like The Killers, The Mars Volta, or Franz Ferdinand. I also agreed with his placement of Latrell Sprewell (30) on the list, and I'm sure I would support him if he put one Terrell Owens or Ron Artest on his list. Overpaid athletes that threaten their coaches and resort to violence to solve their problems are indeed bad examples. They are definitely screwing up America.
Anna Nichole Smith (53) is also screwing up America. But she's not worth the paper.
Ludicris (60), also makes his list. Fine. I'm not a fan of Ludacris, and thanks to some White corporate leaders, he's producing music that stereotypes and damages the image of blacks. With that being said, gangster rappers that promote violence and objectify women should not be tolerated. I might agree with Goldberg on this one. However, if Ludacris was a progressive rapper that discussed issues on injustice in black communities and cried for equality, he wouldn't have been removed from the list, he might have made it much higher on the list. Maybe along with these notable activists: Al Sharpton (12) and Jesse Jackson (4). It's insulting, ignorant, and racist to state that these men are screwing up America. I wonder were Martin Luther King would be on this list if he were still around.
Getting back to Ludacris, like I said, the way he objectifies his "bitches" and "hos" is not admirable in the least. But Mr. Goldberg is no better. Why? Because he also objectifies women. For example, in the very same book, he puts Courtney Love on his list. She ranks at number 95. This is exactly his reasoning to, no more words, no less: "HO." That's it. So, in my opinion, he's just as bad, if not worth than Ludacris.
Now I am off to remotely defend the Democrats that are screwing up America, whom I really dislike as well. All right, notable Democratic politicians that he lists are:
- Ted Kennedy (3; Senator, Massachusetts): All right, this guy's a murderer. That's rough. But he proposes increasing the minimum wage every time he gets. He's one of those Senators that, despite his involvement in the American political system, gives me hope that there are Democrats with reasonable domestic policy. It is outrageous to say he's the third worst person in the United States.
- Jimmy Carter (6; former president): This one blew me away. Jimmy Carter? I'll be honest, I haven't really kept up on Carter's dealings lately. But he doesn't have very much political weight. His biggest mistake is perhaps the Iran hostage crisis that happened about 30 years ago. He also made it really easy for Ronald Reagan to crush him in the 1980 election-maybe that’s why he made the list.
- John Edwards (16; Senator, North Carolina), Al Gore (18; former Vice President): both of these guys are not very defendable, they've done and said a lot of stupid stuff. That aside, I feel like Goldberg simply capitalized on their poor politics. They are not good politicians, or else, they would be in power now. One doesn't lose to George W. Bush because Mr. Bush is a convincing, honest, and decent man. One loses to Mr. Bush because one has no political skills whatsoever. Anyway, it's easy to point the finger at these guys, but they are as crummy as the next politician. Nothing terrible going on here as far as I’m concerned (nothing really good either, though).
- Howard Dean (20; Vermont Governor): This guy is another one like Ted Kennedy. Not perfect, but definitely one of the better Democrats. I think he can do a lot to revitalize the Democratic party and perhaps make it the Democratic Party of Lyndon Johnson or Franklin Roosevelt. The one that starts quagmire wars and dies of Polio, that is.
NOTE: the lack of Clintons in this book blew me away, maybe he forgot about Bill and Hillary.
The "journalist," the journalist, and the publisher:
- Michael Moore (1): Michael Moore is a zealous Democrat, nothing else. He loves the party and that's about it. He makes poorly researched documentaries. But what's good about him? He brings issues to the forefront and makes people who aren't students of history interested in history and current events. For that, I think he's one of the best men that America has within its borders, not its worst.
- Arthur Sulzberger (2): Who's this guy? He's the publisher of the nation's best newspaper: the New York Times. Never mind the editorial content of it. The newspaper does the best reporting in the nation. It really destroys many of the for-profit stereotypes I have about the media. The news is in context, and like the Wall Street Journal, it's all so bland, you know that they aren't trying to sell it. The publisher of the New York Times is very, very important to the integrity of journalism. Without the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the L.A. Times - this nation doesn't have journalism.
- Paul Krugman (8): This one really surprised me. But Krugman isn't exactly a horrifically liberal individual that Mr. Goldberg paints him to be. He's a moderate capitalist, a neo-Keynsian, if nothing else. Sure, he bashes Bush into the ground, but that's to be expected. If you don't like the The Time's editorial pages’ blatant leftist slant (although it does have conservative columnists like David Brooks, Nicholas Kristof, and even Thomas Friedman), target the harsher liberals on their staff: Maureen Dowd (an amazing women), Bob Herbert, or Frank Rich. I don't know why Krugman, a professor and economist, is Goldberg's target.
Goldberg also makes it a point to vilify groups and organizations that lobby Congress to get stuff done. Many of these people are among the most progressive in the United States, this makes them appropriate candidates for Goldberg’s list.
Leaders of activist groups
- Anthony Romero (5; executive director of the ACLU): I’m not a big defender of the ACLU, I think it’s a great institution-one that the American people should support (merely because it heavily supports them). But I’m not denying that its litigations are not the best, but I also believe that it is pretty much the only tool they have been given. The ACLU regularly fights items like the Patriot Act, when authorities are over-stepping their boundaries, and so on. They also tend to defend homosexuals, criminals, and other folks who are voiceless. No one should have an issue with that, if you ask me. Everyone deserves a voice.
- Julian Bond (28; chairman of the NAACP): Unlike the ACLU, I love the NAACP and I think it does some great, great things. Honestly, I think the group is pretty moderate, I recently heard Julian Bond give a speech, and I was impressed by his oration skills, but beyond that I didn’t feel his message was that radical. Black people need to be protected from disenfranchisement, and the NAACP does a great job defending and protecting their rights.
- Ingrid Newkirk (president of PETA): *sigh* This one is hard because I don’t especially respect PETA or its tactics. I think PETA is an important institution, because I believe, ultimately, that animals should be protected from unnecessary pain and torture. That being said, the reason that I’m a vegetarian, and the reason that PETA says I should be are very different things. I am upset that Goldberg is vilifying a well-intentioned organization; but let it be known that I am no supporter of PETA.
The guys above are guys that I expected. You know, Democrats and other partisan individuals, that kind of made me cringe when reading the book. People who I don't really respect, but also people that I don't believe are screwing up America necessarily. But then there are these three men. These guys should be nowhere near Goldberg’s list. They are honest men who deserve the highest of praises from any man who loves democracy.
- Ward Churchill (72): Good old Ward is a professor from the University of Colorado. He's said some wild, wild stuff that pushes the boundaries of free speech. the very least, I love him for that. But he also pushes for American Indian rights like no one else. He's very good in that sense. The American Indians need a good anarchist speaking for them, and while Ward isn't perfect, he is honorable because of that. But that's not why Goldberg thinks he's destroying America. He's thinks that because Churchill wrote a poignant and critical essay of 9/11 on September 12, 2001. He basically argues that the United States had it coming years ago and that the U.S. should not be surprised that it was attacked. The essay, titled, "Some People Push Back" has been made into a book called, "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." They are both worthy of your time. They are among my favorite published works.
- Noam Chomsky (11): This angered me very, very much. Noam Chomsky is an MIT professor and intellectual who has written many works, including, "Manufacturing Consent" and, most recently, "Hegemony or Survival". He is an important American intellectual, and Americans should be happy that he has the knowledge and the guts to criticize American foreign policy the way that he does. He is an amazing writer, is one of the only people that I believe every American needs to read. He's not threatening to the United States - he's entirely crucial to its international respect and its integrity as a nation.
- Jonathan Kozol (9): Now, I can understand Ward's placement, to a degree. I mean the guy has basically encouraged the killing of U.S. military officials. Ouch. That junk ain't easy to recover from. Noam Chomsky? Eh... I'll take it, I understand he's very radical, and that's what I love about him. Conservatives should feel threatened by him. But Kozol? WHAT? I don't know where to begin. Jonathan Kozol is most famously known for his book, "Savage Inequalities". This book criticizes the public education system and spends a great deal of time comparing a poor school district in East St. Louis to a $12,000-per-student district in the suburbs of New York City. When Goldberg calls him an individual who is screwing up America. I see the faces of those children who were simply born in the wrong place and deserve as much money and education as any other student-but they don't get it. Because their parents are poor and they live in a poor area of town. Mr. Goldberg is basically saying that when a man speaks up for these voiceless children, he is screwing up America. I can't tolerate that. And I won't tolerate that. I'm not even mad at this whole situation, I'm genuinely saddened.
Giving credit where it is due:
The following are a list of guys that he included and that I would likely include. There are several others that I agreed with, at least in part:
- Andrew Heyward (13; President of CBS News)
- Paul Eibeler (43; CEO of Take-Two Interactive Software)
- Dennis Kozlowski (44; former CEO of Tyco)
- Ken Lay (45; former CEO of Enron)
- Neal Shapiro (54; NBC News President)
- David Westin (55; ABC News President)
- Michael Savage 61; talk radio host)
- David Duke (66; former leader of KKK)
- Jimmy Swaggart (70; evangelist)
Occasionally, I agree with the name but the not the reason behind it, as is the case for all the media conglomerate presidents. They are destroying America because they are selling America news stories and not fact. They are so afraid of being truthful, that they represent viewpoints and sides that should never, ever be represented. Here's Paul Krugman (Golberg's 8) on the media:
"The media are desperately afraid of being accused of bias. And that's partly because there's a whole machine out there, an organized attempt to accuse them of bias whenever they say anything that the Right doesn't like. So rather than really try to report things objectively, they settle for being even-handed, which is not the same thing. One of my lines in a column -- in which a number of people thought I was insulting them personally -- was that if Bush said the Earth was flat, the mainstream media would have stories with the headline: 'Shape of Earth--Views Differ.' Then they'd quote some Democrats saying that it was round."
For the record, Jesus, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King didn't make this list. But trust me, that's only because they are dead (at least in their bodily form-that exception only applies to Christ).
This entry is getting way long, but here are some people that needed to make the list but did not (they aren't in any special order):
The Journalists and the Corporate Thug
1. Bill O'Reilly (talk show host)
2. Rush Limbaugh (talk radio host)
3. Sean Hannity (talk show host)
4. Ann Coulter ("author")
5. Rupert Murdoch (owner of News Corp.)
The politicians
1. George W. Bush (President)
2. Dick Cheney (Vice President)
3. Condoleeza Rice (Secretary of State)
4. Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense)
5. Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court Justice)
6. Paul Wolfowitz (President of the World Bank)
The Evangelicals
1. Pat Robertson
2. Jerry Falwell
3. James Dobson
The Wacko I know I said I wouldn't rank, but, for now, this is my number one:
1. William Kristol (editor of the "Weekly Standard and founder of Project for a New American Century)
I think I’ve been pretty respectful lately. I’ve been pretty soft-spoken in terms of politics. Sure I'm reading the New York Times daily. And cringing. But in terms of my Xanga etiquette, I’m not pointing out the obvious mess that is going on in Iraq right now. I’m not freaking out that Israel is posing to attack Iran. I'm disheartened, but not yelling, "REVOLUTION" at the Austrialian violence that targets Arabs (and I'm still growing my beard as best as my boy face can).
And most importantly, I still find hope because there are good, honest gentlemen like Harold Pinter in the world today. Thank God for them. But you know what pisses me off? Do you know at what point, I stop being silent, and I stop being "polite"? It's when some washed up, excuse for a journalist, with an unfortunate amount of political leverage calls the men and women that I admire, men and women who are screwing up America.
I know I'm about five months late on this one, but the man that I am describing is Bernard Goldberg. His wrote the entirely irrelevant books about a liberal bias in the media: "Bias" and "Arrogance". And has recently, last July, written a book called "100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37)". Now, before I go on, I found the title of the book pretty amusing. It's clever and kind of daring. Perhaps he should've put himself at #37. That would've been amusing, I think.
In some ways, I should see how he victimizes among the best people in the United States as a good thing. In fact, I would kill to be on his list. If he felt that I was threatening his idea of what America should be so much so that he would include me on an arrogant, out-of-context, and ignorant list--I would be honored. But that's me.
Before I continue this rant, don't assume that I disagree with all the people on Mr. Goldberg's list. For example, Rick and Kathy Hilton rank at 100, and these corporate fat cats have given birth to a women who feels like getting objectified is an honor. It's just gross. I also find including a women like Barbara Streisand (91) or an artist like Eminem (58) pretty amusing, if inaccurate. Now, I don't have any kind words about Ms. Streisand. But as an avid music-listener, I can honestly say, that a man like Eminem has done much less damage to the music industry than a band like The Killers, The Mars Volta, or Franz Ferdinand. I also agreed with his placement of Latrell Sprewell (30) on the list, and I'm sure I would support him if he put one Terrell Owens or Ron Artest on his list. Overpaid athletes that threaten their coaches and resort to violence to solve their problems are indeed bad examples. They are definitely screwing up America.
Anna Nichole Smith (53) is also screwing up America. But she's not worth the paper.
Ludicris (60), also makes his list. Fine. I'm not a fan of Ludacris, and thanks to some White corporate leaders, he's producing music that stereotypes and damages the image of blacks. With that being said, gangster rappers that promote violence and objectify women should not be tolerated. I might agree with Goldberg on this one. However, if Ludacris was a progressive rapper that discussed issues on injustice in black communities and cried for equality, he wouldn't have been removed from the list, he might have made it much higher on the list. Maybe along with these notable activists: Al Sharpton (12) and Jesse Jackson (4). It's insulting, ignorant, and racist to state that these men are screwing up America. I wonder were Martin Luther King would be on this list if he were still around.
Getting back to Ludacris, like I said, the way he objectifies his "bitches" and "hos" is not admirable in the least. But Mr. Goldberg is no better. Why? Because he also objectifies women. For example, in the very same book, he puts Courtney Love on his list. She ranks at number 95. This is exactly his reasoning to, no more words, no less: "HO." That's it. So, in my opinion, he's just as bad, if not worth than Ludacris.
Now I am off to remotely defend the Democrats that are screwing up America, whom I really dislike as well. All right, notable Democratic politicians that he lists are:
- Ted Kennedy (3; Senator, Massachusetts): All right, this guy's a murderer. That's rough. But he proposes increasing the minimum wage every time he gets. He's one of those Senators that, despite his involvement in the American political system, gives me hope that there are Democrats with reasonable domestic policy. It is outrageous to say he's the third worst person in the United States.
- Jimmy Carter (6; former president): This one blew me away. Jimmy Carter? I'll be honest, I haven't really kept up on Carter's dealings lately. But he doesn't have very much political weight. His biggest mistake is perhaps the Iran hostage crisis that happened about 30 years ago. He also made it really easy for Ronald Reagan to crush him in the 1980 election-maybe that’s why he made the list.
- John Edwards (16; Senator, North Carolina), Al Gore (18; former Vice President): both of these guys are not very defendable, they've done and said a lot of stupid stuff. That aside, I feel like Goldberg simply capitalized on their poor politics. They are not good politicians, or else, they would be in power now. One doesn't lose to George W. Bush because Mr. Bush is a convincing, honest, and decent man. One loses to Mr. Bush because one has no political skills whatsoever. Anyway, it's easy to point the finger at these guys, but they are as crummy as the next politician. Nothing terrible going on here as far as I’m concerned (nothing really good either, though).
- Howard Dean (20; Vermont Governor): This guy is another one like Ted Kennedy. Not perfect, but definitely one of the better Democrats. I think he can do a lot to revitalize the Democratic party and perhaps make it the Democratic Party of Lyndon Johnson or Franklin Roosevelt. The one that starts quagmire wars and dies of Polio, that is.
NOTE: the lack of Clintons in this book blew me away, maybe he forgot about Bill and Hillary.
The "journalist," the journalist, and the publisher:
- Michael Moore (1): Michael Moore is a zealous Democrat, nothing else. He loves the party and that's about it. He makes poorly researched documentaries. But what's good about him? He brings issues to the forefront and makes people who aren't students of history interested in history and current events. For that, I think he's one of the best men that America has within its borders, not its worst.
- Arthur Sulzberger (2): Who's this guy? He's the publisher of the nation's best newspaper: the New York Times. Never mind the editorial content of it. The newspaper does the best reporting in the nation. It really destroys many of the for-profit stereotypes I have about the media. The news is in context, and like the Wall Street Journal, it's all so bland, you know that they aren't trying to sell it. The publisher of the New York Times is very, very important to the integrity of journalism. Without the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the L.A. Times - this nation doesn't have journalism.
- Paul Krugman (8): This one really surprised me. But Krugman isn't exactly a horrifically liberal individual that Mr. Goldberg paints him to be. He's a moderate capitalist, a neo-Keynsian, if nothing else. Sure, he bashes Bush into the ground, but that's to be expected. If you don't like the The Time's editorial pages’ blatant leftist slant (although it does have conservative columnists like David Brooks, Nicholas Kristof, and even Thomas Friedman), target the harsher liberals on their staff: Maureen Dowd (an amazing women), Bob Herbert, or Frank Rich. I don't know why Krugman, a professor and economist, is Goldberg's target.
Goldberg also makes it a point to vilify groups and organizations that lobby Congress to get stuff done. Many of these people are among the most progressive in the United States, this makes them appropriate candidates for Goldberg’s list.
Leaders of activist groups
- Anthony Romero (5; executive director of the ACLU): I’m not a big defender of the ACLU, I think it’s a great institution-one that the American people should support (merely because it heavily supports them). But I’m not denying that its litigations are not the best, but I also believe that it is pretty much the only tool they have been given. The ACLU regularly fights items like the Patriot Act, when authorities are over-stepping their boundaries, and so on. They also tend to defend homosexuals, criminals, and other folks who are voiceless. No one should have an issue with that, if you ask me. Everyone deserves a voice.
- Julian Bond (28; chairman of the NAACP): Unlike the ACLU, I love the NAACP and I think it does some great, great things. Honestly, I think the group is pretty moderate, I recently heard Julian Bond give a speech, and I was impressed by his oration skills, but beyond that I didn’t feel his message was that radical. Black people need to be protected from disenfranchisement, and the NAACP does a great job defending and protecting their rights.
- Ingrid Newkirk (president of PETA): *sigh* This one is hard because I don’t especially respect PETA or its tactics. I think PETA is an important institution, because I believe, ultimately, that animals should be protected from unnecessary pain and torture. That being said, the reason that I’m a vegetarian, and the reason that PETA says I should be are very different things. I am upset that Goldberg is vilifying a well-intentioned organization; but let it be known that I am no supporter of PETA.
The guys above are guys that I expected. You know, Democrats and other partisan individuals, that kind of made me cringe when reading the book. People who I don't really respect, but also people that I don't believe are screwing up America necessarily. But then there are these three men. These guys should be nowhere near Goldberg’s list. They are honest men who deserve the highest of praises from any man who loves democracy.
- Ward Churchill (72): Good old Ward is a professor from the University of Colorado. He's said some wild, wild stuff that pushes the boundaries of free speech. the very least, I love him for that. But he also pushes for American Indian rights like no one else. He's very good in that sense. The American Indians need a good anarchist speaking for them, and while Ward isn't perfect, he is honorable because of that. But that's not why Goldberg thinks he's destroying America. He's thinks that because Churchill wrote a poignant and critical essay of 9/11 on September 12, 2001. He basically argues that the United States had it coming years ago and that the U.S. should not be surprised that it was attacked. The essay, titled, "Some People Push Back" has been made into a book called, "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." They are both worthy of your time. They are among my favorite published works.
- Noam Chomsky (11): This angered me very, very much. Noam Chomsky is an MIT professor and intellectual who has written many works, including, "Manufacturing Consent" and, most recently, "Hegemony or Survival". He is an important American intellectual, and Americans should be happy that he has the knowledge and the guts to criticize American foreign policy the way that he does. He is an amazing writer, is one of the only people that I believe every American needs to read. He's not threatening to the United States - he's entirely crucial to its international respect and its integrity as a nation.
- Jonathan Kozol (9): Now, I can understand Ward's placement, to a degree. I mean the guy has basically encouraged the killing of U.S. military officials. Ouch. That junk ain't easy to recover from. Noam Chomsky? Eh... I'll take it, I understand he's very radical, and that's what I love about him. Conservatives should feel threatened by him. But Kozol? WHAT? I don't know where to begin. Jonathan Kozol is most famously known for his book, "Savage Inequalities". This book criticizes the public education system and spends a great deal of time comparing a poor school district in East St. Louis to a $12,000-per-student district in the suburbs of New York City. When Goldberg calls him an individual who is screwing up America. I see the faces of those children who were simply born in the wrong place and deserve as much money and education as any other student-but they don't get it. Because their parents are poor and they live in a poor area of town. Mr. Goldberg is basically saying that when a man speaks up for these voiceless children, he is screwing up America. I can't tolerate that. And I won't tolerate that. I'm not even mad at this whole situation, I'm genuinely saddened.
Giving credit where it is due:
The following are a list of guys that he included and that I would likely include. There are several others that I agreed with, at least in part:
- Andrew Heyward (13; President of CBS News)
- Paul Eibeler (43; CEO of Take-Two Interactive Software)
- Dennis Kozlowski (44; former CEO of Tyco)
- Ken Lay (45; former CEO of Enron)
- Neal Shapiro (54; NBC News President)
- David Westin (55; ABC News President)
- Michael Savage 61; talk radio host)
- David Duke (66; former leader of KKK)
- Jimmy Swaggart (70; evangelist)
Occasionally, I agree with the name but the not the reason behind it, as is the case for all the media conglomerate presidents. They are destroying America because they are selling America news stories and not fact. They are so afraid of being truthful, that they represent viewpoints and sides that should never, ever be represented. Here's Paul Krugman (Golberg's 8) on the media:
"The media are desperately afraid of being accused of bias. And that's partly because there's a whole machine out there, an organized attempt to accuse them of bias whenever they say anything that the Right doesn't like. So rather than really try to report things objectively, they settle for being even-handed, which is not the same thing. One of my lines in a column -- in which a number of people thought I was insulting them personally -- was that if Bush said the Earth was flat, the mainstream media would have stories with the headline: 'Shape of Earth--Views Differ.' Then they'd quote some Democrats saying that it was round."
For the record, Jesus, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King didn't make this list. But trust me, that's only because they are dead (at least in their bodily form-that exception only applies to Christ).
This entry is getting way long, but here are some people that needed to make the list but did not (they aren't in any special order):
The Journalists and the Corporate Thug
1. Bill O'Reilly (talk show host)
2. Rush Limbaugh (talk radio host)
3. Sean Hannity (talk show host)
4. Ann Coulter ("author")
5. Rupert Murdoch (owner of News Corp.)
The politicians
1. George W. Bush (President)
2. Dick Cheney (Vice President)
3. Condoleeza Rice (Secretary of State)
4. Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense)
5. Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court Justice)
6. Paul Wolfowitz (President of the World Bank)
The Evangelicals
1. Pat Robertson
2. Jerry Falwell
3. James Dobson
The Wacko I know I said I wouldn't rank, but, for now, this is my number one:
1. William Kristol (editor of the "Weekly Standard and founder of Project for a New American Century)