KJSL radio host Gina Loudon is excited about all the attention her show has gotten recently from the "Liblogs," especially Ed Martin's recent lunacy that's been discussed by Fired Up!, Show Me Progress and St. Louis Activist Hub. "The leftist blogs seem to really enjoy my Show!" she writes. It's quite inaccurate to say that I "enjoy" her show, but I have appreciated the opportunity she gives elected officials to share their thoughts on the issues of the day.
But after reading the post, I have no choice to but to conclude that (1) Loudon is actually unable to read or (2) she assumes that her readers will believe her garbage without actually checking what's been written in response to the interviews conducted on her show.
For instance, she writes:
[T]hey attacked candidate for Congress, Ed Martin, both for being a Christian in the first place (that can be so offensive to some, Ed, you should be more, uh, sensitive to those who find your faith offensive and ridiculous), and also for “attacking Russ’ faith” on my show. He didn’t, but let’s not get caught up in the details. Even Chris Matthews joined in the rancor, using unauthorized, proprietary audio that belongs to Crawford Broadcasting.
I'm quite confident I haven't "attacked" Martin "for being a Christian in the first place," and haven't seen such an attack anywhere. Loudon links to Fired Up! for the Matthews clip, but provides no links to back up her claim that Fired Up! or anyone else said anything about Martin "being a Christian in the first place."
Earlier in her post, Loudon writes:
First, the liblogs attacked Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder for his announcement on Truth Talk 630 that he would file suit on Obamacare in the near future (Earth to liblogs–the public opposes Obamacare!).
It's quite true that I've criticized Kinder for his Mullarkey lawsuit in its multiple forms, though my post on Kinder's interview with Loudon dealt mostly with the timing of the lawsuit. I also made a point of highlighting Loudon's introduction of Kinder. "He's a deep man," she said. "He thinks a lot. He's a lofty intellectual. He knows his history. He knows where he came from. And he absolutely knows where he's going." Honestly, I think a mocking tone was the only appropriate way to respond to such nonsense.
Loudon's second charge:
Then, they and other liblogs attacked Congressman Roy Blunt for coming on The Dr. Gina Show and, well, being Roy Blunt (in their minds, that is a sin, because he stands in the way of the US Senate seat they want for Robin).
Nope. I did, however, highlight Blunt's preposterous claim that no one had given him sufficient notice to attend a debate with his primary challengers before the August debate. In Loudon's truth-telling world, I guess that means I "attacked" Blunt for "being Roy Blunt."
Loudon's third charge:
Next, numerous blogs attacked Senator Chuck Purgason for using the word “was” instead of “were” on my show (gasp!). We imperfect people should just be thankful that the perfect people out there shine the light on our imperfections, because otherwise, our “forgivenness” would be so meaningless.
Wrong again. I did write the following sentence: "Grammar notwithstanding, it's hard to argue with that assessment." But that's hardly an "attack," and I only mentioned the mistake because it appeared in the quote I chose to highlight in the post's headline. The whole point of my post, as Loudon could read (again, if she's able and willing to do so), was that "I agree with few of Purgason's policy positions, but share his disgust with the hypocrisy and irresponsibility of the policies pursued by George W. Bush and Blunt in his time as a top House leader."
If I really was a typo snob, I'd make a big deal out of the fact that Loudon misspelled “forgivenness” in her post (gasp!). But I'm not such a person, because I know there are more typos in my own writings than I'd like to see.
Loudon concludes her post with the following:
And last, but not least, they attacked candidate for Congress, Ed Martin, both for being a Christian in the first place (that can be so offensive to some, Ed, you should be more, uh, sensitive to those who find your faith offensive and ridiculous), and also for “attacking Russ’ faith” on my show. He didn’t, but let’s not get caught up in the details. Even Chris Matthews joined in the rancor, using unauthorized, proprietary audio that belongs to Crawford Broadcasting.
How can they have it both ways? Either one is an idiot for believing in God and His hand in our Founding Fathers’ establishment of the Constitution and other founding documents–OR–faith is sacred and no one should attack it. You can’t have it both ways. Well, I guess they can, because they are liblogs. We are just citizens. They work for an administration who has made it very clear that they do not care what we think about Obamacare, Arizona, racism, death threats to police officers and babies, Kagan or Berwick nominations, the trillion dollar deficit, …you get the idea.
The Dr. Gina Show has only been on air now for two weeks. This should be fun!
PS: I had Congressman Todd Akin, and Andrew Breitbart on, too. Can’t you find something to complain about there?
Emphasis in the original. Again, I think she's just making up the claims about attacking Ed Martin's faith, and calling Martin "an idiot for believing in God." Such attacks certainly didn't come from me, and I'd be happy to condemn any examples she can provide.
Finally, I didn't hear the interview with Todd Akin, and only heard snippets of what Andrew Breitbart said. But if Loudon can provide some of that sweet, authorized, proprietary audio, I'd be happy to give it a listen. I might even write about it. In turn, Loudon could then just manufacture some complaint about it, and the circle would be complete.
Image credit: DrGLiveOutLoud on Flickr