Tag Archives: Buffalo Beast

Channel 2 to Murphy: Drop Dead

5 May

Ian Murphy was somewhat invited, then quite rudely disinvited, from participating in a NY-26 debate being hosted by Channel 2.

Murphy says the disinvitation reads as follows:

As you are aware, WGRZ-TV and the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle invited the candidates for the 26th congressional district to a debate at the WGRZ-TV studios on May 12th. In fact, after a certified letter to your business, the Buffalo Beast, was returned to our station, we sent Scott Levin to your home to personally make sure you were given every opportunity to respond and participate.

Since the letters were mailed to all four candidates, two major situations have developed. First, a Siena poll shows you garnering only 1% of the vote, while the other three candidates have substantially higher and much closer poll numbers. The Siena poll would indicate you are not considered a serious candidate by the residents of the district.

That indication was supported this past weekend with your latest post on your latest Buffalo Beast blog, dated April 29th. In that blog, you wrote about Scott delivering you the invitation, and refer to Scott as a “tall, orange robot.” You wrote that you were “stoned,” and “a little drunk.” You referred to Scott Levin’s face as “covered with wierd [sic] orange puddy?” You made crude references to the condition of your home. You also greatly distorted the conversation you had with Scott to the point of turning it into a vulgar satire.

You make it clear in the way you present yourself that you are not a serious candidate in this race. WGRZ-TV, the other candidates, and the residents of the 26th congressional district ARE taking this race seriously. As such, we no longer offer you an invitation to the May 12th debate.

Best regards,
Jeff Woodard
News Director
WGRZ-TV

I think that’s bullshit.

Murphy is a duly nominated candidate for federal office by a legally constituted and recognized political party, and has quite frankly presented more substantive positions on real issues than many of the others.  Jack Davis shows that you can be a joke candidate and be taken seriously, so long as you have millions in the bank.

Murphy responds:

And that 1%? Well, WGRZ-TV, it’s not your fucking job to interpret poll numbers. It’s not your fucking job to censor one of the candidates. It’s not your fucking job to tell people who is and who is not a “serious” candidate. It’s just not your fucking job. In case you forgot, your fucking job is to present all the information available to your viewers, on any given subject, and let them decide. That is your fucking job. And, you know what? Maybe I’d have a little more than 1% if the local media did its fucking job to begin with.

Like me or not, what WGRZ-TV has done here is an insult to our democracy. Local news stations, no matter how awful, have no business excluding someone who is officially on the ballot from taking part in a debate. Since, for the most part, the local media has not done its fucking job, this debate was one of the few opportunities for me to speak directly to the residents of NY-26. But WGRZ-TV doesn’t think much of folks around here, apparently. Not enough to let them decide for themselves, anyway.

Whether you agree with Murphy or not; whether you think he’s right on the issues or a joke, he makes a valid point about the way in which the regular media have covered this race.

I’ll be sending a note to Mr. Woodard asking that WGRZ reconsider its decision to disinvite Ian Murphy from the NY-26 debate.  As a voter in the district, I’d like the opportunity to hear what Murphy has to say, and I’d like to see that happen with the other candidates being present.

Barring that, perhaps WNYMedia.net could host some sort of online video chat/forum whereby voters can interact directly with Mr. Murphy.

Jane Corwin Dot Org

27 Apr

Epic campaign silliness ensues in NY-26 as a new “Jane Corwin for Congress” website launches…

 

Corwin Outlines Comprehensive Pandering Strategy

WILLIAMSVILLE – Jane Corwin, successful daughter of rich people and candidate for New York’s 26th Congressional District, today outlined a comprehensive pandering strategy to say she’ll decrease gas prices because that’s what our polling research said people want to hear. Corwin discussed her pandering agenda to a crowd of local idiots.

The need for a “whatever-sounds-good” pandering strategy has never been greater.

“I don’t pump my own gas, or have any idea how much it costs, but my maid tells me she can barely afford to get to my mansion anymore! Washington has heavily subsidized the oil industry and I plan to do the same–except I call it reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Eww, foreign. It sounds so…foreign.” Corwin told the idiots. “When I’m in Congress I will crush the EPA and ensure that your grandchildren live in a dystopian environmental hellscape–I mean, lower costs of fuel.”

Corwin offered several no-nonsense ways to ensure these vague sentiments:

  • Increase domestic energy by burning the homeless and having gross fat people ride a treadmill that’s hooked into the grid.
  • Get Washington out of the business of regulating anything, at any time, for any reason.
  • Stop the EPA from doing stuff. Richard Nixon was one of our greatest presidents, but that agency is for losers.

“America’s energy concerns, kitchen table issues, groceries, et cetera, et cetera, things stupid poor people care about. I’m out!”

 

Who might be behind such a dastardly parody?  I think I have a suspect…

 

Ian Murphy, Habitual Linestepper

A simple whois search shows the site is registered to Paul Fallon, Founder and Mildly-In-Charge Muckety Muck at The Buffalo Beast.

Good job, guys!  I wish we had thought of it first…

Ian Murphy Running for Congress

16 Mar

Buffalo Beast editor and Koch-prankster Ian Murphy will be running as a Green Party candidate for the NY-26 congressional seat recently vacated by Chris Lee.

Currently running are Jane Corwin (R), Jack Davis (RXAH), David Bellavia (Ind.). The Democratic candidate will be announced after a candidate interview and meeting of the party chairs on March 19th.

Bad Pundit, Discussing Things!

3 Mar

Questioning and examining societal memes makes people angry!

In this thread, we discuss “Fuck the Troops” by Buffalo Beast prankster Ian Murphy – conservatives throughout western New York are attempting to use a semi-satirical piece in an irreverent satirical newspaper as the basis for his illegitimacy for public office. Few of Murphy’s critics ever repeat a single word of the essay past the first, provocative paragraph.  I’m shocked they didn’t point out the time Murphy pretended to be a mentally and physically disabled kid visiting the Museum of Creation in “Let there be Retards”.

But what about Murphy’s opinion piece?

During the Vietnam war, returning servicemen were treated horribly – by society, by the government.  The popularity of that war split America viciously for almost a decade, and for decades thereafter it affected how we treated our military, how we treated military engagement, how we wanted to avoid quagmires or Asian land wars.

Not only were those servicemen mistreated and subject to poor aftercare, but they were drafted; for the most part, they had no choice whether or not to go to Vietnam.

In the wake of Vietnam, we have all-volunteer, professional armed forces.  It is a choice for people to go into the service; no one is forced, and there is no draft.  None of the authors on these pages has denigrated their service, their bravery, or them.  It only took us about 30 years to forget completely the lessons of Vietnam, and we are, or recently have been, engaged in two Asian land wars that have turned into quagmires with no end, and unclear objectives.  We defeated the bad guys to enable other bad guys to fill the power vacuum.

The Iraq war was a war of choice – it was unprovoked. The Afghan war was a war of necessity, but we’re still there 10 years later. That is wholly unacceptable.

Chris and I, in comments, made the point that, once you get past the inflammatory language in the title and first paragraph of Murphy’s article, the guy makes a point.  I didn’t say he made a “good” point, or a point with which I necessarily agree – but he makes a point.  Just because that point offends you doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be discussed.

In those comments, one commenter brought up the image of a local Iraq war amputee and told me to stop “digging the hole” deeper.  My response:

Ward, the only holes you should be concerned with are the ones 6 feet deep that contain the remains of young men and women who didn’t have to die for a fool’s errand in a tribal Arabic hellhole that wasn’t bothering the US. Please don’t moralize to me about this.

And because I know how the internet works, let me clarify that the “fool” in “fool’s errand” is the United States Government that decided that an unprovoked war of aggression on a sovereign Asian nation was a phenomenal idea.

I won’t speak for Chris, but there’s a distinction between writing that gosh, I agree with him versus writing that he makes a point.  People are conveniently ignoring that I offered $100 to an Iraqi War Veteran’s organization if someone could point out where I expressed support or otherwise backed a not-yet-in-existence Ian Murphy run for Congress. No one has come forward to claim that prize.

You know, the point here is that I wish there weren’t 4,700+ servicemen and women who were killed during the Iraq war. I wish there weren’t thousands more injured. I wish there weren’t hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians displaced, hurt, or killed in this needless war of choice that was based on lies. If you really cared about the troops, you’d have those same thoughts.  So many lives – so many families – needlessly ruined.

This blog is about discussing things in comments – I admit that this doesn’t happen as often as it should, but I am unapologetic about intelligent people discussing a topic in an intelligent way. One doesn’t have to agree with, or like Murphy’s article or the language that he uses, but sometimes it’s valuable to read and consider different points of view, whether you agree with them or not.  And sometimes it’s valuable to take those points of view and use it to play devil’s advocate in a Socratic way. Some people I respect (and some I don’t, and some I’ve never heard of) have expressed outrageous outrage that we would ever discuss something that they don’t agree with and that insults their sensibilities.

That’s fine. They’re welcome to their opinion and they can hate us or be as disappointed and finger-pointy as they want. (I can tell you that my inbox hasn’t been inundated with complaints). They can repeat that I’m a lawyer or a former political candidate all they want, as if that matters. (Seriously, how does that matter? Yay for Google!)

The outrageous outrage thing is fun because believe me, it’s easy to write about.  It’s easy as hell to take finger to keyboard and express anger or to pick a fight. I do it all the time. So I get what’s going on.

But don’t twist my words and pretend like I’ve taken a position that I haven’t, or that I’ve deliberately denigrated an entire class of people. Quite frankly, in this country it’s bullshit to take Murphy’s article and simply dismiss it as invalid because it uses profane language and advocates for an unpopular and not widely held opinion. I think it raises a point that people should talk about, and that’s what we were doing.

Let’s turn to facts, though, for a second. I didn’t use the word “compelling”.  I used the word “salient”.

sa·li·ent [sey-lee-uhnt, seyl-yuhnt]

1. prominent or conspicuous: salient traits.

Again – I never said I agreed with Murphy’s “Fuck the Troops”. I described a point it makes as “salient” and then questioned people to explain precisely what they disagree with in the article’s text. How many of them read past the first paragraph, which contains a lot of dismissive, profane language towards the troops? Because the next paragraph explains,

Likely, just reading the above paragraph made you uncomfortable. But why?

The benevolence of America’s “troops” is sacrosanct. Questioning their rectitude simply isn’t done. It’s the forbidden zone. We may rail against this tragic war, but our soldiers are lauded by all as saints. Why? They volunteered to partake in this savage idiocy, and for this they deserve our utmost respect? I think not.

Murphy’s taking a pacifist position, albeit in a provocative way. If you don’t think that controversial opinions are worth discussing, then what the hell rights are they fighting for in the military, anyway?

Anatomy of A Dumb Rightist Blog Post

1 Mar

1. Have your feelings hurt because someone else called you out for blatant partisan hypocrisy.

2. Put finger to keyboard. Take a stated fact – “Ian Murphy is considering a run for Congress” – and extrapolate from that support and complete agreement with every facet of Ian Murphy’s existence.

3. Conduct a comprehensive Google search until you find something that Ian Murphy once wrote that you can hold up as evidence of Murphy’s unacceptability as a human being. (In this instance, an opinion piece from the Buffalo Beast called “Fuck the Troops“.)

4.  Ignore the substance of the text to which you link – whether it be the blog post or the Murphy piece – and instead comment on the profanity and the introductory paragraphs of the Murphy piece.

5. Pretend like the “Fuck the Troops” piece is the thing that Murphy and the Beast are best-known for. Completely ignore the existence of the “Loathsome” lists.

6. Because I wrote something about Ian Murphy without calling him a loathsome failure of a human being, extrapolate from that that I completely support and agree with everything he’s ever done or said. This is an extension of the Law of Hannity, where any given Democrat is called upon to condemn the supposed sins of every other Democrat, ever.

7. Get the vapors over the “f” word.

8. Lie. A lot.

9. Continue to ignore completely the fact that the last guy you fervently supported for NY-26, and whose press releases you dutifully regurgitated, suddenly quit.

9. Thank the troops for something unrelated to the troops’ mission.

10. Pepper the post with elementary-school-level writing, such as, “Bedenko thinks this is good writing and Murphy is congressional material.”

I liked it better when they accidentally let this version slip last week. Its creative, outcome-based spelling method was entertaining:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

The Democrats, WFP, and Green Party have not yet rushed into selecting a nominee for a special election that hasn’t been called, and I haven’t expressed support for any candidate – named or unnamed.  Monroe Rising’s Richard Saunders lies – quite obviously and undoubtedly.

I will donate $100 to an Iraqi war veteran’s nonprofit support organization if someone from Monroe Rising will point out precisely where in this blog post I express support for Ian Murphy for Congress.

Ian Murphy for Congress & Corwin goes Homophobe

25 Feb

I don’t even recall where I saw it, but last night I sent an email to the Buffalo Beast‘s general email address and to publisher/owner Paul Fallon inquiring about something big they were planning for the NY-26 race. The response from Ian Murphy and Paul Fallon was that Murphy is considering a run for the Lee seat, possibly on the Green Party line.

Murphy has definitely gained some notoriety this past week with the Buffalo Beast’s epic prank call to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and has lefty bona fides that make a run on that line possible and interesting. The Green Party in New York is tiny, but to its credit does not play the fusion game and runs its own candidates.

While Murphy has practically no shot of winning in this conservative, rural district, he has a unique opportunity to draw even more attention to a special election process that is already quite notable indeed. I predict shenanigans aplenty that will ironically mock the very foundation of our political system.

It’s good to know the Beast is back, and better than ever.

In other news, as you may know the Department of Justice has decided that it will no longer defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in pending litigation to declare it an unlawful usurpation of state’s rights, but remains obligated to continue to enforce DOMA until it is struck down by a court or repealed. Of course, almost everyone in the media and politics has begun screaming about how wrong it is that the Obama administration will now refuse to enforce an Act of Congress, when any fair reading of what’s going on shows that to be patently untrue. Chalk it up to some people not understanding much of anything, and posing as “journalists” and “politicians”.

To illustrate how stupid our politics has become, yesterday brand-new and sparkly Republican candidate for Congress in a non-existant special election, Jane Corwin, came out strongly in favor of the execrable Defense of Marriage Act and slammed President Obama for “usurping the power of the Supreme Court”; something he has quite clearly not done even remotely, even a little. I don’t know what the hell DOMA has to do with jobs and a crap economy in western New York, our needs for science, technology, industry, agriculture, employment, and a knowledge-based economy, but quite literally the first thing Corwin took up in her run for Congress is homophobia. Shame on her, and shame on the Republicans for being so preoccupied with their culture wars and not at all interested in jobs and the economy.

But it won Corwin the unanimous endorsement of the Monroe County Conservative Party, although she needs the state party’s approval for the line. Good to know the Conservative Party’s principles remain firm: hatred of gays, hatred of reproductive freedom, and love of patronage jobs.

When Corwin issued her scathing indictment of President Obama and gay people, three Tweets on the #NY26 hashtag came down simultaneously (One, Two, Three). Evidently, the “New Yorker’s [sic] Family Research Foundation“, the New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, and the New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms PAC have their Twitter feeds run by the same person; all three united to halt the growing menace of teh gay. A-holes.

The Buffalo Beast’s Ian Murphy

24 Feb

Here is the Buffalo Beast’s Ian Murphy on MSNBC last night:

[HTML1]

He also appeared on Corey Griswold’s 1230 at 12:30 on WECK 1230-AM yesterday afternoon. (WECK’s main competitor merely regurgitated an AP wire story about a LOCAL story.