The Light: Hillary

/ Bumped up /

Boy, you’d think after a heady vacation at Martha’s Vineyard that Barack Obama would have learned that being a whiner is not a turn on for the voters. Nope. He’s a goddamned cry baby. Here’s the boy-child from Hawaii in a sob fest with Brian Williams:

President Barack Obama dismissed a recent poll showing that a third of Americans don’t know he’s a Christian – and blamed an online campaign of misinformation by his conservative enemies for perpetuating the myth that he’s a Muslim.

Obama, speaking with NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams on Sunday afternoon, was equally dismissive of conservative talk show host Glenn Beck – saying he didn’t watch the Fox host’s Saturday rally in Washington but wasn’t surprised that Beck was able to “stir up” people during uncertain economic times.

Williams . . . asked Obama why so many people were uncertain about something so fundamental as his faith.

“I can’t spend all of my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead,” quipped Obama, who took a deep breath to gather his thoughts when asked if the poll reflected his inability to communicate with voters.

“The facts are the facts. We went through some of this during the campaign — there is a mechanism, a network of misinformation that in a new media era can get churned out there constantly,” said a visibly annoyed Obama, referring to “birthers,” who have waged a guerrilla campaign questioning either the existence or the validity of his Hawaiian birth certificate.

Oh boo-hoo.

This interview with Brian Williams is telling in many ways. A political pro would not have blurted out, “I can’t spend all of my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead.” WTF!!! This guy does not realize that bringing this subject up will simply feed the story. This is not the smooth move of a political pro. NOPE. It is an amateur drowning.

And since he mentioned it, I think it would be a pretty good idea if Barack would produce the original birth certificate. For starters his birth father was a muslim. No let’s agree that even though a baby born to a muslim father means that initially the child is a “muslim,” the reality is that the kid needs to be taught the faith before he or she becomes a praticing muslim.

Now here’s the tricky part, Barry Obama (he did not take on the name of “Barack” until he was in college) did not receive any significant religious instruction from his birth father. That education came instead from his adopted father, Lolo Soetoro.

When Barack Obama was enrolled in school (not a madrassa) in Indonesia his name in the application was listed as “BARRY SOETORO” and his religion as “muslim.” Why make up another name if he is actually BARACK OBAMA? He wasn’t. He had been legally adopted and Lolo Soetoro was raising him as his own.

Here’s the proof:

Let’s staple this on your forehead champ! Then you can start by answering some questions. At one point did you decide you were no longer a muslim? And why have you and your handlers gone to such lengths to cover up the fact that your birth certificate was amended to reflect the fact that you were adopted by Lolo. In fact, your half-sister, Maya, continues to carry the surname “Soetoro.”

Joining the church of bat-shit crazy Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not exactly the mainstream religious experience of the average American. It is an extremist sect. I don’t think there is any credible evidence that Barack has been a practicing muslim as an adult. He claims to be a Christian. I take him at his word. But he still fails to understand that the questions surrounding his faith have been generated by his own actions and statements. If you regularly fail to attend a Christian church but find time in your busy schedule to kick off the muslim religious event, Iftar, before starting your vacation, then don’t be surprised if folks start wondering if you are a muslim.

Some actual honesty might help you out of this mess. But that seems a foreign concept to you. Too bad. You once were a muslim. You once were a citizen of Indonesia. You were a young boy at the time and not competent to make these decisions on your on. At some subsequent point, while in college, you decided to change your name to Barack Hussein. You would not be the first one to do some crazy, irresponsible shit in college. You can’t hide from the truth forever. The longer you try to pretend that your past never existed the more the curiousity about what you are hiding will intensify. Bet on it.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41575.html#ixzz0y34QwgGn

That is what people who claim there are mosques four blocks away from Ground Zero, so what’s the big deal with building one near Ground Zero? How far is far enough to suit these Islamaphobic bigots anyway?

That is just apples and oranges – yes, there is a mosque four blocks away from Ground Zero, but it has been there for DECADES. Its site was not chosen specifically because it was close to an area targeted by Islamic extremists. The Masjid Manhattan was not chosen precisely because [art of the landing gear of a jet that had been turned into a WMD fell into it, as was the case for the Park 51 mosque. There is a world of difference between the two. It is disconcerting that people like Alex DiBranco, who wrote the article linked above, or since you've probably not heard of him, Mara Liasson of NPR, who made that argument Monday, 8/30, on Fox News All Stars:

[snip] Right, the critics of the project do have a responsibility to say where in Manhattan it would be OK, because there is a mosque four blocks from ground zero, currently. Would they like that one moved?

If it’s just the location, and it’s not the fact that a mosque is being built, where would it be OK? On Staten Island, the upper west side? Where would it be OK? Because there have been other anti-mosque demonstrations elsewhere around the country that are very far from ground zero.

So I think it’s important for the people against this to be extremely clear about exactly what they’re against.[snip]

Well, gosh, Ms. Liasson, I think people have been EXTREMELY clear about why they do not want this mosque built in that location by this developer and why.

Good grief. There is a serious lack of logic operating there (or rather, not operating). How can these people be so obtuse? Is it intentional, or do they really not see there is a huge difference between the two?

The same goes for Obama and his ridiculous, uh, I mean, “brilliant” statement to the effect if Jews wanted to build a synagogue there, or Christians a church, a Hindu temples, etc., that should be A-Okay. No problem with that at all. Well, for once I agree with him, but not because of the conflation and distortion he is utilizing, but because, yes, those groups should be able to build near Ground Zero if they wish (or perhaps an interfaith center to house them all). Why? Because THEY DID NOT MURDER THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS as a direct result of their faith (distortion that it may be). That’s why.

Jews, Christians, Hindis, Buddhists, Wiccans, any other group you can think of, did not pick a location close to where a group affiliated with their religion murdered thousands of people BECAUSE it was close to that site.

And it wasn’t their first attack on that site, either, though too many people seem quick to forget that. This was the second time in less than ten years that Muslims attacked the World Trade Towers. Again, they weren’t terrorists who happened to be Muslims, but because of their particular belief system, were terrorists because they were Muslims.

Just yesterday, we had two more Muslims from Detroitpicked up in Amsterdam who were conducting a dry run to see if they could get materials on board a US flight. The scary thing is, they were able to do so. There was the “Christmas Day” bomber. The NYC bomber. There are Muslim extremists planning – actively planning – to do us harm.

Of course, that does not mean all Muslims are bad, or out to get our country. We understand that, too. But to continue to deny that there ARE terrorists out there who want to harm the US because of their Muslim faith is the worst kind of “tolerance.” That isn’t “tolerance,” that is stupidity.

So, yes, there are over 100 mosques in New York City. We know this. That’s fine. Whatever. And yes, there is one four blocks away that was built decades ago. So? All these folks making that point, or what they think is a point, just need to stop trying to act like its the same thing. It is not.

As I have said before, it is about decency and compassion for those who lost loved ones at Ground Zero, and for the whole country, which may not ever fully heal from that attack on our soil. Conflating this one mosque being built (by a developer with a rap sheet a mile long, I might add) near Ground Zero in a building that had part of the jet land in it has absolutely NOTHING to do with where other mosques are, especially ones that have been there for decades. Nor does it have anything to do with other religious faiths being able to build near Ground Zero.

These are red herrings, obfuscations, the sole purpose of which is to deny the reality of what happened at Ground Zero through the appearance of “tolerance.” Maybe Mara Liasson can forget it. Maybe President Obama can forget it. But the majority of Americans cannot, have not, and will not.

President Obama — “an amateur cipher” — begins speaking at 8 p.m. ET. Don’t miss Larry Johnson’s post, “Barack Obama’s Mission Accomplished Moment.” Share your take below, and check out more stories:

“Obama thanks troops, looks to Afghanistan,” Politico.

“It sure makes things easier when you reject your own campaign rhetoric about how the surge — the Petraeus plan — shouldn’t happen and wouldn’t work,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said.”

“Previewing Obama Iraq speech, Gibbs won’t credit surge,” Byron York at the Washington Examiner. York’s essay is RICH with examples of Obama’s wildly varying comments, including this gem:

“in July 2007, Obama told an audience in New Hampshire, ‘Here’s what we know: the surge has not worked’.”

“WH: Hey, maybe Obama should be talking about the economy,” Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.

Having Obama descend from Mount Martha’s Vineyard to declare that all is well! will only reinforce the notion that Obama has completely lost touch with mainstream America and perhaps with reality as well. Read the rest of this entry »

Who knew? George W. Bush and Barack Obama apparently are twin brothers. Bush played politics with Iraq and Barack, not to be outdone, is following suit. We all remember the flight-suit clad George Bush strutting around the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln just before he proclaimed “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED” in Iraq. There was no reason other than politics to do that speech. At the time the Democrats were shitting themselves. Bush looked and acted the role of Commander in Chief. The Dems were certain that the Republicans would trot out those manly images of George W. Bush during the 2004 election. They did not understand that the actual failure to accomplish the mission in Iraq left intact Sunni and Shia insurgents who were not content to go quietly into that sweet night. Hell no! They were going to fight. And fight they did.

We come now to Barack Obama. Although the White House insists this is not a “Mission Accomplished” moment, there is no other possible interpretation. Once Barack completes his speech tonight he will take full ownership of Iraq. This is likely to be seen with the benefit of hindsight as one of the dumbest moves of the Obama Presidency. Why?

Tonight’s event is all about domestic politics and does nothing to alter the reality on the ground in Iraq. We still have more than 50,000 troops on the ground. We can pretend that they are not soldiers. Hell, we can call them clowns and imagine that they are servicing birthday parties as testosterone ladened entertainers. While we are at it we can also delude ourselves into believing that farts smell like roses. But pretending, imagining and fantasizing does not change reality. George W. Bush pretended, at least for a while, there was no such thing as an insurgency in Iraq. Anyone care to comment on how that little fantasy turned out?

So now Barack creates a new fantasy–the non-combat soldiers. How long will he be able to keep that boatload of crap floating? Six months from now U.S. soldier will still be dying from attacks in Iraq. They only way those attacks will cease is when every single U.S. soldier or marine is finally withdrawn from Iraq. But can we really withdraw forces in a year if the sectarian violence is escalating and Iran comes to the aid of the Shia majority? The most likely scenario in my view is that we will scamper out of Iraq as Iran spreads its visible influence in Iraq. This will foster the world perception of the United States as weak. Last time the Iranians thoroughly humiliated an American President there was a guy by the name of Jimmy Carter wandering the halls of the White House. Looks like Barack is well on his way to surpassing the lowlights of Carter. Go get ‘em kid.

With the economy imploding (we’re on the eve of another collapse that is likely to dwarf the events of September 2008) Barack has nothing better to do then do an Oval office speech that changes nothing on the ground in Iraq. His speech will not compel nor inspire the Iraqis to name a new government. The Iraqis have squandered five months, why not just keep on doing nothing? His speech will not persuade the Sunni terrorists to lay down their weapons and end all attacks. Nope!! Oh, and his speech will not convince the IRANIANS to withdraw their intelligence officers that are posted throughout Iraq.

Barack might as well put on a codpiece and strut around tonight in a pilots garb. His speech will win him the same kind of long term adulation that George W. Bush achieved with his ill-conceived speech on the Abraham Lincoln. The image of that speech came to haunt George W. The same is likely to happen to Barack Obama.

Editor’s Note: We will all live blog Obama’s speech tonight at 8:00 p.m. ET. The live-blog open thread goes up at 7:15 p.m. The following is John Batchelor’s op-ed on the speech.

Bojinka is the term that the infant Al Qaeda coined for the plot to blow up 12 jumbo jets over the pacific in 1995. That plot failed in part because Ramsi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed managed to set their Manila apartment on fire while cooking up a batch of “gun cotton” in their kitchen sink. Their diabolical plan, which had been tested on board a Philippine Air flight in December 1994, consisted of a terrorist carrying the components for a liquid bomb on board a plane. In the case of the Philippine Air flight, Ramsi Yousef boarded the flight in the southern Philippines. During the flight Ramsi went to the bathroom and assembled a bomb that used a Casio data watch, a couple of 9 volt batteries, a bottle filled with a liquid that looked like contact lens solution (but was in fact the explosive, TATP), an tiny light bulb and a bag of “cotton” that was in fact gun cotton. He put it all together and planted the device under his seat. When the plane arrived in Manila he got off and disappeared into the crowd. An unsuspecting Japanese businessman boarded the plane and sat in what had been Ramsi’s seat. The plane took off and when the time counted down the Casio watch produced enough of an electric pulse to spark the broken light bulb which in turn ignited the gun cotton. This in turn detonated the TATP solution. The blast did not bring down the plane but caused significant damage and killed the Japanese man.

So what? ABC reported yesterday the following:

Two men taken off a Chicago-to-Amsterdam United Airlines flight in the Netherlands have been charged by Dutch police with “preparation of a terrorist attack,” U.S. law enforcement officials tell ABC News.

U.S. officials said the two appeared to be travelling with what were termed “mock bombs” in their luggage. “This was almost certainly a dry run, a test,” said one senior law enforcement official. . . .

In addition, officials said, al Soofi was found to be carrying $7,000 in cash and a check of his luggage found a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, three cell phones taped together, several watches taped together, a box cutter and three large knives. Officials said there was no indication of explosives and he and his luggage were cleared for the flight from Birmingham to Chicago O’Hare.

Once in Chicago, officials say they learned al Soofi checked his luggage on a flight to Washington’s Dulles airport for connections on flights to Dubai and then Yemen, even though he did not board the flight himself.

It the report about the travel of these two is correct then there is no way this was something innocent.

There are some key unanswered questions. Was the suspect bag examined with a CTX machine?

The CTX explosive detection device is a family of x-ray devices developed by InVision Technologies in 1990 that uses CAT scans and sophisticated image processing software to automatically screen checked baggage for explosives. CTX scanners are by far the market leader in explosive detection systems (EDSs), accounting for approximately 150 out of 161 FAA-certified bomb scanners installed in US airports as of 2002.

This system is capable of detecting the amount of explosives used to bring down Pan Am 103 in December 1988. The problem with this most recent event is that the CTX technology would not have alerted on benign items strapped together. If there had been an explosive in the luggage I fairly confident that it would have been discovered with the CTX system. What we don’t know is whether or not the bag was put thru such a system before it was allowed on board a plane.

This event highlights for me the need for passenger profiling. I’m not talking about racial or ethnic profiling. That is a waste of time and money. But it is worthwhile to profile passenger travel behavior. If you are flying from Birmingham, Alabama to Chicago and then on to Washington then to Schipol (or Dubai), you should be pulled aside and asked to account for your travel plans. Are you traveling with luggage? If not, you should have to explain why. Unfortunately, these are not required nor routinely used in this country.

I also am troubled that one of the bags was put on a plane and pushed away from the gate before it was discovered that the passenger was not on board the plane. We need some answers from TSA on this part of the incident? Were security procedures violated?

Meanwhile we still have no system in place at screening checkpoints capable of detecting explosives hidden on a passengers body or in his or her luggage. I am cheered by the fact that these guys were identified and arrested. More to come from this story.

UPDATE: FBI now is reporting the two guys did not know each other. Fine. We still don’t have a good explanation for the items discovered in the luggage. And, what was the purpose for each man’s trip?

Actually, here are a number of signs, in fact. Allegedly, these are real signs on Northbound I-5 in Washington State, below Seattle (and I wish I knew who to credit for these). With so much going on right now, there is nothing like a little humor to deal with it all, right (even if some of the words are misspelled)? Enjoy:http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=49609#edit_timestamp

And for some “News You Can Use,” there is this tidbit – guess who else owes back taxes (you know, besides Charlie Rangel, and Timmy Geithner before he became the head of the IRS)? That would be the developers of the mosque near Ground Zero:

The mosque developers are tax deadbeats.

Sharif El-Gamal, the leading organizer behind the mosque and community center near Ground Zero, owes $224,270.77 in back property tax on the site, city records show. (Emphasis mine.)

El-Gamal’s company, 45 Park Place Partners, failed to pay its half-yearly bills in January and July, according to the city Finance Department.

The delinquency is a possible violation of El-Gamal’s lease with Con Edison, which owns half of the proposed building site on Park Place. El-Gamal owns the other half but must pay taxes on the entire parcel. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Oops. So, after all of this brouhaha around this developer building a mosque so close to Ground Zero (for its proximity to that hallowed ground), all of the angst this has caused so many people may very well have been for nothing. Are you kidding me? Sure seems that way since this massive delinquency this could violate their lease.

Um, no one thought to check the tax records before? What a mess, and getting messier by the day.

Oh, and here is another good one from the Dallas News about Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Dallas:

Longtime Dallas congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson has awarded thousands of dollars in college scholarships to four relatives and a top aide’s two children since 2005, using foundation funds set aside for black lawmakers’ causes.

The recipients were ineligible under anti-nepotism rules of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, which provided the money. And all of the awards violated a foundation requirement that scholarship winners live or study in a caucus member’s district.

Johnson, a Democrat, denied any favoritism when asked about the scholarships last week. Two days later, she acknowledged in a statement released by her office that she had violated the rules but said she had done so “unknowingly” and would work with the foundation to “rectify the financial situation.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

As Rev. Jeremiah Wright said, “Americans chickens are coming home to roost…” Amen to that, brother, but I bet this isn’t what he meant by it. Still, truth will out, at least sometimes.

Just ask the drivers on Northbound I-5…

New Orleans is in the news this week as we mark the Fifth Anniversary of Katrina, and the devastation wreaked on this city. It is remarkable to see how much has changed, and how much hasn’t.

But who could forget the images from the Superdome, both the structure itself, and the refuge it provided for numerous people. Look at it now:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

What a remarkable difference between then and now. But there are still major issues that need to be addressed, like transportation and housing:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

No doubt, people are still angry in the New Orleans area. How could they not be? They lost so much, homes, pets (one of my best friends adopted a dog who was displaced from the Hurricane Katrina. He worked with an organization in NC to provide shelter for these animals.) People moved away in droves from the New Orleans area, and many have yet to return.

Dr. Dale Archer, a psychiatrist who grew up in Louisiana, talks about the issue of people not yet returning, and other pressing issues facing New Orleans:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

New Orleans (and its surrounding environs) are only five years into a twenty year rebuilding plan. They still have quite a ways to go, especially when, as Dr. Archer pointed out, they are also contending with the BP oil spill, along with the rest of the Gulf States. The impact of the BP oil spill cannot be minimized. It was a huge blow on top of the current regrouping underway post-Katrina.

All of that is to say, the people of New Orleans continue to deal with a lot, but they are a resilient people. Those who stayed are working hard to breathe new life into this one-of-a-kind city. They need our continued support, as well, both on a governmental level, and with our tourist dollars. If you can, go visit. And have a beignet for me at Cafe DuMonde.

Go, Saints!

Catch Larry Johnson on John Batchelor’s syndicated radio show TONIGHT at around 10:05 to 10:35 p.m. ET. You’ll find programming details and “how to listen” instructions below:

___________________________________________________

Larry Johnson is a regular on the “experts panel” every Sunday night on John Batchelor’s syndicated radio show that airs nightly from 9:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. ET. You can listen live to every show via iTunes, and you can also listen to podcasts of previous shows.

Check today’s schedule (not up yet) for topics and co-guests during Larry’s appearance and for the full four-hour broadcast. If there’s no schedule, you can usually count on hearing Larry between 10:05 and 10:35 p.m. ET.

Here’s how to listen to the live show, using iTunes:

1. Click Radio.
2. Double-click News/Talk Radio.
3. Scroll down and double-click WABC-AM.

Apparently a GOP district in Minnesota as evidenced by a video created by some knuckledragger who thought it would be, gosh, I don’t know – funny? membership recruitment? cool? – whatever this webmaster person thought he was doing when he created a video highlighting how much better looking Republican women are than Democratic women. Only he didn’t put it that nicely. And yes, he used the song, “Who Let The Dogs Out” in it to describe the Democratic women.

Well, one of the alleged Republican women depicted in the video, supermodel, CEO, and chief designer, Kathy Ireland, took exception to the depiction of women in this video in a BIG way. In this AOL News opinion piece, Ireland spoke out:

There are so many warning signs that negativity is devouring honest political discourse in our country, and one of these recently made me a very unwilling part of it. When misogyny becomes part of victory at any price, our democracy is embarrassed and endangered.

Here’s what happened, and here’s why I’m angry and why I feel any American of whatever party or gender should be furious too.

Suddenly it was widely reported on the Internet that a GOP political blog in Minnesota had posted a disgusting video that proclaimed Republican women — candidates and supporters — are attractive and that their Democratic counterparts are, in the most disturbing and distorted photo presentations in their video, just the opposite. This vulgarity and flat-out misrepresentation of all women identified as Democrats was to the accompaniment of the rock song “Who Let the Dogs Out?” That shows the level of maturity.

The more appropriate question is, “Who in the Minnesota Republican campaign let these people near a computer?” Everything about this sordid business was vile. But the most awful fact is that it is absolutely representative of the tastelessness and negativity that is now the American political landscape.

I had become personally involved in this low point of political conniving because these bloggers identified me by name and photo (in swimwear, of course) as one of the “Republican babes” about whom they were boasting. My assumption is that my open position on the life issue has caused the video makers to place me in a Republican box. I’m too odd-shaped to fit into any neat little box. I vote for integrity, character, leadership and policy, regardless of party label. [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Dang – you go, Ms. Ireland! You tell ‘em! And did she ever as she continued:

But my fury derives from the way these “leaders,” and a bipartisan collection of other political negativists on both sides of the aisle, are debasing our democracy and the essential exercise of our privilege to vote our leaders in or out. Political candidates of every stripe are responsible for holding their supporters and campaign teams to their own ethical standards, or else we have to assume that these excesses (whether their prejudices are misogyny or any other form of ignorance) represent what the candidates stand for. [snip]

Snap!!! You said it (and click here to read the rest). You betcha – this kind of thing is indicative of how a candidate, a politician, sees women. Like when Obama’s Chief Speechwriter, Jon Favreau, now his White House Chief speechwriter, had a photo taken of him groping the breast of a Hillary Clinton life-size cutout, which he put on his Facebook page, and was still able to keep his job, it told us EXACTLY what we needed to know about Obama. Not only did he keep someone who clearly had a disrespect for women, but disrespected his future Secretary of State, that said it all. Not that those of us paying attention needed any more proof. We had seen plenty enough misogyny spewed Clinton’s way from Obama, his team, and the DNC long before this disturbing incident.

Good for Kathy Ireland for calling this what it is – misogyny. I appreciate her speaking out in no uncertain terms about what this looked like, and felt like, to her. She really nailed it on the head, and was absolutely right to call people to account for this kind of video.

I should add, the Minnesota GOP was none too pleased with this video, as this Atlantic article acknowledges, “Minnesota GOP Not Pleased With Sexist Video”:

[snip]The video was released by a Republican Party unit, akin to a county committee, in Senate District 56, and the Minnesota Republican Party is quick to point out that this is NOT their doing. They are, in fact, none too pleased with it.

“It was down before we even knew it was up, and obviously it’s wrong and obviously it’s inappropriate,” Minnesota GOP spokesman Mark Drake said.

“I think some people from the party have been in touch with them,” Drake said when asked if the state party has called the Senate District 56 Republicans to scold them about the web ad. “I don’t think anyone’s pleased that it was up.” [snip] (Click HERE to read the rest.)

Good for them for making that clear. So did some of the Republican women candidates.

And how about the guy who made the video, Randy Brown? What does he have to say about it? I bet you know what’s coming. It was just humor, people.

Um, no. It wasn’t humor, and it wasn’t funny. Kathy Ireland said it all: it was sexist and misogynistic. Maybe Brown thinks that’s funny. I sure as hell do not.

One last note, and this is to John McEnroe, who felt compelled to demonstrate his sexism once again in this NY Post article, “Tennis Loudmouth John McEnroe Says Women Players More Fragile Than Men,” please stop talking now. Yes, he said it:

Tantrum-prone tennis bad boy John McEnroe hit a smash shot at the ladies Friday, saying women players aren’t tough enough to compete in as many tournaments as men.

“They should be required to be in less events. There should be less events for the women,” McEnroe said on a CBS Sports conference call about its coverage of the U.S. Open, which starts Monday in Flushing Meadows.

[snip]

“You shouldn’t push them to play more than they’re capable of,” McEnroe said of the female players.

“It seems it takes an actual meltdown on the court or women quitting the game altogether before they realize there’s a need to change the schedule.” [snip] (click here to read more.)

Do I even have to mention that former pro player, Mary Carillo, and current tennis announcer with McEnroe, was not amused? Especially since she won the 1977 French Open mixed doubles championship with him. I am sure, beside Carillo, most of the pro women weren’t either. I’d love to see him say that to Serena Williams face, wouldn’t you?

John, here’s a little tip for you – put a tennis ball in it, you sexist pig. Oh, and you have a call – it’s from Kathy Ireland.