Brancaccio needs introspection: looking for buffoonery? Read any one of his columns.

.
There are few sources of information (I hesitate to sully the word "news" with any reference to the Democratian) more arrogant and out of touch with the community they purport to serve then Brancaccio's own.

Today's re-re effort includes this line:

Hey, wait … one … second. I’m thinking The Columbian has always been a moderate voice in the community. We’ve supported both liberal and conservative viewpoints. For example, in addition to supporting some Democrats this year, we supported Republicans Jamie Herrera for Congress and Dino Rossi for U.S. Senate.

Self-delusion plays an important part in the life of a fringe-leftist like Brancaccio. And this bit is a beaut.

As I've repeatedly pointed out, in 2008, his rag only endorsed democrats for any open seat, from the President on down. That's neither "moderate," nor supportive of "both liberal and conservative viewpoints."

Brancaccio mentions the two token Republicans they actually endorsed. They overlook the local legislative races where they endorsed nothing but democrats, except for Ann Rivers, who Brancaccio in his own perverted, cowardly way tried to destroy by Rule 5-ing me.

One might ask, "What about Craig Riley? Didn't they endorse him?"

I only give that a "kinda" level conclusion. They endorsed Riley, but then failed to remind everyone that Riley's opponent, Mr. Arrogance, was the one responsible for that moronic "what is and what ain't" candy tax, even though they decried the tax along with everyone else.

In short, the couldn't bring themselves to treat Moeller, who they ostensibly opposed in this election, they way they treated, say, Van Nortwick, who they couldn't attack frequently enough for issues that weren't even his fault, unlike Moeller's stupidity, which was quite calculated.

And in the local county races?

Again, nothing but democrats save the Sheriff's race.

So, why Brancaccio has to be such a self-serving liar is beyond me. But THAT he lies with such frequency is why it's so easy to disdain his other efforts to ram his agenda down our throats.

And then, this bit of whining and sniveling:

And if by chance the mainstream media takes some conservative stances or supports some conservative candidates, simply ignore it.

Are you listening!!! I said ignore it!!! If they say something that sounds conservative, call it an anomaly and get back to beating them up!

(Anomaly: deviation from the normal.)

I actually used to go out of my way doing posts where I acknowledged agreement with the democratian. But it made no difference, so, after a few years, I stopped. And now, the rag, which had ripped this blog off for stories for years, but had refused to acknowledge it's existence until this election cycle when Brancaccio used it as part of the reason to come after me personally, while acknowledging Keath Huff's cowardly efforts and using THAT blog as a way to attack both Ann Rivers and myself, whines because I don't acknowledge when they get it right?

A broken clock gets it right twice a day. Should I acknowledge that?

When has this despicable pile of used toilet paper ever acknowledged say, for example, that *I* have got it "right?" When did they acknowledge this blog as a source for their stories? When have they acknowledged that I scooped them on Brian Baird's fake death threats? Or the Anthony Bittner debacle? Brancaccio refused to admit this blog even existed, after 5 years... except to use it as a foil for an anonymous blog, writing lies, half truths and exaggerations (maybe it was an affinity, since that blog was written much like Brancaccio's sorry effort, using the same style of lies, half truths and exaggerations, doing nothing to present any information that would interfere with their self-serving conclusions... just like Brancaccio) to attack me.

The local rag is supposed to get it right ALL of the time. That, like the blind squirrel, they occasionally stumble across a semi-truck sized acorn is no particular reason to celebrate.

Lying about and pushing an agenda that will cause tens of thousands of families and businesses economic pain in the midst of this horrific recession overshadows everything else they write. Whining about "civility" and then unleashing their anal editorial page editor (yes, I'm referring to John Laird) on those they oppose overshadows everything else they write.

Using their soap box in an effort to actually harm someone they oppose... like the Brancaccio tried to harm me... and did harm my family... overshadows everything else they write.

No... it wasn't until Brancaccio was bitch-slapped for starting the process of bullying Brent Boger that he discovered, in fact, you can't beat people up with impunity... like the scum bag he is.

Brancaccio's efforts to bait me into a response to his playground bullshit from late July and early August are detailed at Lou Brancaccio Watch... for those interested in seeing what makes this psycho tick.

So, when you get to this line from Brancaccio:

Sure, some of them have got a lot of buffoonery in them, but they’re fun to read.

You've got to think: if Brancaccio is so into buffoonery, a little introspection on his part would be more then enough to give him his fill. That and a review of the tripe he writes.

Cross posted at Lou Brancaccio Watch.
.