The Content Children of AOL

(And other annoying AOL stuff.)


Images are the property of AOL or their providers.

Links to these stories on AOL may have timed out on their server


Badge of Honor.
Do you have a HuffPo badge of honor, too?

Today's news story was reporting that investors may not know their portfolio was investing in gun companies. "Hmm, but why are you only interested in gun companies, HuffPo?"



Why this page?

I had developed this Web page years ago on how AOL responds to daily news items, seeing AOL's responses too many times as if communicating with a class of second graders and why I now call them the Content Children of AOL.

Below are my recent responses to AOL's management through their feedback link. The rest of the items below are from 2007, showing the content children of AOL are still hard at work!

The bottom line is that the Huffington Post / AOL fills their estimated 13-million subscribers / viewers with trivia they actually want people to believe is unbiased news. It's done to take attention away the real events that effect the quality and safety of our lives and the lives around us. In the America of 50 years ago, citizens would reject these content sources as trash, allowing them to go bankrupt from a loss of business. But that attitude of independence is gone from too many corners of our society today, remembering when you raise the American flag too often you're raising it to a memory.

In late 2012 Huffington Post deleted my password so I could no longer submit comments to hateful stories. All my comments had been backed with documentation with no unacceptable language. I then discovered HuffPo restricted me, without advising me of such, because I had criticized AOL's CEO for purchasing this Marxist news agency without allowing the estimated 13-million subscribers to have any input. Armstrong simply dumped this fascist news agency on the membership without warning.

Some may say that I'm unfair, referring to HuffPo as Marxist. But take a look at RT, formerly Russia Today, and you'll discover how mature RT's posting are when compared with HuffingPost's, which look too often as if it's simplistic content was designed for the mentally challenged. My comment for RT is that it's Web site, unlike the Huffington Post, is designed for mature adults.

When looking at the comments left by too many HuffPo readers, you will discover that many seem to be the most hateful people running around in one place, exactly what you would expect for the Huffington Post. It's what the agency seems to thrive on.


Letter to AOL CEO, February 2012



Beware of the Ides of March from the Content Children of AOL


Perfect Example of an Oxymoron. But Few Citizens will Give a Damn.

AOL pushes HuffPo's far-left liberal indoctrination on AOL members, which endorses Planned Parenthood's abortion-on-demand. This is while AOL shows a cute rag doll aborted kids will never see or hold. But that's okay. Is this what liberals at AOL want for the USA?



Look what AOL / Huffington Post considers "Helpful News" for AOL Members.

HuffPo purposely forces AOL members to drill down for more hits to see more ads for more potential profit for HuffPo via copy that looks as if written for a 5th grader.

It was HuffPo that criticized the chain that owns the Olive Garden on October 10, 2012. It wrote the chain wanted to hold profits by changing employees to part time, HuffPo writing the chain was trying to skate by Obama's Healthcare. In truth, it's Obama's Healthcare that has businesses in an uproar across America, creating more part-time jobs for Americans than permanent jobs.


October 11, 2012




AOL graphics and its logo are property of AOL and its partners.  Graphic was put on the Web for public consumption on July 27, 2011.
On July 27, 2011, AOL was asking for opinions on its new Welcome Screen. Below is ours. If an AOL member, what's yours? Be sure to tell AOL. They want to know after spending millions of membership dollars on far-left content news reporting.

"In 2006 AOL hired liberals to force progressive content down the throats of all AOL members from writers such as Helena Andrews, Laura Miller, and Bonnie Erbe, Erbe formerly working with PBS.

Then this year AOL purchased HuffingtonPost, an opinion outlet not unlike the DailyKOS celebrating Tony Snow's cancer. AOL did THIS on membership dollars NEVER polling what kind of news reporting they wanted for THEIR dollars. AOL, like the donkey it represents, shoveled news like good Marxists. In fact, when I posted a historical fact on Huff/AOL, here is a sample of what I got to prove my point. - 'Have fun defending Teabagger terrorist, sympathizer?'

So when AOL puts up a NEW welcome screen, be sure it proudly shows the Marxist Fist of labor unions. In fact Obama became an Illinois Senator with the help of the Communist New Chicago Democratic Party. So how about a Hammer and Sickle, too? Copy? The People's Republic of AOL."





AOL Headline

Obama Memorial Day Wreath-Laying Need Not be at Arlington Cemetery -  "OUR" writer says that's absurd?



"YOUR" writer mentions Bush senior did not always go to Arlington on Memorial Day, his patriotism not questioned for his active service in the military.  However, Bill Clinton, a draft dodger whose statements against America on foreign soil needed a presidential pardon so he could run for president, did attend Arlington services.

Obama is going to lay a wreath in Illinois, (after BP brought in 400 paid workers to surround Obama when he stormed the beaches of Louisiana), because he is now on vacation in Illinois. 

With my living near Asheville, I saw Obama bring so many people and gas-eating SUVs with him it was as if a King was visiting instead of an elected official.  Of course we all know of Obama's heroic service at Harvard and then having to serve on Alinsky's front line.

Thought AOL's content children should know.



Original Article:

The president has come under fire for skipping the traditional Memorial Day
visit to Arlington National Cemetery. Our writer says that's absurd




Don't Let Your Provider Get Away With Liberal Reporting When You Have To Pay The Freight!


AOL Homepage Team,

Thank you for your reply. But sorry, I can't buy into your spin about the fairness of your news!  

Out of 22 editors AOL's MediaGlow hired for contributing to AOL last year, many of them have worked or are in a far-left environment.  All I had wanted for my $24.95 a month was reporting instead of distorting. 

According to a sample of their own bios . . .

Helena Andrews is a previous reporter for the New York Times and Politico.  Melinda Henneberger is the editor-in-chief of and spent 10 years as a reporter for the New York Times.  C.S. Manegold was a reporter for The New York Times and Newsweek.

Laura Miller, former Dallas mayor, was adored by Robert Redford the New York Times.  Alex Wagner is the executive director of George Clooney’s Darfur foundation.  Ria Misra has had her works appear on PBS, NPR and online for the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. 

Lori Adams Chabay lives in socialist Sweden.  Alex Hughes spent two years working for the Obama campaign.  Linda Kulman covers education for and collaborated a book with Hillary Clinton.

Bonnie Goldsteinhas been a Slate columnist and investigative producer for ABC News.  Mary C. Curtis is an NPR contributor and previously a writer and editor for The New York Times.

Bonnie Erbe is a host for a PBS show.  And Mia Navarro is a New York Times reporter.

I am so tired of selfish and elitist progressives eating off the fruits of our land and living off the deaths of others who fought for individual freedoms as the hallmark for America;  not socialism . . . not social justice . . . and not Marxism for those who bow to POTUS and his lies.  He even continues to call our country a Democracy, when we are a Republic, my writing if he wants to live in a Democracy he needs to move to Venezuela. 

And AOL is also not demanding day in and day out investigations into Freddie and Fannie, the cash cows of the Democrats being left out of the new federal regulation's bill.  Why?! 

It was Freddie and Fannie that Bill Clinton used to take over all those bad loans the Democrats made the banks give out in the late 1990s using Carter's CRA to create a new voting block for Democrats with the help of ACORN, as the Democrats are also going to try to do with giving Illegals amnesty this year.  

Parties can't find many new voters in the country so Democrats created these "voting blocks" when in control of America's Congress and Treasury, using other people's money to feather their beds.  That's how it's done, so simple a baby could figure it out.  But not the content children of AOL.  Gee, I wonder why reading all those liberal bios of AOL contributors.   

How many Americans do you think remember it was Reno at the national level and Obama at the Chicago level in the late 1990s who went after the CEOs of banks at their businesses and their private homes to intimidate banks to give out bad loans to people who couldn't afford them, just as SEIU had repeated just a few weeks ago storming a Bank of American lawyer's home with 500 union members treading on his lawn, you know as if we lived under Chavez?  I bet not many, AOL content providers keeping it that way.   

When the banks and Wall Street saw the Democrats trashing morals and ethics in finance back in the 1990s, they joined in taking those bad loans and bundling them into securities that were sold around the world making tons of money and donating back to the Democrats.  It was the greed of the Democrats for money and power over the last 15 years that almost destroyed this country in 2008.  But reading AOL you would never know that. 

Sorry, AOL, your news reporting is too often shallow, filled with propeller-head stories that are of little use for conservative members being able to make intelligent decisions on the fate of their country. 

And AOL must have millions of conservative members who are simply cheated out of their right to know without spin and the coloring of the news for $24.95 a month, unhappy but needing their AOL e-mail address for ID to other accounts, as I have been complaining about to AOL FOR YEARS asking AOL to simply clean up its act! 

I use my following quote to the surfers who visit my Web site to explain the sign of our times:  "If you can't connect the dots, you've been eating the crayons."

Documenting Sites:

The Candid Conservative, May 30, 2010

Obama Lies Expiration Dates

The Obama Page (Start at the bottom and work up - 2007 to current)

Wishing this was only a Fairy Tale

Fundamentally changing America


In a message dated 6/1/2010 10:11:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

Hi, thanks for the feedback! We're sorry to hear you are unhappy with the news coverage you are seeing on the AOL Welcome Screen. Our news editors do their best to provide a proper balance of news stories, but it’s often difficult to do this on the smaller scaled snapshot you see on the AOL Welcome Screen. We recommend you visit and we believe you will find a balanced presentation in the wider angle view.

The AOL Homepages Team




Interesting Stories from the Content Children of AOL

Sorry, the stories are listed only when we have time to find or care about them.

(Note: The questions from AOL's content children were so silly and numerous it became a waste of time to track after 2007.)


The Huffington Post Article Reads . . .

"President Barack Obama says the Senate's opposition to a bill that would have expanded background checks for gun buyers marks a "shameful day for Washington." He says a minority of senators decided "it wasn't worth it" to protect the nation's children.

Obama spoke in the Rose Garden shortly after the Senate vote. It marked a major blow to the gun control push Obama started in the wake of December's shooting at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school.

The president pinned the blame for the measures' failure on Republicans, though five Democrats also opposed the plan.

Obama was introduced by the father of a 7-year-old killed in the shooting. Other families joined him in the Rose Garden, along with former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head in 2011." . . . Read More

(Note is was reported Tucson police could have picked up Gifford's shooter early on, knowing his mental condition. But they didn't. Instead the law enforcement officer blamed conservatives for the murder when that official could have prevented the tragedy, too worried about political correctness to do his job.)

Note in the above that Obama, as usual, uses a technique well taught to him from the writings of Saul Alinsky to target and freeze the enemy. In this case, anyone not buying into Obama's entry into a beginning of gun ownership control of law-abiding citizens wants children dead.

Of course it is Obama who wants children dead through not voting, when in the Illinois senate, to keep a child alive who survived an abortion. That live child is an American citizen with Obama having no problem of stealing the child's civil right to protect the child's murderer, usually Planned Parenthood.

We all are disgusted with America's history of the KKK. Yet when reports come out that more black children die via the killing tools of Planned Parenthood in just three days than all blacks murdered by the KKK during its history, one has to wonder exactly who is this Obama guy and what is his real agenda.

Finally, when remembering the Boston Bombing of April 15, 2013, by terrorists, we all need to remember that Obama had no trouble hanging around terrorists called the Weathermen. One, Bill Ayers, was reported to assist Obama in running for President while Obama had passed out millions of dollars for socialists school programs of the CAC written by Ayers. And then there is Jeff Jones, another bomber, reported to have helped to write Obama's 800 billion-dollar give-a-way in the 2009 Stimulus Bill.

Yea, Obama, that is shameful!


HuffPo reports Obama was angry that his opponents lied, which Obama has done again and again since 2007.

Huffington Post Headline 4/17/2013

HuffPo links to its story titled, Obama Speaks On Gun Control. But on its above intro page a HuffPo-approved staff member decided to focus on the vote as a "shameful day." It's the signature of this progressive-driven news agency, one AOL's CEO jumped on a few years ago to represent his ISP.

Many Americans may believe a "shameful day" would be when Obama made all those backroom deals to pass his socialist healthcare bill, Pelosi laughing that she wouldn't know what was in the bill until they passed the bill. It was the height of arrogance by the Democrat Party.

Yet not a single Republican voted for the bill, creating the term, "You've Been Stupacked" to get it passed. Americans now begin to realize the carnage it could cause in their lives.

Or a "shameful day" when Obama lied, saying doctors made more money by cutting off the feet of patients instead of giving them medicine. Democrats were placed like manikins in a store window, shoulder to shoulder, behind Obama as he said this, like dead manikins not reacting to the lie that was being said right in front of them.

The scene reminded me of the label Karl Marx gave to his supporters, calling them his very useful idiots.

And many would agree a "shameful day" was when Obama did his famous "Crotch Salute," named by the military. Obama purposely put his hands over his crotch during the playing of our National Anthem at a Democrat fund raiser in Iowa in 2007, later also saying on video he wouldn't wear that pin, the one representing 9/11.

Also note Vice President's Biden's face in the above screen capture, obviously not accepting the view of other Americans and the hallmark of our free society. Biden is a man picked to be Obama's pit bull, rather than representing the country as a "real" Vice President.

Binden's facial expression reminds one of Walter from Jeff Dunham's puppets.


The Huffington Post article continues . . .

"In March 2012, The New York Times described Tebow as 'a preacher in a football player’s body' who wears his religion on his sleeve but rarely discusses controversial issues.

This polite strand of evangelicalism stands in sharp contrast, however, with the barnstorming, hate-filled rhetoric of the church where he is scheduled to speak in April.

First Baptist Dallas is an approximately 11,000-member church led by senior pastor Robert Jeffress, an evangelical Christian who has built up quite a reputation for himself in circles among the religious right.

In October 2011, Jeffress endorsed Texas Governor Rick Perry for president, then went on to claim that Islam, Mormonism and Judaism are heretical religions 'from the pit of hell.' . . . Huffington Post

Note: If it was Christian lifestyles that were spreading AIDS to liberals, the progressive press would be all over it, probably writing Jesus freaks were contaminating the population. In fact the Huffington Post just posted its article as the CDC was releasing its report that the cost of the spread of STI (Sexual Transmitted Infections), was estimated to be around $16,000,000,000, (that's with a 'b' for billion.):

"Be careful on Valentine’s Day—the U.S. Centers for Disease Control just announced that the number of new sexually transmitted infections (STIs) has risen to 20 million nationwide each year.

15-24 year-olds are responsible for half of those infections, leading the CDC to urge abstinence or at least safe sex. The list of diseases is most dominated by human papillomavirus (HPV), then chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, hepatitis B, HIV, and trichomoniasis.

One scientist at the CDC bluntly stated that the nation is in the middle of an “ongoing, severe STI epidemic.” The cost of these diseases nationwide is estimated at $16 billion, with the bulk of it derived from healthcare for those with HIV/AIDS." . . . CDC / Breitbart

So what happened to the term STD? After 25 years it's being replaced by some 'mumbo-jumbo' excuse to make it sound less intimidating to our rotting grass roots. Progressives are therefore likely to be pushing the medical community to tone it down. In other words, Planned Parenthood can now say, 'Keep on 'trucking, girls and boys. It's only a STI.'

"Concerning any statements the church may have made about Muslims, it's the progressive media's own fault for not reporting the number of murders by Islamists against Christians overseas, therefore not forcing Muslims in the U.S. to speak out against it. Instead the media buries many of the stories in the name of . . . wait for it . . . political correctness, the crusher of all democracies throughout human history.

Churches in the U.S., via their missionaries, then react to the need for help in those areas where Islamists have burned down houses of worship and at will hachette up human beings.

Franklin Graham, who reaches out to the families of Christians that have been murdered, is then attacked by the progressive media for hate-speech, Graham 'simply mentioning' the killings and kept from the Pentagon Day of Prayer in 2010.

Also, did the Huffington Post / AOL get involved in helping to free an American pastor in Iraq, recently sentenced in February 2013 to eight years in prison for simply having a Bible study. Or does that offend HuffPo, too, the 'news' agency adopting Sharia Law into its corporate culture? I wouldn't be surprised at anything HuffPo does.

So you're damn right churches in America are angry. And they should be in a country where their grandparents and those before them fought hard against other fascists in the world who tried to prevent them from their freedom of speech. The Huffington Post is only doing what it sees as normal through Alinsky-adopted lenses.

Anyone interested in how this is done can go to this Web page to read who tried to shut Franklin Graham up. They can then scroll down to see a long list of attacks by Muslims on Christian families along with other disturbing stories. . . . "2,000 Years Later"

- Webmaster



Huffington Post Headline 2/15/2013

Secular progressives at the Huffington Post, representing AOL's ISP, attacks an 11,000 member Baptist church in Texas.

Obama's progressive media in 2013 is becoming too reminiscent of another media's attack on another religion in another time, that fawning media having supported the government in Germany after its elections of 1932.


The Huffington Post wrote, "Tim Tebow may not be getting a lot of attention on the field as the New York Jets' backup quarterback, but he's certainly receiving a lot of buzz off of it, most recently with the announcement of an upcoming speaking engagement at a [whose standards] controversial Dallas, Texas, megachurch.

Tebow is slated to speak on April 28 at 9:15 a.m. during a Sunday worship service of the First Baptist Dallas, according to the church's website."

(See more at top left)


Related to more content in the left column, the church is correct to be concerned about the unnecessary spread of AIDS. The Department of Health for the State of New York writes the following warning on AIDS transmission and why sodomy so easily spreads AIDS:

Unprotected anal sex with a person who has HIV or whose HIV status you do not know is the highest-risk sexual activity for both men and women. The walls of the anus and rectum are thin and have many blood vessels that can be injured during anal sex. HIV-infected semen can be easily absorbed through these thin walls and into the bloodstream. Injured tissue in the anus and rectum can expose the penis to blood containing HIV." . . . Read More

Another Web site documents its findings concerning AIDS, writing the following with research completed up to the early 1990's, showing nothing much has changed in two decades:

"At the time we are writing this article, AIDS is the leading cause of death for men age 25-45 and women age 25-34 in New York City; it is the leading cause of death in the U.S. for people with hemophilia and for people who are intravenous (IV) drug users (Institute of Medicine/National Academy of Sciences/Nichols, 1989).

The San Francisco Department of Public Health estimates that half of all gay and bisexual men in San Francisco are infected with the AIDS virus (Schochet, 1989). A recent study showed that almost 2% of babies born in New York City had HIV antibodies, indicating that their mothers are infected with HIV (Lambert, 1988)." . . . Read More



Note to AOL/HuffPo:

Hey HuffPo, where were your editors when Reverend Wright was spewing hate against America from his pulpit on the south side of Chicago? He was doing this while a church member sat in his pews for twenty years, not a football player but a candidate for president of the United States later not vetted, the media knowing full well where he had sat for decades.


When HuffPo's reporters are in agreement with the principles of radicals, then those reporters simply see those teachings and activities as, well, normal.

The Audacity of Hopelessness
From the desk of author, Michael Solomon


February 2012 Letter To AOL's CEO
(Want To Write? See CEO's address in the letter.)

AOL's CEO, Armstrong, allows this kind of bias writing as news from the (cough) news service he purchased on AOL's membership's dime.

Newspapers are not allowed to do this, having to put opinion pieces like this one from HuffPo in the opinion section so the reader knows the article is full of spin and political agendas. But Armstrong goes wild, allowing this biased agenda as if news on the front pages of HuffPo's section.

HuffPo had been as if the sister news organization of the DailyKOS, HuffPo a liberal progressive Web outlet when purchased by AOL. Its diatribe was allowed to continue such as shown in the article on the right that drips with bias, copy below written by HuffPo with the full context on the right:

"A professor, that is, with a million-dollar megaphone and a well-honed ability to dish apocalyptic warnings about a tyrannical government angling to grab people's firearms."

HuffPo likes to forget that new information had already come forth that the Obama administration in Washington D.C. had killed an American citizen on foreign soil with a military drone because the citizen was reported to be a terrorist. We used to capture Americans accused of terrorism and put them in front of a court to prove their guilt or innocence. Now this administration simply whacks them like Al Capone in Chicago.

Since this 16-year old American "terrorist" was from Denver, what exactly are the rules these days for who qualifies to be taken out with a drone, information held secret when it happen to be an American citizen.

HEADLINE: Team Obama Killed 16-Year Old Denver Kid in Yemeni Drone Strike . . . Read More

This is an excellent question when remembering Obama's open support for the Southern Poverty Law Center, allowing its hate on an FBI site and then to Homeland Security, both well documented.

While candidate Obama in 2008 had accused then President Bush of torturing known terrorists in the process of water boarding, three reported, their information was later used by Obama to capture, (oops), kill ben ladin. (See story in next segment below.)

Obama himself, as president, now obviously avoids torture. He instead simply murders an assumed American terrorist from the air in another country by the simple push of a button. And what's best for Obama is that he never gets his hands dirty.

Yea, HuffPo, and those AP "journalists," who are reported to have helped to write this story on the right, LaPierre was obviously correct in being concerned that the Obama administration could be a tyrannical government angling to grab people's firearms.

My wife, born in Wyoming in the 1940's, well remembers firearms being brought to schools without question for gun clubs to teach safety, no one shot in the classroom. That society at that time was controlled by conservatives.

Seventy years later this American society is controlled by progressive nannies represented by HuffPo's corporate culture and the Obama tyrannical administration HuffPo just loves, along with its Czars, some admitted Communists. Even a former Weather Underground bomber, Jeff Jones, was allowed by Obama to help write the regulations in Obama's Healthcare Bill.

It proves again that guns don't kill, people do, especially those being brought up in a progressive culture where Hollywood and video game producers now fill TV and movie screens with gun-killing violence. They also add plenty of blood and gore 24/7 not unlike the blood and gore left on the floors in the Newtown killing by a mentally ill young adult, who had been bullied all his life.

Something is extremely wrong with this picture of America today, one HuffPo with its progressive media are wanting to hide it from the American public by pointing to other subjects while mocking them, such as LaPierre of the NRA in this story.

Be aware the progressive media's technique has a teacher. Its from the late Saul Alinsky and his Power Points for control. The technique also has an outcome. It's called fascism, it finally raising its ugly head in America.

The Obama administration has created the faux need for a "Nanny State," a cultural foundation that allows fascism loose onto societies. America had come to the rescue of one of those in Germany in WWII.

But now I have to ask, who will come to the American people's rescue when fascism goes viral on this soil? Surely not AOL, not HuffPo or its progressive mainstream media, or the Obama administration, and of course hands down not the Southern Poverty Law Center.

AOL's CEO, Armstrong, calls this progressive bias "news" for AOL's estimated 13 million members.

As if news, AOL allowed on February 9, 2013 -

WASHINGTON — Wayne LaPierre would just as soon read a book as fire a gun.

That's right, the National Rifle Association's fire-breathing defender of gun rights is more academic than marksman.

"A policy wonk," says Joseph Tartaro, president of the pro-gun Second Amendment Foundation. "He is more professorial than you would think."

"Wayne is a Washington-type person," says John Aquilino, a former NRA spokesman who worked with LaPierre. "He is best characterized as an absent-minded professor."

A professor, that is, with a million-dollar megaphone and a well-honed ability to dish apocalyptic warnings about a tyrannical government angling to grab people's firearms.

"It's about banning your guns ... PERIOD!" LaPierre wrote in a January email to the NRA's 4 million-plus members. . . . Read More


The following article was reported by HuffPo on March 6, 2012. I was stunned that HuffPo waits for WikiLeaks to ask the question that HuffPo doesn't seem to have had time to investigate, too busy with its daily partying with the Obama administration?

"Was Osama Bin Laden Really Buried At Sea? WikiLeaks Emails Suggest Al Qaeda Chief's Body Was Flown To U.S. Military Mortuary" - Huffington Post

"Osama Bin Laden was apparently buried in the waters of the north Arabian sea, but internal emails from intelligence service Stratfor, obtained by hacker group Anonymous and posted by WikiLeaks suggest otherwise.

According to official accounts, he was wrapped in a sheet and “eased” off the decks of the U.S.S Carl Vinson just hours after he was killed on May 2 in a United States-led operation, in accordance with Muslim tradition." . . . Read More




"Was Osama Bin Laden Really Buried At Sea? WikiLeaks Emails Suggest Al Qaeda Chief's Body Was Flown To U.S. Military Mortuary" - HuffingPost headline

In response, the following comment was sent to HuffPo. But I suspect it was never posted since no replies were returned:

Surprise, surprise!

So WikiLeaks is the real provider of news and HuffPo just another media parrot?  It's why I'm furious with AOL’s CEO buying HuffPo for content calling it news.  HuffPo should have ferreted this information out months ago on its own, watching out for the members of AOL now that it’s a provider for AOL and no longer a George Soros look-a-like. 

For years it had been treating the Obama administration as if invited over to a slumber party, everyone drinking hot chocolate and slapping each other on the back.  There is a word for this relationship.  It’s called being spoon-fed. 

But with today’s WikiLeaks potential revelation, it doesn't taste so good anymore, does it HuffPo?  You’ve been taken to the cleaners by another Obama photo op and on the dime of AOL members. 

No matter where humans go, be it Russia or the United States, the rule is simple for journalists; "Power Corrupts.  Absolute Power, Corrupts Absolutely."  To that end HuffPo instead acts as if it’s just another political arm of the Obama administration, protecting the readers at AOL from nothing . . . zero . . . zip.

As the American voters are quickly discovering, sometimes they get the government they richly deserve, be it from progressive Democrats pushing Marxism on the people or RINOs pushing balls of elephant dung down their garden path. 

The following was sent to HuffPo on March 2, 2012, as a comment to the article on the right:

I see AOL's HuffPo's, pajama propeller heads are out in force today, it just turning noon.

First, is the HuffPo article talking about "Holder's" Justice Department? Isn't that the same Justice Department that used straw men to move commercial grade weapons across the Mexican border, knowing they would murder hundreds of Mexicans? Isn't this also the same Justice Department that is working with the DNC to pin those expected murders on American gun shops for the November presidential elections, the deaths acceptable collateral damage the department knowing full well these guns would be killing humans, not road runners?

Is this the Justice Department HuffPo is talking about?

And the writer says the sheriff is the "self-proclaimed" toughest sheriff in America. I thought it was the locals of Maricopa County who said this, delighted illegals were being removed off their streets. “Holder's” Justice Department calls it racial profiling because the sheriff is detaining the DNC's undocumented voters for the November election, the ones that steal American's identities so they can vote. Didn't anyone see Judicial Watch's report on the "Rebranding of ACORN?"

Finally, the birth certificate put up by the White House was a .pdf file. Taking an existing birth certificate and posting it as a .pdf file is an oxymoron, at least to states that need to know the person standing in front of them is the person standing in front of them. That is unless HuffPo’s political correctness says, "Nothing to see here, move along please."

HuffPo goes after Arizona Sheriff.

Image is from AOL's HuffingtonPost

AOL's HuffPo attacks the Arizona Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, for daring to look into Obama's birth certificate, the one the White House had posted as a .pdf file. The article also made the claim that Arpaio is the "self-proclaimed" toughest sheriff, when it's the people from his county who know he is.

Joe Arpaio, Prominent Sheriff, Unveils Results Of Investigation Into Obama Birth Certificate


Update on reports on Obama's Birth Certificate

The following is lead-in copy from a story for the far-left, liberal progressive Internet Service Provider, AOL, by the HuffingtonPost, its news agency of record.

The acid hate lead-in for the stories headline proves again, as I have said, that the HuffingtonPost news agency purchased by AOL is not unlike the DailyKOS, a blogging service that had been excited to see the FOX News reporter, Tony Snow, come down with and die of cancer, all the presidential 2008 Democrat candidates running to seek approval from the DailyKOS readers.

"Many of you will be shocked to learn what our possible future president believes, who he answers to, the bloody jihads his so-called church has carried on for centuries, and its current role as the tactical arm of the North American Man-Boy Love Association." - HuffingtonPost, February 24, 2012

The Story is written by Larry Doyle, who is attributed to being a comedy writer for shows such as the Simpsons and Beavis & Butthead.

Doyle goes on to write for AOL's HuffingtonPost's Comedy Section:

"Unlike Christians, Santorum and his fellow Roman Catholics participate in a barbaric ritual dating back two millennia, a "mass" in which a black-robed cleric casts a spell over some bread and wine, transfiguring it into the actual living flesh and blood of their Christ.

Followers then line up to eat the Jesus meat and drink his holy blood in a cannibalistic reverie not often seen outside Cinemax.

Roman Catholics like Santorum take their orders from 'the Pope,' a high priest who, they believe, chats with God. Santorum has made no secret of his plans to implement his leader's dicta on allowed uses of vaginas and anuses, but has said little about what additional dogma he will be compelled to obey.

Will child killers and terrorists go unexecuted on the Pope's say-so? Will we be able to conduct our wars as we see fit, or only the 'just' ones? If Santorum is a good Catholic, and he appears to be among the very best, our real president with be Benedict XVI (a "former" Nazi, by the way)." - Larry Doyle, HuffingtonPost's (HaHa) Comedy Section. . . . Read More

Image is from AOL's HuffingtonPost.

AOL attacks the Catholic Church under the Huffington Post's . . . wait for it . . . "Comedy Section" under the headline. . .

The Jesus-Eating Cult of Rick Santorum

I wrote the following to the Content Children of AOL on the story found on the right they reported on February 22, 2011.

The content children of AOL had the headline today, "Four American Hostages Killed by Somali Pirates."

But they were not hostages, as in a building, but Christians abducted in International waters, an important part of the headline since readers do not always go beyond the headline.

Also they were not killed. They were murdered. And they were not murdered by just Somali Pirates but by Muslim Pirates in an area where I believe Muslim have been at war with America since the days of Thomas Jefferson.

President Obama had four war ships following the yacht when one rubber raft with Navy Seals at night would have ended the abduction in a heart beat.

So below is how your headline should have read, probably similar to what would have been written in the 1950s by real journalists, not today's liberals happily coloring the news to be PC:

"Carrying Bibles for the world, four American Christians abducted at sea murdered by Muslim Pirates."

AOL should correct it, but it won't.

But it doesn't end there.

Then AOL in its World News Section blamed the American Christians for their murders, writing in its headline, "Americans Killed by Pirates Knew the Risks, Friends Say."

Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle, of Seattle, Washington, murdered by Muslims while in International waters.

The [yacht] Quest was the home of Jean and Scott Adam, a couple from California who had been sailing around the world since December 2004 with a yacht full of Bibles. The two other Americans on board were Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle, of Seattle, Wash. - CBS News

This story was carried by AOL in February 2011, AOL parroting the headline pushed by the mainstream media as found on Google, "Four American Hostages Killed by Somali Pirates."

Our comments on the left complained that too many readers don't look beyond the headline, and that AOL's headline left out the heart of the story.


Note: AOL could have picked up this CBS Story instead, CBS at least getting its teeth into what had happened to these innocent Christian Americans at the hands of Islamists.

Below is the first few sentences in an article AOL's content children had linked to from Politics Daily. Note the lead-in to the story says nothing about a GOP plot, AOL inventing that image on purpose.

"While acknowledging they don't have the votes for outright repeal of the health care reform law, congressional Republicans plan to chip away at it piece by piece such as through measures that would limit the government's ability to enforce key provisions of the measure, the New York Times reported Sunday.

The Times said that an example of the Republican strategy includes limiting money for the Internal Revenue Service so that it could not aggressively enforce the provisions of the law that require people to obtain coverage and employers to help pay for it. That provision of the law depends heavily on the fact that those who don't comply would face tax penalties.

Republican leaders also plan to use spending bills to block other elements of the law to which they are object."

Politics Daily, November 7, 2010

AOL's lead in words on its membership's news page were no different than what the far-left AARP had done to its membership in its magazine mailed to them. In AARP's summer 2009 issue before the healthcare vote had been taken, AARP had shown a thumbs-up graphic symbol the height of a page.

When AARP was later challenged on only representing its liberal membership in discussing the bill, its executives said in so many words, "Who, us? We would never do that!" Remember this video of a meeting held by an AARP representative, reminding one of how a dictatorship operates?


AOL goes out of its way to call GOP's trying to take back the Healthcare Bill as a "PLOT!"

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on November 7, 2010. When the Democrat House leader, Nancy Pelosi, said in 2009, "We wouldn't know what's in the bill until we pass the bill," where was AOL and the plots of Democrats to ruin the greatest healthcare system in the bill under the banner of progressive control? Way you didn't hear anything because AOL was on board with those same Democrats.

We suspect this story is from the far-left progressive writers AOL had hired on your membership dime.


And don't forget the lies of Barack Obama, telling audiences before the bill was passed and to justify its existence that their doctors were purposely cutting off feet and taking out tonsils to make money rather than do good medical research to avoid the profitable surgeries. No one in the Democrat-planted audience reminded Obama that the doctors who discover the problems aren't the ones doing the surgeries.

The Democrat-supported audience's lack of response is probably just another sign of what comes out of the poor education system in America run by the NEA, a teacher organization that recommends Alinsky Power Points as a teaching tool on its Web site.

And Obama had also told a woman concerning her elderly mother, needing a pacemaker and getting the procedure, that the elderly, such as her mother, could have instead taken a pain pill. However pain is usually not the issue when considering a pacemaker, instead an irregular heart beat. Remember, this president is a graduate of Harvard University, ground zero for progressive propaganda.

AOL content children holds subscribers in total suspense, biting their nails, See Who She Wants to Resign

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. first lady Laura Bush -- in a rare foray into foreign policy -- called on Myanmar's military junta to "step aside," give up the "terror campaigns" against its people and allow for a democratic Myanmar in a commentary published in Wednesday's Wall Street Journal.

"Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies are a friendless regime," Bush said. "They should step aside to make way for a unified Burma [Myanmar] governed by legitimate leaders."

"The rest of the armed forces should not fear this transition -- there is room for a professional military in a democratic Burma," Bush said, in keeping with the U.S. policy of still using Myanmar's former name.

In Wednesday's commentary, Bush called on Myanmar's military leaders to release Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders so they can meet with and plan for a transition to democracy.

"Meanwhile, the world watches -- and waits," Bush warns.

"We know that Gen. Than Shwe and his deputies have the advantage of violent force. But Ms. Aun Sung Suu Kyi and other opposition leaders have moral legitimacy, the support of the Burmese people and the support of the world."

"The regime's position grows weaker by the day. The generals' choice is clear: The time for a free Burma is now."

The humanitarian rights situation in Myanmar has been a cause for the first lady in the past few months as the crisis there worsened.

Myanmar state media has reported that 2,000 people were detained during the demonstrations and the crackdown against them -- under an emergency law imposed on September 25 banning assembly of more than five people -- and that 700 of those people have been released.

The AOL content children do it again, asking the question, as if AOL members are in the first grade, "See who She wants to Resign."  See Jack run.  She Jill chase Jack.  See Jack and Jill get lost, unable to read road signs.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on October 10, 2007. The question they asked about the First Lady on their homepage as shown above was, "See Who She Wants to Resign."


AOL Source: CNN News 10/10/07

The AOL content children ask if AOL members agree with the First Lady's comment, asking for the violence to stop and to allow a free Burma.

You should know that she was talking about Myanmar's leaders murdering over 1,000 of their own people, who had been demonstrating for freedom and protected by hundreds of monks. In response Myanmar chopped up and murdered monks, leaving their bodies for others to see.

Obviously AOL wants to be politically correct, so if you believe using hatchets on human beings, AOL is delighted to give you a voice in the approval of this method of persuasion. So if you are fighting for freedom, AOL wants you to know they really aren't for you or against you, seeing you as if they had come from Mars.

AOL asks the question only the investigating vet can know, Did Ground Zero Smoke Kill Jake?

(July 26, AP) - A black Labrador who became a national canine hero after burrowing through white-hot, smoking debris in search of survivors at the World Trade Center site died Wednesday after a battle with cancer.

Owner Mary Flood had Jake put to sleep Wednesday after a last stroll through the fields and a dip in the creek near their home in Oakley, Utah. He was in too much pain at the end, shaking with a 105-degree fever as he lay on the lawn.

No one can say whether the dog would have gotten sick if he hadn't been exposed to the smoky air at ground zero, but cancer in dogs Jake's age - he was 12 - is quite common.

Some rescue dog owners who worked at the World Trade Center site claim their animals have died because of their work at ground zero. But scientists who have spent years studying the health of Sept. 11 search-and-rescue have found no sign of major illness in the animals.

The results of an autopsy on Jake's cancer-riddled body will be part of a University of Pennsylvania medical study of Sept. 11 search-and-rescue dogs.

Flood had adopted Jake as a 10-month-old disabled puppy - abandoned on a street with a broken leg and a dislocated hip.

"But against all odds he became a world-class rescue dog ," said Flood, a member of Utah Task Force 1, one of eight federal search-and-rescue teams that desperately looked for human remains at ground zero.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on July 26, 2007. The question they asked on their homepage AS shown above was, "Did Ground Zero Smoke Kill Jake?"



AOL Source: AP News 7/26/07


AOL asks mind-blowing question on Pizza Hut waitress getting $10,000 tip, How will she use the money?

(July 13) — It was just a typical day on the job at the Pizza Hut in Angola, Ind., for 20-year-old Jessica Osborne when out of the blue, she received a gift that would change her life: a $10,000 tip from one of her customers.

"When I opened it up, I just — I thought maybe I read too many zeros and I lost my breath," Osborne said on "Good Morning America." "It was amazing."

The tip of a lifetime came from a family of regular customers. Every Friday, Becky and her family, who asked that their last name not be used, come in and order the same thing: a Meatlovers pizza, half pepperoni, half black olives and mushrooms. Becky said Osborne always came to the table with a smile on her face.

"She was sweet and bright and cheerful and never complained," Becky said. "She was just a sweet waitress."

But Osborne had recently been let down by financial troubles that were keeping her ambitions at bay. She had enrolled in a local college but was forced to withdraw because of a lack of financial aid. She told Becky's family about the textbooks she had bought and kept in the trunk of her car and her dreams to become a photographer.

"I thought, 'This is a very generous person,'" Becky said, "and we enjoyed just talking to her, finding out about her life."

Osborne got to know Becky and her family through their weekly pizza dinners, but she didn't realize that they had recently suffered a great tragedy. Becky's husband and eldest daughter were killed in a car accident, and she had been left with a large settlement.

Once Becky heard about Osborne's broken dreams, she decided to use some of the money from the settlement to make them come true.

"We decided we needed to help Jessica and she was there, we were there, and it just seemed like the right thing to do," Becky said.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on July 13, 2007. The question they asked on their homepage AS shown above was, "How will she use the money?"



AOL Source: ABC News 7/13/07


Critical question for those who pay $24.95, Do you believe the Amazon monster exists?

RIO BRANCO, Brazil (July 8) -- Perhaps it is nothing more than a legend, as skeptics say. Or maybe it is real, as those who claim to have seen it avow. But the mere mention of the mapinguary, the giant slothlike monster of the Amazon, is enough to send shivers down the spines of almost all who dwell in the world’s largest rain forest.

The folklore here is full of tales of encounters with the creature, and nearly every Indian tribe in the Amazon, including those that have had no contact with one another, have a word for the mapinguary (pronounced ma-ping-wahr-EE). The name is usually translated as “the roaring animal” or “the fetid beast.”

So widespread and so consistent are such accounts that in recent years a few scientists have organized expeditions to try to find the creature. They have not succeeded, but at least one says he can explain the beast and its origins.

“It is quite clear to me that the legend of the mapinguary is based on human contact with the last of the ground sloths,” thousands of years ago, said David Oren, a former director of research at the Goeldi Institute in Belém, at the mouth of the Amazon River. “We know that extinct species can survive as legends for hundreds of years. But whether such an animal still exists or not is another question, one we can’t answer yet.”

Dr. Oren said he had talked to “a couple of hundred people” who had said they had seen the mapinguary in the most remote parts of the Amazon and a handful who had said they had had direct contact.

In some areas, the creature is said to have two eyes, while in other accounts it has only one, like the Cyclops of Greek mythology. Some tell of a gaping, stinking mouth in the monster’s belly through which it consumes humans unfortunate enough to cross its path.

But all accounts agree that the creature is tall, seven feet or more when it stands on two legs, that it emits a strong, extremely disagreeable odor, and that it has thick, matted fur, which covers a carapace that makes it all but impervious to bullets and arrows.

“The only way you can kill a mapinguary is by shooting at its head,” said Domingos Parintintin, a tribal leader in Amazonas State. “But that is hard to do because it has the power to make you dizzy and turn day into night. So the best thing to do if you see one is climb a tree and hide.”

Geovaldo Karitiana, 27, a member of the Karitiana tribe, claims to have seen one about three years ago, as he was hunting in the jungle near an area that his tribe calls “the cave of the mapinguary.”

“It was coming toward the village and was making a big noise,” he said in a recent interview on the tribe’s reservation in the western Amazon. “It stopped when it got near me, and that’s when the bad smell made me dizzy and tired. I fainted, and when I came to, the mapinguary was gone.”

Mr. Karitiana’s father, Lucas, confirmed his son’s account. He said that when his son took him back to the site of the encounter, he saw a cleared pathway where the creature had departed, “as if a boulder had rolled through and knocked down all the trees and vines.”

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on July 8, 2007. See the question they asked. Do you believe the Amazon monster exists?



AOL Source: By Larry Rohter, The New York Times, Posted: 2007-07-08 13:22:40, Filed Under: Science, World


AOL asks, Do you think a second grader could have done better?

MEYERS, Calif. (June 25) - A raging wildfire  near Lake Tahoe on Monday forced hundreds of residents to flee towering flames that destroyed more than 200 buildings, turned the sky orange and fouled the lake's famously clear waters with falling ash.

Many hotels offered free rooms as families clung to one bit of good news: Despite the destruction, there were no reports of injuries.

"All the memories are gone," said Matt Laster, a legal assistant forced to flee his rented home of five years with his wife, two young children and cat. He showed up at a recreation center looking for clothes and a sleeping bag.

The blaze had scorched almost 2,500 acres -- nearly 4 square miles -- but by early Monday evening fire officials said the blaze was about 40 percent contained. The U.S. Forest Service expects full containment of the fire by Thursday, said Ken Pimlott, assistant deputy director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

About 1,000 people had evacuated from the path of the flames, and authorities feared up to 500 other houses could be threatened in this resort area along the California-Nevada state line.

More than 700 firefighters  were on hand, but plans to send up airborne tankers and helicopters to drop water and retardant over the heavily wooded, parched terrain were scrapped because of low visibility from the thick smoke.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on June 25, 2007. See the question they asked. Do you think a second grader could have done better?



California officials declared a state of emergency, meaning the state would cover all firefighting costs. The National Weather Service issued a dense smoke advisory warning people from South Lake Tahoe to Carson City, Nev., that heavy ash was making it difficult to see and breathe.

Oh no, AOL reports Sea water rising

You may have to kiss that summer trip to the beach goodbye later this century, thanks to rising sea levels and more intense tropical storms, scientists predict.

A new study of the potential sand losses to North Carolina beaches reports that a 1-foot rise in sea level in the next 25 to 75 years (which is at the lower end of the range predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) would cause the coast to move inland by 2,000 to 10,000 feet and could cost an estimated $223 million in lost recreational value by 2080 to beach-goers in that state alone.

Predicting exactly how much beaches will shrink is impossible because beach erosion rates are highly variable, even between points that are only a few miles apart. The make-up of each beach's sand, the absence or presence of jetties and other man-made structures meant to retain sand, and offshore topography (which influences wave formation), all affect erosion rates.

But even with all the uncertainty, scientists say the future of our beloved sandy havens doesn’t look good.

“We have no way of predicting what sea level rise will do to erosion rates, except to say that they will increase,” said Duke University geologist Orrin Pilkey, who was not involved in the new study.

Whitehead found that people prefer wider beaches, which provide more room for throwing Frisbees and eating sandy sandwiches. By determining how far people will drive to these roomier beaches and calculating the cost of those drives, Whitehead estimated the millions of dollars that would be lost to vacationers. And for those for whom the allure of a vacation at the beach is simply irresistible, few options will be left, as the only beaches to survive would likely be the ones that are undeveloped now.

“People would have more limited beach options,” sociologist Maureen Harrington of Griffith University in Australia said in an email interview. “[They] would have to go to beaches that are able to migrate, that are not urbanized ... so these beaches would be more crowded.


This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on June 22, 2007, treating a scientist saying sea water was rising as if he was "God."



With beaches slowly vanishing from the coasts, vacationers might have to find some other way to entertain themselves and soak up the sun in the summer in the coming decades. “I’m predicting that they [will take] fewer beach trips,” said lead author of the North Carolina study John Whitehead of Appalachian State University in North Carolina. The report was funded by the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan, non-profit group of energy experts.

AOL asks, Tribute fitting or exploitive, as if it was any of their business

This is not just content children at work, these are employees paid by your monthly fee trying to manipulate the news on your dime. Read the poll again positioned by the content providers of AOL:

"Should Irwin's final show have been aired?"

Then they not only ask Yes or No, but they go a step further:

"Yes, it's a fitting tribute." "No, it's exploitive."

"Exploitive!" Really, exploitive?!

AOL is basically asking you, in their words, is Steve Irwin's wife, who controls what is produced in the name of her husband, purposely exploiting his death to further her future or her earnings.

Exploitive is a loaded word. There is no licensing, there is no quid pro quo here," Sweeney said. "There's no financial incentive to them or to us."

Did you forget that Google is the company with the mission statement, "Do no harm?" Yet we ourselves have experienced our URL suddenly being sucked from Google's search engine immediately after we had written a letter of complain through "Grassfire." The next day ironically our URL titled "Freedom is Knowledge" disappeared off of Google's radar.

Of course if you are not dumb, blind, and have not lost your hearing, you know Google has already helped the Chinese government to censor Web pages from its own people, Google knowing exactly what it was doing.

Google obviously from the Chinese experience alone is not to be trusted at all, as it could justify in its mind doing the same for any other government. For instance, we know it has been reported that Google's employees only donate as a group to the Democrat Party. So what is to stop Google from saying one day, "We need to sensor information that would not be beneficial to the image of OUR Democrat Party?"

Google has already proven that it would be capable of doing just that to its users. Yet only 2% of 29,228 taking the poll saw Google as a negative force. That's absolutely frightening, since people aren't protecting their democracy instead simply accepting that Google will never do them any harm . . . as if Google was this big soft, stuffed teddy bear. Wow! That is amazing.

In other words, if the AOL users who took this poll was a young boys and Google was a NAMBLA member that lived next door or was e-mailing him on the Web, how long would it be before this young boy would have already been raped having a trust factor of the NAMBLA member 98%? You should think about that. If not, ask Barbara Curley what she thinks about that.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on January 21, 2007, asking if it is a fitting tribute or exploitive.



"If you love your freedom, you should never trust anyone with a 98% rating, be it governments or private corporations like Google. That means you've become an easy target for corruption, abuse, and manipulation. Should you then lose your freedom? You bet, because you never protected it in the first place.

Wake up or die!"



This is the stuff AOL should be doing for its users, teaching them to never absolutely trust the information they are receiving from outside sources. But sadly this was never the intent of the posting.

An interesting quote at the end of story that we bet was missed by nearly all who took the poll read:

"There is no licensing, there is no quid pro quo here," Sweeney said. "There's no financial incentive to them or to us."

Did you forget that Google is the company with the mission statement, "Do no harm?" Yet we ourselves have experienced our URL suddenly being sucked from Google's search engine immediately after we had written a letter of complain through "Grassfire." The next day ironically our URL titled "Freedom is Knowledge" disappeared off of Google's radar.

Of course if you are not dumb, blind, and have not lost your hearing, you know Google has already helped the Chinese government to censor Web pages from its own people, Google knowing exactly what it was doing.

Google obviously from the Chinese experience alone is not to be trusted at all, as it could justify in its mind doing the same for any other government. For instance, we know it has been reported that Google's employees only donate as a group to the Democrat Party. So what is to stop Google from saying one day, "We need to sensor information that would not be beneficial to the image of OUR Democrat Party?"

Google has already proven that it would be capable of doing just that to its users. Yet only 2% of 29,228 taking the poll saw Google as a negative force. That's absolutely frightening, since people aren't protecting their democracy instead simply accepting that Google will never do them any harm . . . as if Google was this big soft, stuffed teddy bear. Wow! That is amazing.

In other words, if the AOL users who took this poll was a young boys and Google was a NAMBLA member that lived next door or was e-mailing him on the Web, how long would it be before this young boy would have already been raped having a trust factor of the NAMBLA member 98%? You should think about that. If not, ask Barbara Curley what she thinks about that.

98% of over 29,000 people polled on January 7, 2007, said they had no negative feelings about Google.  Tell me corporate executives at Google aren't smiling right now, knowing they now have a free pass. Remember, "Power abuses.  Absolute power abuses, absolutely."  Wake up!

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on January 7, 2007, asking your opinion of Google, which if you think about it can also be looked at as a trust issue. Note: Link to this story on AOL may have timed out on their server.



"If you love your freedom, you should never trust anyone with a 98% rating, be it governments or private corporations like Google. That means you've become an easy target for corruption, abuse, and manipulation. Should you then lose your freedom? You bet, because you never protected it in the first place.

Wake up or die!"


As if subscribers all live in the same town, the AOL content children ask, How do you think the mayor died?

I can't believe this. AOL's content children are at it again, asking if AOL subscribers,"How do you think the mayor died?"

How the hell are they supposed to know, sitting in their shorts on a computer five miles away or on the other side of the world.

But here are some suggestions if the content children at AOL really don't know, since they are looking for an answer.

- He was cleaning his gun in the parking lot when a wasp landed on his chest, his using whatever was in his hand to swat the thing off.

- There was a loud "bang" from a nearby flat tire, the mayor thinking his gun went off. So he pulled the trigger to see if that was the sound he heard.

- He wanted to cause harm to his town, so he shot himself to give it a bad name.

- He was robbed, saying to the individual, "Go ahead and shoot. I don't care."

- Some white people hated him, so they shot him right in the open where they could be seen by a passing individual or nearby security cameras.

- Hell, I don't know. Give it to CSI. They solve everything. We just hate it when anyone has to bite the dust this way. But remember just like in the music industry with Gangsta-Rap artists, the violence of the street rides with them up the ladder of success.

AOL wants you to tell them how this mayor died.

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on January 6, 2007, asking how do you think this Louisiana Mayor died. Note: Link to this story on AOL not longer was available. The link above is from Yahoo!.

AOL asks its more experienced African hunter subscribers, Did hunters shoot the right elephant?

I still can't believe this. AOL's content children are at it again, asking if AOL subscribers know if hunters shot the right elephant. Since AOL seems to not know the answer, here are some potential clues we thought of:

1. The elephant didn't provide the proper ID upon being approached by the hunter.

2. The elephant got scared, ran when a hunter screamed, "This is the law. You're under arrest. Stop or I'll shoot."

3. The elephant's family is going to court, accusing the hunter of profiling.

4. The hunter got the wrong elephant, then was sued by Chief Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg for gender-speech violation when it was reported by one of AP's political correct journalist he had said, "If you've seen one elephant, you seen them all."

5. The elephant isn't dead, having watched Ice Age II at a local outdoor theater a free weeks ago and is still playing possum. If they're not sure, we suggest they look for large, warm bowling-ball type structures near the rear of the elephant.

Did hunters get the right animal?  Do you know, because we don't, living in North Carolina.

This lead-in story ran on December 17, 2006, asking users if the hunters of the elephant got the right animal. We have some suggestions to your left, since AOL is asking for our assistance again. Note: Link provided to this story on AOL may have timed out on their server.

AOL asks nail biting $24.95 question, Why was the solo flight cut short?

AOL's content children are at it again, asking if AOL subscribers can tell them why the solo flight was cut short. Since AOL admits it doesn't know the answer, here are some potential clues we thought of:

1. The pilot has a prostate problem and forgot to take his medication, needing a quick rest stop.

2. The plane's fuel tank showed empty.

3. A wheel fell off.

4. The engine slipped out the back end.

5. A teeny-tiny light was not working.

Hell, I don't know why and I also don't know why we have to go through this "See Dick Run" routine with the content children at AOL.

However, AOL actually did know the answer, reporting a date sensor was not working. "Wow, now I needed to know that!" See what you get for $24.95 a month at AOL. Do you think PeoplePC asks dumb questions like this? For $9.95 a month, no one would care.

Finally, while Iran is making ready to attack Israel, saying they faked the Holocaust in WWII, AOL wants us to know that Angelina is to remain a single mom, calling it, (tears), a "Love Story." Do you want the real story the content children missed here? 1/3 of all children born today in the U.S. are now born to single mothers. You can go back now to playing your XBox.

Users pay $24.95 a month for this?   AOL asks its users why the solo flight of a new $275 billion fighter jet had its flight cut short, like we are all aeronautical engineers betting in a lottery.  The AOL content children strike again.

These are two AOL lead-in stories on December 15, 2006, one asking its users why a $265 Billion fighter jet's solo flight was cut short. We have some suggestions to your left, since AOL is asking for the assistance. Note: Link provided to this story on AOL may have timed out on their server.

Thank you, Aneglina.  Maybe you can help support all the single mothers in the U.S., or do you just help poor people living in Africa?

AOL asks subscribers racist question, Are you ready to vote for a black for president? AOL content children ignored the more important question, Who would you want to see as the first black president?

AOL's content children are at it again, asking if AOL subscribers are ready to vote for a female or black [African American, dudes] for president.

Wasn't it AOL that just put up a recent poll where people wrote in the most likable candidates they would like see run for president. And, uh, wasn't John Kerry last on that list and Condi Rice up near the top, a woman and an African American?

I think the question AOL's content providers asked, as usual, don't speak well for their view of the intelligence of AOL users. I would think better and more intelligent questions to ask, and that didn't look like race baiting, might be the following:

"Would Obama's lack of experience concern you if he were to run for president?"

And for Hillary, maybe the following question would be more appropriate:

"Do you think the America people are tired of hearing about the Clinton's and instead want new blood in the White House in 2008?"

Finally, how about asking, "Do you want to see Obama or Hillary as president in 2008 or someone else?"

This is one of AOL's lead-in stories on December 12, 2006, asking if America was ready for a female and a "black" president. Talk about race baiting. Note: Link to this story on AOL may have timed out on their server.

AOL asks, Does the Ebola Virus worry you? Yet AOL ignores the more important question right under their noses.

On December 10, 2006, ran the lead-in story, "Ebola Has Killed 5,000 Gorillas, Study Suggests."

This story on AOL from Reuters reported that thousands of gorillas have been killed by the Ebola Virus running rampant through its population.

I was shocked (but shouldn't have been) at the way AOL's content providers handled the poll question to AOL users on this very serious story, users whose dimes are used to pay content providers to hopefully not offend their intelligence.

The poll question was based on an estimated 5,000 gorillas that have died from a horrible virus, one which could wipe the entire species off the face of the planet. Remember that this is not happening to the Polar Bears, but with an assumed global warming everyone is suddenly worried about the bears. And we have the far-left telling us that taking oil from Alaska will hurt the Caribou, when in reality those animals just love the warmth of the pipe lines, which has actually increased their population.

So what poll question did the AOL content provider's create concerning this story? You can see for yourself on the right. They asked, "Does the Ebola virus worry you?"


This is one of AOL's lead-in stories from Reuters on December 10, 2006, and the potential extinction of the Gorilla off the face of the earth., titled "Ebola Has Killed 5,000 Gorillas, Study Suggests." Note: Link to this story on AOL may have timed out on their server.


AOL content providers keep reminding me of my first second grade reading book on the adventures of Jack and Jill. "Look at Jack run." the little book had read. "He is fast. Do you think you could run as fast as Jack?"

At noon on December 10, 2006, 86% of 35,000 AOL users answered "Yes" to the poll question. (Duh!)

An example of a better question for AOL users could have been, "With STD's running rampant in the world, should humans become smarter about controlling how diseases are spread among them after seeing what is happening to the gorilla?"

AOL should be helping its 13,000 users to better think about the quality of their own lives, and how stories like these can impact a change in the way they conduct themselves. The recent spread of a dangerous strain of E.coli on lettuce, and more recently on green onions via Taco Bell, should make people more aware of their basic everyday habits of what they do to or put into their bodies, ensuring a longer and more fruitful life . . . one that seems to be currently taken so lightly in a world of renewed terrorism around the world to bring permanent harm to the Western world.

The above image is from AOL on November 14, 2006

AOL ignores the West's Achilles' Heel relying on only satellites for communications

Finally, an excellent stat for AOL members that ran on November 14, 2006, from AOL. The story was lead by the following line:

"Web search leader Google Inc.'s chief executive, Eric Schmidt, sees a future where mobile phones are free to consumers who accept watching targeted forms of advertising." . . . read more *

AOL then surveyed their members with more than 56-thousand responding before noon on this day. Note the interesting figure, that 19% have already dropped their land line.

While you say, "Oh, good, we don't need a phone at home anymore," you might be wrong. One of the West's Achilles' Heel is its sophisticated communications for everyday needs. China has already aimed a laser beam at one of our military satellites, one they actually know about. If America becomes dependent on cell phones for all communications including emergencies, and then finds itself in a cold or hot war, satellites could go down in an instant and an entire society would have no idea what was going on or what to do. Organized chaos would be the order of the day.

Of course you know satellite feeds are already sent to cable providers and used 100% by satellite (duh) television providers. That makes America extremely vulnerable to not getting any news or directives without a physical gun or missile being fired. Of course radio would be very helpful, except it relies on feeds, too, for their updates. But you could at least enjoy the music while you watched your country fall into a black hole.

But what do I know, coming from the 1950s when America was one country and everyone understood what it meant to be safe. Of course, with Google in China, you never will really know who the enemy is or who is running the enemy, as a few American executives are now being hired to run Chinese companies. No, not companies in China. I said Chinese companies.

And you must already know that as of 2002 China was substantially ahead of the U.S. in technology graduates. Of course, America's college graduates lead in diversity, tolerance, and homophobia, effective brain tools you can use in a good fight to defend the country.

But what do I know, just an old fart whose father fought on Okinawa in WWII. By the way, did you know that was the last war America won, with thanks to yuppies like John Kerry and his Hollywood friends? Seen any movies lately. Those ticket sales are translated into anti-war dollars for Hollywood keeping us safe.

* - link may be down. AOL usually doesn't keep URL news links active very long.

The above image is from AOL on October 31, 2006


Nearly Half of Americans Uncertain God Exists - 2,010 polled

AOL content children ask another really stupid question, Should Wicca be a Major Religion, when a major religion is based on membership numbers, not a name.

On October 31, 2006, 43,717 AOL respondents (43%) by 10 a.m. in the morning had already said in private that they believed in witchcraft. Gee, according to that, America is only 8% away from becoming like the Incas (See Mel Gibson's new movie to get a feel of that exciting world.) AOL did not spin for an answer on this story, even providing a logical question, so we have to applaud them.

But this cannot be good news for those unique secular Jews that have crossed the line and joined the ACLU, or for atheists either, all by their actions have no tolerance or diversity for people of religion. However, for the ACLU there is always a twist for an organization that was started by a socialist, and here it is.

Have you already forgotten the intolerance of witches, one several years ago suing a town in Missouri for it to take a tiny cross off its city flag, which had been there to show the diversity of its citizens. The ACLU used its neo-fascists tactics out of Washington, D.C., and forced the other 99.9% of the town's citizens to have to remove their tiny cross, the witch saying it offended her.

And you think you live in a country where the majority rules? Fool! Today it's who has the power that rules the country, the ACLU planning back in the 1980s to use ACLU member-advocating judges to override the people's Constitutional rights. And if the people riot over the loss of their rights, the ACLU will be sure those insurrectionists are dumped in jail using the same judges. Now you understand how the Third Reich was able to take over an entire country, pitting citizen against citizen. It's called divisiveness. And which political party in this country uses that tactic as its mission statement?

Remember the joke about the Get Smarter Pills? See, you're getting smarter already.

Remember AOl is not an independent news service. It looks as if AOL's PC content providers are spinning an agenda while drawing a salary on the backs of AOL's member's nickels and dimes. AOL has become too much like the mainstream press, shoving an agenda down the throats of those it's suppose to represent. These "communication specialists" have left their duty of informing AOL users, instead realizing with a little glee they can control the images and sounds their members receive every day, seeming to treat them as if cattle on the ranch instead of intelligent Americans that have a Constitutional right to know. This is a dangerous game you are playing with our rights, AOL.

AOL asks, Is it unpatriotic to watch this film, rather than asking should an American president be shown in a faux documentary of an attack on his life? Of course in the coming Obama world, AOL's content children would be shocked if a similar film had been made!

AOL's content providers are asking a question in the graphic on the left, posted October 26, 2006, concerning a new movie made on the assassination of a sitting U.S. President.

AOL writes in response, "Is it unpatriotic to watch this film."

Duh, talk about teaching to the test.

Let's look at another very timely event of our time. Would AOL ask if it would be also unpatriotic to watch a terrorist film on the shooting of a U.S. soldier, one that was actually posted on CNN News, the terrorist actually saying on the audio before shooting a young American, 'Wait until civilians are out of the way?"

Mature adult Americans are able to smell a rat on their own, so should the question here then be, "Do you think CNN knew what it was doing with a voice-over saying the terrorists were worried about hitting civilians?" Now ask "Yes" or "No," AOL.

So in that light, how about this one, AOL, for the one you posted today?

"Should a film be distributed showing the murder of an actual sitting president while his country is at war?" I bet your "Yes" and "No" count changes, now asking an intelligent question that affects the country's citizens and their country's safety.

Michael J. Fox now said, (as of October 26th), he was actually over-medicated. But if he was, why did he then proceed with the ad? He wouldn't have continued a scene in a sit-com where he was drawing a salary, so why this ad?

AOL asks, as if subscribers were present at the event, if the actor was acting in the ad, rather than waiting for the correct answer that later came from Michael J. Fox himself (see bottom left.)

Rush made the point on his radio show on October 25th, using actual sound bites from Michael J. Fox, that when Michael wants to show the effects of his disease he simply does not take his medication, which he knows will then make his body shake, as he had done when speaking to Congress.

But in the case of these recent ads run against Republican candidates, Michael J. Fox was no longer before Congress. Instead, he had now entered the political arena, his body looking in the ad as if he had again not taken his medication. This time, however, his purpose was not for assistance with his affliction but to try to swing on election, while at the same time not telling the entire truth about who had and who hadn't voted on stem cell research and why, making Democrats look like the good guys (or gals) and the Republican not caring about those with Fox's disease.

And this is why Rush got into the fray on his October 25th radio program and would not back off his statements of the previous day, that Fox had before purposely not taken his medication for the effect of getting the best reaction (Hollywood style), which Rush did not fault him for as long as it wasn't being used for political purposes.

Now it becomes really interesting if Michael J. Fox is really using his affliction as a political stunt, which to us is sad. I mean, if you feel you're going to throw up, you don't just sit there and let the cameras roll while the stuff comes flying out of your mouth. You run to the bathroom, and then later get your crap together or film another day.


Michael J. Fox obviously knew what his body was doing and allowed it to be captured on film to get people to feel sorry for him. Up to now, we had respected his dealing with his affliction as a private matter, as we currently do for Neil Cavuto on the Fox News Channel, who doesn't allow his MS to get in the way of his ongoing career.

"So what's up Michael, and why do you say that conservatives like myself want you to be sick. That's a big assumption . . . the word meaning 'ass-you-me.' You crossed a line, dude, and you won't stand up to it."

So what of AOL and now did they handle it?

First, their lead-in (see above) says "Rush Mocks Ailing Fox," when in fact Rush was only bringing up the fact that he believed Michael J. Fox had created the shaking on his own by purposely not taking his medication, something he had already admitted doing for the effect of staging.

But it doesn't end there with AOL's spin. Look at how the question is posed by AOL in the next image. Note the voting question then asks, "Do you think Fox was acting in the ad?"

The appropriate question should have been, "Do you support Michael J. Fox in trying to sway voters by not taking his medication?" That was the real issue with Rush Limbaugh and continues to be the day of this writing.

AOL did not investigate the actual voting history and opinions of all candidates that Fox makes comments about in ads across the country, for a journalistic effort to explain exactly how these officials had previously voted on stem cell research and why. So it was not even known by AOL if Michael J. Fox's comments were even correct.

Rush also noted on his radio show that it was cruel for Michael J. Fox to mislead people in an ad to say if Republicans were elected, diseases would not be cured. Rush has labeled a media that does not investigate both sides of an issue, such as AOL is doing in this Fox/Rush story, as the "Drive-by" media . . . journalists machine-gunning a story and then driving on leaving dead bodies behind that had not supported their political agenda.

This is very troubling and an abuse of power, since it is being done in a society that allows journalists the freedom to obtain the truth.

A perfect example of this was the Valerie Plame story, where reporters hung out on Carl Rove's lawn and accused him and other's for month's that the Bush administration had been trying to get even with Plame's husband for a statement he had made about Hussein not looking for yellow gold in Africa. Yet recently, and three years later, it was discovered that the Bush administration never had been involved or had anything to do with the Plame issue, and that instead it had been an enemy of Bush that had made the statement off the record to the press in the first place, one that Plame's husband had known about from the beginning.

This would have been call treason in a different America.

Do you understand how dangerous this is to your Constitution's guarantee of your right to know? You have been, and you are going to continue to be, deceived by journalists who have chosen to no longer live with you but only among you as if spies.

Today we have an American media run by managing editors educated at leftist universities, who are not afraid to use the free press as the Third Reich had done against the Jews, their twisting the truth to promote an agenda. We have reached a point of revolution as Americans need now to demand consequences for these acts. Our democracy and right to know is not a game, and that when people's ideas are run over for propaganda the time has come for it to come to an end.

With our recent discovery that America's failure in Vietnam was assisted with lies from the America media, as it is now doing in Iraq and actual encouraging insurgents to kill for the American cameras, not to mention its start with Kerry lying in front of Congress in the early 1970s, politicians and many in the media need to be brought to justice and placed behind bars for a very, very long time.

The number of human beings that were and have been murdered or lost their lives, because of personal agendas by a scheming American press while America was at war, needs to now be measured in count with journalists brought to task for the heinous crimes they have caused around the world to our men and women in uniform and to foreign individuals who only wanted freedom and had trusted America to help them achieve their right of human dignity.


On Tape: Rep Won't Let Customer Quit AOL


An incredible video from CNBC shows an AOL customer trying to cancel his account, but a phone rep won't let him do it. What customer Vincent Ferrari got when he tried to cancel his account was a lot of frustration. Read the transcript now. or listen.






AOL Sticks It To Conservative Users



We had written two letters to AOL, one in the summer of 2005 and one in the fall of 2006, complaining about AOL's content that looked more like propaganda than assistance for its users to make real decisions on today's events.

In the section ran today by AOL News, as seen by its users and shown below, AOL puts up a picture of Ben Laden, questioning if a conservative ad run by a desperate Republican Party will hurt their election efforts, AOL then asks its users to vote. But what is interesting is that when you click on the hot link to watch the ad, there is no ad.

Instead the link goes to a negative spin on the ad from whom else, CNN, the ones who purposely put an X over Cheney's face while he was giving a live speech last year. CNN was so sorry back then and blamed it all on a fired technician. But it was the CNN culture that had encouraged it in the first place, which the very liberal suits over at CNN never took responsibility for.

Most conservatives already understand that when they watch CNN News, it almost looks like it had been first approved by the DNC. Today AOL's yuppies, who control the news content over at AOL, seem to have decided to follow virtually the same path.

Here is how it looked on AOL today:

This is what AOL showed on the screen on October 21, 2006, the link we picked up running about 2:30 p.m. We have made an actual hot link for you on the graphic words above "Watch Video: New GOP Campaign Ad" as we had seen it today. You can also click below for the same link. However, be aware AOL may have taken it down.

Notice the vote we captured, AOL asking people what they thought about the ad. That's funny, because the ad never ran. Isn't this sort of how the Third Reich ran things when it was controlling opinion through the media in pre-war Germany?

AOL video that says watch GOP ad, when in reality it is a spin news report from CNN.

In the hot link to the AOL piece that ran today, the content providers for AOL News asked AOL users to vote on the ad. Notice (if the link is still up) that they were never actually able to watch the real ad promised, but instead a report from CNN talking about former ads that had been run on a similar theme, the report being a negative spin, one the secular progressive CNN is so very capable of doing today without even having to blink an eye.

Yet over 44,000 AOL voters clicked on Yes or No on the radio buttons for an ad they never saw. Huh!?

Remember, it was CNN that made a pack with the devil, Saddam Hussein, before the Gulf War, which said if they could keep their news bureau in Baghdad they would not report on any of his atrocities on the people of Iraq. CNN stayed and every other American news agency was kicked out. Why would any American today, unless associated with the acid far-left part of the Democrat Party, ever trust CNN News for anything, never knowing where the news ended and the spin began.

Are you surprised at this so-called vote based on non-information AOL had provided to its users? Talk about propaganda from AOL, its content providers having no problem spitting on its conservative users. What percent do you think they are of AOL's estimated 11-million users? AOL should think about that, but they won't.

And we would hope Ted Turner would want his former CNN baby not to lie and actually show the ad in its piece picked up by AOL. But could we expect that from a suit, who recently said he hadn't made his mind up on which side to be on in the terror war?

Be aware that in the first sentence on this page, we have put up hot links to two letters we had written to the CEO of AOL. The first one was sent registered mail, and one he responded to by having some young content provider call us to say that AOL was going to do a better job with its user feedback. "Ha," we knew that would never happen, the little darling thinking he had spun us into the world of AOL joy.

The second letter was sent the following year normal postal mail. We never heard back.

So maybe you would like to write AOL's CEO yourself and ask why his content providers put up a hot link to watch an ad, but instead provided propaganda from CNN why the ad was thought to be naughty, never showing the ad so you could make a decision for yourself.

But on the other side of the coin, you may also want to write to the the CEO of AOL and thank him for the propaganda, and that he was a good secular progressive.

The address is below.

Oh, and if you are an AOL user, have you ever noticed that AOL's news, in its constant questions to its users, looks more like those days in elementary school when you had to read about the adventures of Dick and Jane? We thought AOL news was also representative of the new math, the one which asks the students questions like, "If Sally has five cents, and David has seven cents, should Sally be angry?"

Again, read the letters we sent to AOL's CEO via the hot links in the first sentence (formatted in Word 2000) and then decide for yourself if we were fair in our own content.

Unlike AOL, we show you the real thing . . . or did we get that confused with Coke?


(Note: This address is from 2007. Please check for any changes to CEO.)

Mr. Jonathan F. Miller
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, VA 20166

If you want a chance for a reply, send it registered mail through the U.S. Postal Service.


AOL video that says watch GOP ad, when in reality it is a spin news report from CNN.


And remembering AOL's promise of security, in 2004 its software engineer stole and sold over 93-million AOL subscriber names, later their being whacked with spam . . . who knows if it ever ended. Well it didn't. In 2012 LifeLock contact me and reported someone was trying to sell my AOL password.




"Freedom is Knowledge"









AOL video that says watch GOP ad, when in reality it is a spin news report from CNN.