<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Tucker Carlson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/tucker_carlson/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 11:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Maddow: Good luck, Tucker!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/maddow_good_luck_tucker/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/maddow_good_luck_tucker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rachel Maddow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The New Republic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MSNBC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13253992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MSNBC star tells Salon about her history with the indefatigable Tucker Carlson -- who's headed to "Fox and Friends"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rachel Maddow tells Salon that she is rooting for <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/03/tucker-carlson-to-cohost-fox-friends-weekends-160334.html">newly hired</a> "Fox and Friends" weekend anchor Tucker Carlson -- the man who helped bring her on board at MSNBC.</p><p>In a recent New Republic cover story on the liberal-leaning cable news network, Rebecca Dana <a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112733/roger-ailes-msnbc-how-phil-griffin-created-lefts-fox-news">wrote</a>: "In 2005, Tucker Carlson’s team brought Rachel Maddow into the network based on a tape her agent sent them. Maddow wasn’t Griffin’s style—she didn’t look like a Fox blonde—but Carlson insisted that she stay on, and Maddow quickly proved herself to be erudite and winning on-air."</p><p>Surprising, considering that Carlson is now the editor in chief of the conservative <a href="http://dailycaller.com/">Daily Caller</a> and seems like a natural fit at "Fox and Friends." But, Maddow told Salon via email, there's truth to it:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/maddow_good_luck_tucker/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/maddow_good_luck_tucker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson, you’re no Andrew Breitbart!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/25/tucker_carlson_you%e2%80%99re_no_andrew_breitbart/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/25/tucker_carlson_you%e2%80%99re_no_andrew_breitbart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Breitbart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rep. John Lewis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shirley Sherrod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anthony Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Menendez]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hating Breitbart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Journalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13250586</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A hyped-up scandal and a lame documentary remind us that the blogger’s showmanship is gone, but his hatred lives on]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Strangely, the night before the latest humiliation of the Daily Caller’s Tucker Carlson -- by <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dominican-official-links-daily-caller-to-alleged-lies-about-menendez/2013/03/22/d81470d0-930a-11e2-8ea1-956c94b6b5b9_story.html?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost">a Washington Post report</a> that the Caller’s key source for its “scoop” that Sen. Robert Menendez patronized prostitutes now says the website paid him to find women who would lie about it  -- I watched the documentary “Hating Breitbart,” a hagiographic 90 minutes of the late Andrew Breitbart ranting, vamping and raging for the admiring camera of his friend Andrew Marcus.</p><p>I wasn’t going to write about it, not because I hate Breitbart – I didn’t, and don’t – but because, sadly, it’s kind of slight. It doesn’t do justice to its outsize subject, however much it worships him. But the Carlson news juxtaposed with the documentary reminded me how much more talented Breitbart was than the pale imitators he left behind – as well as how much his rage-fueled, by-any-means-necessary character assassination posing as journalism lives on, albeit ineptly.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/25/tucker_carlson_you%e2%80%99re_no_andrew_breitbart/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/25/tucker_carlson_you%e2%80%99re_no_andrew_breitbart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>57</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Daily Caller&#8217;s outrageous smear</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/01/daily_caller_puts_out_another_underwhelming_scoop/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/01/daily_caller_puts_out_another_underwhelming_scoop/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Menendez]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13059600</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This time it says Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez paid two Dominican women for sex]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/">grand tradition</a> of Daily Caller scoops, the latest one leveling sex scandal allegations at Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., seems to have underwhelmed the general public.</p><p>Last night, the Drudge Report and the Daily Caller were hyping a sex scandal involving a "powerful" U.S. senator. It turns out, the story involved two Dominican women who claim Menendez paid them for sex. The evidence is pretty flimsy, relying on testimony from the two women, who identified a client as Menendez by looking at a picture. Nor does the Caller have any evidence that Menendez was definitely in the Dominican Republic at the time. From the <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/01/women-sen-bob-menendez-paid-us-for-sex-in-the-dominican-republic/">Caller</a>:</p><blockquote><p>"When shown a photograph of Sen. Menendez, the women said they recognized him as the man with whom they’d had sexual relations at Casa de Campo this spring. Both said they were brought to the resort with the understanding they would be paid for sex.</p> <p>Neither knew the identity of the man at the time. Both claimed to recognize him later as Sen. Menendez.</p> <p>'He called him[self] "Bob,"' said one."</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/01/daily_caller_puts_out_another_underwhelming_scoop/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/01/daily_caller_puts_out_another_underwhelming_scoop/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Must-see morning clip: Tucker Carlson&#8217;s theory on Sandy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/must_see_morning_clip_tucker_carlsons_theory_on_sandy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/must_see_morning_clip_tucker_carlsons_theory_on_sandy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Must see morning clip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hurricane Sandy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13058421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Carlson jokes that though the storm isn't exactly Obama's fault, he "did promise to lower the level of the ocean"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Fox News on Tuesday, Tucker Carlson was analyzing how Hurricane Sandy might impact the election, and remarked that "typically people dont blame any candidate for the storm itself, though one of these candidates did promise to lower the level of the ocean and obviously that didn't work."</p><p>He added that the hurricane could help Mitt Romney next week, because it "adds to the sort of general feeling that things are amiss in America."</p><p>When pressed by host Bret Baier on that comment, Carlson elaborated: "I'm in no sense suggesting that people are rationally going to conclude that Obama is responsible for the hurricane, of course not. But if you are looking at the incumbent and asking, 'am I happy with the state of the country right now,' it's possible, on the margins, to effect the tiny group of undecided voters at this stage, that the fact there's a hurricane, and ugly pictures on television, will add to the cumulative effect that America's not going in the right direction."</p><p>Watch:</p><p><iframe src="http://mediamatters.org/embed/191009" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="400" height="225"></iframe></p><p>Via <a href="http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/10/30/discussing-sandys-effect-on-election-tucker-car/191009">MediaMatters</a>.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/must_see_morning_clip_tucker_carlsons_theory_on_sandy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/must_see_morning_clip_tucker_carlsons_theory_on_sandy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nine most racist moments of the 2012 election</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/16/nine_most_racist_moments_of_the_2012_election/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/16/nine_most_racist_moments_of_the_2012_election/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The 47 Percent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kenya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AlterNet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voter suppression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sean Hannity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13041775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The "47 percent" is only the tip of the iceberg -- and the election is still weeks away]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.alternet.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_alternetInline.jpg" alt="AlterNet" align="left" /></a> The son of a Wisconsin candidate for Senate turned heads over the weekend when he indulged in a favorite Republican pastime: appealing to racism to get out the vote. But that moment was only the latest in a campaign chock full of race-bating  appeals and utterances the Republican Party has been using to try to defeat Democrats.</p><p>The subtle appeals to racism, reminiscent of President Nixon's "Southern Strategy," help pave the way for the more outrageous forms of blatant racism.</p><p>From the coded appeals to the blatant manifestations, here are 9 racist things that have happened during the 2012 election campaign.</p><p><strong>1. Wisconsin Senate Candidate's Son: We Can Send Obama ‘Back to Kenya’</strong></p><p>The website <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/wisconsin-gubernatorial-candidates-son-says-we-h">Buzzfeed reports</a> that yesterday morning, Jason Thompson told a crowd of supporters at a brunch that “we have the opportunity to send President Obama back to Chicago — or Kenya.” Thompson is the son of former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson, who is now running for Senate. In attendance at the brunch was Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/16/nine_most_racist_moments_of_the_2012_election/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/16/nine_most_racist_moments_of_the_2012_election/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hannity and Carlson freak out over Drudge video</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/03/hannity_and_carlson_freak_out_over_drudge_video/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/03/hannity_and_carlson_freak_out_over_drudge_video/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matt Drudge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sean Hannity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13028967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sean Hannity said Obama was in "Al Gore preacher mode" in the 2007 video]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tucker Carlson appeared on Sean Hannity's show last night to discuss the "game changer" video, trumpeted by the right-wing media, of Obama giving a speech about race in 2007.</p><p>Hannity pointed to Obama's cadence, what he later referred to as "Al Gore preacher mode," and which he thinks is different from Obama's normal style because of the audience: "You notice the change in the way he delivers this speech before a predominantly African-American audience," Hannity said.</p><p>Carlson agreed: "This accent is absurd. This is not the way Obama talks...he is telling a predominantly black audience something very clear. the federal government doesnt like you because you are black."</p><p>Watch:</p><p><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tbpKRa7-JCE" frameborder="0" width="400" height="225"></iframe></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/03/hannity_and_carlson_freak_out_over_drudge_video/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/03/hannity_and_carlson_freak_out_over_drudge_video/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Underwhelming Daily Caller &#8220;scoops&#8221;: A recent history</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Caller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mortgage Crisis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13001070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's outlet often fails to impress]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When is a scoop probably not a scoop? When it's published by <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/">Tucker Carlson</a>'s conservative news site the Daily Caller. Here is a recent, and incomplete, history of its biggest flops:</p><p>* This week, the conservative site <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/with-landmark-lawsuit-barack-obama-pushed-banks-to-give-subprime-loans-to-chicagos-african-americans/?print=1">put out</a> a four-part series on a 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank that trumps up Obama's role defending 186 African-American clients, when he was an associate at a law firm in the '90s. Most of the plaintiffs in the case were ultimately foreclosed on, the Caller reported. <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">The Caller, in other words, wants the takeaway to be that </span>Obama was totally responsible for precipitating the mortgage bubble. But then it admits that maybe Obama was ultimately <a href="https://twitter.com/Talkmaster/status/242928445418520576">not very involved</a> after all. From the Caller, emphasis ours: "The Chicago Sun-Times reported in 1998 that Obama claimed $23,000 in billable hours for his role in the lawsuit. <strong>That role was limited, partly because he was networking his way toward his 1996 election to the Illinois Senate. </strong>But he stayed with the firm until 2004, and it was his lawsuit."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/05/underwhelming_daily_caller_scoops_a_recent_history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson&#8217;s downward spiral</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12909472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Once a promising young magazine writer, the bow-tied Daily Caller pundit has come to epitomize right-wing hackdom]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In many ways Tucker Carlson's a better symbol of the pathetic state of what passes for conservative journalism than even Glenn Beck or the late Andrew Breitbart, to name two of his contemporaries with a much larger following. Glenn Beck started as a no-account shock jock and is now a no-account Internet show host. Breitbart at least went from Drudge lackey to successful right-wing media mogul. Carlson, though, began his career in the most respectable fashion possible and has spent the ensuing decades gradually lowering himself into the gutter. His story illustrates why we can't have a responsible or at least slightly less hysterical conservative media.</p><p>The Daily Caller, the site he launched with a promise to offer a new model for conservative journalism, is primarily a catalog of sleazy traffic-baiting aggregated Web garbage ("Top 10: Most beautiful ‘most beautiful’ women [SLIDESHOW]"), ancient relics of online commentary with nowhere else left to publish (Ann Coulter, Mickey Kaus), and overblown scandal-mongering headlines that promise much more than they can deliver. In other words it is like a mean-spirited parody of a conservative version of the pre-AOL Huffington Post, with a healthy dose, recently, of attention-grabbing race baiting. This is not the sort of thing Carlson used to be known for.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/26/tucker_carlsons_downward_spiral/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>131</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Rush Limbaugh and the right turned on Trayvon Martin</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/02/why_rush_limbaugh_and_the_right_turned_on_trayvon_martin/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/02/why_rush_limbaugh_and_the_right_turned_on_trayvon_martin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trayvon Martin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12767831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A national tragedy became another awful political shouting match, thanks to vile pundits and talk-radio hosts]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seventeen-year-old Trayvon Martin was killed by a gun-toting, self-appointed "neighborhood watch leader" named George Zimmerman on Feb. 26, in Sanford, Fla. Zimmerman was not and has not yet been arrested. Martin's death took some time to go from a local news story to a major nationwide controversy, but once it went national it quickly became huge. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/14/trayvon-martin-sanford-florida_n_1345868.html">Coverage from the Huffington Post</a>, <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57393088/parents-seek-justice-for-unarmed-sons-killing/?tag=morningFlexGridRight;flexGridModule">a March 8 CBS News report</a> and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/trayvon-martin-fla-teen-k_n_1332440.html">related Associated Press stories</a> led to widespread Internet and cable news coverage.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/02/why_rush_limbaugh_and_the_right_turned_on_trayvon_martin/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/02/why_rush_limbaugh_and_the_right_turned_on_trayvon_martin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>362</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hack List Alums: Where Are They Now?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/hack_list_alums_where_are_they_now/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/hack_list_alums_where_are_they_now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salon Hack List 2011]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas Friedman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10318731</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Still employed, mostly]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can think of these guys as retired from the Hack List (like a Hall of Fame) or as simply to dull to rip into at length for a second time, but these 2010 Hack List veterans did not actually improve their game in 2011.</p><p><strong>Pat Caddell</strong> (Last year: <a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/22/hack_list_27/">Number 27.</a>)</p><p>The fake Democratic pollster is repeating himself, and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/21/fake_democratic_pollsters_have_stupid_idea/">somehow it just gets dumber every time.</a></p><p><strong>Jonah Goldberg</strong> (Last year: <a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/24/hack_list_7/">Number 7</a>.)</p><p>In March Jonah Goldberg <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/03/04/goldberg_phelps/">literally wrote "meh" instead of rebutting an argument,</a> in his nationally syndicated political column.</p><p><strong>Thomas Friedman</strong> (Last year: <a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/11/24/hack_list_3/">Number 3.</a>)</p><p>Thomas Friedman continued to, domestically, demand a centrist third party that acted exactly like our current centrist Democratic party. But his best work, as always, concerned foreign lands. What other columnist would have the balls to go to the scene of a popular revolution and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/04/13/friedman_hotel_lede/">"quote" a native pleading with the wise American columnist</a> to explain what <em>he</em> thinks is going on in her country?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/hack_list_alums_where_are_they_now/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/hack_list_alums_where_are_they_now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Daily Caller won&#039;t back down from false EPA &#8220;scoop&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/29/caller_epa_berman/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/29/caller_epa_berman/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's new editor, a former big industry misinformation artist, attacks the fact-checkers and their facts]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week, Tucker Carlson's still-breathing Daily Caller news site published a blatantly false story about the EPA. The story was either wrong because somewhere there made a mistake or because the Caller intended to plant a false anti-EPA story knowing it'd garner a lot of attention and end up as a common conservative talking point, even though it was false. While the "mistake" option seemed the most likely answer at first, the Caller's executive editor now has me convinced that this was intentionally bad journalism.</p><p><a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/26/epa-regulations-would-require-230000-new-employees-21-billion">The Caller claimed</a> to have learned that the EPA was planning to hire "230,000 new bureaucrats &#8212; at a cost of $21 billion" to implement new greenhouse gas regulations. That was the scoop. $21 billion and 230,000 new EPA bureaucrats! That is false. It's based on a misreading of <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64582.html">a Justice Department brief</a> filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals DC circuit, which presents the "$21 billion" figure as an example of what the EPA would need to regulate emissions <em>if the rule they're going to court to defend is blocked.</em></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/29/caller_epa_berman/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/29/caller_epa_berman/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Daily Caller blows Michele Bachmann migraine story</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/19/tucker_bachmann/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/19/tucker_bachmann/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 15:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/07/19/tucker_bachmann</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's website insinuates she is addicted to "pills" and incapacitated by stress]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is the Daily Caller's <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/18/stress-related-condition-incapacitates-bachmann-heavy-pill-use-alleged/">Michele Bachmann piece</a> the quintessential Daily Caller story? It's by Jonathan Strong, the sexed-up headline isn't supported by the text, and Tucker Carlson's already <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/benpolitico/status/93159547761471488">defensive about it.</a></p><p>Here's the story: Michele Bachmann suffers from migraines. Here's the way the Caller played it: Michele Bachmann is constantly incapacitated by debilitating and mysterious "headaches" and she pops pills like candy!</p><p>The headline is, "Stress-related condition 'incapacitates' Bachmann; heavy pill use alleged." Again, the "condition" is generally called "migraines." And "heavy pill use" certainly sounds like an allegation of a prescription painkiller addiction, though the article does not once name any of the specific medications Bachmann supposedly takes.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/19/tucker_bachmann/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/19/tucker_bachmann/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>87</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Private messages from top Palin aide leak</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/24/mansour_twitter_messages/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/24/mansour_twitter_messages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 15:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bristol Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/05/24/mansour_twitter_messages</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Shocking Twitter DMs reveal that Rebecca Mansour worships her boss and dislikes Mitt Romney]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tucker Carlson's Internet Tendency has published <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/24/what-a-top-aide-to-sarah-palin-really-thinks-about-mitt-romney-bristol-palin-erick-erickson-and-more/">a series of private Twitter messages</a> sent by Rebecca Mansour, Sarah Palin's closest advisor, to an unknown "online-only acquaintance." The direct messages forwarded to the Daily Caller were sent in the summer of 2010, and they contain a number of unflattering descriptions of various figures in the Republican party and the conservative press.&#160;The Caller <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/24/rebecca-mansours-direct-messages-the-full-text/">does provide the (partially redacted) original messages,</a> in case you don't want to rely solely on their interpretation of the material.</p><p>The DMs are not that outrageous or shocking, because we already all know that Palin and her inner-circle are paranoid and petty. It's news that they hate Mitt Romney? The fact that Palin's operation is an unprofessional cult of personality is public knowledge. But they're still entertaining for anyone fascinated by Palin and her camp.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/05/24/mansour_twitter_messages/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/05/24/mansour_twitter_messages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Daily Caller, Andrew Breitbart go after Glenn Beck for idea theft</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/04/18/caller_breitbart_beck_theft/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/04/18/caller_breitbart_beck_theft/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Breitbart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/04/18/caller_breitbart_beck_theft</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The departing Fox host is accused of borrowing videos and blog posts from the conservative movement without credit]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Evangelical Mormon conspiracy theorist Glenn Beck has become a slightly divisive figure in the conservative movement. He's got a big audience, and he is good at riling them up, but his sheer nuttiness can make everyone else look bad. He's also not really a team player, as <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/03/15/beck_breitbart_okeefe">he demonstrated last month</a> when his website debunked a hidden camera "sting" video by activist James O'Keefe, prot&#233;g&#233; of right-wing Web publisher and all-around new media guru Andrew Breitbart. The Blaze's fact-checking was thorough, fair and devastating. In other words, it wasn't the sort of thing one conservative site is supposed to do to another.</p><p>While that video -- a supposed expos&#233; of NPR's fundraising practices -- was produced by a regular Breitbart associate, it was first published and promoted by Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller, for reasons unknown (perhaps because it was shoddier than some of O'Keefe's other work, and the Caller, being more desperate for traffic, had slightly lower standards).</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/04/18/caller_breitbart_beck_theft/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/04/18/caller_breitbart_beck_theft/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sarah Palin enraged at Daily Caller for printing her side of story</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/30/palin_outraged_caller/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/30/palin_outraged_caller/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/03/30/palin_outraged_caller</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's conservative news site comes under fire for not quoting the former governor on Page One of a story]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank god Sarah Palin ended <a href="http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/palin-continue-fight-against-media-not-sexists">her lengthy moratorium</a> on complaining about liberal media bias, because someone had to make sure Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller didn't get away with <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/30/conservatives-take-on-palin-for-government-subsidized-reality-show-palin-calls-criticism-ludicrous/">this shoddy reporting job.</a></p><p>The Caller was writing up the story of how Sarah Palin's reality show received a generous tax credit thanks to legislation signed into law by Sarah Palin. (That was strike one!) After explaining where the story came from and quoting some critics (strike two!), the story goes on to quote -- for three full paragraphs -- Palin's responses to the criticism and her defense of the program that subsidizes filming in Alaska. I think, if I'm reading <a href="http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150142191023435">Sarah Palin's ferocious Facebook response to the story</a> correctly, that was strike three.</p><p>The Caller's Chris Moody, author of the story, is obviously a sexist Palin-hater. Look at how he ended his article:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/03/30/palin_outraged_caller/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/30/palin_outraged_caller/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>42</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson hires Ginni Thomas to interview people, for some reason</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/22/ginni_thomas_daily_caller/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/22/ginni_thomas_daily_caller/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/03/22/ginni_thomas_daily_caller</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Daily Caller's new "special correspondent" is a paranoid conservative activist]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ginni Thomas, longtime conservative activist and wife of silent Supreme Court Justice (and <a href="http://wonkette.com/440055/clarence-thomas-heaving-body-in-the-heat-of-passion-described">"national treasure"</a>) Clarence Thomas, has a new job! <a href="http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110322006032/en/Ginni-Thomas-Joins-Daily-Caller">She is... a journalist now, apparently.</a></p><p>She has been hired by Tucker Carlson's "The Daily Caller," a web magazine that seeks to answer the question, "will people read literally any bullshit at all if we call it 'conservative' and occasionally throw in some <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/11/27/this_week_crazy_joe_rehyansky">sexism and homophobia?</a>" <a href="http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110322006032/en/Ginni-Thomas-Joins-Daily-Caller">Thomas will be a "special correspondent" for the Caller,</a> which means she will "interview key political and community leaders -- from high-profile politicians to grassroots activists -- with a focus on listening to those outside the Beltway."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/03/22/ginni_thomas_daily_caller/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/22/ginni_thomas_daily_caller/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson to receive media &#8220;accuracy&#8221; award</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/31/tucker_carlson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/31/tucker_carlson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/01/31/tucker_carlson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The man whose news site accused the first lady of killing pedestrians is rewarded for his achievements]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations to Tucker Carlson, who is going to win a prize, at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Carlson will be given the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award, by Accuracy in Media, a conservative media "watchdog" organization.</p><p>At the 2009 CPAC, Carlson was actually booed for <a href="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/cpac-carlson-attempts-defend-new-york-times-gets-booed">saying that the journalists at the New York Times care about accuracy</a>, because everyone knows that the MSM is full of lying liberals, and also because activist conservatives are basically hostile to the idea that facts exist.</p><p>Since then, Carlson has launched his own news website, and he learned that in order to get attention, "accuracy" must sometimes take a backseat to "telling people that what they wish to be true is true," and also "stupid stunts." (Don't get me wrong -- I love stupid stunts.) Here is a Daily Caller headline that I just saw two minutes ago: "UFO drops flare-like objects over Utah [VIDEO]." (Again, don't get me wrong -- I also love UFO news.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/31/tucker_carlson/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/31/tucker_carlson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson&#8217;s plot to embarrass the New Yorker</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/07/jane_mayer_tucker_carlson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/07/jane_mayer_tucker_carlson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarianism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/01/07/jane_mayer_tucker_carlson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Was a spiked Daily Caller story supposed to stop the venerable magazine from submitting its Koch story for awards?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week, we learned that Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller was <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears">working on a piece alleging that The New Yorker's Jane Mayer was guilty of plagiarism.</a> The Caller's Jonathan Strong spent a week working on the story, after an unknown source sent him the "evidence" of the claim. Mayer wasn't guilty of plagiarism, and the Caller spiked the story. But was the whole thing just designed to scare the New Yorker into not promoting its story on the powerful Koch brothers?</p><p>What we don't know: Who sent Strong the story? Why did the Caller spend a week trying to confirm it when a cursory reading of the stories in question would've disproved the plagiarism accusation, and the authors who were reportedly borrowed from both agreed that their work wasn't improperly used? Who then sent the story to the New York Post's Keith Kelly, and did his reporting lead Tucker Carlson to spike the piece, which was apparently ready to go up?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/07/jane_mayer_tucker_carlson/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/07/jane_mayer_tucker_carlson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tucker Carlson&#8217;s attempt to smear the New Yorker</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarianism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Daily Caller was all set to report that the Jane Mayer had plagiarized. But she hadn't]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hilarious news out of <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/smear_disappears_Xs7WqA7cghZ3IWtmyDg7rO/0">Keith Kelly's media column in the New York Post yesterday</a>: Jonathan Strong, investigative journalist for Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller, spent weeks "investigating" the claim that the New Yorker's Jane Mayer plagiarized her recent story on the Koch brothers, funders of much of the conservative-libertarian movement that has been amassing power in Washington for decades. But the plagiarism story fell apart upon closer examination, and they will not be running it. (Except that, of course, the story of the story they're not running ended up in Rupert Murdoch's New York Post.)</p><p>Someone -- I won't speculate as to who, though Kelly surely knows -- handed Strong a story: Mayer plagiarized blogger Lee Fang for her Koch piece! Except Fang himself said: "Jane Mayer properly credited me in her story. She clearly did a ton of her own research. I have nothing but admiration for her integrity as a journalist." But there was more! A 2002 Mayer piece on the SEC had stolen from a 2000 BusinessWeek story! Except the author of <em>that</em> piece said, "I remember reading her story at the time, and I think she did a good job."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/06/jane_mayer_smears/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Daily Caller (sorta) defends crazy old bigot&#8217;s &#8220;don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell&#8221; column</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/12/03/daily_caller_not_sorry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/12/03/daily_caller_not_sorry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 22:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Don't Ask Don't Tell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/12/03/daily_caller_not_sorry</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tucker Carlson's website removes the most offensive line from Joe Rehyansky's column, but isn't sorry for it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remember <a href="http://www.salon.com/life/this_week_in_crazy/?story=/news/feature/2010/11/27/this_week_crazy_joe_rehyansky">last week's "This Week in Crazy" winner,</a> Joe Rehyansky? He's the old kook who said in Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller that gay men shouldn't be allowed to serve in the armed forces because they all have AIDS and they will look at Joe Rehyansky in the shower, which scares him.</p><p>Rehyansky also said he was fine with lesbians serving, because they're less diseased than the gay men and he wants to give "straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream."</p><p>That line, about converting lesbians, was removed from the column by Daily Caller editors <a href="http://www.tbd.com/blogs/amanda-hess/2010/11/daily-caller-admit-lesbians-into-military-to-turn-them-straight-5018.html">after people began talking about how awful it was.</a></p><p>Today, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/02/the-demonization-of-joe-rehyansky/">Daily Caller editor Peter Tucci defends Rehyansky</a> from those awful liberal bloggers and their horrible liberal readers. They are disrespecting a veteran! A bigoted, crazy old veteran!</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/12/03/daily_caller_not_sorry/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/12/03/daily_caller_not_sorry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
