Mitt Romney soundly stomped his rivals last night in New Hampshire. The closest competitor was Ron Paul and most of his voters aren’t even Republicans. In third was Jon Huntsman and then Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum rounded things out. It was a terrible night for Santorum, who didn’t get much bounce out of Iowa.
Remember when every AP picture of Obama in 2008 was fantastic. Mitt Romney will not be gettting the same coverage. Here's the AP's version of Robot Romney.
It was fun watching people spin the results last night. This race is over. It would take something huge to change this race. The field is scattered and no one is in Romney’s league when it comes to money and organization. The other candidates are struggling to get on the ballot in several states. Romney’s victory speech last night sounded like an acceptance speech.
To amuse myself I watched about 30 minutes of MSNBC. They had one Republican and five deranged liberals attacking the candidates. That’s what they consider “coverage.” Rachel Maddow was the voice of reason. It’s comical that Al Sharpton is on that network. The MSNBC panel was really disturbed that Romney compared Obama’s vision for America as European. Why you ask? They love Europe and don’t get it. Europe’s big goverment entitlements and unused mass transportation systems have bankrupted the state. Liberals haven’t been able to put two and two together.
The race moves to South Carolina and then on to Florida after that. Romney is the only candidate running ads in Florida right now because he really the only candidate left on the GOP side.
Gossip Girl or serious journalist? After watching the Republican debate on MSNBC last night I'm leaning toward Gossip Girl.
As usual, Henshaw made some good points about last night’s Republican debate, though I’m not sure I agree with his winners and losers. Alas, it is quite difficult to come up with an objective list of winners and losers since a debate isn’t quite as easy to score as, say, a boxing match. And even boxing matches that declare a winner without a KO are sometimes controversial.
Even so, here’s my list of winners, losers and those who fought to a draw… Winners: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain. Losers: Rick Perry and Jon Huntsman. Draw: Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum.
Part of my problem scoring and declaring a winner is that these debates don’t allow for much explanation by any one candidate, thus they tend to stick to rhetoric and key words. Even when it’s narrowed down to two candidates during the Presidential race, debates don’t offer much substance.
Still, the candidates could make a move away from the pack by better articulating core principles. In the case of a conservative candidate, one of these core principles, and what is perhaps the most important one, is the role of the Federal government.
Ron Paul and Herman Cain came closest to hitting the mark on this, though no one’s really listening to them. The others danced around it and the moderators probably don’t know the difference between Federalism and oligarchy, though they certainly know how to gossip (“A friend of your campaign manager said that Rick Perry is a wussie. Why is he a wussie?”)
There was a golden opportunity at this debate to point out that the governors in the debate did the best they could with the circumstances specific to their states and the needs of their constituents. And that’s the point. Who best to make decisions for the welfare of its citizens than local and state government? And, who is more accountable to their voters than local and state government?
You can yammer on and on about this and that you did as governor, or that this governor had this much or this little job growth in his state, but it’s just a waste of time. Just once I’d like to see a candidate point out that an ever-encroaching Federal government endangers the individual and his liberty. The growth of the Federal government is, in fact, a move toward oligarchy; rule by the few over the many. Moreover, it’s an oligarchy that favors certain people and groups over others, destroying the concept of equality before the law. The bailouts, stimulus and health care bamboozles are striking examples of this inequality created by cronyism.
Still, I don’t know how much you can blame the candidates for their shallow answers. The moderators made it quite difficult to provide any depth by purposely pitting one candidate against the other and framing the questions to make it sound as if they were defending the indefensible. “Rick Perry, Romney said or did this. Respond,” or, “Why are Republicans so heartless?” Bullshit. Ask them a real policy question.
Speaking of BS, how about that brief foray into “science”? The Charlie Crist-like Huntsman took a sideways swipe at Perry, playing the ever-so-reasonable-and-moderate Republican card. He’s pro-science because he has not an ounce of skepticism about the wild-eyed lunatic-fringe claims of a madman (Al Gore)?
Meanwhile, Perry’s response was less than adequate. Once again, a golden opportunity to put the nail in the coffin of the climate change debate wasted. Will anyone rise to the occasion and point out simple logic? As a reminder, logical and thought-provoking arguments Perry could have made include:
- The sun may have something to do with our climate, given that it accounts for 99.86 percent of the mass of the entire solar system
- The climate has been changing for more than four billion years; it always has and it always will. This would mark the first time in the history of earth that a species was willfully unable to adapt to a changing climate. Who’s more stupid, the dinosaurs who simply didn’t know they needed to adapt, or human beings who drown in extremely slow-rising water because they thought the government was going to do something about it?
- Do Climate Changelings/Global Warmongers really believe that we have the power to regulate the earth’s thermostat, and if we did, what is the proper setting?
- Further, if we had the power to regulate the climate, who makes the decision about where to set the thermostat and who benefits from the settings? Will the entire earth be like San Diego, or will only those parts the enviro-nitwits care about live eternally in San Diego’s climate?
- Global warming is far better for life on earth than is global cooling. You can look it up. But the beauty of “climate change” is that you can claim the climate’s changing no matter what’s going on globally or locally. A little warmer this year? Climate change! Unusually cold another? Climate change! No change? Climate change!
The whole thing is absurd, as is the case for a larger and more meddlesome federal government, and yet it’s nearly impossible to get a cohesive, coherent and concise answer on either subject from the candidates. Immigration? I know that Rick Santorum’s grandparents were immigrants, but that doesn’t tell me jack diddly about his plan.
Perhaps most absurd, and also the best part of the debate, was the commercial produced by Californians for Population Stabilization, which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there’s a special interest group for anything and everything these days.
Californians for Population Stabilization is against legal immigration. That’s right, legal immigrants are taking jobs away from Californians and Californians for Population Stabilization wants to end this travesty. What’s next? Californians against Seeing Eye Dogs and other Working Dogs?
httpvh://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ryd1-xco9cg
I just finished watching the GOP debate on MSNBC. It was a painful exercise. There are too many people on the stage that have no chance of being elected. The questions were often from outer-space. Every question to Ron Paul was a joke. It’s as if Brian Williams has never heard libertarian theory. He asked Paul about abolishing FEMA, TSA, and Homeland Security. All of the questions were phrased as if “you don’t really believe that do you?” Paul has a reason to be insulted. However, Paul also claimed that a border fence is dangerous because it could be used to keep Americans in the country!
I suppose the biggest talking point from the debate will be Rick Perry stubborn insistence that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The fact that this is even remotely controversial is the reason the nation is in the predicament it’s in. The fact that Mitt Romney is willing to pander on this issue may mean he’s more electable, but ultimately I’m not going to vote for someone who believes that Social Security is successful when it’s taking over 12% of my income, income that I’ll never see a dime of in the future.
My last observation is on climate change. Jim Huntsman, who had no business being on the stage, claimed that 98 of a 100 climate scientists agree that humans are causing the Earth to warm at an alarming rate. Instead of pouncing on this ridiculous claim Brian Williams asked Rick Perry to name prominent skeptics! Really unbelievable stuff. That’s pretty much all I have. It was nice of MSNBC to have a Hispanic news anchor come on stage to ask questions about illegal immigration Apparently, MSNBC believes the only issue Hispanics care about is illegal immigration. Lean forward!
Winners: Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Rick Perry
Losers: Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, MSNBC
Perry Surging: The first poll after the Perry announcement has him up big in the race for the GOP presidential nomination. For the moment this is probably his high water mark. A candidate is never as good as they are the moment they jump in the race. Perry has already put his foot in his mouth and there’s a lot of campaigning to do before Super Tuesday. Also, there are rumblings that Paul Ryan and Chris Christie are thinking about joining Perry in the race. I’m sure Romney is hoping that is true, but it’s getting late for anyone to get in now.
Even the Clouds are Racist: How can anyone take MSNBC seriously? Ed Schultz took to the airwaves claiming that Rick Perry was making veiled racist remarks about President Obama by saying there’s a “black cloud hanging over America.” Schultz edited the video in the worst possible way, but it’s still clear that Perry is talking about the national debt and not the President.
Killer TV: Watching TV can lead to a shorter life. At least that’s what researchers say. One hour of TV can shorten the average lifespan by 22 minutes. I am always leery of studies like this because I’m not convinced it’s accurate. How long before those in favor of the nanny state start advocating for the abolition of TV?
America at 235
One of the most frustrating parts of the political process is dealing with uninformed people. This really isn’t a left/right issue. The list of things Americans are uninformed about is almost endless. Look at what people say about the Separation of Church and State, 9/11, the JFK assassination, or the issue that started the Civil War. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard someone say that “slavery didn’t start the American Civil War.” This is probably because I live in the South and that talking point has always existed, but it doesn’t change the fact that the argument is delusional. If the war wasn’t about slavery, what was it about?
The Information Age is great for those who are willing to use it, but it’s terrible for people who are lazy. The increasing trend in New Media is to tailor coverage towards the audience. FOX News has perfected it. FOX isn’t in the business of shaping the news. They’re in the business of covering the news that most Americans want to see. The FOX philosophy is simple: if people want to watch it they cover it. It’s all about increasing ratings and advertising dollars. MSNBC has become the liberal news network. While “leaning forward” the talking heads are actually cocooning themselves inside a tunnel of delusion.
What about newspapers? For a long while papers like the New York Times prided themselves for being “above the fray.” It was all nonsense, but the perception existed. It’s over now. The New York Times is just another source for the progressive cocoon. Krugman and Friedman write haughty, faux intelligent articles that aren’t exactly friendly with the facts. Just today William Buffett wrote an article about taxing the super rich. The world is aflutter! Who cares? Taxing the rich won’t put a dent in our debt problem. If people were better informed, they’d realize this and dismiss Buffett’s liberal talking points.
Mickey Kaus who considers himself a “neoliberal” wrote about the MSNBC effect on the New York Times today for the The Daily Caller.
In June the paper deployed its powerful “Draws Attention To” template, the formula for which is
X event in the news (go find one if necessary)
“draws attention to”
Y argument the Times wants to push
One of the unsettled issues from the Bush years is the seething hatred on the left. Attacks on Bush went unanswered for nine long years without defense. There’s nothing wrong with debate. There was a long list of things I wasn’t happy with during the Bush administration, but the bile that came from the left is largely forgotten in the attempt to label anyone who disagrees with Obama as either racist, misogynist, homophobe, fascist, or some combination of them all.
After Bush the left has had two long years beating up on Sarah Palin. I’m exhausted from the hate-mongering. Now the left has turned its eyes toward Michele Bachmann. Just do a quick Twitter search for “Bachmann + bitch” to get an idea of how deranged people are about her.
The internet is a great tool for information, but it’s also a source for misinformation. Let’s face it, if your sole source for news is MSNBC, Slate, The Nation and Twitter hate feeds there’s a good chance you’re terribly misinformed. Heck, even ABC News is feeding the frenzy. Now what I’m about to say isn’t politically correct. Christians view homosexuality as a sin. It’s Biblical, it’s clear, and it’s not debatable. However, there’s a whole list of things that are sins that aren’t illegal in the United States. You can fornicate to your heart’s content and there’s not a law against it; however, it is a sin.
Does that mean that anyone who confesses to be a Christian (one that believes the Bible is the Word of God) is unfit for public office? Well, according to many on the left the answer is yes. All these liberals who are up in arms about religious organizations who can be linked (the influence of the association is of no consequence) to Bachmann didn’t bat an eye about Obama’s ties to the New Left and radical pastors. I can guarantee if people on the right talked about the President the way these leftists are talking about Bachmann it would be on page 1 of the New York Times.
What it all boils right down to is Christianity. Many of the left absolutely have no tolerance for evangelical Christians. The seething hate is undeniable. Christians are portrayed as brain-dead morons in all facets of American culture. Christians spend more time and money on charity than any class of people in the United States. In the year 2011 the individual is free to do, think, say, or act any way they want. Christians tolerate the practice. What more do liberals want?
When I was posting the deranged tweets for my entry about the GOP field I had no idea that I would uncover the the Holy Grail of crazy. Kathryn Scaglione, where have you been all my life? Nestled in between blog posts about the Real Housewives of New Jersey (no, really!) is an open letter to Sarah Palin. The Daily Plunge has written ad nauseum about Sarah Palin Derangement Syndrome so I won’t get into that again, but there is plenty to take exception to with Scaglione’s tweets and blog posts. So Kathryn, here’s my open letter to your political derangement. It’s a love letter to crazy. A monument to tribal wisdom and shallow intellectualism.
A great place to start is the last 24 hours. Let’s just look at some of the tweets she’s written.
Wow, she’s about a purple horseshoe marshmallow short of being a box of Lucky Charms. You can cut the white guilt with a knife. This is what happens when you watch too much of MSNBC and The Daily Show. I can hear her now. “This guy gets his news from FOX News!! That facist, racist, asshole!” I mean this his how people like this think. Just read what she wrote about the birther nonsense.
Donald Trump is now a birther. Meaning, he’s a racist. Again, if you’re a birther, YOU ARE A RACIST. There is NO reason to demand a President to show his birth certificate, other than the color of his skin. Does anyone else remember past Presidents being ORDERED to show their birth certificates?
How many past presidents had fathers who weren’t American citizens? Is it really strange that our society of conspiracy theorists wouldn’t have a field day with Obama’s history? The Daily Plunge always thought the birther movement was dumb. However, what about truthers, the JFK assassination, and Bigfoot? Do all conspiracy theories that involve black people automatically equal racism, or those that involve Big Foot, Yeti and the Loch Ness Monster equal Mythical Creature Phobia? When the press was creating “fake but accurate” stories about President Bush’s National Guard service was that racist? In another post from last November Scaglione opines…
Even as crazy and psychotic as the Tea Party is, in a political climate, the ones who DO scream the loudest seem to be heard the most and win the ‘argument.’ The Democrats and liberals don’t know how to scream at all. The Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert Rally to restore sanity WAS in essence, true … but it felt like I was in 3rd grade and the teacher was giving the whole class a lecture, even though everyone knew who the culprits were
Let’s not forget the crowd at that fake rally, or celebration of Stuff White People Like. It was a rally for morons that was held by liberal comedians. This wasn’t a political event. It was a snarky event that had no impact on the election. Liberals aren’t loud enough? Really? Eight years of Bush Derangement Syndrome, war protests, and speaking truth to power wasn’t enough? I’m supposed to take this person seriously as an intellectual, fact-based follower of politics? Really? Reality is not your friend. Scaglione goes on to cite Bill Maher. Yes, that Bill Maher. Is it any wonder Scaglione is politically deranged when she gets her “facts” from people like Maher?
With the epidemic of fake lesbian bloggers I almost wonder if Scaglione’s blog is a parody of the left. When someone becomes this deranged about politics what are facts? There’s no such thing has objective, fact-based analysis, just childish rants. It’s just worn out talking points such as “Sarah Palin said ObamaCare would create Death Panels, it’s a lie and she’s a bitch.” Ah, I see. Although, a very logical argument can be made that rationed health care will lead to some pesky end-of-life decisions made by the state. The state will choose “panels” to make those decisions. Rationed care isn’t wild speculation. Every nation who has implemented socialized medicine eventually rations care. Don’t tell Kathryn Scaglione, she won’t listen anyway.
The most interesting thing about people like Kathryn Scaglione is that they drape themselves in faux tolerance and enlightenment. What you really see is a person full of hate. She can’t comment on anything without vile language. She lashes out aggressively toward anyone who doesn’t agree with her worldview. Who does this woman really hate? Conservatives? God? It’s nearly impossible to agree on everything with people. Some of my best friends have completely different points of view. I don’t pretend to believe that liberals have sole possession of the crazies like Scaglione, but when only 38% of Democrats claim to have excellent mental health there’s a problem.
What else can explain the hypocrisy of the anti-war movement? What are the facts? Well, the United States is unleashing predator drones all over the place, the War Powers Act is being ignored, and we’re bombing Libya for no other reason than to protect Europe’s oil interests. Where are the angry war protesters? C’mon Kathryn Scaglione, where’s your fact based rage? Apparently you’re either too obsessed with Sarah Palin or you’re too busy watching MSNBC, The Daily Show, or the Real Housewives of New Jersey. Continue reading »
Unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged.
Nothing sends close-minded liberals into a tizzy faster than Fox News. The talking heads at MSNBC are obsessed with “exposing the lies” of Faux Noise! Trying to discuss politics with people stuck in the echo chamber is almost impossible. These are the people who believe that Valerie Plame was the victim of an elaborate plot to expose her status as an CIA agent. Scooter Libby went to jail for breaking the same law President Clinton broke when he lied under oath. Except it’s less likely Clinton forgot about his misadventures and more likely Libby couldn’t remember three-year-old conversations about a subject about which no crime was committed. Unfortunately for Libby his trial wasn’t before the Congress. Ah, details, details, details. It just sounds so much simpler when Ed Schultz talks to Joe Wilson.
I know, I know, I’m covering old ground. Today I read an article Mark Tapscott wrote that discusses the Media Matters/MSNBC template. In this case, it’s in regard to the church of global warming. The unproven theory of manmade global warming is one of the dogmatic truths on the left. Fox News Washington Bureau Chief Bill Sammon recently made the mistake of saying the following:
“Given the controversy over the veracity of climate change data, we should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without immediately pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question. It is not our place as journalists to assert such notions as facts, especially as this debate intensifies.”
The back story here, of course, is that Media Matters is doing exactly what billionaire radical liberal financier George Soros paid it $1 million to do, which is to trash Fox News at every opportunity no matter what the facts might be in any given situation.
Watching this campaign unfold, it becomes clear that Fox News drives today’s extremist liberals into the same sort of eye-bulging, irrational, spittle-flying, blind rage that we saw back in the 1950s from the far right whack-jobs in the John Birch Society who claimed Ike was either a fool or a card-carrying commie.
Over the last five years MSNBC has gone further and further off the deep end. The network has finally moved into the territory of irrelevancy. It’s become a den of misinformation, paranoia, and angry curmudgeons. MSNBC is the only news network that I’m aware of that has a host of a show who advocated voter fraud. Is advocating skeptical journalism really a bad thing?
I’ll be monitoring the election returns from Durham, N.C. this year. Here are a couple of resources I recommend to monitor the election results:
If the the GOP is winning big MSNBC will be required viewing. The most deranged news network will reach apocalyptic levels if the Republicans win in a tsunami. Most people are expecting a big night for the GOP so the left is concentrating most of its attention on Delaware and Alaska, because they’re the most embarrassing for Republicans. For some reason Christine O’Donnell is a household name and Alvin Greene is a forgotten Democrat in South Carolina.
In 2008, the mainstream press’ talking points were all about hope and change. It was a joyous moment for the American people. I don’t expect that type of coverage this time around. Expect a lot of talk about the “angry American electorate.” There won’t be any talk about the failed agenda of the Democrats.This election isn’t about the GOP. It’s entirely about the Democrats’ four-year control of Congress.
For actual election coverage I highly recommend Jim Geraghty at The Campaign Spot. Even better, follow Geraghty on twitter @JimGeraghty. The National Review’s blog The Corner is also a great place for election coverage. That’s all I have for now. Remember if you’re voting in North Carolina you don’t need your driver’s license. All you need to know is your address. Make sure you get to the polls early so a Democratic operative doesn’t vote for you.
Exit question: Remember the gleeful President telling the Republicans in February 2008 elections have consequences, “I won.” Will the Republicans use the same hopeful rhetoric with Obama in January? I hope so, not that it will change anything…
It’s generally a bad time to be part of the media establishment. However, MSNBC has the solution. A brand new tagline! What is the tagline that’s going to restore American’s faith in the media? How about finding some on-air talent that appeals to the political mainstream? Instead, the marketing geniuses at MSNBC have come up with “Lean Foward.” Here’s the promo video for the new campaign.
Hmm… Lean forward? Doesn’t this sound suspiciously like the Great Leap Forward? I’m not the only one who caught this, of course, but is this campaign Chairman Mao Light? By some estimates the Great Leap Forward killed 45 million Chinese. What is MSNBC’s goal with this campaign?
The video above has all the typical progressive Utopian nonsense. “We are the United States of Come as You Are”? “Our differences are what unite us”? The narrator quotes from the Declaration of Independence but leaves out the bit about the Creator. You see, our differences are what unites us, unless of course, you believe in Jesus Christ, like Sarah Palin, or are against homosexual marriage. And please don’t come as you are if you’re to the right of Barbara Boxer.
Recent Comments