October 19, 2010
— Ace I was bothered by Kurtz's last point, and wasn't sure why.
The biggest media blunder, in my view, was the walk-on-water coverage that Obama drew in 2007 and 2008. The only real debate was whether he was more like FDR (Time) or Lincoln (Newsweek). The candidate obviously played a role in creating his own myth, but it was the breathless media that sent expectations soaring into the stratosphere. Once Obama had to grapple with two wars, a crippled economy and reflexive Republican opposition, he had no place to go but down. The press has long since fallen out of love with the president, but the overheated hyperbole did him no favors.
First of all, note how that is put: the overheated hyperbole did him no favors. It's interesting that Kurtz lapses into this sort of Freudian slip where he laments the press' having done Obama a bad turn -- that is, he proceeds (unknown even to himself, I'd bet) from the premise that the press was supposed to prop up Obama, but, by claiming he could walk on water, overpromised, which now leaves their Precious in a bad spot.
Kurtz would claim he's merely being descriptive and not prescriptive; I think he'd be wrong in claiming that. When we're not being careful we give away what we really believe.
But that's minor.
The more important failure of the press wasn't to claim he could do all these amazing things -- okay, that's bad, I grant him -- but to utterly fail to vet him as a candidate.
The public was promised -- by the press, which swore to this on a stack of Bibles -- that Obama was post-partisan. That he was everything good about liberalism mixed with everything good about conservatism. The press allowed him to run both to McCain's left and McCain's right, even on the same issue. Obama, for example, was both more of a terrorist-killing warrior than McCain and also more of a man of peace and soft power; he was both going to raise taxes and lower them.
Part of the public's revolt against Obama is the late-coming realization that he's just a very, very liberal president, and intensely partisan to boot, and not anything at all like the unifying post-partisan post-racial (post-human?) healer the press swore he was.
And this of course was all crystalized in Obama's not-at-all-fateful encounter with Joe the Plumber, a common citizen who dared to ask The One a perfectly legitimate question which the press had not bothered to ask, something along the lines of whether it was in his interest to have his taxes raised.
And Obama was not careful, and gave away what he really thought: We needed to "redistribute the wealth," he said, a central tenet of full-blown socialism.
The press' reaction? Did they inquire further about Obama's socialistic mindset? Look into his membership in the socialist New Party? Ask more questions about the bevy of hard-left radials who were his friends, champions, patrons and even most likely his ghostwriter?
No. They insisted the answer meant nothing, it was a crazy question to begin with, and then intensely vetted.... Joe the Plumber, who wasn't running for anything.
Within two days we found out he wasn't a licensed plumber (as if this means he wasn't a plumber at all), had liens against him, was divorced (wink-wink, we know what that means), etc.
Instead of vetting the man voluntarily seeking the most powerful office in all the world, the media instead chose to fix its full investigatory power upon a plumber who had dared to ask the Little King a question.
And so it was throughout 2008 -- Did Obama's long-time association with racist radical Reverend Wright give any insight into his actual politics? No, the press insisted, it did not. It embargoed the story for a year (despite it being pushed to them by the Democrat Hillary Clinton) and then when they finally broke down and reported it, they proclaimed it no longer a story after a vapid, vacuous speech. (The greatest speech since Lincoln, in their estimation.)
And then anyone who brought the subject up was vetted again, or, not vetted really, just called a racist.
The media refused to look for anything negative in Obama, or even anything neutral -- any policy choice he was pushing that that might not appeal to all voters was ruthlessly blackholed.
But, you know... none of this was intentional. I would certainly not say the media mangled the coverage of the 2008 elections.
Posted by: Ace at
09:01 AM
| Comments (133)
Post contains 767 words, total size 5 kb.
Posted by: WalrusRex at October 19, 2010 09:06 AM (xxgag)
Ugh. I hate it when a candidate makes things harder than they have to be--this is a classic unforced error. I still wonder what it says that she won the primary--if this was the winning candidate, how strong could Castle have actually been in the general...?
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at October 19, 2010 09:06 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 19, 2010 09:08 AM (9Cooa)
They did more then even that. They made up a false claim that he was related to Charles Keating and ran with it, and when a Democrat bureaucrat misused her position to dig up dirt on him they worked with her to spread it as far and wide as possible.
Anyone care to guess what would happen if a Republican bureaucrat tried to pull this trick?
Posted by: 18-1 at October 19, 2010 09:08 AM (7BU4a)
Posted by: WalrusRex at October 19, 2010 01:06 PM (xxgag)
I picked a good ghost writer for my "auto"biography.
Posted by: Barack Obama at October 19, 2010 09:09 AM (7BU4a)
Posted by: Ron at October 19, 2010 09:09 AM (XrvQ5)
Posted by: boniface ballers at October 19, 2010 09:11 AM (bPbwB)
See the previous Kurtz post. She's right (even if she's not terribly eloquent or savvy about expressing it).
So, how about instead of saying "Daily Facepalm!!!11!!eleventy!" You go to people you know and explain to them why she's right?
Posted by: AllenG at October 19, 2010 09:11 AM (8y9MW)
O/T Megyn Kelly just said from five to seven shots were fired at the upper floors of the Pentagon. There should be security video.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:11 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: t-bird at October 19, 2010 09:12 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: TheresaD/FirePattyMurray at October 19, 2010 09:12 AM (f0Q++)
Why? Because some idiot AP reporter summarizes what one candidate said and then gives the opposing candidate's exact quote in response? When do you ever see that? I'll tell you when. It's when the reporter is lying.
What you really should be wondering is why anyone in the media is working hard to discredit someone who absolutely cannot under any circumstances win. Hmmmmmm......
Posted by: The Mega Independent at October 19, 2010 09:13 AM (XrvQ5)
Sorry to say, once the public figures out that the media have not vetted any of the Republican candidates this year, they will all sink in the polls and the Democrats will win everything.
Yeah. We're waiting for the media to vet politicians. They always let the conservatives slide til the last minute.
Posted by: The Voters at October 19, 2010 09:14 AM (QKKT0)
Comparing Obama to Bush 43 - consider;
For Bush 43 the media;
Spent 8 years looking into his military service, and when they couldn't find anything of substance ran with forgeries, that they knew were forgeries, on the eve of the election.
Reprinted claims from a felon, who later killed himself, that Bush used cocaine, and greatly covered his years as an alcoholic.
Examined his role as a businessman in depth.
Considered in detail whether being Governor of one of the largest states was sufficiency preparation for the Presidency.
For Obama;
Actively opposed any analysis of Obama's associates: Wright, Ayers, etc
Actively opposed any investigation of Obama's admitted cocaine use and to when, or if, Obama had stopped being a drug addict.
Lauded Obama for his work as a community organizer but refused to analyze what his results were.
Actively opposed the question of whether he was qualified as a State Senator and community organizer for the office of the Presidency
Posted by: 18-1 at October 19, 2010 09:15 AM (7BU4a)
Posted by: dagny at October 19, 2010 09:15 AM (N1fth)
My point is that it was mishandled; she sounded ignorant. If she had simply explained how his view was not only incorrect, but radical in its own right, that would have come out much better.
So yes, a facepalm, but for execution, not for viewpoint.
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at October 19, 2010 09:15 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: john Ryan at October 19, 2010 09:15 AM (Snu7z)
What Kurtz says and the MFM claimed about Zero is irrelevant. He telegraphed his radical agenda with words, associates, and history loud enough for a deaf man to hear. Blaming the MFM for people, who are finally waking up from their willful blindness/ deafness is pointless. Many of his voters wanted to be deceived. They were mainlining hop'n'change from a syringe that looked like a grease gun. Zero's warts were so fucking big that only someone who had decided their love was blind could possibly miss it.Shit, Zero's election is the result of willful stupidity of the American people, not the MFM.
Kurtz should look in the mirror and stare down the face of a damn fool.
Posted by: maddogg at October 19, 2010 09:15 AM (OlN4e)
Ace, best post in months (and there have been some great ones in there). very well written and reasoned. sweet.
Posted by: Vergeltung at October 19, 2010 09:16 AM (jttPx)
What a pile of shit. Obama has been a creation of the media since day 1 when they rolled him out at the convention. He has always been a phony with no experience, no knowledge, and the only claim to fame he had was that he was an articulate and clean black.
No. They insisted the answer meant nothing, it was a crazy question to begin with, and then intensely vetted.... Joe the Plumber, who wasn't running for anything.
Oh, don't forget the teams of people they sent to AK to paw through Palin's garbage. Nothing could have alerted the population to how scared they were of Palin more than the MFM attack as well as the outpouring of outrageous lies. There were, and still are , scared to death of her.
And for good cause.
Posted by: Vic at October 19, 2010 09:16 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: t-bird at October 19, 2010 09:18 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Jane D'oh
You probably already did this, but you can inform them that Obama has stated that he went to that church several times a month for over 20 years.
Posted by: IreneFingIrene at October 19, 2010 09:19 AM (JNqU9)
Here's a copy of the e-mail I just sent to the U.S. House Republican Conference:
We are getting mightily torqued off with the GOP on this compromise talk and would like you to convey same to the GOP leaders.
We will work to throw everyone of them out in the next election if Boehner, et al do not move to repeal Obamacare and pursue a rigorous conservative agenda, which includes investigative hearings on Obamacare. I would highly recommend a conference call be set up with key leadership post hast so conservative new media can be reassured of the political vector the GOP will be taking. We have been working our tails off out here in the field and are becoming terribly demoralized by certain GOP representatives' talk about "compromise" in response to the mainstream media's "GOP Bad" narrative. We reach millions of readers a day through our network of blogs and believe me, while we have momentum, we need to be reassured by the GOP of the track we will be taking. Sincerely,Posted by: journolist at October 19, 2010 09:19 AM (O/NP5)
But, seriously, this has been my major peeve for the last 3 years. No one but the magical Negro would have been allowed to proceed as far as he did. Would a white freshman senator with as leftist a record as Obama have made any headway even in the Democrat primaries?!? Would anyone else with no military, executive, or business experience have even been considered a serious candidate at all? Would anyone else whose background, including the details of his parentage, was so opaque not have raised a hundred alarums? Wouldn't the media normally have descended on these issues like a pack of hungry dogs?
The only people fooled by Obama were the ones who wanted to be fooled.
Posted by: Drinky Crow at October 19, 2010 09:19 AM (mAm+G)
"I would certainly not say the media mangled the coverage of the 2008 elections."
As Francis Urquhart, the villainous protagonist of House of Cards, was fond of saying, "You might very well think so. I couldn't possibly comment."
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:20 AM (7AOgy)
"... but the overheated hyperbole did him no favors."
Isn't "the overheated hyperbole" The Thing that got Big 0 elected?
Or is there some actual achievement in 0's record?
Posted by: Arbalest at October 19, 2010 09:21 AM (BqSr3)
How many times did we have to defend Bush because he'd said something that came out stupid, but everyone knew what he meant? Same issue here, though, in this case, voters in DE might actually be ignorant of the fact that the Constitution doesn't say anything about the Separation of Church and State.
Posted by: AllenG at October 19, 2010 09:21 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:21 AM (UOM48)
This is why so many people donate ANONYMOUSLY. So they don't end up in a hit piece by the media. Or worse, the list of 'Enemies of the State.'
Posted by: blindside at October 19, 2010 09:22 AM (x7g7t)
"Once Obama had to grapple with two wars, a crippled economy and reflexive Republican opposition, he had no place to go but down."
Wow. Amazing. So despite Obama's assurances and the MFM's reiteration of those assurances that he knew what he was getting into and had a sure-fire plan to deal with those problems, we all should have known that the job was waaaaaay too big for him? (Some of us did know, but the MFM told us that we were all racist reactionaries.)
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:22 AM (7AOgy)
This assertion is thin, Ace. I just don't see the premise that the press was supposed to prop up Obama.
But, then again, of course they were, because they're all God-less commies and douchebags, so what else is to be expected? Were they going to support Teh Fred, or Mittens, or the Chillbilly? Who were they supposed to get behind? An American?
How do we hold these fucknozzles and clownpunchers to account for their blatant fucknozzling and clownpunching?
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at October 19, 2010 09:23 AM (5aa4z)
Didn't Orca start the whole "He is The One we have been waiting for" mantra?
That cow can't leave the airwaves soon enough. And she just gave free round trip air fare to Jon Stewart's clapping seal audience to attend his "Insanity" rally in DC.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:24 AM (UOM48)
Alternate comment: There's a picture of Pelosi on Drudge.
Posted by: The Mega Independent at October 19, 2010 09:24 AM (XrvQ5)
In 1944-45, when tax rates were higher than they are today, the United States was the world's #1 manufacturer.
First rate talking point.
You think we may have gotten to Number One by blasting the living shit out of any who might have otherwise competed for that title? Christ you lefties are ignorant. Go fuck yourself.
Posted by: spongeworthy at October 19, 2010 09:24 AM (rplL3)
Do they have to pay income tax on it like they do when she gives them cars or vacations?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at October 19, 2010 09:25 AM (Vz9lf)
As Francis Urquhart, the villainous protagonist of House of Cards, was fond of saying, "You might very well think so. I couldn't possibly comment."
I knew I liked you, stuiec. I loved that series. Did you watch Porterhouse Blue? I liked that, too.
Posted by: Senator Soothsayer (R-AoS) at October 19, 2010 09:25 AM (gM4zK)
Posted by: dagny at October 19, 2010 01:15 PM (N1fth)
It's even harder when you're also giving the Senate Majority Leader a hand job and diddling the historic first Madame Speaker at the same time as you're sucking off Teh Won. So I guess we should cut the MFM some slack.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:26 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: George Orwell at October 19, 2010 09:26 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: john Ryan at October 19, 2010 01:15 PM (Snu7z)
Hmm, I wonder if the fact that between us, the Germans, British, Japanese and Russians that we destroyed the rest of the worlds manufacturing capability had anything to do with that?
Posted by: robtr at October 19, 2010 09:26 AM (fwSHf)
Da chickenszzzzz..are-a comin' home to roost-a
Summarizing the big poll dump the NRCC just provided the Washington Post:
FL-8: Daniel Webster (R) 46, Alan Grayson* (D) 30 PA 3: Mike Kelly (R) 56, Kathy Dahlkemper* (D) 39 OH-15: Steve Stivers (R) 51, Mary Jo Kilroy* (D) 39 WA-3: Jaime Herrera (R) 51, Denny Heck (D) 38 NY-20: Chris Gibson (R) 48, Scott Murphy* (D) 45 MA-10: Jeff Perry (R) 44, Bill Keating (D) 42 IL-17: Bobby Schilling (R) 44, Phil Hare* (D) 41 PA-10: Tom Marino (R) 44, Chris Carney* (D) 37 VA-9: Morgan Griffith (R) 44, Rick Boucher* (D) 44 OR-5: Scott Bruun (R) 44, Kurt Schrader (D) 42 OH-6: Bill Johnson (R) 40, Charlie Wilson* (D) 40Posted by: beedubya at October 19, 2010 09:27 AM (AnTyA)
And all of this after the MFM promised us a Goodyear that would make everyone Goodrich. We should cut off their nuts.
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 09:27 AM (eQtPf)
And who could ever forget "corpseman"? MFM?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:28 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Senator Soothsayer (R-AoS) at October 19, 2010 01:25 PM (gM4zK)
No - but if I can find it somewhere, I will.
We recently bought the DVDs of Sleepers, a BBC miniseries about two deep-cover Russian sleeper agents dealing with the end of the Cold War (and the KGB's effort to tie up its loose ends).
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:28 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at October 19, 2010 09:28 AM (90bLF)
Yes, or enemies of the queer nation--as Prop. 8 supporters found out.
Posted by: Drinky Crow at October 19, 2010 09:28 AM (mAm+G)
The only people fooled by Obama were the ones who wanted to be fooled.
Posted by: Drinky Crow at October 19, 2010 01:19 PM (mAm+G)
Oh sure, look at John Kerry. They go to bat for leftists no matter what.
What made Obama magical was that he totally disarmed the Clinton attack machine and checkmated Hillary because of the race card. The Press will do its thing for any Dem candidate.
I will say that there was a significant amount of wish fulfillment in the sufferers from Bush fatigue who crossed over to join the skittles and unicorn parade.
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 09:29 AM (z1N6a)
Someday, historians will castigate the Supreme Court, for NOT taking the case of whether someone born a dual citizen, is a Natural Born Citizen, PRE ELECTION... because of the fear of Riots...
This could have all been avoided...
Posted by: Romeo13 at October 19, 2010 09:29 AM (AdK6a)
I'm sure if they do, they'll whine and cry like little bitches.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:30 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at October 19, 2010 09:30 AM (ruu60)
I just saw an extract over at JWF about Barney's girlfriend... I mean hooker and the Sean Bielat kerfluffle.
Franks spokesman mentioned that the guy was an amateur photog who would continue to hit the stump with Barney.
Oh, how true!
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at October 19, 2010 09:30 AM (RkRxq)
Let's also not forget that the media spun the campaign to more of a Palin vs. Obama race than McCain / Palin vs. Obama / Biden.
WAS PALIN QUALIFIED TO BE ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENCY? Because, really, look at John McCain. He's old. Faltering. Could keel at any moment. Any. Moment. I mean, she's only been governor...
VS.
Of course Obama is qualified to be President! His awesomeness actually comes from his lack of insidery taint of years and years of political experience! He'll be awesome because he's out-of-the-box!
My guess was that, once Palin was named running-mate, it would put a monkeywrench into the MSM's coverage. She brought the 500-pound gorilla into the room with regards to Obama's qualifications, as compared to her's. Yet, while her qualifications were scrutinized, ridiculed, and mocked, Obama's equivalent lack remained ignored, avoided, flung deep over the boundary into Racistville.
Posted by: reason at October 19, 2010 09:31 AM (sPO/s)
In 1944-45, when tax rates were higher than they are today, the United States was the world's #1 manufacturer.
First rate talking point.
You think we may have gotten to Number One by blasting the living
shit out of any who might have otherwise competed for that title? Christ
you lefties are ignorant. Go fuck yourself.
Posted by: spongeworthy at October 19, 2010 01:24 PM (rplL3)
Does that mean they want us to produce thirty thousand tanks, fifty thousand warplanes, and three dozen aircraft carriers?
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 09:31 AM (z1N6a)
And all of this after the MFM promised us a Goodyear that would make everyone Goodrich. We should cut off their nuts.
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 01:27 PM (eQtPf)
Radials don't have nuts, you big lug. That last part of your joke left me flat.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:31 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: George Orwell at October 19, 2010 09:32 AM (AZGON)
According to recent media reports, Democrats stand to lose as many as 8,000 congressional seats and more than 917 gubernatorial races in November's midterm elections. "Republicans are poised to pick up 1,500 seats in Ohio alone, and could wind up with a 23,576-to-12 majority in the Senate," Beltway observer Isaac Hundt said Wednesday, noting the GOP's advantage is likely to increase by Election Day given that its candidates are outspending their opponents by some $900 trillion. "With Democratic disapproval ratings in the quadruple digits, it's a foregone conclusion that Republicans will not only retake Congress, but hold it for the next 20,000 to 25,000 years." Experts also predicted the one-sided election results would cause Barack Obama to die on the spot, at which point the nation's leading conservative talk-radio host would be sworn in as president of the United States forever.
Posted by: JP at October 19, 2010 09:32 AM (ctq0s)
Either Ace ran out of cigarettes/Valu-Rite/Hobo blood/All-of-the-above this morning for breakfast, or his hemorrhoids are acting up again.
Posted by: John P. Squibob at October 19, 2010 09:32 AM (/U/Mr)
Posted by: RickJ at October 19, 2010 09:33 AM (udpRV)
In 1944-45, when tax rates were higher than they are today, the United States was the world's #1 manufacturer.
Explain the relationship. How are these cause and effect? Cite specific evidence directly related to mid-40's tax rate and productivity, not just generic fluff.
You have one hour.
And....go.
Posted by: reason at October 19, 2010 09:33 AM (kZVsz)
Supporting a candidate isn't just about money and words. Sometimes there are other services to be rendered, often far more useful ones. Bah...
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at October 19, 2010 09:34 AM (GBXon)
WAS PALIN QUALIFIED TO BE ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENCY? Because, really, look at John McCain. He's old. Faltering. Could keel at any moment. Any. Moment. I mean, she's only been governor...
Hey, Barry picked me. Just in case you didn't know, it was the best decision of his campaign. My brain is bigger than my head.
Posted by: Sheriff Joe at October 19, 2010 09:35 AM (No0N3)
Posted by: George Orwell at October 19, 2010 09:35 AM (AZGON)
"Once Obama had to grapple with two wars, a crippled economy and reflexive Republican opposition, he had no place to go but down."
This means that all of the unexpected stuff every week was really expected and the MFM knew all along that it was going to happen because they are so smart but they were just reporting that it was unexpected because...
they are so stupid?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at October 19, 2010 09:36 AM (RkRxq)
I'm down with that. DoD contracts are the only industry that can't bring in foreign workers instead of hiring Americans.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at October 19, 2010 09:36 AM (Vz9lf)
Posted by: runninrebel at October 19, 2010 09:36 AM (i3PJU)
It was. You're better assassination insurance than even Dick Cheney.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at October 19, 2010 09:37 AM (Vz9lf)
Joe the Plumber found out about the wrath of the fanboys when he dared to question their idol. They performed a colonoscopy on him and didn't even offer him any anesthetic.
Posted by: Steve L. at October 19, 2010 09:37 AM (Gkhxf)
Joe the Plumber found out about the wrath of the fanboys when he dared to question their idol. They performed a colonoscopy on him and didn't even offer him any anesthetic.
Posted by: Steve L. at October 19, 2010 01:37 PM (Gkhxf)
Don't insult fanboys. They know everything there is to know about the latest teen heartthrob.
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 09:39 AM (z1N6a)
Ooooh! Can we please?
We could sell them to Israel. Wouldn't that be fun?
@71 - Eh, maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. I suspect more of the former than the latter, but other than doing something about it ourselves, what good does griping about it do, besides depress turnout?
The thing is, COD has made her campaign about being up-front with her beliefs, honest almost to (or perhaps beyond) the point of sanity, etc. If she suddenly changed into some suave politician, I think she'd start seeming fake- and that really would put a knife in her campaign.
Posted by: AllenG at October 19, 2010 09:39 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: George Orwell at October 19, 2010 09:39 AM (AZGON)
What made Obama magical was that he totally disarmed the Clinton attack machine and checkmated Hillary because of the race card. The Press will do its thing for any Dem candidate.
I will say that there was a significant amount of wish fulfillment in the sufferers from Bush fatigue who crossed over to join the skittles and unicorn parade.
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 01:29 PM (z1N6a)
Here's the thing: a lot of Democrats were deathly afraid of Hillary getting the nomination. They were sure that Bill's baggage would cost her a chunk of the vote in the general election. However, they couldn't stand in the way of the election of the historic First Woman President.
So along came Obama, and suddenly they had the perfect out: sorry, Hillary, but we're going to go for the historic First Black President this time around.
Then McCain picked Palin, so it became imperative to pick apart the historic First Woman Vice-President narrative. Hence, they had to paint Palin as unqualified and unready, which of course meant ignoring the fact that Obama was less qualified and less ready than she.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:39 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at October 19, 2010 09:40 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: dagny at October 19, 2010 09:40 AM (N1fth)
Posted by: ploome at October 19, 2010 09:40 AM (p6op4)
We were the #1 manufacturer at a time when we didn't have OSHA or the EPA either, dipshit.
Posted by: model_1066 at October 19, 2010 09:40 AM (VnECg)
Posted by: Dr Mabuse at October 19, 2010 09:40 AM (jgkJo)
That depends on whether they're treated as prizes (taxable) or gifts (not taxable).
Posted by: Drinky Crow at October 19, 2010 09:41 AM (mAm+G)
a brilliant and intelligent man. Even our allies joined in on selling this fraudulent notion. Thanks, John McCain, for telling us we had nothing to fear from an Obastard presidency.
Remember how he was a "great speaker"? um, er, ah, teleprompter, er, um, ah,uh, corpseman, er um
Posted by: dagny at October 19, 2010 09:41 AM (N1fth)
Posted by: comrade stalin at October 19, 2010 09:41 AM (eQtPf)
Whoa. Buy futures in orange jumpsuits. *beings to feel slightly giddy*
Posted by: Jane D'oh at October 19, 2010 09:41 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at October 19, 2010 09:42 AM (mHQ7T)
In 1944-45, when tax rates were higher than they are today, the United States was the world's #1 manufacturer.
Explain the relationship. How are these cause and effect? Cite specific evidence directly related to mid-40's tax rate and productivity, not just generic fluff.
You have one hour.
And....go.
Posted by: reason at October 19, 2010 01:33 PM (kZVsz)
Do not use more than one blue book. Draw a diagonal line across the first page of your blue book. Show all your work.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:42 AM (7AOgy)
No. They insisted the answer meant nothing, it was a crazy question to begin with, and then intensely vetted.... Joe the Plumber, who wasn't running for anything.
Within two days we found out he wasn't a licensed plumber (as if this means he wasn't a plumber at all), had liens against him, was divorced (wink-wink, we know what that means), etc.
Ace you forgot his biggest sin of all. His first name wasn't actually Joe!!!1!11!!
Posted by: buzzion at October 19, 2010 09:42 AM (oVQFe)
Posted by: George Orwell at October 19, 2010 09:43 AM (AZGON)
When people started to notice that perhaps Obama was running both to the right and the left, I believe it was John Harwood of MSNBC/NYT who saved the day by naming Obama's secret sauce "pragmatism".
Posted by: MayBee at October 19, 2010 09:44 AM (WetPl)
I think that that is right and I further think that we have an opportunity. The left has always sought the great magical spokesperson candidate who is immune to criticism for whatever reason. You may recall that Ditch Witch Cindy Sheehan was endowed with "unimpeachable moral authority" by the media to criticize Bush becuase her son was killed. It turned out that hers was not the only son killed and that most surviving family members did not agree with her but only she had unimpeachable moral authority. Then there were the 9/11 widows who were a far left bunch not representative of survivors but they also could not be criticized right up until Ann Coulter criticized them. Now we have the Magic Negro and his magical race card. That too is failing. Where can the left go after Obama gets bitch slapped on 11/2 for immunity from criticism? I think that they have scraped as deep into the bottom of the barrel as they can go. They may have to actually address issues.
Posted by: WalrusRex at October 19, 2010 09:44 AM (xxgag)
Posted by: Porno Fluffers Union, Local 375 at October 19, 2010 09:44 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at October 19, 2010 01:40 PM (GBXon)
<Caster, Camber, Toe . . . you big Zerk fitting.
Posted by: journolist at October 19, 2010 09:44 AM (O/NP5)
Posted by: Jean at October 19, 2010 09:45 AM (uA+vD)
Posted by: Greg at October 19, 2010 09:45 AM (Snu7z)
Does that mean they want us to produce thirty thousand tanks, fifty thousand warplanes, and three dozen aircraft carriers?
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 01:31 PM (z1N6a)
It's not enough to produce them. You also have to use them to destroy the productive capacity of the other nations of the world. Then you can enjoy a monopoly on production and even otherwise ruinous rates of taxation won't put everyone out of work.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:46 AM (7AOgy)
Oprah paying the way is the only means of getting people there.
Even free rides on the SEIU Expressline didn't get as many as desired to the 10/3 rally.
Posted by: reason at October 19, 2010 09:46 AM (kZVsz)
Posted by: Pruman at October 19, 2010 09:46 AM (udRDY)
Posted by: the Golf Digest at October 19, 2010 09:47 AM (AZGON)
We also had no competition from the Third World, the USSR was out of the game, and Europe, China and Japan were destroyed.
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at October 19, 2010 09:47 AM (mHQ7T)
Don't tread on me. I was tired when I typed that comment.
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 09:48 AM (eQtPf)
Posted by: john Ryan at October 19, 2010 09:48 AM (Snu7z)
"Then McCain picked Palin, so it became imperative to pick apart the historic First Woman Vice-President narrative. Hence, they had to paint Palin as unqualified and unready, which of course meant ignoring the fact that Obama was less qualified and less ready than she."
But he gave a campaign speech to the Germans! He had way more foreign-policy experience than that hick with the funny bew-bew-yewbetcha! accent.
Posted by: completely unbiased newsmedia at October 19, 2010 09:50 AM (XiVKO)
Don't tread on me. I was tired when I typed that comment.
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 01:48 PM (eQtPf)
So your inflated sense of your funniness stems from fatigue and not the pressure to be clever?
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 09:51 AM (7AOgy)
Posted by: reason at October 19, 2010 09:53 AM (XiVKO)
Still, what will it take for the MFM to really "get" this guy, and start to write truthful pieces with all the full-throatedness used when he was being raised up and carried, as if the messiah into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday?
Posted by: Boris Yeltsin at October 19, 2010 09:55 AM (4sQwu)
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 09:57 AM (eQtPf)
Posted by: Boris Yeltsin at October 19, 2010 01:55 PM (4sQwu)
When they have a different presidential nominee they think can win.
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 09:57 AM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Drinky Crow at October 19, 2010 09:57 AM (mAm+G)
Don't tread on me. I was tired when I typed that comment.
Guys, you're leaving a skidmark on a road paved with Bridgestone, on a radial route towards Yokohama.
Posted by: Arbalest at October 19, 2010 09:57 AM (BqSr3)
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 19, 2010 10:01 AM (bE4Em)
It's not enough to produce them. You also have to use them to destroy the productive capacity of the other nations of the world. Then you can enjoy a monopoly on production and even otherwise ruinous rates of taxation won't put everyone out of work.
Posted by: stuiec at October 19, 2010 01:46 PM (7AOgy)
No need for us to do that to outproduce them. The ruining we did with bombing was pretty marginal in terms of cutting production. German inefficiency in plant and design, and unwillingness to use female labor kept them back, and we are just so much larger then they were as well.
Posted by: Oldcat at October 19, 2010 10:02 AM (z1N6a)
The mayor of Wasilly, I think it was.
Posted by: sandy burger at October 19, 2010 10:03 AM (twiRb)
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 10:03 AM (eQtPf)
Can you guys imagine Ace ghost-writing for Howard Kurtz? Jeez, that'd be funny. Ace, why not ghost-write for Kurtz here? On a regular basis. Seems like the kind of stunt Benjamin Franklin would pull.
The premise would be "the things Kurtz should have said this week."
Posted by: rdbrewer at October 19, 2010 10:05 AM (bE4Em)
Posted by: andycanuck at October 19, 2010 10:05 AM (eQtPf)
They were, because, like it or not, the pernicious truth about affirmative action is that any member of a minority that benefits from it is seen as being incapable of having gotten anywhere absent the soft bigotry of low expectations being in play.
Posted by: ya2daup at October 19, 2010 10:13 AM (HmCnI)
Instead of vetting the man voluntarily seeking the most powerful office in all the world, ...
Thankfully, events vindicated the media for this oversight. Obama was right about everything, as evidenced by the thing with the Chilean mine.
Posted by: FireHorse at October 19, 2010 10:15 AM (sWynj)
Posted by: willow at October 19, 2010 10:29 AM (iAu/o)
You'll notice that one of the MSM's "gotcha" questions this cycle is to demand that the GOP candidate identify specific entitlements cuts they'd make in order to provide opponents with attack ad material. Do you even remember a single question aimed at Golden Urkel demanding that level of specificity regarding his future policies? I seem to remember him answering all questions with some Hope and Change bullshit which our media watchdogs always seemed to find satisfactory.
Posted by: Alec Leamas at October 19, 2010 10:33 AM (r1OG3)
Posted by: Comanche Voter at October 19, 2010 12:12 PM (3ESDJ)
Will this continue? Will it swell up? Will we start seeing stuff like this plastered all throughout the MFM pages?
Are the stupid libtards losing a little of that KoolAid glow, and coming around?
Posted by: Boris Yeltsin at October 19, 2010 12:17 PM (4sQwu)
A coupla days ago, Andrew Ferguson published a weird piece ridiculing those who call BHO a socialist. His argument, boiled down, is:
People called Bill Clinton a radical and a socialist, but he triangulated after the midterms, and now people think he was not so radical. Therefore, Obama is not a socialist. QED.
Andy defeats his own "argument" by referring to a strange new respect for Clinton: the reason for it is that Obama makes him look moderate by comparison!
Posted by: Radegunda at October 19, 2010 01:13 PM (E2Q2k)
Posted by: FeFe at October 19, 2010 01:16 PM (TjlA2)
Posted by: Radegunda at October 19, 2010 01:53 PM (E2Q2k)
And by this:
Andy defeats his own "argument" by referring to a strange new respect for Clinton: the reason for it is that Obama makes him look moderate by comparison!
I meant that Andy apparently doesn't understand why Clinton is looking better from the vantage point of the Obama era. It's relative.
More fundamentally, he overlooks how Dems keep moving the stake of "centrist" in a leftward direction. Then it's considered "extreme" to want the center to be where it was before.
Posted by: Radegunda at October 19, 2010 01:58 PM (E2Q2k)
Posted by: Banjo at October 19, 2010 03:00 PM (nnZ5F)
Posted by: eman at October 19, 2010 06:35 PM (GuTnD)
Posted by: Sid Knee at October 19, 2010 08:45 PM (imN5c)
Oh, man!
That's what I come here for!
Posted by: Deety at October 20, 2010 01:01 AM (Jb3+B)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.266 seconds, 261 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: ParisParamus at October 19, 2010 09:05 AM (aYS5W)