Friday, October 16, 2009
Tolerance & Civility
It doesn't get any clearer than this. Remember, Olberman works for Sunday Night Football. For those of you who don't realize, that means NFL games. He seems to have a special kind of hatred for Michelle Malkin.
Ignorance is Blitz
What an awesome week for proud and blustery displays of ignorance! The commissioner of the NFL doesn't know what Rush has said, but he knows he doesn't like it. Columnist Jonathan "I hate Bush" Chait doesn't know what's in the Baucus health care bill but supports it wholeheartedly. We have a president who repeatedly displays his total lack of historical knowledge to the point where one wonders if he is even curious about what actually has transpired in the world prior to his miraculous appearance on the political stage.
This willful blindness to facts infects the fourth estate to the point they are acting with absurdity: Fact-checking Saturday Night Live within days of running fake quotes from Rush Limbaugh. The trend was clear in last years campaign for President when the media en masse took no interest in Obama's past. Only when stories broke through from the Internet (Reverend Wright, for example) did the MSM even acknowledge Obama had a past, and friends that populate it.
When it comes to health care, many in the "mainstream" media love to repeat phrases that say, in essence, that the USA is the only first-world country that doesn't provide universal health care. Well, that must mean the rest of the world is full of examples of exactly how this experiment has played out. Germany has been trying to make it work for well over 100 years. But the networks would rather show you posters with Hitler mustaches on Obama than real-life examples of how government care works in practice. It would be unreal, but it fits a pattern of decay over the last few decades, as journalism gives way to analysis, which gives way to simple propaganda and featherbedding.
We have majorities in Congress proudly admitting they have not and will not read the bills that purport to change almost 20% of our economy and fundamentally alter forever the relationship between the individual and their government. They are proud of their ignorance, and heated in their condemnation of those who cry, "Wait a minute. Think this through." To the point where white SEIU union thugs beat up a black protester and the media turns away: "Nothing to see here. Move along." Unbelievable? Believe it.
Look for yourself upon this mess. Google it. Bing it. But don't rely on the media to tell you the facts. Those days are over.
For years I have noted in my experience, people who are the most vociferous critics of the Bible or Rush Limbaugh are the very ones who 99% of the time have spent time with neither. Ignorance allows them to state with conviction, "Rush is a racist!" Or that, "The Bible supports slavery." And now we have, "Rush supports slavery." So this blitz Rush experienced this week is the latest tsunami of misinformation fed to the public by race hustlers and malcontents, happily beamed into the households of America by "legitimate" news networks. In the meantime, the White House declares war on Fox news -- and sees that cable network's ratings fly through the roof.
This willful blindness to facts infects the fourth estate to the point they are acting with absurdity: Fact-checking Saturday Night Live within days of running fake quotes from Rush Limbaugh. The trend was clear in last years campaign for President when the media en masse took no interest in Obama's past. Only when stories broke through from the Internet (Reverend Wright, for example) did the MSM even acknowledge Obama had a past, and friends that populate it.
When it comes to health care, many in the "mainstream" media love to repeat phrases that say, in essence, that the USA is the only first-world country that doesn't provide universal health care. Well, that must mean the rest of the world is full of examples of exactly how this experiment has played out. Germany has been trying to make it work for well over 100 years. But the networks would rather show you posters with Hitler mustaches on Obama than real-life examples of how government care works in practice. It would be unreal, but it fits a pattern of decay over the last few decades, as journalism gives way to analysis, which gives way to simple propaganda and featherbedding.
We have majorities in Congress proudly admitting they have not and will not read the bills that purport to change almost 20% of our economy and fundamentally alter forever the relationship between the individual and their government. They are proud of their ignorance, and heated in their condemnation of those who cry, "Wait a minute. Think this through." To the point where white SEIU union thugs beat up a black protester and the media turns away: "Nothing to see here. Move along." Unbelievable? Believe it.
Look for yourself upon this mess. Google it. Bing it. But don't rely on the media to tell you the facts. Those days are over.
For years I have noted in my experience, people who are the most vociferous critics of the Bible or Rush Limbaugh are the very ones who 99% of the time have spent time with neither. Ignorance allows them to state with conviction, "Rush is a racist!" Or that, "The Bible supports slavery." And now we have, "Rush supports slavery." So this blitz Rush experienced this week is the latest tsunami of misinformation fed to the public by race hustlers and malcontents, happily beamed into the households of America by "legitimate" news networks. In the meantime, the White House declares war on Fox news -- and sees that cable network's ratings fly through the roof.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
NFL Made a Stupid Mistake
This week Roger Goodell showed he doesn't have the sense to run the NFL. He wimped out when he should have been strong. He let sportswriters and hatemongers (and yes I know that those groups overlap quite a bit) inform his opinion instead of using common sense.
I love the NFL and am a big fan of talk radio. I've listened to Rush for years, but have a wide range of other radio personalities to compare his performance to as well, like Jim Rome, Tom Lykis, Hugh Hewitt, Tammy Bruce, Art Bell, Michael Medved, Dennis Miller and lots of others. None of those guys or gals has displayed the consistent passion for the game of football and for the good sportsmanship the best of the players show than Rush Limbaugh. Not even Jim Rome. Rush is an enthusiastic fan, has demonstrated knowledge of the game and would have been the biggest booster the League has ever had.
Instead, Roger Goodell, commissioner of the National Football League, torpedoed that opportunity by saying Rush wasn't welcome in their little club, because he made divisive statements.
That's a load of crap. It's a phrase made up of weasel words and devoid of substance. To paraphrase a famous saying, "Divisive is in the ear of the hearer." The commissioner didn't cite anything specific or say Rush was racist, so we really don't know Roger the Most Sensitive's definition of divisive. But in 40 years of enjoying NFL games, news conferences, and commentary I can state with 100% certainty I have heard some pretty "divisive" things. It is a league that thrives on controversy and where there is controversy you can bet there is "divisiveness" of some sort. At least I think so.
The main problem then id the fact that Rush was being smeared as a racist for things he did not ever say, and then for things people interpreted as racist. Both are wrong, in my opinion. It is heinous if Goodell based his "unwelcome" statement on the lies that unscrupulous journalists spread about Limbaugh. I don't fault players who spoke out, because like many young people they don't actually watch the news, they hear about it on Twitter or from their friends. I'm sure there's a lot of urban mythology about Rush being racist. But Goodell should have checked with NFL players, current and former, who actually know Rush Limbaugh. Or at the very least checked the record.
Rush has been broadcasting for over 20 years, more than 15,000 hours of commentary, and most of the last few years is on record in transcript and podcast form. He sometimes says outrageous things, but he is clearly an equal-opportunity jester, puncturing the egos of liberals of every color and calling out good and bad behavior of athletes of all races. I can't believe anyone could listen to him for any length of time and truly hold the informed opinion that Rush is a racist. How could a racist introduce Americans to Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell as guest hosts? Why would a racist want any part of a team likely to be 70% African American?
Take the example of calling Obama a "halfricanAmerican" for example. I can't think of any way the contraction of "half African American" could be offensive. Obama is half African American. I know. He said so a million times during last years campaign. But that's one of the prime example cited by Hillary Clinton's media lapdog website.
Finally, on Donovan McNabb there was so little offensive in Rush's statements on ESPN that people had to interpret it, and embellish it to mean what they wanted it to. People have argued about the value of quarterbacks since before Sammy Baugh, so I can't believe it was Limbaugh questioning McNabb's contribution to the "eggles" as he calls them. So it boils down to the opinion Rush expressed that the media was invested in and eager for a black quarterback to succeed. Watch ESPN from the Doug Williams days on. Try and make the argument that counter's Limbaugh's based on their cheerleading for African Americans. You can't do it. They are constantly highlighting the success of black coaches couched in the "NFL trying to change its image" storyline. Why?
Because it is the NFL that has had the real problem on race, not Rush. Rush refuses to give anyone a pass because of their race, and that is what bugs Roger Goodell. It reminds him that there is a colorblind majority out there. Maybe it shames him. Maybe it should, but it shouldn't cause him to react in a knee-jerk fashion and throw a black flag on Rush.
The NFL made a stupid mistake this week. And it looks like they made a stupid mistake when the elevated Goodell to commissioner.
I love the NFL and am a big fan of talk radio. I've listened to Rush for years, but have a wide range of other radio personalities to compare his performance to as well, like Jim Rome, Tom Lykis, Hugh Hewitt, Tammy Bruce, Art Bell, Michael Medved, Dennis Miller and lots of others. None of those guys or gals has displayed the consistent passion for the game of football and for the good sportsmanship the best of the players show than Rush Limbaugh. Not even Jim Rome. Rush is an enthusiastic fan, has demonstrated knowledge of the game and would have been the biggest booster the League has ever had.
Instead, Roger Goodell, commissioner of the National Football League, torpedoed that opportunity by saying Rush wasn't welcome in their little club, because he made divisive statements.
That's a load of crap. It's a phrase made up of weasel words and devoid of substance. To paraphrase a famous saying, "Divisive is in the ear of the hearer." The commissioner didn't cite anything specific or say Rush was racist, so we really don't know Roger the Most Sensitive's definition of divisive. But in 40 years of enjoying NFL games, news conferences, and commentary I can state with 100% certainty I have heard some pretty "divisive" things. It is a league that thrives on controversy and where there is controversy you can bet there is "divisiveness" of some sort. At least I think so.
The main problem then id the fact that Rush was being smeared as a racist for things he did not ever say, and then for things people interpreted as racist. Both are wrong, in my opinion. It is heinous if Goodell based his "unwelcome" statement on the lies that unscrupulous journalists spread about Limbaugh. I don't fault players who spoke out, because like many young people they don't actually watch the news, they hear about it on Twitter or from their friends. I'm sure there's a lot of urban mythology about Rush being racist. But Goodell should have checked with NFL players, current and former, who actually know Rush Limbaugh. Or at the very least checked the record.
Rush has been broadcasting for over 20 years, more than 15,000 hours of commentary, and most of the last few years is on record in transcript and podcast form. He sometimes says outrageous things, but he is clearly an equal-opportunity jester, puncturing the egos of liberals of every color and calling out good and bad behavior of athletes of all races. I can't believe anyone could listen to him for any length of time and truly hold the informed opinion that Rush is a racist. How could a racist introduce Americans to Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell as guest hosts? Why would a racist want any part of a team likely to be 70% African American?
Take the example of calling Obama a "halfricanAmerican" for example. I can't think of any way the contraction of "half African American" could be offensive. Obama is half African American. I know. He said so a million times during last years campaign. But that's one of the prime example cited by Hillary Clinton's media lapdog website.
Finally, on Donovan McNabb there was so little offensive in Rush's statements on ESPN that people had to interpret it, and embellish it to mean what they wanted it to. People have argued about the value of quarterbacks since before Sammy Baugh, so I can't believe it was Limbaugh questioning McNabb's contribution to the "eggles" as he calls them. So it boils down to the opinion Rush expressed that the media was invested in and eager for a black quarterback to succeed. Watch ESPN from the Doug Williams days on. Try and make the argument that counter's Limbaugh's based on their cheerleading for African Americans. You can't do it. They are constantly highlighting the success of black coaches couched in the "NFL trying to change its image" storyline. Why?
Because it is the NFL that has had the real problem on race, not Rush. Rush refuses to give anyone a pass because of their race, and that is what bugs Roger Goodell. It reminds him that there is a colorblind majority out there. Maybe it shames him. Maybe it should, but it shouldn't cause him to react in a knee-jerk fashion and throw a black flag on Rush.
The NFL made a stupid mistake this week. And it looks like they made a stupid mistake when the elevated Goodell to commissioner.
Friday, September 11, 2009
The President has a Math Problem
One thing Obama said in his ginormous health care reform speech stuck in my mind. Without getting into who is lying, or misrepresenting, or generally not playing nice on health care, I can say for certain that the President is WAY off on his math.
At one point he said -- and I know it's accurate because I bipped back the TiVo twice to make sure and asked my wife if he really said it and Jake Tapper heard it too -- that if we can "slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term."
Wow, he must be thinking REALLY long-term! Let's solve for X shall we?
One-tenth of one per cent of X equals $4 trillion or
.01 * X = $4,000,000,000,000
X = $400,000,000,000,000
Therefore the amount of growth in healthcare costs is $400 trillion, although we don't know the rate because he provided no time component (how much of what by when). But just accepting his number, it takes a whole lot of per cent of anything to equal a trillion...or four. The growth of healthcare costs is about 8% per year now, so saving $4T might help the deficit, if it were possible.
Somehow, I think those numbers just don't add up. And the fact that no news story on his speech evinced skepticism about his numbers is astounding. But finally, remember when Newt Gingrich said we wanted to "slow the rate of growth for medicare" in the mid-1990s? Dude was hung out to dry. Called a dirtbag and a hater of old folks. Now, of course, as in many other things, when Obama says it the press just nods and says "Great!"
Times change, Baby!
At one point he said -- and I know it's accurate because I bipped back the TiVo twice to make sure and asked my wife if he really said it and Jake Tapper heard it too -- that if we can "slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term."
Wow, he must be thinking REALLY long-term! Let's solve for X shall we?
One-tenth of one per cent of X equals $4 trillion or
.01 * X = $4,000,000,000,000
X = $400,000,000,000,000
Therefore the amount of growth in healthcare costs is $400 trillion, although we don't know the rate because he provided no time component (how much of what by when). But just accepting his number, it takes a whole lot of per cent of anything to equal a trillion...or four. The growth of healthcare costs is about 8% per year now, so saving $4T might help the deficit, if it were possible.
Somehow, I think those numbers just don't add up. And the fact that no news story on his speech evinced skepticism about his numbers is astounding. But finally, remember when Newt Gingrich said we wanted to "slow the rate of growth for medicare" in the mid-1990s? Dude was hung out to dry. Called a dirtbag and a hater of old folks. Now, of course, as in many other things, when Obama says it the press just nods and says "Great!"
Times change, Baby!
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
The 3 Lies in Every Story on Health Care Reform
Every current article on health care reform (or "health insurance reform") contains at least three lies that the media repeats time after time. Of course, some articles have more than three, but that number seems to be the minimum daily requirement for the MSM. For convenience I'll use my local paper, The Riverside Press-Enterprise, which ran an article this morning by their Washington Bureau guy, Ben Goad. But you can have fun by applying the "3 Lie Test" to any article by a MSM source.
Obama's health care plan
The first line of the story contains the phrase "President Barack Obama's health care plan," which is a false premise. Obama has pointedly made clear in multiple interviews that he has not put forth a plan, nor has he given many specifics as to what a plan should include to get his signature. You can believe the Obama of 2003 and 2007 if you like the single payer plan, or you can believe President Obama who now says the current plans under consideration are in no way a "trojan horse" for a single payer system. What you cannot believe is that Obama has A Plan he provided to the public or to Congress. Such a thing does not exist.
In fact, this is a problem Obama has inflicted on himself twice this year, first with the stimulus bill that he outsourced to the two people with the lowest approval ratings in the country, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid. Of course, they larded it up with crap that can't and won't stimulate the economy, but are long-held wishes of the Left.
Public Undecided
The fourth paragraph of the story leads off with the phrase "Polls show the public is torn over Obama's vision for reform" and is but one variation of the "undecided meme" playing out in the media. And it is a bold-faced lie, one often paired with the "two sides in the debate break mostly along party lines" lie. The truth is more than three quarters of Americans polled are very concerned about the shape of the plans in Congress, and those in favor are dropping below "Elvis is alive" numbers. In fact, the most recent poll finds Americans are overwhelmingly happy -- 80% of them -- with the insurance they have and are worried that Congress will blow it up to make their universal health care plan viable. Nothing that has those kind of numbers can be a one party vs. the other debate. If you have a slice of America 80% wide, then you have what used to be called "bipartisan" support.
Which brings us the the third of the must-have lies for every article on health care:
Sales Job
Coming in the fifth paragraph of the story but widely reported everywhere, is the Big Sales Job lie. As evidence by my local paper's story this morning, and various videos burning up Youtube the real mission is by Democrats is to avoid public discussion at all, if possible, and if a debate must be joined to lie about what's in the bill or feign (let's hope) ignorance. I leave open the possibility that there could be real ignorance in Congress and the Executive Branch, of course. But the sales job meme is just another continuance of a theme the MSM hammered during the campaign, when it seemed that Barack could do no wrong, and words slipped off his silvery tongue to wild applause. Let's face it, unless he's selling Barack he can't sell worth squat!
This has become all too apparent as he holds press conference after prime time snoozer after on-site droning. The man is the best argument against health care reform every time he opens his mouth. The idea that he is any kind of a salesman is an insult to real sales professionals. The hallmark of a good salesman is the ability to provide value through solutions, typified by the well-worn car sales line, "What do I need to do to put you in this car today?" Have you ever heard Obama consider what the public would like to know about "health care reform" in order to make a wise decision? No! He doesn't care what you think, as long as you don't think too long or too hard about what Congress is doing.
The other trait common to good sales professionals is product knowledge, the ability to clearly communicate features and benefits of the service or widget they sell. The public is well aware that every "news conference" he's held on the subject has been famously devoid of actual facts about the bills under construction. Not only is he ignorant of the particulars, he is quick to give off the slimy vibe of someone trying to pull the wool over their customer's eyes. The media can say he is doing a bang-up sales job, but it is so patently false that fewer Americans are buying, and that is why there is such a rush to get a bill -- any bill --signed into law before the popular uprising leaves a permanent taint on the President.
This little post has gone on so long, I don't have time right now to expound on the various "lies of omission" that would round out my take on the article in question. But go ahead, test these lies against your local paper's story on health care reform today. Then ask yourself, "What are they not telling me?" (Hint: tax increases and budget deficits.)
[Edited for spelling and syntax about one hour after original post. Content is the same, just clearer now, I hope.]
Obama's health care plan
The first line of the story contains the phrase "President Barack Obama's health care plan," which is a false premise. Obama has pointedly made clear in multiple interviews that he has not put forth a plan, nor has he given many specifics as to what a plan should include to get his signature. You can believe the Obama of 2003 and 2007 if you like the single payer plan, or you can believe President Obama who now says the current plans under consideration are in no way a "trojan horse" for a single payer system. What you cannot believe is that Obama has A Plan he provided to the public or to Congress. Such a thing does not exist.
In fact, this is a problem Obama has inflicted on himself twice this year, first with the stimulus bill that he outsourced to the two people with the lowest approval ratings in the country, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid. Of course, they larded it up with crap that can't and won't stimulate the economy, but are long-held wishes of the Left.
Public Undecided
The fourth paragraph of the story leads off with the phrase "Polls show the public is torn over Obama's vision for reform" and is but one variation of the "undecided meme" playing out in the media. And it is a bold-faced lie, one often paired with the "two sides in the debate break mostly along party lines" lie. The truth is more than three quarters of Americans polled are very concerned about the shape of the plans in Congress, and those in favor are dropping below "Elvis is alive" numbers. In fact, the most recent poll finds Americans are overwhelmingly happy -- 80% of them -- with the insurance they have and are worried that Congress will blow it up to make their universal health care plan viable. Nothing that has those kind of numbers can be a one party vs. the other debate. If you have a slice of America 80% wide, then you have what used to be called "bipartisan" support.
Which brings us the the third of the must-have lies for every article on health care:
Sales Job
Coming in the fifth paragraph of the story but widely reported everywhere, is the Big Sales Job lie. As evidence by my local paper's story this morning, and various videos burning up Youtube the real mission is by Democrats is to avoid public discussion at all, if possible, and if a debate must be joined to lie about what's in the bill or feign (let's hope) ignorance. I leave open the possibility that there could be real ignorance in Congress and the Executive Branch, of course. But the sales job meme is just another continuance of a theme the MSM hammered during the campaign, when it seemed that Barack could do no wrong, and words slipped off his silvery tongue to wild applause. Let's face it, unless he's selling Barack he can't sell worth squat!
This has become all too apparent as he holds press conference after prime time snoozer after on-site droning. The man is the best argument against health care reform every time he opens his mouth. The idea that he is any kind of a salesman is an insult to real sales professionals. The hallmark of a good salesman is the ability to provide value through solutions, typified by the well-worn car sales line, "What do I need to do to put you in this car today?" Have you ever heard Obama consider what the public would like to know about "health care reform" in order to make a wise decision? No! He doesn't care what you think, as long as you don't think too long or too hard about what Congress is doing.
The other trait common to good sales professionals is product knowledge, the ability to clearly communicate features and benefits of the service or widget they sell. The public is well aware that every "news conference" he's held on the subject has been famously devoid of actual facts about the bills under construction. Not only is he ignorant of the particulars, he is quick to give off the slimy vibe of someone trying to pull the wool over their customer's eyes. The media can say he is doing a bang-up sales job, but it is so patently false that fewer Americans are buying, and that is why there is such a rush to get a bill -- any bill --signed into law before the popular uprising leaves a permanent taint on the President.
This little post has gone on so long, I don't have time right now to expound on the various "lies of omission" that would round out my take on the article in question. But go ahead, test these lies against your local paper's story on health care reform today. Then ask yourself, "What are they not telling me?" (Hint: tax increases and budget deficits.)
[Edited for spelling and syntax about one hour after original post. Content is the same, just clearer now, I hope.]
Friday, July 24, 2009
Birthers and Truthers are both Stupid
Of all the conspiracy theories one could waste time on, the fretting and arguing over Barack Obama's citizenship is the dumbest. Even if he was born in Kenya or Indonesia, he is an American citizen because his mother was. So whether or not you "believe" the Hawaiian facsimile or not, it doesn't matter. If you are born of American parents -- or even just an American mother -- you are an American. Go ahead, ask a lawyer about that.
For example, if a US citizen is traveling in France and gives birth, the baby is not French. It is a US citizen. There are some countries that will confer dual citizenship, such as happened to friends of mine in South America when their parents where in the peace Corps. But still, being born of Americans they are American. But wait, you say, what about Mexican "anchor babies?" This is a strange interpretation of the Constitution that was invented by Democrats and rarely applies to immigrants other than Latinos crossing our southern border.
And it's not reciprocal. Try having a baby in Guadalajara and see if their government will claim it a s a citizen and give it welfare. In the end, the Birthers, like the psycho Truthers who think somehow the fumbling American government pulled off some grand conspiracy to take down the twin towers -- and got away with it despite thousands of people trying to prove it so -- will not let facts and the evidence in plain sight sway their opinion.
For example, if a US citizen is traveling in France and gives birth, the baby is not French. It is a US citizen. There are some countries that will confer dual citizenship, such as happened to friends of mine in South America when their parents where in the peace Corps. But still, being born of Americans they are American. But wait, you say, what about Mexican "anchor babies?" This is a strange interpretation of the Constitution that was invented by Democrats and rarely applies to immigrants other than Latinos crossing our southern border.
And it's not reciprocal. Try having a baby in Guadalajara and see if their government will claim it a s a citizen and give it welfare. In the end, the Birthers, like the psycho Truthers who think somehow the fumbling American government pulled off some grand conspiracy to take down the twin towers -- and got away with it despite thousands of people trying to prove it so -- will not let facts and the evidence in plain sight sway their opinion.
Two months?
I can't believe it has been that long since I had a long-from piece. However, my Twittering has also slowed considerably -- for two reasons: First, I have started a Twitter feed for one of the Brands I manage, and the brief time I can devote to tweets has been allocated mostly to that exercise. And it's fun to interact with customers and enthusiasts too! Second, there is far too much to do for the Brands I work with to tear myself away and offer up commentary or links. I am blessed in that I still have full and interesting employment.
So, all that being said I have some writing in the works and will post to the Tiny Pundit soon. One project is a long post about how Sarah Palin made me tweet. But first, there will be some more...uh...current topics to write about. See ya!
So, all that being said I have some writing in the works and will post to the Tiny Pundit soon. One project is a long post about how Sarah Palin made me tweet. But first, there will be some more...uh...current topics to write about. See ya!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)