The Stupid Media, Sometimes a Guy Just Wants to Scream

Posted on by

Quite often, really.  Former Vice President Dick Cheney recently received a heart transplant after a 20 month wait.  It’s not like he went to the head of the line, now is it?  So what angle does ABC News want to play?

Is Dick Cheney Too Old for a Heart Transplant?

Translated, it means should Republicans receive heart transplants since they don’t have them anyway.  I’ll guarantee that if an aging Democrat party member received one, the media would be all gushy about it and never question if he or she were too old.  I’ll also guarantee that if a younger Republican received one, they’d just come up with another question asking if he or she should have received it.

This article is stupider than most because it answers the question in the third paragraph, saying that people Cheney’s age do get them.  But wait, it gets stupider than that.

Experts differ on whether the 20-month wait is longer than normal.

“Twenty months, as an outpatient, [is] not [an] unusually long wait,” Dr. Marrick Kukin, director of heart failure at St. Lukes Roosevelt in New York said.

But Dr. Keith Aaronson, medical director of the heart failure program at the University of Michigan said 20 months “is a relatively long waiting time for an LVAD recipient to wait for a heart transplant.”

Now how useless is this?  About as useless as Joe Biden, except Biden supplies entertainment value.  Theoretically, news stories should inform people, but presenting two different claims when there is a definitive answer to the question wastes space, energy, and isn’t very green.  So which is it?  A long wait, or a normal wait?  I don’t know, but there is an answer and a reporter should know how to find it.  I do, however, have a theory that might explain why this ambiguity exists.

The reporter contacted Dr. Aaronson first and didn’t want to report that Dick Cheney waited a long time.  It would have looked far better to report that he didn’t wait long at all, then interview a distressed liberal-approved victim group mother of a child waiting for a new heart.  That one’s coming, mark my words.  The reporter, not liking the answer then contacted more doctors hoping to find one that would say it was a short wait.  The best the reporter could come up with was Dr. Kukin, who said it wasn’t unusually long.  Sometimes you just don’t get dealt the hand you want.

What Does It Take to Be a Democrat Party White House Press Secretary?

Posted on by

First of all, it’s a lot easier than being a Republican White House Press Secretary.  The press will be wanting to report bad stuff about your boss.  They’ll hound you for three weeks asking you to prove your boss wasn’t AWOL thirty years ago, and every time you offer more evidence, they’ll report that it “raises more questions than it answers.”  It’s a tough job.

A Democrat party press secretary has a tough job in a different way.  They have to explain what the president or VP meant when he said something outrageous.  There are always a few reporters asking about it, but not many.  The PJ Tattler reports how Jay Carney, the current Democrat party White House press secretary, was asked about Biden’s comment about the most audacious plan in 500 years, which was BHO authorizing the raid that netted Bin Laden.  Carney’s explanation was that BHO made an actual decision when receiving conflicting advice.  Taken in that context, one can’t blame Biden and Carney for being impressed, being that they might not have seen BHO do that before.  Biden can be forgiven for a mild exaggeration.

So Carney is left to deal with it, but it’s not that bad because the press is looking for spin they can use when it’s a Democrat.  It’s a one stop process.  When it’s a Republican in the White House, it’s a two step process.  First they attend the press briefing, then they go to the Democrat party to find out how to report it.  That takes two steps.  Occasionally they might even do some investigative reporting, like they did in Wasilla four years ago.

But Carney has what it takes.  Just go out and spew spin and it doesn’t even have to be sophisticated spin because he’s operating on the assumption that he has to fool enough imbeciles to get his boss reelected.  The press will be satisfied with it.

Half a Pipeline Is Better Than None

Posted on by

Politicians think we’re stupid.  But the Democrat party thinks we’re imbeciles.  And they may be right because it gets a lot of them elected.  So what did they do this time?  Well, as you know, BHO nixed a Canadian oil pipeline this year due to “environmental concerns,” meaning the far left threw up a roadblock any competent president would have gone through with a bulldozer.  Instead, BHO obediently stopped and delayed any decisions until after the election.

That turned out to be a very dumb move in an election year with skyrocketing gasoline prices.  Something an imbecile would do.  So what’s the answer when making a boneheaded decision like that?  Compromise, like any good politician.  Compromise in this case means building the southern half of a Canadian pipeline, starting in Oklahoma.  Personally, I consider this a southern interstate pipeline, but what do I know?  To make the matter even more ridiculous, TransCanada hasn’t applied for permits for the southern part yet, meaning any memos that BHO writes trying to put this on the fast track will have the same effect as his executive order to close Gitmo.

After the Democrat party has been insisting the president can’t do anything about gas prices as mentioned in my Voters are Stupid post, it would be funny if just writing a memo announcing half a pipeline actually lowered them.  Betcha Barry would take credit for it, too.  And you know what?  The same imbeciles who believe a Democrat party president can’t influence gas prices would also believe he just did, without registering any cognitive dissonance.  They’re called liberals.

Most Audacious Plan in 500 Years

Posted on by

That’s a lot of plans and a lot of years.  And in all that time, the most audacious plan of all was authorized by…

None other than President Barack Obama!  Yes, the plan to kill Bin Laden!

At least according to Joe Biden, and who am I to doubt Joe Biden?  His reasoning is that if the raid failed, BHO wouldn’t get reelected and it was a 48% proposition that Bin Laden was there.  My theory is that if the raid failed, we’d never have heard anything about it.  For all we know, this might have been the tenth raid to get the guy, with the first nine failing.  We’ll never know this, unless BHO tells us and even then we won’t know it because it might not be true.

Not to take away from the SEALs who went in to get the guy, I suspect the Normandy landings were a bit more audacious than anything Barry Obama will ever have to order.  Can you imagine BHO having to deal with something of that magnitude?  Let’s hope he’s never in that situation, because we’ll be screwed.

We’ve had a lot of presidents who had to deal with a lot of tough decisions, and most don’t go bragging about how audacious they were to have made them.  They just do what’s necessary.  What is it about Democrat presidents that the job has to be about them?

Bloomberg Bans Food Donations to the Homeless

Posted on by

You can’t make this stuff up.

In conjunction with a mayoral task force and the Health Department, the Department of Homeless Services recently started enforcing new nutritional rules for food served at city shelters. Since DHS can’t assess the nutritional content of donated food, shelters have to turn away good Samaritans.

I have to apologize to both of my readers this fine evening.  I’m at a loss for words.  What can be said about this?  Not a heck of a lot, really.  You know what I’d really really like?  I’d like to find out it’s a hoax and print a retraction, admit that I’d been lured in by an internet hoax.  But it’s probably true.

Unions are probably behind this, it’s gotta be that.  It’s not about nutrition, it’s about non-union volunteers volunteering to feed people.  Can’t allow that, now can we.

Quit Going on Those Stupid Sunday Shows, Senator Santorum

Posted on by

It’s enough to make a person scream.  If you go to Senator Santorum’s site, you’ll find some menu items across the top such as Issues, Events, Why Rick?, Home, stuff like that.  If you click on Issues, it takes you to a page with the title of Where I Stand.  There are about twenty articles.  It looks a little like a blog, but nowhere near as attractive as this one.  At the very bottom is one called Enforcing Laws Against Illegal Pornography.  He wants to enforce existing laws.  Well, the predictable happened.

The DNC must have latched onto this and faxed it to their media allies in the mainstream media, and of course it’s front and center as a war against pornography.  It’s not like it was at the top of the list, and he probably wishes it wasn’t there at all.  Or maybe not.  So he goes on these Sunday morning shows and of course gets quizzed about what’s at the bottom of his site.  He doesn’t know how to turn it around on them like Newt does, so he says he still plans on enforcing existing laws.  Now he’s seen as “doubling down” on it, and it’s written as if it’s a subject that he’s bringing up himself instead of responding to a question.

Hard to say what he should do, other than stop going on those shows.  Not much can be gained by it, and there’s a lot to be lost.  He’d be better off making campaign appearances.  When will Republicans learn?

Obama Wants to Stop “Tax Subsidies” for Oil Companies

Posted on by

Meaning tax breaks, undoubtedly.  The Democrat party has an uncanny ability to change terminology to make something good appear bad to a populace who hasn’t caught on to it yet, and there are a lot of people who just repeat the verbiage of the left without realizing the source or the meaning.  But let’s think about oil companies for a minute.

Most of you pull up to the pump and stick a credit card into the slot and listen to the pump activate, meaning precious fuel is available to get you to your destination.  Of course, if you’re a Democrat Party member without papers, you have to walk up to the window and pay in advance.  If you’re in the latter category, you see the immediate impact of the price while the rest of us see it once a month when we get the credit card bill.  And you blame it on Bush.  Also, you shouldn’t be driving without a license.

My point is that oil companies are good.  They enable the country to be on wheels, other than bicycle wheels, meaning there is food in the stores that keeps us alive.  If the oil companies didn’t exist, most of us would die off from starvation or be killed in the looting.  So next time BHO talks about cutting oil company subsidies, tell him to just cut the nonsense.  Prices are high enough as it is without waging war on the companies that keep the country going.

Rutherford B. Hayes

Posted on by

Good grief.  BHO said the following:

“One of my predecessors, Rutherford B. Hayes, reportedly said about the telephone, ‘It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one?'”

FactCheck.org of all places says it’s total nonsense.  Not only is it nonsense, but President Hayes was the first president to have a telephone in the White House.  So it’s worse than nonsense, it completely misrepresented what took place.  President Hayes was a Republican, as if you haven’t deduced this one already.  This blog is late to the party, the others have already covered it in depth and done it better, no doubt.  But I have one comment to add…

There are, like what, forty or fifty czars running around the White House these days?  Why not create an Office of Getting It Right Before Telling Me to Say It czar?

Voters are stupid

Posted on by

Voters are stupid.  Well, yeah.  A candidate promises to lower the oceans and people vote for him.  Are the oceans any lower?  When the tide goes out, sure.  Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if BHO pointed to that and said, “See?” and people voted for him again.  The article covers people thinking he’s a Muslim, which doesn’t make them stupid.  It just means they think he’s a Muslim, and there isn’t any evidence to the contrary, just claims.  Claims do not equate to evidence.

But my favorite is that people think the president can affect “the day-to-day price of fuel in a global market.”  No, people aren’t saying he can affect the day-to-day price of fuel.  But we do think his policies will affect prices over the long run.  Prevent pipelines and totally botch Brazilian oil deals, and the prices will be higher than if we had a pro-gasoline president.  We don’t, so the price is through the roof in an election year.  Way to go, BHO.  You own this one.

So what’s this Democrat party pollster up to?  It’s a familiar narrative.  When a Democrat party president can’t deliver, it’s because it’s not possible to deliver.  The job’s too big for one man.  Too big for Obama, apparently.  The too big for one man narrative appeared in 2010, less than two years into his presidency.  It’s interesting he didn’t admit this while campaigning.  Instead he used the standard Democrat party arrogance of thinking the current Republican president either couldn’t do things, or just hadn’t bothered to do them.  A Democrat party candidate thinks he can accomplish anything just through the force of his personality.  In BHO’s case, he could give speeches and the mountains would move.  Or the oceans would lower.

So what do we have now?  A failed olympic bid.  And he gave a speech, too.  Not so easy, is it, Mr. President.  There was the Cairo speech, and now they’re burning effigies of the guy in Afghanistan.  Maybe they don’t have TV there.  Green energy?  He could feed a lot of poor for the money he poured into those boondoggles.  And is Gitmo closed yet?  I’ve already mentioned the gas prices, which you all experience at the pump.

So yes, a competent president can lower gas prices if he makes sure we have enough oil and refineries to supply the population.  Thinking that doesn’t make a voter stupid, it just means he or she will make a better choice next time and not be hoodwinked by speeches enhanced by reverb and phony Styrofoam Greek columns.