John McCain

Mitt Romney Fails World Economy 101

Posted by on January 5, 2012 at 3:38 pm. 1 Comments :

The Republican presidential candidate relying the most on a resume of financial acumen to propel him into the White House is undoubtedly Mitt Romney (or R*Money, as his Highlife Homies call him). But as his first post-Iowa campaign event in New Hampshire shows, he may not be able to live up to the hype. From the National Journal:

“One man asked about the growing gap between rich and poor in America. Romney essentially said that it could be worse, and challenged the crowd to name a country where the average income is higher than in the United States.”

First of all, there are ten countries that have a higher average income than the U.S., including Norway and Qatar. But that’s beside the point. The average income says nothing about income inequality. If I were in a room with Bill Gates, the average net worth of that room would be about $25 billion dollars, of which my contribution would be negligible. The United States is home to several billionaires whose presence warps the average income scale.

A more relevant fact is that the 400 richest Americans control more wealth than the bottom 150 million combined. There’s your wealth gap. What’s more, on income inequality the U.S. ranks 18th out of the 20 richest countries:

Click to enlarge
Decadence Index

Romney, the man who believes that corporations are people, chose the cowardly route and dodged the substance of the question. It was also a bit arrogant of him to expect the crowd to have come to the event with data on the world’s average incomes and then claim victory when they didn’t dispute his evasive premise. Which is a good thing because the facts didn’t support his premise.

Finally, the event was also an opportunity for Romney get a bootlicking from his newest fan, John McCain. After declaring his endorsement, the exceedingly “senior” senator from Arizona introduced the former Massachusetts governor as “President Mitt Romney.” Just a slight reality tilt. I’m sure he’ll be fine.

[Update:] McCain’s endorsement of Romney got even better the next day when he expressed his confidence that President Obama would turn the country around:

Glenn Beck: McCain Would Have Been Worse Than Obama

Posted by on September 21, 2009 at 5:20 pm. 7 Comments :

Katie Couric is premiering a new Internet interview program tomorrow. Her first guest will be Glenn Beck. In a teaser for the episode, Couric asks Beck what he thinks of Hillary Clinton. That set off an interesting exchange:

Beck: How about this? I think John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama. How’s that?

That’s pretty remarkable. Considering that Beck has alleged that Obama is marching the nation to socialism; he asserts that Obama is both a Marxist and a fascist; he connects Obama to all sorts of figures that Beck regards as evil and/or corrupt; he believes emphatically that Obama is intent on destroying every principle on which our country was founded; he insists that, due to this administration, these are the most dangerous and frightening days of his lifetime.

I have to wonder then, how does it get worse than that? What does Beck think McCain might have done that would exceed in horror the destruction of America? Beck’s characterization of McCain as a “weird progressive like Theodore Roosevelt,” doesn’t seem to be enough to validate his fear. After all, Roosevelt served as president for eight years and the country survived and is still here a hundred years later.

I will be interested to see if Beck explains his position further in the Couric interview. Can he possibly present a coherent argument that justifies his bombastic assertion? And if he does, then how on earth can he remain silent about such an existential threat that still occupies a prominent place in the United States government?

Ever since Obama was inaugurated, Beck has been on a televangelistic crusade against some relatively low level administration advisors and non-governmental organizations. But McCain is the ranking member of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee, he serves on several other important committees, and he is a frequent guest on television news programs. Yet despite the risk Beck sees in him, Beck has never bothered to alert his audience to the danger. If McCain is truly worse than Obama, shouldn’t Beck do a week-long series exposing him? Shouldn’t McCain be driven from office to protect our nation’s future?

On the surface, I have to agree with Beck (did I just say that?). McCain would indeed have been worse than Obama. But my reasons for that opinion have nothing to do with a paranoid and foreboding sense of doom, nor even a belief that McCain would have reduced America to rubble. This outburst is just further evidence that Beck is suffering from a dementia that may be deeper than modern psychology can address.

Media Milestones And Millstones For 2008

Posted by on December 30, 2008 at 12:38 pm. NO Comments :

At the conclusion of a year that few people will miss, it is time once again to indulge in the hackneyed cliche of annual list-making. While some events are already etched into our collective memories (i.e. the election of our nation’s incoming, first-ever, African-American president; the shoe attack on our nation’s out-going, worst-ever, remedial president), other events may be more subject to fading recollection as a new year of stimuli compete for a place in America’s short attention span.

It is in this spirit that I submit the following collection of awards in the hopes of preserving these moments for history, if not for comedy.

Starting with the history-making presidential election, Barack Obama wins the Somebody Had To Say It Award for this:

Obama: “I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls. If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right?”

Sticking with the campaign theme, Sarah Palin has repeatedly demonstrated her ignorance of the media’s role in public life. She believes that it is unconstitutional to criticize her, and that she is the one to restore the media’s credibility. That alone would be enough to merit an award, but Palin wins the What Constitution? Award by showing Carl Cameron of Fox News that she has no comprehension of the Constitutional role of the office she sought:

Palin: “The vice president, of course, is not a member – or a part of the legislative branch, except to oversee the Senate. That alone provides a tremendous amount of flexibility and authority if that vice president so chose to use it.”

Of Course, Palin has her fans – like Ann Coulter who along with Human Events Magazine named Palin Conservative of the Year. But that was not enough to pry away the Fatuous Infatuation Award from Rich Lowry of the National Review:

Lowry: “I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, ‘Hey, I think she just winked at me.’ And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.”

On the plus side, CNN’s Jack Cafferty played a stream of gibberish from Palin’s interview with Katie Couric. After which he said that if you aren’t afraid that she is a 72 year old heartbeat from the presidency, you should be. Then Wolf Blitzer tried to cover for Palin by saying that she was just trying to squeeze a lot into her answer. Cafferty’s reply earns him the Anchor Smackdown Award:

Cafferty: “Don’t make excuses for her. That was pathetic.”

I suppose I should give an award to Palin’s running mate…what was his name? Oh yeah…John McCain certainly deserves a mention for his aggressive attacks on the media. But that’s all he gets. While it takes real guts for a former press darling who hosts barbecues for his reporter pals to turn on them when the next object of media affection pops up, the act for which I will remember McCain is his promotion and exploitation of Samuel Wurlzebacher – aka Joe the Plumber – whose name is not Joe and who is not a plumber. Despite his obvious deficiencies, Plumber Joe became a staple of Fox News, particularly business chief Neil Cavuto. On one notable occasion, Cavuto queried Joe on the subject of Barack Obama’s patriotism. And for his response Joe gets the McCarthyism Reprise Award:

Wurzelbacher: “Oh you know, [Obama’s] ideology is something that is completely different than what democracy stands for, so I had some question there. In my opinion.”

However, Joe will have to be satisfied sharing this award with News Corp Chairman, Rupert Murdoch, who also earned this honor in an interview with Cavuto:

Murdoch: “[Obama’s] policy is really very, very naive, old fashioned, 1960’s socialist.”

Old Rupert was destined to have an over-representation on this awards program. That’s partly because of the expansive nature of his media empire, but mostly because that empire is a repulsive purveyor of smears and propaganda. There is so much of it that I could devote an entire set of awards to News Corp alone. Consequently, I’ll focus here on the more peculiar instances of journalistic abuse. Starting with Amy Chozick of the Wall Street Journal who wins the Biggest Loser award for an article titled, “Too Fit to Be President?” which asks:

Chozick: “…in a nation in which 66% of the voting-age population is overweight and 32% is obese, could Sen. Obama’s skinniness be a liability?”

Then there is Fox News’ own Liz Trotta, winner of the Death To America Award for her public call for assassinating Obama:

Trotta: “…and now we have what some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama …uh… Obama … well, both if we could.”

And don’t think I’ve left out the Grand Wizard of Fox News, Bill O’Reilly. Oh…where to begin? I’m going to skip over O’Reilly’s generous offer not to lynch Michelle Obama, and his assertion that 200,000 documented homeless veterans don’t exist, and even his delicious submersion into lunacy as demonstrated in any of the “Don’t Block the Shot / Dodge Us at Your Peril / We’ll Do It Live” rants. For some reason I get a kick out his delusional conspiracy theory that the TV ratings are fixed and that Nielsen is intent on destroying him. Never mind the fact that he is number one in those ratings and he frequently cites them as evidence of his ego-starved greatness. So for inventing enemies around every corner, O’Reilly gets the Paranoia Strikes Deep Award:

O’Reilly: “The bottom line on this is there may be some big-time cheating going on in the ratings system, and we hope the feds will investigate. Any fraud in the television rating system affects all Americans.”

When O’Reilly isn’t threatening “the folks,” his colleagues in conservative crime are doing it. Rush Limbaugh is this year’s recipient of the Domestic Terrorist Award for exhorting his listeners to attend the Democratic Convention and to “Screw the World! Riot in Denver!”:

Limbaugh: “[T]he dream end of this is that this keeps up to the convention and that we have a replay of Chicago 1968, with burning cars, protests, fires, literal riots, and all of that. That’s the objective here.”

Glenn Beck, not to be outdone, issued his own threats. But in an attempt to boost the degree of difficulty, Beck went off the scale. In November he told a story of how we had been accosted in a diner by a hostile trucker who threatened to run him down. He summarized the experience by saying that, no matter how much he disagreed with someone, he would never say such horrible things – not even to Michael Moore. However, just a few months prior, Beck said this about Moore and, thus, earned his Serial Hypocrite Award:

Beck: “Hang on, let me just tell you what I’m thinking. I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out – is this wrong?”

The Grand Prize for a year of countless media atrocities is reserved for a despicable act of greed and betrayal. Actually, it is a pattern of acts that has persisted for many years, but came to a head during the Bush administration and was courageously uncovered by the New York Times. It has been called the Pentagon Pundits scandal, though I call it SPINCOM. It centers around an initiative to stack the press with analysts who were willing to lie to support an illegal war and to fatten their own wallets. The Times gets the Milestone of the Year Award for revealing the rancid corruption of the media, the military, and the Bush warmongers:

NY Times: “Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance.”

“The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.”

Sadly, the heroic work of the Times was largely ignored by the rest of the press, particularly television. Of course, the TV news networks were the most aggressively abusive employers of the tainted pundits. It would have taken a powerful dose of integrity to criticize behavior that they were in the thick of engaging in. The failure to cover such a controversial issue that impacts so directly on themselves is further evidence of a media community that is untrustworthy and uninterested in serving the public. However, the story in the Times has resulted in an investigation at the FCC and another proposed in the next Congress. So, hopefully, some accountability will be brought to bear.

The fight for honest and independent journalism will continue into the new year. While there are some promising signs accompanying the incoming Obama administration, there will undoubtedly be much work to do. So in the spirit of optimism and renewal, and hopes for better future, I wish everyone a…

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Sarah Palin: Conservative Of The Year

Posted by on December 23, 2008 at 6:43 pm. 4 Comments :

The uber-conservative Human Events Magazine has named Sarah Palin its “Conservative of the Year,” and I couldn’t agree more. Palin exemplifies the vacuous philosophy of Republican politics. Her strident anti-intellectualism, blind faith, and personal corruption are the hallmarks of her Party and stand as testimony to her worthiness for this honor.

The tribute paid to Palin by Human Events was authored by another icon of rightist infamy: Ann Coulter. In the opening sentence of the article, Coulter identifies Palin’s key attribute as “her genius at annoying all the right people.” I’ll defer to Coulter on this since annoying people is a talent for which she has no peer. As proof of this, Coulter devotes most of her column, not to praising Palin, but to slamming McCain, Obama, and Democrats in general. About McCain’s selection of Palin, Coulter says…

“I assume Palin was chosen because McCain had heard that she was a real conservative and he had always wanted to meet one — no, actually because he needed a conservative on the ticket, but that he had no idea that picking her would send the left into a tailspin of wanton despair. “

Aside from the insult to McCain, Coulter totally misread the response from the left. It was quite apparent that the left could not have been more thrilled with McCain’s choice of a theo-con nitwit that believed geographical proximity was a measure of one’s grasp of foreign policy. Palin does have her supporters. Polls amongst Republicans show that 64% want Palin to run for president in 2012. I haven’t seen a similar poll of Democrats, but I would venture to guess that 100% would want to see Palin run in four years. I sure do.

What becomes obvious in Coulter’s homage is that she has a serious crush on Palin, referring to her at one point as “our beauteous Sarah” and later waxing poetic about “her beautiful head.” But it was not enough for Coulter to champion the object of her affection, she also had to attack the women who threaten her:

“Democrats may have a fleet of women politicians, but they don’t have a deep bench of attractive ones. You don’t even think of most Democratic woman as women.”

Classy as always, Coulter continued by disputing, even ridiculing, the contention that Palin was not accessible to the media. Of course, Palin’s aversion to the press was well documented. During the campaign she didn’t hold a single press conference, she never appeared on a Sunday news program, and most of the rare interviews to which she agreed where conducted by friendly inquisitors like Sean Hannity. It was only when she sat down with relatively neutral reporters like Charlie Gibson that she embarrassed herself. But the funny thing about Coulter’s assertion that Palin was readily available to the press is that Palin herself denies it. In an interview with Human Events accompanying her award, Palin laments…

“…the opportunities that were not seized to speak to more Americans via media. I was not allowed to do very many interviews, and the interviews that I did were not necessarily those I would have chosen.”

So not only does Palin confirm her press scarcity, she reveals that it was because she was not permitted out of her bubble by her handlers. On this point I have to score one for the handlers. Clearly they knew what they were doing. Palin was so plainly unprepared, she could only hurt her cause. On this, surprisingly, Coulter seems to agree, but doesn’t care:

“Who cares if Palin was qualified to be President? She was running with John McCain! There was no chance that ticket was going to place her anywhere near the presidency.”

On the contrary, putting Palin on a ticket with a 72 year old man who has had four bouts with cancer is placing her very near the presidency indeed. But Coulter apparently discounts the need for any vice-president at all and, therefore, an inadequate one is no disgrace. And Coulter goes even further to extinguish Palin’s flame by disparaging her experience and advising her to sit out 2012 in order to “become wiser and better read.”

Now that’s the kind of testimonial that justifies an award for Conservative of the Year. Even the author of the tribute thinks Palin is a cerebrally deficient lightweight who is ill-prepared for leadership. And yet, by Republican standards, she ranks above all of the other conservatives in meriting this award.

Congratulations Sarah.

John McCain’s Campaign Concedes Fox News Is Biased

Posted by on November 14, 2008 at 4:51 pm. 7 Comments :

In an upcoming article in the National Review, Rich Lowry interviews John McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis. Much of the interview deals with the handling of Sarah Palin, the VP candidate who Lowry says…

“…was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. [Her TV appearance] sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.”

Wiping the drool from his chin, Lowry asked Davis why he booked Palin on Katie Couric’s CBS News program. Davis replied…

“Our assumption was people would not let us release her on Fox or local TV.”

If McCain’s campaign manager can admit that Fox News is a de facto arm of the Republican Party, and that nobody would take seriously a softball interview conducted on that network, why does Fox still try to peddle the myth that they are “fair and balanced?”

After the McCain team nixed Fox for the initial interview, they chose Couric because they were…

“…under the impression the Couric thing was going to be easier than it was. Everyone’s guard was down for the Couric interview.”

Let’s count the stupid: First they presumed that Couric would be easier on Palin because they were both women. Of course, Couric had an incentive to perform at a high level due to her low ratings and expectations. Plus, a woman reporter would actually have more leeway to be aggressive when interviewing a woman candidate. It was political malpractice for McCain and company not to recognize this. And it opens them up to charges of sexism as well because it presumes that a woman reporter would not be as probing or professional as a man.

Secondly, they actually think that the questions Couric asked were too hard for Palin. Their guard was down for such confounding inquiries as, “What newspapers and magazines do you read?” Or, “What does Alaska’s proximity to Russia have to do with foreign policy experience?” If that’s their idea of tough questions, it’s a good thing they kept her under wraps most of the time.

Thank goodness they have Fox News around for the post-election interviews where Greta Van Susteren delved into Palin’s recipe for moose chili.

The Disappointment In Sarah Palin’s Heart

Posted by on November 6, 2008 at 1:10 am. 3 Comments :

It’s been less than 24 hours and already the wheels are coming off of Sarah Palin’s wagon. Fox News’ Campaign Carl Cameron is reporting what those of us with a functioning cerebral cortex already knew: Sarah Palin is an idiot.

Cameron’s sources with the McCain campaign are leaking tales of infighting between the Palin and McCain camps. She is characterized as a diva who would not take advice from staff, refused to be prepared for interviews and debates, and threw temper tantrums when faced with negative press. Even worse they are revealing the depth of her stupidity, or as Cameron describes it, “a lack of knowledgeability” (right, and Stevie Wonder has “a visionary deficiency”). Palin apparently couldn’t name the countries signatory to NAFTA. She didn’t know that Africa is a continent, and not a country. And Cameron says to expect more of these bimbotic disclosures in the days ahead.

But, as usual, the real gems come from Palin herself. In some off-the-cuff remarks she declares her intention to restore credibility to journalism:

“I want to make sure Americans do understand that there’s a little disappointment in my heart about the world of journalism today and I don’t want any individual journalists to take it personally but I have such great respect for the role of the media in our democracy. It is a cornerstone. It allows for checks and balances but only when there is fairness and objectivity in the reporting.

And I want to make sure that Americans can have great faith in that aspect of our society, the media. So whatever I can do there to help and actually be able to allow credence to be giving to the media, I want to help in that respect. That’s where I start as a journalist, receiving a journalist degree, my foundation is, again, with great respect for what the vocation is all about. I want to help restore some credibility there.”

She really does have the gift of gibberish. However, it stretches credulity for a candidate for the vice presidency, who deigned to hold a single press conference, to profess to have respect for journalism as a cornerstone of society. Her notion that the press provides checks and balances only when there is fairness and objectivity forgets that opinions and editorials are also a part of the profession. What she is really arguing for is an end to criticism, particularly of her.

She wants to make sure that Americans have faith in the media and refers to the degree she received in journalism (from the University of Idaho in Moscow, ID) as her “foundation.” But the only use she ever made of it was a brief stint as a weekend sportscaster in Anchorage. Nevertheless, she believes that she can restore credibility to the “liberal” media despite her inability to name a single newspaper or magazine that she has read.

Is this a foretelling of an interest to return to her journalistic roots? In response to questions about her post-campaign activities she said that she would like to have a public role, but not in a partisan sense. That would rule out politics, but it wouldn’t prevent her from setting up shop on talk radio or, more likely, Fox News. She still has another couple of years to kill as governor of Alaska, but that shouldn’t get in the way of her developing the pilot for the Palin Factor and premiering it in the fall of 2010. The question is…will journalism survive long enough for her to get around to saving it?

Barack Obama’s Victory: A Mandate For…..

Posted by on November 5, 2008 at 9:14 am. 3 Comments :
America’s Barack Stickers and T-Shirts

America Is Back!

History was made on November 4, 2008, when Barack Obama overwhelming won election to become the 44th President of the United States of America. Forty-five long years after Martin Luther King’s iconic “I Have a Dream” speech, the manifestation of that dream has come to pass. The fulfillment of this dream is a declaration that we can come back from the dark days of division that characterized the past eight years, and much of the past two hundred. And it is evidence that the people, when inspired, will rise up to take back their country. Barack Obama is merely the reflection of our own hopes and dreams. We are America, and…

America’s Barack

However, if the media, led by Fox News, is to be believed, then the next administration should provide some surprises. Obama was castigated by John McCain, McCain’s supporters, and the omnipresent rightist press, as a Muslim and a Marxist. His patriotism was challenged. Television anointed experts told us that Obama would raise our taxes and ruin our economy. And this dangerously risky, untested, neophyte, even palled around with terrorists.

But America voted for him anyway. Does that mean that a majority of American voters have just given a mandate to the President-elect for an agenda of Godless Socialism? Rejoice Pagans, for the day has come that the United States has affirmed its commitment to spreading both wealth and heresy.

Either that or the vacant ideologies of limp-brained, bile-spewers like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc, has been fiercely rejected, repudiated, and denied.

Time will tell.

The Man Who Calls The Elections For Fox News

Posted by on November 3, 2008 at 7:31 pm. 1 Comments :

Tomorrow is election day, children. It is one of the most cherished privileges of being an American citizen, and one of the most solemn responsibilities as well.

Many people take great pleasure from having the ability to help to choose who will lead our great nation, and they believe that by voting they are playing an important role in that choice. However, most are unaware that sometimes this process is not as straight forward as one might think.

After millions of well intentioned consumers citizens have gone to the polls to cast their votes, our friends in the media spend many minutes, and millions of dollars, figuring out who really won the election. They add up numbers given to them from computers and pollsters and other pundits, and when they are certain that they can make a reasonably close guess – BAM! – they announce it on television and America has a new president.

At the nation’s biggest and most dishonest cable TV news network, Fox News, the man in charge of making the final call sits in a busy TV studio with lots of electronic devices and a hotline to Republican campaign operatives. His name is John Moody, and he is also the Executive Vice President of the Fox News Channel. Mr. Moody’s job is so important that he gets to write memos every morning to tell all the news anchors what to talk about on that day (although Mr. Moody downplays this communication making the profound distinction that, “It’s not even called a ‘memo,’ it’s an editorial note.”) In one of these editorial notes that Mr. Moody distributed the day following the elections of 2006, he made some fascinating observations concerning the broad scope of victory enjoyed by the Democratic Party:

  • “The elections and Rumsfeld’s resignation were a major event but not the end of the world.”
  • “…let’s be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents, who must be thrilled at the prospect of a Dem-controlled congress.”
  • “The question of the day, and indeed for the rest of Bush’s term, is: ‘What’s the Dem plan for Iraq?’“
  • “In the House, the newly empowered Dems will shed some fraternal blood before settling in.”
  • “Just because Dems won, the war on terror isn’t over.”

As you can see, Mr. Moody has a cheerful and sunny view of the disastrously rotten outcome produced by the majority of voters who all seem to have made the wrong decisions. We should all be grateful that people like Mr. Moody are on the job and looking out for us, even when we don’t know what is in our own best interest.

Good news, kiddies. Mr. Moody will be looking out for us again tomorrow. He will be the executive in charge of making the final call on all of the state presidential elections, and on the national race as well. This job may be easier this year because it appears that Mr. Moody already made the call. In a posting on his blog last week, he wrote about an alleged attack on a volunteer for John McCain’s campaign by an African-American thug who was also a Barack Obama supporter. Mr. Moody concluded the post saying that…

“If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain’s quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting.”

Well, it was hoax. That would settle the matter for most people, but at Fox News no one is ever accountable for anything they say. So Mr. Moody will take his place in the studio and prepare to make his call on who wins the presidency as if there were really any doubt.

It should be noted, however, that at Fox News there is always doubt. That comes from being able to make up the news as you go along, something the reporters at Fox News take great pride in. So if Mr. Moody wants to declare McCain the winner after Obama receives the majority of electoral votes, he may just do that. There is historical precedent for this. The man who called the election for Fox News in 2000, when George W. Bush was crowned, was John Ellis, Bush’s first cousin. So, as you see, news is whatever you want it to be, if you work for Fox.

Have fun tomorrow, children, and remember to vote. Just because Fox News doesn’t care about honest reporting or elections doesn’t mean you can’t still exercise your Constitutional rights. And be sure to keep an eye out for Mr. Moody’s morning memo on Wednesday to see how Fox will spin the landslide victory of Barack Obama, if they decide to report it at all.

Neil Cavuto Cavorts With Cliff Claven And Plumber Joe

Posted by on November 2, 2008 at 4:41 pm. NO Comments :

Today on Fox News Neil Cavuto, the managing editor of the Fox Business Network, brought in a couple of first string financial pros to discuss America’s economy and politics. The renown expert John Ratzenberger (formerly Cliff from TV’s Cheers) was there to provide his unique insight on world affairs. And even more exciting, Joe the Plumber Ignorant, Lying, Tax-Dodging, Opportunist, showed up to school us all on patriotism:

JOE: McCain has fought and bled for our country, and loves our country. There’s too many questions with Barack Obama and his loyalty to our country. And I question that greatly.

CAVUTO: Well, you’re not doubting that he’s a good American. Or you are?

JOE: Oh you know, his ideology is something that is completely different than what democracy stands for, so I had some question there. In my opinion.

Does the word “Dumbass” spring to mind. And I mean that for both Joe and Cavuto. Even though Cavuto nominally challenged Joe, the fact that he keeps inviting him on the show is enough to dismiss him, his program, and his network. Cavuto frequently hosts such unqualified mental pygmies as Ted Nugent, Jon Voight, and various Hooters waitresses.

This is the kind of credibility that Fox brings to business reporting. The close association between Fox News, the Republicans, and the Bush administration explains a lot. They share the same advisors. It’s no wonder our economy is in tatters.

Pundits Make Electoral College Vote Predictions

Posted by on November 2, 2008 at 2:05 pm. NO Comments :

As the 2008 campaign winds to close, the pundit class is weighing with their electoral vote calls. It’s bad news for John McCain when everyone is predicting a Barack Obama win and the Republicans give Obama bigger victory margins than the Democrats. Below are the predicted Electoral College votes for Obama (270 needed to win).

Democrats:
Arianna Huffington: 318
Paul Begala: 325
Hilary Rosen: 333
Donna Brazile: 343
Eleanor Clift: 349
James Carville: 365
Democratic Average: 338.8

Republicans:
Alex Castellanos: 318
Matthew Dowd: 338
Ed Rollins: 352
George Will: 378
Republican Average: 346.5

Media
Chris Cillizza, Washington Post: 312
Craig Crawford, Congressional Quarterly: 333
David Gergen, CNN: 338
Mark Halperin, Time Magazine: 349
George Stephanopoulos, ABC: 353
Larry Sabato, UVA: 364
Media Average: 341.5

If you exempt McCain campaign operatives and rightist pod-people like Hannity, O’Reilly and Limbaugh, there are few Republican advocates expressing much hope. Last week Fox News Executive VP John Moody pronounced McCain’s campaign over. Even Rupert Murdoch predicted a landslide victory for Obama way back in May.

Are Republicans in some sort of shock? What does it mean when uber-conservative George Will puts Obama in landslide territory and suggests a stronger outcome for Obama than Democratic icon James Carville? Maybe it doesn’t mean a thing. Most of these people are wrong more often that not, so we shouldn’t put too much emphasis on what they are saying today. Still, it will be interesting to store this for future reference to see how these predictions compare with the actual results.