Displaying 751 To 780 Of 1,116 Comments There is certainly a great deal of space between the ideological center of the Beltway Media and the ordinary citizens of the United States. That first Daily Show clip that KilgoreTrout embedded above illustrates that extremely well. The “inside-the-beltway” conventional wisdom was that Paul Ryan’s plan was courageous! Ryan was willing to touch that third rail of politics! How brave! Such was the reporting and the punditry when Ryan introduced his budget ideas. For a brief moment, he was the golden boy of politics. But the people didn’t like his ideas one little bit. Gingrich noticed the backlash at the town hall meetings, read the polls, and realized that the public opinion was solidly against privatizing Medicare. So he went to Meet The Press knowing this information, and unknowingly offended the tender sensitivities of the Washington establishment. John Stewart was right to ridicule this obliviousness. Gingrich should have known better. The whole kerfluffle highlights this huge divide between what the people want and what the players in the seat of power want. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 4:20 pm Many Americans don’t want to refer to themselves as liberals when asked; that’s true. There has been a massive, well-funded and broad-based effort to make “liberal” a bad word. So when pollsters ask people to label themselves as conservatives or liberals, the conservative label tends to win out, and the media dutifully reports that we are a center-right country. But when Americans are polled on individual issues? Things look a little different. 69 percent of U.S. voters agree that, “government should care for those who cannot care for themselves.” (Pew Research, 2007) 64 percent of Americans would pay higher taxes to guarantee health care for all U.S. citizens (CNN Opinion Research Poll, May 2007) 69 percent of Americans think it is the responsibility of the federal government to provide health coverage to all U. S. citizens. (Gallup Poll, 2006) 80 percent of Americans support a government mandated increase in the minimum wage. (Associated Press/AOL Poll, December 2006) 86 percent of Americans want Congress to pass legislation to raise the federal minimum wage (CNN, August 2006) 71 percent of Americans think that taxes on corporations are too low. (Gallup Poll, April 2007) 66 percent of Americans think taxes on upper-income people are too low. (Gallup Poll, 2006) 78 percent of Americans think “women should have an equal role with men in running business, industry, and government.” (National Elections Survey, 2004) 67 percent of Americans think the U.S. should emphasize diplomatic and economic means over military methods in combating terrorism. (Public Agenda and Foreign Affairs, 2007) Just 15 percent of Americans think the U.S. should play “the leading role in the world” (Gallup Poll, February 2007) 62 percent of Americans in September of 2007 thought the invasion of Iraq was “a mistake.” (CBS News, September 2007) I culled this list down quite a bit, in the interest of brevity. The whole thing can be read here:http://www.occasionalplanet.org/2010/08/20/america-is-not-a-center-right-nation/ » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 3:58 pm Yep. The mainstream really IS best described as “the corporate media.” That explains why they call industry-friendly Blue Dog Democrats “moderates.” » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 2:46 pm His comment may have been too centrist for the Washington establishment, but it wasn’t out of line with the sentiment of the American people. Most people don’t like the Ryan plan. Republican congressmembers came home to their constituencies to find unexpected opposition from the vey people who voted them into office. Gingrich may have simply looked at the polls, and decided to make his remarks to David Gregory based on that. That seems sensible to me. How could he have known that the Republicans would turn on him so suddenly? » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 2:43 pm It worked well. Nice picture! » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 2:39 pm In this clip, the lovely and talented Samantha Bee points out: “As far as pundits are concerned, no matter which party’s nomination you’re seeking, it’s important to distance yourself from the Left.” She says it with a smile, and she says it in the context of a comedy routine, but she happens to be absolutely correct. That does seem to be the conventional wisdom of our nation’s punditry. Why is that, I wonder? » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 1:11 pm You mean it really ISN’T just hard work and clean living that enables people to reach the pinnacles of success? So much for the idea that we live in a meritocracy. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 10:49 am Feh. Most of us aren’t lucky enough to just sit around and “think up stuff for the rest of the world to keep busy at.” I don’t think that’s an ability that makes one successful. I think it’s a luxury for people who are born into such a position. And I agree with you about Kucinich and Sanders. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 10:15 am I didn’t know that about the NLRB. That makes Mr. Kadlec’s claims even less believable. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 8:33 am I like to read a magazine called The Week, which provides a collection of news excerpts from other publications, and the latest issue had a snippet from Forbes.com that caught my eye. The snippet is headlined “Obama Can’t Hide His Lust for Power,” and it comes from Charles Kadlec, who is apparently a staff writer for Forbes. It’s all about an executive order that President Obama is about to sign that would require any corporation bidding for government business to disclose all the political donations that it has made over the last two years. Mr. Kadlec says that this order “would vastly expand the power of his administration to coerce and intimidate the private sector into submission while restricting the ability of his opponents to engage in political activities,” and that the president would be able to “use the trillions of dollars in federal expenditures to punish his opponents and to reward those who contribute to his campaign.” As an example, he points out that GE contributed to Obama’s election campaign, and was bailed out under TARP, but non-contributor Boeing has had to suffer restrictions under the National Labor Relations Board. Here Kadlec warns against “tyranny,” defining it as “oppressive power exerted by government.” I read this excerpt three times, and still couldn’t see Kadlec’s logic. How do disclosure requirements translate into tyranny? Alrignt, just for the sake of argument, let’s imagine that Kadlec’s allegations of corruption are absolutely true, and that the Obama administration gives political favors to his campaign contributors and punishes those who do not contribute. Personally, I doubt that is true, but just for a moment, let’s assume that it is. What would the next logical step be? To require disclosure of all contributions? Does that make any kind of sense at all? Does Kadlec imagine that disclosure initiates corruption? That political corruption only exists when it is visible, and does not exist when it is invisible? Perhaps it is insulting to Charles Kadlec to say so, but that kind of thinking strikes me as infantile. It is what makes the game of “peek-a-boo” fun for a baby. You hide your face, and the baby gets the impression that you do not exist, and then peek-a-boo! you suddenly reveal yourself, and you pop into being and the baby laughs. But Charles Kadlec is a full-grown adult, and he should know better. Political corruption exists whether it is visible or not, and anyone who would like to engage in such corruption would not press for greater disclosure. By the way, I found his entire article online, for those who would like to read it. It is here: » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 19, 2011 @ 7:16 am Too bad! Throwing glitter doesn’t really harm anybody, so it doesn’t seem like assault to me. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 5:05 pm I noticed that too. Newt seems to have become some kind of persona non grata among his conservative brethren all of a sudden. How DARE he speak ill of Paul Ryan, describing his plan as “Right-Wing Social Engineering!” Because of this, when I heard that someone threw glitter on him as a show of protest, my first thought was that it was from someone on the Right that did that. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 4:35 pm Thanks Kalima. One of those random moments of hilarity I guess. Or maybe it’s some kind of inside joke. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 3:09 pm Congratulations! He’s a very handsome kitty cat. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 2:58 pm Does anyone here speak German? I ran across this funny video; it makes me laugh along with the weather lady, but I don’t even know what we’re laughing at. I wish I knew what she was saying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN_eSXmSsEE I guess I’m just laughing because she’s laughing. It’s infectious, like yawning. Or maybe it’s because I haven’t had enough sleep. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 2:55 pm Yes, if there’s any justice in the world. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 2:52 pm I agree with what he said to David Gregory too. Strange. I never thought I’d ever agree with anything Mr. Gingrich says. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 2:51 pm I’m no fan of Chris Matthews, but he is absolutely right about Sarah Palin in this clip. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 18, 2011 @ 2:29 pm That’s absolutely right. “Off the job? Off the job?” he stammers. He could not come up with three adjectives to describe himself without that uniform/badge/gun. He didn’t even want to think about it. He didn’t seem able to think about it. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 17, 2011 @ 11:15 pm “Pettyfogging.” Am I the only person who has not heard this term before? I looked it up, and find that it is being used in the U.K.: I like it. It’s a descriptive turn-of-phrase. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 17, 2011 @ 2:37 pm Right on the top of the list of search results on Google! Congratulations. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 17, 2011 @ 1:22 pm Stewart says, “Be consistent in your outrage.” The fact that FOX is not consistent in this way is the main observation that Stewart brings to the table, it seems to me. Why ARE the other musicians who have been to the White House that he mentions (Bono, Dylan, etc.,) not treated with the same outrage? O’Reilly never really has a decent answer for that. Thanks for posting this; I would never have seen it otherwise. I only regret that it was too short. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 17, 2011 @ 12:57 pm What a nice guy! Love the song, too. The pennywhistle fits right in to a song like this. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 16, 2011 @ 4:44 am Reminds me of that awful joke – You can lead a horticulture, but you can’t make her think. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 14, 2011 @ 4:57 am I looked at the original video on YouTube, and tried to translate the comments from the Russian language using online tools. The title of the video is “Как отучить кота курить” which translates (as far as I can tell) as “How To Wean A Cat From Smoking.” And the additional information seemed to say, “Boys and girls! This cat is named Simon. He is the favorite of our entire family. Simon is sweet and tender. No, there’s nothing wrong with what we were doing. It was just a game. Sorry if you thought that we were treating him badly!” » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 3:31 pm I find that animals are usually pretty good judges of character. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 3:21 pm Hey thanks, man. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 3:19 pm I know what you mean about the body language. I remember the first time I saw pictures of Obama with his family, and I remember thinking right away about his daughters: “Now, those are some little girls who really love their daddy.” There just isn’t any way to fake that. All kinds of politicians like to pose with their wives and children, but if you look at the kids’ expressions and everybody’s body language, you get the real picture. I didn’t know much about Obama when he first showed up in the news, but one thing I DID know: the man is a good father. » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 2:57 pm You’re probably right about that. It seems likely. (Hey, I was trying to be funny though, with that dry style of humor…) » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 2:26 pm I’ll have to look for that clip! And NO, I’m not surprised that Hannity read those lyrics out of context, and made a big deal over it. I’ve never liked that guy. He’s certainly no journalist. About Johnny Cash… were those lyrics that Stewart quoted from Folsom Prison Blues, where Cash talks about shooting a man in Reno, just to watch him die? I know he wrote a lot of prison songs, and plenty of gritty material. That’s the way good art is… it covers a lot of ground, often without much consideration as to what might or might not be politically embarrassing. Since this IS an off-topic thread, I’d just like to embed my very favorite Johnny Cash tune here, if nobody minds. Here he is singing about the man with a satisfied mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QphglQu3oL0 » Posted By Buddy McCue On May 13, 2011 @ 2:20 pmComments Posted By Buddy McCue
http://blogs.forbes.com/charleskadlec/2011/05/09/obamas-nixonian-enemies-list-on-steroids/
http://www.wordnik.com/words/pettyfogging
and that it is defined in the Urban Dictionary (in an American context) as well:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=petty%20fogging
«« Back To Stats Page
Really good tune.
Home Stats