This is hilarious. The people on MSNBC are so warped, the other libs are starting to make fun of them.
Keith Olbermann is in need of some psychiatric help. “Get a grip” often comes to mind. Stewart is a comedian with a political bent. MSNBC is a joke with a political bent , Kieth is just the straight man.
UPDATE: This is mostly Jon Stewart eviscerating Kieth Olbermann. Eight minutes of Kieth would be the longest day of my life.
I spent the other night watching the Obama implosion on one of the Obama networks (MSNBC) and in the course noted that MSNBC is unbelievably horrible from a talent perspective, much like the old Air America was: just really sucky television by people who did not belong there, and with commensurately abysmal ratings.
Well it turns out Air America radio has still been on the air – I honestly thought it went out of business when the godawful Al Franken television program got the deep six a couple years ago. But alas, Air America radio has been around, albeit apparently only playing on a few college networks piped into the dorms via the AC circuits:
The news did not come as a total surprise to staffers. The company, which was founded in 2004, has never been on sound financial footing. The company first filed for bankruptcy protection in 2006, but managed to stay on the air at that time.
The fact is, liberals are generally boring as on-air talkers because they tend to be wrong about everything, and consequently it’s tiresome to hear them prattle on because in order to make their points they have to lie. The audience can pick up on this pretty quickly. Thus the atrocious ratings the other cable news networks get compared to Fox. Compared to Fox the other stations are so piss poor in terms of audience they are all like the New Jersey Reds up against the Harlem Globetrotters: They don’t even belong on the same playing field, but we are also happy and amused to see them there.
I hope they don’t all go the way of Air America, but eventually someone is going to tire of losing money so they probably will.
Media panel, discussing opinion vs reporting, and “news judgments,” including what goes on their news outlets and what goes on their blogs.
Left to right: Ryan Nobles of NBC 12, Julian Walker of Virginian-Pilot, Anita Kumar of Washington Post, Kimball Payne of Daily Press and Shad Plank. (Vivian moderating)
Hillary Clinton has become a strange spectacle, who really has no dog in the fight but is left with no more of a role than mouthing the words:
Hillary Clinton is not exactly setting the world on fire at the moment, but she is doing her best to compete with Barack Obama over who can give the most apologies for their country on foreign soil. Obama clearly had an edge until recently with major set piece speeches in Strasbourg and Cairo which frankly made the dove-like Jimmy Carter look like Dick Cheney in comparison. You can hardly switch on talk radio in America (with audiences of tens of millions across the country) without listening to outraged callers fed up with their own president rubbishing America’s past actions in front of foreign audiences.
Heh.
Thank you, Ace.
UPDATE: Welcome to our Other McCain visitors!! And thanks to our buddy RS for yet another Stacylanche, of which few have been repaid by even the barest attempt at a Rule #2 reacharound. My bad. I have a post in the works on some of the brightest stars in the blogosphere and R.S. McCain will be featured prominently, it’s just this year has been a bad year for getting anything serious done in my off hours so I have been totally remiss in acknowledging the latest developments such as the new majordomo of DC blogs.
Ugh. Anyone watching the Tour this year? If you are, you know it is a combination of a) the most interesting competition in a few years, and b) the biggest ripoff for viewers – perhaps ever.
What is happening is the broadcast is being regularly interrupted with ad hoc commercial breaks which completely pre-empt portions of the event. The cable network Versus is providing a fantastic, entertaining program, and half-hour segments are even touted as “commercial free” – most of these hosted by Nature’s Valley. Periodically, as any television broadcast does, the Versus program officially breaks for commercials. All fine and good.
The problem is that – at least on Comcast cable, which is what I have – there are many, many additional commercial breaks which are not integrated into the program and are, in fact, just dropped onto the broadcast. So you have the excellent announcers reporting the event and then suddenly it goes into one and a half minutes of commercials … and then the Tour comes back on with us having completely missed whatever occurred during the break. The program does not pause and then pick up where it left off. YOU JUST END UP MISSING WHATEVER YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SEEN WHEN THE BREAK FOR COMMERCIALS OCCURRED.
To reiterate: There are the normal commercial breaks, when the announcers say “And when we return we will see thus-and-so.” But there are extra commercial breaks which overwrite the program. It is like if a football game showed the team breaking the huddle, and then going to commercial, and then coming back on two plays later with absolutely no mention of what happened in the meantime.
I have to think either Versus is run by idiots, or Comcast cable is dropping commercials into the Versus broadcast. If the former, god help us that as a species we could put together such a great program and then ruin it. If the latter, Comcast should be sued – by every bike race fan on the planet, but especially by Nature’s Valley, who are paying to have their name attached to “commercial free” 30-minute segments which turn out to be anything but and make both Nature’s Valley and Versus look like grifters.
It is a shame that such an interesting year for the Tour – with Lance Armstrong returning and a major conflict brewing on arguably the best team in years, Astana – should be marred by a broadcast which randomly deletes significant segments of the action, like some bush league 1950s-era television broadcast.
Oddly enough, our household had already been scheduled to switch from Comcast to Verizon tomorrow, so I should be able to check if the same BS is happening on other cable providers, and thus determine if the morons are at the Versus television network or Comcast cable television. Somebody is ruining the broadcast of this year’s Tour de France, and it will be worthwhile to see exactly who is at fault.
It appears that Obama, who when he was a candidate thought there were 57 states in the US, has now declared Putin president of Russia. I am sure Medvedev does not mind. Really. Unlike a good ol’ fashioned Bushism, an Obama misstep this is not worthy of mention at the New York Times, or any NBC outlet, etc. This kind of blithering or faux pas was parroted by the MSM ad nauseum to drive home the point that Bush is an idiot — despite the fact that his grades were higher than either of his presidential electoral opponents. Both of whom the media declared intellectual paragons: Kerry was the nuanced war hero who survived being shot three times by 50 cal fire; Gore was a scientist.
This is but another example of the media fawning over the Democrat in the office. If there is a negative story, run it if you must, but do so in the least damaging way. If the politician in question is a Republican, hammer them with all the innuendo and viciousness possible, and, repeat as often as needed until the maximum damage possible is done. Identify them as Republican of course, but, if the scandal involves a Democrat, the party affiliation is not needed.
This is why MSM is bleeding money like a stuck pig. People know the difference between news and propaganda. MSM has morphed over the years into a brigade of water carriers for the Democrat party. 90% of them have never voted Republican ever. In an attempt to mask their rank partisanship– they declare they are listed as independents on the voter rolls; all the while rooting for the left. When people protest against the policy’s of the left, the “reporters” shout them down and echo the Democrat party line while declaring they are objective; this is the pathetic current posture of our fourth estate. The giggle factor shoots through the roof when Obama laments how one out of all the media outlets is not sycophantic; this is really terrifying because none of the media outlet should be sycophantic but Obama does not realize it.
The American people have been harmed by this media. We deserve better. For this great republic to continue we need a media that harbors no favoritism. This is impossible at the individual level. The media at large must be representative of the views of the whole country. If we were to have a robust fourth estate, we would actually see some policing of both parties. We would see policy that was actually beneficial to the whole country. Both parties could stop in their mutual race to the intellectual and ethical nadir. Barney Frank belongs in a cell. The members of the Obama administration who entertained paying the Washington Post for access should be under investigation. The bills the congress is passing would be read, reasoned over and debated.
The emperor has no clothes. It is a pathetic spectacle.
Just watch, nothing further really needs to be said.
It is amazing that our President and Press have remained as passive as they have in the face of this and countless other such acts in Iran. The real interesting question is what is the source of the unrest, face it both candidates were hand picked by the Mullahs. Another example:
To intervene or not? Loudoun Insider at TooConservative provide some analysis. Unfortunately I do not agree, air strikes without boots on the ground will only give the Mullahs a scapegoat with some measure of credibility. After the past 7 years, our press has so damaged us we cannot engage in such ventures. Obama’s great ‘I’m sorry tour’ only sealed the deal. The ideal of American exceptionalism is dead.
UPDATE:
Protest organisers held in Iranian raid – report
I guess at first glance I could see how the latest Charlie the Clown episode might seem like something significant, but in order to make that claim you have to assume ABC network news is significant.
This, I would submit, is a false assumption. ABC News reporting objectively on El Dipshitio? That cow has left the barn. ABC’s evening news is a joke, and Charlie broadcasting from the Blue Room or wherever is but a munchkin hop compared to the mad shark-jumping Peter Jennings era.
This is wild. It appears we truly are moving toward a soviet style government. Obama and his pack of thugs are now taking over the media. It is not enough that they call him God, and have shivers up and down their legs, or a lump in their throat, or tears in their eyes. Nope. Being sycophants is not enough. Obama and his team are out for direct control.
I recommend we rename ABC ‘Truth’ (pravda) and we rename NBC ‘News’ (isvestia). Then we will be able to say as they did in the USSR – there is no truth in the news and no news in the truth. The next move is to teach our troops to goosestep.
It is not enough for Obama to control GM and Chrysler. It is not enough for Obama to control the banks. Obama wants to control the pay of all employees of all publicly held companies. Obama wants to control the health industry outright. To do this Obama needs to even further tighten his control of the flow of public information. This is done by controlling the programing directly at the ‘objective’ news outlets. Just in case the poor little dears don’t get it, move the anchor into the white house. This will bring order.
We are seeing the government taking over the economy, the media and health services. The czars who are in charge of all these functions do so without congressional oversight. This is an incredible amassing of power in the presidency. I recall the liberal loons worrying about an imperial presidency under Bush. This is an order of magnitude worse. Such is the nature of this much concentrated power. Can someone please tell me how this is not becoming a dictatorial state?
I’ve got no definitive information except the basic report that Martin Casey, longtime editor of the Loudoun Easterner, is no longer with the paper. Forgive me if this has been reported in some other forum; whatever, I never saw it until now.
I sent a press release and received the following reply:
Thank you for contacting the Loudoun Easterner. As of Friday, May 8, Martin Casey is no longer with the newspaper.
I’m sure something more substantive will follow.
Martin has been a media institution in Loudoun County, editing a paper which has gamely fought on in a very competitive media battlefield here. We have a ridiculous number of local newspapers – I think currently it is five. Frankly, I don’t know how you pull away from the pack in such a marketing environment. But the Easterner has done it for years now, in no small part because their managing editor has also served as a primary reporter and columnist.
I have a lot of respect for the man because he held to personal principles but was generally fair in presenting different points of view. We had a conversation a couple years ago about the illegal migration issue, and I explained my interest in the problem was based on people I knew who’d lost their livelihoods to companies employing illegal workers, and people who had difficulties in their neighborhoods because of boarding houses. Martin responded by noting a local Catholic priest who had decided to learn to speak Spanish as a way of dealing with the burgeoning immigrant community.
Point-Counterpoint: My initial reaction was, “So what would the priest say to those who lost their jobs or who had their neighborhood streets turned into industrial zones?” On the face of it we were coming at the issue from two different perspectives, it seemed, but coverage of the issue at the Easterner was always balanced, in my opinion. I think Martin Casey did a really good job ensuring the Easterner presented both sides so that the residents of this area had the most accurate information. His reporting was always fair during a time when the topic of illegal immigration did not always get such treatment in the local press.
Job well done, Mr. Casey: I hope you are off to an enjoyable next stage in life.
From the Weekly Standard. It would be even funnier if it was not so awfully true.
I did not write this, but I believe I know the person that did (I know several people that it would fit, so I’m not positive which one it might be). It was good enough (even though anonymous, given the political climate today) that I thought it worth passing onto our readers.
Thought I’d pass this on. Pass it on to whomever you think it might be useful:
A Response to “If I Only Had a Gun”
On April 10, ABC ran a persuasion piece done by Diane Sawyer entitled “If I Only Had a Gun.” The purpose of the piece was to convince people that if one were in a situation in which he or she was attacked, especially by someone with a gun, the very last thing that person would want is a gun of their own to defend themselves with.
Because of a growing concern over a hostile political climate, I am choosing to write this response anonymously. I am a self-defense, firearms, and tactics instructor who teaches the defensive use of firearms to private citizens, police officers and private security. I am also a competition self-defense pistol match director. I have been used as a source for firearms information by journalists in this country and in Europe.
There were some helpful aspects to Ms. Sawyer’s piece, but on the whole her belief that only people who can pay for private protection should be protected colored the whole piece, and there were fundamental errors at the root of her expose.
The ability to own and carry (“keep and bear”) firearms is a right. That right morally requires the responsibility of training and proficiency, but the lack of living up to that moral responsibility does not take away the right. The first amendment guarantees the right of freedom of the press. That right also morally requires the responsibility of telling the truth, getting your fact straight, and the like, but the mere fact that journalists do not do this does not take away their right to freedom of speech in the print or broadcast media.
Among the not-quite-true intimations of the piece was that the police have far superior training compared to the average concealed handgun permit holder. With the exception of SWAT teams, most police agencies have very poor training. In fact, it’s not really training. It’s annual, slow-fire-from-known-distances to pass some minimal state requirement (much like the minimum requirement for most concealed handgun permit holders).
But many concealed handgun permit holders are not satisfied with the bare minimum. No one makes them carry a gun. They have chosen to, and they feel obliged to be good with it. Many concealed handgun permit holders (not all) are ardent students of the shooting martial arts. Now there are police officers who are dedicated to studying the shooting disciplines, and some of them are outstanding shooters. But such police officers are rare. Most police officers carry their gun simply because they are required to do so as a part of the job, and so are satisfied if they can make the minimum scores for their qualification.
Self-defense pistol competition is a great place for those who carry a gun to test their abilities. These competitions have gained in popularity, and most people who carry a gun could easily participate in one a week if they chose to.
These competitions regularly require moving to and shooting from behind cover, decisional shooting, avoiding “innocent” targets and engaging only threat targets, all done under the pressure of a timer. Fast times and clean shooting wins. Slow times and misses or mistakes lose.
You would think such competition would be a police officer’s dream, particularly because in all likelihood his or her department provides nothing similar, but surprisingly few police officers participate. Most competitors are private citizens with concealed handgun permits. When police officers do show up, most of them place in the bottom half of shooters. I’ve seen police officers fumble reloads, shoot non-threat targets (either because they missed the indicators that they were non-threats and deliberately shot them, or because they missed the target they were shooting at and hit the non-threat), and shoot so slowly that I could have eaten a sandwich in the time it took them to solve the scenario. Some of these officers never come back out of embarrassment. Others stay and improve.
In Sawyer’s piece she displayed footage of actual shootings in which the upright citizen prevailed, but then went on to say that we should not pay any attention to these actual instances, but rather should make our decision based upon a “scientific” classroom scenario that she set up.
The problem with the scenario was the person who played the part of the criminal shooter. She co-opted a highly skilled firearms instructor to play the part. That’s simply skewed journalism. None of the mass-shooters have had that level of skill. What would have been more telling is if Diane Sawyer herself played the part of the criminal shooter. That situation would more approximate the skill level of the murderers in actual incidents.
The piece was helpful in one aspect though, enough for me to recommend to my clients that they watch it. Those who stood still while reaching for their own gun were shot by the highly-trained shooter. It reinforces what I constantly preach: Don’t stand flat-footed, get off the “X.” Your first order of business is to get to where you are safe. You need to buy yourself time to get to your gun. You are behind the power curve when you start against a drawn gun.
One of Sawyer’s points highlighted how different her moral make-up is than mine. In one of the scenarios, a young lady was able to return fire and hit the shooter, but not without herself being hit. It was obvious from Sawyer’s reaction that she deemed this completely unacceptable. The message was, “You may get the shooter, but not without you yourself being shot,” with the implicit conclusion, “It is therefore not worth it to have a gun.”
That’s where Ms. Sawyer and I differ. If taking a bullet means that I can save my family members, friends, or scores of innocent people from a murderous rampage, I’m willing to do it. Without shooting back, there’s a good chance I’ll die in the carnage anyway. If I’m going to die anyway, I’d rather my life count for something and that my death serves to save innocent life. That moral conviction is what separates Diane Sawyer from most concealed handgun permit holders.
There are several things I find outrageous in culture today. I suppose the one that is greatest is that cowardice is praised. The final part of the article talks about what I would hope would be nearly anyone’s reaction … that if there were a choice of being killed in the saving of many lives, that some would rather run from the scene and than with a chance of saving lives reasonably high, run toward it. Why do we listen to cowards that openly proclaim that getting hurt saving lives is a bad thing? Why don’t we call such cowards to account?
In a military situation, we might praise a person for going beyond what is demanded of all men; we demand of all men that they stand and fight with their comrades unless ordered to retreat. We call it bravery to move forward into an advantageous position at some small personal risk to save comrades. We call it heroism to perform a task at great personal risk to save the lives of others. Those that would run from the scene would be stood up and rightfully shot for cowardice in the face of the enemy. Hopefully Ms. Sawyer is not advocating and honoring cowardice.
I just received my recent edition of “The Independent” newspaper. Front page was historical inaugeration, largest crowd, great things gonna happen, blah, blah, blah. Now back when, there were 3 local papers; the Easterner, the Loudoun Times and the Loudoun Times-Mirror. The Mirror costs to get and the other 2 were free (advertisers paid for). The only one I read was the Easterner because it seemed to carry all the news that the others did AND it didn’t show a slant or bias.
The Easterner was sold and I was disheartened. I didn’t know how I was going to obtain “accurate” news within the county. Well, John Geddie wasn’t one to lay down and retire and he started another paper called the Independent. I had my accurate and unbiased reporting back. At least until John Geddie died. That was a tragic loss. I always liked the way John ran a paper and I was not unfamiliar with his political leanings….but he kept them OUT of the paper. It took less than a month before his son showed his bias and I guess the edict at the paper is “liberalism and bias first-screw objectivity”! Needless to say that it is another propaganda rag for the left and, again, there is no source for unbiased news in Loudoun.
There seems to be a trend in this county. We are turning Democrat and everyone in any position of importance is helping to further the cause. Heck, we have a nit-wit governor bouncing around the countryside trying to curry political favors and position from a rabid administration (he did get Chairman of the DNC) instead of taking care of the citizens of Virginia (other than blowing a BILLION dollar surplus almost before he moved into the governor’s mansion) and the “esteemed” of this county fall all over themselves giving accolades to this guy for doing……what?
The O-bummer bandwagon is in full stride and the last of the good papers has hitched their team to his wagons. Wave of things to continually come. I just wonder if this is the way it was originally intended to be or if Big John is rolling over in his grave. The living will never know.
Sheesh, guy can’t catch a break ….
“John McCain was a Senator before Obama even knew what name to call himself.”
[Found via Ed Flinn's "yeti" story, about which I have to ask: Does it strike you as "yick", or scary, or .... something else?]
