Dancing With The Stars finale
Missing in America Memorial
Madison Commencement
Book Nook provides readers with insights into the world of books. Vick Mickunas takes you into the center of the publishing world with the latest book buzz, book reviews, and exclusive chats with authors..Home > Blogs > Book Nook > Archives > 2009 > September > 09 > Entry
“Whack-a-Mole” with Glenn Beck
Most readers will be familiar with the arcade game Whack-a-Mole. No doubt, they still exist in some bowling alleys and kiddie pizza parlors.
The object of the game is simple. You score points by whacking plastic moles with a mallet when they randomly pop up from a dozen holes arrayed before the player.
My cats still enjoy our original version. There are a half dozen mole holes beneath the bird feeders. Our cats spend many happy hours swiping at those moles with their paws. Once in a blue moon, an unfortunate mole will be apprehended. These kitties love that.
Right wing talk show host Glenn Beck reminds me of Whack-a-Mole. Every time I turn around he pops up again. The man is ubiquitous. There he is, taunting President Obama. Here he is again, with his best-selling book, “Common Sense”. There he is again, losing sponsors on his program. Pop. Pop. Pop. There he is again.
Beck’s newest book, “Arguing With Idiots” will be out soon. I’m tempted to read it but the thought frightens me. What if I like it? What if I find myself agreeing with him?
I would much rather play Whack-a-Mole with Glenn Beck. Whack! him gently, clear to Muncie, Indiana. Whack! him harder, all the way to Peoria. A more forceful Whack! might get him all the way to Dubuque. And if I really let him have it maybe Glenn Beck will alight in Des Moines. I still have a lot of friends there. They will be happy to help him along his journey to points further west, Grand Island, Nebraska - Boulder - Prince George, Utah - Juarez - the middle of the Pacific Ocean. You get the idea. Am I doing it wrong? Was I supposed to be whacking Glenn back into the hole? Sorry….these arcade games, it is so easy to get carried away. Just ask Glenn.
I can see why my cats like the game so much..it can be deeply gratifying - like “Arguing with Idiots.”
(Note* Whack-a-Mole is probably a registered trademark. Do not attempt this at home. These were professional whackers on a closed course).
Vick Mickunas
Permalink | Comments (48) | Post your comment | Categories: clearing the cobwebs
Comments
By Raoul
September 17, 2009 5:51 PM | Link to this
All due respect Mark, I read and re-read American history all the time. It presents a very convincing case for Capitalism as a way to achieve prosperity for all citizens in comparision with all other sytems. For you to deny this calls into question all those sources of information you get, where your money goes, and who benefits from it? Fox news is just another channel on the dial, so please, quit laying your anti-Fox phobia on me. The only thing interesting about Fox is that they are not in the tank for the Democratic Party, which puts them all alone in the news/cable/media world.By Mark from St Paul
September 16, 2009 11:03 AM | Link to this
Raoul, with all due respect, reread your American history. Capitalism didn’t get us our independence, but it did almost destroy this nation 150 years ago when we had a very big fight over money and what you can and can’t own. I hope some day you wake up to the fact that Fox News does P.R. for the people who want your money (and get it).By Raoul
September 16, 2009 10:03 AM | Link to this
Mark, ever heard of IRA’s, mutual funds, 401k’s, Roth 401k’s, etc.? And for all those that enjoy “European style socialism”, congratulations. You can have it. And whenever terrorists or tyrants try to disrupt your enjoyment of European style socialism, don’t worry, we’ll send in our cavalry to protect you. I guess you could say that capitalist USA makes your socialist utopia possible, since we take care of the bad guys for you.By Pragmatic
September 15, 2009 3:40 PM | Link to this
Mark, Downsized…a refill for your Kool-Aid???By Mark from St Paul
September 14, 2009 4:16 PM | Link to this
Did all Americans benefit from John Dillinger’s entrepreneurship? Please explain to me what products Wall Street has manufactured lately, what services they’ve rendered? Raoul, it’s ALL abuse once you get past the workers and the management teams needed to develop, create, manufacture and distribute products or deliver services. We do NOT compare favorably with other first world nations anymore. When it comes to personal per capita income, the USA is 15th on the IMF list, and 12th on the World Bank’s list (IMF lists Qatar ahead of us, but other than that ALL the folks ahead of us enjoy European style socialism). It’s one thing for Fox News to keep saying USA USA, it’s another to come up with actual numbers that prove it.By Raoul
September 14, 2009 12:51 PM | Link to this
Mark, I am aware of the abuses of capitalism, which produces winners and losers alike. You want to eliminate the losers by taking from the winners. Greedy capitalists have given Americans the lowest costs for goods and services that can be found in the world. You seem to want to ignore the many benefits our people receive from our capitalist way of life, and instead, point your finger at the greedy rich who make much of it possible. Somewhere, you have to accept the fact that we Americans enjoy a way of life that the world continues to envy. Within our society, people experience ups and downs, and a lot of it is beyond their control, yet still, even when things are down, we compare favorably to anywhere else. We can always strive to make it better, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that all Americans benefit by our current system, warts, greed, and all.By Mark from St Paul
September 14, 2009 11:40 AM | Link to this
OK, let me try this again. Raoul, your son’s game plan for keeping his job is 100% consistent with the coaching I gave my clients. You’re assuming based on your ideology, not facts on the table. You need to meet some of the hundreds of people I worked with who had your son’s work ethic, who worked for profitable businesses, but whose jobs were shipped overseas not because of greater profits, but because of short term gains that resulted in bigger bonuses for executives. The Dutch, btw, just fixed their problem with out of control banks by limiting bank officers to their paychecks, bonuses are out because they incentivize risk taking. Banks taking risks? The whole point of banking is to safeguard your money, but that got turned upside down when the capitalists ran wild and, in a nutshell, ruined our economy. How did workers create the dot.com bubble? How did workers create the mortgage bubble? How did workers create the stock market crash of last fall? Workers are paying for the excesses of the greatest transfer of wealth the world has ever seen, from the pockets of workers to the offshore accounts of the wealthiest one percent.By Raoul
September 14, 2009 7:35 AM | Link to this
Thanks for the history lessons. I read history myself. I asked my son why he has been able to keep his job, while many others have been hired only to be gone within weeks. His answer was that he shows up on time, does what is asked, and tries to do a good job. Apparently, this is too much for those he competes against in the work force. Our society suffers not because of robber barons and obscene profits going to the super rich, but because so many have found it easier to fool guys like you into thinking they are innocent bystanders who can’t get a break. This is real life, and it serves as my source for information. In America, our poorest people live better than many working people in Communist countries. That’s why so many come to our shores. Since you read history, you will find endless examples of American prosperity to occupy your time. But you have to open your mind to it. Perhaps that will be your greatest challenge.By Mark from St Paul
September 13, 2009 8:37 PM | Link to this
Raoul, please try to remember you’re talking about income taxes, and not all taxes. Once you add in state taxes, sales tax, property taxes, SS withholding — the picture changes radically, and I do mean radically. Income tax isn’t an issue for many Americans because they aren’t paid enough to have to pay them. Also, when you cite income tax figures for the very rich, you need to remember how much of their income is shielded from taxes altogether by tax dodges. The percentage of their gross income paid in taxes is far more modest IF you define gross income as ALL income, and not just the tax code’s “gamed” definition of income. http://tinyurl.com/pjgfa2By downsized
September 13, 2009 6:01 PM | Link to this
Raoul: When will you understand that this is not a “Horatio Alger” society, anymore? Our nation’s economy is not a level playing field meritocracy. Teddy Roosevelt understood that over a hundred years ago when he attacked the richest capitalists for breaking the law under the Sherman-Anti-Trust act. He understood that left unfettered, the super rich capitalists will exploit the people, and the promise of our nation, for their greedy, self interests. After untold billions of dollars in tax cuts, what’s been the result? Record unemployment, homelessness, health care costs doubling in the past ten years and misery for so many of us. Please give your rhetoric a rest and start living in the real world. I fear that it is you who has been “indoctrinated.” Do me a favor and visit an unemployment office and then tell me people aren’t trying to better themselves. Visit a homeless shelter and I think you may, maybe, start to understand that your information sources aren’t telling you the whole truth. And, Jesus WAS a communist in his teachings and lifestyle. It wasn’t politics. This is not a dress rehearsal. This is the real world. Oh, and who should be paying the bulk of taxes? The poor and middle class or those who have made obscene profits and possess historical highs of the country’s wealth? Never have so few owed so much to so many.By Raoul
September 13, 2009 9:36 AM | Link to this
Thanks Mark. I always listen to what others have to say. That doesn’t mean I accept their positions. There is a lot of tax propaganda out there, but roughly 50% of the people pay 100% of the taxes. The rich pay the lion’s share. I don’t take issue with that. But that also means 50% of the population pays no taxes. It has been proven many times that when you cut taxes to the rich, tax revenues increase. Your average Democrat voter simply can’t comprehend that fact. How can cutting taxes increase revenues? Well, I am sure you are smart enough to know how. What I am really saying is that we are indoctrinating our people to believe that they can never amount to anything because the rich are holding them down. Baloney! We should be indoctrinating our people, particularly our young, to believe that they hold the power to their success, and that they can acheive their goals without having anything handed to them. America rose to greatness behind this concept. Without it we are lost, and will surely slide into a stagnant, sluggish, mediocrity, where dreams of prosperity are replaced with mundane hum-drum. It’s funny how the Buffets and Kennedys of the world can be so liberal in their politics. Well, they can afford it. As for Fox News, anyone that suggests that they alone skew the truth, and all the other news outlets are giving us the real deal is a complete and total fool. Bill Moyers is a shill for the Democrat party, but we are supposed to believe he is honest and non-partisan, and only seeks the truth? What you and I need to do is cut through all the propaganda and look around at how the world really is and decide how we want to do our small part to make it better. I am sure we can agree on that. I tried to paste your pyramid link to my browser, but no go. I will try again, but I still assert that no other form of government has ever provided as much prosperity for all it’s citizens as the good old capitalist, Wall Street driven, USA. No 100 year old pyramid concept could convince me otherwise, because I can see the results with my own eyes. Can’t you?By Mark from St Paul
September 12, 2009 3:16 PM | Link to this
Raoul, it’s kind of weird but people tend to understand your points a little better when you make an effort to hear what they are saying. Me for instance. I worked with over 7,000 people from all fields to help them get better jobs and improve themselves, but because I believe in economic justice for all you repeatedly jump to the conclusion that I want to take what you have and give it to someone else. And then you get offended when I point out that Fox News distorts lefty arguments encouraging folks like you to miss the point. How is that lefties keep saying tax the rich, but righties keep thinking we want to tax them? And why is it no one ever seems to notice that increased taxes start on income over a quarter million, and are not increased taxes on the first quarter million? Do you understand that the rich pay at a rate that is lower than what the middle class pays? Forget the tax tables, read the reports on actual taxes paid after all loopholes are factored in. Warren Buffet avails himself of fewer loopholes than most wealthy people, yet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Since when is paying your “fair” share of taxes redistribution of wealth? And why don’t you seem to “get” that the middle class’s “wealth” is being redistributed to the very rich? And do you have a better illustration of our economic pyramid than the one I linked to?By Raoul
September 12, 2009 11:00 AM | Link to this
Thanks Down for posting something that steers clear of the usual name-calling. “Jesus was a Communist”? I think not. Politics was not His forte. In this land of opportunity, where free will is is our earthly birthright, and personal liberty and freedom is granted us by our government of, by, and for the people, we hold the power of making our choices. President Obama rose above his humble beginnings and became President. For that he should be congratulated, and his personal story should be celebrated, but more importantly, should be held out as an example for all those who think that opportunity isn’t knocking on their door. It is the essential key to our American way of life. The redistribution of wealth unravels everything that we stand for. To simply give up and say to our poverty-stricken that there is no hope for you, so here are some crumbs for you to live off is to condemn them to handouts and poverty. Is that what you prefer?By downsized
September 11, 2009 3:34 PM | Link to this
Raoul, is correct as always. Presidents from Theodore Roosevelt to Richard Nixon all believed tort reform would solve the nations’ health care woes. The “all pervasive” media, Hollywood types, unions, professors, publishers and George Soros finally wrested control from common folks like Reagan, and the Bush’s. Progressives just aren’t fair and balanced like Fox, Rush, Beck et al. And, the 1 in 7 families living below the poverty line along, with around 10% of the country who are unemployed, are merely slackers who want a free ride from guys with a job like Raoul. Now, if Raoul, TRS and Irishguy would just run for office and deliver their message of hope, redemption and solutions for our ills, we’d all be saved. But, those darned Acorn-like organizations would probably steal the election from them. By the way, Jesus was a communist. I guess his message just wasn’t fair and balanced enough to save him from the cross. Like IG says, “who knew”?By Mark from St Paul
September 11, 2009 11:06 AM | Link to this
For any of Vick’s readers wondering about that pyramid, here’s an artist’s representation from over 100 years ago. http://objectionablecontent.com/images/pyramidofcapitalism.jpgBy irishguy
September 11, 2009 8:52 AM | Link to this
Mark, who knew progressives were upset with liberal media folks?By Raoul
September 11, 2009 7:43 AM | Link to this
Mark, why don’t you just come out and say “Workers of the world unite”? You want the pyramid turned upside down. I think it’s called Communism, and history has clearly shown that in comparison, our Wall Street driven world provides a huge advantage for our working people. But it only works when personal liberty and freedom is instilled in our young, and they are motivated to push themselves to succeed. You also fail to mention the very powerful forces behind the so-called Progressive movement, such as George Soros, the Trial Lawyers who are in bed with Democrats (which is the real reason for high health care costs)the unions, and all the Acorn type organizations that want to re-distribute the wealth from the achievers to those that won’t try to earn for themselves. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. When it comes to special interest power brokering, the Progressives rule the roost and take a backseat to no one. Disparaging Fox news and talk show radio insults those that simply want balance from the media. If that is a problem for you, you and your fellow Progressives have only yourselve to blame. Indoctrination of the Progressive cause is all pervasive, from University Professorship,main-stream media, publishing companies, and Hollywood. If Progressives would provide more balance and truth in their cause, there would be less of a market for those outlets that you find so contemptible.By downsized
September 10, 2009 5:06 PM | Link to this
Well said, Mark. Well said, Alice. Kudos to you both.By Mark from St Paul
September 10, 2009 3:27 PM | Link to this
And I should point out that on many blog comment sections my avatar is Joe Stalin wearing headphones, so no, I’m not about to criticize Beck’s sense of humor. It’s the only thing he’s got working for him.By Mark from St Paul
September 10, 2009 3:26 PM | Link to this
Irishguy, you might enjoy knowing that the names in b’cast media that most infuriate progressives are Chris Matthews, Tim Russert, George Stephanopoulos. Begala is fairly well regarded but Carville has managed to P.O. almost everyone on the left by now. Olbermann is bombastic. While I don’t watch these people, I follow the media criticism sites closely, and to the best of my knowledge the only network b’casters and pundits who get any respect from the left are Rachel Maddow, Matt Taibbi, Bill Moyers, and a host of folks who show up once and then NEVER get invited back (Glenn Greenwald, Marcy Wheeler, Jane Hamsher, etc.) But Russert (RIP) and Matthews are held in absolute contempt as much because of their political background as for their contemptuous establishmentarianism. —- I believe very strongly that the hard right and left would be united right now if not for talk radio and Fox News distorting the issues to keep us at each other’s throats. We all know who the real enemies are: Wall Street, overpaid CEOs, and the super rich who choose to use money to buy influence. We may disagree on a lot of things, but the truths are hard to miss: working people aren’t fairly compensated for hard work, whether through self-employment or employers who overpay top execs while underpaying actual producers. None of this is about guns, abortion, equal rights or who used to be a commie. We have met the enemy, and he is our boss’s boss’s boss.By Alice
September 10, 2009 2:24 PM | Link to this
“I had no problem with the President speaking once the Dept of Ed redacted their lesson plan” (TRS) You’re exactly right, TRS in questioning why the White House would have changed the wording to “clarify”, as they say - but you are right for a completely different reason. The Obama administration’s biggest failure is in trying to reach too far across the aisle for a consensus and in doing so have lost the faith of independents for not having big enough balls. As TRS has pointed out in the past, perception is everything. Anyone can sell polished crap to the American people if it’s marketed well enough. The Obama admin is good at upholding Bush policies so they should take another tip from our former president: do what they want and tell their critics to kiss their a*s. His personal politics aside, Van Jones was right about Republicans. They’re good at advancing their agenda because they’re aholes. I wish Obama was a bigger ahole and I wish our system didn’t turn out so many people who don’t know how to think for themselves.By vick
September 10, 2009 1:42 PM | Link to this
Nice, Ray. Thanks, for cleaning it up…By Ray
September 10, 2009 1:20 PM | Link to this
You should have said “Whack a Van Jones” right up Obama’s butt. Cause that’s what Beck did.By irishguy
September 10, 2009 12:58 PM | Link to this
Mark, I know a lot of folks who would agree with the Mr Scarborough being a “former Republican” line :-) As far as Dem broadcasters, Matthews, Cumo, Carville, Begala, Russert, Stephanopolis, etc, etc. may not have been elected representitives, but they all worked in Democrat administrations before working in the liberal media.By Mark from St Paul
September 10, 2009 12:12 PM | Link to this
CORRECTION: Joe Scarborough is not a former Republican. I inadvertently omitted the key word “Representative.” He is a current Republican but a former member of Congress. [scratching head] Trying now to remember the names of all the former Democratic members of Congress who have national TV talk shows on the ‘liberal’ networks.By Mark from St Paul
September 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Link to this
Irishguy, I’m pretty sure you saw that Demi video on my blog. I just used it recently, but it dates back to the Inauguration and has NO connection whatsoever with Obama’s address to school kids. Sorry to have accidentally misled you.By irishguy
September 10, 2009 11:04 AM | Link to this
Vick, I’m sure some thought that about Mr Obama (WackaBama?) Mr Wilson picked the wrong time and place for his outburst. However, Mr O did call a few folks liars in his speech.By vick
September 10, 2009 10:37 AM | Link to this
Somebody could have taken a mallet to Joe Wilson last night, or, at least a gavel…By irishguy
September 9, 2009 10:54 PM | Link to this
DS, when it comes to spewing hate, we all take a backseat to you. If you’ve heard some of Mr Jones speeches you’d know why I called him a leftist, racist radical. I happen to believe anyone who is a 9/11 truther is crazy. The liberal Mr Jones SAID he was a communist. I didn’t even know Newt & Laura B. liked Mr Obama’s speech ‘till I read your post. Being a parent gives me every right to be involved in my childrens education. After seeing the Demi Moore “I pledge to be a servant to my president” video that was to be shown in some schools in conjunction with the presidents speech, I got a bit concerned. Since D of E spending goes up every year and test scores seem to fall, I think the Dept of Ed is a bit suspect. Messrs Regan & Bush addressed schoolchildren before I had any. Disagreeing with Mr Obama, doesn’t make one racist. And lastly, I have no idea how you jump to the conclusions that I wish to burn books, check teachers political backgrounds, or desire an authoritarian society. I happen to enjoy America’s many freedoms.By Mark from St Paul
September 9, 2009 10:45 PM | Link to this
“once the Dept of Ed redacted their lesson plan” —- TRS, do you have a link for that. I’ve been looking and looking on Google and all I find are references to the original lesson plan which AFTER it was distributed, helped spark the faux controversy. What pained me most was the notion that children writing their president was some kind of political plot. Every recent President has done as much and for the same reason: to encourage kids to learn to write letters. —- Raoul, sorry, I don’t watch cable or I’d be sure to tune in each morning when former Republican Joe Scarborough does his three-hour show. I’ll gladly claim Rachel Maddow but will own up to Olbermann only if forced to pick between him and Glenn Beck. —— Over at my blog a “moderate” Republican stopped by last week and said, “you’re always complaining about talk radio and Fox.” Without any sense of irony he then said he agreed with me that the furor over Obama’s speech to the school kids was way out of line. He didn’t answer when I asked him who exactly was pushing that furor. —- If it’s broadcast, it’s B.S. I don’t need to know what some corporation thinks the news is. With a newspaper at least I can study the words and do some research about stuff that sounds ‘funny’ to me. Love Vick or hate him, once he posts his thing he’s stuck with those words. — And for the record, Van Jones was stupid for calling himself a communist when he was in fact a Christian Marxist. Technically he was correct but the old sense of communist is long lost thanks to the criminals of the Soviet bloc and Red China. Christian Marxists also have the advantage of embracing ALL of Christ’s teachings, and not just those they find convenient. Van Jones grew up in a mainstream church and was blessed by his active involvement in that church. It’s sad that men and women of character are no longer judged by the actual work that they do, but only by loose words and careless associations.By vick
September 9, 2009 8:39 PM | Link to this
Thanks, Raoul. Welcome back. My whack-a-mole shtick was meant to be humorous. Beck is always popping up-or popping off-like one of those moles. I don’t really want to hit him with a mallet. That’s pure Three Stooges. I just wanted to inject a bit of humor into these oh so serious disputations.By Raoul
September 9, 2009 8:29 PM | Link to this
I’m back! Mark, check out MSNBC if you don’t think Fox has any competition on the left. I don’t know about all the other conservative wingnuts out there but I am getting pretty tired of all the rhetoric out there from Rush, Beck, Hannity, etc. Not that I disagree with a lot of what they say, but it is getting too contentious and there comes a point where it is counter-productive. Obama’s school speech was fine. Beck’s on to something and there’s no reason not to appreciate his asking a lot of questions. It’s interesting to see the reaction from the Dem’s; they are clearly defensive about a lot things going on. Maybe President Obama should quit acting like a community organizer and more like a President. He is causing his own problems and inviting criticism. Vick, Bush’s high level appointees may not have been perfect, but they were chosen for their ability to help keep Americans safe from terrorism. That is a worthy cause. Obama’s picks seem to have a different agenda, and that is why they need to be vetted. Why don’t you interview Beck and tell him about your whack-a-mole phantasy? He has a good sense of humor and might find it funny.By downsized
September 9, 2009 5:53 PM | Link to this
What a sad, sorry duo, TRS & IG. You two have always been so diplomatic with those who disagree with you. Your posts never spill bile on the “crazy, leftist, racist, and radical”, do they? Both of you SPEW the politics of divisiveness, with regularity. “Liberals” are likened to communists and/or un-American destroyers of our country, society, culture and way of life, by you both. You now claim to approve a President of the United States addressing your children after his remarks have been properly vetted by Newt and Laura?! What gives you, and those like you, the gall to attempt censoring, or remove your children from school because our President wishes to encourage them to pursue their education? Please home school them. You have neither respect for our country, our duly elected President or his right to address the people?! Both of you constantly rail against teachers, professors, the dreaded “MSM” and everyone who you perceive to be “liberal.” Even the Department of Education is a suspect in your world. Where was your paranoia about President’s addressing our youth when Reagan or Bush and others spoke? You chose the word, racist. You decide what ideas your children should hear. What’s next? Book banning/burning? Taping the classrooms? Conducting political backround checks on teachers? What you appear to desire is an authoritarian society unlike any in this country’s history. True conservatives cringe when we read the bilge you SPEW! We are a nation of multiple cultures, races and IDEAS. Grow up. Or your kids won’t.By TRS
September 9, 2009 3:24 PM | Link to this
DS - I had no problem with the President speaking once the Dept of Ed redacted their lesson plan. If it was all something about nothing then why did they change/redact the original version? I disagree with Limbaugh an and agree with Gingrich and Laura Bush. Vick - certainly we could argue the merits or lack thereof of those you mentioned but no where in their history did they accuse “the white man” of purposely depositing poisons in minority communities nor transferring wealth to native Americans nor openly admitting to being a Communist. The one thing that didn’t bother me so much is his calling Republicans name. Everyone does that - just look at DS comments (“spewing and wingnuts”).By irishguy
September 9, 2009 3:00 PM | Link to this
Well DS, I’ve never called you a moonbat. TRS and I were using facts, something you may not be familiar with. I was a little concerned about my little ones hearing Mr Obama’s speech until I was able to read it on Monday. It was just what I’d want a President to say to school children. I was also a bit concerned with the 1st draft of the Dept of Ed’s “menu of Classroom Activities for the President’s Address” but once the political stuff was removed in the 2nd draft, I had no problem with it either. I didn’t have you pegged as a Rush listener, go figure. Unlike the Dems in ‘91 after Bush schoolchildren speech, I’m guessing the Repubs aren’t going to start an investigation of Mr O’s speech.By downsized
September 9, 2009 2:38 PM | Link to this
I notice IG and TRS, two of this blogs’ consistent wingnuts, are spewing their “observations”,again. A question. Rush said The President was brainwashing students with his address on Tuesday. Newt Gingrich and Laura Bush supported the President’s speech. Who brainwashed them into supporting Obama’s speech? And, who are they in bed with?By irishguy
September 9, 2009 2:22 PM | Link to this
Mark, you don’t believe your boy, Mr O’Reilly, when he says GE is in bed with the Obama administration?By vick
September 9, 2009 2:13 PM | Link to this
TRS, thanks, for that info. Those still sound fairly low level to me. The FCC is getting up there though. Are you saying then that the Obama administration is staying consistent then with past practice? Look at some of the truly high level picks that GW Bush made: VP Dick Cheney. Sec. of Defense Don Rumsfeld. Atty Generals John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales. Now those are some high level people and as more time passes they seem to have been quite “a strange cast of characters…”By TRS
September 9, 2009 2:05 PM | Link to this
Well Vick - hard to believe the NYT can’t use google because all the info they needed is out there to confirm. Also hard to believe that had a “birther” been appointed to the Bush admin the Times wouldn’t have pursued that with a vengence, but then, thats just me. The LA Times described czars as “high level staff members who will oversee the administration’s top initiatives”. Doesn’t sound “low level” to me. Other Czars have said some pretty controversial things. Cass Sustein advocates human beings suing on behalf of animals, Jon Holdren discusses in a text book options of population control such things as involuntary fertility controls, mandatory family size, sterilants to drinking water, etc. While it doesn’t appear he advocated them and states he has changed his view on gvmt involvement it does give pause to his thought processes. Mark Lloyd, the FCC chair, has expressed support of the “fairness doctrine” and although he claims it will not be implemented there are always other ways to “skin a cat” (sorry Mr Sustein). Finally, drug czar Kerlikowskwe talked about discontinuing a war on drugs making one wonder what we need a drug czar for? All in all, on the surface it seems the President has picked a strange cast of characters to surround himself with.By Mark from St Paul
September 9, 2009 1:48 PM | Link to this
Beck’s getting some payback right now, and I’m not sure what to think about it. Some very p.o.ed people have started a net rumor that Beck raped and killed a girl in 1990. It’s utterly false and most of the people promoting it acknowledge as much in a fairly transparent manner. The point is to see how rapidly an overt lie can overcome the internet. ——— This lie, however, won’t be aided by talk radio or Fox, and that’s where the experiment will fail. There is no leftwing equivalent to Fox News. CBS is wholly owned by Viacom, ABC by Disney, and NBC by GE. Viacom, Disney and GE are all as NOT LIBERAL as they come. ——- Over the years most of the liberal voices have been purged from television news. Dan Rather’s retirement was the end of an era that has been grossly overstated (the whole liberal media thing really doesn’t make sense if you examine the argument in any kind of context larger than just isolated incidents). ——- Calling Glenn Beck a rapist-murderer is very unfair to Glenn Beck, but some people would say that his own karma coming back on him. Every day that he broadcasts Media Matters posts at least two corrections, and the fact that the right has been “programmed” to ignore Media Matters doesn’t impact their facts. —— Glenn Beck tells lies every single day. He is what psychologists call a “liar.” I don’t read or watch liberal liars (I don’t “watch” any news other than live events), and I really don’t have a very high opinion of conservatives who willingly suspend their disbelief so they can be entertained by a conservative liar. At best, Beck belongs on the air opposite The Daily Show.By irishguy
September 9, 2009 1:06 PM | Link to this
Sorry Vick, my mistake. I just assumed it was rage. I’ve never seen more than a couple of minutes of his show, but he did seem amused.By vick
September 9, 2009 12:50 PM | Link to this
Rage, Irish? Actually, I find him rather amusing…By irishguy
September 9, 2009 12:43 PM | Link to this
Flipper, it’s much easier to focus your rage on one idividual (like Vick has) than a few hundred deserving politicians. Besides, your arm would get tired.By vick
September 9, 2009 12:17 PM | Link to this
Irish, I just looked at the NY Times website and Jill Abramson had a response to questions about their coverage of Van Jones. She said: “The Times was, in fact, a beat behind on this story. Why? One reason was that our Washington bureau was somewhat short-staffed during the height of the pre-Labor Day vacation period. This is not an excuse. Another is that despite being a so-called “czar,” Mr. Jones was not a high-ranking official. Nevertheless, we should have been paying closer attention.” So, there’s your answer from the Times, Irish. Of course, I have heard of this low ranking official. I read lots of different media sources, Irish. I’m sure you do, too.By irishguy
September 9, 2009 12:06 PM | Link to this
I can understand how you haven’t heard of Mr Jones, the NY Times didn’t write a word about him until he resigned.By flipper
September 9, 2009 11:26 AM | Link to this
I’d rather punch-a-politician.By vick
September 9, 2009 10:52 AM | Link to this
Irish, (yawn) exposed who? I can’t keep track of all the times that Glenn pops up. I’m just having fun playing “Whack-a-Mole.” Or, maybe, baseball?By irishguy
September 9, 2009 10:48 AM | Link to this
Vick are you just upset that he exposed Mr Obama’s Red/Green Czar, Mr Jones’, crazy, leftist,racist, radical, Truther, past?