Media Fail

Posted in Media Bias,U.S. by Ryan on the April 16th, 2012

I’m a casual news junkie, and yet I am repeatedly confronted with statements from “media personalities” that don’t seem to be very good at their job.

John Avlon writes about Rep. Allen West’s “communists in congress” comment.  He laments the lack of civility and how this is horrible to associate members of the Democratic Party with Communism, which is responsible for the death of millions of people.

I personally have no idea why West said what he did, but Avlon’s dismay at the lack of condemnation causes him to draw the following comparison.

And just for a moment imagine if a liberal member of Congress made an equal and opposite accusation, saying that all the members of the tea party caucus were Nazis. It would be rightly greeted with wall-to-wall outrage.


I assume John Avlon simply collects a check from CNN for word count.



Huntsman and Service to Country

Posted in Election 2012,Foreign Policy,U.S. by Ryan on the January 10th, 2012

In the Saturday debate in New Hampshire, Romney and Huntsman had an exchange regarding China.

HUNTSMAN: Listen, we have the most important relationship of the 21st Century with China. We’ve got to make it work. Of course we have challenges with them. We’ve had challenges for 40 years. It’s nonsense to think you can slap a tariff on China the first day that you’re in office, as Governor Romney would like to do.

You’ve got to sit down and sort through the issues of trade like you do with North Korea, like you do with Iran, like you do with Burma, and Pakistan, and the South China Sea. They’re all interrelated. And to have a president who actually understands how that relationship works would serve the interests of the people in this country, from an economics standpoint and from a security standpoint.

ROMNEY: I’m sorry, Governor, you were, the last two years, implementing the policies of this administration in China. The rest of us on this stage were doing our best to get Republicans elected across the country and stop the policies of this president from being put forward.

[ …Romney comments at length about China stealing intellectual property among other things… ]

HUNTSMAN: I think it’s important to note, as they would say in China, that (speaking mandarin)…


HUNTSMAN: … he doesn’t quite understand this situation. What he is calling for would lead to a trade war. It makes for easy talk and a nice applause line but it’s far different from the reality in the U.S.-China relationship.

So, a robust back and forth.  Huntsman taking issue with Romney talking about coming down hard on China and Romney taking some issue with Huntsman saying he doesn’t know what he is talking about.  I took Romney’s jab about Huntsman’s time in China as a “heat of the moment” comment that simply reflected his displeasure at being criticized on his comments.

Well, on Sunday, without being questioned about this exchange, Huntsman deliberately brings it up, taking issue with Romney criticizing his “service to his country.”

HUNTSMAN: Let me say — let me say, first are all, with respect to Governor Romney, you know, there are a lot of people who are tuning in this morning, and I’m sure they’re terribly confused after watching all of this political spin up here.

I was criticized last night by Governor Romney for putting my country first. And I just want to remind the people here in New Hampshire and throughout the United States that I think…


He criticized me while he was out raising money for serving my country in China, yes, under a Democrat, like my two sons are doing in the United States Navy. They’re not asking who — what political affiliation the president is.

I want to be very clear with the people here in New Hampshire and this country: I will always put my country first. And I think that’s important to them.

GREGORY: All right. Well, why don’t you get a response, Governor Romney? And then I’ll come back to you on the austerity question.

ROMNEY: I think we serve our country first by standing for people who believe in conservative principles and doing everything in our power to promote an agenda that does not include President Obama’s agenda. I think the decision to go and work for President Obama is one which you took. I don’t disrespect your decision to do that. I just think it’s most likely that the person who should represent our party running against President Obama is not someone who called him a remarkable leader and went to be his ambassador in China.

HUNTSMAN: This nation is divided, David, because of attitudes like that.

It was a pointed exchange.  I almost expected Romney to perhaps apologize, saying it was the wrong thing to say and that it was simply the heat of the moment.  However, he didn’t, he made some generic points about serving under Obama.

I was driving home tonight and listening to CSPAN radio here in the DC area and it had some live events from New Hampshire.  One of the events was Huntsman’s and he was reminding people of the exchange.  He asked the crowd if they’d caught the debate the day before.  He said something to the effect of “We made clear to one candidate that this campaign will always put this country before politics.”

It was then that I had an epiphany.  Huntsman, in his effort to decry partisanship, may have overlooked the awkward position from which he standing.  He “put his country first” and began his service as ambassador in August of 2009.  Less than 2 years later, he resigned from that position in April of 2011 to run for President.

In effect, according to Huntsman, he put politics ahead of country.

The Bain Pile On

Posted in Election 2012,U.S. by Ryan on the January 9th, 2012

And so, in the party which celebrates equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome, we have major presidential candidates openly lambasting another candidate’s business experience.  In effect, they’re appealing to the basest of arguments that because not all of Romney’s business dealings resulted in full and complete employment at those companies bought by Bain, he is not fit to be President.

So much for an embrace of the free market.  This is such a socialistic mentality, that everyone deserves a job, no matter what.  If Bain can be shown to have unethically manipulated situations to enrich themselves at the expense of others, so be it, I welcome the truth.  Until then, this rhetoric doesn’t belong in the Republican party.  I’d expect it in the Democratic Party, where they appeal to these sorts of base sensibilities of entitlement.

This isn’t just a weak field, this is a desperate field.

What Are You Waiting For?

Posted in U.S. by Ryan on the October 21st, 2011

So the Occupy Wall Street protests have found “allies in ranks of the wealthy.”

If these people feel that government is the best vehicle for their wealth to help others, why have they not already given their wealth to the government? Let alone just giving their money away to charity or using it to fill whatever needs they perceive.  The irony that strikes me is that although they advocate forcing others to give up more of their wealth, they haven’t yet done it themselves.

Of the sampled group that is quoted, they appear to have all inherited their wealth.  I wonder how representative this is of the 1% that are “joining the ranks.”

Farhad A. Ebrahimi, 33,….inherited wealth…
Burke Stansbury, a 35-year-old….He inherited a little more than $1 million and stands to inherit more….
Elspeth Gilmore, a 33-year-old….raised in a life of privilege….
Leah Hunt-Hendrix, a 28-year-old….She believes her family would be at the upper end of the 1 percent….

If you wanted to make a compelling statement about supporting OWS as a member of the 1%, I’d recommend the following criteria:

  1. Actually have worked and earned your money
  2. Have given away your wealth already

Toilet & Lightbulb Throwdown

Posted in Climate Change,Government,U.S. by Ryan on the March 11th, 2011

A great segment of video showing Rand Paul blast Kathleen Hogan, a deputy assistant at the Energy Department. He outlines the hypocrisy of those that fiercely advocate a woman’s right to choose, yet support restrictions that force compact fluorescent light bulbs and low capacity toilets upon consumers.

While I’m sure all conservation policies are not a bad thing, I am still confused why we would do away with harmless (but inefficient) light bulbs in favor of twirled tubes full of toxic mercury vapor. And put them in every home in America.

You would think this conservation crowd would have warmed up to nuclear power already.

Arizona/Palin Synopsis

Posted in Media Bias,U.S. by Ryan on the January 14th, 2011

Allahpundit says it all.

My point this week, though, and Ace’s point at his site, has been that this episodeisn’t business as usual. This isn’t some standard “Palin’s using rhetorical dog whistles for her Christian base!” attack. This is a congresswoman bleeding out of her head on the sidewalk with six bodies lying around her, one of them a little girl, and Palin being blamed for it instantly. And yet according to Keith Ellison, the proper response here should have been to validate that accusation by implication by saying, gee, yeah, I guess I should have toned it down. I’m not known for being a Palin fan (as, er, any actual Palin fan could tell you) and even I can’t contain my indignation at the charge. And yet she’s supposed to just mellow out and take it because political reporters who won’t flatly correct the record for their readers think it’s bad “optics” to do otherwise? Unbelievable.

UPDATE: Ace makes equally awesome points in his wrap up linked to in the above.

We are now debating — quite seriously, or we’re supposed to be quite serious about debating this — whether Sarah Palin can use martial imagery in her speech, even though everyone in politics does this, including the very media now assuring us this is all a terrible thing. And we are supposed to have this very serious debate while our opponents in the debate are simply making things up, or, more accurately: We are supposed to indulge our opponents’ retreat to a fantasy world they’ve constructed, and not disrupt their fantasy too much, because, who knows, Paul Krugman might snap if we do.

Hard Questions

Posted in Immigration,U.S. by Ryan on the December 21st, 2010

Time to ask them.

It does not have to be this way. If we chose our immigrants differently, immigration would upgrade the average skill level of the U.S. population. (As is, 31% of immigrants have not completed high school.) If we chose our immigrants differently, they could contribute more in taxes than they require in benefits. (As is, immigrants are 50% more likely to be poor than the native-born.)

Someday, the United States will probably have to double back and do something for the hard cases showcased in the Senate hearings on the DREAM bill. But if we really want to do something useful, we should do more than help the hard cases. We should ask some hard questions.

More Liberal Hypocrisy

Posted in U.S. by Ryan on the December 20th, 2010

Ruben Navarrette lays out yet another example of mainstream liberal hypocrisy.  This time, making fun of a politician shedding tears.

We’ve seen this skit before. Liberals make fun of Sarah Palin because, despite their declared affection for average Americans, they can’t stand the sight of one. And now some of them are making fun of Boehner because, despite their historical role as the party whose policies preserved the American Dream, they consider the fact that someone would get emotional over that storyline to be comedic material.

Didn’t Obama Talk About a New Green Economy?

What was the stimulus for again?  I could have sworn I was promised massive investment in a new green economy.

Chu said the United States still concentrated on research in areas such as computers, defense and pharmaceuticals but that its funding for energy innovation was paltry.

“America still has the opportunity to lead in a world that will need essentially a new industrial revolution to give us the energy we want inexpensively but carbon-free,” Chu said.

“But I think time is running out,” said Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist.

“Incompetence” to Blame for Incompetence

“Frankly it just came down to the fact there was not a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed administrator in place until I was confirmed at the end of June to make a really significant decision like that, that would have impact on a number of people,” Pistole said. “That was a big part of it.”

TSA Director Pistole is basically telling us that the White House was so inept in responding to the threat of underwear bombers, that it took the actual confirmation of a TSA director over 7 months later to then begin the process of implementing the pat downs, which wouldn’t take effect until another 3 months later.

So this Christmas, if you’re flying, as we celebrate the 1 year anniversary foiling of the “Underwear Bomber,” we can also join hands in celebrating the 2 month anniversary of nationwide pat downs.

« Previous PageNext Page »