For some reason I’m having a difficult time getting worked up over bodyscanners. Personally, I don’t think I’d mind it that much, but it probably isn’t necessary because it probably won’t stop anything. I remember when they had the lighter ban on airplanes, and I usually got one through about 50 percent of the time. Wonder if that would apply in some way here.
So many people are so freaked out by the pat downs, too. I’ve had at least one of these on one flight, for some reason I was picked out and frisked and that wasn’t too terrible either. Certainly not a sexual assault, as I’ve heard it described. I think sometimes people need something to get excited about. Perhaps there will be something new on the horizon next week. A little too boring.
So I heard these two guys talking on the radio the other night. They were discussing Sarah Palin and whether she would run for the presidency in 2012. “No, I think she’s enjoying her life right now as it is… and I think she’ll stay in that life.”
Obviously these two guys don’t understand the female ego very well. Of course she’s going to run. Is she doing this TV show for fun? I don’t think so. She’s raising money for the run. And what about Bristol on DWTS? Lots of people are complaining on the web about the fact that Bristol keeps from getting eliminated on Dancing With the Stars. I saw one comment where someone accused Sarah Palin of paying ABC to keep Bristol on the show. Hah. What a load of $@%!!! Bristol is winning because people are fired up about the “republican revolution” — even if it’s only a stupid network TV show.
So I have watched bits and pieces of the interviews former President George W. Bush has done to promote his new book “Decision Points.” I was unimpressed. I used to defend him pretty boisterously but now see him in a different light. As Laura Ingraham pointed out, Bush did damage not only to the Republican party but to the nation as a whole by refusing to respond to his critics while he was in office. He told Bill O’Reilly he didn’t want to engange in a “spitting contest” or something like that. Why couldn’t he have taken a cue from Bill Clinton who was a master at defending himself…and at explaining himself. That’s what Bush didn’t do: explain things. A big disappointment in the end.
Best summary I’ve seen yet of Tuesday’s election is entitled “What Just Happened?”
It could be—it seems just possible—that the “truth and science and facts” that these Democrats talk about are really only schoolhouse theories that have no bearing on reality; that they are tried-and-failed progressive fairy tales that could only continue to be believed by people who have spent most of their adult lives glued face-first to the public tit. It’s possible that the best-informed populace in history has risen up in a truly spontaneous grassroots movement deeply connected to the nation’s founding principles and prudently given the heave-ho to a bunch of spendthrift, incompetent, supercilious, and self-deceived buffoons who mistook their college degrees for wisdom.
Obama, as usual, doesn’t seem to get it judging from his Wednesday news conference.
Overall, some very solid GOP gains in the House and the Senate. Could have been more, yes. But strong enough for now.
So, yes, the day is finally here and Sean Hannity can quit his countdown. One interesting story of note involves President Obama and his admission that calling Republicans “enemies” of Hispanics might not have been the brightest idea a week before elections. Although, again, he didn’t specifically define who the “enemies” were. Too little, too late, methinks. Lots of people are predicting a higher than expected Democratic turnout. I don’t think so. And I’ll admit it if I’m wrong. Vote! Don’t forget it.
Come Tuesday, the TV networks and newspaper syndicates are going to be shocked. Because of the election, the media czars are going to become painfully aware of the fact that they no longer control the electorate.
In 2008, they were successful at demonizing Sarah Palin, at least to the point that the voters rejected John McCain. But no more. Just as Scott Brown’s election in February was a was an earthquake, Tuesday’s election is going to be a tsunami. Because the democrats are disgusted and aren’t going to vote, and the republicans are energized and will be flocking to the polls.
So what are the implications? Of course we already know that most people don’t read newspapers and a lot fewer people watch the network newscasts. And people’s viewing and reading habits aren’t the only things changing: journalism is changing as well.
I had to laugh when I watched the CBS Evening News Friday night and saw Katie Couric reading Facebook questions from viewers within the newscast. It looked nothing less than cheesy, as if the network was saying “Hey, we know Facebook exists!” What must a 23-year-old think?
What the “old” boys (and girls) fail to realize is something that Fox News gets: provocation works.
The trick to attracting Twitter followers and getting a story or video to go viral on Facebook is to provoke.
Simply put, the big, “old” media is boring and self-important, and no longer nearly as influential as it once was.
Anyone who considers how much money has been spent on this election should realize that much of the TV advertising that was purchased was worthless. The electorate has figured out these ads and wants to learn more about individual candidates rather than watching hateful attacks. Perhaps it will take a while before candidates realize this, but once they do, the spending on television spots is going to subside. Then people will really have to become educated and make an effort to learn more about candidates, probably through the Internet. It’s a wonderful world
I have been reading the polling results and all the republicans in major races across the country are gaining ground..even Christine O’Donnell. Just watched a video of Sharron Angle being pounced on by a young TV reporter in Nevada when she arrived home at the airport. Really obnoxious reporter. She retaliated by banning two of the local television stations from her campaign headquarters on Tuesday night. Sweet revenge against journalists, that.
I don’t know what has happened to reporters and why they feel they have the right to demand answers of people, even political candidates. Someone suggested that this is happening primarily against women. But I’ve see it done against men, too, perhaps not so intensely.
In any case, it’s turning the public against them.
It’s going to be a rude shock on Tuesday.
I wanted to take note of Obama’s comments to a mostly Hispanic audience earlier this week where he referred to Republicans as “our enemies.” At least we think it was the Republicans. Maybe he was referring to white people. Kind of hard to tell. In any case, race-based politicking was the order of the day. That’s simply wrong.
And it smacks of desperation.
Another story that deserves mention is the Gawker.com story about Christine O’Donnell. The one night stand that wasn’t. So now it’s news that a political candidate DIDN’T have sex. An unmarried candidate, no less. Even the National Organization of Women is speaking out about this one.
The above is from my favorite Youtube channel.It’s great to watch if you need a little cheering up at the end of the night. Or day.
I got asked to work at the polls next week and I just may do it. A friend of mine is an elector and he asked me about it last night. So I’ll think about it.
I’ve been a little busy the last couple of days but I guess the polling polls bear some discussion. Sixty-seven percent of republicans plan on voting and some 37 percent of Democrats. I think that’s the statistic I saw. Good news for the GOP again.
It would be interesting to work the polls just to see what violations, if any occur. I’ve always been a little suspect, but have visited polling places in many different parts of the country. It’s kind of neat to see the different rules about voting in different states. I was in California for the last Super Tuesday and we passed a lot of different polling places but did not stop to check one out. I’m not sure if they would have let us in but if I had been alone I might have tried it.
I have seen violations occur. One time I videotaped a candidate going into a polling place but the station wouldn’t run the story. Hmmm. Wonder why that was.
At any rate, less than a week to go so there will be lots to talk about then.
So the Washington Post ran a story this week about Clarence Thomas and his women.
Chief among them is one Lillian McEwen, who dated Thomas during the 1980s and 90s. She has written a book, and is trying to pump up sales by saying Thomas is “obsessed” by porn. She decided to reveal that factoid after Thomas’s wife placed a call to Anita Hill recently, demanding she apologize to Thomas. Ain’t gonna happen. So there’s been lots of speculation as to whether or not this is the result of an organized smear campaign against Thomas, in at attempt to embarass him so much that he’ll resign from the Supreme Court. Democrats, of course would be at the root of this. My view of the Anita Hill affair is that was some truth on both sides, and there’s little that can be done with that now that would put an end to Justice Thomas’s career. But the larger question is this: are members of the U.S. Supreme Court still “sacred cows” who have obtained a job for life and can’t be interfered with? Or are they to be subject to public criticism? Barack Obama obviously believes the latter, judging from his admonishment of the court during this year’s State of the Union address. Even fewer justices are expected to show up at next year’s speech.
It’s an interesting question. I think members of the Supreme Court were used to considering themselves – and being considered– members of a lofty institution that was above criticism by the president or anyone else in a position of power. Certainly no one was going to publicly discuss their sex lives. Should the Supreme Court be subject to the same media scrutiny as the President of the United States? With a lifelong position helping to determine the most important issues in the land, why not?