Stupid Headline Alert

My old home town paper, The Cleveland Plain Dealer, had an interesting headline this afternoon about an intra-squad game the Cleveland Indians played today in Arizona.

They have since changed the headline but it does make one ask the question, how does one not win a game you play against yourself?

Though i guess if there was a way, the Indians would find it…

Please follow and like us:

McGovern Gets Thrown Under The Bus

For Throwing Unions Under The Bus.

Former Senator and Presidential candidate from South Dakota George McGovern penned what some would consider a less than union friendly op-ed for the Murdoch Street Journal that has the pro-union Democrats seeing Wal-mart blue.

Well, in case you were wondering why McGovern decided to go off the deep end on the employee Free Choice Act, it turns out he’s already been swimming in it for some time.

It’s safe to say George McGovern is a patsy for anti-union lobbyist Rick Berman, the leader of a $30 million front group interfering in key Senate and House races this cycle.

McGovern sits on the board of FirstJobs, another pro-business Berman front group, alongside the likes of Bush Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens, the editorial page director of the Washington Times, and the head of Sam’s Club.

He is from the somewhat union unfriendly South Dakota so what do you expect?

Please follow and like us:

Edwards Admits Affair But Not That He Has Lovechild

I had held off on this except for a quick mention when the National Enquirer first reported it because, well, it was the National Enquirer, but it appears that the rumors that John Edwards was involved in an affair are true.

The former Democratic Presidential candidate is set to come clean tonight in an interview on ABC’s Nightline where he will admit to boinking former campaign worker Rielle Hunter while she traveled with him back in 2006. He also claims that despite what the Enquirer is reporting, he isn’t the father of Hunter’s baby because the timing doesn’t fit.

Edwards, who’s wife is stricken with incurable cancer, also made a point of telling ABC that his wife was in remission from her disease during the affair because as you know, that makes it so much better.

Edwards made a point of telling Woodruff that his wife’s cancer was in remission when he began the affair with Hunter. Elizabeth Edwards has since been diagnosed with an incurable form of the disease.

I guess we can now put the possibilities of his being chosen as Barack Obama’s VP candidate or being given any position within an Obama cabinet to rest can’t we?

Please follow and like us:

Randell Beck Promoted

So you write what some would consider a libelous column, you and your boss get sued for it. You rag on blogs and bloggers after they expose your organization’s somewhat questionable allegiances saying the blogs are places where the views of the ‘pinheaded’ on the ‘political fringes’ with ‘nutty opinions’ can ’spew forth.’” and then start your own blog. What’s next?

If you work for Gannett, you are given the keys to the building.

Randell Beck, executive editor of the Argus Leader for the past seven years, was named Wednesday as publisher and president of the media company.

Beck replaces Arnold Garson, who is taking over as publisher and president of the Louisville, Ky., Courier-Journal.

“I’m very excited, both professionally and personally,” Beck, 54, said. “I’ve learned over seven years, both living in Sioux Falls and working at Argus Leader Media, that this really is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. The chance to stay here in an expanded role, a different kind of role, really is sort of a dream.”

Please follow and like us:

Too Skinny?

One of the few things that I don’t have to worry about but for some reason the Wall Street Journal wonders aloud whether Barack Obama is too skinny to be President.

“Listen, I’m skinny but I’m tough,” Sen. Obama said.
But in a nation in which 66% of the voting-age population is overweight and 32% is obese, could Sen. Obama’s skinniness be a liability? Despite his visits to waffle houses, ice-cream parlors and greasy-spoon diners around the country, his slim physique just might have some Americans wondering whether he is truly like them.

But then again someone wouldn’t not vote for him because he was too thin right?

“I won’t vote for any beanpole guy,” another Clinton supporter wrote last week on a Yahoo politics message board.

So are you reading this Senator Obama? Looks like it is time to stop exercising and hit up McDonalds 4 or 5 times a week so that you’ll have a better chance this fall. Okay, I guess you better make that Burger King as you wouldn’t want to go against the American Family Assoiciation boycott of that “pro-homosexual” company and piss off the religious vote.

Would something like this have appeared in the WSJ pre-Ruppert Murdoch?

Please follow and like us:

The Magazine Cover Parade Continues

This time “Vanity Fair” chimes in with their satire on the “New Yorker” cover satire. Vanity Fair’s target for their faux cover is John McCain and it plays on many of the stereotypes associated with McCain. Though stereotypes might be too strong, maybe misconceptions? Ok maybe slightly exaggerated truths…

McCain Vanity Fair Cover

The question is, will the McCain camp get the joke and maybe more importantly, will McCain figure out this internet thing in time to even see it?

Please follow and like us:

Dead Tree Bias? Say It Ain't So

The latest controversy going around the right-wing blogosphere revolves around the news that the New York Times has rejected an op-ed submitted by John McCain that was in response to an earlier one printed from Barack Obama. Obama’s July 14th piece detailed his position on several topics including his previous and future positions on Iraq as well as detailing the differences between him and John McCain.

Apparently not wanting to be outdone, John McCain submitted his own op-ed piece to the Times that they subsequently rejected because they didn’t think that it contained any new information. Opinion Page Editor David Shipley:

“Let me suggest an approach,” he wrote Friday. “The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans. It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece.”

You would have to be from another planet to not know that the Times tends to slant to the left. Why wouldn’t it considering that their target audience is in one of the more liberal states in the country, but if you read the McCain piece, you would have to agree with Shipley that other than ripping Obama it has no substance.

While there is no doubt that both the Obama article and the subsequent response from McCain are nothing more than campaign ads disguised in the op-ed clothing, Obama’s actually contains some semblance of news, his policy stance going forward. McCain’s on the other hand is nothing more than an Obama attack ad.

As McCain’s article consists now, I can understand why the Times has issues with putting it on their Op-Ed pages. With that said though, if McCain wants to keep the piece as is without offering any new policy, I am sure they would be happy to sell him a full page ad because hit pieces, even against liberals, are much more palatable for the media when they get paid for them.

Please follow and like us:

So There!

Putting aside the mis-interpretation of my comments on the New Yorker cover, satire such as that done by the New Yorker is definitely a free speech issue no matter whether the audience gets it or not. With that said, free speech isn’t always free and the New Yorker is finding that out first hand.

Forty journalists, including such leading correspondents as Dan Balz of The Washington Post, will be aboard his plane for next week’s swing through Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and England.

The campaign received 200 requests for press seats on the plane.

Among those for whom there was no room was Ryan Lizza, Washington correspondent of The New Yorker. The campaign, which was furious about the magazine’s satirical cover this week, cited space constraints in turning him away.

Childish retaliation or sweet revenge (or more likely the math)? I guess that depends on your perspective but one thing I do know, everybody gets the meaning this time around.

Please follow and like us:

Didn't Get The Joke

Not surprisingly, the folks that the latest “New Yorker” cover was intended to satirize aren’t getting the joke.

If you listen to the artist responsible for the cover, it was supposed to poke fun at the portion of the population that still believe the far right mis-information campaign aimed at Barack Obama which included the long disproven claims that he is a Muslim and that Michelle Obama made the “whitey” comments.

Who exactly are the people the cover poked fun at? Unfortunately it’s not the media pundits that continue to allow these rumors to propagate with their “Osama” slips or by accentuating Obama’s middle name of ” Hussein” but instead it hits squarely on the people that will never get it. For example the readers over at WorldNetDaily. They have poll going currently that has 60 percent of those voting saying that “The image isn’t too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family” with another 12 percent believing that it is at least partially correct. Bingo, i think we have a winner!

Of course The “New Yorker” is standing by their cover despite the condemnation that is coming pretty much from all sides including both the Obama and McCain campaign’s. They state that the satire was obvious and that their readership was smart enough to figure out the real meaning.

The problem with that logic of course is that while the “New Yorker’s” readers might be smart enough, as the WND poll shows, not everyone is a “New Yorker” kind of reader and all that cover has really done is put an image to the ridiculous beliefs of those who refuse to do even the most basic research and who probably shouldn’t be voting in the first place.

For better or worse the magazine cover did accomplished one thing, it got them several days of free publicity which will surely sell a few more magazines.

Please follow and like us:

This Will Leave A Mark!

Surely no one will be talking about this…ok maybe they will.

Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama

UPDATE: The Obama Campaign responds:

The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Senator Obama’s right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree.”

And the New Yorker cartoonist:

I think the idea that the Obamas are branded as unpatriotic [let alone as terrorists] in certain sectors is preposterous. It seemed to me that depicting the concept would show it as the fear-mongering ridiculousness that it is.

Sounds like this guy went to the Randell Beck school of satire.

Please follow and like us: