It’s Presidential Primary Debate Season; Considered Yourself Warned

Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends come inside come inside.

Yes it’s that time again when all the hopeful/wanna be/ has been Presidential candidates attempt to sell their souls for your heart, mind and checkbook to stay afloat among an overcrowded cast of characters to be your next President of the United States.

That’s right one and all, beginning this August some of your favorite Cable News talking heads will be pre-empted for one night a month for the next eight months so pundits can get paid to analyze everything from the tie of a candidate to on stage water consumption and possibly even what the candidates actually said.

To be fair, only the Republican National Committee has actually scheduled their televised primary debates as the Democratic National Committee will not hold a single televised debate till... um... till.. Uh, well there are no dates listed yet just a notation of “*tentative date, not confirmed” per the uspresidentialelectionnews.com website.

The DNC’s so-called scheduling issue is simple to explain; it gives them plenty of time to borrow the Carnival House of Mirrors prop so all can watch Hillary Clinton debate her past, current, and future self to millions across the country.

OK, that’s not fair to the DNC, but then again it’s all cheers for the RNC as they realized (thanks to a 2013 Autopsy) that 2012’s 27 scheduled televised primary debates was just overkill to the voting public. Not to mention the murder of the networks ratings and advertising budgets.

Anyway, a few weeks ago I pondered aloud about how would the RNC fix their “candidates” issue for the upcoming primary debate cycle?

By “candidates” issue I mean the claustrophobic field of individuals who will inform the viewers they’re the right one to represent the GOP, why the others suck, and then by the end of the cycle backtrack to endorse the victor as the true candidate of choice even though they had stated prior that the individual sucked.

Personally, I don’t see a problem with having too many candidates, truly I never did. My complaint has always been about the quality of the candidates. Seriously, I know I’m being a political d*ck about this, but two-thirds of those running for President in 2016 know full well their chances are slim and are looking at their future to bank more contractual money either in television and/or print or a power trip when they return to their day jobs. The other one-third actually have legitimate claim to move about the country to spew their will amongst the people.

As of today, there’s a possible GOP candidate count of 20 individuals lining up, trying to be heard amongst the many, hoping to get equal amounts of face time in the Media. And the primary debates are the best place to meet the candidate, right?

Wrong! Well for 2012 it was wrong but for the moment in 2016 the problem is fixed.
RNC head honcho Reince Pribus had mentioned over the past year or so about a “political bracket” style debate calendar, having different candidates at different debates to give everyone a chance to be heard. As time passed he did the next best thing imaginable. To take the pressure of candidates and their Big Money backers banging on his door, he decided to let the networks decide who gets to play and who gets to stay (out).

Respectfully both FOX and CNN were granted the first two televised debates, with each running a different type of debate docket fully supported by the RNC. Hey, it says so on their website!

FOX has chosen to only invite the Top 10 polling candidates to their August 6 televised debate, while CNN decided to allow all to speak during a two event broken down by polling numbers.

I love this idea! Yes that’s right I said I love this idea for many reasons, however I believe CNN did the best for the candidates. I can also understand FOX’s one night event, as primaries do not do well in ratings, so with the abbreviated commercial breaks for a night, bills don’t get paid. And of course, they don’t want to upset the ratings of their coveted much bragged about 800p-1000p slot.

I gotta wonder which poll/polls will be used, because if they use the latest Quinnipiac Poll there is not a true front runner among a group of candidates.

Well to be fair, according to the Q Poll “Don’t Know/Undecided” actually leads with 20%, with Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, and Scott Walker are all tied at 10%. Funny little side note about “Don’t Know/Undecided” as it was in 1976 Iowa Straw Poll that helped propel Jimmy Carter as the Democratic candidate, because he was polled at #2 and his campaign capitalized on it by saying he was the true winner.

But that was Iowa and I’m talking the current Q poll which has Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Chris Christie, and Carly Fiorina completing out what would be considered the “Top 10” candidates that would fill out the FOX debate if it were held today.
Sadly, it leaves John Kasich, Rick Santorum, George Pataki, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, Rick Perry and Lindsey Graham staying home.

But look hard at the list of GOP candidates. Cruz, Paul, Rubio, Carson, Fiorina, Huckabee, Santorum, Graham and Pataki have all announced their intentions with Bush, Walker, Christie, Perry, Jindal, Kasich and Trump waiting it out.

In my opinion, only those that have announced deserve to be on stage for the FOX one night stand, if one is to be “Fair and Balanced,” or CNN’s first night event. Those fence sitters need not apply or wait till the next day.

Yes I know August is still a few months away so the favorability of a candidate can go up and down. And I just realized I broke my cardinal rule of never writing more than the average person can read during the average bowel movement, so thus we end my excitement of Political Plinko.

Then again, it would better for the viewer if these debates were played out on the set of The Price Is Right when considering the amount of money being hedged by bid money donors.

That’s it, slap the political tap on the Bishops Finger and pay your political tab before a candidate knocks on your door

CHEERS!

2016 Democratic hopefuls- Hillary, Horseshoes and Hand Grenades.

2016 Democratic hopefuls- Hillary, Horseshoes and Hand Grenades.

I never truly understood the term “it’s like throwing horseshoes and hand grenades” until it became a good characterization for the 2016 Democratic Presidential hopefuls/wanna be/has been/not ready for prime time Democrats. So close for the fringe Party Left yet so far away from the rest of the Party.

Yes of course I’m talking about the Democratic Party placing all bets on Hillary winning it all in 2016, a rehashing of dreams from 2008. It’s quite fair that Hillary, Hillary, Hillary is the “Marsha” to the rest of the Democrat Party’s’ “Jan,” but it’s their own fault for their current dilemma.

It’s a fair assessment when looking at the Democratic Party over the past few Presidential elections that they don’t have what it takes to do the job.

Yes I know, Obama won the last two Presidential elections, but can we honestly say the GOP put their “best man” forward in those elections?

But going into 2016, however one wants to call it, from political bench warmers or JV farm team, the Dems lack depth as the youth movement is far from strong and lacks backbone as the Old Guard sits atop the order. And any of those young potentials from Corey Booker to Julian Castro to Deval Patrick all went *POOF* into political obscurity.

Some say Julian Castro is in training for future elections, but taking a job within the Obama Administration pulls him away from any attention he would need to boost his name recognition, while Deval Patrick has currently taken a job within Mitt Romney’s Bain Corp.

Apparently the 2016 version of the Democratic Party class has reverted into the 2000 version of the GOP. By this I mean a very small, career politician field with only one illuminating brand name trying to tell everyone to “PICK ME PICK ME!.”

So now the Dems hopes lay within the names such as Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Lincoln Chaffee.

A refresher of the 2000 GOP class that had all too familiar names of George W Bush, John McCain, Gary Bauer, Orrin Hatch, Steve Forbes and Alan Keyes. I don’t know how it relates to today, but it’s rather funny that the GOP didn’t want George W Bush to run, as they pushed hard at recruiting brother Jeb, whom now 15 years later, many do not want near a primary.

But then again, that’s not fair to equate the 2000 GOP class like this. The Dems didn’t have a huge choice either in 2000 with Al Gore, Bill Bradley, and Lyndon LaRouche, while a host of names from Howard Dean to John Kerry declined to play in the 2000 election cycle.

Of course I’m taking for granted that only the “Dem 3” shall be the only ones to run, because we have yet to hear the future intentions of Martin O’Malley, Jim Webb and “Grandpa” Joe Biden.

Unfortunately for O’Malley, it seems that the events in Baltimore have cast a “doubtful” cloud over his parade due to his terms as Baltimore Mayor and Gov of Maryland being linked to economic disadvantages of the city’s populace.

As for “Grandpa” Joe, well every VP is always a consideration to run in the next open Presidential election, yet as big as of an ego he has, I believe he’ll kick back in a rocking chair after this term is over and enjoy playing Media commentator come election night.

I know there are a few other names being tossed around in Elizabeth Warren and Kristen Gillibrand, of which I will default to the “staying home” tag for these two, even though there are whispers of a Clinton/Warren partnership if Hillary is given her entitlement. But again, the DEMS are falling into the trap of nominating those with little experience/accomplishment thanks to the passion of the Media.

But until Sanders and Chafee get a push in all Media forums, it’s Hillary Hillary Hillary. Please swallow your cackles and cover your cankles for the national audience.
How many times can Hillary have a reservation for the Oval Office?

A quick trip backwards to 2008, Hillary was the victor before entering Iowa and by the end of Jan 3 2008, she finished a distant 3rd to Obama. OK if a smidge over 8% is considered distant thumping then it had to be a punch in the gut to lose by 0.3% to John Edwards that evening.

By the final tally of 2008, Obama had won 33 primaries to Hillary’s 22. Well make that 21, because Obama wasn’t on the Michigan ballot, so we can’t count that one. But if you count Michigan, then she actually wins the popular vote with 18 million counted, which obviously that was a victory in name only, because popular she is not.

She's a "Pantsuit Stylin,’ Demographic Profilin,’ 40 years Limousine Riding, Campaign Donor Jet Flying, Ass Kissing, Bankroll Wheelin’ n Dealin’ Cold Hearted Bitch" of a politician(My apologies to the great Nature Boy Ric Flair)

Face it, for all the infatuation and reverence by many for President Bill Clinton there is an equal amount distaste and condemnation for Hillary. I always like to say that Bill Clinton could walk into a McDonald’s and strike up a conversation with anyone, eat their meal, walk away with their Shamrock Shake and leaving that person saying “I like him, he was nice.” But for Hillary to do so, one gets frostbite just from the handshake.

Just within the few weeks after she announced, her campaign staff has proven every public appearance is a fabrication to the highest regard.

Call it political gimmickry or personality forgery; it’s an application for any candidate to be seen as a man, or woman of the people. Her campaign pulled out all the props and theatrics for a 1,186 “Griswaldish” trip from New Haven, CT to Des Moines, IA to meet common folk along the way the day after announcing.

Does anyone actually believe Hillary was riding shotgun in that jet black van? I honestly believe she was riding sky high above on a private plan and had the van waiting at a small airport for her to jump in. Think about, they pre-announced the areas she was to stop and visit the common folk.

I can bash Hillary the politician all day long but in the end outside of a near catastrophe or death, this is Hillary’s game. But then again, it wouldn’t be the first time a politician lost an election to a dead candidate, just ask then incumbent Missouri Senator John Ashcroft how that works.

Then again, Hillary’s 2008 campaign ended in catastrophe and a broken glass ceiling.
Face it, it won’t matter how much the others try, the Media wants Hillary, the GOP wants Hillary and neither will settle for anyone else because “they can’t quit her.”

That's it, Slap the political tap, pay your campaign tab and call your doctor for a prescription of Cymbalta and Zoloft to make it thru the next 18 months

CHEERS!

Presidential Campaign 2016- Pink (GOP) Elephants on Parade

Since the clock struck midnight on Nov 4th, 2014, Media immediately started their “2016 countdown” clock to a huge crop of hopefuls, wannabe’s, has-been contenders to battle Hillary Clinton come Nov 8th 2016. And the choices thus far, well, are the expected bunch since Election Day 2012.


Look at this way, at least everyone can recycle all their 2008 Hillary Clinton promos. We’ll discuss Hillary’s entitlement of the Oval Office since 2008 on the next blog. But today, it’s all about the GOP baby and as hard as it might be for many to fathom, there are many in 2016 I’m keeping an open mind for.

(THANKS FLICKR.COM)

But as we wait with baited breathe, we’ve been stuck in the muck for the past few months of “breaking news” of this or that candidate “forming an exploratory committee” too see if they have the popularity to make such a run. All the while, padding their newly formed PAC’s with donor dollars as high as can be.

Thank you Citizens United!

As par for the course of the past 14 years, the GOP seems to be the party with the deepest roster of presidential candidates and what appears to be their election win. But then again so was 2008 and 2012, and somehow they manage to bungle the big show only to perform an autopsy of sorts that may have educated them as to went wrong.

Currently there are about 20 contenders for the GOP, some familiar faces, some fresh faces and the majority *sigh* are just there because someone patted them on the butt and said “you can do it.

Familiar names and faces such as Senators Teddy Cruz, Rand Paul, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are mixed with current Governors Chris Christie, Scott Walker and John Kasich followed by the “formers” of Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum that many consider to be GOP Group “A” of the crop.

Although I’m not sure how Senator Graham could be considered part of Group A but we can see how that works out in the coming months. And yes, Huckabee, Santorum and Perry have a huge following to keep them in Group “A” standings.

It’s the GOP Group “B” that normally steals major headlines come primary season. Names of Dr Ben Carson, Rep Peter King, current Governors Mike Pence and Susan Martinez, the “formers” of Gov George Pataki, HP CEO Carly Fiorina, UN Ambassador John Bolton and then there’s TV Personality Donald Trump that are floating in the shallow end of the political cesspool.

And of course there are the few that are still hanging their hopes that Willard “Mitt” Romney will change his mind and go for a third campaign run.

(THANKS THENEEDS.COM)

But it’s all gonna come down to who can lead the headlines the most. I’ve repeatedly stated Romney wasn’t the true choice of the GOP in 2012, just the last man standing in the field. Media on both sides of the aisle helped set that up.

We’ve already have been inundated with the hype of those that have announced in April and there’s whispers of more to come in May. But is it just jumping the gun to eventually get drowned out by those that linger to step up on their soapbox? Or will those that have stamped their campaign tickets early will fizzle out with Media and become partisan fodder with rookie mistakes?

We could spend a good hour only talking about a specific policy idea by each candidate, yet it seems they’ve been focused on just blasting Hillary, knocking ACA, eventual war with Iran and telling everyone why they are the one while the others suck.

Seriously, Huckabee seems to have the “Bubbha” vote all to himself while Fiorina is truly only concerned with a workers platform. Oh not American workers, but that of revised HB1 VISA credentials so American business can hire more foreign workers so business wouldn’t have to pay benefits.

Or about how Rubio, Jindal, Santorum, and Cruz feel about “gay marriage” and whether or not they would enjoy pastries from the cookie table if they attended a gay wedding reception. (Note: If you haven’t been to or had a wedding with a cookie table, you’re missing out.)

So far the “Freshmen 3” of Paul, Rubio and Cruz have announced their intention and now we’ve been told the upcoming expositions scheduled for Carson (May 4), Huckabee (May 7) and Fiorina (May 7) are just around the corner.

Only Cruz’s announcement was met with great flair with a few dogs and ponies as well. Oh come on, he’s announcement was well rehearsed, just like any Obama engagement. Sorry but when you have to practice a “celebratory kiss” with your wife; I wonder who the puppeteer above the stage is.

Honestly, I like less theatrics and more of the candidate. And hearing about how Paul’s intentions were rounded out shortly after he won his Senate seat back in 2010, I would figure he’d have less people introducing him and instead have a few balloon artist on stage performing their skills as substitute for sign language.

Rubio, not to be outdone brought forth such a lackluster announcement that even “Mr Excitement” Tim Pawlenty was jealous of the blandness to be viewed.

Paul and Rubio’s announcements were rather pedestrian in nature compared to Cruz, but significant by all means, as the “Freshmen 3” is now fighting for the affection of the very people who placed these first term Senators in DC, the Tea Party.

I do find humor that the Conservative Media has built the “Freshmen 3” just as the Liberal Media created the aura of Obama. If there’s one thing for certain, as much as the Con-talking Media hype machine loves to slap Obama as a non-experienced freshman senator built up by the Libby Media as the next great thing, they have done the same in the “Freshman 3.”

Young, energetic, well spoken, well educated, minority background, and oops, sorry Paul doesn’t fall under the last category. But most importantly just like Obama, Rubio and Cruz have the worse attendance/voting records in the Senate.

Mirror images, well that’s in the eye of the voters and words of the partisan talkers spewing fictional fact.

But it’s early and Media is happy with finding silly little nuggets of disinterest to provide the public as distraction. So pay attention to any flip-flops that will be considered “revision” per the campaigns over the ongoing months.

OK, that’s it, Slap the Political Tap, put on your $140 knock off rebranded “Rand (Ray) Ban” sunglasses and call the bank for a loan to cover your Presidential 2016 campaign bar tab. It’s gonna be a long nauseating campaign.

CHEERS!

When “tolerance” leads to acceptable “intolerance”; Hey Christians, it’s not all about you

“The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” – President John Adams Treaty of Tripoli 1797

My guess is that if President Adams were alive today, he would be shocked if he heard that as of a March 14 poll conducted by Public Policy Polling that 55% of those polled believed that the US was/has been a Christian nation or that 57% of Republicans feel the US should officially become a Christian nation.


Oh wait, he wouldn’t care because technically Republicans didn’t exist during his term.

So that was then and this is now, when we bicker and debate about everything government, pointing fingers and raising voices as to who is right/wrong and how that person’s belief is always on trial.

The debate that has been hotly contested for the past 12 days is given thanks to Indiana’s RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) law that has been poorly defended by Indiana Gov Mike Pence. Face it Gov Pence made this worse then it should’ve been by sadly trying to protect the law (and his governorship dignity) on the Sunday talk show circuit and failing with every “hm” and “um” when not answering the simplest of questions.

Social Issues are the biggest wedge driven into today’s social/political divide, especially when it comes to religion. Sides are being taken on issues from Sex, Birth Control/Abortion, and Pregnancy, as many feel “Christians” are being persecuted with every whack of the spike by the social hammer. This past week’s events in Indiana have proven to be the latest and heaviest smack thus far.

“Indiana’s got the right idea! The Indiana House voted this week to approve a religious freedom bill that would protect business owners who want to decline to provide services for same-sex marriages. After the 63 to 31 House vote in approval of the legislation, The Washington Post says Governor Mike Pence plans to sign it as soon as it lands on his desk. Thanks to those in government who are standing up for the freedom and protection of Christians to live out their faith. I hope more states will be quick to follow suit” - Franklin Graham

But understand that any RFRA law is not inclusive to Christians, so get over yourself and that belief. Unless naming Christians specifically, these laws are for everyone; Catholic, Jew, Muslim, Wiccan and so on. So please step down from your golden soapbox or at least make room for everyone to pitch their bitch complaint.

Oh that goes for the LGBT and Atheist groups as well. You’re not as special or innocent in opposition/opportune action either.

The constant Media loop of business’ denying flowers/cakes for LGBT weddings, to me, is nothing more than ratings grabs by ALL media, it’s just on how that media source edits and plays the story to warrant one’s emotional response.

Everyone knows the story of how ABC57’s Alyssa Marino walked into the Memories Pizzeria and asked owner Mrs. O’Connor the simple question of “How do you feel about Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act?”

So let’s stop here and think about this; you have the right to freedom of speech but you must take responsibility for what you say. In this case, Mrs. O’Connor could’ve simple said “no comment” and asked Ms Marino to leave her establishment or do as she did and answered the question. No gun held to her head, no barging/banging on doors for an answer, no nothing. Question asked & question answered.

A story that was truly not a story until it went viral on Social Media and other media outlets now has the O’Connor’s in hiding and shuttering their pizza shop due to backlash from opposition. As for Ms. Marino reporting, well she too has received her share of backlash. Trust me, she’s not receiving a Pulitzer or national media contract for the report.

As upset as people can be about RFRA laws, they’ve been around for decades. Nothing new here, move along move along, this isn’t the fracas you’re looking for. Oh only if that were true because even though a federal RFRA was signed in 1993, the state governors and/or state legislators are taking matters into their own hands to protect or unprotect the masses.

“Jefferson’s Virginia Statue for Religious Liberty, which many scholars consider a precursor to the First Amendment, guaranteed religious freedom for everyone, Christian and non-Christian”

The notion to deny service to an individual due to their sexual preference should lend more for Protection of Privacy laws as well, not just RFRA laws.

Could one imagine walking into a restaurant to eat and state “Excuse me, we’d like a table for four and preferably not have a Lesbian waitress, thank you.”

What about two businessmen having lunch? Should they be questioned before being seated at a restaurant if they were a couple or just business associates?

As stupid as it sounds, yes oh yes it can/could/would happen at the rate of society’s downward spiral.

Too often, Media will refer to the June 2013 lawsuit by a gay couple from the Denver/Lakewood area that sued a bakery for discrimination because they were refused a wedding cake as “persecution of Christian belief” yet with little notice will skip over the article from January 2015 about another Denver area bakery that refused to decorate a cake in anti-gay theme and is being sued for discrimination received very little notice.

Strangest thing however, the Denver bakery that refused to bake the anti-gay cake, did offer some sort of service to the potential client; they offered to bake the cake at cost but would give them all the decorating tools/frosting for free. So technically, they were still offered services, but refused the offer. So who’s protecting this business right to refuse service for ignorance/bigotry?

I’ll take the heat for my simple belief that any business can refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they feel necessary, because I know damn well there’s a business that wants my money and patronage.

A business has a “no concealed weapons” policy? Fine go find a business that’s more suited to your needs.

A restaurant has a “no children under 8” policy? Fine go find a restaurant that wants your business.

A bakery or flower shop has a religious belief, so be it, go to a business that wants your business.

We have become such a whiney “me me” society that we’ve become so overly sensitive that at some point we went from being “politically correct” to “politically incorrect.” People have become excited to place a person/business into an uncomfortable corner to get their way. And if they don’t get their way they immediately go to Social Media to hold their breath and throw a temper tantrum.

Here’s the proverbial throne in the side that will creep into many courthouses within the next few years due new/revised RFRA’s; Sharia Law can now be allowed/accepted because many of the RFRA’s protect individuals, not just business as both are seen as equals.

Or the simple argument that a religion cannot be imposed on someone.

So as this debate will go on for another week because, well the Media lifecycle normally last 10-14 days for a particular story, many can all go back to the old argument about religious indoctrination in our public school system. Actually let me rephrase that to religious indoctrination (other than Christianity) in our public school system.

Because believe it or not, yes someone has a lawsuit about their young child being taught yoga in public school and it violates her child’s religious rights because teaching yoga promotes Hinduism and represses Christianity.

You can’t make this stuff up.

That’s it, slap the political tap on some “Out-Haus” Ale, sit back and enjoy while you pay the tab. And no I am not discriminating against non-drinkers.. Get over yourself already, it's not always about you!

CHEERS!

I guess censorship is selective too many or is that hypocrisy is money in the bank?

I guess censorship is selective too many or is that hypocrisy is money in the bank?

It’s not that unusual for people to cry foul to censorship or freedom of the press/speech for a journalist’s renderings, of course, it’s someone they may disagree with and what their soapbox may be about. Take for instance today when I read that the conservative Daily Caller website blogger Mickey Kaus had quit/resigned from the website over a disagreement over his latest rambling.

It’s typical in today’s world for writer/journalist/blogger to clean their desktop in creative disagreement but according to Kaus, his departure was over censorship more than anything by the hands of Daily Caller’s editor-in- chief (sans bowtie) Tucker Carlson.

You can attack everyone but the hand that feeds you.


Kaus’ latest blog was in response towards FOX’s lack of opposition on immigration and amnesty airtime so that FOX can run more stories on ISIS and terrorism ad nauseam. The blog had been posted momentarily at Daily Caller until it was wiped clean from the website. Kaus contacted Carlson who had told him that yes, indeed his blog was deleted from the website because “We can’t trash Fox on the site. I work there.”

Rule #1 of partisan writing; never attack/question your ally.

Rule #2 of partisan writing; expect censorship when attacking/questioning your ally.

Rule #3 of partisan writing; its only censorship or freedom of speech/press when the opposition does so.

Here I thought the chest thumping attack against censorship or freedom of the press/speech in partisan media only went against liberal media and was protected by the “all in” conservatives like Carlson.

Silly me.

However, I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt for the moment only because of at this time Carlson has yet to provide his defense of what transpired, yet I will admit I’m leaning towards Kaus recollection of the eraser.

But I currently have been enjoying the about face by many that mock the liberal media for their abusive censorship and rally around “Freedom of Speech” talk, yet only defend Daily Caller on their action.

I guess censorship is selective too many.

But after reading what happened to Kaus, for some odd strange reason, I find humor in how readers/followers take sides on who and why censorship or freedom of the press/speech is ok, depending on the source. Many agree Carlson had every right to delete Kaus’ blog because it painted his employer in a bad light.

Now had this happened to someone in liberal media, you can bet your star spangled booty there would be applause for their stance in mocking their employer. Well only after they got fired/resigned then they would be “contracted” to speak their will on Conservative programs.

Case in point: Sharyl Attkisson

Nowadays, Attkisson has been a regular in conservative media for multiple reasons such as her soap box stance against her once employers and the Obama Administration’s hijacking/bugging her computer. But prior to that she was working for the Washington Times and CBS.

Absolutely it’s immoral if the government did hijack/hack/bug Attkisson’s computer, but all in the name of the knee jerk reaction known as the Patriotic Act one must wonder how far in legality did they go. Yes, we’ve seen the video of her laptop deleting just written words to claim someone other than she were doing it.

I do like the government’s explanation that her “backspace” button was stuck as to the deletion.

Oops I must correct myself. The Washington Times is the conservative paper. It’s The Washington Post that’s considered the liberal rag. I always get them confused. Well it’s their fault for not being original in name!

Anyway, so she worked at CBS from 1995 to 2014 when she decided to “leave for other endeavors” yet immediately stepped onto her soap box to lambast Mainstream Media bias and the Liberal Agenda. Coincidentally, she was in the midst of writing a book on the topic as well.

Great timing?

I still find it humorous on how so many defended Attkisson on how her departure from CBS and her allegations of Media Bias had many up in arms, yet keep forgetting she took a paycheck from CBS for close to 20 years.

Hypocritical much? I’m pretty sure her bank account could answer that question.

Others too have moved Left to Right in the journalistic resumes and once hated are now applauded as truth tellers. Attkisson is not the only person to slam CBS for their bias, just the latest. Bernie Goldberg did so in 2003, it’s just the partisan divide widen every day in the “Left Said/Right Said” media ratings battle.

This is not an attack on conservative media as the majority of my favorites reading comes from that side of the divide. Yet I find the hypocrisy of someone such as Carlson who trumpets the Constitution and freedom of speech/press so much to flip as he did in hypocritical manner.

Then again, Carlson hasn’t been the same since ditching his trademark bowtie during his final days at MSNBC years back.

That’s it, slap the political tap on some Vergina Lager and pay the tab dammit.

CHEERS!

The Partisan Line Of Hollywood Doesn't Care About Your Politics

It's true when you think about everyday life that it’s in our nature to be a critic. We criticize our employer, fellow co-workers, the waitress and the barista. Yet we are bigger critics of our favorite sports team or the latest partisan parting shot given on the news channel that you never change and of course during award shows.

Postings and memes flooded social media shortly after the announcement of the Stephen Hawking movie The Theory of Everything had won Best Pic instead of American Sniper. Many began protesting that they would not be watching future televised Oscar awards or even going to the movies unless it’s a “Conservative” themed movie to prove “Liberal Hollywood” that they were wrong in their choosing or the choice was due to Hollywood’s anti-American/anti-Military love affair.


Everyone’s gotta have a reason to bitch.

So I pose a few questions to these new found entertainment critics; what exactly makes a movie conservative and secondly is it not “Liberal" Hollywood that is funding and distributing these conservative movies to begin with?

Obviously “Liberal" Hollywood hasn’t shunned those thespians and directors that consider themselves to be on the Conservative political fringe because if they did so then many of Clint Eastwood, Vince Vaughn, Adam Sadler, and Gary Sinise movies wouldn’t have been bank rolled as they’ve been.

But it’s always fun to have an enemy to criticize.

So what is the definition of a conservative movie? Well there really isn’t one, at least not one that I have been able to find. Yes, one can say “anything that gives moral value in God, Country, Military and Family or with Patriotic theme.” But I find that pretty lame in answer because one can describe any movie in that perception even though the movie is quite liberal in reality.

Take for instance the movie My Own Private Idaho from 1991. Rotten Tomatoes describes the movie as “a young street hustler named Mike who suffers from narcolepsy, whose search for the mother who abandoned him leads him across the Northwestern U.S. and even Italy. Mike is joined by Scott Favor, the bisexual son of the mayor of Portland, Oregon with whom Mike falls in love.”

So to some, that would be the liberal version, however Conservapedia’s version is a bit different with “Two good friends learn to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make it in the business world.”

WTF? How does one movie go from one extreme to another in description?

OK, if that one doesn’t scratch your head, how about another movie from 1991 with Don’t Tell Mom the Babysitter’s Dead.

Again, I’ll use the description from Conerviapedia with “Five siblings are left alone for the summer, with no money after their elderly babysitter passes away. They realize the importance of hard work, as well the responsibilities of being an adult, and the negative effects of drugs.”

Have these people not seen this movie?

To be fair, I’ll keep with Rotten Tomatoes’ description of “With their mother setting out for an Australian vacation, a family of five children, look forward to a summer full of fun and freedom. However, their hopes are dashed when a crotchety old woman is hired to babysit them. When the sitter drops dead, 17-year-old Sue Ellen ends up conning her way into a high-powered business job in order to support her siblings and preserve their summer of unsupervised freedom.”

Got that? The older daughter lies on her resume, cons her way into a fashion design company to support her sibling. Not to mention when supporting her siblings, she steals from the petty cash drawer to buy food, one sibling of which gets stoned in his room with his buddies all day until ¾ of the way thru the movie when he decides to grow up to impress a girl.

We can go on and on with this silliness by looking at the Liberal Pocahontas and its feminism/ environmentalist theme and compare it to The Bee Movie’s environmental destructive ways and rewards of hard work description and skip the thought of bestiality when the bee and human fall in love.

Wait, is it considered bestiality to fall in love with a bee?

Even the “Blues Brothers” is considered Conservative because part of the story has Jake and Elwood trying to raise money for an orphanage and their infamous “Mission from God” motto. No mention that Jake was just pardoned from jail and immediately falls back into pre-jail character by lying, cheating and stealing to get that money or complete disregard for authority.

I can understand when reading that a movie like 1984’s Red Dawn is a conservative movie with Americans fighting back after a surprise attack by Russian and Cuban communist army on US soil. Yet I’m surprised someone didn’t yell foul at Red Dawn as a possible liberal smack on President Reagan as the fictional attack happened during his tenure in the White House, as many did for the made for TV nuclear war movie The Day After.

But when reading articles about how conservative movies gross more than liberal movies one must read carefully, as some of those articles do not list which movies they are talking about.

I stumbled on a Feb 10, 2015 article by Diane Howard, PhD of the Austin Movie Examiner titled “Study reveals moviegoers prefer movies with strong conservative values.”

Ok, you got my attention, whatcha’ got for results?

Per Ms. Howard, “In fact, movies with strong conservative values and content in 2014 made more than three times as much money last year as movies with strong liberal, leftist, or statist values and content, averaging $71.49 million per movie versus $22.48 million per movie.”

Interesting, but what movies are we talking about?
Well the list includes: "THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY – PART 1, " "CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER," "THE LEGO MOVIE,""BIG HERO 6, " "MR. PEABODY & SHERMAN," " UNBROKEN," " AMERICAN SNIPER," "SELMA", "DIVERGENT," "AMERICA: WHAT WOULD THE WORLD BE LIKE WITHOUT HER," " PERSECUTED, " "TRANSFORMERS:" "AGE OF EXTINCTION," "THE GRAND SEDUCTION," " MILLION DOLLAR ARM," "CHEF," "JERSEY BOYS," " THE GIVER," "ATLAS SHRUGGED: WHO IS JOHN GALT?," " PENGUINS OF MADAGASCAR," "JACK RYAN: SHADOW RECRUIT,"THE HORNET’S NEST," "DOLPHIN TALE 2," "KORENGAL," "GODZILLA," "FURY," "ROSEWATER," "THE EXPENDABLES 3," and "THE MONUMENTS MEN."

Again, I say it’s all in the eye of the audience, because three are documentaries, another is a Canadian movie, four are animation, and one is Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged Part 3 a movie that barely grossed $500,000 after its September 2014 release.

And for all the push by Conservative Poli-Talkers of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (all three parts),” ticket sales only totaled $7.9 million compared to its close to $20 million budget. Grant it, Atlas Shrugged is one of those books that is so descriptive that trying to get it all on film, let alone a three part series, does not do it justice.

But notice anything strange about the list provided by Ms. Howard? It’s very liberal in creation.

For instance Rosewater was written and directed by Jon Stewart of The Daily Show fame. He even took time on his show to mock those that believe in "Liberal" Hollywood hates conservatives, because if it were true then he should’ve won his category. Yes, the majority of the films listed are filled by liberal actors, liberal production companies and liberal directors. So technically, these profitable conservative movies are brought to you by "Liberal" Hollywood.

Enjoy!

Many believe the most popular is the instant winner and if this holds true than The Hunger Games: Mocking jay Part 1 should have received the trophy with a total gross over $336 million dollars by year’s end.

Yes, yes I know it was reported on March 9, 2015 that American Sniper became 2014’s highest grossing film with $337 million, but those numbers were released two weeks after the Oscar Awards.

The argument over which movie is what in political theme is just plain mind numbing.

It’s easy to point at a documentary in political theme; lord knows we’ve had our fill from Michael Moore and Denish D’ Souza. My view of these films is plain nauseating in that they start off well by the 35-40 minute mark torpedo themselves in outlandish accusations. I will say, I enjoy the Conservative documentary just a bit more, but then again, I despise anything by Michael Moore so it’s considered a “push” on the betting line.

One can go round for round about who’s a liberal/conservative actor as well, but just remember, all the love affair people have for Bradley Cooper’s portrayal of Chris Kyle in American Sniper, he’s still an Obama supporter in real life.

That’s it, Slap the tap on some Colorado Idiot and turn on the Three Stooges for some political reality.

CHEERS!

Open Letter to MSNBC's Phil Griffin: Time to burn 30 Rock

I admit I used to enjoy watching MSNBC, well up until 2011 as I tired of the extreme Left turn the network had taken and the stale reporting that ensued. So I am not surprised when The Wrap released an article the other day talking about possible shakeups at MSNBC by News Honcho Phil Griffin.

This will make the 3rd shakeup since 2013 to stop the miserable free fall of what used to a decent media outlet. Rescheduling, firing, re-hosting and blah blah trying to save what once was reporting into a giant Left Wing partisanship infomercial.

It's not that the ratings are dismissal, heck MSNBC and CNN run close in numbers. However, their combined rating numbers still fall a million and change short of rival FOX. Who am I kidding; thanks to the folks at Zap2it.com, MSNBC and CNN's ratings from 5pm-11pm barely break the average 600k viewer mark, while the average FOX rating sits around 2 million.

Many like to believe the decline began some time ago with the ouster of Keith Olbermann. I was never a fan of Olbermann, even when he sat over at ESPN. I found his feat of "the most intelligent man in the room" a constant almost rip-off of comedian Dennis Miller onomasticon allusion of theatrical words rather vexing to the mind.

Yet Olbermann gave the peacock their own version of an overbearing odious muckraking blowhard that worked in the ratings battle. Yet egos come forth and someone's ass has to hit the pavement. As egotistical as Olbermann was, he was their cash cow for Liberal reporting.

Olbermann has been gone for some time now and the numbers have yet to go up. Only during the campaign season have the ratings gone up, the rest of the time they’ve dipped and become stagnant. Which leads me to think of what is truly wrong over at the 30 Rock nest?

For me the answer is quick; too many partisan personalities reporting the Left view of the political pendulum and not enough hours in the day to actually report a full story. Plus the personalities that squat behind the desk, well they're unlikeable.

I could use 3/4 of this blog to grade the entire Monday thru Friday MSNBC line up, but that would only be disingenuous to my blogging mantra of "never write more than one can read during the average crap (thank you Michael Gold)."

(Personal note- I’ve been told that’s an average of 8 minutes)

It's safe to say Morning Joe is a sure bet of staying its present course, even after getting beat by CNN's New Day in the recent ratings release. I still have a soft spot for this show as it goes against the norm of the "tabloidy" morning shows on other networks with its roundtable political talk. Mika's liberalism works with Joe's conservatism even as many see Joe as a sellout to the network's game plan and lost his way.

However, it works the headlines longer than the other shows that give only minutes so they can get the videos of ski jumping cats and toddler diaper marathons airtime.

Following the coattails of MJ is now the extended time and renamed The Rundown. Telemundo's talented Jose Diaz-Balart now reads the teleprompter and again does very well, even if the ratings don't show. But the rest of the network needs pink slips.

Normally the hours of 11am-5pm, TV becomes a void of game shows, soap operas and cooking shows. So news becomes nonexistent for many as the day wanders till roughly 500p when the kids are home and dinner is burning in the oven.

It all begins with Ed Shultz and ends to Rachel Maddow, if there were no more proof of Leftie in the House comedy I can’t find it with the 30 Rock cast.

Actually I shouldn't place Ed Shultz amongst this group but I have to as he's always good for a "Stroke" moment when his face is boiling red and one must wonder if he’ll spontaneously combust live on the air.

But MSNBC really shot itself in the foot, well actually both feet, when contracting Al Sharpton to host his own program. This is the biggest Left card played by MSNBC and it's choking them. The hiring of Al Sharpton is a slap in the face of many. Yes I have issues with Al Sharpton in more ways than one. He's the Liberal version of Donald Trump; a publicity whore with bad hair, always looking for a way to get their name in anything.

But to follow one egotistical personality with another is too much even for the most Liberal of minds to handle. Yes, I’m talking about Chris Matthews

What happened to this guy? He was once considered one of the best politicos on the air. I believe he was once considered a replacement for late (and great) Tim Russert’s Meet the Press chair. Yet Matthews has become the ugliest cheerleader of the Left and President Obama. If Hillary gets the nod, well if the bathroom door is locked, don't knock you don't want to interrupt Chris's "me time.”

Mr. Griffin, if you want to give the viewers good entertainment, why not combine Sharpton and Matthews for a comedy hour, as neither have been taken seriously for some time now.

But, here comes the biggest issue with MSNBC, the hours of 8p-10p, or as I call it “The Monologue Hours.”

Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow, twins born from different mothers who feel it's best to have a 10 minute monologue before the actual story are presented. And that story normally last 2 minutes, but by the time they breathe from their monologues the story has become mute as one either has changed the channel or fallen asleep.

Grant it, their resumes are impressive, but the on air personality makes one feel like they were just scolded like a puppy for peeing on the floor or sat through an insurance lecture.

Putting Chris Hayes against Bill O’Reilly is like putting a Mini Pinscher and a Rottweiler in the ring. Lots of slobbering and whining with expected results of an ass whopping.

FOX wasn’t losing a ratings battle with Hannity against Maddow, but the genius of moving Hannity to 10p and inserting Megyn Kelly into the 9pm slot, well it only deepened the ratings bruises already dealt.

I’m not in belief FOX is the greatest Media network either, as one can get lost with all the busy graphic nonsense. It’s close to information overload with news scrolls, guest credentials, flashy headers and of course the host barking into the screen while trying to read their teleprompter.

One can see a change in colors of sort with the peacock, as they are slowly turning their away from Obama presidency and looking towards 2016. They have to admit, their best ratings are during the election cycle. But without a Democratic political clown car to chase, they are left with this dirty stalker style reporting of 2016 GOP hopeful Jeb Bush.

Yes there are other GOP’ers lining up, but as FOX is only targeting Hillary Clinton, MSNBC has to cover some sort of opposition. Merely mentioning other candidates doesn’t quench the Liberal palette like a Bush namesake quite does.

Of course, this leaves me to think what will FOX and MSNBC do without a Clinton/Bush 2016 run?

Yes, yes, from 2000 thru 2008 it was easy to point at Fox News and call it the safe haven for the GOP to find hugs, kisses and pats on the butt style questions. If it was MSNBC's intentions to follow that notion with a Liberal feel, well it worked and failed at the same time, which is not easy to do so congrats on that.

I doubt Mr. Griffin will read this little bit of dribble, but if he truly wants to make the peacock fly, it’s time to drop the partisan garbage by dumping the hacks behind the desk and get back to true reporting.

OK that’s it, slap the tap on some Anzus and here's hoping MSNBC doesn't sign Rosie O'Donnell to a contract because we're gonna need a bigger clown car.

CHEERS!