Thursday, May 22, 2008
I happened to have on TV in the background Fox News' "O'Reilly Factor" last night, and saw this segment in which Dick Morris was the guest on the show. Filling in for Bill O'Reilly for the last few days has been radio talk show host Laura Ingraham. Take some time to watch this segment where Laura gets crass with Morris, who is suppose to be the "expert guest" on the show:
I must preface what I say with the fact that I do not care for Laura Ingraham. But this proves my point about her rudeness and elitist attitude. At about 3:55 in the clip, here is where Laura shows her true colors:
Ingraham: She hasn't been making comments like we need to, uh, make sure we don't offend our allies overseas and how we set our thermostat, what we put in our mouth for food and what we drive for SUV's, so I think the statement over the weekend in Oregon by Barack Obama went right to his view of what true change is which is a change of America's sovereignty, she's never said anything like that Dick.
Morris: I'm just pointing out the facts that on three crucial issues, crime, illegal immigration, and education he clearly is to the right of her...
Ingraham: So then why does MoveOn.org...
(Morris tries to talk while she talks over him)
Ingraham:...why does MoveOn.org not like Hillary?
Morris: Laura let me finish! Ok? You want me on the show, let me finish.
Laura: Alright, don't...
Morris: On other issues like...
Laura: Chill out...
This was the second or third time Laura has ran over what Morris said, but this time he spoke up for himself. Laura thinks she knows better than Morris, yet every point where she is wrong about something, Morris shows he knows more and knows better. She got the whole Super Delegate deal wrong, she thinks Obama is totally more liberal than Hillary, and she goes into the interview trying to pontificate a point and trying to use Dick Morris to make her point.
I have listened to Ingraham's radio show three times. All three times she came across as rude, pompous, and impetuous! Whether complaining about men's leg hair or calling Democrats stupid or telling a caller how much smarter she is than them, she exudes no class. Radio show hosts like Ingraham, Hannity, and Levin call names and get rude with people, like that is going to convince anyone to their side of an issue.
The fact is that Dick Morris was correct with his information and Laura was wrong and she thinks she knows all. I am unsure about Morris' last comment about how the voting results are along racial lines, but Morris understands something that many of these conservative talking heads like Ingraham and Hannity seem to forget: Obama may be liberal, but Hillary is dangerous. Yes, Obama has a tendency to be more vocal about his views, because he is less of a political practitioner than the slick Clintons. Hillary is very smart. She usually knows what to say, what not to say, and how not to say things. Obama is actually, as Morris describes, more of a Populous Candidate while Hillary will do whatever it takes to win and have power. If you want to know where she stands on issues, she has almost 8 years worth of Senate votes on her record we can reference. On Education, Health Care, Illegal Immigration, Israeli Sovereignty, Russia-USA relations, and a few other issues, she is to THE LEFT of Barack Obama. Yes, on Iraq and Taxes Obama is more left. But guess what? The Republican nominee John McCain is more left than Obama and Hillary on Global Warming and more to the left of Obama on Education, Israeli Sovereignty, and Russian-US relations.
So we can nit pick all day. I am unsure why Ingraham was picked to sub in for O'Reilly, but she acts like she knows better about the Clintons than a guy who worked with them off and on for almost 20 years! He knows Hillary personally and professionally. And if Laura is wrong about the Super Delegates and about how "liberal" Hillary "isn't", then she needs to stop preaching and start learning. Instead, she tells Morris to "chill out" and puts a smile on her face as to say "Ha-ha, I ruffled your feathers". Laura, this isn't High School where the Alpha Female is trying to one up the smart kid in class, this is National Television.
And all these Conservative radio talk show hosts who are so "afraid" of Obama getting the Democratic Nomination and who are bloviating so much about how Hillary Clinton is more of a "centrist" than Obama need to wake up. Whether Obama could become another Jimmy Carter type of President is not the problem. The real problem is that the Republican voters and Republican "powers that be" allowed John McCain to be the nominee. The real issue is that Conservatives are concerned that McCain does not have a chance against Obama. Whether he does or not is to be seen because the whole setting for the General Election has not been set yet. It's May, not September. And Laura, you wrote a best selling book called "Shut up, and Sing", being rude and elitist does not appeal to Moderates like me. In fact, your impetuousness is a major turn off to many people and Conservatives AND Liberals need to quit the pompousness and name calling and start talking about issues for a change.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Well, Arizona State University has decided to eliminate the Cheerleading squad. They did this as a response to photos appearing on the internet of 6 members of the cheer squad in their "bras and panties". According to rumors online, students at the school and those close to the situation claim that the university has been looking for a reason to cut the cheer squad. Some say it is for financial reasons, others say that their was some feud between the administration and the cheer squad over the years.
Whatever the real story is about why the cheerleading squad was cut, the fact is that the appearance is that the school cut the program as a reactionary move over photos of 6 of the 16 member squad. On the surface, it seems like a very brash move by the administration of a public university.
The fact that this was the thing that "pushed" the school over the "edge" is pathetic. Sure, the photos (which Foxnews went out of its way to show as much as possible during Shepherd Smith's two shows at 3pm and 7pm) can be considered "racy" in nature, but hypocrisy abounds in this situation.
Arizona State University (ASU) is known as one of the top "party schools" in America. For those out there who might equate extreme college partying with movies such as "Old School" and "Van Wilder", then Arizona State fits the bill. According to Rankings by Playboy magazine in 2002 and 2006 and Princeton Reviews' annual college rankings, ASU is a top notch party school, getting very high grades.
So the fact that a public university tries to use "racy" photos of some cheerleaders as an "excuse" to cut the program is similar to the Pastor of a church getting mad his parishioners brought their Bibles to church on Sunday! You are ok with the "party school" image, yet you have a problem with racy photos by your cheerleaders? That's hypocritical. Cheerleaders are viewed, whether it is justified or not is debatable, as "sex symbols". The stereotype is that cheerleaders are suppose to be "cute" and "sexy" and that many are "easy" and "ditzy". Many cheer squads at many colleges wear uniforms with short skirts and tops that reveal their midriff. Yet, a public university is going to cut a program that is a mainstay at colleges and universities across America? Especially as a reaction to racy photos of cheerleaders at a school which is known for, shall I say, amorals?
You can't have it both ways. Even tiny junior and community colleges have cheer squads. ASU is being hypocritical and ridiculous. The school is not being upfront and honest with the public about the situation. The should be. The taxpayers pay their salaries directly. As a public institution of learning, ASU should be held accountable for all their actions, good and bad. Adults are suppose to run a university, not hypocrites.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Here is the news report by WCBS 2 News:
So this is what US Congressman can do with our tax money. They can lease nice cars without spending a dime of their own paychecks. This is disgusting and disgraceful waste of taxpayer money. There are US Congressman leasing cars for 700 plus per month! I think everyone should demand this "loophole" be closed immediately or there be some type of money cap put on the use of such funds. Buick? Lexus? Cadillac? Why can't these people use their own money to lease or buy such cars?
Also, in the video above you see some of the Congressman getting out of the backseat of their cars. So with what money are they paying for their drivers? People wonder why the Federal Spending defecit is so high. Well, frivilous use of Federal money such as this adds up. Lets do some quick math:
-There are 435 United States Congressman
-The average payment per month for the leases in the above video come out to $605.20
-Now, lets assume that all US Congressman utilize this loophole (I am sure that there are those who do not, but this is a figuretive excercise), so if we multiply 435 Congressman by $605.20 equals a total goverment expenditure of $263,262.
-Then for the year, it would cost the US Government (according to these rough estimates) $3,159,144 a year to pay the leases for all US Congressman to have their own government subsidized cars
I have not taken the time to figure out how much gas and insurance costs as well, but those are also paid for by the US government.
Do you think our government is using our tax money wisely or foolishly? I say foolishly and it disgusts me. We should demand this loophole that allows this to be eliminated or regulated in some way. This is ridiculous!