Have been travelling a bit lately, and when I returned home found an interview in New York Magazine by the estimable Michael Kinsley of the execrable Miss Tina Brown. Kinsley, finally, ends any speculation as to the real Miss Brown.
In discussing the short half lives of celebrities these days, Miss Brown said:
"When Vanity Fair began, it was enough to have a movie star on the cover, but Oprah made some psychic scar de rigueur for exposure to have any traction. Now you can't get on a talk show unless you can brag about being a victim of pedophilia or anorexia. It's such a bore, all the whining."
(emphasis added, New York Magazine, Issue dated November 26, 2012, page 49)
Won't England take her back??
Please
Jennnifer Rubin continues to fine tune her ability to intentionally deceive the reader.
Today she states that "In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the" supposed truth about Benghazi.
Note that she credits Solomon for having worked at the A.P. and at the Washington Post. She neglects to mention that he more recently was at the Washington Times. (May the Rev Moon rest in peace.) In fact, acccording to a newspaper that Ms Rubin does find worth mentioning, (the WaPo) Solomon was back at the Washington Times as recently as June 6. How odd that she did not mention this?
Back in August of 2012,Solomon was characterized in the Columbia Journalism Review thusly:
"Then again, Solomon has a history of bending the truth to his storyline. As a reporter for the AP and The Washington Post, he dug up his share of genuine dirt, but he also was notorious for massaging facts to conjure phantom scandals
Similarly, reporters who worked under Solomon as an editor—seven of whom were interviewed for this article—say he often pressured them to mold the truth to his vision of the story. “He had this sort of thesis or idea of what the story was,” says one Center staff member. “Facts be damned.”"
Looks like both Rubin and Solomon could have a bright future at Fox.
It's hard to imagine a more apt description of Bengazi than calling it a "phantom scandal."
I generally think that Matt Taibbi is spot on. Today, not so much. He writes that the Republicans could have won the White House if they weren't so myopic. I agree that their proclivity for insulting Americans and America, as well as their belief in gut over science harmed them, but I also think issues mattered.
As the Huff post noted, Taibbi "argued that Republicans' message about financial responsibility could resonate with a lot of people, but unfortunately it is a cover for their belief that women and minorities are "parasites."
I have to believe that the next time a candidate supported by Karl Rove - the man who just spent $300,000,000 for nothing, bupkis, zilch - tries to lecture the country about fiscal responsiblity the electorate will burst out laughing. Since World War II, deficits are almost always worse after Republican administrations than Democratic ones.
In fact the Republicans have not actually had a message about financial repsonsibility for decades.
(meme)
Conor Friedersdorf of the Atlantic Online has a great piece on the disservice the conservative media did to the conservative cause in yesterday's election. They simply kept on telling their audience what they wanted to hear, steering far from fact. In his conclusion, he writes that "But I expect that it'll be quickly forgotten, that none of the conservatives who touted a polling conspiracy will be discredited, and that the right will continue to operate at an information disadvantage."
It took the folks at Breitbart very little time to prove Friedersdorf right. Their Joel Pollack's first sentence reads that "Though Obama failed to win a majority in the popular vote--and may even have lost the popular vote outright--he won enough votes in the Electoral College to claim victory. " Yet the Wall Street Journal has Obama at 50%, Romney at 48%. The rabid right seems incapable of telling the truth.
In a similar vein, I was struck by how their distrust of science, especially the social sciences, continues to hurt the right. When telephoning people in Ohio for Obama, I was amazed at how precise his team's targetting was and how much they had learned about the psychology of motivating people.
Peggy Noonan could feel that Romney was going to win. Scarborough could call Nate Silver an ideologue because it was outrageous to suggest that it was clearly going to be a victory for Obama.
Reality does have a liberal bias, especially if you try to ignore it.
(h/t meme)
Clearly last night Romney had no new ideas, no plans on Foreign Affairs.
As far as I could tell the only difference between his positions and those of Obama are geographical, and not very realistic.
Despite twice locating Mali in the Mid East last night, the reality is that no 'projection of American strength' would move that poor country from its currrent location - close to the west coast of Africa (and yes Palin-lovers, I do mean the continent, not the country) and into the Mid-East.
Nor could any amount of bluster turn Syria into Iran's 'path to the sea'. Iran of course already has a lot of beach front property on both the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. And it has no border with Syria. Some Path.
Romney did win the style category (only) in the first debate. Obama won all three debates on substance, and the latter two on style. Not that the "balanced" media are able to admit that. At least the public could see it. For partisan "pros" like Joe Scarborough, all that matters is the facade.
As Mitt Romney's poll numbers went up, the stock market went down.
" "If it looks like I'm going to win, the markets will be happy. If it looks like the president's going to win, the markets should not be terribly happy," Romney told donors at a private fundraiser in May.""
The above is from today's edition of The Hill. So much for Mitt's knowledge of the marketplace.
On Friday the New Republic ran a story with the lede: This is probably Romney’s best polling day of this election.
Friday's Financial Times had a story headlined: "Wall Street Endures Worst Week Since June."
It doesn't sound like a happy market to me. Actual investors realize that Romney's plan is unreal. The folks who are buying a piece of Romney are guys like Aldelson and the Koch Brothers. They don't care about a good economy. Sheldon Adelson, the vast majority of whose money comes from casinos in China, cares about making Netanyahu our special envoy in the Middle East, and staying out of jail. While the Koch Brothers would see their profits plummet by billions if Obama removes some of the tax breaks the Oil industry currently enjoys.
(h/t meme
The rightwing was obviously prepared for the pathetic performance by Paul Ryan last night. Talking points at the ready and with one united voice, Biden was described as 'rude', 'demeaning', even 'unhinged'; most 'disrepectful'. The always honest Sean Hannity claimed that he was quite concerned for the Vice-President's health. (about as concerned as I was that the water carrier, water craving Ryan, was going to piss on himself)
Yet the man who was truly disrespectful was Paul Ryan. Time and again, he insulted the American people by declining to honestly respond to fair, legitimate questioning. When asked how he would pay for his tax cuts - the dodging and swerving he did rather than answer was an insult to every voter in America.
Mitt Romney can say, repeatedly, that 47% of the nation are freeloaders, people who will never "take personal responsibility and care for their lives." Yet it is the democrats that are 'disrespectful'???
Also amazing is the difference between how differently the two sides behave after a debate. When the President did poorly in his debate, the left conceded the defeat and castigated the performance. After Ryan's loss the right admits nothing. People like Krauthammer and Brit Hume complain about Biden's demeanor, and Sarah Palin blames the moderator. Who is it that doesn't take responsibilty?
After the debate Hannity wondered if Biden was drinking on the stage. Fox's Eric Bolling tweeted during the debate regarding the V.P.: "Is he still drinking?" Biden is a teetotaller.
Is Mr. Bolling still beating his wife?
Biden wallopped Ryan.(verbally) Admit it. Get over it. Realize that if Ryan is one of the intellectual powerhouses of our nation's two political party's we're in deep trouble.
Lastly, one can't help but laugh, not only at the deceptions perpetrated by Romney/Ryan, but at their gall in condemning someone for smirking. Have they ever looked at Mitt?
It's as if the arrogant Charles Krauthammer condemned someone for "condescension." Which of course is exactly what he did.
(with thnks to meme)
This just in - - -
Huff Post has reported that one of the germiest places at an airport is a toilet.
I didn't want this to be missed. And you thought the Huffington Post's reputation for investigative journalism was undeserved. They actually do investigate - what's on the front page of the NY Times, or, in this case, Scientific American.
"Reader's Digest" is not a product whose time is passed. The Huff and the Digest can coexist.
In fact the original is still alive, and is currently featuring a piece on "Outrageous International Laws," for example
- - Not wearing pants is illegal in Greece
-- Smoking marijuana is illegal in Jamaica
But don't worry - there's no need to read the original in the Reader's Digest, you can always read about it, tomorrow, in the Huffington Post.
In his late eighties, my great-uncle Edwin, sliding towards dementia, sounded an awful lot like Frank Bruni. But he wasn't paid a good salary, nor give the invaluable real estate that is space in the N.Y. Times, to complete his thoughts with phrases like "it's time to take our medicine."
A lot who I admire on the left have no problem mocking the pompous balloon who writes under the name Thomas Friedman. "Friedman Units" and his chats with cab drivers en route to the five star hotel from an airport's first class lounge are lengenday, and legitimately so. He doesn't often go out on a limb, but at least at times he approaches one.
But does even Friedman ever get more fatuous than the following paragraph from today's op-ed by Bruni?
"I think the rise of interest groups, identity politics and cause-specific lobbyists has diminished our attention to, and sense of, a communal good."
Frank Bruni, ever the Edgy Thinker.
Roger Simon's piece in Politico has got to be a phony. The idea that he refers to Romney as "Stench" simply doesn't pass the smell test. I'd love it if the good people at Baloon Juice were correct, but I can't believe it.
If Paul Ryan were actually witty enough to be saying things like, “If Stench calls, take a message” and “Tell Stench I’m having finger sandwiches with Peggy Noonan and will text him later.” he would be a far more formidable foe.
Then again, if he were really smart enough to come up with a line like that he would never been a believer in Ayn Rand, nor the creator of such a rediculous budget proposal.
The guy is buying his ten year old daughter a shotgun, teaching her how to keep her finger on the trigger. He's not thinking about Ms Noonan's sandwiches.
(Thanks Memeorandum)