Category Archives: Media Criticism

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

The Tea Parties

61 Comments

…have already won:

What debuted in nationwide protests on April 15, 2009, has taken less than 18 months to become the current driving force in American politics. The Tea Party insurgency will not only cost Democrats dozens of seats in Congress, and likely their majority — it will define the coming GOP presidential nominating process, determine the direction of the GOP for years to come and threaten any remaining plans Obama has for sweeping reforms of education, energy policy or our immigration system.

And it’s driving the establishment, in both parties (e.g., Karl Rove), crazy. So much for Queen Nancy’s “astroturf.” She’s about to be dethroned.

Humor, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Satire

The Delaware Primary

3 Comments

T. Coddington weighs in:

Who was this mysterious rival, I inquired – some heretofore unknown Machiavellian prodigy from Harvard poli sci? An old-money interloper from the Philadelphia Mainline? Neither, they said. The challenge, they explained, came in the form of one “Christine O’Donnell,” a financially destitute 37-year old Tea Party schoolgirl whose intellectual heft by comparison made even la Palin look Obamanesque. I then watched in abject horror as they played a video of her crusading against teenage onanism. I admit no great pride in my own occasional participation in that unseemly adolescent pastime, but what sort of person declaims it on MTV? And what sort of party allows her name to appear on an official primary ballot? And that is when it struck me: I was obviously now witnessing the premise of an elaborate practical joke. Delawareans have long been known as the irascible pranksters of East Coast Republicanism, and to be selected as the target of their good-natured japery is in some fashion an honor. Even though the stunt nearly led to his untimely demise, the very first T. Coddington Van Voorhees himself reportedly enjoyed a hearty laugh after his waggish Delaware friend E. I. du Pont replaced his trusty dueling pistol with a replica that egested a comical “BANG” flag. Not wanting to spoil their fun, I did not let on to the Delaware party officials that I was wise to their little joke. Instead, I played along and counseled them to run a last minute, no-holds-barred negative media blitz against their impossibly fictional “Tea Party candidate.”

And thus I awaited with wry anticipation as Farquhar slowly traversed the breakfast room with the cart bearing the punchline to the Delawareans’ clever prank. This was followed by gales of riotous laughter when I discovered the wags had printed an entire mock edition of the New York Times announcing their satirical “Miss O’Donnell” had actually won the race! I was so overcome with mirth that I kicked over the cart, spilling grapefruit across the marble. As Farquhar trembled back to the kitchens to retrieve the mop, I reached for the ringing telephone prepared to hear the voice of the Delaware GOP chairman crowing about his ingenious drollery. Instead I was greeted with the panicked entreaties of none other that Mr. Castle himself, joined by the Republican National Congressional Committee brain trust, insisting against all rational evidence that Miss O’Donnell was in fact real and that she had indeed won the contest. I conducted an incredulous review of the cable news channels, which confirmed their wild story. I called the kitchen intercom and bade Farquhar fetch me a stiff drink on his way back with the mop.

He’ll probably need to make it a double.

[Update a few minutes later]

A rare interview with the Hawk himself.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Space

Et Tu, Jim?

2 Comments

In a roundup of some House races, Jim Geraghty at National Review comments on Suzanne Kosmas’ district:

Kosmas defied her district by voting for health-care reform, and many figured she had traded her vote to the Obama administration for some sort of deal to save Space Coast jobs. Instead, President Obama’s space-policy changes are effectively ending manned spaceflight, disastrous news for workers in her district.

I don’t know who figured that she had made such a trade, or how that was supposed to work, but the new policy is not “effectively ending manned spaceflight.” As I’ve explained myself at National Review, in fact, it was the Bush/Griffin policy that was doing that, in wasting money on an unaffordable and unnecessary new rocket that was extending the post-Shuttle gap into the indefinite future. The new policy could have a (commercial) crew delivery system in as little as four years, given proper (and comparatively modest) funding, while allowing the agency to focus instead on human exploration beyond earth orbit.

None of which is to say, of course, that Kosmas should necessarily be reelected.

[Update a while later]

Jim has updated his post to note that this assessment is that of the Republican candidate, and not necessarily his own.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

1963 And Now

19 Comments

Some perspective for David Brooks, from Charles Murray:

You don’t increase spending by those amounts without changing the role of government in ways that go to the heart of the American project. That truth is reflected in the qualitative record. In 1963, 30 years after the New Deal started, the federal government still played little role in vast swathes of American life, from K-12 education to the way people went about providing goods and services to their fellow citizens. We can argue about which of the subsequent interventions were warranted and which were not, but not about this: The way that presidents and Congresses see their power to intervene in American life in 2010 is profoundly different from the way they saw it in 1963. In 1963, among mainstream Democrats as well as Republicans, it was accepted that an overarching purpose of the American Constitution was to limit the arenas in which government could act. Now, the recognition of that purpose has all but disappeared—in the executive branch, in the Supreme Court, and in Congresses controlled by Republicans as well as by Democrats. There has been big change, reflected in big government.

And that, not racism, is what the Tea Party is about.

Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society

Save The Planet

17 Comments

Shop Walmart:

you, and everyone else trying to sell to Walmart, have to spend all your time figuring out how to produce the same product with less. Walmart’s ruthless focus on reducing prices is driving producers everywhere to cut the costs of production: to switch to cheaper materials, use less packaging, cut down on waste of all kinds and to consolidate and rationalize both production and distribution. The result is a steady and inexorable decline in humanity’s impact on the environment for every unit of GDP.

The Green Police couldn’t do it any better. In fact, given the political cluelessness, uncertain signals (is nuclear energy a good thing or a bad thing?), and anti-scientific knuckle dragging from environmentalists on subjects like the use of GMOs in agriculture, it’s likely that a world run by Walmart would be both richer and cleaner than a world run by Greenpeace. Not that I want Walmart (or Greenpeace) to run the world, bu at the end of the day, being ruthlessly cheap is the most important way of being green. To cut out waste, to use methods of production that cut the energy consumed at every stage in the process, to strip packaging to the barest minimum, to reduce the amount of raw materials in every product: this is the mother lode of green. This is how a growing human population limits its impact on the earth. This is where Walmart and green are as one.

I still say that Sam Walton was a greater humanitarian, and did more to improve the lives of the poor, than any politician ever born.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

A Great Review Of Meghan McCain’s Book

12 Comments

But is the book great? Not so much:

It is impossible to read Dirty, Sexy Politics and come away with the impression that you have read anything other than the completely unedited ramblings of an idiot. This being a professional website for which I have a great deal of respect, I searched for a more eloquent or gentle way to accurately phrase the previous sentence – but could not find one.

There’s a lot more.

Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Hating Everything That Congress Has Done

8 Comments

For the first time in my political life, I am in agreement with the majority:

The numbers: Bank bailouts, 61 percent disapprove versus 37 percent approve; national health care, 56 percent disapprove versus 39 percent approve; auto bailouts, 56 percent disapprove versus 43 percent approve; stimulus, 52 percent disapprove versus 43 percent approve. Only financial reform, with 61 percent approve versus 37 percent disapprove, is a winner for the representatives and senators seeking re-election.

OK, not entirely. I think that the financial reform was a mess, and will prove disastrous as well.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary

“Left-Wing” Violence

26 Comments

…surges in Europe.

What I can’t figure out from this article, and I don’t have time to dig into the underlying documents, is what they’re defining as “right wing” versus “left wing.” And where do radical (i.e., those who actually follow the Koran and submit to the dictates of Mohammed) Islamists fall?

As for the fools in comments who say that both the Islamists and the “right wingers” in America want a theocracy, where is the evidence? (And no, Glenn Beck doesn’t want a theocracy.)

Me, I’m a simple sort of guy. I think that people who like big and powerful government, for whatever purpose, whether running peoples’ economic or personal lives, are left wingers. Those who value the liberty of the individual are on the “right,” and by that definition (unlike the nutty ones that the leftists come up with) I’m happy to be called a “right winger,” and even a “wingnut.” If we can’t agree on that, then the whole concept of “left” versus “right” is pretty meaningless. The only issue is where to put the so-called anarchists? The reason I say “so called” is that they don’t believe in a limited government to protect the natural rights of individuals. They don’t seem to believe in much at all, other than violence.