Friday, February 15, 2008

Minimum Wage: Only for the ignorant masses...

Before anyone thinks to skewer me for that title, I'm just speaking of how Republicans seem to see it.

To them, the minimum wage is for the ignorant masses. If you're working a job making that, then you're not that bright and not that skilled. Heck, you likely don't vote. But many who do vote want that wage increased, so they play and pander to that segment of voters during election time and do a piss poor job acting like they want the wage to increase.

They say that raising the minimum wage would increase unemployment and inflation. 12 states that have a minimum wage higher than the federal wage are proof positive that the Republicans are full of hot air on those accusations.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Olbermann Is A Big Fat Hypocrite

I've been a big fan of Keith Olbermann. I watch the show regularly, TiVo-ing it to avoid missing it. Many nights, you'll find me at my computer that is just around the corner from the TV, listening to his reporting of the days events. We share the same viewpoint on many topics, so I trust his show to catch some of the inconsistencies from elected officials that I'd be most interested in hearing about.

But he can often be a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to political correctness and free speech. He was off base when it came to Don Imus, especially given his appearing to be a fan of Howard Stern during his coverage of his transition to Sirius Satellite Radio. He is, also, off base here. Wildly so. More so than he has been in the past.

He condemned David Shuster's comments about the Clintons pimping out Chelsea to help their chances at getting the Democrat nomination. He chooses to ignore the context and its current place in the American vernacular to score points with the Clintons, again. To brown nose. To be, ironically, pimped out for PR by his MSNBC bosses, since the statement wasn't made on his show and he was under no obligation to offer an apology.

Why is he a hypocrite, though? Because he's used the phrase himself on his own show. He said that George Bush was pimping out General David Petraeus with the Iraq report some months ago. The gender may be switched, but the contextual use of the word is the same. Yet, he calls Shuster's comment "indefensible"?

Have you no backbone, sir? Will you be doing a Special Comment calling yourself out for owing America an apology? Glad to see how quickly you turn on your colleagues when the heat is on.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Much Ado About Nothing

Really, people?

Is David Shuster a bit of a smarmy ass at times? Sure.
Was he actually trying to imply that Chelsea Clinton is turning tricks? No.

He's pointing out there being something weird about the way the Clintons are handling their daughter to further their campaign. They generally won't let her be interviewed. They tried to shelter her early and often before Hillary's run. Now, they have her calling super-delegates at their express behest, but won't grant requests for interviews to the media.

There is something off about that. There is something weird about it. There is, certainly, some manner of using going on there...and even, possibly, creating an artificial demand for her by trying to control who can and can't hear her speak.

And the idea that MSNBC is in the hip pocket of the Obama campaign? Ridiculous. Months ago, Olbermann practically fellated Bill Clinton on a regular basis and was a Hillary apologist any time something popped up. I'd say the first time he started being objective when it came to her campaign was when he was the only on-air personality there to point to the fact that she didn't skip a beat after crying in New Hampshire to launching into an attack on Obama. He alluded to it appearing to be calculated, while no one else working on their primary coverage seemed to even acknowledge the possibility.

The Clinton campaign thinks that any reporting of their work that doesn't read directly off the script they provide to the media is biased and out to get them.