If only we could be more like those Swedes…
Another head-scratcher from Fox I noticed this morning was this thing… accusing Barack Obama of being anti-Muslim because the DoD denied a “flyover” show at the Center for Islamic Affairs “Nation and Allah” event. Or something like that.
Anti-Muslim or anti-Christian? Here is what the organizers stated:
NAMPA — Organizers of the God and Country Family Festival say the Pentagon denied a military flyover, which the celebration has featured for 42 years, because of the event’s emphasis on Christianity.
http://www.idahopress.com/news/?2009-07-03-Pentagon-nixes-flyover
Set ‘em up… knock ‘em down.
If you don’t get it, the set up was to get people indignantly asking “AND JUST HOW IN THE WORLD IS IT ANTI-MUSLIM TO DENY A FLYOVER REQUEST AT A ‘NATION AND ALLAH’ EVENT??!??”… The knock-down was when you click the link and you realize a nixed fly-over at a Christian “God-and-Country” event leads certain bloviators to accuse Obama of being anti-Christian.
Is there a link to the Fox editorial?
When I first went to the link, there was no video. It is loading now.
Actually, isn’t the conventional wisdom amongst the medical community that alzheimer’s is genetic? Not that they’ve charged it or anything, but that seems to be the most common assumption. You know, like how many cancers are “in the family” and the like….
…am I making sense?
As far as the F&F thing & Kilmeade, it’s simply a case of someone flubbing up on live TV; funny as heck to point out, but weak cheese to use as another weave in a rhetorical cat o nine tails, IMO. I try F&F at times, but it’s too coffee klatchy. Morning Joe gives me my daily dose of lefty talking points (other than Buchanan & Scarborough, everyone’s a lefty, which is fine….that’s what I’m looking for) since Imus is no longer watchable since his show has been castrated of it’s anti-PC edge.
Good to see Niewert made it through a couple paragraphs without calling someone a fascist of some sort, so there’s always the glass-is-half-full point of view to look at, I suppose.
[yes, I think he's off his rocker]
It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Alzheimer’s has a genetic component… So… if we want to be very, very charitable to Kilmeade, we could guess that he thinks that Swedish & Finnish sub-populations carry few of the genetic markers for Alzheimer’s and therefore ruined the study with their homogeneous, low-alzheimer’s, gene pool. That would make him pretty dumb in any case for assuming that the researchers wouldn’t, at minimum, have provided controls that would identify the effect.
Or we could be less charitable and guess that he thinks that marrying along national/ethnic (species!) lines in some weird way maintains “genetic purity”. I guess he hasn’t spent much time in the mountains of Kentucky.
Based on his choice of words, I’m not prepared to be at all charitable.
Oh, BTW- If you’re having to go to Joe Scarborough for your lefty talking points, I need to get on the ball here. That’s about like me going to him for my righty talking points.
LOL, I mean the SHOW. I’m not one of those “that guy isn’t conservative enough” (who they say about almost everyone) folks. Mika, Barnicle, Jonathan Capehart, Donny Deutsch, Christa Freeland from the Economist, Lawrence O’Donnell, etc., the shows regulars, debate Joe or the other righty (Pat Buchanan, leaving exactly zero people who were for the war in Iraq after ’05 or so). Buchanan is only a guest every once in a while, so it’s usually Joe versus the rest, which is kinda like a conservative going to a lefty web site & arguing in the comments section; I get the views from the left by watching the debates on that show. I shouldn’t have said “talking points” – that was an egregious error on my part & I apologize – because most of those folks don’t have the talking points (O’Donnell does) but rather argue from their own perspective(s).
I get the talking points from the lefty web sites.
I saw about 5 minutes of Morning Joe this morning. Some guy was saying that if the CIA is working on a project that will save millions of lives then they should not be hindered by having to follow the law. Or something like that.
I rarely watch morning television anymore.
Hell, I rarely watch any of that stuff anymore. Even things like Meet the Press that I used to think were required viewing have become unwatchable to me.
I know now why a huge portion of the population just tunes out. I am fast becoming a part of that portion.
Me, too.
Dude, if committing murder would save millions of lives, I’d accept the fact that I’d be breaking the law (and pay the consequences) and go ahead and kill someone.
MILLIONS of lives, bubba. Millions. If I could hop in a time machine, I’d go back and commit rape, murder, kidnapping and even return a book late to the library if it meant getting rid of Hitler & saving the lives of 6 million Jews.
I understand the “you don’t break the law in order to foment your political agenda” argument and I’m all for it & if Bush or someone else broke the law then they should pay the piper, but……millions of lives? What kind of person would NOT break the law to save millions of lives?
I don’t recall the last YEAR I watched any those Sunday shows. The mainstream media, as we once knew it, is dying a slow and deserved death.
Me, too. But obviously, neither of us can get in a time machine, and even if we could, it would be near impossible for us to figure out exactly what had to be done to avoid the holocaust. And, if we did, and it was against the law but we were capable of it and not capable of changing the law… then yeah…
But the guy who says he wants to break the law to save “millions of lives” is full of shit. He doesn’t have a plan for saving any lives – he wants an excuse to break the law: for himself, for his buddy or cousin, for some favored political operative, or for some kind of pseudo-intellectual talking point that he is fond of.
Then that would fall under my “you don’t break the law in order to foment your political agenda” part, above. I only had Buck’s “if the CIA is working on a project that will save millions of lives then they should not be hindered by having to follow the law” synopsis to go by.
I wonder who the guy was, since Joe & Mika were off & I only saw a cast of liberals and/or Jack Welch’s non-political wife during the 15 or so minutes I watched.
Yeah – I understand. I’m just saying that synopses of this type are invariably smoke & mirrors. It’s like a kid who can’t have candy coming up with increasingly unlikely scenarios until they get to one like, “well, if I get all A’s on my report card AND I do plastic surgery on Daddy to get rid of that weird mark on his forehead AND I hit a hundred home runs at the next little league game AND I say please, THEN I really should get candy!”
I’m also reminded GB Shaw quote… Ends with “we’ve already established what you are, ma’am. Now we’re just haggling over the price.”
“Millions of lives” is a foot in the door to justify something else.
9 times out of ten I’d be on board with that sentiment. In today’s age of Islamic terrorism and radical states that hate our guts getting close to nukes….I’m more inclined to listen to the intel (taking into account that there’d better be concrete proof since I’ve already seen what “trust me, we have the intelligence” can lead to) than brush it aside. Plus, I’m assuming that there are “millions” around Israel, since that’d be the #1 target.
Besides, the Messiah is in charge, there’s no way the government is going to encroach on a citizen’s privacy, rights or possessions. I read it on the internet.
Wish I could tell you who it was RW but I just did not know the guy. He may be a regular on the show. He was discussing the point with Lawrence O’Donnell.
Like I said, about 5 minutes of it was all I got. Scarfed down my protein drink and headed for work.
Oh and by the way, the government has been encroaching on a citizen’s privacy, rights and possessions since George Washington was sanding his wooden teeth.
I’m sure you already know that and Barack Obama or Sarah Palin ain’t gonna change any of that.