January 8, 2012

Chris Berman (Yeah, Chris Berman) Faults the Falcons Because They Didn’t ‘Man Up’

Filed under: News from Other Sites — Tom @ 11:50 pm

You know, it’s one thing for a former player to question the heart of the Atlanta Falcons for their failures to convert two critical fourth-and-one situations in their losing playoff game against the New York Giants today.

But ESPN’s Chris Berman? Chris Berman?

Berman’s Wikipedia entry gives no indication that he even played sports in high school (even if he did, it’s a “so what?”), let alone at a higher level.

For Chris Berman to be telling the Atlanta Falcons in the network’s post-playoff game coverage that “they should be ashamed of themselves” and that “You’ve gotta be able to man up” is an embarrassing joke.

Trent Dilfer was similarly but more diplomatically rough on the Falcons, saying something on the order of “you show who you really are in really difficult situations.” Fine. He played the game and quarterbacked a winning Super Bowl team. I get that. But he remembered that he was on TV, and didn’t go with the “man up” line he might conceivably use if he were with friends or former players in a nonpublic situation.

If Chris Berman were at a social gathering and said what he said on TV tonight, I daresay that half the people hearing it would be laughing at him, and the other half would be saying “Who the bleep are you to say that?”

Go back to giving players clever names, good buddy, and leave the analysis and testosterone level evaluations to people with some credibility.

Steyn on Santorum, and What’s Really ‘Crazy’ and ‘Weird’

Filed under: Economy,Health Care,Life-Based News,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 11:05 pm

In the wake of attacks on Rick and Karen Santorum as “crazy” and “weird” for following widely-held advice and bringing their dead infant son Gabriel home so that the rest of their children would get to know and appreciate that they had another brother — and that the couple could get through their own grieving process — Mark Steyn calls out what’s really crazy, irresponsible, and gruesome:

Two weeks ago I wrote in this space: “A nation, a society, a community is a compact between past, present and future.” Whatever my disagreements with Santorum on his “compassionate conservatism,” he gets that. He understands that our fiscal bankruptcy is a symptom rather than the cause.

The real wickedness of Big Government is that it debauches not merely a nation’s finances but, ultimately, its human capital – or, as he puts it, you cannot have a strong economy without strong families.

Santorum’s respect for all life, including even the smallest bleakest meanest two-hour life, speaks well for him, especially in comparison with his fellow Pennsylvanian, the accused mass murderer Kermit Gosnell, an industrial-scale abortionist at a Philadelphia charnel house who plunged scissors into the spinal cords of healthy delivered babies. Few of Gosnell’s employees seemed to find anything “weird” about that: Indeed, they helped him out by tossing their remains in jars and bags piled up in freezers and cupboards. Much less crazy than taking ‘em home and holding a funeral, right?

Albeit less dramatically than “Doctor” Gosnell, much of the developed world has ruptured the compact between past, present and future. A spendthrift life of self-gratification is one thing. A spendthrift life paid for by burdening insufficient numbers of children and grandchildren with crippling debt they can never pay off is utterly contemptible. And to too many of America’s politico-media establishment it’s not in the least bit “weird.”

Y’know, if this all goes much further and standards of living get reduced significantly, people are going to start dying of things that we thought we had conquered or because of unsafe conditions which couldn’t be fixed because we will have run out of money to fix them — and not just in the medical arena. Sarah Palin had a pretty useful term for this, which could arguably used — unless we turn back really quickly — to describe how generations currently alive, particularly the people who have controlled our national government for the past three years — have put the screws to generations yet unborn. Perhaps bleeding-heart theologians and religious leaders should begin dwelling on this before knee-jerk supporting any and every misadvertised “social welfare” initiative that comes down the pike.

In the meantime, I don’t want to hear another bleeping word about how the left supposedly has a monopoly on “empathy.”

CNNMoney.com: Many Docs Are Struggling, and It’s Their Fault; Obamacare Not Mentioned

A frequent BizzyBlog commenter tweeted about an online article he saw at CNNMoney.com entitled “Doctors going broke” about how many doctors are struggling in the current economy. His tweet: “Welcome to Obamacare.”

What’s interesting is that my tweeting commenter is right that Obamacare is definitely already influencing the viability of medical practices. But Ms. Parija Kavilanz’s Friday report acts as if the mind-numbingly lengthy legislation and the torrent of regulations which appear destined to end up being huge multiples of that outrageous length don’t exist, and actually blames many docs for their predicaments:



Filed under: General,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 4:10 pm

Tony Blankley.

Mitt Romney As the Seinfeld Candidate: The GOP Primary (To Them) Is About Nothing Except the Myth of His ‘Electability’

Finally, we see the truth about the Romney campaign presented in capsule form:

Romney Surrogate on N.H. Primary: ‘It’s Not Even About Picking Someone With Your Own Beliefs and Principles’

New Hampshire State Sen. Gary Lambert, speaking for the presidential campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Romney, told the Nashua New Hampshire Republican City Committee that this year’s first-in-the-nation primary is not about liking a candidate, “It’s not even about picking someone with your own beliefs and principles. This is about picking a person that can beat Barack Obama, period.”

“Rather than go on with the blah, blah, blah. I’d like to get right to the point. Which is–Look, we know how this movie is going to end. Mitt Romney is going to be the nominee,” Lambert said.

“This is not about picking your favorite, it’s not about picking someone you like. It’s not about picking someone even with your own beliefs and principles. This is about picking a person that can beat Barack Obama, period.”

Earlier Lambert said, “The way I look at it, the sooner we get it over with the better. We can save the money because in the end, guess who we’re after? We’re after Barack Obama.”

Gosh, until I found this paragraph at Wikipedia, I had no idea how accurate my gut reaction to Lambert’s statement was:

Seinfeld broke several conventions of mainstream television. The show, often described as being about “nothing,” became the first television series since Monty Python’s Flying Circus to be widely described as postmodern. Several elements of Seinfeld fit in with a postmodern interpretation. The show is typically driven by humor interspersed with superficial conflict and characters with strange dispositions. Many episodes revolved around the characters becoming involved in the lives of others to typically disastrous results. On the set, the notion that the characters should not develop or improve throughout the series was expressed as the “no hugging, no learning” rule.

Seinfeld (self-professed) was about nothing but ratings. The Romney campaign is about nothing but the myth of “electability.” Taxes, deficits, values, life, immigration, gay marriage, economic growth, foreign policy, etc.? That all a bunch of irrelevant “blah blah blah” (or, in Seinfeldese, “yada yada yada“), per surrogate Lambert.

The Romney campaign is also Seinfeld-like in that it involves a guy who has not developed at all during his five years of almost non-stop presidential priming and/or campaigning.

As to “electability,” here’s Rush on Friday:

There are way too many voters on our side who still seek media approval of our issues and our candidates.

… I don’t choose these people based on people are gonna think of ME because of my choice. I choose them ’cause: Do I think they’re good? Do I think they’d be good president? Do I think they’re gonna fight for this country, fight for the things I believe in when they get there every day? That’s my sole criteria.

The “Romney is the only guy who is electable” and “Romney is inevitable” meme are being fed to us by the candidate (understandable), the media (who recognizes that, like John McCain, he will easily be bloodied and can’t/won’t fight back), and the party establishment (unforgivable, as they haven’t even learned from the McCain debacle; not even Sarah Palin could save him).

That Romney and his campaign are about nothing except the myth of “electability” explains why he can’t break past 30% in most national polls after five years of campaigning, why he failed last week to improve on his 2008 performance in Iowa, and why it seems that he won’t break 50% in next-door-to-Massachusetts New Hampshire, despite standing by while the press has smeared every one of his major opponents.

Unlike Seinfeld, Mitt Romney’s long-running series has never gotten good ratings, and needs to be cancelled.

AP’s Wiseman Weakly Spins ‘Jobless Trend’ and Not Jobless Rate as Predicting Prez Election Results

Even with recent “improvements” which are still weak when compared to other post-World War II recoveries and which, as shown yesterday (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), are less substantive than December’s two major reported numbers (unemployment rate of 8.5% and seasonally adjusted job additions of 200,000) would indicate, it seems fairly likely that the nation’s unemployment rate will be higher than it has been on the eve of any presidential election since World War II.

Thus, Paul Wiseman at the Associated Press, aka the Administration’s Press, felt it necessary to show that what matters isn’t the unemployment rate, but instead the rate’s trend. In the process, he mischaracterized the state of the economy under Ronald Reagan in 1983 and 1984, ignoring the roaring economic growth which occurred during those two years, and gave only one sentence to a statistic — number of jobs added or lost — which has become as important as the jobless rate, if not moreso, in the intervening 28 years:


Latest PJ Media Column (‘The Associated Press’s Stinky ‘New Distinctiveness’) Is Up

It’s here.

It will go up here at BizzyBlog on Tuesday (link won’t work until then) after the blackout expires.

Just when you thought they couldn’t get any more biased, the AP’s “Journalism With Voice” essentially gives reporters the ability to engage in “more interpretation.”

Sunday Off-Topic (Moderated) Open Thread (010812)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 7:30 am

Rules are here. Possible comment fodder may follow later. Other topics are also fair game.


Positivity: Resident recalls day her son, emergency crews saved her life after heart attack

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 7:00 am

From Houston:

Posted: Saturday, December 31, 2011 2:52 am

In a tight hug with the Emergency Services District 1 paramedic crews that saved her life, Houston resident Rita Jolivet could not express all of her gratitude.

About two weeks before they were all reunited, Jolivet suffered a heart attack while at home and her 9-year old son, Treyvion Fontenot, came to her rescue.

She was reunited Dec. 29 with all of the ESD 1 crew and the Houston Northwest Medical Center staff who helped her.