Trouble in Paradise: Joe Scarborough Rips Into MSNBC

People need to suck less!, The War Hero and the Rockstar: White House 2008  Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments »

I recently lamented the fact that Rachel Maddow got her own show. I was pretty upset that the channel which once bisected CNN and Fox News moved to the left of CNN in the past year through Olbermann’s transformation into leftist wacko and bringing on his sidekick, Maddow. Worse, supposedly non-partisanThe channel has gotten great ratings from Olbermann and Olympics coverage, so it’s not a bad business move. I won’t suggest that the media has a “higher calling” because I have sufficient faith in the viewers and the free market to promote effective, popular media.

MSNBC’s lone conservative, Joe Scarborough, was talking earlier about John McCain’s recent accomplishments in polling. Objectively speaking, Scarborough makes two valid points: a few months ago, the McCain campaign was dead in the water facing a double-digit deficit nationally AND the Obama campaign thought it was impossible to lose this race. Keith Olbermann has an open mic and blasts Scarborough:

The next morning, Scarborough was clearly angry. He had David Shuster, who is liberal, on his show. When Shuster hits Scarborough for not being critical enough of McCain, Scarborough loses it:

I don’t think the tirade was necessary or appropriate, but I can understand it. Scarborough has criticized Republicans and is wildly mocked among “conservative” circles. Also, Scarborough must be upset that Tim Russert passed away (Russert was known as a peacemaker and stabilizing force among network anchors), Andrea Mitchell has become an Obama surrogate without telling anyone, Olbermann has turned himself into a hitman, and Rachel Maddow now gets David Abrams’ timeslot in primetime. For Shuster to claim to be Indpendent was the final straw. Scarborough never wanted to be the token right-winger on the network. He wants to be a small-government former congressman who calls them as he sees them. The network he signed onto no longer exists.

I don’t think this is the end of MSNBC. I don’t think this will hurt ratings. Actually, it should improve ratings as people wait to see what train wreck will happen next. As sad as it is to see Joe completely lose it, hopefully this dispute will get people talking about MSNBC’s shift to the left. More likely, MSNBC’s leftists will further the unfair characterization of Scarborough as a bitter Republican who is watching mainstream America shift to the left.

Why Republicans Deserve to Lose in 2008

Be More Smarter!, People need to suck less!, Why govern when you can dictate dictums?  Tagged , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments »

Alaska, one of the reddest of red states, is now going to turn blue in 2 key races this November. Why? Because Alaskan Republicans are so close-minded and loyalist that they nominated two sitting ducks.

In the Senate race, Republican Ted Stevens is facing jail time over corruption charges. This after he has been widely ridiculed for being too old and too out of touch. Suggesting that the internet is a “series of tubes” certainly didn’t help. Naturally, Stevens won his primary last night with over 63% of the vote. Most Alaskan Republicans think that a potential criminal is the best representative of their party.

Stevens is trailing Democratic opponent, MarkBegich, by 13 points. Race over. Give the seat to the Dems right now, electoral projectors.

In the house race (note: Alaska only has one House seat due to its low population), reformer Sean Parnell trails old party hack, Don Young by a 1,000 votes with only 9 precincts remaining. This may need a recount, but this race should not have been close. Parnell is the Lieutenant Governor under the EXTREMELY popular Sarah Palin. He has fought to clean up Alaskan government and has served on multiple committees in the Alaska Legislature. Don Young is an 18-term congressman (yes, 18 terms. He has been in congress almost as long as William Ayers has been a terrorist!). He has engaged in a few shady, but not illegal, dealings. He is a typical do-nothing bureaucrat. While Parnell received endorsments from the National Review, Club for Growth, and Governor Palin, Don Young’s sole endorsement was from Mike Huckabee’s PAC. When two legitimate, conservative organizations and a highly popular governor support taking an incumbent out in a primary, that should have been a signal to Alaskan Republicans. Instead, they were sheep-like in their biannual support of Young.

If Alaskan Republicans are a microcosm, the GOP is in serious trouble. The party has lost the spirit and enthusiasm of 1994. Party loyalists and hacks are being prepared for the slaughter at the hands of power-hungry Democrats, moderates, and disaffected conservatives.

We need to look at candidates and then make decisions. Candidates define parties, not the other way around! If this means voting for a small-government, libertarian Democrat, so be it. This is not about getting 537 (435 in house, 100 in senate, and 2 in White House) people with an “R” affixed to their name on C-SPAN broadcasts. This is about getting 537 people who support freedom, liberty, and the American way. Democrats have never understood that concept. I’m starting to fear we don’t anymore.

Edit: This post has been edited for better accuracy. However, I will not mention the name of the insignificant Democratic House candidate. He is of no consequence since a competent Republican could easy trounce any Democrat and any competent Democrat will trounce Don Young.

Joe Biden’s Apology for Not Supporting Change

Be More Smarter!, Pragmatism Rules!, The War Hero and the Rockstar: White House 2008, Why govern when you can dictate dictums?  Tagged , , , , , , No Comments »

Obama ChangeI come bringing wondrous news: BARACK OBAMA BRINGS CHANGE! Change! If you don’t like high oil prices, Obama will change them! Lost your job? Change the economic situation! Think that the public campaign system should be altered? Change!

It’s Change, y’all! How can you not want change! Everyone wants change! Barack Obama and panhandlers agree: Change is good.

One small hitch: change doesn’t mean progress. It doesn’t mean improvement. It definitely doesn’t mean prosperity.

Homeless man Change

Joe Biden never got the message. In this “welcome video“, he seems ridiculous. The same man who said that Barack was not ready to lead as recently as this past winter, now joins The Movement. He speaks to Obamaniacs as an outsider. He knows that he was not part of The Movement. He has been in the Senate since Barry was in Hawai’i. He is part of the big, bad political machine that Obama wants to tear down. He does all but apologize at the altar of Change and beg for forgiveness. He praises Obama’s parishioners and congratulates them. He then asks that they accept him as one of their own.

How does he do it? He calls on Change. Eight times in 2 minutes and 57 seconds he says “change”!

This clip is proof-positive that Obama is completely out of touch with mainstream America. He picks a moderate liberal with a ton of experience and this guy is the outsider. Joe Biden, Mr. American politics, has never been an outsider. He offers a solid balance of relative youth and experience, foreign policy and domestic policy. He is from Delaware, a state that doesn’t conjure up any negative images. THe fact that Obama’s campaign is so radically left and so unapologetically “grassroots” makes Biden the annoying step-father who you have to obey to get what you want but don’t actually respect.

Though I am no Biden supporter, I feel awful for him. A proud, distinguished senator is being emasculated by a young upstart with a fresh face and smooth speaking-style. Biden is put in the position of being forced to renounce his past so that he become a full-fledged member of Change.

Instant Runoff Voting: Pragmatically Political, Politically Problematic

Free Markets or at least 99% Free!, Pragmatism Rules!, Thinking long-term, Why govern when you can dictate dictums?  Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , 4 Comments »

Nicky Cheese shed some light on the topic of instant runoff voting in his post yesterday. The video at the bottom of his post is pretty sweet and explains IRV quite well.

IRV allows voters to rank their candidates 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. If no candidate has a majority of the vote, then those who voted for the 3rd most popular candidate have their 2nd-choice candidate receive their ballot.

This concept is hard to explain, but easy to show.

Hypothetical of Georgia in 2008:

Obama gets 48%, McCain gets 46%, Barr gets 6%

Under the current system, Obama would win Georgia and all of its 15 electoral votes.

Under an Instant Runoff system, voters would have already decided which candidate is their 2nd and 3rd choices. Since Barr’s Libertarian Party is ideologically closer to the Republicans, let’s assume that 5% of the voters voted Barr, but put McCain as their 2nd choice and 1% of voters voted Barr, but have Obama as the second option.

This recalculates the vote totals to be: McCain 51%, Obama 49%.

The benefit of Instant Runoff Voting is huge. It allows voters to actually reveal their preferences. Though I am deeply dismayed by many of McCain’s policies and thoughts, I feel that I must vote for him to knock off Obama. If I knew that the vote would go to a run off in the even that neither candidate garnered a majority I would be free to vote for my preferred candidate without the pragmatically political ramifications.

To this end, we can get an accurate and non-damaging look at the popularity of candidates (and their parties). Those Georgians who do vote for Bob Barr risk helping Obama. Those who don’t vote for Bob Barr are denying the Libertarian candidate his rightful support.

While Instant Runoff Voting may seem appealing, it will never get off the ground. The reason is intuitive: Democrats and Republicans lose the most from IRV. They also control every level of government and the bodies which enact the switch to IRV. In a great paradox, the only way to achieve IRV is to outright win elections, which is nearly impossible without IRV.

As I have argued many times, the best way to enact large-scale political change is to use pre-existing political machinery. libertarians (small “l”) need to hijack the GOP and dominate the primaries. If they all voted for Ron Paul in the primaries, Bob Barr wouldn’t be so damn attractive. The Democrats’ support of Obama over Hillary, though the race was close, helps to define their party.


WordPress Theme & Icons by N.Design Studio.
Entries RSS Comments RSS Log in
FireStats icon Powered by FireStats