Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Me So Hungry Me Could Eat A Muppet

I like the Muppets. Sesame Street, not so much. Something about Sesame Street always struck me as preachy and off-kilter. Why is there a monster living in a garbage can? What’s with evil Bert anyway? And why does the show spout liberal nonsense? Well, they’re at it again.

For those who don’t know, Sesame Street is a bastion of political correctness. It was created with the idea of brainwashing. . . er, “educating” poor kids. The stated goal was to teach these kids self-esteem and “feelings of competency,” as compared to actual competency. It pushed diversity and “nonagressive ways of resolving conflicts.” It pandered to Hispanic groups in the 1970s, feminists in the 1980s, environmentalists in the 1990s, Bush hate in the 2000s and gay groups in the 10s. And the show has been awash in controveries:

● In 1969, Grover took lessons in civil disobedience from a hippe. . . Bill Ayers.

● Bert and Ernie’s “ambiguous sexuality” has been an issue for years. . . with ambiguous being a code word for “clearly gay.”

● Kami the muppet caught AIDS in 2002. . . from a toilet seat.

● Big Bird told us what happened in the afterlife in 1983. . . you get 72 virgins.

● Mahboub the muppet, an Arab muppet, was inserted into the Israeli version to “bridge the cultural gap” in 2006. . . he's moderate, he only advocates enslaving Israel, not eradicating it.

● The claim in 2004 that Sesame Street triggers attention deficit diso

● Continuous liberal bias, like when it mocked Fox News in 2009 with Oscar the Grouch calling “Pox News” a “trashy news show”... unlike MSNBC which is just trash.
Now PBS/Sesame Street has discovered a new liberal mission. . . phantom hunger.

That’s right, Sesame Street is introducing “Lily, whose family has an ongoing struggle with hunger” because Sesame Street wants to “teach” your kids that America is a land of starving poor people. Why? Because liberalism has come crashing down in flames and they need to rebuild an army of idiots who are ready to do their bidding. What better way than to tell kids that other kids are starving because evil rich people steal the very food from their mouths. Kids are suckers for “I’m trying to stop hunger,” but not “I’m trying to protect a racial spoils system” or “I’m trying to protect the union’s ability to keep child molesters in the classroom.”

Here’s what they’re basing this garbage on: according to the corrupt Dept. of Agriculture, 17 million kids are starving in the United States. Where does that number come from? It’s estimated based on the number of people who are counted as “living below the poverty line.” In other words, it’s theoretical. In other words, it’s a fraud.

For one thing, they keep raising the dollar threshold for poverty. You can actually be quite well off and still be considered poor. Indeed, study after study has shown that “poor” people in America own cars, appliances and spend their money on cable television and cell phones. Also, this is only an income test, not an asset test. So people living on social security, lotto winners, students, small business owners who earn their income sporadically or who find a lot of great deductions, people who earn their money overseas, and rich people living on tax-free investments. . . are all considered "poor."

I dare the liberal establishment to find me anyone who is legitimately hungry.

And if they can find such a person, then I want to know why this person can’t get on food stamps like the other 43 million Americans who have found their way onto the program and into my wallet? Also, did you know that you can earn up to $39,220 and still qualify for free or discounted school lunches? How can anyone not feed themselves on $39k?

Hunger also ain’t what it used to be. Even aside from being a completely made up statistic, they’ve redefined hunger as “food insecure,” which means at some point during the year your food intake was reduced and your normal eating pattern was disrupted because you lacked money for food. So now you can be hungry if you spent your money on booze or you forgot your wallet or Obama taxed the crap out of your paycheck.

This is all theoretical wishful thinking by liberals which bares no relationship to what is going on in reality. It is shameful propaganda aimed at making liberals feel like they have a reason to exist. But in the spirit of things, let me offer this first line of dialog:
Lily: Why am I so hungry?

Lily's Dad: Because liberals made us dependent on the government and then spent all the money on Obama's friends. Obama is why you're hungry.

98 comments:

Tennessee Jed said...

amen to that! Next will come stagflation

tryanmax said...

Andrew, something tells me that you will never find yourself a part of the Children's Television Workshop.

rlaWTX said...

I must admit that I like Oscar. He got to be grouchy.

my highly annoying prof actually nearly mentioned this problem last night - the discussion of the poverty level and how one can use statistics to one's advantage by cherry-picking them - or in this case, just redefining them altogether... (then he moved back into inanity)

rlaWTX said...

oh - and Muppets are mostly fluff - not really very filling...

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: I banned Sesame Street from the house when my kids were very young. I was still a liberal at the time, but I didn't want them getting their words of wisdom from a scuzzy looking puppet that lived in a garbage can.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, Stagflelmo the muppet!

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Those are the risks of blogging -- that people like the Children's Television Workshop stop inviting you to parties... or send a muppet hitman your way!

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, It's what liberalism as has become. People are no longer suffering in the US from things like hunger and legalized or mass racism or polluted air or etc... so they redefine danger down so they still have something to whine about.

In the past hunger meant hunger and it would kill you. Now hunger means you didn't get what you want.

That lets liberals still whine away about the evil world and still feel good about stealing our tax dollars to help people.... even though they don't really need help.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, True, not a lot of meat on Muppet bones... assuming they have bones?

AndrewPrice said...

Wise choice Lawhawk. You probably wouldn't have been happy with the things they learned.... even as a liberal.

CrispyRice said...

Hey hey HEY!!! Elmo says, "We're treading into difficult ground here!"

You should watch it, or you'll make Elmo mad. And you wouldn't like Elmo when he's mad.



Ok, ok, your points are valid. But I still love Elmo. And the Muppets. And even Sesame Street.

And in one small point of defense, they did come out and officially say that Bert and Ernie are NOT gay, just very good friends and roommates. :)~

AndrewPrice said...

Dear Elmo, You don't scare me! LOL!

That is true that they came out the other day and said that Bert and Ernie are officially not gay. I have to say though that people who were pushing the issue (since the 1980s) have some valid points, especially considering that the show leans so openly toward shoving "diversity" down people's throats.

And of course, "diversity" like always means acceptance of liberal causes, not true diversity as you won't find any conservatives on the show or even any representatives of Middle America... hunter Elmo, truck driver Elmo, small business Elmo, pastor Elmo, etc. Elmo.

CrispyRice said...

How about "clinging to guns and Bible" Elmo?? ;)

tryanmax said...

You know, it's a wonder Sesame Street hasn't messed us all up. Who here remembers the pinball sequence?

One, two, three, four, five,
Six, seven, eight, nine, ten,
Eleven, twelve.

Doo, do-do do-do
Doo, do-do do-do
D’doo, doo-do do-do
Do do do, Doo!

(Yes, every number has a different sequence. BTW, that was a crap-load of coding for such a short comment.)

AndrewPrice said...

Crispy, Yeah! BitterClinger Elmo!

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, That is a TON of coding! I actually have never heard of this pinball sequence... or I don't remember it?

Koshcat said...

I haven't watched SS for years and my children don't like it. I was always confused about the HIV positive muppet. What point were they trying to make? In the 80's before we really understood the underlying process, it seemed anybody could get the disease. But now, with much better blood banking and the use of recombinant factor replacement, the only way to get it in the vast majority of cases is either sexual or illegal drug use especially iv.

So was HIV muppet a crack whore trading sex for drugs, a tweaker when high has sex with just about anything that walks by, just a slut who loves riding bareback, or a heroin addict?

I see some really good teaching moments for kids here. Elmo can find her with a needle sticking out of her arm and unresponsive and rush her to the hospital. Or we can see her take some ice and go to rave and next wake up with some really nasty looking muppets all with their pants off.

And yes, I did us the abbreviation SS on purpose. There are a lot of similarities.

rlaWTX said...

totally OT: the technical universe hates me. and I am coming very close to hating it. I have an old desktop that runs our outdoor light 'em up sign. all of the USB ports have cratered, so I have had to download the software onto another (semi-used) desktop. Check. Hook it into the hard line to the sign. Check. Get it going - Doesn't work.
Then realized that the 3 things that this desktop IS used for will also have to be relocated with the desktop. I should have just bought a new $300 desktop and started from scratch - and hear the Session scream "we're broke - don't spend money!!!" I hate my job today.

Now back to the regularly scheduled programming of the "Muppets Eat Your Preschooler's Mind"!

tryanmax said...

Nah, Koshkat, she just hooked up with Oscar durring a moment of lapsed judgement. Shoulda known better... It just takes one time.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshkat, I like the use of SS. Brainwashing is brainwashing!

I think the point to the AIDS Muppet was to scare kids into thinking that anyone could get AIDS... as if it were random. That was the big thing the activists were pushing back then -- that AIDS wasn't just a gay disease, that everyone could get it, so we should offer an infinite amount of funding because it could just happen to you.

In terms of teaching a lesson as you suggest, they would never teach a realistic lesson -- they only teach liberal lessons of tolerance for misconduct and evil. And implicit in that is to AVOID any sense that a problem might be self-inflicted.

tryanmax said...

Okay, now I have some really inappropriate Muppet images in my head. Lot's of smiling and bouncing. That's all I'm gonna say.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, I know the feeling. Technology can be quite evil when it sets its mind to it. I have often wondered if my computer isn't out to get me at time.

rlaWTX said...

tryanmax- leave Oscar out of it! he's a good guy!

and NOW I have bouncy images - BRAIN BLEACH!

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Yeah, those are some Muppet images I'd rather not have. We're almost at the point we need to put a parental warning on this thread!

AndrewPrice said...

Oscar's a good guy! LOL!

tryanmax said...

Oh, come on, rlaWTX. He lives in a garbage can. Does he seem like the type to care about hygiene?

Here, this is guaranteed to make everything worse: LINK

AndrewPrice said...

O.... M.... G....

It really goes off the rails around the two minute mark. LOL!

tryanmax said...

It just goes to prove a not-so-old adage. "If you can think it, it's already on the internet."

tryanmax said...

Oh, and how don't you know the pinball thing? They even did a parody of it on Family Guy!

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Isn't that the truth. I have never NOT been able to find something on the web. It's amazing all the obscure and strange things that are out there. It's like the sum total of human experience all in one place.


On the pin ball thing, I have no idea. I've just never heard of it?

tryanmax said...

I feel like it is my responsibility to bring this topic back on track.

Andrew, you said a lot when you pointed out that, "[SS] would never teach a realistic lesson -- they only teach liberal lessons of tolerance for misconduct and evil. And implicit in that is to AVOID any sense that a problem might be self-inflicted."

Essentially, they are teaching victimhood. Problems might be addressed on the Street, but their origins are always nebulous, implying that they come from somewhere else.

Boy, did Dr. Spock get it wrong when he predicted that SS would result in "better trained citizens, fewer unemployables in the next generation, fewer people on welfare, and smaller jail populations."

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I agree 100%. They never show where problems arise or pin the blame (unless it's racism or bullying). So in SS's world, problems just sort of happen out of the blue. And they never once hint that personal responsibility could avoid problems. Instead, they repeatedly tell you that the solution to all problems is (1) to not be judgmental (which is total bunk) and (2) seek out authority, who will handle the problem for you.

That is teaching dependence: a lack of personal responsibility... told not to worry about where problems come from... don't try to solve anything yourself... don't even form an opinion (judgmental)... and instead seek out those in power who will take care of the issue for you.

That is the lesson that is pounded into these kids heads over and over and over in this show.

T-Rav said...

Okay, full disclosure--I like Sesame Street. I grew up on it and I liked Bert and Ernie, Big Bird, and all the rest.

That said, this hunger thing does strike me as pretty stupid--about as stupid as that HIV-positive character a few years back. Call me crazy, but shouldn't we wait until the kids are a few years older to start traumatizing them with this stuff? Just a thought.

BevfromNYC said...

I am not sure if we have already discussed this, but the results of a recent study (which I am looking for right now) in "self-esteem" came to the conclusion that what educators thought was just plain wrong.

Children do not derive their self esteem from being constantly told how wonderful they are and that every thing they do is golden, but by actually doing things that make them feel better about themselves. So allowing children to fail and try again to succeed does much more for a child than just telling them how wonderful they are...shocker.

Koshcat said...

Ok, I did a little research (what can I say, things are a little slow today. Here is the Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kami_(Takalani_Sesame_character)

She got it from a transfusion with tainted blood. (sigh) Most children in third world get it via transmission from an infected mother across the placenta. But of course it couldn't be the mother's fault. Wierd thing is she is "orphaned" probably from AIDS. Just bizarr.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Why wait? If you really want to brainwash someone, start young.

Also, as we discuss a couple comments up, it isn't really the actual issue that matters to these people (e.g. AIDS, hunger) so much as it is teaching kids to look to the government for solutions.

T-Rav said...

Oh, the pinball machine sequence! I used to love that also. Okay, okay, I know I'm showing my Generation Y or whatever the heck it is status right now, so I'll stop.

By the way, after scrolling through several of the comments on pinball machines, my mind immediately went to Jodie Foster. That's a bad thing, right?

BevfromNYC said...

Another thought...how is it that we are simultaneously the fattest country in the world and people are starving to death? Can't we send the starving people over to the people who are eating too much to take their food? And why is Michelle Obama more concerned about too much food than not enough if this is such a big problem that it deserves a Starvin' Marvin Muppet character??

tryanmax said...

And just in case there are any lurkers who are thinking, "SS is for little kids. They are too young to understand such complex concepts."

That notion is bunk. Problem solving is the basis of all learning. It's the first thing we teach our children. Finding the source of the problem is just a fundamental part of that.

Teaching young children to address problems without considering the source is an effective way to handicap their problem-solving skills and increase their dependence throughout their lives. It fosters situational myopia such that the "ripple effect" is considered a mind-blowing concept to many people today.

* * *

Another thing I've noticed about SS as an adult is the way it teaches Marxist fundamentals as social skills. Take the typical lesson on "sharing" for example. Now, I'm not saying that sharing is a bad thing. Generosity is a pillar in many ethical codes. But SS holds a different ethic. Sharing is presented not as an option, but an obligation.

If Johnny has two cookies and Mary has none, it is incumbent upon Johnny to relinquish a cookie unto Mary. The matter of how Johnny came into his cookies is unknown. The ways in which Mary might avail herself of her own cookies are unexplored. The generosity of Johnny's gesture is completely downplayed. Johnny is no longer kind for sharing, but he would be cruel for choosing not to. He is merely fulfilling a social obligation.

To underscore the concept, social obligation in free societies is generally limited to abstention from certain activities, such as theft or violence. It is a different sort of society altogether that requires particular engagements of its members.

Koshcat said...

Just watched the video. Holy crap, that is funny. Though it looks like Elmo needs to trim the hedges a little.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Shocker indeed! Of course, that's the same lesson parents knew for thousands of yours. Only trendy educators didn't understand that.

Frankly, I've never understood how you could get actual self-esteem from being protected from reality? If I'm told that everything I do is good, at some point I will realize that everyone is just humoring me and then I will have no basis to really judge my own self worth. Plus, I will have never learned how to improve my skills or deal with failure.... all things we see played out in the White House right now.

I think the self-esteem movement, like much of the counter-culture garbage, is a reaction to a stereotype of what came before. They like to think that everyone in the 1950s was brutal and cruel and threw their kids to the wolves. So clearly, the "right way" to raise kids was to do the exact opposite of that and never once suggest the kid might not be perfect.

It's created a generation of kids with no skills, but big egos and little patience.... and a generation of parents who have abdicated responsibily for raising their kids and instead set out to be their friends.

tryanmax said...

Pinball and Jodie Foster. I don't get it. What am I missing?

BevfromNYC said...

Tryanmax - Who are you and why are you talking like you know what you're talking about??? Ooh, yeah, we like that here! Thanks!

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I'd love to answer that, but this X'er does not know the pinball thing. So I can't say if Jodie Foster should be in that or not! ;)

tryanmax said...

What comes between X and Y? Because I'm never really sure where I fit.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, On the AIDS thing, that's the only way to give it to the Muppet without having to blame anyone. The fault lies in an evil corporation that failed to monitor its blood supply, not someone who used drugs or had unprotected sex or someone who gave it through something like dental surgery (that was a big issue in the 1980s too).

So this was the easiest way to keep the idea that AIDS just happens because there is no one you can actually point the finger at.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew - "It's created a generation of kids with no skills, but big egos and little patience...."

And they are all gathering in Zuccotti Park to stamp their feet and call for heads to roll...

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Starvin' Marvin that's a name I haven't heard in years! LOL!

I honestly think it's impossible to starve in America unless you have incapacitated yourself by becoming a drug addict or something like that.

There is cheap food everywhere in this country -- as shown by the obesity problem. And there is a social net that will feed you if you truly can't afford it. This is just liberals creating a cause based on theoretical abstractions of arbitrary numbers.

tryanmax said...

"Zuccotti" makes me think of pasta. And Andrew's last comment makes me think of gubm'nt cheez. I think I'll go make some zuccotti 'n' cheez, now.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Excellent breakdown. I think that's absolutely right on both counts.

First, if you tell kids not to analyze a problem then you are teaching them "skills" that will prevent them from being able to solve their own problems. Add in the idea that they should immediately run to authority and you've created a drone -- incapable of taking care of itself.

Secondly, you're right about how they treat sharing. They do not treat sharing as a good trait and a noble thing to do, they treat it as a requirement. And the key in what you note is that again, they do not ask questions about how the inequality came about. It could well be the other kid just ate 10 cookies, but that doesn't matter because right now it's 0 to 2, hence the person with 2 must give up what they have saved to support the person with zero. It's perverse. It's essentially meant to wipe out the idea of private property because your property now belongs to everyone in equal shares according to their current wants. And then the fact they don't praise the kid for sharing, adds to this because it assumes a duty on people to surrender their own property to the collective.

Interestingly, I think this ultimate will backfire because it will promote selfish consumption. In other words, this will kill the idea of saving for the future because the natural human response to that kind of lesson is to eat your own cookies as quickly as possible before others come to make you give them away.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, That's them! And I'll bet none of them see the irony in their being able to afford camping out whining about the rich. Clearly, none of them need to work for a living!


Tryanmax... zuccotti 'n' cheez! LOL!

I have no idea what comes between Y and Y? I heard "Generation Next" once, but I think that was Pepsi.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, LOL! I'm not sure you can trim a Muppet... not sure there's anything left?

P.S. I think Elmo smoking is a nice touch near the end.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, there's some movie with a really graphic and notorious scene of Jodie Foster getting raped on a pinball machine. I haven't seen it, and I don't know what the movie is, but I keep hearing about it. So like I say, it's probably a bad thing that my mind went there.

AndrewPrice said...

Ah. The internet says it was The Accused.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew none of them sees the irony that they are posting on Facebook and Twitter from their smartphones while listening to their music on their Iphones, Ipad, and Ipods...All brought to them by Wall Street investors and big "evil" corporations. And the McDonalds & Burger Kings around the park are letting them use their bathrooms.

I point this out at regular intervals on HuffPo. They don't get the irony either. Someone was calling for a boycott of all of the evil corporations, so I responded "Now you're talking! Throw down your Ipods, Ipad, Iphones and stop posting on Twitter and Facebook, etc..." The response was - Buy "used"!!???? Using the same logic, I pointed out that if these kids had been in Montgomery for the Bus boycotts in the '50's they would have still used the buses, but rationalized that as long as someone else was paying for it, it's the same as not taking the bus.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, That's just evil to point out their hypocrisies and poke a hole in their little worlds. LOL! They really are pathetic.

"buy used"? Wow is that idiotic. That's so stupid I almost have to assume it's a parody, only I know it isn't because I've seen these people in action and they are truly clueless.

tryanmax said...

Oh, okay. No wonder I didn't get it. Doesn't seem like I want to, either.

tryanmax said...

Over at HuffPo, they screen any comments that make sense. There's no point.

AndrewPrice said...

So they're using a "rationality filter"?! It wouldn't surprise me.

T-Rav said...

Hmmm, that makes sense. Only buy used, so then there'll be no demand for the new products, which means that the people in Third World countries who make this stuff will be out of jobs, and then they can go back scraping out a miserable existence from a few acres of soil, and their kids can be taken away to serve as child soldiers in the latest thuggish regime, and so on and so on. But hey, at least we showed those evil capitalists! Right?

tryanmax said...

Uh oh, somebody put the rationality filter on. T-Rav is making sense, again.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav always makes sense!


On T-Rav's point, I don't think the Huffers think about the consequences of what they are saying. It never even occurs to them that these companies are in fact raising the standard of living in those countries.

tryanmax said...

I just watched this video which explains what the protestors are hoping to accomplish. In The Lotion Man's own words, he intends to "provocateur your intellectual mind to get you to think, you dumb BLEEP."

To be fair, this guy is obviously a bum with nothing else to do.

T-Rav said...

Aw, y'all are gonna make me blush. :-)

Incidentally, I heard this afternoon that the Occupy Wall Street crowd's official website (yes, they're still protesting, who knew?) is telling members to stop talking about what they support, because "those evil right-wingers are going to twist our words around and make us look like fringe nuts." Delicious irony aside, they must be unaware that they do that all by themselves.

patti said...

lily is in danger of being snatched by #OccupyTogether as their spokesmuppet.

~hungrier...look hungrier~

AndrewPrice said...

Wow they're stupid. So now they're having a protest to tell us something and they won't tell us what that is because they'll look like fools if they tell us!

This has to be a parody!!

We should ask Bev nicely to go down there with a camera and start asking them really confusing questions. Who knows what kind of wisdom we would get?

AndrewPrice said...

Patti, I doubt they'll be very interested in Sesame Street... it's all part of the corporate plot to make us into consumers and stuff man!!

Embiggen your minds people!

T-Rav said...

Off topic, but Breaking News: Via a tweet from Mark Levin, Sarah Palin will NOT be running for President.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I'm glad it's official -- I just heard her on the radio. Now people can stop playing the waiting game and focus on the people in the race.

Joel Farnham said...

I just saw that about Palin. I don't know exactly what to say, except that the conservative sites better treat the Palinistas with the utmost respect. RedState is going to be hardest hit with this. Over there, the hidden Palinistas voted overwhelmingly for Palin during an straw poll. Yet, Erick openly mocked them on Sep 30. I don't think the site will be here much longer if those people don't get their collective heads out their ass.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I'm going to run a HUGE banner tomorrow that reads "CHICKEN!!" and mock her mercilessly... just kidding.

You're right, conservatives need to learn that they are all friends and while friends can (and do) disagree, you shouldn't make fun of people when you disagree with them.

I'm just glad that this takes away the distraction of having the media run to anywhere she vacations and then speculating that this means she's about to step into the race. We need to focus on the people who are actually running.

On RedState, I haven't had the time to visit there much, but I've heard that they've gone very anti-Palin. That's a bad move as it disrespects their audience.

T-Rav said...

Okay, a few thoughts on this:

1. It takes two sides to have such a battle as this. Some of the Palinistas have been downright ridiculous in recent months, but let's not pretend that the anti-Palin crowd hasn't been just as obnoxious at times. I was just browsing through some of my usual sites, and a lot of them (but not all) were in full-on "toldja so" gloating mode. That's just as juvenile, and both sides need to quit.

2. Once the hard feelings start to relax, I think this will do a lot to improve her reputation with the conservative wing overall, especially since she explicitly ruled out a third-party run as it would "guarantee an Obama reelection." That "what's best for the country" tone is the best possible tack she could have taken.

3. Cain and Perry are now under A LOT of pressure. An endorsement from her would not only confirm either of them as the Tea Party candidate, it would also put most of her supporters, together with their obvious fund-raising abilities, firmly in their camp. But for precisely those reasons, I suspect she won't be giving any endorsements until she has some indication what they can do over the long haul. So now it's even more imperative that Cain give an impressive performance at the debate next week, and that Perry try to recover some ground.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew - I will be happy to run down and take pictures, but now the Unions have joined in so the whole "kumbaya" aspect has taken a more sinister direction.

T-Rav -
"...telling members to stop talking about what they support, because "those evil right-wingers are going to twist our words around and make us look like fringe nuts."

They have a newspaper now "The Occupied Wall Street Journal" -yes and it's very professional printed, but still gives has no clear info. Just lots of heart-breaking stories about the poor "99%'er's" who had to drop out of college to come to protest the high cost of a private education...

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, I thought you had to have a job before you could get on unemployment and become a 99er? I can't imagine any of the creatures I've seen at these protests have ever held a job?

Why am I not surprised that the unions showed up... and that they were late getting there?!

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, I don't know if it will help her or not. It doesn't play well to do this tease game of suggesting she's running when a very fair interpretation of facts is that she never intended to run. Given the negatives she already has, that may just cement the idea that she's not a serious candidate. And if you're not serious, then there's no reason to pay attention to you.

I suspect what will ultimately matter the most is how she handles the rest of the primaries. If she keeps playing the game of trying to keep the attention on herself, then people will respond very poorly and tune her out. But if she becomes a team player, that could go a long way toward changing minds. I guess we'll see.

On coming together, there might be a shake out on the web, but I doubt conservatives as a group will split.

Interestingly, both CNN and Politico are now saying "this means the race is between Perry and Romney." Uh... maybe they should pay more attention to the news.

On Perry, I think his best plan would be to release a seriously good economic plan -- something short, new and really conservative, i.e. something to show that he's got some solid ideas.

Cain needs to keep coming across strong, and he NEEDS to show that he can build a ground organization. If he doesn't do that, then he will find himself written off again -- especially as he apparently isn't doing well in Iowa.

AndrewPrice said...

Apple just announced that Steve Jobs has died. eR.I.P.

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I think it's maybe a bit unfair to say that she's been teasing people merely to keep the attention on herself. If that was all she cared about, she might have left the possibility of a third-party run open. Whatever her true intentions, I do think decisively ruling that out ought to placate a lot of people on both sides; though you're right, a lot will depend on what she does during the primaries.

A lot of people have been speculating that she was waiting until Christie made a decision. Which makes some sense; he would have split Romney's constituency and thereby made things easier for anyone running as a Tea Partier. Having Romney firmly in command of one wing of the GOP makes things infinitely more difficult for her.

I'll be curious to see what the next poll brings, now that her supporters have to cast about for someone else. Given what I read on the announcement thread at HotAir (which, two and a half hours after it went up, is at 1100+ comments and counting), most of them seem breaking for Cain, with Perry a distant second. In other words, about as I expected, though again, whether or not he can solidify that depends on the next debate.

T-Rav said...

Ah, Bev, that's so sad. Really. You don't have a violin I could borrow, do you? :-)

I found the exact words I was talking about earlier. Apparently their Occupy Wall Street website was posting a demands list that included a $20 minimum wage, free college education, and a 100% open borders policy, and Gateway Pundit and others got ahold of it. As a result, the website posted the following:

"The opponents of this movement are using the demands posted in this forum as the official lists. And some of these lists regardless of how right or wrong are extreme points of view and will only hurt our cause by making us look like extremist nut jobs. You don’t speak for everyone in this. Stop creating public demand lists, delete demands threads. Let the organizers and the law team working for them do this."

So if I understand this right, this spontaneous protest movement, the People's-Democracy-In-Action movement, is now telling its rank-and-file to stop coming up with ideas and let the elite do their thinking for them?

Yep, sounds about right.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, This is just getting stupider and stupider. I can't wait to see what they come up with next. Maybe they'll demand the elimination of the oppressive letter Q from the alphabet?!

On the open borders, I'm more than happy to let them out... in might be a problem, but they're all free to leave.


On Palin, I honestly think this has all been about self-promotion for books and television shows. The timing is too suspicious. There has never been any effort to set up a ground game, which is a huge clue that she really was never serious.

I'll be interested too what the next polls will bring. I suspect they are more likely to pick Cain than Perry, but that's mainly because Cain is now surging. If this happened two weeks ago, I think they would have gone with Perry.

I wonder if any of them will drift to Bachmann?

T-Rav said...

Andrew, I wouldn't put it past them. They've wanted to change everything else at different times, why should the alphabet be any different? (sigh)

On Palin's motives, we'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess. It's possible this was all self-promotional, but I prefer to avoid that conclusion until I see something concrete.

As far as supporting Bachmann goes, I think it's unlikely. There are some similarities between the two; but for one thing, she's ceased to be a major factor in the race, and for another, I get the sense there's not a lot of love lost between the two camps, whatever they might think of each other personally. I'm not sure her supporters would have gone for Perry, at least not en masse. Palin has criticized him at several points, including over the whole Gardasil thing. And weirdly, it's possible they bear a grudge against both for getting into the race and "stealing" part of Palin's base from her. You know that's how some of the hard-core Palinistas think.

So given the current situation, I think Cain is the logical fallback position for most of her supporters.

tryanmax said...

Had to step away and be Dad for the evening. Looks like a lot of talk I missed.

I can't comment any further on Occupied Wall Street. It starts to feel like ragging on a retarded kid.

On the Palin thing, I've been telling my friends that I think she's angling, and has been, for another VeeP nod. I know it seems strange, but I really do think that.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, We can agree to disagree. But watch for evidence of it, I think you'll find it.

I think they'll go for Cain too, but I think it's mostly an "anybody but Romney" stance and Cain is the guy right now who looks like he has the best chance to beat Romney.

Joel Farnham said...

Here is my take on Palin, the Palinistas aren't finished. Not by a long shot. They are stunned, disappointed and more than a little peeved. They will seek out and destroy the ones who mocked them. They won't destroy the Candidate who Palin endorses. They will destroy everyone else.

Blogs that openly torpedoed her in anything, especially RedState, are in for a big surprise. Erick Erickson thinks he is immune to things he has said. He is not. He said too many things against the followers and her. He allowed RedState people to gang up. At this juncture, he is trying to make nice. A dollar short and a day late.

I think most of the Palinistas will go for Cain and fight just as hard. Courteous sites like this one will profit.

On Palin, her self, you might be right, celebrity status may have gone to her head. I don't think so. I think she has had enough of public office seeking. She doesn't need the money nor the grief. She is so much better at spearing stupid things like Obamacare with a well timed post.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, That might be, but I honestly can't see anyone offering her a VP slot.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I think her goal has always been to become the new Newt -- a party guru who dispenses advice and endorsements and makes a nice living without having to put up with all the crap that comes with running. Honestly, it sounds awful to spend your days traveling all over multiple states to give the same speech six or seven times a day and then fly to places like New York on the weekends to beg for money. I can't blame her if she decided that's not what she wanted.

I think that's why she kept flirting with running. To be like Newt requires a solid following. To keep that following excited requires flirting with running so these people don't lose interest and go find someone else to support. That's what Newt's done for 15 years before he finally had to run or lose his supporters.

I think the celebrity stuff probably did go to her head (and I think her daughter was an overreach), but if I'm right that her goal is only to become a guru, then it certainly hasn't hurt her.

On how the Palin people will react? You may be right. They have been VERY aggressive in pushing her and that usually includes a lot of defensiveness when things go wrong. So it wouldn't surprise me if they turned on people who they see as having undercut her.

(And when I say "they" I mean the hardcore supporters, not the casual supporters.)

Joel Farnham said...

One more thing, sites like Hot Air which needed a Palin controversy every so often for traffic are going to be at a loss.

T-Rav said...

I agree with Andrew, I don't see anyone offering Palin a VP slot. Frankly, I don't think she would take it if offered, either. It wouldn't benefit her more than being at the top of the ticket, and it wouldn't benefit the nominee on average.

As for the hard-core Palinistas, I think both sides need to just bury the hatchet. Notice I said "need to," not "will."

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, That's true. Several sites out there (left and right) used Palin to drive business and they will be hurting unless they can find a replacement.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, True. What people should do and what they actually do are often quite unrelated.

I think she won't be VP because it doesn't help anyone to put her on the ticket. For her, it seems like a demotion, so she doesn't really benefit unless there's a scenario where the GOP really decides they need her as VP to win.

At the same time, she comes from a very small state -- so she doesn't bring a lot of votes. She's female, which is a plus, but she doesn't poll well with women, which negates the plus. But more importantly, if the nominee is just looking for a women, then there are less controversial alternatives for the nominee to pick from the female ranks.

She also bring a lot of controversy and a HUGE spotlight which will overshadow anyone like a Romney.

About the only candidate it might help is Huntsman, who would need something to win over conservatives, but he would never pick her because she's not part of his club.

I could be wrong. Indeed, I could be reading her all wrong, but that's how it strikes me.

T-Rav said...

I'm listening to a replay of Palin's interview with Mark Levin right now. Among other things, she takes a few clear digs at "crony capitalism." She's specifically referring to Obama, but I wonder if that's also an implied criticism of Perry. I suspect it is.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That may well be. The first time I recall her using that term was when the Gardisil issue came up. I'm not saying she didn't use it earlier, but that's the first time I really remember her making a big deal of the term.

tryanmax said...

Like I said, I know Sarah angling for VeeP doesn't make sense, but it's what my gut tells me. Sorry, I don't have a better explanation than that.

tryanmax said...

Holy Zeitgeist, Batman! This was on Kimmel last night: LINK

Too bad it isn't funny.

AndrewPrice said...

Interesting timing! LOL! I suspect that one looked better on the page than it did in a skit, but I did like the "tickle my Elmo" comment!


You could on be right on the VP thing -- that that's what she wants. I just don't think anyone would pick her.

tryanmax said...

More for the zeitgeist file: Laura Ingraham just bumped out with the 1-2-3-4-5 pinball song.

So, Andrew, you are officially the only person in the world who doesn't know the song. LOL!

AndrewPrice said...

Ok, well I'm going to have to sort this out. LOL!

T-Rav said...

What with all the other stuff, I forgot to say anything about Steve Jobs' passing. Very sad. He made a huge difference in the world, and he will be missed. I pray his family will be lifted up from their grief.

Perhaps this might brighten things a bit: Margie Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church announced last night that “Westboro will picket his funeral. He had a huge platform; gave God no glory & taught sin.” She announced this, by the way, in a tweet from her iPhone. Confirmed: God is a practical joker.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, That is funny!

I have to say that honestly, I would not shed a tear if someone helped God call those Westboro bastards home with extreme prejudice.... though I'm pretty sure they're not going to see God when they go unless it's in passing on their way somewhere warmer.

Jobs will be missed. He is indeed one of those people who changed the world.

Post a Comment