BLOGTOBER 2009: It's LOU DOBBS Fault!

Incredible, CNN's abyssmal ratings from 7-11pm ET has nothing to do with how boring their programming is, it's all Lou Dobbs fault (according to the first four commenters at the NYT Media Decoder blogpost on the subject).

Nevermind that Lou Dobbs is only on from 7-8pm, and while his numbers are terrible, they're in line with the rest of the lineup.

I'm sure whatever CNN replaces Lou Dobbs with when he leaves, will do even worse (can an Andrew Sullivan Hour be far behind, they could replace one fake token 'conservative' who hasn't been a conservative for years with another 'conservative' who no longer believes in conservatism).

I don't like Lou Dobbs personally, his brand of populism veers into many bad territories. While there's some areas where libertarians, populist, and social conservatives agree, the populist are the most likely of those three to demand government 'does something' about the things they don't like. I disagree with much that comes out of the social conservative movement, as well, but for the most part, their solution is, let us be and don't force us to pay taxes to fund acts we find reprehensible, more than, let us use the massive apparatus of government to impose our will on others (though as far as progressives are concerned, not spending government funds on something is tantamount to prohibiting that thing).

Lou Dobbs might sound like a conservative or libertarian to the 'progressives' who enjoy the rest of CNN's programming, but he seems to me more like an opportunistic populist who takes whatever position will sell his current book.

Rumor is he wants on Fox Business, but if Fox was smart, they'll leave him alone.

How'd They Let That In the NY Times?!?

(via Instapundit)

John Tierney somehow was allowed to sneak in a piece critical of GLOBAL WARMING!!! alarmism in the Science section of the NY Times. His piece isn't critical of the idea that man is having some sort of effect on weather, rather his piece attacks the bandwagon-ism and consensus-ism that is infecting the public debate and even the process of science review building around this subject. Scientist get in trouble when they lose their skeptism, and it's in even worse trouble when skepticism is cause for ostracization. That's the case now in climate sciences with regards to human caused advanced global warming and any person willing to come forward with doubts as to the likelihood of the models that show all the worst cases happening over the next few decades.

He even takes a swipe at The Goracle towards the end (that takes guts).

The NYT will have to do some act of contrition for allowing this slip, I suggest 14 "Hail Gaias" as propitiation.

(Our Mother, who art the Earth, Hallowed be thy flora and fauna . . .)

I Was Going To Blog About It Also . . .

. . . but the NYT exceeded my capacity for ridicule (and that takes some doing as I have a capacious capacitor for ridicule), and as my circuits were overloaded, I was incapable of coming up with anything.

(via Althouse)

Normally You Have to Read at Least the Entire First Sentence to Detect the Bias

(hat tip Instapundit)

So the NYT does a piece about the job that Tony Snow is doing as White House Press Secretary.

Good for them, he's been excellent, he deserves attention.

But when you have a "journalist" and "editors" who feel it's OK to start a piece with this sentence fragment

"The White House, like any castle"

Someone who doesn't hate Pres. Bush, who doesn't think he's King George II, The Selected, would even contemplate referring to the White House as a "castle".

To even think of that phrase to start your piece suggests that you are a DailyKos addict and find the forums at MyDD to be reasonable.

For a paper that has trouble referring to terrorists as terrorists, they find it amazingly easy to refer to the Bush Administration as an Imperial Presidency (a phrase that seemed not to exist before President George W. Bush took office).

The White House is America's home where the democratically elected leader of all the folks of the United States resides. To use the term "castle" which suggests an entire constellation of undemocratic meanings, is to suggest that the President is undemocratic.

It's the people's house, show the White House, the Presidency, and the current President the respect the office deserves.

Or don't, but if you don't, don't expect anyone other than American-hating crazies to listen to what you have to say.