The Lies of Sarah Palin

I told the Congress to take their bridge and shove it!
This one is a flat out lie and lately even conservative stalwarts such as the Wall Street Journal are willing to soft-pedal around to tell you that:

“She endorsed the multimillion dollar project during her gubernatorial race in 2006. And while she did take part in stopping the project after it became a national scandal, she did not return the federal money. She just allocated it elsewhere.”

For it before she was against it, perhaps?

I got rid of the governor’s chef! Boy, do my kids ever miss her!
But Palin actually just reassigned the chef, and only because her kids left the scene for the summer. Still unclear is whether or not Palin brought the chef back to the governors mansion post-summer vacation.
What she did do is take a per diem for living at home. Michael Luo of the New York Times tells us:

The $60-a-day allowance is available for state employees when traveling on official state business to cover meals and other sundry expenses […] Ms. Palin’s per diems, which included some charges for partial days, totaled $17,059, from Dec. 4, 2006, when she took office, through June 30, 2008, the most recent data available, according to Sharon Leighow, a spokeswoman for the governor’s office. Ms. Palin’s salary is $125,000 a year.

I sold (former Alaska governor) Frank Murkowski’s jet on eBay!
This one is by far the closest to the truth, and yet still manages to bend the facts. The plane was indeed listed on eBay at her behest (having been a major issue in the campaign for governor, dispatching the plane was one of her first actions in office):

“But the jet’s eBay listing did not prove effective, and the state never got its asking price. Instead, in 2007, the state turned to an aircraft broker, Turbo North Aviation. The jet was purchased that year by businessman Larry Reynolds, the owner of a sporting goods store and marine supply store in Valdez. Reynolds paid $2.1-million.”

So it’s at least true that Palin (or, more accurately, the state of Alaska) put the plane up for sale on eBay, but it didn’t sell on eBay. But McCain still likes to take this minor fabrication and turn it into a full-on lie by taking it an extra mile:

“You know what I enjoyed the most, she took the luxury jet bought by her predecessor and sold it on eBay,” he said. “And made a profit.”

Except that none of that happened. As we know, the plane, valued at ~2.7 million dollars in fact sold for $2.1M and didn’t sell on eBay.

How is it that Al Gore can be savaged over the Love Canal based entirely on an immediately corrected misquotation while McCain, Palin, and any other member of the GOP can spew patent fabrications, repeatedly, in public, and raise nary an eyebrow? Must be that liberal media acting up again.

In Aid of A,B,C

The lipstick on a pig thing is indeed the greatest issue facing the country since John McCain spent several years as a guest of The Red Menace.

But it’s worth noting that there’s another scandal of phenomenal proportions out there, just waiting to give us its money:

Palin’s [gubernatorial] office requested $2 million in federal monies to study crab mating habits; $494,900 for the recreational halibut harvest and $3.2 million for seal genetics research.

Those requests for the study of wildlife genetics and mating habits seems pretty antithetical to the long-standig views of Palin’s running mate, John McCain.

“We’re not going to spend $3 million of your tax dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana,” McCain said earlier this year, referring to a request from Montana for federal money to study the endangered grizzly bear. “I don’t know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money.”

My stars, she wanted to study crab fucking? How old were those crabs? Were they instructed on how to use crab condoms? Were there any crab abortions planned as part of the research? And, won’t somebody please think of the seal DNA!?! This is before we get to her tacit approval of dread science and knowledge. Jesus, shouldn’t she be in some kind of jail cell right now awaiting verdict?

Of course, we’ll hear about none of this. Why? Well, fortunately Joe Scarborough told us why in this little moment in which the truth slipped out:

MATTHEWS: Now, [the lipstick on a pig flap will] die, as we said, it’ll jump the shark. Two days ago, no, we’re all talking about – you’re waving the tabloids around, come on. Two days from now – I want to ask you, what will we talk about two days from now?

SCARBOROUGH: Whatever the McCain campaign wants us to talk about, because the McCain campaign is assertive.

To quote Steve Benen:

As far as I can tell, the story has to a) have video; b) be exceedingly simple and easy to summarize in a few seconds; and c) be good for John McCain.

Millions of dollars for seal DNA and crab fucking clearly have A and B, but not enough C. Back to porcine cosmetics, then.

Why not try this on for size: John McCain must hate Israel since he wants to de-fund our support to it. Sarah Palin quotes an anti-Semite in her speeches; she must hate Israel even more (and that’s rather charitably assuming she’s aware of its existence). AIPAC much? They were never that into politics anyway. But they probably just realize that this one only has A and lacks B or C. Lets face it, Israel’s just too boring and complicated for the media. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what the McCain campaign decides to talk about.

The Smallening

Rolling Stone cutting its size down, going glue-back.

Sad, but true. I must admit that I particularly love this line:

On balance, going to standard size should appeal to advertisers, according to Brenda White, senior vice president for publishing at Starcom USA

Why the fuck should that necessarily be so? Advertisers like eyes. Period. RS is (reportedly) at its highest circulation ever. This is like saying people will just naturally prefer New Coke in the total absence of any evidence to support it. After all, it’s new! Didn’t you see the name? New!

And then there’s this all-too-depressing note:

In the large format, long articles often turn up as daunting expanses of almost uninterrupted type. With the revision, such pages are smaller and less intimidating, and more likely to be broken up with photographs.

Yep, we like our 2nd grade level picktoor books. Don’t skaer me with that there tipe of your’n cause’n I don’t cotton to the readin’ so much.

“We’ve evolved,” Mr. Wenner said. “But the core tradition, the mission, remains the same.”

Indeed, Jann, shorter articles and, preferably, just a picture about Brittney are irreducibly the core tradition of long form music criticism and politically charged articles. Hunter S. Thompson became the face of the magazine mostly because of his brief, 10 word bullet points (and lots of pictures) about how Avril Levigne is totally kewl.

Mark my words: this is officially the middle of the end (the beginning was the demotion and summary deletion of anything approaching serious criticism alongside the transformation of the other content to little more than Maxim-style laddy-mag filler).
Content may come and go, but you generally don’t mess with your fundamental brand image and survive. McDonalds, for instance, may as well adopt a large red “D” logo and a friendly but comically edgy cat-spokesman named Terry. How did New Coke work out? More of the same.

My remarkable, nay oracular insight into the future? Single copy newstand sales (what they claim to be after) will not be positively affected by making the magazine more generic in appearance. I know, I know. Rocket science.

The Paper

From Bernie Mac’s Tribune obit:

“When I started in comedy in the clubs in 1977, blacks couldn’t do certain clubs—not because they were segregated. They just didn’t want to put the [black comics] out there,” Mac told the Tribune in 2007.

Huh. Wonder what he could have possibly said. Probably not “gentlemen,” though. Good thing they protected us from whatever that might have been. Also here:

“I ain’t scared of you, [expletive]!” became a signature tag line.

Presumably not talking about [black comics] there…

Can’t we, as a nation, agree that the problem isn’t really so much that 6 year old, delicate eyes are getting all sorts of filthy idears from the nasty newspaper, and instead, that the real problem is much more along the lines of: with few exceptions nobody younger than 65 gives a shit about the paper anymore? And from there, isn’t some sort of, oh, I don’t know “solution” starting to be pretty fucking obvious? And it’s not something that involves ever more trend pieces about how more and more couples are using the intarwebs to shop these days.

Not saying that cursing in the paper is the, or even a solution, but at least adopting a way of discussing more complex subject matter in a way that doesn’t immediately infantilize the readership you’re so desperately trying to court could be a good fucking idea.

Chartsengrafs

This is a start, at least:

Let me make a point about efficiency, because my Republican opponents – they don’t like to talk about efficiency,“ Obama said.

"You know the other day I was in a town hall meeting and I laid out my plans for investing $15 billion a year in energy efficient cars and a new electricity grid and somebody said, ‘well, what can I do? what can individuals do?’ Obama recalled.

"So I told them something simple,” Obama said. “I said, ‘You know what? You can inflate your tires to the proper levels and that if everybody in America inflated their tires to the proper level, we would actually probably save more oil than all the oil we’d get from John McCain drilling right below his feet there, or wherever he was going to drill.’”

“So now the Republicans are going around – this is the kind of thing they do. I don’t understand it! They’re going around, they’re sending like little tire gauges, making fun of this idea as if this is ‘Barack Obama’s energy plan.’

"Now two points, one, they know they’re lying about what my energy plan is, but the other thing is they’re making fun of a step that every expert says would absolutely reduce our oil consumption by 3 to 4 percent. It’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant.

Fine. But what we really need in this fight are Ross Perot style charts and graphs. Hard numbers. Hit McCain right where he’s most vulnerable: his total lack of understanding of anything numerical. He’s already said he doesn’t get economics, is unaware of the computer, knows nothing of the innertubes. The simplest pie chart will strike him like a bolt from the distant future; and he’s guaranteed to do us the honor of saying so on national television. Every one of these idiotic GOP-lead, media enabled "ain’t it funny?” lines needs to be systematically dismantled beyond the point of comfort.

Brazen, prideful stupidity and its media enablers must be exterminated from the public discourse. Starting now. Because it’s only going to get worse, and because McCain is counting on a bunch of silly issues like this sopping up all available debate time. If they actually were to, you know, debate three or four times, well, let’s just say that would be a GOP disaster.

After 9 or 10 years of this non-stop nonsense, we’re so steeped in it we don’t even notice anymore. It’s going to take 15 or 20 years to march it back. Start now.

Just a splash

Well, this didn’t take long:

SHUSTER: Well, here’s the other thing that we saw on the tape, Chris, is that, when Obama went in, he was offered coffee, and he said, “I’ll have orange juice.”

MATTHEWS: No.

SHUSTER: He did.

And it’s just one of those sort of weird things. You know, when the owner of the diner says, “Here, have some coffee,” you say, “Yes, thank you,” and, “Oh, can I also please have some orange juice, in addition to this?” You don’t just say, “No, I’ll take orange juice,” and then turn away and start shaking hands.

Indeed you don’t. In many parts of the world such an incredible affront as requesting what you’d like to consume in a restaurant is met by torture and/or indefinite imprisonment. You know, how they roll at Guantanamo. Either way, I hope somebody sent the alert to MoDo:

DOWD (4/21/07): Whether or not the country is ready to elect a woman president or a black president, it’s definitely not ready for a metrosexual in chief.

In presidential politics, it’s all but impossible to put the man into manicure. Be sensitive, but not soft. Effete is never effective. Not much has changed since George H. W. Bush drove his New Hampshire campaign off the road by requesting “a splash” more coffee at a truck stop.

John Kerry sank himself by windsurfing in spandex and ordering a cheese steak in Philly with Swiss instead of Cheez Whiz.

Next thing you know, we’ll have to sort out how to tell the children that Obama wears four button suits. It’s just not ‘Merican. That’s all I’ll say.

Texas Lottery: Voluntary Scourge of the Super-Rich

Texas, our Texas introduced a $50 lottery ticket in hopes of attracting affluent players…how’d that work out? Not so much:

Laura Estrada, 33, can’t seem to get enough of the high-dollar tickets. She earns just more than $22,000 a year as a customer sales representative for a party store in north Austin but spends anywhere between $100 and $200 a week on scratch-off tickets, including the $50 games. She loves the rush.

“Losing $50 makes you perspire; it makes you nervous. ‘Gosh, I shouldn’t have bought that.’ But then you win and it makes you feel great,” she said.

Estrada harbors no illusion: She knows the lottery is a money drain for habitual players like herself. But it’s her favorite hobby. So she doesn’t calculate the losses; she concentrates on the wins, like the $200 she collected on a $50 ticket. She has to think hard about how many $50 tickets she’s bought to win that one — between six and 10, she estimates.

Her reason for continuing to play? “I have to try to get my money back.”

Census analysis shows she’s pretty much squarely the average player. Neat. So I guess they plan to get rid of the thing? Not so much:

“The $50 ticket salvaged our entire fiscal year last year,” said Robert Tirloni, projects manager for the Texas Lottery Commission, bringing $137 million to state coffers since the game’s debut in May and helping the commission close a $93 million gap in revenue between 2006 and 2007.

Kind of gives you warm fuzzies, doesn’t it? Maybe it’s better that the media is just used to keep track of all the missing white women after all.

The Clinton Rules

And so we begin in earnest: Hillary Clinton, non-tipper.

Forget for a moment that this wasn’t Hillary popping in for a honeybun on her way to catch a Greyhound over to Mount Pilate, this was one of those campaign “events” generated entirely for the media…why the candidate is just plain folk: they eat too!
There were dozens of her staffers there. The overall bill ran to $157. They have records showing they left a $100 tip. Perilously close to 50% (EXTRA: Clinton. Is she too rich to rule?).

Forget all that, though.

Concentrate on this: if you think that this sort of asinine “story,” originating from that right-wing noise machine bastion NPR is limited to Clinton, then think again. Once she’s been dispatched based on excessive or minimalistic tips (and, rest assured, there will be blowback on over-tipping down the line), the laugh, cleavage, haircuts, shoeshines, brand and/or price-point of shampoo, or whatever other critical issue can ultimately be found, the media will eventually move on. Rest assured, though, they won’t move on to, say, Giuliani claiming to know more of torture than John McCain, a man who has actually been tortured. Nope. Nor do we care about the five big lies relating to Giuliani’s signature issue, 9/11. Nope, none of that is important enough even for a passing mention in the mainstream media. Neither can we focus on Hillary’s own highly dubious choice in voting to give Bush license to attack Iran without provocation or further Congressional approval. What we care about are vague missteps in the tightly choreographed luncheon photo shoots of the Democrat. Especially when there’s proof (in this case, proof of a gratuity) that there was no misstep. That’s the best kind of misstep possible: the one that can’t be put to rest because it never happened in the first place. Let’s go 24/7 on this one! This is how you take the true measure of a candidate, after all.

Next debate: Blink round! Candidates, signify with one blink or two: 15% or 20% the adequate tip for service that’s merely “so so”? (Did you see how he/she blinks!?! Is this a President? I think Americans blink with a little more conviction. And, Christ, do I see four buttons on that suit?)