Below are the officially registered entries for the #JustABlogger Electoral Votes Contest. (For information on how you can enter and win, please click here. UPDATE: The entry deadline has now passed.) The entries are presented in their official forms, in the order in which they were submitted. Check back for new entries as they are added, and for a new post coming soon, which will sort the entries into table form for your convenient viewing.
UPDATE: The final electoral vote total of 2012 (not counting faithless electors or unexpectedly discovered warehouses stuffed with ballots) is 332 for Barack Obama and 206 for Mitt Romney. The closest entry in the #JustABlogger Electoral Votes Contest was submitted by Alex Moff (@alexmoff) with 305 for Obama and 233 for Romney. Congratulations, Alex. You may pick your prize.
Many of mainstream media pundits have gone on the record with their predictions on how many electoral votes Barack Obama and Mitt Romney will receive. The only problem is that the vast majority are picking Obama to win. Their exaggerated turn-out models tells them so. This is what happens when we leave it to the #RealJournalists (in the words of Juan Williams) to tell us what is going on.
From the ground level, from the people that aren’t creating turn-out models but actually turning out, it looks a whole lot different. Professor Glenn Reynolds, aka @Instapundit, has dubbed this the Ground-Glass Election (as in, we will crawl across ground glass to vote to evict Obama from the White House).
So here’s the opportunity for the #JustABlogger population*, the hoi polloi, to go on record and show the elite how it should be done…and you can win a prize while you’re at it.
WHO CAN ENTER
Anyone but a #RealJournalist. Bloggers, tweeters, school kids, Walmart moms, Latinos with forks, cats with videos. Anyone!
WHAT TO DO
Go to RealClearPolitics.com and use their map tool to create your Electoral Vote (EV) map. [You are welcome to use other sites' electoral map tools, if you prefer. I've just found this one easy.]
Take a picture/screenshot of it and upload the picture to the photo service of your choice (such as Twitpic.com, Yfrog.com or Instagram.com).
Tweet @PruPaine a link to the photo, along with your tie-breaker prediction of the Popular Vote (PV) percentages Obama and Romney will receive.
Example: My contest entry submission tweet to @PruPaine would say…
All entries must be tweeted to @PruPaine by 9pm EST on Monday, November 5, 2012. The final tie-breaker is based on whichever entry is received first, so enter early…but not often! (See Fine Print.)
All entries will be posted here at PrudencePaine.com, linked to your Twitter handle. If you also have a blog and/or a post about your prediction, I’ll be happy to link to it as well. (Just include the link in your tweet, or send it to me when your post is up.)
Because of the fabulous prize! You can choose to receive one of the following (in either Kindle or print):
or a book from the Prudy personal library (I’ve got lots of books on the disaster that Obama has been!).
The winner will be the contestant whose prediction comes closest to the actual electoral vote (EV) outcome of the 2012 United States presidential election. If the winning EV total was submitted by more than one contestant, the winner will be the contestant who correctly predicted the outcome of the most states. A tie in the number of correctly predicted states will go to the contestant who comes closest to predicting the popular vote percentages for each candidate (to two decimal places). If a tie still exists, the earliest submitted tying entry will be the winner.
Void where prohibited by law. One entry per person. Not responsible for lost, spindled or mutilated entries. Entries will not be returned. Consumption may cause racing pulse and increased levels of optimism. No need to see your doctor if this condition persists.
So far, nearly all the #JustABlogger entries are indicating a Romney win. A new post will be started soon to show the entries received.
When you submit your map, you’ll get a tweet letting you know you are officially entered, or that there is a missing component to your entry. Your entry hasn’t been registered in the contest until you get a “you’re entered” tweet. If you don’t receive a reply tweet within an hour or two, feel free to ask if it has been accepted.
Note: Retweets of other persons’ entries do not constitute a separate entry.
In the final presidential debate of the 2012 campaign season, President Barack Obama tried to score points by lampooning Governor Mitt Romney’s criticism that under the Obama administration, our US Navy had fallen to levels not seen since 1916.
In doing so, Obama sneered that we don’t have many bayonets or horses in the military either because times change.
Yet, our Marines are indeed equipped with bayonets. And the soldiers serving in Afghanistan use military horses.
In fact, Vice President Joe Biden was in New York City at Ground Zero for the dedication ceremony for a statue heralding the proud service of our horse-mounted soldiers.
A statue honoring soldiers who served in Afghanistan on horseback was rededicated Friday at the World Trade Center site. The 16-foot-tall Special Operations Horse Soldiers statue, located on Greenwich Street near the Path Station, commemorates when U.S. Special Operations team members rode horses into combat during the American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.
Riding with and advising Northern Alliance warlords fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda on steep terrain in Northern Afghanistan, it was the first time U.S. troops rode horses in a military operation since 1942.
“Having the terrorist attacks here, bringing this back home, it’s priceless, words can’t describe the pride and honor we all feel,” said U.S. Army “Horse Soldier” Master Sergeant Michael Elmore.
“Only one had ever been on a horse in his life. He is a no kidding cowboy. The other men had never been on a horse. In the spirit of great Special Forces guys they adapted and began to conduct a horse-mounted operation with their Afghan counterparts,” said Special Operations Deputy Commanding General Lieutenant General John Mulholland Jr.
The statue was made possible by private donations, with $750,000 raised in six weeks.
“Mulholland and his guys would never ask for anything and that’s the beauty of it. They’re the quiet professionals so we wanted to do something to recognize them and all those who went and served to fight the battle of 9/11,” said Constellations Group CEO Bill White.
“The message is that military service to your country is an honorable thing,” said Sculptor Douwe Blumberg.
Among those on hand for the ceremony was Johnny Spann, whose son Mike was the first American to die during the invasion while working with the CIA.
“Hopefully the dedication of this Horse Soldier Monument will make people more aware and maybe they will get interested in reading about it or whatever. It’s a part of our history, and it’s important people know exactly what took place,” Spann said.
The statue was first dedicated by Vice President Joe Biden on Veteran’s Day.
During the debate, Obama also noted that he’d been at Ground Zero. Apparently he paid no attention to the statue there. Or perhaps he walked by it and just laughed at how preposterous he thought it was—just like he did in the debate.
It’s even odder to know that celebrity-obsessed Obama didn’t know about the horse soldiers because Hollywood knows. According to a special report at the Daily Caller, “Secret Mission: The Horse Soldiers of 9/11,” “producer Jerry Bruckheimer is producing a future movie about America’s ‘Horse Soldiers.’”
The Daily Caller story begins:
It was the news the world breathlessly waited for immediately after the 9/11 terror attacks: a report of the first American troops on the ground in Afghanistan.
All at once the world’s attention focused on an iconic photo of those Special Operations Forces doing something no American military had done in nearly a century: They rode horses into combat.
Their secret mission: secure northern Afghanistan by advising the warring tribal factions that formed the Northern Alliance. During the 2011 Veterans Day Parade on November 11, a new monument to these men — and to all Americans in uniform — made its way down New York City’s famed Fifth Avenue on the way to its final home, a stone’s throw from Ground Zero.
What a fascinating, uplifting story. One that our President should never belittle with derision dripping from his lips to score political points. In trying to make Romney look small, he mocked our heroes.
And in doing so, he proved he is a very small man with a large ignorance of military equipment.
(hat tip to @LifeOnAHorse for alerting me to the statue story. Follow the retired Navy man. And thanks to @MissSaraEliza for alerting me to the Daily Caller story.)
The rocky terrain found in remote areas of Afghanistan isn’t easy to traverse, even by jeep. Native horses become a mode of transportation. Pack animals, especially donkeys, also become familiar partners. For some of America’s elite troops, however, knowledge of horses and their four-legged relatives isn’t familiar territory. The first time they actually halter a horse, saddle it and ride it may be at Smith Lake Stables.
“That’s why the only horses we get, that the government buys, are what we call dead broke,” Rossignol says. “We can’t afford to have anyone get hurt.”
But there’s more to it than just learning about tacking up and riding a horse, Rossignol says. The troops also learn herd management and how to treat common equine health issues affecting equines.
“We teach them about anatomy and basic vet care,” he says. “That’s because many times these troops are working with the local people.”
That’s one side of the Special Forces that isn’t often seen by the Americans at home. In order to establish a good rapport with an agrarian or nomadic society, a Special Forces member might offer to help care for sick or injured animals owned by local peoples. It’s all part of spreading goodwill.
Yet despite the benefits of maintaining a select group of horses for military training, the horses associated with Fort Bragg have faced some budget cuts. Land originally used for pasture was deemed too valuable for grazing, and horses were moved from the actual military base to their current home at Smith Lake Stables, a few miles away.
There the moderator sits. A member of the Gang of 500, the Washington journocrats, The Journocracy, appointed to their role by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Oh, the prestige, the honor, the gleeful stab at those who have held them in lesser esteem.
As the debate begins, most moderators believe they will be fair and impartial. But as time rolls on, the moderator’s irrepressible bias slowly emerges.
See, speaking now is the candidate for whom the journalist has a natural affinity. It’s okay if they let the guy ramble on, they think. Using the “my primary duty is to be a facilitator” excuse, they can generously permit the guy to fully explain his position and make a few attacks on the opposition.
But then it’s the other guy’s turn. Ugh, thinks the moderator, some of his positions are just untenable. How can anyone fall for this baloney?
In a normal interview, the journalist would rake the guy over the coals with a passel of hard-nosed questions. But here on the debate stage, the journalist-as-moderator must foster an appearance of a balanced approach. So they begin tensing up, hoping the guy will shut up soon.
Just as we try to watch Sunday morning news shows with an open mind, the other side’s talking points are often like nails on a chalkboard, rife with so many lies, distortions, naivete and meaningless babble. We just want to scream at the stupidity, tell them a thing or two, or change the channel if it becomes too inane to handle.
But journalist-moderator is stuck there on stage, having to smile and listen to stuff they dislike. Sooner or later, they interrupt. They can’t help it. “All right, all right, I think we’ve got that. Now let’s hear the better side.”
Then when their secretly preferred guys speaks, it’s like a soothing balm. Ah, yes. There’s the logic that America needs to hear, they think as their guy goes over the time limit and beyond. The moderator thinks it would be impolite to interrupt while he is on such a roll. The moderator knows where the candidate’s rambling point is leading and will, with cheerful, hearty forbearance, give him a chance to get there—or perhaps sneak in a little prompting word or two to refocus him on the proper argument if he gets lost.
[Recall when Jim Lehrer rescued a momentarily stumped Obama with the key word "balanced," to which Obama looked grateful and spilled out his stump speech on "balanced approach."]
If the other guy attempts to break in or complain, they get the stink eye the first time and then the verbal rebuke the next.
When it’s finally wrong guy’s turn to speak, again with the grating wrong arguments, the moderator feels they are doing the audience a favor by ending such babble. Surely everyone else must feel the same need to cut him short. But to be generous, the moderator permits a few more seconds, endures it all just a tad more to show how reasonable and balanced they are. And then smack! “Let’s move on.”
Yet, there’s an inherent flaw that goes beyond the impatience the liberal journalist will have for the conservative candidate: The seasoned journalist covers politics daily and has heard much of this information before, but many in the television audience are just now tuning in, and most of it is rather new to them.
By not giving equal time, by constantly interrupting one but not the other, is to give the other side a clear advantage. Time is money. If a candidate were to buy four minutes of national wall-to-wall channel television ad time, just how much would it cost them? This may be the only shot a candidate gets to connect with the audience.
The moderators need to get back to benign moderating. If journalists feel incapable of doing it without putting their stamp on it, let’s have non-journalists do it. How about a business man? Or a housewife? Someone who will just moderate and get out of the way and be fair about it.
If the Commission on Presidential Debates had clocks running showing the audience and the candidates the amount of time they are getting, the moderators would have a much better guide than their internal tolerance clocks to ration out the critical time allotted to each candidate to make his case to the American public.
Back in 2009, the satire website The Onion did a spoof on how the media avoided doing any negative story on Barack Obama. Ann Coultertweeted a link to it yesterday (with no mention of it being three years old), and it just goes to show how the media has, if anything, grown more protective of him—especially in the wake of the AlQaeda murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens on 9/11 2012.
WASHINGTON—More than a week after President Barack Obama’s cold-blooded killing of a local couple, members of the American news media admitted Tuesday that they were still trying to find the best angle for covering the gruesome crime.
“I know there’s a story in there somewhere,” said Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, referring to Obama’s home invasion and execution-style slaying of Jeff and Sue Finowicz on Apr. 8. “Right now though, it’s probably best to just sit back and wait for more information to come in. After all, the only thing we know for sure is that our president senselessly murdered two unsuspecting Americans without emotion or hesitation.”
Added Meacham, “It’s not so cut and dried.”
Since the killings took place, reporters across the country have struggled to come up with an appropriate take on the ruthless crime, with some wondering whether it warrants front-page coverage, and others questioning its relevance in a fast-changing media landscape.
“What exactly is the news hook here?” asked Rick Kaplan, executive producer of the CBS Evening News. “Is this an upbeat human-interest story about a ‘day in the life’ of a bloodthirsty president who likes to kill people? Or is it more of an examination of how Obama’s unusual upbringing in Hawaii helped to shape the way he would one day viciously butcher two helpless citizens in their own home?”
“Or maybe the story is just that murder is cool now,” Kaplan continued. “I don’t know. There are a million different angles on this one.”
So far, the president’s double-homicide has not been covered by any major news outlets. The only two mentions of the heinous tragedy have been a 100-word blurb on the Associated Press wire and an obituary on page E7 of this week’s edition of the Lake County Examiner.
While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.
“There’s been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all,” Washington Post seniorreporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show. “It’s enough of a tragedy without the press jumping in and pointing fingers or, worse, exploiting the violence. Plus, we need to be sensitive to the victims’ families at this time. Their loved ones were brutally, brutally murdered, after all.”
Since the media enjoy special protections, get unique access to people and places from which the hoi polloi are excluded, I’d suggest a professional oath of objectivity. But would that be the thing that would finally make them shape up and do their jobs properly? No. Our President, Congress and cabinet members take a loyalty oath to protect and defend the Constitution—the foremost priority of their jobs—and they often ignore that pledge, with no penalty. Oaths don’t seem to mean much anymore.
Plus the profession already has a code of ethics. Take a look at it. It is laughable (cry-able?) how few of the mainstream media political reporters actually abide by a tenth of these simple Society of Professional Journalists rules.
If you weren’t watching the 2012 Republican National Convention before it came on network television at 10pm on Thursday night, you missed some marvelous testimonials about Mitt Romney, the person. I hesitate to describe them because my words cannot do the content justice.
They are all relatively short, especially when considering your vote will last for four long years. It’s worth taking a moment to get to know Mitt Romney.
First, there’s the humbling tale of Pat and Ted Oparowski and their young son David’s terminal illness:
Second, there’s the moving testimonial of Pam Finlayson, a former member of Romney’s church:
Finally, there’s the video compilation of home movies and more testimonials to Romney’s life and career:
Pass the word. Share the videos with the ambivalent. Ask them to give Mitt Romney a chance.
Yet it doesn’t stop there. Last week, Barack Obama’s campaign chairman sent out a fundraising email with the subject line of “Let’s win the damn election.” Damn? Damn election? Is that vulgarity necessary? Does the Obama campaign believe that the use of coarse language will turn an unsuccessful plea into a successful one?
All this has been well reported of late, but it struck me hard this weekend when I was reading two different books about the Obamas. I was surprised to find it’s not just their subordinates that talk like sailors.
In the first, The Amateur, the author Edward Klein quotes a Chicago television reporter, Charles Thomas, who was speaking with Michelle Obama in the station’s green room moments before they were to do an on-air interview:
“…I asked, ‘Michelle, how are the kids? We want to talk to you about the Time magazine piece.’ And she rose up out of her chair. She’s a lot taller than I am. And she put her hand on her hip and glared down at me. Waving her forefinger at me, she said, ‘Charles, don’t you try that shit with me or I’ll walk out of here!”
That came to me as a surprise that she would use such language so casually.
Then as I was later reading Barack Obama’s Dreams From My Father, the same sort of thing arose in the very first scene on the first page of Chapter 1:
When the weather was good, my roommate and I might sit out on the fire escape to smoke cigarettes and study the dusk washing blue over the city, or watch white people from the better neighborhoods nearby walk their dogs down our block to let the animals shit on our curbs—”Scoop the poop, you bastards!” my roommate would shout with impressive rage, and we’d laugh at the faces of both master and beast, grim and unapologetic as they hunkered down to do the deed.
I enjoyed such moments—but only in brief. If the talk began to wander, or cross the border into familiarity, I would soon find reason to excuse myself.
Wow. The sentiments expressed there, so full of anger and racism, and premised on a racist, class-warfare lie: no rich white New Yorker is gonna walk their dog from a cushy neighborhood to some crime-ridden one with barking dobermans so that their dog can take a poop. And yet in this bizarre fantasy world Obama has constructed, he and his roommate seething with “impressive rage” get to force white people to pick up excrement. This is who we elected President of the United States?
So I guess I should stop being surprised at the filthy language coming out of the Obama campaign. Apparently it just rolls naturally off the tongues, and pens, of everyone there, from top to bottom. We’ve known that they are deficient in sound American ideas to govern the country; apparently they are also deficient in the level of vocabulary used to communicate outside of a saloon.
[Lights dim. Timpani drum roll. Baritone-voiced announcer booms throughout the auditorium.]
Ladies and gentlemen…welcome! to the 2011 Second Annual Sooper-Proodey Awards. Here are your hosts, SooperMexican and Prudence Paine.
[Curtains part. Sooper enters in a dashing black tuxedo and red cape, with Proodey in a matching evening gown, to uproarious applause. Soop smiles and motions for everyone to take their seats.]
Thank you, thank you. You are too kind. Gracias. Thank you. It’s such a pleasure to have you all join us once again as we take a moment on New Year’s Day to look over all the scandals, shenanigans, milestones and memories of the past year. As with our inaugural 2010 ceremony, we’ll mark our progress with comparisons to the previous year. Proodey?
Thank you, Soop. It’s such an exciting night! What a glamorous audience! So many glittering awards! Without further ado, let’s get the big show rolling with our first golden trophy:
[The still punch-drunk Boeing staggers toward the stage but stumbles and falls into some starlet's lap. Audience gasps, giggles and guffaws.]
Ooof! Boeing’s gonna have one major hangover tomorrow! That’s okay, boys. We’ll send your award over to you, with an icepack and some bloody mary mix. Take it away, Soop! What’s up next?
[Sooper takes the microphone.] Thank you, Proodence.
On a more somber note, every year we see capricious mother Gaia strike down our fellow man for our sins against our emotional global mother. In 2010, Haiti experienced one of the worst nature-caused disasters, and 2011 had its own share of anguish and misery. A massive earthquake struck off the coast of Japan, which triggered a disastrous tsunami. Storms hit Alabama with terrible results, flooding enveloped Thailand, and a 7.2 earthquake caused many deaths in Turkey.
In order to recognize that life has many trials and tribulations, we offer the following acknowledgement:
THE WORST GAIA-CURSED DISASTER TO BEFALL MAN FOR 2011
…and the winnah is…
The 2012 GOP Presidential Candidates!!!
Yes, yes, even the most positive Pollyannaish pro-Republican ideologue could not but grimace at the stumbling and bumbling events of the 2012 GOP run to replace Obama. From Cain’s numerous “indiscretions,” which were obviously trumped up by pizza-hating conspirators, and Rick Perry’s marble-mouthed rhetorical skills, to Michele Bachmann’s flapping eyelashes, Ron Paul’s Paulophrenia, and Mitt Romney’s placid smile programmed and poll-tested by his Wall Street puppeteers, no one seems pleased by the debates. No one, that is, except the Democrats, as the venerable Thomas Sowell points out.
Let’s not forget whiny Rick Santorum, demanding attention like a petulant teacher’s pet, or Jon Huntsman, the only one running for European president of the United States, with his not-so-subtle condescension and clumsy attempts at edgy humor. There was the awful effort by Donald Trump’s toupee to moderate a debate in order to promote his show and advocate the bombing of China and the forced extraction of Iraqi children’s vital fluids.
Today the feeding frenzy will be consummated by the first caucus, in Iowa, and the circular firing squad will arm itself with automatic weaponry to take more victims on this bloody, weary road to challenge Obama. More and more, we, the conservative public, are seized with the boring dread of impending election acceptance. Perhaps this campaign season has done to us what 40 years of Europeanized social engineering could not do: afflicted us with existential ennui!
[Prudence emerges from the curtain and briskly joins SooperMexican at the microphone. Smiling she says:] *ahem* Excuse me, ladies and gentlemen. I need just a quick word with my cohost here…
[With a clenched smile, she whispers into Soop's ear. The audience hushes to strain to listen to her barely audible words over the PA.]Mexy! While I can tolerate some gentle jabbing at MY Michele and the two Ricks, I did not know that you were going to protect one candidate from any lambasting. And how convenient that unmentioned candidate just happens to be YOUR candidate, the Noot!!!!
[Soop gently shoves Proodey behind curtain]
As I was saying… Not evenPaul Krugman could see an upside to this disaster, and he’s a Keynesian! I need a tequila shot or three. Proodey, take away the next award!
Thank you, NewtperMexican.
[Proodey slips a mickey into Soop's drink while he's distracted by her dress.]
Last year, the Tea Party changed the face of Congress and put fear in the pants of big spenders. Did Time magazine make the Tea Party the Man of the Year, acknowledge that they had made the greatest impact on the events of 2010? Silly question, I know. Of course it did not. Because Time does not agree with the Tea Party’s objectives.
Yet Time had the brazenness to name a bunch of rock-throwing, raping, cop-car-defecating, lice-infested hipsters as its 2011 Man of the Year. It raised on to its liberal pedestal people who have no mission other than to provoke local police forces and municipal governments that have no means to resolve their unstated concerns even if they agreed with them.
Therefore, in honor of Time‘s glorification of civic inanity and hippie nostalgia, we present…
TIME’S SCAM OF THE YEAR AWARD!
We searched through all the Occupy Wall Street videos to find the one that best captures their purpose, their intelligence, their method of communicating to shine the light on Time’s vaunted Man of the Year.
And the winner is…..
Nightmare on Occupy Wall Street![audience gives twinkles]
Ecce the prime example of what Time (the measure, not the magazine) will soon forget, if it ever took notice in the first place:
Take it away, el Sooper! Not that I’m implying that you steal stuff. By the way, I’d like my hubcaps back, please….
They have been appropriated for the glorious Reconquista.
This year has seen the coming-of-age of that venerable social media microblogging platform that I like to call… el Twitter. We saw celebrities, sports figures, politicians, pundits all make headlines because of their inane and often incredibly stupid gaffes on twitter! In addition, we saw many bloggers and citizen journalists use this media to seize fifteen minutes of fame, and beyond!
And the winner is… [breaks pinata… kids grab all the candies. Soop waltzes into the mexi-throng, grabs an envelope and opens it…]
The winner is Alec Baldwin!!
[the crowd goes wild, laughing and clapping and tweeting insults to the #AlecBaldwin hashtag]
Because he’s been committed to a sanatorium, to accept his prize is his interlocutor and twitter nemesis, SooperMexican!! [hands award to himself]
Only Alec Baldwin could carry the moron torch that hath been passed on by Keith Olbermann with his liberal twitter rant spurtings. He began his lonely drunken march into insanity by tussling with a very handsome and witty Sooper Mexican on twitter once, and then once again. He insulted America’s moms, and tried to mock conservatives on twitter by comparing his follower and tweet counts! Now there’s a man who’s secure with himself.
To add insult to his own mental injury, he caused a scene on an airplane, had to be tossed off by the captain, and tweeted arrogantly about it. He then shamelessly portrayed the pilot apologizing to Baldwin on Saturday Night Live, showing the entire world his smug vainglory cannot be quelled! Thankfully, the ridicule he received made him recede from the twittersphere at least…
Finally, as a Christmas gift to America, Alec sadly announced that his dream had died of rising above a bit character on a sitcom with poor ratings and running for mayor of New York City.
As the writer of the twitter pebble that got the big idiotic elitist rock rolling towards the abyss, I’d like to say, “Thank you, Alec. Thank you so much.”
[Sooper bows to a standing ovation, breaks the award over his knee, and motions to Prudence.]
That was quite a sooper smackdown! And the bad behavior continued all over the world all year long—and not just by celebrities. Politicians competed to see who could crash and burn in the most dazzling sex scandal. In honor of 2010′s most bizarre sex scandal leading to the resignation of a political figure, we present…
Arnold Schwarzenegger! He admitted to his mistress and his 13-year-old love child. Since he waited until after his term as a liberal Republican governor of California ran out before he revealed this teenage tidbit, he didn’t lose his job—-but he did lose a wife…maybe.
Then there’s John Edwards. Fortunately for us, he never made it into the Pennsylvania Avenue job for which he tried to sell his soul on Ebay, so it wasn’t his to lose. Yet there was enough proof that an old woman (and others) bought him, so he could pass her money on to hush up his pregnant honey. After years of his running from the law and paparazzi, a grand jury handed down an indictment earlier this year, leaving him to insinuate that he was contemplating suicide and begging his mistress to marry him or move in so that she can’t testify against him.
Out of all of these philanderers, the one that tickles us the most, and therefore the winner, is….may I have the envelope please…
[Andrew Breitbart moseys out and over to the microphone, carrying the award envelope. He addresses the surprised audience, as their bewilderment turns to excited cheers of recognition.]
I’m here coincidentally. I just arrived at LaGuardia and at the media’s request, I came on over. I didn’t know they were going to be announcing this. I’m staying at a hotel about three blocks away, so I decided to come on by and see who the winner was. [Audience murmurs. Breitbart rips open the envelope]
And the winner of the Tickle Me Massa Award is…
…for perpetuating a false malicious meme in blaming the messenger, blowing up his own job while still keeping his Twitter open (unlike Alec Baldwin doing the reverse)…
[Thunderous audience applause]
Thank you, Andrew Breitbart for stopping by. [Audience applauds and stands, as he walks off the stage]
Let’s use this moment to present our new…
This special prize goes to our favorite RedEye correspondent on the Fox News late night show. We completely neglected this prestigious award last year, so this fella will be forever known as our first recipient. [audience shifts nervously in their seats]
And the winner is… [maracas shake]
[Audience erupts into cheers and begins a conga line through the auditorium to Juanlu Montoya's "Ana Maria"!]
But now, back to our regularly scheduled programming, and here’s SooperMexy with another major award!
[Sooper saunters out, margarita in hand, as a mariachi band plays a peppy tune.]
I’m not sure what’s in this drink. Or what’s going on at this awards show.
As we peer glassy-eyed through the hazy margarita glass of news stories past, we’re reminded of the domestic terror attack way back in February 2010 on the IRS building in Austin, Texas. The media took no small measure of glee in quickly connecting it to every conservative they could think of, short of claiming it was an inside job organized by Abe Lincoln. 2011 saw its own share of some of the worst knee-jerk media reactions to underdeveloped stories. But with the emergence of New Media, the common person has been able to define for himself the context of the news he reads, and even craft his own headlines! In fact, pinko commie media has gotten so bad, conservatives have gotten tired of hearing about it; it’s the same old story, over and over.
In that spirit, let’s delve into boredom once more, and see the worst…
KNEE-JERK MEDIA REACTION of 2011!
[tweets out to the prize committee from his iPhone. Receives a direct message… reads:]
And the winner is.. whoah! This unprecedented!!! A Three-Way tie!!! [confused applause]
The winners are… the pathetic media coverage of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the tragic shooting of Gabby Giffords, and the Oslo shooter!
The supposed Arab Spring in Egypt was lauded by media pundits as a democratic uprising against a Middle Eastern tyrant, Hosni Mubarak. As the coverage continued, as much as news outlets wanted to assign credit to their saint and savior Barack Obama, he would not speak out in favor of the revolution, nor would he send any support. The days ticked by as his bony, gangly finger stuck stubbornly in the air, trying to sense what wind of fortune would direct his vague and ill-conceived foreign policy. Meanwhile, the media, and later, the Occupy protestors, gladly embraced the overthrow, with not a thought to the chance that maybe this pro-Western despot might be the only thing keeping the extremist Islamo-fascists from power.
Second, just to be fair, is the knee-jerk reaction of conservatives, including myself, when the horrible news of the Oslo shootings came out. Immediately, and I think reasonably, many conservatives posited that this was an Islamist attack. As the details came out, we realized that this was the shooter the media was waiting for: Caucasian, supposedly Christian, easily labeled as a right-wing extremist. Then, surprisingly, as more details came out, he seemed to end up being some weird mix of European nationalism and Nietzschean power-of-the-will atheist existentialism.
Finally, the terrible shooting of Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) provided us with the worst and most maddening of knee-jerk reactions by the media. Before the victims’ blood could dry, the media had already gleefully pinned this on Sarah Palin and other conservatives. Markos of the Daily Kos broke the speed of sound while running to type this accusation: “Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin.” They voraciously reported on any tidbit of insinuation that the insane shooter, Jared Loughner, was a Tea Partier (he wasn’t), a Rush Limbaugh enthusiast (nope, not that either), or a rabid conservative (wrong again). As it turns out, he was obsessed with a grammatical conspiracy that brainwashes Americans.
Far from admitting his insanity, and their culpability, the media will allow the occasional vague attribution of guilt to Sarah Palin, the lightning rod of liberal criticism. This was so egregious that it occasioned an famous opinion column by Jonah Goldberg entitled “To Hell With You People,” wherein he documents instance after instance of Democrats calling conservatives terrorists, and then claiming the high ground when accusing us of violent hate-speech that supposedly led to the Giffords’ shooting.
So to you, the gutless, idiotic, double-faced media, we give you this award. We’re sure there will be many more to come!
Ahhh, what a show! *hic* As this ceremony and what’s left of my sobriety come to a close, I’d like to thank everyone for such a great year in twitter politics! Oh the hashtag games, and snarky political commentaritweets that we had! And a great big thanks to guest bloggerette Prudence Paine!!
And thank you to my debonair guest blogger, SooperMexican. What a night it’s been! Your chariot awaits, Mexy. [loads him into a wheelbarrow and starts rolling him out]
[SooperMexy calls out over his shoulder:] But before you go, vote on the last GringOpinion poll of 2011: which one of the awardees should win the grand prize? Write-ins welcome!
[curtain closes. orchestra begins the recessional music. audience meanders out in a daze...AFTER casting their poll vote!]
Could it be a sign that the Obama 2012 is feeling shaky? Politico has reported that Oprah is ready and willing to campaign for Obama again:
Winfrey, who is beginning a new chapter in life following the sunset of her monster-hit show, told POLITICO she would be “happy to be of service” to Obama for his reelection campaign.
“I supported Barack Obama in 2008 because I believed then as I do now that he is the right man for the job,” Winfrey said in a statement. “I wanted to share my enthusiasm for his candidacy in hopes that others would see what I saw in him.”
“As for 2012,” Winfrey added, “If the campaign needs me, I’m happy to be of service. I’m in his corner for whatever he needs me to do.”
Since Obama’s inauguration, Winfrey hadn’t publicly declared her intent to campaign for his reelection, even when he and first lady Michelle Obama taped an episode of the “Oprah Winfrey Show” near the end of its final season.
Could it be that Oprah’s network has now gained a sufficient share of the viewership so that she doesn’t have to worry that her liberal Hollywood politics would drive segments of her audience away? Um, not likely. About.com Media reported last week in “The Oprah Winfrey Network Falls to 73rd in Cable TV Ratings” that:
Its ranking had been 45th for the first quarter, so dropping to 73rd place for the second quarter shows that ratings are in a free fall. TV Week reports that OWN is in last place among all women-focused cable networks.
Winfrey’s issues extend beyond television. Her O magazine is faced with an advertising sales drop of more than 31%. The Media Industry Newsletter says that compares with a 7% drop in ad sales for monthly magazines overall.
So is Oprah simply willing to toss her troubled network over to assist her buddy Obama? Or is campaigning for him simply a way to get her name in the media again?
Oprah’s CEO announcement in the NY Daily News also included a little tidbit about one of OWN’s shows in development: a new talk show hosted by Rosie O’Donnell set for this fall.
Anyone afraid their endorsement of Barack Obama would damage their business would not be putting the toxic, hate-spewing Rosie O’Donnell in a prime slot on their network. Having O’Donnell gush anger and slime daily might tend to turn off more people.
Oprah can’t help herself. She’s just a lefty, now more anxious and willing to promote liberal views.
Therefore, I’d bet Oprah needs the publicity as much as Obama does. She’s gonna gamble that she’ll gain more eyeballs than lose the ones she pokes in the eye by appearing in support of Obama again.