The Low Bar For Great Exhortations: W vs. Obama

"non-sequitor" should be "non-sequitur"

How many people even care about W's opinion on any subject? Considering his track record as President I think he was wise in keeping his mouth shut. It was about the wisest decision he had made regarding just about anything.

1. "non sequitur"
2. "go too far"
3. Wiffle Ball™
.
Ask your buddies in the Village why they would give it (a typically unremarkable and unenlightening collection of Bushisms) so much time and space.

MEDIA SENSATIONALISM

Are you telling us that a Drudge headline is not accurate? How can that be?

By the way, I love the quote from W about how the "government doesn't create wealth."

His cronies sure made a lot of cash off the government during his tenure as president. It's amazing to me that he can say such a statement with a straight face.

Michael Scherer:
.
Though it is enough for the blogs and the cable networks.
.
That's a rather broad brush, isn't it?
.
It's probably good enough for the professional dicks at Politico.com, sure.
.
That's not the same thing as "blogs" at all.
.
Please correct this slur by naming names, Michael Scherer:
.
Which blogs in particular are most likely to forsake real news about real events in order to flog fake controversy for the millionth time?
.
Surely you can't mean real blogs like FireDogLake or TPM, right?

Shorter MS: Pay no attention to the bright shiny object I'm describing - pay attention to ME for being in the know about it (and calling attention to it).

stuart: Well put. I'd add that this "story" is a case of MSM ADOS disorder.
.
MS: Follow up to W: What part of the Enron debacle was "an environment where people take risks to expand the job rate in the United States"?
.
Also, the quotes are suspect since they are two sucessive complete sentences. Please re-check. Also.

Michael, me lad -
.
How many people d'ye think really be carin' wha' W be sayin'? Be thar nothin' more important an' topical ye could be coverin'? I be done wi' this thread already b'cause it be so much spindrift t' me.
.
Arrgh. (it be not worth an exclamation point, matey)

The former President is free to say what he will and doesn't owe Obama any particular measure of decorum. What I find so much more troubling is GWB echoing the Karl Rove's 'nyuk nyuk' joke about giving terrorists therapy, not for what it says about terrorists but for what it says about his target audience's attitude toward the mentally ill.
.
The whole joke is based on the assumption that people who seek help for behavioral problems are actually shirking responsibilty. I'm sure it's a real hit for folks who see 'therapy' as a code word for coddling but if I were a returning PTSD sufferer, I don't think I'd find it very amusing.

Michael Scherer:
.
On further reflection, I withdraw my complaint.
.
I don't even think of Drudge as a blog, just the way I don't consider People Magazine a magazine about people.
.
HuffPo is a blog. Apparently they've got people on their payroll who wake up at the crack of dawn to read and reprint Drudge. Oh well.
.
I was wrong; you did name names that could be understood to be "blogs".
.
I apologize for my error.

I dunno, seems to me like even these mild criticisms from Bush show less grace than Bill Clinton offered W over 8 no-doubt frustrating years.

[...] on the LATEST lie of this serial liar can be found here and here. Oh, and Michael Scherer at the Swampland thinks we’re making too much out of it.  Maybe he’s right — after all, you EXPECT [...]

Actually, it seems like Michael is agreeing with the position most of us would take: "this isn't a story."
.
Only exception I'd take is that to wear a Red Sox cap is pretty much the same thing as making totally accurate remarks about A-rod, such as the one you suggest..

So, if I get this right, you're preemptively attacking likely future media fixation on a completely political non-story by writing a 532-word blog post about it?

Well, it is obvious that only liberals read the Times. It sounds like an Obama cult but what should you expect from the left.

The sad commentary on today's media. The former president, who I disliked greatly, makes some general remarks in keeping with his conservative views and the media tricks it up to sound like some 'smackdown' of the current president.
It cannot be because they are bored. Not with all that is happening in the world (and they are doing their best to underplay or ignore).
Our media has become not the proud successors of such luminaries like Murror, White and Cronkite. Instead they are now the successors of such reporters as Hedda Hopper, Walter Winchle and E entertainment.

How pathetic.

Looks like Question Hillary has had another litter of crackpot babies.

Can you fix Bush's grammar too:
"I'll just tell you that there are people at Gitmo that will kill American people at a drop of a hat and I don't believe that persuasion isn't going to work."
I think the best thing in the world right now would be for Bush to start telling us how terrible government run healthcare is. Well the next best thing in the world after Cheney doing the same thing.

The sensationalism I see here is from this individual who quotes two mostly irrelevant and certainly less than mainstream sources about something no one else is talking about.

Bush? Bush who?

Oh, that's right, the unconvicted war criminal who was Americas third dictator until the American people wised up and punted him and his party from office and power. Who cares what he says? The only reason anyone cared before was because he could have ordered the world to be destroyed. Now that he's a no-body, his opinions count for nothing.

And why isn't he on trial?

In any event, having heard nothing about this alleged political brouhaha anywhere else, my guess is that this whole story is little more than a thinly plausible excuse to justify some blog posting.

(And please, use a spell checker. Being a professional writer demands SOME mastery of the skills involved in writing.)

Well this sucks:
.
FROOMKIN OUT?....
.
In a move sure to ignite the left-wing blogosphere, washingtonpost.com columnist Dan Froomkin (author of the "White House Watch" blog) has been let go by the news organization, POLITICO hears. In so many words, Froomkin was told that his blog had essentially run its course.
.
Froomkin's work for the Post has, at times, been amongst the most popular, but he has also ruffled some feathers, including former Post ombudsman Deb Howell, who used a column to field complaints over the labeling of Froomkin's "highly opinionated and liberal" "White House Briefing" column, which was subsequently changed to "White House Watch."
.
Not sure it's going to ignite the left blogs.
.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

From the great mind of Mark Halperin: Please remember while you are reading this guy still has a job. In the media.
.
HALPERIN'S TAKE: 5 reasons to bet AGAINST major health care reform passing this year.
.
1. 1/6 of the economy can't be remade without genuine bipartisan support.
.
2. The sticker shock threatens to whittle the thing down to something well short of universal coverage.
.
3. The public is not demanding action.
.
4. The upside doesn't seem big enough now to give congressional Democrats sufficient cover to vote for a tax increase.
.
5. Most journalists still have health insurance.
.
http://thepage.time.com/halperins-take-5-reasons-to-bet-against-major-health-care-reform-passing-this-year/

gunny:

Well, that's Halperin for you. Politics up to the minute, idiocy up the wazoo.

I'd like to hear from Froomkin about this currently inexplicable decision.
.
I truly don't understand.