Analysis, Speculation and Opinion is the electronic and journalistic equivalent of the fictionalized law firm of Dewey, Cheatem and Howe. Talking heads on your television analyze far more than explain. They speculate far more than they substantiate. They opine far more than they report. Welcome to the 21st century wide world of broadcast news. 24 hour nonstop daily news coverage is now more about filling time with enquirer like fluff than filling minds with straightforward professional news. It seems more the rule than the exception nowadays that if you see a round table of self appointed experts discussing the major issues of the day, those particular issues are neither major or even issues for that matter. They're the kind of nonsensical gossip, amateur psychobabble and high school like theories about whether or not the biology teacher, Mr. Catania, is dying his hair. Has television journalism been trivialized from breaking views to faking news? Just this past week illustrates a few of my suppositions.
The first major bone of contention of the week was rampant speculation regarding whether or not Hillary was going to bare her "ready to lead from day one" fangs and plunge them into Barack Obama's jugular vein on Thursday night's 19th presidential debate held in Austin, Texas and televised worldwide on CNN. Firstly, how much can you really learn about candidates after they've squared off a mere 18 times in the past few months? If you have 19 or 20, then and only then does it become definitive. These pundits do after all insist the candidates supply them with enough trivial gossip to run for at least three news cycles. After repeated analysis, speculation and opinions, it turns out none of the pre-game hype regarding a bare knuckled, bare chested bar fight was going down. Hillary placated her base by half heartedly pawing Obama with the impotent plagiarism and inexperience references and was audibly smacked down both times. Hillary looked like an old, frustrated and resigned runner up candidate with a big xeroxed X stamped squarely across her face. Out with the old and in with the new. In her closing statement, only she and her handlers knew if she was working the pity party ploy or preparing for inevitable defeat. Thank God the talking heads were at their battle stations ready to offer their unique brand of canned blather for we, the masses.
Last week also saw the New York Times submit news that doesn't appear fit to be printed regarding Senator Johnny Mac. Where it's true that John "my friends" McCain has more lobbyists on his payroll than Major League Baseball has steroid and human growth hormone users on theirs, they failed to demonstrably support their claim that Old Mac was trading senatorial influence for sexual gratification. The first thing they teach you in law school is that any living person can accuse any other living person of any act as long as he or she can back it up with a little something called corroborating evidence. The Times thus far has been unable to do so but the analysts are diving in both head and feet first. You think he did it? I don't know, do you? I don't know, maybe. He was tortured. I know, his wife scares me too, I think she's an ice sculpture. No, not her you idiot, he was shot down in Vietnam. Oh yeah, I forgot. I hadn't heard him mention that in almost 24 hours. Wait, I thought he was America's mayor. You nitwit, that's Booty Fooliani from the island of "nine - one - one". Whatever happened to him? I think he's a condo president in Del Boca Vista. Enough already. We get the point.
Now we're almost ready for another debate between Hillary and her daddy, Barack Obama. All day Monday and Tuesday, team Anal will speculate and opine about last weeks debate while preparing for number 20 Tuesday evening. The same basic analysis will be revived that was beaten to death just last week. They will spoon it out and you are prepared to come back for seconds. Not this sophisticated man of the world. I'm going to analyze the news myself. I'm every bit as sharp as the guys and gals on cable news. The only difference is they wear more makeup than I do. I am going to sit down and figure this thing out for myself. As compelling as Wolf Blitzer and Chris Matthews are, I have something they don't. I have honesty. I don't have any sponsors, bosses, National Organizations of Women, Rifle Owners, Evangelicals or Clintons to worry about. I can say NOW causes significantly more negatives than positives for chicks. See, I just said chicks instead of sweeties or babydolls. If Matthews says that, he'll be bitch slapped and pimped off to Idaho to cover public bathroom dwellers with wide stances. I can say 99% of second amendment proponents are ill informed morons who substitute their big guns for their small penises. I can call Evangelicals dumbellicals and do often. In fact, I just did it again right now. I keep my anal equipment in my pants where it belongs. The Cable News Teams wear their anals on their sleeves. Never forget, a good anal should rarely ever be seen and definitely never be heard........
The first major bone of contention of the week was rampant speculation regarding whether or not Hillary was going to bare her "ready to lead from day one" fangs and plunge them into Barack Obama's jugular vein on Thursday night's 19th presidential debate held in Austin, Texas and televised worldwide on CNN. Firstly, how much can you really learn about candidates after they've squared off a mere 18 times in the past few months? If you have 19 or 20, then and only then does it become definitive. These pundits do after all insist the candidates supply them with enough trivial gossip to run for at least three news cycles. After repeated analysis, speculation and opinions, it turns out none of the pre-game hype regarding a bare knuckled, bare chested bar fight was going down. Hillary placated her base by half heartedly pawing Obama with the impotent plagiarism and inexperience references and was audibly smacked down both times. Hillary looked like an old, frustrated and resigned runner up candidate with a big xeroxed X stamped squarely across her face. Out with the old and in with the new. In her closing statement, only she and her handlers knew if she was working the pity party ploy or preparing for inevitable defeat. Thank God the talking heads were at their battle stations ready to offer their unique brand of canned blather for we, the masses.
Last week also saw the New York Times submit news that doesn't appear fit to be printed regarding Senator Johnny Mac. Where it's true that John "my friends" McCain has more lobbyists on his payroll than Major League Baseball has steroid and human growth hormone users on theirs, they failed to demonstrably support their claim that Old Mac was trading senatorial influence for sexual gratification. The first thing they teach you in law school is that any living person can accuse any other living person of any act as long as he or she can back it up with a little something called corroborating evidence. The Times thus far has been unable to do so but the analysts are diving in both head and feet first. You think he did it? I don't know, do you? I don't know, maybe. He was tortured. I know, his wife scares me too, I think she's an ice sculpture. No, not her you idiot, he was shot down in Vietnam. Oh yeah, I forgot. I hadn't heard him mention that in almost 24 hours. Wait, I thought he was America's mayor. You nitwit, that's Booty Fooliani from the island of "nine - one - one". Whatever happened to him? I think he's a condo president in Del Boca Vista. Enough already. We get the point.
Now we're almost ready for another debate between Hillary and her daddy, Barack Obama. All day Monday and Tuesday, team Anal will speculate and opine about last weeks debate while preparing for number 20 Tuesday evening. The same basic analysis will be revived that was beaten to death just last week. They will spoon it out and you are prepared to come back for seconds. Not this sophisticated man of the world. I'm going to analyze the news myself. I'm every bit as sharp as the guys and gals on cable news. The only difference is they wear more makeup than I do. I am going to sit down and figure this thing out for myself. As compelling as Wolf Blitzer and Chris Matthews are, I have something they don't. I have honesty. I don't have any sponsors, bosses, National Organizations of Women, Rifle Owners, Evangelicals or Clintons to worry about. I can say NOW causes significantly more negatives than positives for chicks. See, I just said chicks instead of sweeties or babydolls. If Matthews says that, he'll be bitch slapped and pimped off to Idaho to cover public bathroom dwellers with wide stances. I can say 99% of second amendment proponents are ill informed morons who substitute their big guns for their small penises. I can call Evangelicals dumbellicals and do often. In fact, I just did it again right now. I keep my anal equipment in my pants where it belongs. The Cable News Teams wear their anals on their sleeves. Never forget, a good anal should rarely ever be seen and definitely never be heard........
<
1 comment:
Great Blog you have here and great post!
Post a Comment