Reading Digest – 15 November 2012   Leave a comment

“So?  She’s good looking, shut up.” – Carl

FoxNationLogo The resentment is strong with this one:

Moocher BastardsIn addition to being dumb, the article also serves as a nice illustration of how FOX straddles the line that lets them badger their audience with bullshit while not quite outright lying.  So the headline states:

47 Million Food Stamp Recipients = 75.4 Percent of Obama’s Votes

And the first line backs that up without quite confirming it:

If all 47 million food stamp recipients voted for President Obama, it would account for 75.4 percent of Obama’s 62.3 million votes.

And then they reinforce their idea with numbers that are basically irrelevant but sound germane:

Welfare programs now cost taxpayers a record-high $750 billion. While government “charity” has grown, so has poverty—and so has the Democrats’ poll numbers.

The candidates and their PACs spent $6 billion for the election. Should we add the $750 billion in federal welfare to Democratic campaign spending total?

Finally, well buried in the middle of the article is a single sentence of plausible deniability:

Not everyone on food stamps votes or votes Democrat (and no one polls this subset of the population), and I don’t want to overstate the effects of the growth in welfare.

But that gets glossed over quickly and it’s right back to resentment:

It’s tough to beat politicians handing out free stuff, but we have to hope that careers and purposeful opportunity will appeal to American people’s ethos.

It’s a very finely honed schtick, strongly imply the blatantly false thing you want to say, but don’t quite say it.  Meanwhile, in nursing homes all across America, confused people will confidently say that 75% of Obama voters were on food stamps. 

DailyBeastLogo This is their headline:

Petraeus Fever Paralyzes Capital

Virtually every journalist in Washington, D.C. is feasting on the sex scandal surrounding Gen. David Petraeus. Howard Kurtz on the irresistible lure of tawdry affairs.

And this is just slightly to the right on the same page:

Reality Scandal

That’s the Newsweek Jr. two-step: outrage and sanctimony paired tightly with titillation and voyeurism.  Of course, they aren’t nearly as good at it as . . .

DailyCallerLogo Boom:

Related Coverage - Other Attractive People

But unrelated celebrity naval gazing is pretty standard these days, where’s that extra special reach into something genuinely disgusting I’ve come to expect from Carlson’s House of Wingnut Welfare?  Oh, there it is:

Too Hot Not To Publish

The thinking here seems to be that if she didn’t want to see herself in a conservative tabloid, she shouldn’t have been “hot”.  Eat a bag of dicks, Tucker & Friends.

usatodaylogo What this has to do with anything, I have no idea:

Dr. Phil 'Tech'

Turns out that execrable flimflam man has written a book about technology.  Because I get all my advice about electronics from senior citizens who don’t seem smart enough to dial a phone without written instructions.

Posted November 15, 2012 by Charlie Sweatpants in Reading Digest, The Simpsons

Tagged with

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: