So, where did you get your information from huh?

In my younger and more vulnerable days I tried repeatedly to get Jeff Jacobs to read John Milton's Areopagitica. This fascinating work should be read by every American who values are open and democratic society. Aeropagitica is an essay that convinced the Catholic church to allow freedom of the press in pre-colonial England. Before this time, the church did not trust people with information and would routinely edit essay's or destroy them as to keep people in the dark. Milton argued that humans had a fundamental right to know all sides of an issue and be free to make up their own mind. This idea was taken up by the founding fathers as they traveled to the new land and trusted humans to read, think, discuss and debate without the filter of the church. Milton argued that God created man with a mature, reasonable mind that would not be influenced by a secular or evil ideas and the church did not need to "protect" man from the works of man. In other words, if you are a Christian you do not need to shield yourself from ideas or thoughts that differ from your ideology. In fact, Milton stated that a true Christian with real faith would welcome debate and would seek to know what the other side thought. He argued that to purposely limit yourself from information that runs counter to your beliefs only serves to show how tenuous your beliefs really are. I have always tried to look at both sides and look at events from all angels. When I voted for Bush twice I still attended Michael Moore movies, listened to Air America and actively debated my friends and co-workers who voted for Gore or Obama. In those days, I mostly watched Fox News but would still watch MSNBC and especially Chris Matthews. So, I was repeatedly dumbstruck when I brought up current events to my extended family that were pro-Obama and they looked at me with a blank stare. They had no knowledge, no idea, or literally had never heard of what I was talking about it. I was shocked so I decided to conduct my own little experiment and watch Bill O this evening at 8:00 on January 26, 2010.

As everyone knows, the biggest political story of the day was the criminal and atrocious behavior of four men who attempted to bug the phone of a United States Senator. This is domestic terrorism on our soil and all four of these men could spend up to four years in jail. These disgusting humans are heroes on the right for taking on acorn for "illegal" behavior and showed the world today they are just pitiful hypocrites who belong behind bars. So I eagerly tuned into Bill O to see what he would have to say about these lawbreakers. I tuned in a little early at 7:47 and Gretta was talking about it so I could not wait to see the righteous fury that Bill would unleash on these traitors. But guess what? HE NEVER MENTIONED IT! He had an entire hour and he choose to ignore the story entirely. I watched the crawl on the bottom of the screen and it never came up. I was honestly shocked that Bill did not bring it up. After he pounded Acorn he did not have the balls to admit that the anti-acorn operation was lead by a bunch of thieves? I thought Bill was "fair and balanced." How could he not mention it? Is he trying to shape how his viewers think? Is it possible that he only spoon feds you the news you want to hear to bolster ratings? No, no, that can't be it! So here are a few topics that Bill did find time for in his hour-long show:

1) Obama is moving to the right
2) How the spending freeze is a big lie
3) How smart Bill is for predicting all of it
4) Newt Gingrich on to call Obama Jimmy Carter
5) Nancy Kerrigan's dad
6) Tim Tiebow being pro-life
7) Can we get Americans who are pro Al Qaeda
8) Some blonde saying "George Bush kept us safe" (conveniently forgetting 9/11)

If you choose to willfully not pay attention to the news than you get what you deserve. True patariots always question where they get thier news from, after all, that is what the founding fathers wanted.

Nancy and I discuss politics

Nancy has been beaming at me since the nude male model was elected to take over Teddy's old Senate seat last week. She really believes that we are on the edge of a revolution and that this vote was a direct strike at our President. I told Nancy that it was all about looks and gender and as usual the better looking candidate won. She called me an "elite intellectual" and I thanked her for the compliment. She than told me that she thought I was a laid-back California surfer but she somehow pegged me wrong. I am still wondering what surfing has to do with it. So, as this week roles on my favorite actor comes out and backs up my assertion on Mr. Scott (hey let me take my pants off while you take pictures) Brown.

"Specifically, his election has nothing to do with health-care."
-Arnie

As I got to know Mr Nude and had some time to look at his voting record as a state senator I found out that he has SUPPORTED UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE in his home state of Massachusetts! How can this be? How can the great anti-Obama savior be such a phony! How could he run against his own voting record? He is also socially liberal (no surprise) and as a man who likes to nude up in public he also supports gay rights. As I got to read more about Scott Brown I almost spit out my tea just thinking about how this man was going to save the Republican party. But, hey........I sure do like his hairy chest.

Can you possible image the "outrage" from the right if a liberal senator has posed nude? What would the party of "family values" have to say about this? What would the evangelical base say? Oh, the horror, the horror..........

So as Nancy and I finished up discussing politics she said that "Scott Brown is going to save America." I thought to myself, save America from what exactly? Posing nude for Cosmo?

Matt cuts through the noise

"The Presidency is at stake. If they lose this, this is a catastrophe for them."
-Glen (cry like a little girl) Beck

"This is a revolution"
-Sean Hannity

"This has sent shock waves around the world"
-Let Freedom Ring blogger

I love hyperbole as much as the next guy, heck, I was an English major for God's sake, but I do find the hyperventilation regarding Scott Brown to be very amusing. The media is in business to get us to watch television, listen to the radio and buy their newspapers. The more they can ratchet up the stakes and heighten the drama only serves to increases their viewership and thus, the bottom line. All media pundits are there to be entertaining. They are not there because they are patriots, or real Americans, or love their country. They are there to get paid. Sarah Palin quit her job as governor because she wanted to get paid. It is a simple as that. So, let us leave the hyperbole behind and look at the numbers in this election.

In the 2010 election Scott Brown received 63,823 more votes than John McCain did as a Presidential candidate in 2008. Only 63,823 votes?

This is a state that in 2010 had a 51% of the voters registered as independents.

Brown was able to beat Coakley by the following numbers:
1,168,107 Scott Brown
1,058,682 Martha Coakley
22,237 Joe Kennedy

Wait a second, I thought this was a revolution! How could Brown only win by such a small margin? He only beat Coakley by 109, 425 votes! That is it! Hmmnnnn........that does not sound to me like an earth shattering win. But I know he got more votes than Obama did, right? The Presidency is on the line, glen beck said so!

In 2008 Obama picked up 1,891,083 votes for President in the state of Massachusetts. That means that he received 722,976 more votes than Scott Brown did in 2010.

So what we have was a victory due to low voter turnout, a motivated base, and an attractive candidate that was able to pull across independents. It would actually go against the grain for a Democrat to win the Senate seat in Massachusetts. The right paints the state as a liberal heaven due to Kennedy's long service but the facts do not support this at all. Again, how was a moderate Republican governor elected overwhelmingly in this state? Mitt Romney served as governor from 2002-2007. Romney also pulled even with Teddy when he ran as a senate candidate and almost beat Teddy in 1994. Clearly, the voters want a moderate Republican to serve the state.

So, it is not a revolution, it is simply a blip in history that will soon be forgotten. I predict that Obama will carry Massachusetts in 2012 and will be re-elected. As fun as it is to make outrageous statements it is always useful to look at the facts. Numbers don't lie (but talk-show hosts do!)

Matt travels to Massachucets to slaughter the goat and read it's entrails

Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat was taken yesterday by a moderate Republican state senator named Scott Brown. This race was all about gender and had nothing to do with Obama or health care. Scott Brown is a broad shouldered, square-jawed, good looking MAN who ran an excellent campaign. He campaigned vigorously for this seat, used his underdog status to his advantage and connected with the voters. Now, I know the teabaggers are reading this with steam coming out of their ears because they want to see yesterdays vote in Mass as a vote against Obama but I assure you, it was not. Teabaggers, I have two words for you: Mitt Romney. How did this man get elected as the Republican governor of Mass? Mitt Romney is a broad shouldered, square-jawed, good looking MAN who connected with voters........kinda like a Ted Kennedy. I know that the conventional wisdom sees this race as a referendum on heath care (even the evil liberal L.A. times said so on the front page) but as usual the conventional wisdom is wrong. As always in politics the better looking candidate won.

Here is my take on healthcare:
1. The most popular government programs are social security and medicare. (Still waiting for the teabaggers to give up these) The reason that these are so popular is because they cover everybody and can be easily explained.
2. The benefits of healthcare reform are hard to explain because in a nation of over 300 million only 30 million are without health insurance.
3. People are not really motivated to cover the 30 million because it does not immediately benefit them. (such as medicare and social security)
4. Obama and the Dems did not frame the argument as to why our country will benefit from healthcare reform
5. Healthcare will therefore not go through, and millions of poor people will not visit the doctor out of fear of cost. Republicans should be proud of themselves for this. As always, the rich and well connected will be taken care of the poor will get the shaft.

Cheney says "jump" and you say "how high?"

"You take the red pill-you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
-Morpheus

I had a dream last night in which I could manufacture emotion and outrage in just one phone call. I could wait three days, while my minions said nothing and were not upset, pick a phone to call politico, and cast dispersions on a wartime President for the exact same thing that happened when I was Vice President. I dreamed that I could release the masterminds of this attack in 2007 and still blame our current President. Why do I undermine the President of my country? Why did I go out of my way to get 5 deferments during Vietnam? Why do I vehemently disagree with a 4 star general and try to discredit him? Why did I set up a shadow government of Neocons? Because I love to watch the rubes ask me how high when I tell them to jump!