Morning Joe 4/23/2012 -- Huntsman and the moderates

On Morning Joe today the guests were Jon Meacham, Steven Rattner, Jon Huntsman and some guy who's written a book on Afghanistan titled No Worse Enemy. There wasn't much to the first part of the show except political talk about Romney and Obama. New polls out show that unemployment in swing states has gone down a percentage point or two, although the number is still much higher than the national average in practically all the swing states. No one broke down the unemployment numbers to see if it takes into account workers in these swing states who have given up looking for work, or the unemployed who moved from the swing states with high unemployment to states with low unemployment. Morning Joe simply took the raw numbers, presented no smart analysis and stated that politically this is good news for Obama.

This is the problem with Morning Joe, pundits like Joe Scarborough, and the political class as a whole -- they no longer think reality matters. Cable news shows and the political class think that perception is all that matters, and this is why the political class is so unpopular. Pundits think it's sophisticated to look at realism in politics and sneer at the idealistic fools who suggest politics be transparent and honest, but reality always has its say, no matter how many lies are told or how many political operatives attempt to create perceptions favorable to their candidate. This is why Obama is in trouble. Obama's team might be very good at creating perceptions and propaganda, but none of it changes the reality of the economy, and at some point, the economy becomes so bad that people become angry when they're manipulated -- they know better and it's deeply insulting.

Later on in the show, Jon Huntsman came on to talk about a comment he made comparing the GOP to the Chinese government because he, Huntsman, was disinvited to a fundraiser for suggesting we need a third party, or something like that. Hunstman blamed bloggers for making a big deal out of what he said, but why is he trying to back down from what he said? If Huntsman thinks that the GOP is becoming like the Chinese government, repressing dissenting views, then stand up for the idea -- don't blame bloggers for writing about it and expressing their own opinions. That's sort of hypocritical. Huntsman was allowed to speak in platitudes with no one challenging him or asking what he meant the fourth time he said the GOP should do bold, courageous things. Like what? You would think that someone on Morning Joe would have asked Huntsman what he thinks the GOP should do that's bold and courageous, but they didn't. They asked, instead, if he thinks Romney will do anything bold and courageous even when Romney has no core. There had to be Romney bashing. I don't think the moderates want Romney to win -- they want to wait until 2016 when they think the libertarian influence will have exhauted itself and the Tea Party will be a distance memory. Huntsman talked about a third party, but it would be nothing except what the GOP was a few years ago, Democrat-lite.

The conversation regarding Afghanistan was interesting because Scarborough backed down from his call for immediate withdrawal. Scarborough admitted he doesn't believe the troops should be withdrawn right away. However, the author of the book mentioned above stated that Afghanistan will go back to what it was no matter how long we're there, even though he believes there are good ways to handle the situation and bad. Obama is trying to save face, and the panel admitted that this is what's happening. We're allowing young Americans to die so Obama can save face. Does anyone realize how criminal this is? Can we not become morally outraged anymore? All the analysis of this tribe and that tribe, how the north feels about the south, how Pakistan plays a role, and this and this and that and that play into it are all just so much chatter.

Now they're saying that we'll stay longer than 2014 but with a very reduced presence. It does not matter if our intervention entails 10 special forces and a clown or 100,000 troops, it's the intervention that's futile and which has and will create unintended consequences. We should not be intervening in the affairs of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran or any other country. If a country attacks us, we defend ourselves and we punish the attacks or prevent the attack if we can, and that's it. We don't occupy countries for a decade and spend over 500 billion dollars with no changes and call it prevention. This is insanity.

Huntsman is a weird duck

Huntsman's candidacy was weird from the start with the motorcycle in the desert thing and no real theme to it. I suppose this mysterious, cool Republican/not-Republican was hitting the scene to wow the moderates and independents, but it flopped.

In the first debate, Huntsman appeared shaky and unsure of himself. I can understand, because I hate public speaking, but then I'm not running for President. Huntsman dissed conservatives from the start, then decided he needed conservative credentials, but still said the movement is insane. Huntsman spit in Iowans' eyes, put all his eggs in one New Hampshire basket, spoke Mandarin in the debate, and then  dropped out.

There's nothing wrong with speaking Mandarin, but how he did it appeared arrogant. Huntsman always seemed to be looking down his nose while at the same time appearing to lack confidence -- it's a strange combination. Then there's the shadow his father casts. I don't think Huntsman has become his own man in his personal life, and this came through with a lot of confusion surrounding him and his personality. Papa Huntsman is a big, powerful man, while Jr. Huntsman has piddled with some government positions, tried his hand at executive with Papa's company, became governor of Utah through his family connections, and now he's quitting the race. I think Huntsman has some soul searching to do. The comfort in which he was raised has obviously dulled any sense of urgency regarding political matters and how government economic interventions have affected average people -- Huntsman needs to connect with what's real before making another stab as CEO of the US.

Morning Joe 1/11/2012 -- Intellectual Revolution

On Morning Joe they showed clips of Jon Huntsman's speech after the New Hampshire primary results. Huntsman's speech reminded me of the Howard Dean speech that ended Dean's campaign, and when Huntsman said, "On to South Carolina", I swear I thought he was going to emit a Dean screech.

The regular guests were on Morning Joe, from Mark Halperin to Andrea Mitchell to Michael Steele, etc. It was the same old conventional analysis with an emphasis on Romney getting close to taking it all. Their efforts to give Huntsman a boost failed miserably. There was talk about Gingrich preparing to lay into Romney -- there was talk about Perry's slam on Romney's "vulture" capitalism. None of it was interesting. The fact that Santorum, Gingrich and Perry are taking the populist route and slamming Romney's success means they've lost. The interesting segment of Morning Joe was the interview with Ron Paul. Mark Halperin pulled the common liberal trick of taking a popular government program, Headstart, and attacking Paul by asking if he will end it, then forcing him to say -- Yes, I will end it. Liberals hope to get a headline saying -- Ron Paul will end Headstart!

Paul answered in a way that voters need to understand. No one, not even Paul, can come into government and cut it down to the right size right away, and it's not so much about the particular programs that should go -- it's about a change in direction. It's about an intellectual revolution in government whereby our ideas change regarding the role of government. It's about a modern understanding of what limited government means. Once the intellectual revolution enlightens the public, and people have a vision of a future with private sector empowerment, then many government programs can be transitioned to the private sector, or government programs that are no longer needed can be ended. Although media wants the public scared of Paul and to think of him as a crazy anarchist who would shut down the military and invite terrorists to blow us up, Paul served in the military and he understands that reforming the military/industrial complex, the Fed, welfare and such takes time, and that first there has to be understanding. The intellectual revolution is happening, and it reveals the intellectual decay among liberals and moderates. We've been drifiting in statist decay for decades because no one has had the courage to take on the powerful State machine, and those in the political class who make their living off the powerful State machine have obstructed all change.

Chris Matthews came on and he described Romney as an efficient manager who promises to return America to normalcy. I'm not sure this is the change we need, if it means that we simply hire a more efficient, upbeat manager of a failed statist system. Romney has to prove he understands the intellectual revolution put forth by Paul, because if he doesn't, and if people grab on to Romney because he's strong and efficient, they will be just as disappointed as the left has been with Obama.

Huntsman "surge" -- 17%

That was the last report on the New Hampshire primary I saw with approximately 60% of the votes in. Media tried their best to "surge" Huntsman into at least second place, but Paul is in second place about 8 points ahead of the Huntsman "surge". Romney takes it all with around 37%. Huntsman and the media gave it all they had and still only scrapped together 17% -- pitiful.

Huntsman's "surge" was more like a fart in the wind, although Huntsman is declaring some sort of victory and is charging on to South Carolina where he will likely be less than a fart in the wind.

With the serious problems facing the nation, I'm glad that media and Huntsman failed tonight, because the last thing we need is a status quo defender. The Republican race is sucking up the oxygen in the news realm, but our national and international problems are still there waiting for the hoopla to die down to become prominent in the minds of Americans again. Let's not forget that we went another trillion in the hole in 2011, and that Afghanistan is not improving, and that US hawks are itching to start a war in Iran, and that real unemployment is around 16%, and gas is still way too high, and Europe is still a big question mark, and I could go on and on and on...

Morning Joe 1/10/2012 -- Intellectual decay among political class

Some who read here may wonder why I comment on Morning Joe. I wonder the same thing after shows like the one this morning. I've been commenting on the show because it's a microcosm of the political class and represents what's wrong with government and media/political analysis of current events. There's a troubling intellectual decay in the political realm, mostly among liberals, but the decay is also present among Conservatives and Big Government Republicans.

This morning's show was a low point for Morning Joe, the hosts and the guests. They took an incident that happened with Mitt Romney yesterday and they played it dishonestly - to the point of corruption, really. They played a clip of Romney saying he likes the ability to fire those who provide services, like insurance companies, when they provide inferior services. I understood exactly what he was saying, and anyone listening, except braindead partisans, understood what he was saying. Then they showed a clip of Huntsman taking political advantage of the statement -- I like to fire people -- taking it out of context. Rather than excoriate Huntsman for such a weasel tactic, the Morning Joe crew criticized Romney for making the statement. It wasn't until an hour and three quarters into the program that Joe and Mika helped put the comment in perspective, but then Katty Kay and Eugene Robinson said that the statement is bad even in context, that no one should "like" to fire anyone, then Joe and Mika and the gang all laughed and agreed. This is intellectual decay. We should not only like the ability to fire those who provide inferior services, we should love and cherish this ability, if we want to avoid tyranny and the fate of the USSR where no one had any choices regarding services. The ability of voters and consumers to fire politicians and incompetent or unsrcupulous service providers is what makes the capitalist system superior. The sad fact is, even when you look at Romney's statement from a political viewpoint and criticize the use of words as tone deaf, if we live in a world where the public is too stupid to discern Romney's meaning, then it's all over -- it's a moot point. The political class believes the public is so stupid that they will fall for Huntsman's spin on Romney's words, and that speaks volumes about the political class and Huntsman. Huntsman is a weasel, and what he did by framing Romney's words as Romney liking firing people, as in a company-firing where Romney gleefully fires people, is despicable, and in my opinion it makes Huntsman unfit to be President. And Huntsman is talking about trust?

The Morning Joe hosts later interviewed Huntsman and said nothing about his dishonest spin on Romney's statements. It was a softball interview, and it became obvious that Morning Joe is pushing Huntsman. This is intellectual decay. It's media decay. It's the decay of the political class.

After interviewing Huntsman, they interviewed Newt Gingrich, and to Gingrich's credit, when asked about the Romney statement, Gingrich said it's ridiculous and wrong to take Romney's words out of context and use them against him when it's clear Romney was talking about the ability to choose a new service provider when the old one you've used is incompetent. The entire converstation surrounding this on Morning Joe was ridiculous, and this shows what the political class has come to -- game, lies, foolishness and intellectual decay. Where are the serious intellectuals?

There's a populist movement going on in the Republican Party, and while I don't support Romney, it's unfair to Romney. I don't support Romney, because I think he will continue statist policies if elected, just like all the other candidates except Ron Paul, but what's going on in the media and among Republican candidates is just more class warfare and, underneath, anti-capitalism. The Republican Party is joining the populist movement to further demonize and destroy capitalism. Capitalism was perverted by government interventions long ago, and now all remnants of capitalism are being destroyed.

Ron Paul is the only candidate who stands up with integrity to defend free markets, limited government and non-intervention. Paul was practically ignored on Morning Joe, even though Paul is polling in second place. Scarborough realized that Paul had been ignored in the conversations, so he asked Chris Matthews why Paul is ignored. Matthews disdainfully said it's because they are talking about who can realistically win the presidency. It was lost on the righteous Matthews and clueless Scarborough, but right after Matthews made this statement, they showed a CBS poll regarding which Republican does the best in a contest against Obama -- Ron Paul was second to Romney -- Huntsman was last in the poll. Neither Matthews nor Scarborough noticed this after claiming with authority that Paul has no chance to win the presidency. It's frigging incedible. Yes, intellectual decay.