The Rivett Report 02.19.07
Posted by Joe Rivett on 02.19.2007
My thoughts on Fox News' version of the daily show, and why I like Bill Richardson and Joshua White more than John Edwards.
Ladies and Gentlemen, you all owe me tonight. That is right, for the benefit of the readers, I decided to give my thoughts on Fox News' half hour news hour… get it? An hours worth of news in half hour or its free.
Where do I begin? First, there is a fake studio audience with laugh tracks. Secondly, the laugh tracks are played so often that the show couldn't possibly be that funny and it isn't.
For instance, they had a Saturday Night Live fake commercial about Barack Obama magazine, get it BO magazine. One headline read: Barack Obama Drives Voters Wild, and then the laugh track is played really loud.
Now you would think they would have a really cool guest for the first show, nope. It was a guy who claimed to create political shirts. His big joke was saying the word "bullshitte" and claiming that kids don't know who Idi Amin was because of public schools, followed by of course a very loud laugh track.
I don't care that this show is a conservative themed show. I have a problem with the fact that it is not funny and fake news shouldn't be on an actual news channel. If you consider any cable channel a real news channel. My recommendation is to watch the show once. It's like looking at a really fat person, you are curious but you'll never want to look again.
Feel free to email me what you thought of the show or the worst joke and I'll put it in the next Report.
Now for the real news…
HEY, Bill Richardson is Running for President
My favorite Democratic candidate for president is Bill Richardson and here are some highlights from a recent interview he did…
At the same time, he said, the United States should convene a "reconciliation conference" in Iraq to include the Sunnis, the Shiia and the Kurds. "You force them to have a coalition government, to divide up oil revenues, divide up the territory, not as separate countries, but territorial boundaries,"
Richardson said the United States "is very vulnerable to oil shock, which will affect our national security." He said that as President, he would call for "an Apollo-like, man-on-the-moon effort" to reduce U.S. dependence on oil from 65 percent to 10 percent in 10 years.
"Not a little energy bill here and there," he said. "This will take massive public and private investment, tax incentives to develop renewable technologies." He would set fuel efficiency requirements at 40 miles per gallon and "concentrate on efficient fuels."
He would also promote "green buildings, solar roofs in schools, and retrofit homes for energy efficiency, more efficient air conditioning, more efficient lighting. And we will conserve, and the federal government will do its part."
Richardson, asked how he differs from the other Democratic candidates, cited his endorsement last October by the National Rifle Association.
"I'm a hunter," he said. "I respect the Second Amendment. I'm not for assault weapons, but I'm a Westerner, and (hunting) is part of the culture."
He supports the death penalty for "the most heinous of crimes," is pro-choice and supports domestic unions, but opposes gay marriage.
On fiscal policies, Richardson said, he supports tax cuts for the middle class, including in capital gains. He said he would also cut taxes "for companies that pay more than the prevailing wage. I've had tax cuts for companies for technology start-ups" in New Mexico.
"The Democratic Party, our first solution is to tax, and I'm not of that school," he said.
I believe if the Democrats want to win, Bill Richardson is their man. He has cut taxes and is endorsed by the NRA. The problem with the last two candidates is that they were too liberal on the wrong issues. Not only is he electable but he was an UN ambassador, energy secretary, congressman and governor. With the way things are going now, we need someone with experience. I don't want a Washington outsider, Mr. Obama.
John Edwards is a Jerk
In case you have had your head up your ass, John Edwards had these two bloggers that made some naughty comments about Catholics. Edwards when hearing about this did not fire them. Here is what one of them wrote:
There's a pragmatic reason that the Vatican might be a little hesitant to come right out and say that there's no limbo (definition here, for those who don't know much about Catholicism) is because the concept is wielded by everyday Catholics to explain where the souls of unborn babies go, which is just an extra way to guilt trip women who have abortions. But it's sort of a balancing act, as far as I can tell, because as most people understand it, unbaptized children go to limbo but when Jesus returns, they all get to go to heaven. So it's a way to guilt trip women who have abortions without casting god as such an uncruel monster as to throw souls into hell that never even had a shot at sinning. So that's limbo: it sucks enough to make women feel guilty about abortion, but it doesn't suck so much as to run people off.
I suspect Pope Ratz will give into the urge eventually to come out and say there's no limbo and unbaptized babies go straight to hell. He can't help it; he's just a dictator like that. Hey, fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, the Pope's gotta tell women who give birth to stillborns that their babies are cast into Satan's maw. The alternative is to let Catholic women who get abortions feel that it'll all work out in the end, which is just not doable, due to that Jesus-like compassion the Pope is so fond of. Still, it's going to be bad PR for the church, so you can sort of see why the Pope is dragging ass.
Which all brings me to recommending this great post by Austin Cline at Jesus' General about why authoritarian types are so damn interested in cobbling people's sex lives and meddling around in people's private sexual decisions, like in this case why the Catholic church is so interested in making sure that people can't make the perfectly sound decision to limit their family size while enjoying a healthy sex life—either you're going to have to forgo birth control or you're going to have to feel guilty to the point where you fear you're casting babies into hellfire, by their standards. It's a way to disrupt people's lives so the church can get more control.
Now this is America and we can make fun of religions. Yet, there is a reason why I will never be hired as a blogger, I have made offensive comments. Edwards should have canned them as keeping them will crush his campaign by alienating the religious left and catholic democrats. Luckily for Edwards, the two women resigned. This is another reason why Democrats should be looking at Bill Richardson.
A Response to Joshua White
In one of Jay Hova's columns, he expresses his hatred for the presidential cycle coming so early. I have figured out why. We want a new president, Democrats, Republicans and Independents all want a fresh face. I think most people would agree that any candidate should do better than Bush except for maybe Kucinich.
Praise for Joshua White
Josh's column on rape and abortion was stellar. I agree with him that an unwanted pregnancy is similar to an unwanted man inside of you. Your body is your property. You make decisions on your property otherwise, we have a can of worms. Imagine someone is dying because of a failed kidney. Morally, you should give them your kidney, but legally it is your body and if you want to keep your kidneys, you have that right. Does that make me pro-abortion? No, it makes me Libertarian in the belief that your body is your property and not the government's property.
Preview of the Individualist
This week I'll be writing about buying a foreign car for the first time.
STAY CURRENT