What's Mallard raving about today?
Katie Pavlich
Mallard Fillmore once more demonstrates his parochialism, believing anyone other than the Teabagger readers of Townhall have heard of this columnist. Also his belief that her writing are based on facts, which would make her unique at that particular website.
12 comments:
Wait. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Wait.
Is Batshit actually suggesting that only qualified, educated people be involved in issues falling under their expertise, rather than any idiot wahoo with or without a radio show?
That economists handle economic matters?
That scientists have final say regarding climate and environmental science?
That teachers handle their own classrooms and curriculum without FoxNoise launching a pogrom or Scott Walker trying to run them out on a rail?
Holy shit. I can see problems with that philosophy (for example, trusting the Vatican or BP or the Army to investigate itself, even though that's already status quo), but this is pretty wild for Tinsley.
His masters will NOT be pleased.
The teabaggers will REALLY be pissed.
HAHAHAHAHA THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO COUNT!!!
How many taxpayers have those degrees? Is the columnist ready to suggest that the ones who don't should have their own finances taken out of their hands?
More to the point, is Tin trying to put so little into his strips that his critics will starve for lack of any substance to mock?
Sorry Bruce, Katie Pavlich is not going to fuck you.
So Rand Paul should not be blocking regulation on gas pipelines because he knows nothing about pipeline safety?
Sincerely - I'd love to have some sort of educational requirement for government officials. The scientists would be able to fix the global warming problem and the teabaggers wouldn't be dogcatchers.
BTW the "artwork" on today's "comic" is lazy, as usual. With five minutes effort I did something which I humbly suggest is better (politically pertinent and graphically effective) and, in the name of "Occupy Wall Street", urge you to share:
"You Pay Sales Tax ... So Why Won't Wall Street?"
And likewise, let's see YOUR efforts - surely all-y'all can go better than Brewsky!
Yeah, leave things to the expert super Einstein brains of Perry and Bachmann and Palin!
Although I'd never heard of Katie Pavlich until now, a few minutes' research (the internet kind, not the Wild Turkey kind) reveals why Brucie finds her so compelling: She's a regurgitator of simplistic, dishonest right-wing pablum, just like Brucie himself. Plus, she's cute. Trying to make Sarah jealous by "trading her in" for a younger, prettier model, eh, Brucie?
That's the stupidest argument I've ever heard. There are people called advisors. This is like the idea of Plato's philosopher-king, only set in a backwards world where "economics", devoid of meaning, replaces the values and goals of a society. It's the same type of myopia people display when they say only ex-military are fit to be President. We don't live in an "economic" society devoid of values, and we don't live in a martial society either.
If Tinsley and the idiot columnist were to claim that Congress should better represent the variety of the general population, rather than just one particular soft science, I would agree with them. Personally, I'd like to see more engineers, scientists and other professionals in Congress.
Most Congressman are lawyers, who are trained to voraciously argue for a side regardless of who is right -- when going into a debate, they often don't know which side of an issue they'll be arguing for! By contrast, "can-do" engineers are trained to work together to accomplish goals and reach a consensus. Scientists, especially, are trained to rigorously examine their own beliefs and pride themselves in admitting when they are wrong. Looking at Congress' recent behavior, it's not hard to see that they can use both those traits.
While I agree that the most qualified people for congress never seem to be in congress, I would point out that it is rather simplistic thinking on the part of ducky that it is congress's fault.
Besides, isn't the conservative argument that it's okay for the system to be stacked so that the richest win because they're rich and obviously know so much about money?
Pavlich's bell rings, Tinsley reflexively salivates. She still won't f*ck you, Bruce. You're old and gross.
Even if Katie Pavlich weren't a Townhall dog-whistler, I still wouldn't take her seriously because:
1. her degree (from the University of Arizona, a whole year and a half ago) is in Journalism, not Economics, therefore she's not qualified to comment on whether it's important for members of Congress to have degrees in Economics.
2. she uses "Katie" as her professional name. Eddie Murrow and Maggie Bourke are rolling in their graves.
And where's Tucci? Shouldn't he be here arguing with Katie Pavlich by telling her that the pre-eminent economics mind in Congress is an MD? Because Ron Paul learned so much about economics simply by being in Congress?
Post a Comment