Daily Flog: Campaign's rich laughs; Bolt beats Phelps; fatal wounds to Musharraf, John Galt, Georgia, and a boxer
Running down the press:
Gross overplaying of the Phelps story all over the press — "his cellphone is blowing up . . . the hottest commodity in China right now was made in the USA," ESPN breathlessly "reports" this morning.
No matter all the hubbub about Michael Phelps and his eight gold medals — he's great, even though some of them were earned with the collaboration of others, and all of them were predicted — here's the fact:
Usain Bolt: Fastest person on Earth. Unexpected, and in the most basic, fundamental athletic competition.
Next to him, Phelps is just another pretty gill.
I love to swim, and luckily I live by the ocean. But any kid who's ever run around a playground (and that's just about every kid on the planet who's physically able to) can appreciate what Usain Bolt did, despite the fact that he's a Jamaican, not a jingoized American athlete.
Simon Turnbull says it best, in the Independent (U.K.):
We're assuming (and hoping) that Bolt is not on on a speed-inducing drug (or drug-induced speed).
And so what if he coasted and boasted to the finish line? What winning kid on the playground hasn't?
The paper promo'd it this way:
In other words, George W. Bush can say, as he said in Iraq in May 2003: "Mission accomplished."
Would it be asking too much — and I guess it was — to at least mention the severe limits the Bush regime likewise placed on Western journalists covering the Iraq War who weren't embedded?
Not asking for a mention of the phony agitprop that the Bush regime sometimes tried to get away with (I broke one of those stories, in October 2005).
Just one tiny mention of the Bush regime's censorship of press coverage in Iraq.
Post: 'SLAIN BOXER'S 'DANCE' OF DEATH'
Nice job by Joe Mollica on a very brief piece:
"Sober school," right. I stayed there several years ago, when it was a well-appointed, but dying and empty, hotel, and the place was as creepy as the manse in The Shining.
Maybe it would scare these rich addicts straight.
A self-proclaimed "exclusive" on the 9/11 reconstruction-in-progress building:
One angle the story doesn't address: Who are the principals of this corporation that's being probed?
More to the point: Who is John Galt? Waiting for Dagny Taggart's folo.
Not too exclusively, this story has more detail, noting:
Wait till Dagny Taggart finds John Galt. You'll really see some sparks.
Some rich campaign laughs, some of them at McCain's expense, in Greg Miller's extremely interesting piece this morning.
Obama: "I would argue that if you are making more than $250,000, then you are in the top 3, 4 percent of this country. You are doing well."
McCain: "I think if you're just talking about income, how about $5 million?" He added that he knew "that comment will be distorted"; his campaign later insisted that he was joking.
What a knee-slapper.
Seriously, some of the quotes in the story are funny.
No doubt Miller's editors insisted on the tired old dictum of making him get quotes from "experts," but the ones he dug up are doozies:
Rand economist James P. Smith: "To be fair to both of them, 'rich' is an adjective. Economic science is not going to tell you that 'this' is the cutoff point."
Americans are laughing all the way to the food bank.
Not mentioned in Miller's story — I'm not being critical of him — is the "economic science". From the Census Bureau in August 2007, some "cutoff points":
And what's the official cutoff of "poverty"?
Agence France Presse analyzed those stats this way:
Not trying to be funny, I wrote in September 2004, during that particularly abysmal presidential campaign:
But let's get back to the Census Bureau's economic science: An American family of four making $25,000 a year is not officially in poverty. But here's the good news: They don't have health insurance, so they don't have to spend any of their money on it.
That's also not in Miller's story. But his other piece of rich humor from an "expert":
Len Burman of the research org Tax Policy Center, noting that 95 percent of people "think they are middle class": "I guess it says something nice about America that rich people don't want to act like they're better than anybody else and poor people don't like complaining about how tough it is to pay their bills."
Of course it's possible that rich people who aren't super-duper rich are just being jealous while they're relentlessly striving to want to join up with the super-duper rich. Nice.
And, poor people don't like complaining about their plight? What do you think their dinner-table conversation is like — when they have enough food to have dinner?
The D.C. paper's Ben Pershing does a recon of my state and reports back:
Washington Post: 'Musharraf to Resign as President of Pakistan'
Candace Rondeaux (I've worked with her, and she's good) quotes the ex-strongman's speech with a straight face. Because this is ostensibly a news story, she probably wasn't allowed to analyze those three sentences, so I will:
One foreign government is eagerly swooping down to make a killing on our foreclosure crisis.
But which country is it? (Actually, which government is it this time?) The story refers to a "sovereign" — see this definition — and Terri Buhl writes this press-release-sounding piece:
Back into affordable homes? Now that's funny.
At least the Post regularly has more business news than any other NYC daily (aside from the Wall Street Journal, and not counting the New York Times's constipated, usually uninteresting bulk).
For those who don't know, a "sovereign" investor is a government-controlled entity — think Dubai's investment companies, which are actually the UAE's government, which is gobbling up NYC properties.
But, again, which country is the one in this Post story? And does John Galt live there?