House of Eratosthenes

I’m not much for fiction, but you could persuade me to plunk down some serious coin on a hardcover about — whatever — just by adding a sticker to the front of the jacket, so I can see it from a good distance away in the bookstore: “Contains a character based on White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.”

Okay, maybe you’d have to drop a hint as to what happens to the character. But oh yeah, I’d snatch that puppy up.

Or duck outta there and order it on Amazon.

Does he take some kind of vitamin every morning to be this obnoxious? Is this the kind of persona the Obama administration wants to send in to these all-important sit-downs with our “enemies” that will magically heal everything?

Baghdad Bob, live at the White House, folks.
- djmoore | 08/31/2010 @ 20:32
I’ve bookmarked this so that I can prove to folks that I am not the most arrogant jerk in America.
.
- OregonGuy | 09/01/2010 @ 10:09
Maybe he could just answer the fucking question, instead of keeping count of how many times it was asked of him. Even when he finally did kinda-sorta respond (the SIXTH time it was put to him) he was evasive and did not give a straight answer.

This guy reminds me of why I hate politicians. Pretty much all of them. The stupid word games.
- cylarz | 09/01/2010 @ 12:02
He’s been parodied on SNL…as the reasonable guy who can’t get a word out before Greta van Susteren interrupts him.

Yeah. They kinda lost me there, too.

It would be more accurate to dress him up as the “Count” character from Sesame Street. “Six! That’s the sixth time I’ve been asked that question! Ah, ha ha ha ha!”

I’d like to interrogate him Casino Royale style, with the bottomless chair. “Again, I’d be happy to refer you to any one of the many times the President has said…” +++THUMP!+++
- mkfreeberg | 09/01/2010 @ 13:08
I’m glad you all think the same. He made some remarks towards and about the English (or British) which raised a few eyebrows here. He comes across as an arrogant little prick.
- alisonni | 09/01/2010 @ 13:25
I do like how Carlson deflected the question from him. “I’m not the one being interviewed here.” Real classy guy, that Gibbs…trying to start a debate with this gal or make her personal political positions somehow relevant.

It goes along with the liberals’ narrative that FOX is biased and/or dishonest. I had a rather heated conversation yesterday at work (I know, I know) about this very subject – that is, the integrity of the FOX News channel.

My co-worker was trying to tell me that some Saudi prince has a 7% ownership share in the network, putting him at #2 behind Rupert Murdoch. (I looked it up and it turns out he is #4, not #2). He says this is dishonest because the FOX network is apparently claiming that this guy is also financing the Ground Zero Ha-mosque in Manhattan, and simultaneously accusing him of ALSO being involved with the financing of terrorism…but all the while not giving their viewers his name. He thinks it’s interesting that the FOX anchors apparently aren’t aware of the “contradiction” or worse, they are aware but have intentionally withheld the information from the public.

Of course, I can’t verify any of what he has told me, except for the part about someone in the Saudi family apparently being #4 on the list of major shareholders at FOX…and even that information came from a website I’d never heard of & have no reason to trust. Morgan, have you heard about any of this?
- cylarz | 09/01/2010 @ 13:40
Yes. Unfortunately, it was presented as “fact” on The Daily Show, and as a result it becomes unreasonably convoluted & tricky to try and figure out exactly what is being asserted as truth, and what is being offered as a ludicrous statement to slander and smear something else, a la “I can see Russia from my house.”

As I understand it, Al-Waleed bin Talal is part owner of Fox News, and is also funding the Cordoba Initiative so that makes Fox News hypocritical. Or he’s a part owner of Fox News and Fox News says bin Talal is funding the Cordoba Initiative. Or he’s a part owner of Fox News, and the message from Fox News as interpreted by enthused leftist myrmidons is that anybody of Arabian appearance is supposed to be a terrorist, so this is what makes Fox News hypocritical, or something.

It’s kind of like assembling a miniature airplane model while you have an attack of Delerium Tremens, just trying to figure out what argument is being advanced — when the person advancing it speaks entirely in parody. Have you tried directly asking your co-worker what it is he’s trying to say, to see if he’s capable of putting it into words? I used to have co-workers like that, and when I tried that it was an iffy, fifty-fifty proposition how the exercise would come out.

Naturally, anything undesirable about this outcome was entirely my fault…
- mkfreeberg | 09/01/2010 @ 13:48
What was he trying to say? You know, I’m not really sure. Surely he realizes that Fox News’ anchors, producers, etc have no control over who purchases stock in their company. Are they supposed to simply avoid reporting anything which might be embarrassing to one of their shareholders? That makes no sense, as Fox News employees don’t report directly to the shareholders anyway.

The Daily Show. Snort. So that’s where that tidbit with the Saudi prince came from. Why am I not surprised? This particular co-worker gets ALL his news from Jon Stewart’s 30 minutes comedy-as-fact misrepresentation. Good golly I hate that show. Colbert is nearly as bad, but he’s simply un-funny.

The conversation got started when a third co-worker remarked “I can’t stand Colbert” as the latter was winding up his broadcast. I said, “Yeah, I don’t think he’s funny at all.” To which the first guy demanded, “What’s wrong, can’t handle the truth?” “Truth?” I said. “These guys take crap out of context, misrepresent things, and frankly mislead people.” Instead of trying to defend Stewart et al’s “comedy,” he began attacking Fox News. The conversation then migrated to Stewart’s tantrums of the evening – the Dr Laura Sarah Palin n-word controversy, and then on to the Hurricane Katrina debacle. On the former, I said that it’s insane that you’re allowed or not allowed to utter some word based on your pigmentation…on the latter, I said that I couldn’t understand why FEMA (and by extension, Bush) was supposed to be the bad guy after the Mayor Ray “Schoolbus” Nagin and the governor of Louisiana both sitting on their hands waiting for the feds to come rescue them. Their inaction cost lives.

Of course, he wouldn’t hear any of it. You simply can’t get through to some people.
- cylarz | 09/01/2010 @ 18:39
Michael Savage refers to him as “the human gefilte fish”-Classic.
- dlsada | 09/01/2010 @ 19:59
Savage is a douche. I never listen to him anymore. I still entertain the possibility that he’s nothing more than a left-wing plant trying to make conservatives look nasty, rude, and prejudiced.
- cylarz | 09/02/2010 @ 01:33
[…] Don’t Give a Sh*t Romer’s Keynesian Economic Stimulus Plan Failed Best Sentence XCVI “Smug, Flippant Jerk” Another Example of Progressive Inversion Tongue (PIT) “A Society Does Not Survive If It Does […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 09/06/2010 @ 07:56
“As I understand it, Al-Waleed bin Talal is part owner of Fox News, and is also funding the Cordoba Initiative so that makes Fox News hypocritical. ”

I got dragged into the same discussion by a smug Lefty. I said “So let me get this straight… FOX news is being dishonest because it reported something that makes one of its owners look bad? Explain to me how THAT works.” I love the deflated-balloon look Libs usually get when after pick a fight with me.
- CavalierX | 09/06/2010 @ 08:36

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

“Smug, Flippant Jerk”Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

“Smug, Flippant Jerk”
Tuesday, August 31st, 2010