Skip to content

No need for pundits

Slowly but surely I’m working my way back to normalcy so far as my daily intake of news is concerned. I still don’t read the papers as much as I did before the day the Republic died, but I’m coming around, and I’m pretty much back to full bore reading on my RSS reader. But there’s still an impediment to regular blogging and I fear it won’t go away. I give you this quote from Kellyanne Conway, in which she defends the Donald’s mocking a disabled reporter:

“Why is everything taken at face value?” she asked. “You can’t give him the benefit of the doubt on this and he’s telling you what was in his heart, you always want to go with what’s come out of his mouth rather than look at what’s in his heart.”

You see, the mission of a pundit, even a dime store one like me, is to shine a light on aspects of the news that might not occur to those who have other things to think about in their busy days. But is there a brain so weak, likely to read this blog, that needs any help in deconstructing the absurdity of a statement like that? I used to think shooting fish in a barrel referred to a barrel full of many swimming fish, meaning you could still miss, but now I see the light. The Trump administration is a barrel full of tightly packed fish. You can’t miss. In fact, there’s no point in shooting because the fish are already dead.

Is there really any point in pointing out that Jeff Sessions is a racist, or that Trump’s cabinet consist mainly of kleptocrats who have already all but announced that their main objective is to siphon as much as they can from the U.S. Treasury and shakedown foreign governments for even more?

Oh, wait. I understand that the intelligence community has concluded that the Russians have something on Trump, and that some people are actually surprised! Maybe there is a need for someone to point out the obvious.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.