'Most Admired' List Has Some Bad News for Oprah, Obama, and Bush Haters

Hillary has edged out Oprah for the title of “Most admired woman” in 2007.

In the Gallup poll, 18% admired Hillary so much that many of those respondents are currently out finding pudgy girls to go home and fellate their husbands just so they can emulate the forgiving nature of their hero.

President Bush was the “most admired man” on the list, which leads me to this passing question for pollsters: How can Bush’s approval rating be constantly touted as hovering around 1.42% or some such number but yet he ends up being the most admired man? Did he “steal” another title? That darn Karl Rove continues to amaze, even after he’s exited the White House.

Bad news for Oprah and Barack:

Barack Obama was the “most admired man” of 5% of those polled. Oprah was “most admired woman” of 16% of those polled. This means that, at most, 31% of those who chose Oprah as their “most admired woman” gave a damn about her spirited endorsement of Obama. If you don’t take the advice of someone you so greatly admire, how much can you really admire them? I mean, come on!

null

Hillary breaks the bad news to John Edwards that, for the first time in ten years, he doesn’t appear on the “Most Admired Woman” list

‘Most Admired’ List Has Some Bad News for Oprah, Obama, and Bush Haters

Hillary has edged out Oprah for the title of “Most admired woman” in 2007.

In the Gallup poll, 18% admired Hillary so much that many of those respondents are currently out finding pudgy girls to go home and fellate their husbands just so they can emulate the forgiving nature of their hero.

President Bush was the “most admired man” on the list, which leads me to this passing question for pollsters: How can Bush’s approval rating be constantly touted as hovering around 1.42% or some such number but yet he ends up being the most admired man? Did he “steal” another title? That darn Karl Rove continues to amaze, even after he’s exited the White House.

Bad news for Oprah and Barack:

Barack Obama was the “most admired man” of 5% of those polled. Oprah was “most admired woman” of 16% of those polled. This means that, at most, 31% of those who chose Oprah as their “most admired woman” gave a damn about her spirited endorsement of Obama. If you don’t take the advice of someone you so greatly admire, how much can you really admire them? I mean, come on!

null

Hillary breaks the bad news to John Edwards that, for the first time in ten years, he doesn’t appear on the “Most Admired Woman” list

Every Government Project is a 'Big Dig'

Boston’s wildly more expensive sequel to “Waterworld,” the trouble-plagued “Big Dig,” is almost finished — at least until the next colossal structural failure.

The outcome was typical of almost every government project (by the way, the fastener company mentioned is no relation — at least I hope not):

BOSTON – When the clock runs out on 2007, Boston will quietly mark the end of one of the most tumultuous eras in the city’s history: The Big Dig, the nation’s most complex and costliest highway project, will officially come to an end.

Don’t expect any champagne toasts.

After a history marked by engineering triumphs, tunnels leaks, epic traffic jams, last year’s death of a motorist crushed by falling concrete panels and a price tag that soared from $2.6 billion to a staggering $14.8 billion, there’s little appetite for celebration.

Civil and criminal cases stemming from the July 2006 tunnel ceiling collapse continue, though on Monday the family of Milena Del Valle announced a $6 million settlement with Powers Fasteners, the company that manufactured the epoxy blamed by investigators for the accident. Lawsuits are pending against other Big Dig contractors, and Powers Fasteners still faces a manslaughter indictment.

Heck, even uber-liberal Barney Frank said, before the project, that it would be cheaper to raise the city than lower the expressways.

That aside, is any of this surprising at all?

What’s the difference between the “Big Dig” and any other big government project? The water. The “Big Dig”, minus the water, would still be a failure, but nobody would notice as much because there wouldn’t be the reminder eerily dripping through the walls.

Take any government program, such as Social Security, and pretend it’s a tunnel under a river. Then, substitute water for accountability, common sense, reason, and fiscal prudence. Nobody in their right mind would drive through the thing.

Remove the water from the equation though, and nobody immediately notices the incompetence and inherent dangers… until the very structure collapses.

Remember, some of the same politicians who thought up The Big Dig are the same types of people who will be in charge of designing National Health Care. What could possibly go wrong?

The truth is, most government programs are “Big Digs” on a scale that makes the “Big Dig” look more like a “modest scoop.”

Every Government Project is a ‘Big Dig’

Boston’s wildly more expensive sequel to “Waterworld,” the trouble-plagued “Big Dig,” is almost finished — at least until the next colossal structural failure.

The outcome was typical of almost every government project (by the way, the fastener company mentioned is no relation — at least I hope not):

BOSTON – When the clock runs out on 2007, Boston will quietly mark the end of one of the most tumultuous eras in the city’s history: The Big Dig, the nation’s most complex and costliest highway project, will officially come to an end.

Don’t expect any champagne toasts.

After a history marked by engineering triumphs, tunnels leaks, epic traffic jams, last year’s death of a motorist crushed by falling concrete panels and a price tag that soared from $2.6 billion to a staggering $14.8 billion, there’s little appetite for celebration.

Civil and criminal cases stemming from the July 2006 tunnel ceiling collapse continue, though on Monday the family of Milena Del Valle announced a $6 million settlement with Powers Fasteners, the company that manufactured the epoxy blamed by investigators for the accident. Lawsuits are pending against other Big Dig contractors, and Powers Fasteners still faces a manslaughter indictment.

Heck, even uber-liberal Barney Frank said, before the project, that it would be cheaper to raise the city than lower the expressways.

That aside, is any of this surprising at all?

What’s the difference between the “Big Dig” and any other big government project? The water. The “Big Dig”, minus the water, would still be a failure, but nobody would notice as much because there wouldn’t be the reminder eerily dripping through the walls.

Take any government program, such as Social Security, and pretend it’s a tunnel under a river. Then, substitute water for accountability, common sense, reason, and fiscal prudence. Nobody in their right mind would drive through the thing.

Remove the water from the equation though, and nobody immediately notices the incompetence and inherent dangers… until the very structure collapses.

Remember, some of the same politicians who thought up The Big Dig are the same types of people who will be in charge of designing National Health Care. What could possibly go wrong?

The truth is, most government programs are “Big Digs” on a scale that makes the “Big Dig” look more like a “modest scoop.”

For Your Christmas Day Viewing Pleasure: Santa Claus Conquers the Martians

I’m a big fan of horrible movies — flicks that would make even Ed Wood himself wince in agony.

On Christmas and the days leading up to it, everybody shows movies like It’s a Wonderful Life, Home Alone, Miracle on 34th Street and A Christmas Story, but hardly anybody ever shows gems like this.

Below is a 9:33 clip from the 1964 train wreck, Santa Claus conquers the Martians,” with running critique from the cast of classic program, Mystery Science Theater 3000.

Merry Christmas all!

Monday's Column: Fight Against DC Dim Bulbs

nullToday’s column, a pre-Christmas special, at WorldNetDaily is about the energy bill that was just passed by the House of Reps. and signed by President Bush, which includes mandating that light bulbs be 70-percent more efficient by the year 2020.

This effectively bans (“outlaws”) the traditional incandescent light bulb.

Saving energy is a good idea, but why is it a bad idea to mandate it into existence, and what’s the real motive behind the ban? Read “From my cold, dead light socket” for the rest.

Click here to give it a “Digg.”

Have a great Christmas Eve, everybody!

Monday’s Column: Fight Against DC Dim Bulbs

nullToday’s column, a pre-Christmas special, at WorldNetDaily is about the energy bill that was just passed by the House of Reps. and signed by President Bush, which includes mandating that light bulbs be 70-percent more efficient by the year 2020.

This effectively bans (“outlaws”) the traditional incandescent light bulb.

Saving energy is a good idea, but why is it a bad idea to mandate it into existence, and what’s the real motive behind the ban? Read “From my cold, dead light socket” for the rest.

Click here to give it a “Digg.”

Have a great Christmas Eve, everybody!

What's Your Life Worth to the Government?

We now know the answer to that question, with the help of Steven Milloy’s latest “Junk science” story on provisions in the new energy law:

First, the law requires auto fuel efficiency standards to increase by 40 percent by 2020. Unfortunately, this goal is presently only achievable by reducing vehicle weight — but lighter cars are deadlier cars. So what’s the purported benefit of mandating 4,000 or more deaths per year?

The law’s supporters claim that it may reduce national oil consumption by about 5 percent (400 million barrels of oil per year). Doing the math, your life is now worth about 100,000 barrels of oil. In touting the law, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “it is an environmental issue, and therefore a health issue… it is an energy issue, and it is a moral issue.”

A barrel of petrolium is currently priced at about $93. This means our lives are worth about $9.3 million to the government. Not bad, really, though I have a feeling this is an incredibly high estimate — especially if you’re a conservative.

It’s amazing what constitutes a “moral” issue for liberals. Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore expect us to consider the murder of the unborn a celebrated “choice” to which we should be desensitized, but at the same time we’re supposed to fall into a moral freakout because the friggin’ temperature went up .6 degrees?

What’s Your Life Worth to the Government?

We now know the answer to that question, with the help of Steven Milloy’s latest “Junk science” story on provisions in the new energy law:

First, the law requires auto fuel efficiency standards to increase by 40 percent by 2020. Unfortunately, this goal is presently only achievable by reducing vehicle weight — but lighter cars are deadlier cars. So what’s the purported benefit of mandating 4,000 or more deaths per year?

The law’s supporters claim that it may reduce national oil consumption by about 5 percent (400 million barrels of oil per year). Doing the math, your life is now worth about 100,000 barrels of oil. In touting the law, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “it is an environmental issue, and therefore a health issue… it is an energy issue, and it is a moral issue.”

A barrel of petrolium is currently priced at about $93. This means our lives are worth about $9.3 million to the government. Not bad, really, though I have a feeling this is an incredibly high estimate — especially if you’re a conservative.

It’s amazing what constitutes a “moral” issue for liberals. Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore expect us to consider the murder of the unborn a celebrated “choice” to which we should be desensitized, but at the same time we’re supposed to fall into a moral freakout because the friggin’ temperature went up .6 degrees?

Another Congressman Caught in the Flynt Trap?

Until the day that Hustler publisher Larry Flynt is wheeled down the handicapped entrance ramp to Hotel Hades, he’s determined to “out” as many gay Congressional Republicans as possible.

According to this Vanity Fair story, Flynt has the goods on another Senator:

The ripest target now, Flynt claims, is a closeted gay Republican senator who is not Larry Craig, though last spring Flynt’s investigators were also pursuing rumors about Craig, going as far as putting a surveillance team on him, before his arrest in June for allegedly soliciting sex in a mens room at the Minneapolis airport.

“The other shoe’s going to drop any day,” Flynt says, speaking of the other senator. “It’ll surprise a lot of people that he’s gay. And I’ll bet you he resigns the same day and rides off into the sunset. He won’t be as stupid as Craig… His boyfriend is in a quandary about selling him out. It’s really somewhat of a pathetic situation. But we also have other boyfriends that he’s been involved with… We got some motel records. We got some photographs. They don’t involve sex, but sort of romantic walks on the beach and that sort of thing.”

I hope it’s Norm Coleman from Minnesota. That way, going into his Senate race against Al Franken, the Republican might steal a few votes from left-of-center undecideds in the Gopher state.

Keep your fingers crossed!