Snark-Infested Waters by Mike Bailey

Snark-Infested Waters by Mike Bailey

Subscribe  |  Share    |  Print

Follow me on Facebook

Archive for the ‘Reality Check’ Category

Today’s Reality Check

Saturday, September 5th, 2009

As I’ve heard and become involved in debates over health care (see my previous post) I’ve noticed that some opponents take an interesting tack in stating their opposition to any kind of government-run health care program.

You mention the public option and their take is that the government will royally screw up such a system. America already has the greatest health care system in the world, they’ll say, so why fix it if it ain’t broke?

Well, first of all, if there are people in this country who cannot receive basic health care because they cannot afford to pay for it, it’s not the greatest. And if the private companies are refusing to provide coverage to those who can afford it (even with the assistance of their employer) because of a pre-existing condition, it’s not the greatest. And if the companies refuse to pay for a procedure because it’s “unnecessary” despite the recommendation of a doctor — the person who is ostensibly the best judge of such things — it’s not the greatest. I could go on, but you get the point.

But to my main beef. Many reform foes will neatly contradict themselves in their arguments, claiming America is already A-number-one in the health care department and doesn’t need a government-run program. Yet you point out that we already have such programs in the form of Medicaid and Medicare, and that the health care program for American military personnel is government run, those programs suddenly become exceptions to the rule. Those things? Aw, they suck and are proof positive that Uncle Sam would make a poor Dr. Sam.

Yet, did not Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard recent say that Medicare and the military health care systems were in fact top-of-the-line? He did, in a discussion with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show. Yet he could not reconcile that statement with his belief that a government-run system for the general public would be a mess.

And I might remind the GOP opposition in particular, our own former governor Mitt Romney wholeheartedly approved of a state government-administered health care system in Commonwealth Care? And so far Mitt has yet to completely reverse his stance there (so far, but give him time).

What I’m saying, health care opponents: let’s have a little consistency.

In your Facebook

Thursday, September 3rd, 2009

I recently became embroiled in a war of words with a guy on Facebook. I know, I feel a little dumb too.

It came about because a friend of mine (a real one, not a “Facebook friend”) posted something about the health care reform debate. A friend of hers (a “Facebook friend,” which means she in fact barely knows the person to whom he’s responding) responded in what I would describe as an unnecessarily belligerent manner. He wasn’t out to start a lively but civil debate or offer a contrasting opinion. He was just out to be a jerk.

You know the kind of kid who, in school, responds to everything other students say with mockery or derision because he cannot differentiate between “good” attention and “bad” attention? You know the kind of person who goes to a concert for a band he knows he doesn’t like for the express purpose of heckling them? You know the kind of person who yells “FIRE!” in a crowded building for the sole purpose of creating chaos then excuses his behavior by claiming he has the Constitutional right to free speech? That’s the kind of person this guy is.

The “discussion” degenerated quickly. He threw out patronizing cracks and accusations of socialism (which has become the modern-day equivalent of “Commie”). When I didn’t back down he apparently went and checked out my profile so he could make some more personal (yet still quite superficial) attacks. He resorted to ad hominem strategies (wherein one of the parties attempts to devalue his opponent’s information by claiming fault with the speaker or source of information; the information itself is not directly challenged or disputed). Y’know: the usual.

Then he hit rock bottom: he whipped out a Nazi reference (Josef Mengele, specifically).

Did I mention my friend is Jewish? Kind of important to the story, really.

Which brings me to my point. During this debate, a lot of people have alluded to Hitler and the Nazi regime. Let us recall that woman who showed up to a hearing with Barney Frank (a Jew) with a poster of a Hitlerized Obama. The allusions have been flying pretty freely, I’d say far too freely.

Unless the individual on the receiving end of such an accusation is directly or indirectly complicit in the murder of six million human beings, resorting to a Nazi comparison means you automatically lose the debate. It shows that you have exhausted all rational fact-based avenues of argument (if you had any to begin with) and are now so desperate you have to reach out to push one of the hottest of hot buttons to provoke a visceral emotional response and demonize your opponent/garner cheap sympathy for your point of view.

Today’s Reality Check

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

Fall River is even less a part of Cape Cod than Wareham.

When the Boston Herald first reported about wedding photographer (and, it seems, professional attention-seeking liar) Phillip Brunelle’s double Lottery windfall, they ran this headline:

Cape photographer scratches for $1G — then for $1M!

And then, in his opening sentence, the reporter called Brunelle “a sleepy Fall River man.”

Good god. Bad enough Wareham is trying to horn in on the good Cape Cod name, but now Fall River? Cripes, Cape Cod would let Wareham into the club a thousand times before it’d even let Fall River reach the locked wrought-iron gate the Cape erected long ago to keep out such riff-raff.

I mean, yeah, Wareham still gets its drinking water out of wells (not from a pristine groundwater source piped directly into homes via solid gold pipes, like Cape Codders do), but at least each resident has their own bucket. And they’re nice buckets too — solid oak jobs, and I hear a few of Wareham’s most well-to-do citizens actually have metal buckets (it’s a status thing).

Fall River? Every resident has to SHARE the same bucket to get water from the community well…and it’s a cheap pine bucket someone picked up at a Christmas Tree Shop. Pine! How gauche can you get? Really.

Today’s Reality Check

Thursday, July 9th, 2009

Wareham is NOT part of Cape Cod.

I aim this specifically at the Taunton Gazette, which ran a story with the following opening:

A Cape Cod woman could face multiple theft charges after police said they caught her Sunday trying to either sell or exchange merchandise for drugs.

Nicole Petronelli, 23, of 1 Highland St., Wareham, was arrested by Taunton police at around 4:30 p.m. in the parking lot of the Cumberland Farms on Broadway, after cops say they saw her pick up a suspicious man seen walking out of Fairfax Gardens Housing Complex on DeWert Avenue.

No, no, a thousand times, no.

Cape Cod is a geographically distinct region, a collection of 15 towns in Barnstable County, and Wareham is not one of those 15 towns, no matter how hard it wishes it were.

Wareham is part of Plymouth County. The closest it comes to being part of Cape Cod is the fact it is part of the Second Plymouth District, which overlaps with Bourne, and its self-proclaimed status as the “gateway to Cape Cod.” Wareham’s major export is Geena Davis.

The management concedes this is a very petty gripe, but as a native Cape Codder from a long line of Cape and Island natives, I’m genetically predisposed toward putting Wareham in its place.

Today’s moment of hyberbole

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

There’s some controversy a-brewin’ in Falmouth, over the board of selectman’s recent decision not to re-appoint George Morse as a town constable. He lost the appointment due to some questionable information that arose during a background check — a check Morse now claims was conducted illegally.

Selectman Ahmed Mustafa, who supported Morse’s reappointment, said Morse was the victim of a personal vendetta against him. At a recent meeting, Mustafa put the entire situation in persepctive when he said: “This was nothing more than a witchcraft trial. What is going on here is very irregular and it makes the Salem Witch Trials look like a fairy tale.”

So: George Morse being subjected to a possibly illegal background check and getting ousted from a low-paying civil service job is worse than 150-plus people getting tossed into the blender of a kangaroo court assembled to try them on ludicrous charges brought forth by superstitious and often vindictive neighbors, resulting in nineteen people getting hanged, five people rotting away in jail, and one man getting crushed to death by heavy stones during interrogation.

Got it. Perfectly sensible analogy.

Swine Flu And You: A Snark-Infested Waters Public Service Announcement

Monday, May 4th, 2009

SWINE FLU!

AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! SWINE FLU! The swine flu is upon us! We’re all gonna die! Repent! REPENT!

Or not.

All right, people, pull your heads out from between your butt cheeks for a second, okay? Good, now listen up. This swine flu – or as they want to call it now, the H1N1 flu (how sexy) – is…are you ready?

THE FLU.

A strain transmittable between animals and humans, and yeah, that’s unusual, but even that isn’t a factor here; the strain hitting the U.S. now is not “zoonotic,” which means it doesn’t jump species.

What makes this strain so special (read: unnecessarily terrifying)? Let’s see what the Centers for Disease Control says about that:

The symptoms of this new influenza A H1N1 virus in people are similar to the symptoms of regular human flu and include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. A significant number of people who have been infected with this virus also have reported diarrhea and vomiting.  Also, like seasonal flu, severe illnesses and death has occurred as a result of illness associated with this virus.

Wow, that’s…uh…that’s completely ordinary. In fact, most resources I’ve found say that something as simple as Tamiflu will fix people up nicely.

But wait, you say! What about that “death” thing the CDC mentioned? Isn’t that worth flying into a screaming panic fit?

No, you dolt, it isn’t. In a given year, a normal flu virus (or complications from the same) kills about 36,000 people, and that’s an estimate. Many of those people are the ones who are told every winter to get a flu shot as they’re especially vulnerable: kids, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems.

As I post this on Monday morning, the CDC has confirmed 226 cases of H1N1 and only one death, an infant – hardly a sign that in a few days half of us will be going to hook up with Randall Flagg in Las Vegas while the rest of us go to chill with Mother Abigail in Nebraska.

But it’s a pandemic, you fool! you’re most likely screaming at the screen now. What have you got to say about that, Mr. Smart Guy?!

The word “pandemic” is the new greatly misunderstood word of the week (supplanting “socialism” and “fascism”). A true pandemic refers to a disease that is relatively new to a given population center that, in part because of its unfamiliarity to the natives, spreads quickly and easily.

The H1N1 virus was the culprit behind the 1918 pandemic that killed an estimated 20 million to 100 million people worldwide, and what really took out a lot of those people – very healthy people, I add – was a condition called a “cytokine storm,” in which the person’s immune system went into crazy overdrive trying to fend off the virus and winds up attacking healthy cells. So far the CDC has found no evidence that this strain stands to trigger a similar reaction in the infected, or even stands to be more severe than your garden variety flu.

This doesn’t mean that you can go around licking every stranger with a cough — I mean, let’s be sensible, shall we? — but we’re not looking at the Black Plague of the 21st century either. So, in the immortal words of the (ironically) late Douglas Adams, don’t panic.

Today’s reality check

Monday, March 9th, 2009

It took President Bush eight years to destroy the economy. It’s going to take President Obama more than eight weeks to fix it. You can’t call his plan a failure for a long time yet, so be patient and kindly shut the hell up for a while.

PS: Actively wishing for Obama’s attempt to fix the economy to fail, just because you don’t like the way he’s going about it, is not just unpatriotic, it’s reprehensible. The President does not fail in a vacuum; the impacts of any failure to right the nation’s economy will be felt far outside his own house (so to speak) and could mean new or continued misery for literally millions of Americans. By wishing failure on Obama, you are, by extent, wishing hardship on your family, friends, and community.

So don’t be a jackass. If I can support the troops without supporting the war, you can support Obama’s end if not his means.

Today’s reality check

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009

If you oppose abortion on the basis it is taking a life, i.e., against the sixth commandment (fifth if you’re Roman Catholic or a Lutheran), then you cannot also support the death penalty. It’s more than contradictory, it’s hypocritical.

No, you cannot argue the point based on specific conditions, e.g., an unborn baby is innocent while a death row convict is guilty of a heinous crime. There’s no asterisk next to the commandment. It says Thou shalt not kill, period.

You also can’t support war in any form. Jesus advocated peace and the turning of cheeks. Support war and you oppose Christ’s teachings.

Today’s reality check – [insert preferred holiday here] edition

Thursday, December 11th, 2008

PVP Christmas strip

Yeah, it’s that time again: time for everyone to get into a pointless knot over which greeting they receive at retail stores.

I’ve said it before, but it’s worth repeating: I don’t give a toss whether I get a “Merry Christmas” or a “Happy Holidays”…as long as they’re not telling me “Go **** yourself,” I’m cool.

The argument, as always, is over the exorcism of Christ from Christmas; the argument is that refusing to even say the word is part of some greater effort to secularize the holiday and strip it of its alleged Christian roots. I say “alleged” because Christmas is a essentially co-opted pagan holiday, and sorry, people, there’s ample historical proof to back me up on that one.

I disagree. I see running with a very generic slogan as a wholly understandable (if kinda gutless) reaction by the retail industry to those people on the opposite end of this foolishness: those who get themselves in a knot over a greeting that excludes everything but Christmas. Going with the all-inclusive, if bland, “Happy Holidays” is the best option in a no-win scenario, because you know it’s happened somewhere: someone went and scrounged themselves up a lawyer to sue a place for not offering a Christmas-specific platitude. Even in today’s frivolous litigation-happy society, you really have to push the bounds of jerkdom to claim you suffered emotional distress because someone wished you well in the most general of manners, so in simple terms of liability, I’d think “Happy Holidays” is more defensible than “Merry Christmas.”

(If there are any lawyers out there who would care to expound upon this — without claiming billable hours — please do.)

Whatever holiday you subscribe to, chances are it’s somehow based in a philosophy of peace, love, acceptance — you know, the good stuff in life. Why crap all over that just because someone’s being nice to you, just not in the precise way you’d like them to be?

Today’s reality check

Thursday, October 30th, 2008

To State Senator Dianne Wilkerson: innocent until proven guilty? Yes. But come on, woman, there is video of you stuffing $1,000 in CASH in your bra all over the Internet. The best you can hope for right now it be be found not guilty (not innocent; not guilty) on a technicality. Stop acting like you’re the victim, because you’re so not. This, coupled with the fact you lost your primary race, is ample reason to withdraw and go away before voters humiliate you further with a second crushing defeat on Tuesday.

To voters who are actually sticking by Senator Wilkerson in the face of very damning evidence: are you people insane? The woman gets nailed red-handed in the culmination of an 18-month FBI investigation — for corruption and accepting bribes to influence legislation — and you still want her representing your interests in the State House? I can only hope that you’re all too damned stupid to properly manipulate your ballots and wind up writing her name in the wrong spot.

Other blogs

Follow us on Facebook

Advertisement