Jeff Gannon Blog

Friday, February 04, 2005

Mailbag

I appreciate everyone who has taken the time to write to me. Your questions have been thought provoking and your comments lucid. Unvarnished, even. And since I'm trying to build a community of people who aren't Jeff Gannon, as well as a community of people who aren't someone else who isn't Jeff Gannon, I thought it would be right of me (hahah) to share and comment on some of your ideas.

I will call this the mailbag but I'm not claiming that it's an actual mailbag.

First up is Anonymous (I wonder if that is his/her real name?) who writes:

"It's about time that we got more real journalists like you and fewer traitors like Helen Thomas who have the nerve to ask our Dear Leaders real questions."

Anonymous,
Don't be too hard on Helen. She's a doll. She's just a part of the old media.


Next up is KarmiCommunist who chimes in with this comment:

"Perhaps you should stick to asking questions, since your reports on the SOTU lacks a lot."

KC (can I call you that?),
I've always considered myself sort of a double threat. I think that I have the ability to ask great questions and then report the answers myself. It separates me from all those Lefties who are, in my opinion, quite bonkers. The SOTU was different in that it wasn't really due to a question I had, but rather a constitutional requirement. However, I will keep your critique in mind next year and try to improve.


Another one from Anonymous:

"1 Are you now, or have you ever been a journalist?

2 Does Karl drink pine-apple juice or does he taste salty?

3 Do you prefer Baghdad Jeff or is there a different name that works better for you?

4 Is your mother proud of you or did she raise you to be honest and is highly disapointed in you?

Thanks in advance."

Anonymous,

1. Obviously.
2. I don't understand. I think your sentence structure is off. It doesn't have to be either or.
3. A few relatives used to call me that during the build-up to war because I was a whiz at explaining all the reasons we needed to protect ourselves and go to war.
4. See my answer to number 2.


Good friend Tomato was kind enough to share this painful, personal secret:

"My grandma was in a union all her life and she lived to be 92. In hindsight, it appears she was probably a communist, too."

Tomato,
My prayers go out to you and your family. Well, everyone but your communist grandma.


More Tomato:

"Do you think old people will taste like chicken or more like beef?"

Tomato,
I understand you're upset at your communist grandma, but you really shouldn't.


And finally, more Anonymous:

"Let me just lay this out: The Social Security payroll tax is something you dislike because they take your hard earned dollars and give them to old people. Well, gee... by that rationale, shouldn't we be looking at the uses of all of the taxes you pay? How about: the income tax is taking your hard earned dollars and building roads and providing defence (offense??), among other things, for many people other than you. Gee, maybe we should destroy those programs, too.

Social Security is an amazingly efficient "Poverty Insurance". If we had no Social Security, we would have many more people in poverty. People in poverty are going to cost the government much more money than the cost of Social Security. Well, then you say, "why does the government have to take care of people that can't take care of themselves?" Good question. Actually, wait... no, it isn't. It's in everyone's best interest to provide a minimum level of support for people. It provides stability to the economy. Sure, the economy won't have the highest possible highs, but it certainly won't ever reach great depression levels, either. People, for lot's of reasons, just never get enough money set aside to take care of themselves until the day they die. Sometimes they get sick, sometimes markets change (jobs move overseas, new technology makes their expertise obsolete, etc.), sometimes they get swindled, sometimes they have their money invested in Enron then it turns out the company was a giant Ponzi scheme and there never was any money. The CEO walks a multi-millionaire, but they are destitute. If there were no Social Security, these people would have to rely on their family (if available) or they would be homeless. Homelessness leads to all sorts of social ills- from the festering and spread of communicable diseases (assuming we don't provide them with emergency room crippling free medical care) to increased crime.

So, perhaps that paltry payroll tax- which will also provide YOU with poverty insurance- isn't such a high price to pay to avoid recessions, depressions, epidemics and much higher crime. And, as for having these nice young men at Wall Street manage their money... give me a break. The government handles the money in SS at a cost of 2%. Even very conservative estimates say that the cost of having brokers handle the money will be much closer to 20%. Imagine the rate of return one would have to achieve to eclipse that difference! We already know from Argentina and England that those types of social security programs are utter failures."

Anonymous,
If I wanted the Lefty talking points I'd read the New York Times and watch CNN.

My Thoughts on Social Security

I'm torn. On the one hand, I want to see SS strengthened. On the other hand, I want to see it completely destroyed because it has always been a pretty useless program, another way for the government to take away my hard earned cash (I'm a journalist) and give it to an old person who is not a member of my family. (Not Grandma Gannon.)

Thankfully, we have a President (Bush) who understands that in order to completely destroy SS, we must first strengthen it. What the Bonkers Left fails to realize is that old people hate SS. It's confusing. They would feel much more comfortable if a smart young man from Wall Street would take care of the details.

Thursday, February 03, 2005

What is a Kos?

A good friend of mine (not Armstrong Williams) informs me that certain Lefties are researching Jeff Gannon. So I guess this is an ideal time to point out once again that I am not Jeff Gannon and I am not pretending to be anyone else who isn't really Jeff Gannon.

Anyway, if they're anything like most other Lefties, my guess is that they're going BONKERS over nothing at all.

President Participates in Social Security Conversation in North Dakota

Another unvarnished nugget brought to you by yours not truly, Jeff Gannon:


"I'm -- I was proud that the Governor was at the State of the Union address last night, and I was proud that he flew back from Washington with me, and I really enjoyed flying back, as well, with Senator Kent Conrad. I'm proud you're here, Senator. Thank you for coming. I enjoyed our visit. (Applause.) And Senator Conrad asked permission if he could bring a Senator with him from another state. I said, fine, who is it? And he said, well, that would be Senator Conrad Burns from Montana. I said, bring him on. Welcome, Senator. I'm glad you're here. (Applause.)

After here, we're going to Montana, then I'm going to Nebraska, then I'm going to Arkansas, and then I'm going to Florida. See, I think it's important to get out amongst the people and talk about important issues. And that's what I'm doing. (Applause.) And Congressman Denny Rehberg is with us from Montana, as well. Denny, thank you for joining us, proud that you're here. (Applause.)

Guess what we spent a lot of time talking about -- with the Senator -- both Senators and the Congressman and the Governor. We spent time talking about beef."


Again. Why is the Franco-Mainstream Media afraid to report this stuff?

Elevated from Comments

Anonymous said...
Yes George Bush is indeed a kind, concerned and loving father. Not only to his two daughters, but in effect to everyone! And I have it on the best authority that his daughters go to church *every day.*

Why does the leftist press continually make up completely fictional stories about Jenna and Barb partying every night like a couple of Manhattan socialites.

Why doesn't somebody stop those lying gossip columnists!!!


I hear you Anonymous. You're preaching to the choir. The reason is because the leftist press is bonkers.

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

More Proof that the Lefties are Going BONKERS!

This Lefty non-journalist is accusing me of being Jeff Gannon.

I have clearly stated that Jeff Gannon is not my name and I am in no way pretending to be anyone else whose name isn't really Jeff Gannon.

Enough said.

The Most Heartfelt Moment of the Night

"If you've got children in their 20s, as some of us do, the idea of Social Security collapsing before they retire does not seem like a small matter."

Maybe you liberals should keep this in mind as you accuse our President of trying to destroy social security. You think he wants to see his twin daughters go without in their golden years? He's doing this with them in mind. This is about a father and his love. You Lefties are going bonkers!

FYI

I will be covering the SOTU tonight, and will attempt to type the entire speech in real time. However, when the speech is over I will rewind it with my Tivo (a must for any real journalist) and check for any varnishes. Then I will file my report.


Update: I guess this is as good a time as ever for a little stenography or gun talk.

Chat away!

Update II: Once again, Fox News is wippin' the liberal media elite's butt! Notice this was posted BEFORE the speech was given. What other new organization could do that?

In case you're wondering. I'm able to make this update because my son Jeff Gannon Jr. (not his name) took over the stenograph for me. He's pretty good. His style is more unfiltered than unvarnished; whereas I err on the side of unvarnished.

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Old School Reporting

I appologize for not posting yesterday, but I think you'll be more than happy with the scoop I've managed to aquire. Like I said, I am a shoe polish reporter. It's what I do. So yesterday I read a story on the main page of the White House web site, and I am now prepared to report that President Bush met with the NBA Champion Detroit Pistons and correctly dubbed them "liberators." Here's the ACTUAL quote:

"I also appreciate the fact that you've been involved in great causes like teaching children how to read. I can't think of a more important cause than lending a gift of knowledge to a child. I remember the time in Houston, Texas, when a woman walked up to me and she said, reading is the new civil right. I thought that was such a powerful phrase. If you believe that, if you believe you liberate people by teaching them to read, consider yourself liberators as a result of being in the program, 'Read to Achieve.'"

Also significant is Commander-and-Chief Bush's admission that he was informed by a woman in Houston that reading is the new civil right.

I haven't seen this information anywhere in the mainstream super liberal media.

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Standing up for myself (not Jeff Gannon)

It appears that many of you are quick to make accusations about me, a guy who's not really Jeff Gannon. So I am going to very quickly refute this ridiculous speculation.

1) I am not a fake journalist. I took a course and have a certificate to prove it.

2) Like that other guy who's also not named Jeff Gannon, all I'm doing is presenting the unvarnished and often times unfiltered positions of the Bush Administration.

3) I'm certainly not involved in any sort of payola. For that to be possible, I'd at least have to be the other guy who's name also isn't really Jeff Gannon because that guy hasn't really been Jeff Gannon for a little longer than me and has better connections.

4) Yes, I occasionally copied straight out of the book when writing book reports in junior high. It seemed like the best way to convey what the author was trying to say. Unvarnished.