Is “Crazy Aunt” Helen Thomas a Conservative?
Today’s “Red America” blog at WaPo headlines with “Whiny? Crazy? You Just Might Be A Conservative”. Does that mean that White House reporter Helen Thomas is a “conservative”? No, the cat is finally out of the bag. Or should I write - “The crazy aunt is finally out of the White House attic”? Yes, that evil genius, Karl Rove, has finally exposed crazy Aunt Helen to the world. Why else would the President have called upon Helen Thomas at his press conference?
Not only did President Bush’s press conference prove that there IS a crazy aunt in the White House press room’s attic, and that although she is still “alive”, the reporter herself showed the world that she is “NOT well”. White House reporter Helen Thomas has been scribbling in the press room since the days of the Kennedy administration, and regrettably, it shows. Time to go home Helen, and sit by the fireside and throw your own shoes at the television set instead of being the target of everyone else’s shoes.
(NewsBusters) Helen Thomas: “… the President and his cohorts, … have really encouraged all of the horror that’s going on. We have killed so many innocent people..”
Now, getting back to WaPo’s headlines that if you be “Whiny? Crazy? You Just Might Be A Conservative”, they are quoting a research study that discovered just how conservatives come into being.
You know that one loud, whiny kid in the supermarket yesterday? He’s probably the future George W. Bush, according to a Toronto Star article about a study from the Journal of Research Into Personality.
“Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative,” says the article. “At least, he did if he was one of 95 kids from the Berkeley area that social scientists have been tracking for the last 20 years. The confident, resilient, self-reliant kids mostly grew up to be liberals.”
Lest you think that this must be another one of those loony leftist university studies, think again. You, dear taxpayer, paid $1.2 million for the “scientific” study in 2003, by John T. Jost of Stanford, that discovered that Adolf Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbaugh were just one big band of socially warped right-wing brothers.
“From now until the end of the world, we and it shall be remembered. We few, we Band of Brothers. For he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.” ~~ William Shakespeare (”King Henry V”)
Save This Page
Perhaps they should do a study on the liberal blogosphere and opinion media
Rather than 95 kids from Berkeley over the course of 20 years. This is hilarious:
Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chan…
Trackback by Sister Toldjah — March 22, 2006 @ 10:27 am
Bias In Study of Liberals/Conservatives
All the study tells you is what the researchers value and how they chose to describe traits they either like or dislike. Rather than focusing on toddlers, the study’s authors should have focused on why it is that liberals are so whiny as adults.
Trackback by Sensible Mom — March 22, 2006 @ 11:56 am
The real tragedy is that they get paid by American taxpayers to write this psycho-babble. Our money was wasted on such lunacy instead of “feeding the starving children”. Even worse, it was during the Bush administration.
Comment by Kerfuffles — March 22, 2006 @ 12:04 pm
You make the assumption that Helen Thomas is ‘Whiny and Crazy’
If she’s ‘whiny and crazy’, then how could she be a respected UPI correspondent for 57 years, covering every president since JFK?
Her question seemed reasoned and logical enough.
Some facts here (I know, I know). No WMD. No Al-Qaeda ties. Israel not involved. Oil was not a factor. No connection to 9/11 (Bush admitted that point).
So, what do we have left? The fact that Saddam is a bad man? That Saddam invaded another country on 1990? That he killed off his own people (absolutely undisputed)?
(I’ll discretely leave out the fact that the Reagan administration implicitly supported and armed him here)
Because she’s asking the questions that 65% (Mar. 18th Newsweek Poll “Disapproval of Bush handling of war) of Americans are asking?
It that’s a classic example of ‘whiny and crazy’, I’d like to hear what you call sane.
I really would.
Comment by Canuckistanian — March 22, 2006 @ 10:38 pm
That Helen Thomas is whiny is not an assumption on my part, but was her observed behavior at the President’s news conference yesterday - and at other times. She has been nicknamed the “Crazy Aunt in the Attic” by others, whatever that means. Most normal people do not threaten suicide if Dick Cheney decides to run for President, but perhaps that statement by Helen Thomas to “The Hill” newspaper last year was hyperbole. I am not sure if “crazy aunt” really means “crazy” as I am not a medical doctor, but what if it is proved to be true that Helen Thomas was a Karl Rove plant in the White House Press Corps? Would you consider that sane behavior, or would you then call her crazy?
Comment by Kerfuffles — March 22, 2006 @ 11:00 pm
“others”
Who exactly are these “others”? Anyone reputable? Respected? Insightful?
I’m always interested in debunking hyperbole…
Comment by Canuckistanian — March 22, 2006 @ 11:44 pm
Here’s the quote, in full from The Hill:
If Vice President Cheney is indeed a “serious darkhorse” candidate for president in 2008, as Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward recently suggested, he probably won’t want to enlist legendary White House reporter Helen Thomas to help with his press relations, even though she has proposed a campaign strategy he could run on.
Thomas, a syndicated columnist for Hearst Newspapers who has covered the White House since the Kennedy administration, wrote in May that Cheney “certainly could campaign on the theme that he has had experience in running the White House.”
Thomas made the suggestion in a column she wrote about President Bush’s not being notified about a terror scare caused by an off-course Cessna airplane until after it was over, according to Editor & Publisher magazine.
Declaring that the incident “again raises the question of who’s running the show,” Thomas also noted Cheney’s central role on Sept. 11 and the widely held view that he is “probably the most powerful vice president in recent times, perhaps in U.S. history.”
But asked this week if she is promoting a Cheney candidacy, Thomas made it clear she isn’t.
“The day I say Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I’ll kill myself,” she told The Hill. “All we need is one more liar.”
Thomas added, “I think he’d like to run, but it would be a sad day for the country if he does.”
Comment by Canuckistanian — March 23, 2006 @ 12:02 am
Okay Canuckistanian - You asked for it! There are many, many others who have referred to Helen Thomas as “the crazy old aunt in the attic”. Just Goggle it! James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal used the phrase when he was commenting about one of Helen ‘I’ll kill myself’ Thomas’ editorials: “From a column by Helen Thomas, American journalism’s crazy old aunt in the attic.” The “crazy old aunt” herself seemed to enjoy the attention as she has been quoted in a book that features prominent anti-warriors as herself bragging:
“I must say that The Wall Street Journal called me the crazy aunt in the attic, and so did Fox, for questioning the war. Well, I want to know who is the crazy aunt in the attic now? I think The Wall Street Journal owes me an apology.” (Excerpt from “Stop the War Now”) Most obviously, Helen ‘I’ll kill myself’ Thomas was not offended by the “crazy aunt in the attic” title, because she did not demand an apology from the Journal for being called one, but for “questioning the war”. Here’s the link if you want to buy the book: “How to Stop the Next War Now”
The funniest post I’ve found about Helen Thomas is when she was interviewed by Hugh Hewitt and she demanded to know his credentials as a journalist. He said that he had ten years experience with PBS. Helen Thomas responded: “Well, that’s a good credential. But then you decided to switch over?” Hugh answered “To switch over to what?” Helen: “God knows what you are.” Obviously she was shocked that Hugh had gone from PBS to the “dark side”. Then she hung up on him. Radio Blogger has the Interview from 15 February 2006.
In all honesty … Kerfuffles would have hung up on Hewitt too and a lot sooner than did the Crazy Old Aunt in the Attic.
Comment by Kerfuffles — March 23, 2006 @ 5:38 am
Crazy Aunts of the White House Society
Helen Thomas and Bill Clinton
Comment by Kerfuffles — January 25, 2009 @ 9:53 am