A Reporter’s Wasted Time

For some weird reason, Politico thinks that what Jose Canseco says about the fiscal cliff deal is news. It makes me feel bad for Patrick Gavin, the reporter who had to write about it. If I was a reporter for a news outlet and the editor told me to cover Jose Canseco’s tweets, I’d be pretty pissed off about it. Though this part is pretty funny:

Canseco’s comments, apparently, drummed up some interest in his own for for political office, which he accepted … sort of.

”Thank you for your support but i cant run for president because I was born in Cuba not hawaii,” said Canseco, but he added that one of his New Years resolutions was, “Get elected to a important political office in the U.S. or canada to help all people and governments with there problem.”

You might try learning how to spell first.

10 comments on this post.
  1. Rodney Nelson:

    Theirs moor importent stuff than speeling, like…like…well, their ar!

  2. Larry:

    They’re, they’re, Ed. Don’t be so catty. This is Canseco we’re talking about. He has had more than a few baseballs bounced off his head.

  3. StevoR, fallible human being:

    What just because he didn’t capitalise Canada?

    (Or is that another grammar / spelling fail on my part?)

  4. StevoR, fallible human being:

    Oh yeah, ‘I’ is traditionally capital I aye?

    (And there’s an interesting lemur homonyn too.)

  5. StevoR, fallible human being:

    See :

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQoZ5ESK4YI

    with Stephen Fry’s aye-aye (warning micturation reference at start.)

    Cool creature.

    Also, wait is that Patrick Gavin’s fault or Jose Canseco’s one?

  6. Reginald Selkirk:

    because I was born in Cuba not hawaii

    At least he’s not a birther, let’s give him credit for that.

  7. Akira MacKenzie:

    Yes, only in America will our reporters ask trivial celebrities about politics and economics while they ask our politicians about their undergarment preference.

  8. Nemo:

    I was gonna comment on “U.S. or Canada”, but I found this in the article: “first replace income tax with spending tax. … spending tax rewards savers and normal workers and hits the rich guys.” No, Jose, you have it exactly backwards. A “spending” tax is extremely regressive. The rich guys are the ones who can afford to save.

    Wait, now I’m reading the comments at Politico. Here’s a real gem: “Liberals want to tax the rich even though the poor have to count their pennies before going to buy groceries and what is a few more thousand to someone buying a BMW. Shows the intelligence level of a democrat.” Whoever can explain that one to me, wins an Internet.

  9. Michael Heath:

    Nemo writes:

    A “spending” tax is extremely regressive. The rich guys are the ones who can afford to save.

    Not necessarily. One can do a number of things to make consumption/VAT taxes effectively progressive. One policy would be to subsidize the amount of the tax to the point it’s eradicated for the poorest, with decreasing subsidy rates as income increases. This in conjunction with having different tax rates for various goods, like a higher tax on luxury goods than non-luxury goods.

    In addition “rich guys” are able to avoid significant tax liability on income and wealth per our current scheme, e.g., keeping wealth off-shore, various tax shelters, and certain deductions and credits to reduce the effective tax rate on income and wealth and sometimes even delay liability. A competently crafted consumption/VAT tax can reduce tax avoidance on those people where they can’t enjoy their wealth unless they consume items which would have an embedded tax.

  10. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven:

    Wait, now I’m reading the comments at Politico. Here’s a real gem: “Liberals want to tax the rich even though the poor have to count their pennies before going to buy groceries and what is a few more thousand to someone buying a BMW. Shows the intelligence level of a democrat.” Whoever can explain that one to me, wins an Internet.

    Presumably the dipshit thinks liberals support taxes just to be MEAN, and is “cleverly” pointing out that what the robber-barons are being asked to contribute to the functioning of the society that allows their existence and wealth doesn’t, objectively, “hurt” that much.

Leave a comment

You must be