Is keynoter Laura Ingraham ever 'not political'?

Akron General Health System's centennial celebration this week produced, if nothing else, an odd public relations failure with a remarkably poor antidote  for whatever ails health care today.

In short, it invited a widely known right-wing TV commentator to be its keynote speaker and paid her well.   Yep.  Laura Ingraham, she of Fox News and all of the journalistic darkness that such employment portends.

No fool to blow such a festive opportunity, Ingraham struck her sword at Obamacare.  According to the Beacon Journal, she asserted:  "I would say that Obamacare is the most glaring example of government overreach [read: President Obama] that I've seen probably in my lifetime."

In a city with a long progressive health care tradition, I'd say her invitation was the sort of overreach that served only the partisan speaker and her hosts.  There was nothing in her attack mode for the Democratic leaders in the audience or the new health insurance applicants around town. Talk  about public relations! (I did today with two former veteran PR guys from the rubber companies.  Both said they were astonished by  the choice of Ingraham).   Is anybody having any fun yet?

The hospital's president and chief executive, Dr. Thomas "Tim"  Stover, described Ingraham as "dynamic", but made the situation worse with a strategic retreat by saying:
"It wasn't anything political".  Even when you stand at the podium  blasting President Obama's calling-card  initiative?

 It wouldn't  have been more political had Ingraham been led to the podium arm-in-arm with  Mitch McConnell and  John Boehner.

Time for some triage called Damage Control 101.

Romney joins Dems: Economy is getting better!

IF SOME REPUBLICANS worry about McMitt Romney's unedited campaign-speak when he isn't constrained by a debate, here's another example of the sort of stuff that has Democratic strategists reaching for their notebooks for future use:

Appearing on a Fox News interview with Laura Ingraham on a huge issue that Romney and others have used against President Obama, he opined that the economy is improving! Startled that a Republican presidential candidate would go so positive, Ingraham asked him if that's what he meant to say. Replied McMitt: "Of course, the economy is getting better."

Maybe he should stick to his talk about "self-deportation" and leave the economy to his script writers.

Sotomayor's critics can't do simple math

IF WE NEEDED more persuasive proof of the right-wing's desperation in self-serving revisions of current events, it was the gangland attacks on Sonia Sotomayer in the wake of yesterday's U.S. Supreme Court decision in the New Haven, Conn., firefighters case. Proving that they are as inept in math as they are in their public utterances, the wingnuts immediately described the 5-4 decision as a 9-0 whipping of Sotomayor's vote to reject the firefighters' complaint of discrimination. (By the way, she was one of three appellate judges who unanimously supported the city's action against the firefighters.). Fox commentator Laura Ingraham called it "9-0 on Soto's summary judgment of firefighters claims." Or as Rush Limbaugh put it, "9-zip." On and on throughout the day, the absurd story line reported a "9-0" defeat for Sotomayor. But I was particularly struck by the judgment of Gail Heriot, a law professor at the University of San Diego, who bloviated: "Nobody agreed with Sotomayor - nobody!" Did I say law professor? At any rate, this group deserves a unified award for its loony day's work, and I will honor it with my first multiple Grumpy Abe Linguistic Lunacy Award. (GALL)" I regret that this will have to do for now inasmuch as I have never set up a similar math award for folks who can't count.