When "Thin Air" Is Acceptable

For the past two nights, I've been closely watching C-SPAN's replays of the daily White House press briefings with Press Secretary Dana Perino. While she's a lot easier on the eyes than Ari Fleischer, Scott McClellan or Tony Snow, the thinly-veiled spin is as apparent as ever.

Even the MSM hacks are seemingly pushing her a little harder lately in terms of Iraq. Particularly with Barack Obama's Middle East trip this week. The media whores have done a decent job of pointing out that the Iraqi government seems to be in step with Obama's "policies" (though we'll see how much they change once he's in office), and withdrawl plans, and they continue to stress this point while asking Perino about Administration reaction.

The answer over and over and over is the same. "We're not going to discuss arbitrary dates," "we're not going to pick withdrawal timetables out of thin air."

On face this sounds valid, but why is our economic policy based PURELY on arbitrary info and the creation of money out of thin air? Nearly everyone in government (sans Ron Paul and a few others) seems to think this is an acceptable - if not effective - means of regulating our economic systems. Meanwhile, just watch the clip of Congressman Paul's comments to Fed Chair piece of filth Ben Bernanke last week to find out what it really means to conduct business this way.

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

The point is this - it's okay to completely devalue the dollar and destroy the middle class of our country by printing money, credit, and help for floundering criminal banks out of thin air. But when it comes to something completely irrelevant to the day-to-day lives of Americans - in so far as leaving Iraq completely tomorrow wouldn't affect us at all - there's "no way" we're going to pull timetables out of "thin air."

What better an example of how backward the priorities of our leaders - both parties - are?