Ever see something printed or heard something said in the media that you feel like answering quickly, and then you realize it's a little difficult to effectively shout at a newspaper clipping? Me too.
So let's take a few items on some different subjects that deserve a reply:
"The reason that there are seven-game series in the hockey finals as opposed to the other sports is that the game is so competitive now."
The higher seeds in hockey have been winning playoff series at about a 67 percent rate for years. In basketball, it's above 80 percent. If the better team is going to win, I'd bet it happens quicker than in a sport where there a larger chance for an upset. Meanwhile, hockey went for years and years without a seven-game final, so the small sample size has something to do with it too.
"How can Chrysler get a bankruptcy ruling so fast? It takes months and months just to get a divorce these days."
Let's see -- there are thousands of jobs at stake here, and I assume enough lawyers have been working on the case in the last couple of weeks to fill a small city. It might be in everyone's best interests to get this done as quickly as possible. And why would you criticize the court system for working too quickly?
"Why would Obama say we are making money when banks return TARP funds with interest? We'll never see that money."
Would you prefer the banks keep that money? Even if the program is a net loss to the government balance sheet, it's still nice to see the plan working as advertised in some cases.
These last two comments came from a talk-show host, who you think would know better.
"Instead of cutting the size of legislatures in half, why don't we cut the salaries of legislators in half?"
The relevant phrase is, "You get what you pay for." If you think there are some mediocrities in elected offices now, think about what sort of talent pool would be interested in those jobs if the pay was 50 percent less.
Ah, I feel better already.