It’s perfectly understandable that Smitty would think I “lashed out” at him over the Danica Patrick non-story…
…even though, if one bothers to read my previous post, it’s quite clear that I did nothing of the kind.
No, if I “lashed out” at anyone, it was at Danica herself, for being too nice. A character flaw which prevented her from ignoring a patently ridiculous question, asked by what I can only assume was an immature and opportunistic “journalist,” and then for (I speculated) allowing herself to be distracted with worry that her answer to that ridiculous question was itself ridiculous.
Which, of course, it was.
On this aspect of our discussion, several people have asked questions similar to this one:
Dude, do you think that maybe if she is so easily distracted as to cause her to wreck, maybe she might want to think about taking up another line of work?
Thank you, Pagan Temple, for the question. Answer: that’s exactly the point. Danica is a highly successful athlete and spokeswoman – a Type A personality with the drive and ambition to reach the top of a highly competitive profession. That sort of person doesn’t simply sit around waiting for somebody else to make things right. That sort of person does for herself.
Case in point, Danica won the pole for today’s Nationwide Series race:
A moment of silence, if you please, for the “Danica Patrick gets gifts she doesn’t deserve” argument. Cause of death: Patrick’s triumphant capture of the pole for Saturday’s Nationwide Series Drive4COPD 300.
… The pole comes just 24 hours after Patrick walked away from a brutal crash in the Sprint Cup Series’ Gatorade Duel 150, a qualifying race for Sunday’s Daytona 500.
This would seem to prove false my earlier speculation about Danica’s “being distracted.” It would also seem to prove my earlier description of Danica as a highly competitive Type-A personality…true.
See, this is an example of examining the evidence, and altering conclusions based on new evidence.
Given this new evidence of Danica’s toughness and competitive spirit, however, why in the world would Danica say to Michelle Fields
“I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans.”
As I’ve said several times now, we can only speculate. Now more than ever. Perhaps she just wants to make sure none of us come to her for help and advice. She’s very busy, after all. Perhaps she felt this the best way for Bill Quick to finally learn who she is.
Maybe. But the most logical answer seems to be: she was unprepared for the question, but felt it a matter of good manners to answer the question anyway.
As I thought I’d made clear in my last post.
How exactly that translates into “lashing out” at Smitty, well, you have to understand one thing about Smitty: he’s a Navy man.
Despite these transparent attempts to deflect from the real story and instead make it all about me, however, the real story remains: why did the Daily Caller’s Michelle Fields ask Danica Patrick, a race car driver, swimsuit model, and GoDaddy.com spokeswoman, about President Obama’s contraception mandate?
How, exactly, was the decision to ask this question made?
(Snigger, heh) dude, I’m gonna ask Danica Patrick about the contraception mandate!
Whoa, dude, (heh, heh) she isn’t gonna know nothing about that.
(snigger) No duh, dude. That’s the point. (snigger, snigger)
Tee hee, tee hee. Snicker, snicker. Heh heh heh, heh heh heh.
See what I’m getting at, here?
There was no Earthly reason – other than to play some silly, liberal-istic game of one-upmanship – to ask Danica that question. There was no Earthly reason to write the blog post and post the video of the question and answer. There was no Earthly reason for the Daily Caller to leave the blog post on their website.
There is no Earthly reason for the crew at The Other McCain – a blog which purportedly prides itself on journalistic integrity – to give the Daily Caller a pass on it.
And yet she did ask the question; she did write the post; they did leave the post; and they are giving the Caller a pass.
Why? We can only speculate.
UPDATE – Ah-Hah! Smitty speculates:
Then again, what if she meant her original reply in a sarcastic way?
Hey, could be. Watch the video here, and judge for yourself. That would be some awfully subtle sarcasm, if so, but we won’t rule it out!
In fact, this might also explain that odd little cut in the video between the question and the answer: that – and again, we can only speculate, since the raw footage hasn’t been released – that might be where Danica looked up, saw what appeared to be a young, green, and probably liberal reporter, and rolled her eyes while thinking: “oh, Lord, how can I get rid of this chick the fastest?”
We may never know for sure, but that could be it.