Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

I can see clearly, now!

After his abomination of a speech at the U.N. (Upchuck Nations) today, Obama has cemented in the minds of all who will open their eyes that Sarah Palin, on her worst day ever, was more prepared to be our President than he was, is, or ever will be. 

When, in the future, the idiots of the media try to railroad her on the basis of not being prepared for such a lofty position, the vast majority of the American people will just laugh at them.

What are they going to use in his defense:  His tasteful selection of  gifts to foreign heads of state?  His paying obeisance to every thug ruler in the civilized world?  His endless apologizing for the exceptional-ism of  the United States?  His clearly superior way of strong-arming legislators to get things done?  His disdain for the American People?  His willingness to actually work with Republicans to reach workable solutions on important issues? 

There are plenty of other equally revealing examples, but the usual media suspects will, I am sure, be looking for ways to divert attention from them all. 

But there is one nagging little problem:  a lot of our fellow citizens have opened their eyes, and do not like much of what they are seeing.

Monday, September 21, 2009

Joe Wilson's Truth

Joe Wilson's only mistake was that he didn't keep talking while he had the floor - he should have spelled out the details until forcibly removed or gagged. Even the Mangy Socialist Media (MSM) would have switched the focus to him just to get it on tape. Those few who were watching for their, seemingly, hourly dose of socialist doctrine would have at least heard some truth, in that evening of studied avoidance of such. 

Note: This was the moment in time which forever established the ultimate nickname for our current president. There are a lot of very creative manipulations of the name that he has chosen to go by, and most of them reveal a solid statement on his character or ideology. But, forever, the term ”staring like a deer caught in the headlights” will carry a mental image of Obama’s face at that point in time. Henceforth, he should rightfully be known as Obambi, which many have used before, but which now has the imprimatur of the House chamber and national television cameras.  

Obambi's response to Mr. Wilson's contention: staring around for Saul Alinsky or Soros or Ayers, as if to say "You didn’t tell me what to do when someone actually stands up during my speeches and correctly points out that I am lying. What do I do now?” Finding none of them present in the chamber, he abjectly looks to the teleprompter, but no help there, either.  

At least he had his wits about him enough to not look toward Heaven for Alinsky, or to turn around for consultation with Ghoul Pelosi or Bilious Biden. I thought for a moment he was going to take the Jeremiah Wright approach, requesting the Almighty to strike down this white American who was telling the truth, and just as he was on a roll with his tapestry of lies! 

Then, he remembered just in time that God won’t listen to a person who champions the murder of babies just as they enter the world. More importantly, he realized that he would lose the support of a few million liberals just for pretending to acknowledge that there is a God. Can’t take a chance on shrinking that base!  

Now, all of that thought processing might have taken the average citizen several seconds to sort through, but this is a really smart man, as we are constantly reminded by the Sqealers and elitists of all stripes. In a few blinks of an eye, he went through all those possibilities and came to the perfect answer. He calmly looked toward his accuser and semi-forcefully mumbled “not true.” 

That is what liberals think of as a brilliant put-down, and he didn’t even have to use foul language, which, of course, further strengthened their view of him as the greatest statesman of our time (maybe forever, but, then, Stalin is a formidable standard for them). They will also sing odes one day to the way he picked right back up on reading his tele-prompted speech after the rabble-rouser Wilson was put in his place.  

Of course, one can’t blame Mr. Wilson for not grabbing the opportunity and running with it. He may very well have been looking around himself to see who had dared utter such truth, especially in a chamber that has witnessed so little of that commodity for a half century or more. After all, it is repugnant to think of a member of this venerated House (of ill repute) who doesn’t strive to live up to the decorum and moral standards of the likes of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson-Lee, John Murtha, Jerrold Nadler, just to name a few of our courtly representatives. And to think that in this room have sat the tainted (er, I mean sainted) Traitor Ted Kennedy, Chuck "Slimeball" Schumer, John McCain (the Benedict Arnold of conservatism), Lindsey “Can I Find a Way to Compromise on Principles so I Can Look Powerful” Graham, and a host of other craven power seekers.  

How can one possibly be so crass as to soil the haunts of that bunch of sycophants and toadies? They, and others, will lead the charge to brand Joe Wilson as something other than “truth teller,” and there is no doubt in my mind that they will herd together to censure him, simply for stating what the vast majority of Americans would have been thinking or saying, had they had the stomach to even watch this charade of a speech. 

I like the way Sandy Rios puts it in a Town Hall article. “If the chamber of the Congress of the United States of America isn’t the right place to fight for the future of the Republic, then where is that place?”  

In the spirit of truth-telling, and probably to comply with McCain’s campaign reform deal with the devil, I must admit that I sent Joe Wilson a relatively small donation for his re-election effort, as did my wife in a separate action. Mr. Steele and the RNC might take note that Joe Wilson is the type of Republican that I told them I would be willing to support, in my post on Two Cents' Worth, my Town Hall blog, entitled An Open Message to Mr. Steele and the RNC!

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Long Term Care

Well, I haven't heard it raised as a question and have not seen it addressed as one of the silly items in the Health Scare Bill, but I am wondering just how all of this is going to affect all those Long Term Care contracts that people have been paying premiums for over the years.
 
I'm sure that as soon as Otrauma and his Legion of Death appointees figure out that this has slipped through their fingers, they will quickly resolve that oversight!

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Do you think I am racist just because...#3

NOTE:  Please refer to my previous post, Do You Think I am a Racist Just Because..., for the background and context of this post.


Do you think I am racist just because...I don't respect Barack Obama and am never likely to, and it is not all due to his shady associations.  I reserve the right to change my mind, and will gleefully do so, if he turns out to be a president who governs in a manner that preserves and protects our Constitution.


I have seen absolutely nothing from Barack Obama that gives me any reason to respect him.  There is the matter of being a smooth talker, but all of the great con men of the world are smooth talkers (e.g., Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, even Al Gore at times).  As it has with those others, only time will tell if the smooth talk is backed up by wisdom and insight, or just by some brains and a lot of cunning.

I don't respect him because of his penchant for using people and then leaving them by the wayside, particularly members of his own family.  He has the temerity to talk in terms of waking up to family responsibilities, and yet he doesn't make even minimal attempts to better life for his own flesh and blood.  To me, this reveals a certain shallowness of soul. 


I don't respect him for deviously bringing race into the campaign, just to get an edge. 


I don't respect him for agreeing to use matching funds, and then backing out.  Very cunning move, that, and it worked well for him, but it was not the act of an honorable man.

Most of all, I don't respect him because I perceive that he and the Dems are going to make every effort to lead this country down a path to socialism.  God help us, and moreso, our future generations!

Monday, November 10, 2008

Do you think I am Racist Just Because...

We are seeing a number of post-election articles extolling the sudden advancement of race relations in America because B. H. Obama was elected to our presidency.  The tone and intent of these articles vary widely, for instance, Harry R. Jackson, Jr. (Race Still Matters, Townhall.com, Nov 10, 2008) presents a positive suggestion for the coming together of churches to effect a faith-based approach to closing the racial divide.  On the other hand, Ken Connor (Still a Long Way to Go for Equality, Townhall.com, Nov 9, 2008) lectures us about how we have now shown that we are no longer a racist nation by this election.  I am afraid that Mr. Connor is being a little devious, in that the real purpose of his article seems to be to get us to give up our bigotry towards other areas of human rights.  You should read his article, as he makes some valid points.  Indeed, his concerns are, to me, much more valid than his introductory point.  I may be a little sensitive here, but it seems that his use of the "racism" term to bring attention to his real agenda smacks of – racism.
  
These particular articles are, by no means, being questioned as to the intent or sincerity of the authors.  They are simply convenient examples based on a major flaw (my word, not theirs) in the current, wildly popular premise that America has been a racist country, and now, all of a sudden, that has gone away.  Racism has been dying out in this country for quite a while now, and we should all be better off for it.  Those of us who understand and applaud the fact ARE better off for it.

Those individuals and groups, black and white, who perpetuate, and try to profit from, the practice of systematic racism need to look deep within themselves and learn to accept people on their merits, not use or mis-use them because of skin color.  Will this election put to rest the prejudices and abuses of these people, who truly are racist, no matter their color?  Left to their own devices, probably not.  After all, even racists have most of the rights in our country.  Ironically, it seems that the black proponents of racism (the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons) will likely be more affected by this election than the hate-mongers on the white side.  It may be a little harder for them to sell their “snake oil” in the light of facts, such as we have elected a black president.  I would suggest to the new president and his old party that, rather than pass a lot of new laws to control the white racists, just ignore them and let that particular brand of hate die with them.  It is dying out, you know?

So, all of the above is provided to set the stage for a series of questions and/or comments that I plan to introduce, and hopefully to get some feedback,  detailing those things that I think many people attribute as racist attitudes simply because they in some way are connected to a minority.  I will define the point and then try to give you my thoughts on the “racial” connotations.  I am, obviously, hoping to generate some good discussion, but, if that does not occur, I will have gotten my thoughts down in writing

I am doing this as an informal poll.  If you choose to participate, just give me your answer and add any comments you may have.  Instead of trying to cram all of the questions into a single post, I will present additional questions in subsequent posts.  In that way, we can give each of the subjects its appropriate level of attention.

Do not be mis-led by the seemingly lighthearted approach to my poll.  Rest assured that the specific questions or points raised in this effort have been of major concern to me for many years. 

For the sake of limiting the tedium, there are a few guidelines on participation:


1. I, and other readers, do not know you and are, therefore, likely to judge your intelligence by the clarity and civility of your writing.  Only you know how you want to be viewed by others, but I will appreciate everyone keeping it clean and civil.
2. Remember, we would like to have the benefits of your own thoughts, so no cheating or referring to Talking Points from either party.  That will keep us from having to read through the same boring “intellectual stimuli” over and over;
3. Please do not read just the first few words and jump straight to a conclusion.  The idea is to generate some thought and maybe even a little discussion;
4. Likewise, maintain a little intellectual honesty in your thought processes.  Unless you are using group-think, the only person you will be lying to is yourself;
a. According to exit polls, 47% of Americans think it is pretty dumb to do that (lie to yourself, that is), 33% asked if there was any alternative, 15% said that sounded racist to them and 5% voted “present”
b. The margin for error is impossible to calculate because a number of self-proclaimed moderates changed their responses several times.
c. I used the Washington Ethical Behavior Standard  (WEBS) in developing these statistics, so don’t waste your time trying to verify them, or my time (and that of the other readers, if we have any) in trying to refute them
5. Main stream media types, there is no need for you to use your valuable Palin research time (and/or Obama worship time) to participate in our little project.  I have already written down your collective “yes” simply because I am a white male, born and raised in an extremely small Southern town;
6. Bill O’Reilly should not vote because it will not sell any books for him.  If you want to know the depths of my admiration for this court jester, you can read a couple of my previous posts;
7. Carl Cameron should not vote because no one will be whispering in his excitable little ears for a “major” scoop (see the next item).  Need to vet those sources a little better, Carl.  You are dangerously close to being grouped with Chrissie Matthews in the “tingly-leg media,” and
8. McCain campaign staff twerps will not be blamed or credited with the results here, so there is no need to clutter Carl’s telephone with whispered un-sourced accusations that Governor Palin is funding this with her lingerie allowance.
Otherwise, all Americans, including those who let themselves be hyphenated and are proud of it, those who abandoned their party and conservative principles when the going got a little tough, and those narrow-minded liberals who never open their thought processes to anything that moveon.org doesn’t tell them, are welcome to interject their Two Cents’ Worth, as it were, into the discussion.
  
We will, of course, be willing to provide the results to Bill Ayers for inclusion in his soon-to-be-award-winning education reform efforts for the Chicago schools.  One only has to look at the state of education in Chicago schools to see that his endeavors are at least as deserving as Al Gore (his personal carbon footprint is growing at an astounding rate) and Jimmy
Rabbits-are-meaner-than-Iranians Carter.

So, here we go:

How many of you think I am racist  just because…I voted for John McCain (actually, of course, I voted for Sarah Palin but it has the same force and effect) instead of Barack Obama (and the piteous Joe the Biden)?

The prevailing theory in Democrat circles (including the msm) and the Republican turncoats such as Colin Powell seems to be that everyone who did not take this historic opportunity to vote for Obama did so only because of overt racism (isn't that racist in itself?  Oh, of course not, blacks can't be racists, can they?). 

However, let me clue you in on a dirty little secret - if Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, Lynn Swann or J. C. Watts were running for national office, I would support them in a heartbeat.

You see, it has to do with the agreement that you have, or do not have, with their core beliefs.

Saturday, November 8, 2008

Bribes and Republicans!

In "Top 10 Recipients of Fannie and Freddie Cash," theWire, page 16, Townhall magazine, November 2008, the information is revealing and frankly, disgusting!

It has been fairly widely trumpeted by everyone in the country except John McCain, his campaign, and the main stream media that Chris Dodd and Barack Obama were the top two recipients of bribe money from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac wealth distribution officials.  Even Bill O'Reilly managed to work up some indignation over that until the cameras were turned off (and he realized that it was not going to sell any books).  It was somewhat lesser known that John Kerry is number three.  Disgusting, but not the least bit surprising, I would say.

What did surprise, and absolutely infuriate, me is the fact that three Republicans (Sen. Robert Bennett, Rep. Spencer Baucus and Rep. Roy Blunt) are numbers four, five and six on that list.  In addition, Republican Senators Christopher Bond and Richard Shelby have the dubious honor of filling the eighth and ninth slots on this distinguished list of scumbags.

It reveals more than a little about why there was no hue and cry to tree the perpetraitors (new word that) and pick them off one by one. 

I was not the least bit surprised about the Democrats.  In fact, until I saw the Townhall article, I just assumed that the remainder of the Top 10 would be populated with less accomplished Dem grifters.

But, hold on, Mabel!  That was a dumb assumption!  I feel absolutely ashamed by the presence of five Republicans on this list.   I am not a generally a naive person, and would not have been surprised at one, or even two, but I did think that there were some limits on such behavior, and that we could depend on our party to hold its members to a higher standard.  The only difference between this bunch and William Jefferson is that he owns a freezer.

I personally will never see or hear one of those five names again without gagging.

Out with such trash!

Friday, November 7, 2008

Here's a Word For You, O'Reilly!

Buffoon!

While you and Luntz are sitting there preening and slapping each other on the back, your supposed journalistic credentials are falling down around your ankles.

Indeed, Obama scored high with the little group of "independent voters."  And you high-fived one another that he hit a home run with his promise to give all citizens the same insurance coverage that Congress has.  Well, as a retired civil servant, I paid, and still pay, about $400 a month for my insurance coverage.  The Government pays some amount (probably about the same) as their share of the benefits package that was a part of my total compensation for my work for 30 years.

So you are impressed with the popularity of his answer that potentially translates into about $10-12,000 a year of our tax money for each family which receives it.  I'm willing to bet there were no more than one or two people in the room who had a concept of the cost associated with that little promise.  And there are no journalists who would even think of questioning it.

Your claim to be looking out for the people is as shallow as your willingness to dig into the facts.  I never expect a straight answer from Obama, and I guess it's too much to expect you to try to get one.  But, he looked you in the eye and you know he would only speak the truth to you, right?

You, sir, are a buffoon.

By the way, where does your hard-hitting expose of B Franks and the other thieves stand?  Just more bloviating, I guess!

Thursday, October 23, 2008

A manufactured crisis?

When Vornado-mouth Biden made his brag/guarantee that a president Obama-the-One would be tested on the world stage within six months of his inauguration, every one assumed that it was just another of his self-defining gaffes.  Note that he also asserted that it would look as if they had made an incorrect response but that everyone should be cool and it would be revealed to us that the all-knowing, all-seeing, chosen one would have everything under control.

One has to wonder if there have already been meetings (without pre-conditions, one assumes) with one or two of their socialist friends to generate plans for a little bit of a "crisis" in order to establish the foreign policy bona-fides of the new administration.

Why do I think this is not only possible, but probable?  A couple of things lead me to it:

  1. This was a compound-thought "gaffe" from a man who, although highly developed in the gaffe tradition, is not seemingly capable of stringing thoughts together without at least one of them being a fabrication.
  2. These assertions did not sound like the usual Biden exaggeration.  They sounded more like a message to the base (see "bin Laden" for the approach and style).
  3. How could he know what their response would be to a supposedly undefined "crisis" that, even assuming he is correct in his estimate of the timing, is six to nine months in the future?
 I may very well be wrong about this, but, frankly, it fits so well with the Obama philosophy and background that I just can't shake free of the nagging thought.