Monday, March 23, 2009

Petraeus, We Pray: Rescue Us From This Circus

There’s nothing like someone else validating your daydreams to make a person feel hopeful that such musings might come true.

Today, the Washington Times has an opinion column by Andrew Breitbart about my own hope for 2012: General Petraeus for President. Given the rate at which O’Bama is flushing our assets down the federal toilet, we need someone who has experience in nation-building to put things back together after the Gang of One has finished disassembling the U.S.

I’ll admit I wanted to like Obama. He wasn’t my choice, but my choice wasn’t anything to brag about. So I was willing to give President Barack Obama the benefit of the doubt; I really did want to be pleasantly surprised. Unfortunately for all of us, the surprise was there, but there wasn’t any pleasure in it…unless you count watching someone make an utter fool of himself as pleasureable. I don’t. He is an embarrassment.

Every day we wake up to another witless gaffe by our elected leader. And every day we become a little poorer. More than three states have an unemployment rate of ten per cent and O’Bama has barely started with his demolition machine.

We could begin the story of Amateur Time with the inept choices he made for his administration. Daschle was a disgrace, the Treasury Secretary is a big-time tax cheat (the depth of his sins would’ve landed others in court). His commerce secretary resigned before he could even begin. His chief of National Intelligence turned out to be a paranoid anti-Semite. You have to wonder who is vetting these people.
- - - - - - - - -
Meanwhile, Obama can’t make an extemporaneous remark. As soon as his teleprompter goes awry, he becomes stuck in the groove of his previous sentence. The man is not thinking, he is reading - and more likely he is reading what others wrote. If we don’t have someone in the front of the pack who can think and speak on his feet, we are (to use the expression of a previous president) in deep do do. In fact, we’re in it up to our knees and the level of swill is rising.

One commentator has asked him to his face if he’s punch drunk, this because the president was chuckling and smiling through his descriptions of the economic mess we’re in. I think his laughter was born of hysteria: there he was on national television, forced to answer questions without the aid of his teleprompter.

Those are my complaints. Breitbart has a list of his own:

Clearly, our national will is wilting away.

Following the tragic lead of Europe, too many Americans no longer want to engage our external threats head-on. And on the domestic front, we are confronting the economic crisis of our lifetime with the same full-steam-ahead spending-spree mind-set that got us into the mess to begin with.

We say: Let’s create more government dependency, reward the incompetent and print more money.

That’s doubling down on stupidity.

And stuck on stupid, to boot. How does he offend us, let me count the ways. Breitbart notes this particular goof:

I still can’t believe that the president of the United States traveled across the country - without his teleprompter crutch - and made fun of the Special Olympics on national television.

Now you could expect a dumb old WASP, unused to the chronic grievance of “special” groups, to stumble on this kind of mine field. But a black president? He’s supposed to have built-in antennae for unfairness, and if anything in life is unfair, it’s being born with mental and physical deficits. But no, Obama sails right on, comparing his prowess at bowling with a “Sped” kid (for our European readers, “special education” is a euphemism for these deficits, especially kids with Down’s Syndrome).

But Obama, sensitive and soulful, thought he was making a joke.With the rest of us, Breitbart moans with disbelief.

If Obama thinks that little faux pas is going to fade with time, he’s got a big lesson coming. This will cost him in the next election, as the You Tube variations are endlessly looped for the entertainment of the electorate he so cleverly fooled.

Breitbart lists the ways Obama is failing socially:

I can’t get out of my head that the leader of the free world gave the British prime minister 25 films on DVD that don’t even work in U.K. machines.

I can’t wrap my head around the fact that the commander in chief tried (for a minute anyway) to require injured warriors to pay to have private insurers take care of their treatment.

I can’t believe the president would allow the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to dictate the terms of his budget - and Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, the symbols of government kowtowing to Wall Street - to be spokesmen for his financial bailout.

And did President Obama really produce a YouTube video to appease President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mullahs of Iran?

Yes, he did.

These aren’t beginner’s mistakes. These are his core incompetencies.

Our President does not play well with others. This major failing will come back to haunt him, even as the gaffes, goofs, and idiocies continue to pile up in the corner, moldering and - after enough of them have accumulated - to begin to smell.

He has completely and forever lost the vote of those wounded warriors whose war injuries he tried to avoid having the government pay. Obama could go out tomorrow and build a new VA hospital out of his own funds (he and Michelle have managed to accumulate enough assets now to erect at least a small clinic) but he won’t get their vote. As the commander in chief, you never, ever try to save a buck on the backs of your soldiers.

His You Tube video to the criminals in Iran, his “secret” begging letter to the Russians (what? He thought they would keep it a secret?), his snubbing of the press at the Gridiron dinner, his barring of the white press during the presentation of a journalism award (voted mostly by white journalists) - all of these and the hundred more stupidities he will rack up in the months to come are going to bite him in the butt, repeatedly. The man has a tin ear for Washington politics. He was never around long enough to learn how to play the game well, and yet elective office is the only game he knows. There are Special Olympics children who could beat him at this one, too.

Breitbart admits he is freaked by this guy:

The media that got him elected knows it is responsible for the gathering debacle, and so Jon Stewart, a so-called comedian and exemplar of the groupthink of the governing elite, is desperately hunting for scapegoats. Now that their secular savior is in charge, the “Dissent is Patriotic” bumper-sticker crowd is figuring out ways to stamp out criticism.

I admit, I am now officially freaking out.

The last time I felt this hopeless was when the Democratic Party and its cohorts in the media sold us on the false premise that we lost the war in Iraq.

They didn’t succeed though. Vietnam taught the American public the perfidy of the American press when it comes to war reporting.

And as I do, Breitbart sees a glimmer of hope here:

His name is Gen. David H. Petraeus.

Less than two months into the Obama presidency, which appears to be lost somewhere in the Mojave Desert, I have decided to try to soothe my anxieties by placing my hope in a political surge.

In the election of 2010, Republicans should run heroic veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom who exhibited the will and fortitude to defeat the enemy and to rebuild a torn nation, even while too many of their fellow countrymen wrote them off.

And in 2012, the man President Obama’s staunchest allies called “General Betray Us” should come in with guns blazing and defeat the man whose only weapon to lead us to victory is a teleprompter.

I can’t remember when I had my own Petraeus moment. Perhaps it was when I figured out that Obama doesn’t like the General. Since I have found myself disliking and/or distrusting the people Obama chooses to fill his administration, it seemed a logical choice to turn to Petraeus.

The general is not only responsible for the success of the surge, but he has proven he can bring warring parties together, he has shown that he can bring people as stubborn as the Sunnis in Baghdad to the table. He has done this on too little money, too few troops, and the heavy-handed interference of the State Department.

Obama so far has only proved himself a fool. He may yet prove himself to be a knave.

Let’s repeat history and go with the victorious general. Personally, I’m more than ready for a return to capable leadership.

Meanwhile, we can keep a running tally on Obama’s hairball moments. It will give us some entertainment as he drives the country round the bend and straight into the cesspit.

Lord protect us.


. said...

Two months does not a failure make in Presidential terms, Dymphna. After all, I though George Bush was a success all the way through the end of 2002, two YEARS into his term! I'm surprised that you were also, apparently, a closet Obama apostle, expecting him to save the world (or at least the non-Muslim part of it) within days.

As for General Petraeus, he would make a quite excellent President. Which means that you will end up hating him, because "excellent President" and "right-wing Christianist" are oxymorons. I suspect that once General Petraeus' common sense became known to the Republican primary-voting illiterati, he wouldn't have a chance in hell against Huckabee or the 2012 yahoo version of Huckabee. But I might actually vote for him, especially if my Obamamania has turned to disillusionment by 2012.

Dymphna said...

Ah, sweet Nodrog--

I am trying to unravel the reasoning in this snip:

you will end up hating him, because "excellent President" and "right-wing Christianist" are oxymorons.

Is he a "right-wing Christianist" and if he is, what is that exactly?

How does one differentiate between a Chistian and a Christian-ist? Is the latter simply a camp follower, kind of pinko instead of cardinal red?

Please, you have to explain these obscure terms, you intellectualist, you.

X said...

I have noticed that Godron seems to be limiting his contact to just threads posted by Dymphna. D, I think you have an admirer!

I've heard "Christianist" as a term before. I believe it's meant to be an insult, a sort of implication that "christianists" are following some sort of shallow immitation of "real christianity", which is all sweetness and light and liberal-left "values" without any of that icky moral fortituted or belief in an actual God. Christianists are also usually waycists and possibly even (gasp!) creationists!

On Obama: the thing you seem to be missing, Gordon, is that while 60 days doesn't make a presidency, it does make an apparent trend. If Obama carries on the way he is he'll have a terrible presidency, and all the evidence indicates that he will in fact carry on this way.

No go on, tell me I'm suffering ODS. You lot have just been itching to have something to bash us righties with ever since the BDS meme started. You're all about revenge; why else would people have been screeching "impeach Bush" for practically hi entire term in office, except because Clinton had to face impeachment proceedings?

Of course a large part of "derangement" is beleving things that are patently false. Is Obama not acting like a complete fool on national television? Is Obama not laughing about the problems faced by the entire world? Is he not making stupid mistake after stupid mistake with his appointments? I'd be deranged if I thought so, if he wasn't. The problem is, he is making these very, very stupid mistakes. If you thought Bush was dumb for some of the things he said, well, he never once made derogative remarks about the mentally disabled, on national television or elsewhere. And as I've pointed out to others in the past I have personal reasons for being particularly intolerant of "jokes" on this matter. It's one of the few things that provokes me to violence.

Defend this man if you wish, but be prepared to live wih the consequences of defending a venal, self-regarding, classless, misanthropic, obsequious liar who laughs at the misfortune of his "inferiors" and steps over the metaphorical bodies of anyone who gets in the way of his quest for self-aggrandised power. Such a defence, of something so indefensible, would appear to be a sign of quite some derangement to this poor foreigner...

Dymphna said...


Gee, do you really think Nodrog is my secret admirer? If he is, he ought to try for a job with a top security classification because he sure hides it well.

Nah, he chooses me because he knows the Baron could make mush out of what he presents as arguments. I am just a gurrl, after all, and we know that men are much smarter. So Nogdrog attacks the weakest link in the chain...

When you calleld our Fearful Leader:

a venal, self-regarding, classless, misanthropic, obsequious liar who laughs at the misfortune of is "inferiors"...

you forgot a few other incompetencies: clueless, racist, bumbling, shady, and mean. Imagine cutting off debate with his opponents by saying "I won". You can't make this stuff up...unless you're Obama, that is.

His foes have four years to dig for the information he refused to release the first time around: his birth certificate, his passports he used while a student at Columbia, his lack of a track record at Columbia, the strange black hole where his law writing must have gone, and all of the myriad parts of one's past that are normally a matter of record for the rest of us.

These strange lacunae may take second place to his performance in the present and future, though. People are beginning to get up in teh morning just to read the latest news on Obama's Offal of the day.

Since we'll all soon be too poor for movies, O can be our entertainment. I wiah I could say "cheap" entertainment but we'll be years cleaning up after his expensive socialist largesse.

BTW, the only one suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome so far appears to be Obama himself and a few people like Stewart. Even the New York Times turned against him yesterday with FOUR anti-Obama screeds in their Sunday edition.

. said...

Dymphna, a "Christian" is a person who believes that Jesus Christ is our savior. As for "Christianist," I will quote from one of your favorite people (:))Andrew Sullivan, who defined the term this way:

Christianism is an ideology, politics, an ism. The distinction between Christian and Christianist echoes the distinction we make between Muslim and Islamist. Muslims are those who follow Islam. Islamists are those who want to wield Islam as a political force and conflate state and mosque. Not all Islamists are violent. Only a tiny few are terrorists. And I should underline that the term Christianist is in no way designed to label people on the religious right as favoring any violence at all. I mean merely by the term Christianist the view that religious faith is so important that it must also have a precise political agenda. It is the belief that religion dictates politics and that politics should dictate the laws for everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike.

I was actually equating you, my dear Dymphna, with the term "right-wing Christianist." And even, if I am incorrect in this assessment, there are certainly enough right-wing Christianists in the Republican party to deny a competent General such as Petraeus a Presidential nomination if he does not agree with their agenda.

. said...

I didn't realize that I was favoring Dymphna in my comments on this blog - I have no problem with taking on the Baron as well when it is appropriate. I've eviscerated enough of his arguments on this blog to make that readily apparent.

Dymphna said...

I used to read Andrew Sullivan when he was editor of The New Republic. He is, or was at the time, a Catholic. I would say that some Catholics would fall under the definition you present.

Personally, I follow the dictum to render to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Thus, we don't need "In God we Trust" on our money, as it belongs to Caesar's realm.

As for this snip,

religious faith is so important that it must also have a precise political agenda, I don't personally know anyone like that, though I read about them.

The realm that "belongs" to God is a mystery to be lived in humility, not a social problem to be solved.

The "thin place where God gets in" is where silence resides, where one listens...the numinous.

I am not a moral theologian, but if I were, I would not accept Sullivan's view. As I remember, he has his own religious axe to grind.

X said...

Hey Gordon, you're starting to sound like CJ.

The great thing about sticking "ist" on the end of a collective noun is that you can use it to attack just about anyone you don't like, whilst pretending you're only attacking "those people".

Christianists, islamists, leftists... to a greater or lesser xtent these classifications are entirely fictional. If you're attacking "christianists", what you're really doing is attacking christians in disguise. Now I wouldn't know this Sullivan guy from Adam but I expect he's the sort of catholic who doesn't really profess any particular faith and doesn't even go to confession that often. A catholicist, perhaps?

As for eviscerating arguments... declaring yourself the winner based on the fact that you think you're the winner isn't evisceration, yet I've seen you do that many times here

How Bushist of you.

Unknown said...

It might be too early to write Obama off. Yes, yes... it took the sort of Special Olympics talent that defines Obama so far to make GWB look like the pinnacle of human sophistication, wit and seriousness in a mere two months.

But I keep reminding myself that the first black president had a pretty bad first two years before he smelled the coffee, turned on the radicals who'd elected him and gave the US a decent, if far from perfect, final six years.

Perhaps Obama will grow up too, now that his out of the shadow of Rev. Wrights all-to-obvious replacement father figure.

Unknown said...

The rise of "Christianists" (or theocons as they're sometimes called) is largely a reaction to the Culture of Death. Edmund Burke's assertion that society is a compact between the dead, the living and the unborn has been forgotten.

We live in a Laodicean age and "Christianist" politics are a weak form of pushback. Faith-based initiatives especially are a terrible idea. You know your religion is in trouble if you need the government to subsidise it.

filthykafir said...

Aw shucks, Dymphna, EVERYBODY knows a Christianist is like an Islamist, except he yells "Jesus is Great, Jesus is Great" as he runs up to the muslim suicide bomber to disarm him. The feminine form is, of course, Christianista, and she is especially dangerous. Christianistas have been known to mother-love a true believer into submission in less than an afternoon. They're a Force of Nature.

filthykafir said...

"The realm that "belongs" to God is a mystery to be lived in humility, not a social problem to be solved."

Now that's my idea of true religion. Thank you, Dymphna.

Henrik R Clausen said...

This post isn't complete without a link to Obamas Teleprompter itself, also known as the TOTUS!

Enjoy :)

spackle said...

I think it has become patently clear that Obama is our first true experimental/ Manchurian candidate president. Like Frankensteins monster he is a mish -mash of parts that were thrown together, groomed and propped up for an election. I dont believe for a moment that the man has an original thought. And his lack of personality is downright creepy. Has anyone even checked to see if he has human DNA? I swear to you that sometimes I think that they take him out of a tank (think "The Matrix") every morning and download the days agenda into his brain. Obviously the technology is still quite flawed.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Oh. We're not writing Obama off, not by any means. We're just noticing that for someone who's supposed to be a significant leader in difficult times, he is a remarkably Scripted President.

And given his choice of advisors, speech-writer etc., it's a fair guess that the Plutocrats of Wall Street have an absolutely disproportionate influence in the United States of America today. Incidentically, that is almost diametrically opposite from the position he was Hoped to have.

Frankly, I don't think he has neither the knowledge, the understanding nor the guts to confront the Wall Street elite.

I may be mistaken. But I think he's being played like a puppet, by people who do not want to be held responsible for their financial and monetary circus. It's not like those people are unknown - one is Bernanke - they just happen to have undue unelected and unaccountable influence.

'Nuff ranting. Here's a Marc Faber quote for relief:

I think gold will be a relatively good investment under any kind of scenario until the US government bans the ownership of Gold in the United States.

Tuan Jim said...

Actually Jon Stewart did do a decent piece on the vet healthcare issue last week - Video

Ilíon said...

As I understand it, the term "Christianist" is a secularist back-formation from "Islamist."

The term "Islamist" reflected the "compassionate conservative" will-to-believe that the existential problem we face is not Islam itself, but rather the "hi-jacking" of the "Religion of Peace."

The term "Christianist" is similar ... and different. What it *really* boils down to is the assertion-by-insinuation that all serious Christians are terrorists-in-waiting.

abcd said...

Nah, he chooses me because he knows the Baron could make mush out of what he presents as arguments. I am just a gurrl, after all, and we know that men are much smarter. So Nogdrog attacks the weakest link in the chain...

If that´s what you think, speak for yourself.

Ilíon said...

Goodness! This is like "QED!"

X said...

It's true that irony tends to have a little trouble passing across the 'net, but wow... I mean, even outside its context that one's easy to spot. In the contextual whole you'd have to be pretty insensitive not to see the cheeky smirk behind it.

Dymphna said...

abcd said...
Nah, he chooses me because he knows the Baron could make mush out of what he presents as arguments. I am just a gurrl, after all, and we know that men are much smarter. So Nogdrog attacks the weakest link in the chain...

If that´s what you think, speak for yourself.

Ummm...what part of what I said was not "speaking for [my]self", pray tell?

I gave my opinion, you repeated it and then told me to speak for myself. Does repetition make teh statement truer? It's merely opinion, and that's mine. Why I should have to say it a second time is a mystery.

Dymphna said...

islam o'phobe--

The compact between the dead, the living, and the unborn predates Burke-- all the way back to the Patristics,whose theological descendants eventually formed the notion of the Christian faith as a corporate body, indivisible by death, time, or internecine theological warfare.

And you're right: subsidizing that is skating on thin ice. I think churhces ought to lose their tax-free status. Deductions to religious institutions should not be part of any moral calculus.

Not that God has no place in the public square, just that one has to tread very carefully to keep one's integrity in such a situation. Letting government get its foot in the door limits faith's freedom.

Religious faith is born of the experience of the Transcendent, but it is lived out in our grasp of the Immanent. Which is what makes it an adventure, because our discernment is so limited -- thru a cloud darkly and all that.
Archonix, I'm dense. What did your last comment mean?

Paul said...

Did the Commander-in-Chief, Barack Obama, really declare that veterans wounded in the service of our country should be forced to provide for their own medical care???

Did he mock the special needs children of tax paying Americans on comedy TV to score jester's points?

Did he laugh on national TV about our financial fiasco as countless fathers and mothers sweat about their children's food, rent, and future?

It appears Mr. Obama doesn't care that his 52% was no mandate.

Maybe Gen. David H. Petraeus could play a role. Time will tell. I'm hopeful there are at least a few quality Democrats left in our country. It's time for the quality ranks on the Demo side to put the bum out. The natives are growing restless.

Dymphna said...

Paul, I hope you're right about there being a few good Democrats still around.

I left the Dem ranks because they were so uncivil, intemperate, and determined to make the US a huge re-education camp.

Find me a good Democrat, please. Someone who truly has the interests of his constituents at heart, who hews to the Constitution, and who does not engage in below-the-belt snarky ridicule.

Such a person would draw people like honey draws ants.

laine said...

Everything that people are observing about Obama the POTUS was visible in Obama the campaigner but was drowned by the mass American Idol hysteria stoked by the media.

There were plenty of Cassandras who were accurate but disbelieved when they eviscerated the Manchurian Candidate, who in this case is programed to shoot successful free capitalist America in the head and substitute the universally failed system of socialism.

The vehicle chosen and groomed is a pathological narcissist with a giant chip on his shoulder against whites with a matching wife.

Joe the plumber was vetted more thoroughly (with the aim of discrediting him) than the pig in a poke candidate for POTUS. Why the secrecy? There's something very damning there. He's either not even eligible and/or his academic record shows him to be a mediocre affirmative action student and poof! there would go the usual Dem "Our candidate's a genius" meme. There's no proof of any intellectual achievement, just assumptions about Harvard. Even his two autobiographies may be ghostwritten.

Any thinking person doesn't need a transcript to see the guy's a big zero off his teleprompter. He said he'd campaigned in 57 states but not Alaska or Hawaii (his own supposed birthplace and 50th to join the USA). He should have been disqualified on the spot for being dumber than a fifth grader. His handlers claimed he was "tired" i.e they probably needed to plug him into the wall for recharging. Careless that.

The man was a red diaper baby on both sides (following his deserting father's footsteps who wrote some proposal in Kenya for 100% taxation rate) and consorted all his life with marxists including domestic terrorists and black bigots.

As a result, he had no one appropriate to appoint to his administration, making do with corrupt Clinton retreads and encouraging them all to persist even when their various malfeasances came to light. You can take the boy out of Chicago but you can't take Chicago out of the boy.

He has never run so much as a lemonade stand. (He would have tried to "organize" the community to demand free lemonade). He has never worked at any of his jobs, just campaigned for the next step up. His senatorial record is far left or voting present.

That strategy doesn't work in the White House. Bush inherited a whirlwind of a different sort but shortly put a steady hand on the tiller. Obama ran around squawking like the stupidest Chicken Little stirring things up when markets needed calming.

He's a standard issue Democrat tax and spendaholic.

He's lazy. He had Pelosi and crew draw up a dog's breakfast and signed it without reading it after taking a weekend in Chicago to gad about with his wife. Then he sold it like the snake oil it is.

He's a pathologic liar, lying even when it will be found out immediately e.g. "There are no earmarks...(if like me you don't bother reading the bill)".

His foreign policy consists of cutting longstanding allies and sucking up to enemies and dictators. Basically, he has a check list and goes down it doing everything the opposite of Bush (except for spending).

He's deeply unserious, acting like some third rate celebrity horsing around on a talk show and putting his foot in his mouth yet. That was truly Nero fiddling while Rome was burning. "Yeah the stock market's down thousands of points, but on the bright side, my bowling score's up to 129!"

Behind the pasted on smiley face, there's a cold and cutting character. Narcissists tolerate no criticism. (Attack dogs sicked on Joe the Plumber, Palin, Limbaugh, Cramer...the list of public enemies will be endless).

He's childish. "I won".

This is just a miniscule percentage of data available. Every day brings fresh material. Anyone who's still admitting to being an Obamamaniac didn't do their homework and is now in deep denial about their own stupidity.

This time the stupidity is painful, in the wallet. Unfortunately, those of us who were not stupid share in the misery.

babs said...

LAINE - While I agree with your assessment, the alternative was not much better. Keep in mind that McCain was pro illegal amnesty and, more importantly, pro cap and trade. I don't know about you but if energy prices rise any higher it will ruin us...
So, I held my nose and voted for the old fart. The bigger question is why didn't the Repub party see this coming and vote in someone that actually has managerial experience like Romney? Was it his religion? I happen to think that the country did not want to address the coming financial tsunami and therefore surfed the wave of impossibility; that is that someone with no experience would deliver us from the evil we all knew was right around the corner.

Joanne said...

Obama is a psychopathic narcissist, who feels no empathy for others and doesn't even understand the concept of empathy - that is why he can compare his poor bowling skills to those in the Special Olympics, finds it amusing to chuckle about the misery of millions whose economic future is being flush, can vote to have babies born alive from botched abortions be left to die in a back room, and think a resulting genocide from pulling out of Iraq too early isn't a reason to stay...just for starters. Lack of empathy is a classic symptom of narcissism and in a psychopathic narcissist, it is far worse. Obama isn't capable of even knowing he is making statements that show his lack of empathy for others, or else he would catch himself when he does, which he never has to be pointed out to him. He just kept laughing during the 60 Minute interview until the interviewer pointed out his bizarre behaviour - he didn't catch himself with the Special Olympics comment, and on and on.

laine, you said it, and although McCain certainly was not nearly the best Republican candidate, he was a whole lot better choice than Obama who is going to take America right down the toilet and out to the Pacific and Atlantic.

Proud Infidel said...

I for one am not surprised Obama is turning out to be like he is. The more I read about this man, the more horrified I became that he might become our president. I was intending to vote for a third party candidate because of my dislike for MCain, but the more I learned about Obama, the more convinced I was he had to be stopped so I wound up voting for the only guy with a shot to beat Obama, McCain.

I don't expect him to become like Bill Clinton and wise up because Clinton wasn't raised as a radical and didn't spend as much of his time hanging out with the kind of slime Obama has. Obama has been influenced by radical leftism far more than Clinton was. And let's not forget that Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas so the man had key experience governing that Obama lacks. This is what Obama is, and only voting him out of office will put an end to his radicalism.

babs said...

I am cashing in our retirement savings and buying gold.
I don't think there is a more important satement than this about my observation of the United States economy...
We cannot possibly out compete the Chinese and the Indians in work force or incentive. I don't really care that we have "the most productive work force". It doesn't matter anymore. Our work force is being swamped by workers in other countries that just want a pay check at the end of the week. They don't care about work place rules, social security, pregnant father' rights, and all the rest that our western work force demands. It is no wonder to me that jobs have moved off shore. Having been to China and watched the work force there I can tell you that all our "labor laws" will just bring us down.
I also get a kick out of our environmental laws. The air is so polluted in Beijing and Shanghai that pilots need to land by instruments on a perfectly sunny day. And yet, we continue to self flagelate about the status of our air and water...
If you want to do something about the pollution on our mother earth, send a coal scrubber to China... This is the insanity of the discussion.

Ilíon said...

Ah, but Romney isn't really a conservative, now is he?

Anonymous said...

This is the affirmative action presidency.

B.O.'s ham handed fumbling vulgarity is perfectly genuine. He really doesn't know better, and he's far too pleased with himself to care.

The best that sensible Americans can hope to do at this point is to get in the way, slow him down a bit, and with luck, to limit somewhat the extent of the damage he is about to inflict.

This will be the FDR + Carter in a framework of Eduard Said and Frantz Fanon, baseed on a theme by Karl Marx and orchestrated by Saul Alinsky.

Buy gold. Buy ammo. Circle the wagons.

We've had more than 50 years of the crack-brained welfare state. And we are about to reap the whirlwind.

laine said...

Yes, one of the many reasons Obama won was that Republicans ran a hybrid part RHINO. Something stinks to high heaven in Republican primary machinery that eliminated Romney while running two economic illiterates against each other at a time that the financial storm was gathering.

The other reasons were:
1) Obama passed for black, locking up the black vote and libs who wanted to show off their lack of racism among themselves and to a world that is with few exceptions more racist that the USA.
If he had been white, he would not have gotten out of the starting gate with his background.

2) 600 million dollar campaign chest, much of it raised illegally.

3) additional hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of free PR by the MSM making him the billion dollar POTUS plus giant cover-up of his unsuitability...priceless.

4) ACORN's dirty hand on the scale, particularly "organizing" the gullible young.

5)the Gramscian leftist dumbing down of America having proceeded to the point that they treated the presidency like an
American Idol contest and chose the cool funky black dude over the old white veteran.

6) fortuitous timing of first slump in the economy that hapless Repubs let Dems paste on them with the help of the left wing media again.

7) rich guy(s) who prefer socialism's serfs. George Soros' name comes up most often. He looks like a humorless Bond villain but he's for real.

Did I miss any?

Bottom line, it was the perfect storm of leftist evil, bad luck and stupidity.

Unknown said...

7) rich guy(s) who prefer socialism's serfs. George Soros' name comes up most often. He looks like a humorless Bond villain but he's for real.

Did I miss any?

You missed the fact that Obama's Soros connection was one of the genuinely bipartisan aspects of his election campaign.

John McCain funded by Soros since 2001

Anonymous said...


... it was the perfect storm of leftist evil, bad luck and stupidity.

Nice one.

And all too true.