Friday, October 29, 2010

Idiot Europeans Still Support Obama

It’s still quite early in the morning as I sit here, dressed up like the brunette version of Tinkerbell and sporting a snarky attitude that the pint size pixie would be proud of.

I trust my readers are intelligent enough to figure out why I’m wearing what I’m wearing – big hint: Halloween – but I will explain why I’m annoyed. The short answer is liberal thinking (oxymoron, I know) and the longer answer is liberal thinking in Europe.

It amazes me how exceedingly dumb people are sometimes. To illustrate this, let me copy Marian Smith’s commentary, as posted on MSNBC yesterday…

“Europe ‘dismayed’ as midterms highlight Obama’s struggles”

“LONDON – Before he was elected to the White House, Barack Obama drew 200,000 ecstatic fans during a 2008 visit to Berlin. Analysts predicted he would have easily been elected France's president if he had been a candidate there. And the day after Obama's election triumph, practically every U.K. newspaper splashed his picture across their front pages.”

Umm… he shouldn’t have been campaigning in Europe in the first place. It was a waste of time, a waste of money and that move cost him in the polls as I remember. Also, I recall hearing rumors that he offered those “200,000 ecstatic fans” beer, which is why they showed up in the first place.

“Europe had fallen in love.

“Two years later, Obama is struggling at home. With the midterms looming, the president's approval rating is at just 47 percent and most indicators suggest that the Democrats will take a hit on Tuesday.

Many Europeans don't get it.”

Clearly, many Europeans are idiots then… twice over: once for falling in love with him in the first place and again for not getting why America has fallen out of love with him. Like his own campaign repeated over and over again in 2008, “It’s the economy, stupid!” We weren’t doing this badly until he hopped into office and started implementing his harmful, hateful policies.

“‘They're very confused as to how [Americans] could vote for Obama and then two years later turn around and vote for a completely different set of policies,’ Sarah Oates, professor of political communication the University of Glasgow, told msnbc.com.”

Because, number one, Obama campaigned as something that he is not… a unifier, an honest man who respected the people… even as somebody who could curtail the rising sea levels. He lied on all counts, as evidenced by his vicious partisan rhetoric, his ridiculous stories about how passing healthcare would save the U.S. economy, and the fact that the sea levels haven’t subsided.

“When viewed from abroad, Obama's campaign promises of ‘hope’ and ‘change’ left Europeans expecting a fundamental shift in American politics.

“‘[People here] are just dismayed,’ Oates added. ‘There's a real feeling of ... disappointment that it didn't signal the change they thought it would.’”

Again, they were idiots for putting that much trust in one single person like that.

Plummeting fortunes

“Normally, congressional elections don't resonate much abroad.

“But Europe's love affair with Obama – and interest in his plummeting fortunes – mean that midterms seem to be getting more coverage than usual in the U.K. and across the continent. In the wake of financial crisis, Europeans also wonder how the vote in America will affect the global economy.”

Hopefully for the better.

“French and British newspapers have been covering the run-up to the vote for weeks, with Tuesday's showdown already occasionally making the front page. In Germany, TV news channels are reporting regularly on U.S. politics and newspaper editorials have focused on the Tea Party movement and the perception that conservatism is growing in America.”

It is. Why? Because liberalism has proven an unkind and uncaring master… not just in the U.S., but in Europe as well, where they’re broke!

“On Thursday, the websites of the BBC and the London-based Guardian, Telegraph and Times newspapers all prominently featured stories about Obama's appearance on ‘The Daily Show.’”

Yeah, wasn’t that a laugh?

“‘He's not Mr Miracle’

“But with the economic crisis and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan casting a shadow over his presidency, Obama's reputation has also suffered abroad.

“‘He is no longer seen as an icon, but as a politician who is doing his very best,’ said Christian Malard, senior foreign analyst on France 3 TV. ‘He is paying the price for the crisis. He's not Mr Miracle, he's not a prophet.’”

On the first sentence, he isn’t doing his very best, at least not towards helping the U.S. And on the second sentence, Duh!

“However, Obama remains broadly well-liked and many Europeans think the disenchantment that many American voters have been expressing is unfair.

"What he inherited was so enormous that no American president could have fixed it," Manfred Gortemaker, professor of modern history at Germany's University of Potsdam, told msnbc.com.”

I can tell Mr. Obama how to fix it. Stop threatening to raise taxes. Lower them! Stop spending so much taxpayer money on uncessary projects, such as shipping practically the entire White House to India next month. Stop listening to dolts like Timothy Geithner. Start taking notes on Ronald Reagan instead. Stop forcing your will on the American people. Start listening to them!”

See? Easily fixed. Sorry, but I have to say it again… Idiots.

“Meanwhile, those who got caught up in the ‘Yes, we can’ fever of 2008 simply want to know what will happen to their star.”

Hopefully, if he doesn’t smarten up, he and his harmful policies are leaving in 2013.

“‘Obama is like a movie character," said Nicole Bacharan, a historian, political analyst and associate researcher at the Institute of Political Studies in Paris. ‘There is something very romantic about him and his fate is something that people want to know. Why is this young, attractive, very smart president struggling?’”

Easy answer for stupid people: Because he’s not that smart… or attractive, for that matter.

“Tea Party rhetoric

"Many Europeans are also wondering whether the Tea Party is simply a phenomenon born from the financial crisis, or whether its rise signals a broader, lasting, more radical conservative movement.”

Hopefully, the latter.

“‘In all the French newspapers and magazines, people are writing, trying to figure it out,’ Bacharan said.

“While the economic downturn has sparked severe spending cuts from Ireland to Greece and renewed questions over European-style ‘big government’, a Tea Party-like movement hasn't emerged on the continent.”

No, they’re too busy whining over the potential of their precious tax-payer funded freebies going out the window. Pitiful.

But Europeans have noticed that some opponents of the Tea Party are being demonized as ‘socialist’. That rhetoric has at times included references to far more sinister chapters in history. An editorial in Germany's Der Spiegel newspaper last week slammed the Tea Party’s references to Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany when criticizing the Obama administration’s policies as being irresponsible, flippant and ignorant.

“‘The Holocaust was the result of murderous ideological fanaticism of the kind not to be found in leaders forced to face re-election every four years,’ the newspaper's editorial said. ‘It is hard to imagine even the most hard-bitten Tea Party activist sincerely believing that President Barack Obama wants to systematically murder over 6 million people like Adolf Hitler did. And that is necessarily the implication.’”

First off, I don’t remember Europeans hollering when George Bush was compared to Hitler. Or, for that matter, when Chris Matthews just compared the Tea Party to Nazis. Second of all, Nazi Germany wasn’t just about killing people. It was also about socialism: about the government being involved in every aspect of its citizens lives. So maybe, just maybe, that’s what the Tea Party was talking about. Though you could also make an argument for Obama’s abortion support. And yes, those are babies… not randomly strung together pieces of tissue.

“Obama's more liberal policies also resonated with many Europeans. With polls suggesting the Democrats could lose control of the House, Professor Oates said the idea that many of his plans could potentially never come into effect baffles some people.”

They’re bad policies, ergo, they go.

“‘It's hard for them to understand the frailty of the American presidency,’ she said.”

This is such a dumb statement that I’m half-tempted to just call them idiots again and leave it at that. But I’m going to take the high road, call them idiots, and then explain why they are just that.

“The frailty of the American presidency,” was demonstrated quite well with George Bush just a few years ago. Or does Obama redefine the term “American presidency” in a way that I’m unaware of?

Even if he has though, it isn’t as if Europe’s own politicians don’t undergo the same attacks. Look at the UK’s former Gordon Brown or French President Nicholas Sarkozy. How about German President Angela Merkel?

They’ve all undergone some serious attacks in the last year especially. Aren’t their citizens smart enough to draw parallels?

Apparently not, which is why I can accurately call them idiots.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

The 2010 Elections… Let’s Get ‘Em Over With!

Let’s give the November 2nd elections – just five days away now – a brief rundown, no matter how much it pains me to focus on a topic I’m frankly sick of…

Here in my adopted state of Maryland – I’m still a Jersey Girl by birth – they’re saying that current governor Martin O’Malley is 14 points ahead of former governor Bob Ehrlich. That may be true or it may just be a fantasy hatched and nurtured by the liberal media.

I choose to believe that my state isn’t as dumb as they like to make it out to be though.

Still, I have to say that I don’t care about our gubernatorial race nearly as much as I’m interested in Senate races elsewhere, namely Christine O’Donnell in Delaware and Sharron Angle in Nevada.

The latter of the two is running against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, whom I’d love to see go down… and go down hard. A particularly bruised ego might be just what the man needs to turn him into a useful member of society instead of a political cretin.

But as happy as that would make me, my hopes are mostly tied in Christine O’Donnell. Maybe it’s a combination of her age, gender and Tea Party affiliations that I relate to, or maybe she symbolizes something I might want to be someday. Or perhaps I just really, really, really want the media – which mocks her and takes her out of context whenever it can – to eat its words.

Regardless, go Christine!

2010 Election Voter Fraud

Of course, I’d be remiss in mentioning the elections – even briefly – if I didn’t bring up the rampant voter fraud that’s already emerging. I hate to say it, but I’m not at all surprised. And because I’m not surprised, I can’t muster up much outrage about the topic, even though I probably should.

Nonetheless, here’s a brief rundown…
  • Daytona Beach, FL – Daytona Beach City Commissioner Derrick Henry and his campaign manager, Genesis Robinson, are charged with committing absentee ballot fraud. They were arrested the same day, and while Henry claims to be “nonpartisan” on his Facebook page, how much do you want to bet that he supports liberal policies if he’s resorting to such underhanded tactics?
  • Bucks County, PA – Backed by the county Republican committee, some residents filed a petition accusing Democratic Congressman Patrick Murphy of utilizing fraudulent applications for absentee ballots.
  • Clark County, Nevada – Resident Joyce Ferrara allegedly went to vote for Republican Sharron Angle and found instead that Democrat Harry Reid’s name was already checked on her ballot. Ferrara says that her husband and several other voters experienced the same phenomena.
On the latter example, Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller has poo-pooed the implied accusations, saying that there is no way the electronic voting machines could have been pre-programmed. Furthermore, he finds the whole thing sad, as it detrimentally affects confidence in the electoral process.

Really? Confidence in the electoral process? That’s been a joke ever since Acorn came along.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Sit in the Back!

This is going to be a short but shocking blog.

Well, maybe not shocking – that all depends on whether you cling to delusions of Obama being the great unifier he projected himself as while on the campaign trail in 2008 – but it will definitely be short.

If you’ve been following the news at all the last few months, you should be very familiar with President Obama’s flat-out lie of an analogy… You know, the one about the economy being a car and Republicans driving it into a ditch? R stands for reverse – and Republican – and we don’t want to send the country back the way we came… Blah, blah, chirp, chirp, beep, beep.

Yeah, that one.

Anyway, Obama took that darling thought a step further on Monday, saying this: “We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”

I have a few responses to this, the first one being the completely ridiculous “Nobody puts Baby in the corner!” But that’s just because I was reading about Dancing with the Stars, which Jennifer Grey just happens to be performing on this season.

After running through the ending dance sequence in my head, I have to just roll my eyes. And no, not at the movie. Come on, who doesn’t love Dirty Dancing?

Instead, I have to imagine the chaos that would ensue if a Republican had said this about Democrats. That’s all we would see on the news for a decent week, with headlines and discussion topics about “the racist elements of the Republican party.”

And you know what? They’d have good reason to cry “foul!” on that statement. If a Republican had said that, it would have been at best an extremely poor choice of words and at worst, flat-out racist. But because a black, Democrat politician says it, it’s perfectly fine?

Talk about a double standard!

Then there’s the fact that Obama, who enjoys blabbing on – and little else – about his desire for “bipartisan support,” is essentially admitting that he could care less about listening to the other side. It’s his way or nothing at all, apparently.

No big surprise there, really. That’s been obvious for a while now.

And personally, I’d much prefer the “nothing” option, thank you very much.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Let’s Talk about Something that Isn’t the Elections!

I don’t know about you all, but I am getting exceedingly bored of the headlines. By now, we all know that the American populace is discontented. We all know that they’re more likely to vote Republican than Democrat. And we all know that Republicans may very well take control of Congress in both houses.

Please don’t get me wrong… The thought of Nancy Pelosi having to kowtow to something other than her botox-inflated ego makes me want to shout “Hallelujah! Glory be!” like the most expressive charismatic on a Sunday morning.

But that either will or won’t happen in a week. And in the meantime, I’m sick to death of reading about “what if?”

Of course, if I really want a different story, I can also just go to the ever-relevant CNN, which features the headline, “Ex-lover: Clarence Thomas ‘not stable.’”

Pathetic.

It’s Really Rather Sad when You Think about It

Speaking of pathetic, Jimmy Carter is babbling again.

To those of you who voted for Mr. Carter – particularly one person who will more than likely take a bit of offense at this next comment… and be sure to tell me about it later – please accept my apologies, Mom. I love you anyway, despite your poor judgment on that fateful November day.

Hopefully you still love me after reading that.

The former – and failed – president is quoted as saying: “We had almost complete harmony with every nation on Earth. We not only preserved peace for our country, we never went to war. We never dropped a bomb. We never fired a missile.”

So? What does that prove? Other presidents can boast the same.

Some of them were simply fortunate enough to govern during a time of peace. Others were too preoccupied with other… ummm… activities to bother with retaliating against deliberate and obvious provocations from our enemies.

*Cough.* *Cough.* Bill Clinton.

And some are too delusional to face the facts… facts like the Iranian hostage crisis. Or the ongoing tensions with Russia. But maybe it all depends on how you define the word “peace.”

My Generation Again. Sigh.

I’m sure that the self-described “cool cats” behind the “Government Doesn’t Suck” rally would disagree with me on all of the above.

Then again, they probably have a high opinion of Barack Obama, which means they’re relatively stupid and/or unobservant, and therefore not really worth paying attention to in the first place.

And yet, I’m going to pay them their fifteen minutes of fame. Why? Because, as I said before, I’m bored of election coverage, this is my blog, and I can write about what I want to.

So nyah, nyah, nyah.

Sorry, I think I just stooped to the maturity level of those who will be attending the above mentioned get-together and marching alongside Jon Stewart’s equally immature “Rally to Restore Sanity.”

Jon, honey, if you really wanted to restore sanity, then you would have gone to the Glen Beck event on August 28th with the rest of the patriotic masses. You wouldn’t be mocking people who only want to divert the country from its headlong dive off a cliff.

But anyway, back to another example of how dumb my generation can be…

As the Washington Post reports, “a group of younger, web-savvy feds” are planning to join Jon Stewart and his brainwashed minions on Saturday…

“Organizers of the ‘Government Doesn’t Suck’… were inspired in part by last week’s Washington Post poll that revealed widespread negative perceptions of federal workers.

“‘We hear it day in and day our: the government sucks, federal employees are lazy and their positions are redundant,’ said march organizer Steve Ressler, founder of GovLoop, a social networking Web site for public servants.

“‘It’s time to turn the tables and remind the world that government employees just happen to be people – people that don’t suck,’ Ressler said in a message sent to The Federal Eye on Sunday announcing the march."

Yes, they’re people. I don’t think that anybody is really disputing that fact. (Whether they don’t suck, I don’t know. I’d have to meet them before I could say one way or the other.) But while certain government positions are necessary, too many of them are not.

For example: We don’t need as many IRS workers as we have. What we need is a more straightforward tax code!

The federal government has expanded well over its constitutional – and logical – limits. It currently employs around 2 million civilian employees – not including post offices – which makes it the U.S.’s largest employer.

If that doesn’t scare you, then you’re not really thinking about it.

Monday, October 25, 2010

The Young Voter State of Mind

Bloomberg has an article out today about young voters’ likelihood of sitting out this year’s mid-term elections.

Among some of the opinions the article recorded from the 18-30 age bracket were:

“Most students don’t care about elections in general. In most midterm elections, there’s not that central person for us to rally around.” – Melody Mostow, 20

“I’m trying to follow the election a little bit, but I’m not really motivated. I don’t really like any of the candidates.” – Chris Williams, 22

“I’d rather be spending time focusing on my grades.” – Jenna Fumo, 20

Incidentally, at least two of the above did vote in 2008, and they voted for Obama.

I could analyze and interpret the larger article – which also reported that less than three in 10 voters under the age of 30 really plan on visiting their polling places on November 2 – a few different ways, but let’s start out with the most obvious…

All of that sweet talk of “hope” and “change” just hasn’t gone very far. Yeah, sure, we now have healthcare coverage for all… by 2014, at least. And we’re “out” of Iraq. But the war has been stepped up in Afghanistan now, and our troops are dying left and right for an increasingly unpopular cause.

Then there’s the abysmal unemployment rate and the generally dilapidated national mood. We’re a nation of concerns nowadays, and no longer one of wide-eyed excitement.

Even the most clueless college student has to feel at least a little bit of that. It’s easy for young people to wrap themselves up in some sort of protective bubble, especially when at school. But economic worries have expanded enough that not even the most sheltered cocoon is completely safe these days.

Generation Nitwit

Speaking of cocoons, my generation – and the ones that have followed – have grown up on an unbalanced diet of celebrity gossip, consumerism and instant gratification. We’re taught not to think for ourselves, but to absorb other’s opinions from preschool all the way through college.

That has had a decided negative affect on the population…

At age 26, one of my coworkers can tell you tiny and completely insignificant details about the most obscure bands out there. Unsurprisingly, she voted for the biggest celebrity in 2008, Barack “Star” Obama.

(This is also the same girl who argued with me over whether people really are equal or not… Of Asian descent herself, she sincerely believes that blacks deserve more consideration than whites.)

That celebrity culture teaches my generation that it’s all about being acceptable and seizing the day, consequences be damned.

We also learn that values are old-fashioned and consequences considered obsolete… until they smack us in the face.

But until that happens, we’re very happy focusing on the most easily attainable “truth” that best seems to fit into our jealously guarded bubbles.

The Easy Choice

My generation fell for Obama because he was the easy choice. Everybody else did the thinking for us – the media, our professors, our media-influenced peers, celebrities – and so we happily gave him our warmest endorsement because everybody else did.

But even the media can’t muster up that kind of enthusiasm this year, and so because everybody else isn’t doing it, we can’t be bothered either.

In essence, we’re lazy, as the above quoted Chris Williams inadvertently admitted when he said that he wasn’t “motivated.”

Or as Melody Mostow put it, “there’s not that central person for us to rally around.” I.e., there’s nobody to follow that requires little to no effort whatsoever.

Like I said, we’re lazy. And Democrats, since you’re in charge of the education system in this country, you have nobody to blame but yourself.

Friday, October 22, 2010

My Opinion on Michelle Obama’s Fashion Taste

A few days ago, Rush Limbaugh made an offhand comment about Michelle “My Belle” Obama on his program. And then he got onto a short bunny trail about the emails he gets from his female listeners concerning the First Lady and her media-lauded fashion sense.

Though he wouldn’t repeat any of them, he gave the strong impression – while never actually flat-out saying – that some of them were very catty.

On the one hand, I think he was probably wise not to share any of them. On the other hand, I’m rather annoyed with him for using discretion in this case, since he certainly thought they were funny.

If you’re not going to say anything nice, don’t bring up a subject, snicker, and then change the subject. It’s just plain mean.

Now, I can’t get the subject off my mind, so forgive me if I stoop to a decidedly non-political level for a page or two…

Michelle Obama’s Fashion: Waaaaayyyyyyy Overrated

Let’s start out with the outfit she wore to her hubby’s inauguration. What the Huffington Post predictably gushed over as “a sparkling yellow-gold sheath dress with matching coat by Cuban-born American designed Isabel Toledo… a choice many applauded as a cheerful message of hope and a vote for the American fashion industry,” seemed, to me, like it was made out of the same material one might see at a cheesy Las Vegas side show.

Honestly, the dress itself wasn’t horrible by any means. But I can’t find anything to swoon over either, since I outgrew my obsession with sparkly material back when I was twelve. And my obsession with gold back in the 80s.

Yeah, yeah, I know. “Meow” to that last comment.

All the same though Michelle, here’s a tip from one female to another, try pairing down the gold next time. Maybe with a trendy black jacket instead of ummm… more sparkly gold. It’s a bit much.

The same goes for the “one-shouldered silk chiffon Jason Wu number covered in organza flowers and Swarovski crystals” that she wore later that night. It’s shapeless and silly with all of those bumpy flowers on it; kinda like a bad prom gown.

Again, could it be worse? Yeah, definitely. But I won’t be modeling myself after her formalwear attire anytime soon either.

Did’ith Thou Look in thy Mirror Before Thee Left, Michelle?

How about what she wore on Jay Leno before her husband officially took over as PotUS?

Again, waaaaaaayyy too much yellow. It’s really a little bit blinding. I understand that a white girl like me would look even worse in such bright colors, and I normally respect – and even envy, from time to time – black women’s ability to pull off such shades and still look good.

But Mrs. Obama much more resembles a canary than a fashion icon here. She should apparently stick to more classic cuts, like the power suit she wore while in France. Now that, she pulled off quite well.

Not so much the one-sleeved top she donned during her Spain vacation though. She’s in her 40s, has two daughters and is out in the daytime. Really, while I don’t mind the top in and of itself, I think it would be much more appropriate on a single 20-something out on the town with her equally 20-something girlfriends.

Sorry Michelle.

Finally, as to the outfit she chose to wear on her husband’s desperate “Get in the Game” attempt to galvanize voters into voting for people who back his destructive policies… it looks like something Tea Party supporters would have worn… back in the 18th century.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

If Global Warming is Real, Then Why Aren’t They Taking It Seriously?

The elections are getting nastier and nastier the closer we get to November 2, which is really just right around the corner at this point. I don’t know about you, but I feel as if this month – like just about every other one so far this year – is flying by at an unprecedented rate.

And speaking of President Obama’s favorite word, “unprecedented,” let’s get into his latest self-serving and distorted propaganda message, this time about fighting the ravages of global warming through his pet project of last year, the $787 billion “stimulus” plan.

MSNBC sums it up quite nicely when it says, “The Obama administration is crediting its anti-recession stimulus plan with creating up to 50,000 jobs on dozens of wind farms, even though many of those wind farms were built before the stimulus money began to flow or even before President Barack Obama was inaugurated.”

I’d make a sarcastic comment about being surprised, but such revelations are so common these days that I’m much rather apt to say “duh.”

It shouldn’t be any kind of shock at this point that our country’s topmost elected leader thinks we’re dumb enough to fall for every one of his lines. For one thing, as a nation, we did vote him in. But also, he really just does think we’re that stupid, as Karl Rove reminds us of in the Wall Street Journal:

“At an April 2008 fund-raiser in San Francisco, Barack Obama let loose with his famous ‘they cling to guns or religion’ line.” And he clearly hasn’t changed his mind about that, as his statements last Saturday in Massachusetts indicate: “‘Facts and science and argument [do] not seem to be winning… because we’re hard-wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared.’”

Inspirational, huh? Don’t you want to vote for his policies now that he’s called you backwards?

Global Warming Hype and a Broken Heart

James Cameron certainly still supports Obama’s take on the world ending – at least in theory – donating large sums towards fighting California’s Proposition 23, which would suspend the state’s global warming law.

Then again, James Cameron doesn’t actually have to live the green life he preaches, what with his lavish lifestyle, multiple properties and modes of transportation. He just enjoys pushing it on everybody else.

How nice.

What’s equally as obnoxious is the Obama administration’s promises through General (a.k.a. Government) motors concerning the Chevrolet Volt.

Now, if you haven’t heard about the much-touted Volt, let me fill you in with what it was supposed to be: an electric car with a back-up gasoline tank for those long trips you need to make every once in a while… and it got 230 miles per gallon in the city!

I’ll admit that even I found myself falling hopelessly in love with the concept. If I bought one, I could save so much money that I’d otherwise be spending on gas. At today’s prices, I spend a decent $120 - $150 on gas every month, thanks mostly to too many out-of-state friends and family that I want to visit.

So forgive me, please, that I indulged in a few daydreams of the places I could go and the money I could save by stupidly buying into Obama administration hype.

Seriously. Please? Forgive me?

Regardless, my silly little crush is officially over, leaving me disappointed and ashamed.

As investors.com cites, “It’s not an all-electric car” after all, “but rather a pricey $41,000 hybrid that requires a taxpayer-funded $7,500 subsidy to get car shoppers to look at it.”

And worse yet, far from the 230 miles per gallon it was supposed to get, “Popular mechanics found the Volt to get about 37.5 mpg in city driving, and Motor Trend reports: ‘Without any plugging in, (a weeklong trip to Grandma’s house) should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s.’”

Forgive me if I still sniffle at what could have been if Obama wasn’t such a blatant and habitual liar.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

There’s No Such Thing as a Free Dinner… Not Even in D.C. Public Schools

It seems that the closer we get to elections, the more crazy the news gets. It’s enough to make a blogger’s head spin.

Fortunately, this blogger has a tight hold on it all – on her better days, at least – and can quickly sum up this morning’s most important headlines in one semi-succinct posting. Of course, it’s especially easy when one headline easily trumps all of the others in the “most important” category.

Brilliant, I know. Please hold the applause until after the show.

The topic of discussion today: the American education system.

Scary ground, I know, but I figure it’s an appropriate subject for a traditionally frightening holiday less than two weeks away.

Unfortunately though, the “trick” called the U.S. education system is no childish prank.

It is, however, an utter joke. The kind that a Batman villain might make.

Free Dinners Cost a Lot

How do we know that our education system is a joke? Well, other than the self-centered brats it’s produced for the last several decades, all we need to do for proof is turn to the D.C. chapter of Fox News, which put out a disturbingly fascinating report yesterday.

Apparently, students in Washington D.C. public schools aren’t just getting free lunches. They’re getting free, federally-funded dinners too. Fox 5 Reporter Audrey Barnes reports, “D.C. joins 13 states which serve three meals a day at school – and to the tune of $5.7 million.”

Before any bleeding hearts gush all over my post, let me clarify that I don’t believe in letting small children starve. But I also don’t believe it’s the responsibility of the schools – or the federal government – to be feeding them.

IT SHOULD BE THEIR PARENT’S JOB!

Sorry for the caps, but this is a very important point. More than likely, we’re already giving these children’s parents welfare handouts of some kind. And let’s also be brutally honest, too many federally educated, immature parents are quick to spend that money inappropriately.

For proof, just look at California’s recent revelation that welfare recipients are using their undeserved government checks to gamble at casinos.

So basically, we’re giving them money to live and then telling them that they don’t have to worry about feeding their children, except on the weekends. We’re paying them to live irresponsibly and then further encouraging them to be even more so.

Not to mention that we’re also making the children even more dependent on public school thinking through these programs. These kids will be ill-equipped to think outside of the box when they barely leave the box in the first place.

They’re being trained from an early age to depend on the government instead of themselves. This hardly paints a pretty picture for their future or the future of their country.

If we’re raising generations of people who so-rarely come face to face with personal responsibility, we will have a nation filled with defenseless dependents who will either topple us from within as they find fewer and fewer to lean on, or passively allow foreign attackers to topple us from without… because helplessness is all they ever learned.

Either way, the U.S. will collapse.

They say there’s no such thing as a free meal, and they’re right… even in D.C.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

A World Gone Mad

We’re officially living in a topsy-turvy, logic-less mess of a world. And that especially seems true in the traditional Western sections of the globe right now.

Over in Europe, they’re protesting government spending cuts. Apparently they’ve adopted the Loreal slogan – at least of a few years back – of being “worth it,” everything else be damned.

Problem is, they seem much more focused on their supposed worth and rights, and far less on their countries’ futures, their children’s futures, or even their own. After all, let’s face it: The traditional economic powers of the twentieth century are falling fast, while China rises on its odd mix of oppression and capitalism.

Honestly, I don’t think that China can really pull it off long-term until it gives its people a bit more respect, but the communist nation is going for the gold all the same, pulling ahead at an often-frightening pace.

Meanwhile, France and England specifically, are busy pushing backwards, as their entitled citizens – a breed their governments foolishly bred for years now – yell loud and long in favor of selfish ruin.

Germany Doesn’t Get It Either

Move Eastward from England and North East from France, and you don’t find much more intelligence. For proof of that, just check out Germany’s Spiegel Online International, which features the extremely sheltered view that:

“Barack Obama is not a bad president. He is extremely eloquent, sharp-witted, and has certainly not lost any of his talent since moving into the Oval Office. Members of his staff say he still listens to what people say. A senator who once lost an election to Obama says the president demands dissenting opinions and that he's reliable, funny and works best under pressure.

“Nor is he a weak president. He has begun withdrawing American troops from Iraq. He has been able to strengthen his alliances. And he has tackled the global economic crisis with an $800 billion stimulus package and a reform of the financial markets. His education policies target performance and aim to improve the disastrously under-resourced public school system. Millions of Americans have been dreaming of healthcare reform for decades. Bill Clinton failed to get it passed. Barack Obama succeeded.

“Why then does it appear as if the American people would prefer to bring about a political stalemate between the White House and the two chambers of Congress, and thus ensure their own ungovernability, rather than giving the president a little more time? Why is the United States again leaning toward the kind of Republicans who have little to offer but tax cuts and who left Obama with a legacy of two wars and an economic crisis?”

“Not a bad president?” Not “a weak president?” This is the man who led the country into double-digit unemployment numbers and can’t bring us back down even close to 9%. This is also the man who goes around whining about what he “inherited” 24-7, goes on copious amounts of vacation, and bows to foreign leaders. This is also the man who lets unfriendly countries like Russia and Iran walk all over us, along with terrorist suspects.

Need I go on? Because I certainly can.

In short, we’ve already given him nearly two years, two years of failed promises, two years of accusations and two years of blatantly ignoring us. That is why we’d prefer “political stalemate” over “giving the president a little more time.”

Meghan McCain, Pampered Twit Extraordinaire

Of course, there is no shortage of really dumb people in the United States. Let’s start out with the ever-clueless and annoying Meghan McCain. Honestly, I’m ashamed that she shares my political party, my gender and my general age group. The silly harpy is a disgrace to intelligent thought.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, she just had to express her opinion on Delaware GOP Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell, calling her “a nut job.”

“Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office,” she said, claiming that her fellow Republican’s lack of any “real history [and]… real success in any kind of business” sends a harmful message to her generation: that “one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how [little] experience you have.”

Great point hon! Because all of the so-called “experienced” people in Washington are doing such a great job.

Not done ripping her party right along with the best of the mainstream media, McCain continued, “It scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know in my group of friends, it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nut job.”

Here’s my question for the self-involved young woman who enjoys hearing the sound of her own voice: Has she actually watched or listened to anything O’Donnell has said, other than her “not a witch” ad?

Because other the general name calling, I haven’t really seen much negative press on O’Donnell after her recent debate with her opponent, Democrat Chris Coons. Even the New York Times could only really bash her on her supposed “Sarah Palin moment,” when she couldn’t come up with a recent Supreme Court case that she disagreed with.

Even CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer couldn’t think of anything better than Roe v. Wade. And, as O'Donnell pointed out, the question was for a recent decision. So Blitzer is even dumber than she supposedly is. Not to mention that the question was an easy handout for Coons, who quickly jumped on the recent court decision to allow corporations to fund political campaigns.

I wonder if he could cite another one?

Other than that, from what I heard O’Donnell say, she seemed strong to me. Maybe Little Miss Nitwit can try reading something other than the mainstream, horribly biased, mainstream media.

And please McCain. Shut up!

Monday, October 18, 2010

Why Congress still Failed

Oh the AP. You gotta either love them or think they’re pathetic. More than likely the latter though, considering their continuous kiss-up approach to liberal theology.

(And yes, liberalism is a religion, something akin to Scientology in its predisposition towards the ridiculous.)

Take the following article they put out this morning, as posted below with my snarky – but accurate, insightful and well-deserved – comments.

It starts out with the grossly misleading and watered-down: “The public panned it. Republicans obstructed it. Many Democrats fled from it. Even so, the session of Congress now drawing to a close was the most productive in nearly half a century.”

“Panned” it? Some word choice to describe the righteous outrage shown at town meetings and rallies for well over a year now. That word is so infrequently used that I had to look it up.

And I feel the need to point out once again that Republicans couldn’t obstruct anything for the first year. Democrats had super majorities in Congress until Scott Brown came along. Blame the party of “yes” for not being able to pass their own stupid plans.

Congress’ Very Significant Record of Ignoring the American People

The article continues: “Not since the explosive years of the civil rights movement and the hard-fought debut of government-supported health care for the elderly and poor have so many big things — love them or hate them — been done so quickly.”

Ummm… Newsflash: Doing things quickly isn’t always a good thing. In fact, more often then not, it indicates shoddy work and shoddy results.

“Gridlock? It may feel that way. But that's not the story of the 111th Congress รข€” not the story history will remember.”

Edit much?

“Democrats are dearly hoping history won't repeat itself. In 1966, after Democrats created Medicare and Medicaid and passed civil rights laws, they got hammered in the election, losing 48 seats in the House and four in the Senate. They maintained their majorities in both at the time, but an identical result next month would turn the House over to Republicans.

“In the 1960s Democrats paid the price for events largely outside their control — an escalating war in Vietnam going badly, rowdy anti-war protests and violence in American cities, said Linda Fowler, professor of government at Dartmouth College.

“‘I think that's what's going on this time too,’ Fowler said, ‘despite a very significant record of accomplishment.’”

Can we have a second opinion on this? An intelligent one this time? Democrats got knocked back then – and will get knocked this time as well – because they didn’t listen to the people who put them into power in the first place. Not to mention how that “escalating war in Vietnam” was Kennedy’s doing. And Kennedy was a Democrat.

As for the whole, so-called peace movement? What party is and has been responsible for promoting animosity towards American troops? Certainly not the Democrats, now headed by a man can’t bring himself to even say the word “victory” much less promote it.

“Democrats struggling now to retain majorities in the House and Senate must deal with a public that is quick to blame Washington for the prolonged economic downturn, and that resents the bank bailouts that were actually passed by the previous Congress.”

Those bailouts were fully supported by Nancy Pelosi – who was and still is Speaker of the House – and Harry Reid, who was and still is Senate Majority Leader.

“In terms of legislative successes, the current session of Congress is ‘at least on a par with the 89th Congress’ of 1965-1966, said Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

“But, he added, Republicans have done all they could to discredit Congress and Democrats have failed to sell their agenda. Moreover, it will take years to fully feel the effects of the health care law and financial regulation.”

Yeah, we’re already feeling little bits and pieces and we already don’t like it. Oh, and Democrats haven’t failed to sell their agenda. They’re not running on it at all!

Blah Blah Blah, Chirp Chirp, Beep Beep

“‘A world dominated by bickering and epithet-throwing and bomb tossing in Washington obscures accomplishments,’ Ornstein said.”

No, the American people are very aware of Washington’s “accomplishments.” We just don’t like them, or what they’re doing and will do to this country.

“Congress passed an $814 billion economic stimulus package soon after President Barack Obama took office, tapping a staggering sum of money to avoid a full-blown depression. Democrats have trumpeted the gains from that effort, but know it's not enough for restive voters. “Americans still see themselves in a ditch,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.”

We still see ourselves in a ditch because we are still in a ditch. Remember, unemployment didn’t hit 9% until after the stimulus package passed. And it’s stayed there ever since. You can blame Bush all you want, but liberals own the economy at this point.

“The two other landmark acts of this session were the health care overhaul, a giant step toward universal coverage that had eluded presidents back to Franklin Roosevelt if not Teddy Roosevelt, and the Wall Street accountability act.”

Yes, because our capitalist-based healthcare system is such a sham that people from other countries that do have nationalized versions travel here to get treatment instead of sticking to the far-less pricey – and far-less effective – offerings back home.

As for the Wall Street accountability act? It benefits big banks, not the people.

Congress’ Track Record: Bad, Worse, and Shockingly Horrendous

“Obama has also signed into law at least a dozen other pieces of legislation of significance. They include:
  • Making college loans more affordable.
  • The Cash for Clunkers program that helped rejuvenate the auto industry.
  • New consumer protections for credit card users.
  • Making it easier for women to challenge pay discrimination.
  • Increasing federal regulation of tobacco products.
  • Cracking down on waste in Pentagon weapons acquisition.
  • Making attacks based on sexual orientation a federal hate crime.
  • Giving businesses tax incentives to hire unemployed workers.
  • Tax credits for first-time homeowners.”
Let me sum up all of the above with a single word: Bad!

Making college loans more affordable? Try shanghaiing the entire college loan system. If the government can’t handle anything else responsibly, why do we want to trust them with this?

Cash for Clunkers? It was a short-term, short-minded deal that had no lasting effect.

New consumer protections for credit card users? All it does is promote irresponsibility. Now, we don’t have to keep watch on our bank accounts. If we overdraw, the banks can’t penalize us, which they have every right to do so. If we don’t like fines on paying for something we can’t afford in the first place, then we should have two options: Don’t overdraw or keep our money under our mattresses.

Pay discrimination? I didn’t hear about that one, but my guess is that it was as harmful as everything else Congress has done.

Tobacco regulations? If Americans smoke these days, it’s because they don’t care about the potential side effects, not because they don’t know about them. I don’t smoke, I don’t like the smell of smoke, but you know what I don’t like even more? A nanny government that butts its nose into all of our businesses while running its own into the ground.

Pentagon waste? I’m sure there is some. But why are we focusing solely on military spending when we recklessly throw money at so many other areas of government?

Hate crimes? That’s unconstitutional and flat-out unethical. You can’t prosecute people for what they think anymore than what they say. Not to mention that so-called hate crimes put more value on certain people’s lives (blacks’, gays’, females’) as opposed to others (whites’, straights’, males’).

The whole hiring incentive? It didn’t work because it was a stupid idea in the first place. Employers hire workers when there is too much customer activity for them to handle. Since only the filthy rich seem to be spending money these days, anybody not catering to the filthy rich – i.e. most businesses – don’t need to hire anybody.

Housing tax credits? The housing market is still in dire straits with no promise of even leveling off, much less rebounding.

“So,” as the AP asks, “where is the love?”

There’s a reason why “Polls suggest three-fourths of Americans disapprove of Congress.” It’s because everything Congress did this time around was wanted only by Congress… and a few idiots.

The “love” is coming from Congress to Congress, which is why We the People don’t love them.

Friday, October 15, 2010

France and Two Cow Economics

If writing a simultaneously coherent and searchable blog was an easy task, I’d start out with the line, “France is filled with idiots.”

But since it really is a frustratingly difficult task, please accept this alternative beginning instead…

I’m sure that most of my elite (read: small) group of readers have heard of two-cow economics, the short and simple explanation of the often confusing world of government policies.

I’m unfortunately going to have to ignore the new – for me – Californian one, hysterical and sadly accurate as it is. But I will give you a taste of a few of them all the same…

Two Cows, One Really Stupid Country (i.e. France… OK, and Maybe the U.S., Which Makes Two… But More so France)

DEMOCRAT: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. Barbara Streisand sings for you.

REPUBLICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So?

CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.

BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE: You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, and then pours the milk down the drain.

AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one. You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses. Your stock goes up.

FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows. You go to lunch and drink wine. Life is good.

France’s Obsession with Strikes… Makes Ya Wonder How They Have Cows at All

I didn’t have to include all of the above and I do realize that it took up a decent amount of space, but they lead into each other so nicely and, overall, so accurately that I had to include a few more than just France. (Though I’d add a few provisos to the Republican one, of course. Still, even that one makes me laugh.)

I firmly believe that human nature is the same across the board. It doesn’t matter where you go or who you study, you’re going to inevitably find that people run off of the same emotions and needs as everybody else. They just have different ways of expressing them.

Or so I thought.

After the last month or so of seemingly never-ending strikes in a supposedly enlightened part of the world, I am going to have to revise my previous assessment of the global population.

I firmly believe that human nature is the same across the board, except in France, where they appear to be unusually lazy and stupid.

Before I go any further, let me assure you that I’m not normally Francophobic (My own word. Pretty neat, huh?). I thought the whole “Freedom Fries” movement was ridiculous when France refused to support the U.S. in Iraq. And since I’ve never been to France myself, nor can I recall really running into any truly, bonafide French people, I normally hold off on expressing any concrete opinions of them.

No more. I will be very blunt in my criticism.

They’re idiots.

At least, according to polls, two-thirds of French citizens take issue with President, Nicholas Sarkozy’s plan to raise the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62. They also don’t care for his attempts to do the same to when people can retire on a full pension, from 65 to 67.

Umm… Guys, your country is broke! You kinda need to do something!

If That’s the Way France Wants it, Say Goodbye to France

For a summarized explanation of what France is doing wrong, I’m going to turn to a piece Jeffrey Folks published this past May on American Thinker. The whole thing is well worth a read, but I’ll only quote a few paragraphs.

“Taking into account higher taxes and inflation, French per capita GDP is $32,679 versus $46,381 for the U.S. (2009 IMF figures). Ranked by purchasing power, France comes in at #21, while the United States is first among major economies. The reasons are not hard to find. It is certain that the French do not work as many hours as do Americans, and it is doubtful whether they work as hard. National workplace regulations make it difficult to fire incompetent or lazy workers. As a result of overregulation, French industry is slow to adapt and innovate. While unionized workers enjoy full benefits, early retirement, and guaranteed annual vacations of five weeks, France as a whole pays the price of significantly lower growth rates than America.

“There is, unfortunately, one area in which the U.S. already resembles France all too closely. As in the USA, France has piled up increasing amounts of unfunded liabilities in its retirement schemes. President Sarkozy has proposed reasonable reforms that would ensure adequate funding of government-run pensions. An obvious solution for a country in which workers retire at age 60 is to gradually raise the retirement age to at least 65, a level comparable to that of other developed countries. Union response to this proposal has been to schedule a nationwide walkout on May 27. As in Greece, it appears that French workers would rather wave their little red flags and shut down the economy than negotiate a practical means of funding their own retirements.

“Perhaps this is because they ‘know when to quit.’ Unfortunately, their knowing when to quit – that is, at age 60, with full benefits regardless of years of service – has bankrupted the pension funds that must support workers for an extra five to seven years beyond those in comparable economies. The result is that France's pension funding is now deeply in debt – a debt level that is projected to reach $127 billion by 2050. Predictably, unions have called for more taxes on the rich and, implicitly, for increasing the national debt. In return, they offer little or nothing in the way of compromise.”

In other words, France is practicing socialism at dangerous levels. And what country can survive off of socialistic policies for very long?

History shows none so far, and I don’t think that France will prove any exception to the long-standing rule.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

The Common Link Between Vice President Joe Biden, Pop-Star Avril Lavigne and Congressman Barney Frank

I don’t know about you, but I’m really quite sick of personal and political doublespeak.

I understand that it’s an unfortunate human condition to recognize fault in others while remaining conveniently blind to our own, but I think we’ve taken it to a fascinating new level these days.

Want some examples? I’ll be glad to give them to you:

How about Vice President Joe Biden actively feeding into the Bush-is-an-idiot mentality when he’s a walking gaffe? If we had a liberal press, we would recognize the man that Karl Rove calls a “serial exaggerator” and Toby Harnden of the UK’s Telegraph describes as “legendarily verbose and self-regarding” as the pathetic buffoon that he is… and quite possibly Obama as the unscrupulous politician that he is for choosing Biden – a man of all talk and no substance – as a running mate in the first place.

Just to drive the point home, let me quote Harnden’s last paragraph in the piece: “I loved, near the end of the NYT piece, Viden’s plaintive ‘I hope they think I’m smart’ response when he was asked about what voters think about him. I’m sorry to break this to you, Joe, but…”

And despite the lack of media commentary on the man’s blithering idiocy, even Jay Leno thought the fact well enough known to make a joke about it recently.

“President Obama announced that his new chief of staff would be his longtime aide, a man named Peter Rouse. Obama said one of the most popular phrases around the White House is, ‘Let Pete fix it.’ That’s the most popular phrase. Second most popular phrase at the White House? ‘Tell Biden I’m not here.’”

Barney Frank: Not as Comical but Just as Delusional

Barney Frank, I consider a much more intelligent man than Joe Biden. Or the soon-to-be mentioned Avril Lavigne, for that matter, though Ms. Lavigne trumps Biden. Not that that says much.

Surprisingly enough, I’m not going to mention how Frank is now blaming Republicans for the housing crisis that he largely engineered through his no-holds barred support of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and “encouragement” of risky mortgages.

Instead, let’s go to a direct quote of his. For those who will be quick to shout “bias” considering the source, you can find the video elsewhere. This site just has a convenient transcript of the conversation attached:

“We can't continue to have economic growth that is concentrated in the hands of a few. In America we are becoming more and more unequal. Some inequality is necessary for a capitalist system but we've gone way beyond that, and the average working person, we're talking 80% of the population has seen an erosion in his or her economic position rather than advance.”

Sounds like a regular champion of the poor, right? A modern-day Robin Hood and certainly not a man who would accept “free luxury jet rides to the Virgin Islands with a financier who got a $200 million federal bailout” or stayed “at the billionaire’s tropical mansion,” right?

Completely putting aside the legalist issues the vacation raises, Barney Frank is clearly just one more example of a say-one-thing-and-do-another liberal.

Avril Lavigne: Pop Princess or Pathetic, Tired Tramp?

Harsh words for such a beloved icon of the I’m-My-Own-Person-and-I’ll-Prove-It-by-Acting-Just-the-Same-as-Everyone-Else trend? I’ll let you be a judge, but I’ve already delivered my own damning verdict in the face of exceedingly blatant evidence.

As a woman, it drives me nuts when members of my gender try publicly exploiting both the good girl and liberated hussy routines at the same time. How about save that for the bedroom with your men, ladies?

Besides, it’s really, really, really old at this point, not to mention that it was an obvious lie the first time some idiot female tried to play it.

Do you really think that men look at commercially distributed nude or deliberately provocative pictures of women and think: “Wow! What a classy lady. I respect her for being a complete person instead of merely a sexual object.”

I’d compare the number of men who would think that to the number of women who want to sleep with Hugh Heffner because he looks like he’s good in bed.

In other words, very few. And I think that’s being exceedingly generous.

Yet Avril, who recently posed topless for Maxim, apparently still thought it’d be a great idea to try out tired lines like: “I like a classy man, a gentleman who opens the door and gives flowers and always puts the lady first. I'm a little old-fashioned like that.”

She even stooped so low as to describe herself as “really shy and quiet.”

Newsflash nitwit: Real shy and quiet girls don’t go posing nude or semi-nude for no-good reason.

It isn’t like she doesn’t have money to afford a shirt. In fact, with the money she has, she should be able to afford a clue as well.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

The News Press Shows its True Face

Let’s play a little game today called “What’s Wrong With The Press?”

First, I’ll show you an article and then you decide what’s wrong with it. I’ll only use two, but there are plenty more though if you have the time to go through them all. Just let me know.

And if you’re nervous, don’t be. We’re going to start out with a really easy one in the New York Times.

Then again, isn’t that publication always easy?

On so many levels.

“President Obama Looks Forward – and Back” by Michael D. Shear

“President Obama said that he is expecting Republicans to offer him more cooperation after November’s elections, no matter the outcome.

“In an hour-long interview with Times
[He didn’t italicize it. Not me] White House correspondent Peter Baker, Mr. Obama predicted that his political rivals will either be chastened by falling short of their electoral goals or burdened with the new responsibility that comes from achieving them.

“‘It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, they feel more responsible, either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them,’ Mr. Obama said. ‘Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.’

“The president’s comments are reported in an in-depth assessment of Mr. Obama’s first two years in office, which appears in the Times Magazine this Sunday.

“In the article, which is based on interviews with nearly two dozen of the president’s advisers in addition to the president himself, Mr. Baker offers a series of inside details about Mr. Obama’s time in the White House, including the following:

“* According to his wife, First Lady Michelle Obama, Mr. Obama is not particularly fond of the presidential retreat at Camp David. Mrs. Obama reports that her husband, a longtime resident of Chicago, is more at ease in an urban setting.

“* Pete Rouse, Mr. Obama’s new chief of staff, bet deputy chief of staff Jim Messina $400 that he would be gone from the White House by the end of this year. Mr. Messina predicted that Mr. Rouse would stay well beyond that date.

“* Mr. Obama – unlike most of his senior staff – does not have an iPad. Asked why, he said: ‘Because I have an iReggie,’ a reference to his personal aide, Reggie Love.”

If you’re fond of reading drivel, by all means, continue. But I won’t subject you to anymore myself.

The pointless piece continues along the same optimistic lines, idealistically painting Obama as a good guy doing a tough job – and don’t we feel bad for him that he got to go on vacation at Camp David? – instead of examining his policies and results in any kind of critical light whatsoever.

You can practically hear the lip smacking as Mr. Shear kisses up to Jimmy Carter II.

“Biden, Obama’s Traveling Salesman, Makes Hard Sell to Voters” by Kate Andersen Brower

Don’t be fooled by the title, which almost seems like it might possibly be thinking about journalistic integrity. This article skirts around every tough issue that it supposedly covers:

“He’s flown 330,000 miles since taking office, the equivalent of circling the globe 13 times, much of it campaigning for Democrats and telling anxious voters that the $814 billion stimulus measure is working. Vice President Joe Biden knows it’s a hard sell.”

Forgive me, but a real reporter instead of a paid propagandist would have questioned why he’s leaving such a humongous carbon footprint when he’s the number two guy in an administration that really, really, really wants to push Cap and Trade to save the planet from the evil ravages of global warming.

“‘Less bad is never good enough,’ Biden said in an interview on board Air Force Two on Oct. 8, the same day that Labor Department figures showed the jobless rate held steady at 9.6 percent in September, the last yardstick before voters in the Nov. 2 elections determine which party controls Congress.”

The unemployment rate might have somehow miraculously – or artificially – held steady at 9.6%, but the U.S. economy still “unexpectedly” shed more jobs than it added. Care to report that? Apparently not…

“‘Voters want to be told the truth,’ Biden said on the way to Madison, Wisconsin, jacketless, kneeling against the back of an airplane seat and holding gold-trimmed aviator sunglasses.”

Who bloody cares?

“‘They want to know, ‘Tell me, man, do I have a shot?” he said, his enthusiasm undeterred by a cold.”

Again, you can read on, should you have nothing more important to do (like watch re-runs of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Now that girl doesn’t pull any punches.)

But why bother when it’s the same tired old story you already know?

How Low Can they Go?

So why am I focusing on the particularly obvious fact that the ignominious media is the main liberal pushcart?

To answer that question, allow me to run off down a seeming bunny trail for a minute…

Today, the first of the trapped Chilean miners was pulled out of the hole he and 32 of his coworkers have been trapped in for over two months now. Florencio Avalos, 31, was finally reunited with his wife and son, an amazing moment for his family, who must have had a harrowing time themselves during the long wait to free the men.

It should have been a perfect scene and it would have been if not for the global media, who were camping out in the area in order.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with reporting news – when it’s actually news, as in this case, and not a memo about the president’s lack of an iPad – but apparently the some 2,000 press members who were gathered there weren’t nearly as interested in celebrating the safe return of a man to his family.

They were much more interested in who got to break the news first:

As Gael Favennec reports for MySinchew.com, “when Avalos appeared on the television they were watching, to cheers, applause and horns throughout the camp where the miners’ families were staying, the news workers rushed forward as one to capture the historic moment.

“Avalos’s father Alfonso, tears running down his face, said ‘It’s a huge joy. I’m so happy.’

“Then, as Alfonso hugged his wife Maria Silva, things turned ugly.

“Reporters pushed and shoved to be the first to interview them, pulling on the hair of those in the way, throwing punches and almost knocking others to the ground.

“The family retreated, and a frightened-looking Maria angrily hit out at journalists close to her with the Chilean flag bunched in her hand.

“But the media mob, five-deep, kept advancing, crushing furniture and finally toppling the family’s humble tent.”

Nice, huh? If this is any indication, the media is extremely self-serving. And if the first two articles reveal anything else, the news corp. believe its best interests lies with the liberal agenda.

Clearly, they’re not only uncompassionate, opportunistic and unethical, but they’re also major idiots.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

The Future of our Country isn’t Lookin’ too Good these Days

Today, I face a big decision…

Should I concentrate on the sorry state our country is in? Or on one of Yahoo!’s featured stories – complete with pretty pictures – of nitwit Kim Kardashian bowling in high heels?

Clearly, this isn’t an easy choice to make, as they’re both of national importance. Though both might be eclipsed by a subject that has people everywhere up in arms over for the past few days: the new Gap logo.

Sure, we could be asking ourselves what we can do for our country instead of focusing on pointless “celebrities” who seem set on breaking their ankles, or raising awareness about our distaste for something so uncontroversial as a bland and boring clothing store.

But where’s the fun in that?

Abraham Lincoln once said that, “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” And if that’s true, we’re really in trouble, considering that our young people – and too many of our adults – today seem much more focused on inconsequential details than on the increasingly frightening facts right in front of their faces.

It doesn’t seem like much of a leap in logic to attribute that mental lethargy to what we teach – or don’t teach – in the classroom. When our curriculums subtly or blatantly push group thinking on subjects like evolution vs. creation, global warming vs. climate cycles, socialism vs. capitalism, etc., we do our youth – and in the end, ourselves – a serious disservice.

I still remember the day in my history of science class at Messiah College, where I turned in my study sheet for the chapter on Darwin and evolution. The professor always left an area blank for us to write any questions we might have, and I took advantage of it that time around by writing that I might have a more positive opinion on evolution if somebody would simply explain the process of carbon dating.

I got the study sheet back a few days later with the response: “What’s to understand about carbon dating? It’s very simple.”

In other words, why was I even bothering to think outside of the box?

If this is the Present…?

It rather makes you rather wonder what they were teaching back when Gore Vidal was in school. Perhaps he came up with his silly ideas about the Republican Party on his own, but in that case, he’s even more a sad little man than I originally thought.

Here’s a taste of one of his more recent interviews:

“[Republicans] are the small-town enemies of everybody. They just dislike everyone. They couldn’t come out and say: ‘We don’t want a black president’ – we’ve finally got past that roadblock. So what they did was set out slaughter the opposition party, the Democrats.”

There are some arguments I’m willing to spend time tearing to shreds, and then there are the ones that are so totally insane that they’re worth only a roll of my eyes. Guess which one this is.

There’s a reason why almost half of Obama’s supporters don’t support him to the extent they used to, if they do at all. It’s called the economy. No amount of Kim Kardashian pictures can change the bleak unemployment rate or the fact that things aren’t getting any better despite the much hyped “summer of recovery” and “end” of the recession.

While the average American may or may not be blissfully unaware of how the state of California is so broke it has to sell 24 government buildings to private investors in order to raise cash, they’re much more likely to notice when they don’t get an expected raise in their Social Security checks… because the government screwed up its spending too much this time or when they have to cut back on their monthly budgets.

But here’s the really scary thought: If our politicians are this purposely clueless or corrupt now, and if our children today are constantly bombarded by images and audio of people much more focused on shallow materialism, what will our legislators, our legislation and our country look like a decade or two down the road?

I don’t foresee a pretty picture unless we start drastically changing.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Miley Cyrus, Lil Wayne and Nudity: Obama’s Woodstock

Try looking up the term “streaker” or “nude” on the CNN, ABC News, CBS News or MSNBC websites. For that matter, do a preliminary search for the same terms on the supposedly anti-Obama, Democrat-bashing, opportunistic hotbed of conservative scumbags, Fox News.

What you’ll more than likely come up with is exactly what I did: Nothing.

You might very well be asking right now why you would ever want to look up those terms in the first place. (And if you’re not automatically asking that question, well, I’ll try not to judge.) But there’s a very good reason to do just that…

There was a streaker at one of Obama’s recent rallies. Didn’t hear anything about it? Neither did I, until I checked out the UK’s DailyMail, which features a prominent picture of a nude guy being led away from the Philadelphia arena that President Obama gave a speech this weekend.

Incidentally, this man says his actions weren’t done in protest of Obama, and that he even voted for the president in 2008. There’s a shocker, I know. Who would have thought that somebody so immature could be a Democrat-leaning voter?

Most telling, perhaps, was the Vote 2010 sign – complete with the Obama “O” – the cops used to cover up his genitals as they marched him to the car.

(It’s so tempting to run with at least half a dozen jokes right now, but I’m going to at least attempt to be mature.)

A Little Hussy and a Littler Man

Since I’m being gracious, I might as well cut the major news networks some slack for not reporting the bizarre occurrence. After all, there’s more important information to cover, like the uproar over 17-year old Miley Cyrus’ music video for her latest single, “Who Owns My Heart.”

Parents are getting up in arms over the latest level the pop princess has stooped to, namely wearing blindfolds in bed and behaving like an overall self-involved hussy. Then again, that last one is a norm for her, so I can’t say I’m shocked at all by her latest exploits. Really, compared to just about every other music video out there, hers really isn’t all that unique.

Ho hum.

Speaking of tacky and inappropriate music though, President Obama may want to add the silly child to his iPod list of other immature twits, like Lil Wayne.

Thomas Chatterton Williams, author of “Losing My Cool: How a Father’s Love and 15,000 Books Beat Hip-Hop Culture,” takes great issue with the president admitting to such listening choices:

“Lil Wayne,” he says, “is… a modern-day minstrel who embodies the most virulent racist stereotypes that generations of blacks have fought to overcome. His music is a vigorous endorsement of the pathologies that still haunt and cripple far too many in the black underclass.”

Not that I disagree with Williams, but I’d also like to add a comment about the rapper’s notoriously indecent treatment of women, both in his music videos and in his lyrics. Some of his more tame lines include the following from one of Shakira’s songs he participates in:

“I’m the cashier I change girls / You can go up my crane girl / And I’ma go down that drain girl.”

If you can make those semi-indiscernible lines sound even slightly respectful towards the female sex, than you probably work PR for a politician or should apply to the Obama administration… because they could sure use your skills…

In Over Their Heads

Even Time magazine has to acknowledge that the Obama presidency is in big trouble these days. If you visit its website today, you’ll find Mark Halperin’s article, “Why Obama Is Losing the Political War,” which reads:

“With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters.”

That might be because of situations like the one down in North Texas, where Tropical Storm Hermine wreaked havoc last month. The damage was so bad that Governor Rick Perry made a formal request to the Obama administration for 13 counties to be declared disaster areas… a request that would have garnered them financial assistant… and one that was ultimately denied.

I personally don’t think that the federal government has any business doling out money to such causes in the first place, but isn’t that exactly the mentality that liberals push in the first place?

Apparently though, that nice thought only holds up for people they can get some political or financial gain out of.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Politics as Usual

Today’s blog is going to be an all-over-the-place summary of today’s news, but with one common theme: politics as usual.

Let’s start out with what gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown – or one of his aides – said about his Republican opponent, Meg Whitman, last month.

For some reason, this is only coming to light now. No idea why, nor do I really care that much in this case, largely because I think the whole thing is a non-issue.

Mr. Brown apparently called up the Los Angeles Police Protective League in early September to encourage its endorsement. Since the intended party wasn’t available right then, he left a voice message… and then somehow idiotically forgot to hang up the phone before having a battle tactics chit chat with one of his aides… in which one of them very strongly insinuated – if not flat-out said – that Whitman was a whore.

So why do I think this case of calling your opponent a gender-specific derogatory name is a non-issue? Possibly because it was supposed to be private, unlike Alan Grayson’s much more public sexist comments in the past.

After all, who hasn’t called somebody they don’t like a nasty name on the sidelines before?

I certainly can’t judge on that front, though I normally stick with what I see as demeaning terms, such as “twit” or archaic words like “wench,” which are incidentally very fun to say. “Whore” and similar naughty words are typically too gutter trash for my taste.

Was it mature of him to use or agree with using the description “whore” about his political enemy? Of course not. But if that’s the worst thing he says on the sidelines, then I’m quite sure he has several one-ups on politicians of both stripes.

Rory Reid Talks from Both Sides of His Mouth

What are politicians best known for?

Regardless of whether you answered lying, kissing up, manipulating or underestimating the intelligence of their constituents, you’d be right.

An A+ all around!

Not so much for Nevada gubernatorial candidate Rory Reid, the son of elitist wretch, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. He gets a big fat F for creativity.

In a televised debate, he had the following to say:

“I don’t deny, however, that Nevada needs to be vigilant on this issue. The [healthcare] law that was passed gives time for the new system to go into effect, but there is potential for it to put significant pressure on states because Medicaid rates could go up significantly.”

This was after he stated his support for the bill by voicing his opposition to the ongoing legal battles against it.

Double speak much? The word “vigilant” carries some pretty serious connotations with it. People don’t advise you to be “vigilant” against bunny rabbits getting into your garden. Instead, they do so against very serious, very threatening and very probable dangers.

So either Mr. Reid doesn’t understand the English language very well – not that far-fetched a conclusion considering his liberal leanings and the U.S.’s current immigration policies – or he’s trying to shamelessly court voters on both sides of the aisle.

Not really sure which one it is.

Fudged Numbers…

Not too far away from Nevada, in the broken and bleeding state of California, we have news of a scandalous cover-up… for political purposes!

I know, it’s shocking, isn’t it? But try to pull yourself together enough to read on all the same.

“California grossly miscalculated pollution levels in a scientific analysis used to toughen the state’s clean-air standards, and scientists have spent the past several months revising data and planning a significant weakening of the landmark regulation, The Chronicle has found…”

The article goes on to report how originally, “scientists” estimated that there was 340% more pollution entering local air spaces than actually was the case, as found out by the California Air Resources Board.

340% is kinda a big difference. So once again, we’re faced with a choice of judgment… Either the original men and women who conducted the study are grossly uneducated in their field and/or negligent at their jobs, or they were paid off somehow to suit some wider political theory… say, maybe, global warming?

Just saying.

And Bridges to Nowhere

I feel as if something needs to be said about Massachusetts as well right now, where they’re spending $4.6 million buckaroos to fix a pony bridge.

Oh right, according to Steve Olanoff, part of the Friends of the Blue Hills, it isn’t just horses that use the bridge. He leads hikes over it too.

If you think that $4.6 million in state funds is a bit much to fix a single, non-necessary, leisure-activity pathway… well then, Amy Mullin has absolutely no good argument against you.

Owner of the nearby Blazing Saddles Equestrian Center, the obviously brain dead liberal has this to say about the project:

“How many other misappropriations have been given through the state for financial funding? You can ride here for an hour, an hour-and-a-half on this side. It’s fun but it gets boring. But once that bridge is back, you can ride five, six hours.”

Oh! I get it now! Thanks Amy. You’re spot on: It’s perfectly fine to waste money we don’t have if we’ve already wasted other money we don’t have.

And I’m sure that the Founding Fathers would agree with you on the whole “boring” defense too. That’s what they fought for, after all, right? So that future Americans could be properly entertained for “five, six hours” instead of just a measly one and a half.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

The Media’s World Looks Very Different than the Real One

It’s official: The media is grossly biased. Not that it hasn’t been obvious for years now, but all the same, I feel as if I have to point it out.

If there’s a Democrat president in office, automatically be wary of any positive reports that appear. If there is a Republican president, then regard any negative reports with suspicion.

And yes, I used the terms “Democrat” and “Republican” instead of “liberal” and “conservative” for a reason. Former president George Bush was hardly your ideal conservative. With all due respect and thanks to the man for keeping the country safe, he spent and allowed a lot of money to be spent that he had no business meddling with.

Yet despite his liberal use of funds – real and imagined –the media still despised him. Compare their intensely negative coverage of “W” to the velvet glove treatment they give to their messiah, Barack Obama. They’re all too quick to report whatever flattering information they can about the economy during his administration. The problem is – or maybe to them, it isn’t a problem whatsoever – is that they then have to go out and correct themselves days, weeks or months later.

When they covertly praise Obama for ending the recession in his first few months of office, remember that they’re merely the partisan, unethical fan club of an elitist idea: liberalism. In other words, the economy hasn’t improved like they’re saying. Even somebody like Warren Buffett, who supported and continues to support President Obama, will tell you that.

When they write pretty things like, “The number of planned layoffs at U.S. firms rose slightly in September, though it was the second lowest level of the year [emphasis added],” recognize that this is not a good thing, no matter how they try to spin it… not to mention that they’ll probably have to revise that down again before November sets in.

If it Looks Bad, Leave It to the Media to Clean Up a Bit

As the previous example illustrates, the media doesn’t do a good job of covering negative information these days even when they do deign to acknowledge a cloud in the economic sky.

If a Republican was in office right now, I wonder how the press would have spun Goldman Sachs’ prediction of two main scenarios going forward into the next six to nine months: “A fairly bad one in which the economy grows at a 1 ½ percent to 2 percent rate through the middle of next year and the unemployment rate rises moderately to 10 percent, and a very bad one in which the economy returns to an outright recession.”

More than likely, instead of the headline Bloomberg did run – “Goldman Sachs Says U.S. Economy May Be ‘Fairly Bad’” – it would have read something more like, “Goldman Sachs Sees Further Economic Trauma Ahead.”

What the Media will and Won’t Cover

You really have to go digging for straight up negative coverage these days, though surprisingly, MSN.com does actually feature one fairly straightforward piece in its business section.

Then again, it’s about how badly Greece is doing. Not the U.S. The same goes for how Ireland received yet another downgrade to its credit rating due to the “exceptional and greater-than-expected cost” of its bailouts. Bloomberg was fine reporting that.

And you have to go all the way across the Atlantic Ocean to read about the International Monetary Fund’s dire comparison of U.S. and European banks as “Achilles” heels.

The much more conservative (i.e. honest) leaning Wall Street Journal did make it a point to write up on how “Middle-class Americans made their deepest spending cuts in more than two decades, slashing spending on such discretionary items as restaurant meals and alcohol during the recession.”

But what about how Joe Biden said he would “strangle” Republicans if he hears them tell him “about balancing the budget” one more time? Sure, he said he was using hyperbole, but if a Republican had said that, don’t you think that would have generated some buzz?

I checked out CNN, MSN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS news – both their main pages and political sections – and found no mention of such unbecoming language.

Though on ABC, you will find the headline “Mexican Pirate Attack? Wife’s Story Questioned on Both Sides of Border.” It’s so nice of them to obviously express doubts about a possible traumatized victim – whether guilty or innocent, I don’t know – but not about our obviously corrupt government.

And they wonder why they have to keep downsizing their staffs… maybe it’s because their so-called news amounts to nothing more than blatant and childish opinion.