Two morning questions:
Recent Comments
freedomfairy01 on Oklahoma Is Not Ok Tonigh… Lola-at-Large on Simple Answer Propertius on Simple Answer conner43 on 3 Scandals, No Story. Matt Cavanaugh on 3 Scandals, No Story. Thank You!
Buy This Movie!
On the radio!
The Obama campaign is obnoxious because his writers and supporters and campaign managers are good at mudslinging and, since most campaigns are fear based events (fear of exposure, fear of losing, fear of the loss of power and money et al), the intensity gathers as the fear levels rise. Look at the percentages – when Obama’s popularity drops the smear campaigns get worse. Are Obama supporters insane? No, not in my opinion. They are not supporting a political platform or even believing his promises any more, they are doing a “feel good” by supporting a person who says he is African American (which was his first lie as he is bi-racial and why not celebrate that?) and it is “right” to support a “minority” isn’t it? I do not believe that Obama supporters are thinking, I believe that they are feeling. End of story.
Ellen, your comment gets a big “like” in my book.
Big like from me too.
“I do not believe that Obama supporters are thinking, I believe that they are feeling. End of story.”
That is the long and short of it, right there.
Ellen, fantastic. You hit the nail on the head. Obama is about how one feels. That poor man Soptic, who I actually feel somewhat sorry for since it seems he is still grieving the loss of his wife, stated that ‘that’s how I felt’ about what Romney did to him. Or, words to that effect.
How could he BE more African American? His dad was African and his mom was American.
The over focus — nay, the obsession — with “feelings” is exactly what is wrong with this country & which led directly to a fraud like Obama with no resume & no accomplishments being thrust upon us. All the special little snow flakes have been taught that how they “feel” is more important than the consequences of their actions; more important than reality; more important than examining something with rational thought. How you “feel” about something trumps all else.
Obama actually said not that long ago his “mistake” during his first term was not telling a “good story.” For the love of cheese! Never mind tripling the deficit, never mind down grading our credit rating, never mind 42 months of unemployment at +8%, never mind drones killing innocent people (and US citizens), this country just needs a “story” so we can “feel good” about ourselves.
The Obama team’s scorched earth policy worked so well in Chicago, why change ?
The obots are still fixated on hating Sarah Palin. What does that say about them?
They still hate Hillary more.
^ LL, I don’t see what you’re referencing AT ALL.
Imo, the real question might be ‘are we a country of Chicago voters?’ You know, uneducated and corruptible.?
I have commented so many times on O’s disdain and disrespect for the average person, I am sick of it myself, but don’t know how to reach any other conclusion.
Only Chicago? Hmmm…O do believe he was voted in as President and I do not believe Chicago had the only say. Why single out a particular people? He was voted in. Period. Respect the office, not the man, fine but singling out a particular “type” is frightening to me.
Chicago politics is notoriously corrupt. The obamalonians have exported their mafia methods to the national political scene. I see nothing wrong in pointing that out.
John, have you seen this? http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-09/exclusive-romney-interview-on-humility-and-tax-returns
He adopted my talking point:
Bolding mine. This is good strategy: tell the truth, point out the hypocrisy, and let the voters decide.
Tamerlane, I see nothing at all wrong in pointing out whatever you want to point out. John makes this blog possible for all of us to say what we need to say. Thank you John for creating this blog and I hope people are donating to it!
Hating Hillary? Palin? So long as we have hate, we have a country, nay a world, divided, wanting to label, wanting to war, wanting to destruct. What can we construct? We have proven ourselves to be very capable of DEstructing how about doing some CONstructing, starting here? Just a thought.
Interesting perspective, Ellen. My father used to say that those who can not create have the desire to destroy. I’ve always been at a loss as to why first Hillary and then Palin generated so much shameless and vocal hate. It was like ObamaNation needed a punching bag and these two women became their targets. Being happy and enthusiastic about their candidate wasn’t enough for them. They needed a wicked witch of the west to pummel. To this day, when I think back, it still stuns me. All I know is if Romney wants to win in November, his VP better have a penis.
The reasons to loathe Palin have nothing whatsoever to do with her gender. She’s stupid, mean and retrograde and put herself in the spotlight.
Jay – Facts please on the stupidity, meanness and “retrogradeness” of Palin. I’ll provide you an example. Obama is stupid (believes Austrians speak “Austrian,” didn’t know who liberated Auschwitz or when the march on Selma occured, thinks there are 57 states and oh . . doesn’t understand basic economics such as the fact that private sector resources fund the public sector.).
Obama is mean (stabbed his mentor, Alice Palmer, in the back and destroyed her chance at reelction to further himself, has employed some of the most thuggish tactics around to win his elections, played “99 problems and a bitch ain’t one” on election night in the Iowa primary clearly referring to HRC, told HRC at a debate that she is “likeable enough,” called practically everyone who ran against him or criticized him racist at one time or another, including the Clintons.)
Obama is retrograde (employs McCarthyite tactics in his campaigns – Romney is a felon and a murderer, now let him prove it’s not true; has not only claimed the right to assassinate anyone abroad, including US citizens, without due process, but actually carried it out – certainly a throwback to 50′s and 60′s CIA and covert US tactics overseas).
Your turn.
Really Run? You haven’t heard her speak? You haven’t heard her state that Alaska’s proximity to Russia qualifies as foreign policy experience?
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/26/palin_defends_remark_on_russia/
You haven’t heard her views on abortion?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/01/palin-on-abortion-id-oppo_n_122924.html
That’s just fucking MEAN.
You haven’t heard about her church and her retrograde religious beliefs?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/02/palins-church-may-have-sh_n_123205.html
You haven’t heard HER????
Why would you even ask such a question? That’s like asking ‘when did W ever misspeak’?
My point is that people hate Palin because she’s a woman is like saying that people hate Godzilla because he’s Japanese.
I have heard her and know her views. Have you heard the President? And, you’re damn right I asked the question because I’m sick of Obamaphiles making wild statements like this – - their own conventional wisdom about people who had the temerity to go up against their lord and master – and expecting everyone else to just accept them because as if they are true.
1) She had a completely valid point that being a governor of a state with proximity to a foreign country meant she interacted with their diplomats on questions of trade, energy, etc. meant she had more foreign policy experience – AS A VEEP CANDIDATE – than Obama did as the presidential candidate given he had ZERO. And, couldn’t even be bothered to convene one meeting of his senate foreign relations subcommittee to gain any. What’s stupid about that. The only thing stupid about that whole episode are the many people – Obama fans all – who really believed that a joke Tina Fey made actually was said by Palin.
2) She is against abortion in all cases, except when the life of the mother is in the balance, and is absolutely consistent about that fact with both her own body and her children. Although I don’t believe anything Huff Po writes about Palin, I’ll take the truncated phrase from Palin that article repeats as fact. She believes that – even if a fetus is conceived through rape, it is still a life and she wouldn’t support the aborting of it. She also didn’t say she would prevent it if her daughter chose differently. She said SHE would oppose it. I think that is more morally consistent than people who claim they are against abortion becuase it is a taking of a life, but think it’s ok if someone is raped. THAT makes no moral sense to me. You can disagree with her all you want, but again – how does her stance make her MEAN, the same way as Obama – who is clearly just an incredible asshat.
3) Man- again with the Huff Po as a source? If that’s all you read, no wonder you have an ill-informed and narrow-minded belief system. And, what you link to is not at all about what Palin has said she believes, it’s only about what the Pastor of her church has said! Honestly, you really don’t know what “evidence” means do you? I gave you examples of things Obama himself specifically said and did and you give examples of something someone else said who preaches at Palin’s church? Not comparable. For one thing, I certainly didn’t believe everything my pastor said when I used to attend the Presbyterian church, so I definitely wouldn’t accept that all his beliefs and statements were mine. For another, an Obama supporter really wants to ascribe ALL the beliefs of the pastor of a church someone attends to them?! Really?! Want to take a second to think about that?!
My point stands – nothing you’ve linked to establishes stupidity, meanness, retrograde beliefs.
Run, you think I’m an Obamaphile? Well I suppose that’s fair, since I can’t tell what the hell you are. I’m guessing a conservative, since you’re a Palin apologist. Either that or a member of the ‘women do no wrong’ society.
You asked for ‘facts’. Well, stupidity, mean-ness and retrograde thinking is all subjective I suppose. The fact is I find her those things based on her public statements and performance in front of the camera when unscripted. You don’t. Those are ‘facts’ of some kind I guess.
And since the bee in your bonnet seems repetitively focused on compering Palin to Obama — an element that you simply interjected and ran with all on your own that had NOTHING to do with me or what I said — I guess you don’t read my comments here at all. Which is fine. Please scroll past them. Anyone who respects Palin as a moral and bright person isn’t someone I’m going to agree with much.
Seen plenty of your comments, Jay. Not that hard to figure you out. And, the reason I kept comparing your statements about Palin to Obama is because: 1) you go out of your way to lob random insults at Palin whiile acting like you are trying to be oh so objective about Obama all the while doing your damndest to defend his incompetence every chance you get, so it seemed like the right thing to do; 2) If Palin hadn’t come on the scene as part of a team of candidates against Obama I feel incredibly confident you wouldn’t harbor these feelings of hatred against her even if you knew her record; 3) your “I don’t care about her gender” is bogus – since McCain had the same positions as Palin and he doesn’t get lobbed vicious ad homimen, non sequitur attacks by you.
And, I may be conservative; I may not. I don’t care what you think I am. But, I do care about truth and fairness and calling someone stupid, mean and retrograde with no to specious evidence is not only unfair but a prime example of the debased dialogue we have today in this country.
I also love the fact that a woman like Palin can come from a relatively humble upbringing, make her own way in the world, start a business with her husband (her first and only one), rise – on her own and against a male establishment – to the highest public position in her state. In essence succeed wildly all on her own, with her own brains and grit and willpower, in an environment that is one of the more alpha-male dominant and still be considered stupid by so-called and self-identified “smart people” just because her world view differs from theirs. Hey – Jay- why don’t you go out and become governor of a state and then we’ll see whether you have the credibility to call someone else stupid.
Yes, deadenders, yet he wants people to see him as only Black and he is bi-racial which is great – why not celebrate that?
gxm17, I hear ya yet I am an optimist and I believe the day will come when genitals, color, creed et al have nothing to do with why a person becomes President.
They have always been this way, this is what got them, all their wins. This is “Chicago” style politics on the big white way! also touring, nationally. You are witnessing how the Obama cast and crew works and operates. It is great theater, if you can stomach it! It closes permantly on November 6, nationwide.
I think you all will find Anthony’s post at Lola’s website worth a read. Some news network is actually doing fact-checking. It’s CNN.
http://peacocksandlilies.com/2012/08/09/cnn-returns-to-responsible-journalism/#comment-5032
Thanks for promoting that, fembots. Much appreciated.
Lola, of course. It’s just too juicy and fun.
ellen my comment was misunderstood, I certainly know that not only Chicago, but a lot of other cities as well, contributed to O’s victory.
I was generalizing about the type of voter who falls for the O line of persuasion. One would have to be entitled, greedy, gullible, and ignorant of political realities to buy whatever O was selling. There were enough Chicagoans like that to form his power base and start his journey. They liked his smile, he made them feel important for a millisecond and they took the bait. Politicians are like that most everywhere. Like it or not , the ones who get elected tend to be representative of the tyof people who sent them to the dance in the first place . In evaluating O’s lies, distortions, and attempted annihilation of those who oppose him, we get a glimpse into the type of people who support him. Those types are everywhere. some voters love a rabid bull dog, they mistake viciousness for strength. Especially when most of the dirty work is done by surrogates.
Ok, conner, I hear you. Our elected officials reflect something in the voters en masse. Yes, true indeed.
The Obama campaign is so obnoxious, nasty and despicable BECAUSE Obama supporters mentally ill.
The inmates are running the asylum.
Words of clarity.
And they’re doing a fine job. Let’s leave them to their own devices. They’re doing just fine…
Taking pictures and naming names
http://freebeacon.com/ten-donors-financing-obamas-super-pac-smears/
From commenter cj at TCH
John, to answer your question — because they’re allowed to be. There is no check by the MSM. We have seen the media slowly degenerating into mere mouthpieces for the status quo for a long time. During the build up to Iraq, reporters were more concern about protecting themselves from being killed from combat fire than questioning the claims of the Bush Admin, a la the new designation of “embedded journalist.” Remember that? But since 2008 it just seemed to rise to a deafening crescendo of ridiculousness. Investigative journalists lost all sense of rationality as they reported the great feeling Obama gave them (tingly-legs, Obama man love, etc.). Obama’s words and claims were never analyzed. Even when Rezko hearing was going on. Who went to Chicago to report on it, or Obama’s involvement as a “witness.” Obama’s books were used as evidence of his qualifications (on AAR radio even). The press went all nutzy-kookoo on us. They stopped asking basic questions. As the soft questions were increasing so as not to offend Obama, his campaign claims became more outrageous, and this just continued during his first term. With CNN and even Mika admitting the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of Obama’s latest ad, perhaps we’ll see some more objectivity, or at least god forbid, some questioning from the 4th Estate. Then maybe they’ll be the check on hypocrisy and narrative control they are supposed to be.
To Run_dmc @Jay Floyd above: BRAVO!
To Jay Floyd re your conversation about Sarah Palin above: since I chimed in last week, just want to tell you you’re spot on here; and it’s so obvious, I’m (maybe very belatedly) taking another look at the gender/feminist issue you’ve raised.