Archive for September, 2011

September 8, 2011

NEW MEDIA MEME: THAT RICK PERRY IS SOOOOO CRAZY FOR CALLING SOCIAL SECURITY A PONZI SCHEME, RIGHT? (EVEN THOUGH IT IS A PONZI SCHEME)

Overheard on Hardball (Very rough interpretation)

Chris Matthews: WOW! THAT GUY CALLED SOCIAL SECURITY A PONZI SCHEME.

Analyst #1: Yeah, you can’t do that.

Analyst #2: Yeah, you can’t do that. Even though it is a Ponzi scheme.

Analyst #1: Exactly. I mean it is kind of a Ponzi scheme. Technically. But you can’t say it.

Chris Matthews: YEAH! I mean, I guess it IS a Ponzi scheme. But, WOW! So this guy, Perry, HATES Social Security.

Advertisements
September 5, 2011

HAS WHITE HOUSE DECLARED OFFICIAL ACT OF WAR AGAINST TEA PARTY? Will Obama condemn Hoffa’s words or does he support violence against Tea party by proxy?

UK Telegraph — Toby Harnden: “…the statements today by Jimmy Hoffa Jr and Vice President Joe Biden demean the presidency and, tactically speaking, are stupid own goals.”

Biden, whose mouth has long been a liability for Obama, was at an AFL-CIO rally when he told union members: “You are the only folks keeping the barbarians from the gates…the other side has declared war on labour’s house.”

…uttered publicly by someone chosen by the White House to introduce Obama and by the sitting vice-president at a time when Obama is calling for a bipartisan coming together to tackle the economy. To add to their foolishness, they follow on from Obama’s sensible call in January for “civility” in public discourse and for people to talk “in a way that heals, not a way that wounds”.

Hoffa’s comments were much worse than Biden’s, though the vice-president’s demeanour suggests he could be a liability on the campaign trail (I’d wager there’s a campaign plan for him to be used only in “rev up the base” type events). Put together, they are embarrassing enough to require an apology from Obama.

But will Obama have the political and moral courage to repudiate a powerful union boss and his own vice-president?”

September 5, 2011

THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO..WTF?!

Why is it that the media has no problem labeling Tea Party constitutionalists too right wing and extreme for America, but the same media blushes in embarrassment with any discussion that Obama is a socialist??

Btw….what’s so extreme about wanting a balanced budget? What’s so wing-nutty about taking the Constitution seriously and not merely paying lip service to it? What’s so crazy about wanting to rein in government entitlements and, by extension, the size, scope, and reach of a bloated, inefficient government bureaucracy? What’s so radical about disdain for ineffective social programs that have for too long been subsidized by tax-payers (unaware of where there money goes and what it’s wasted on)?

September 5, 2011

TEAMSTERS THUG HOFFA: “President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out”; Obama has yet to denounce Hoffa or his union army

Real Clear Politics: “Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa had some profane, combative words for Republicans while warming up the crowd for President Obama in Detroit, Michigan on Monday.

“President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong,” Hoffa added.”

Is Obama subtly encouraging violence against Tea Partyers?

September 5, 2011

KEYNSIANS: “Hey man, you know where I can get some stimulus?…I need that good stimulus, man…”

Matthew Mitchell: “The tendency for spending to ratchet up during a crisis is important because it suggests why fiscal stimulus is unlikely to be economically helpful. In an oft-repeated quote, economist and stimulus advocate Lawrence Summers has argued that stimulus ought to be “timely, targeted, and temporary.” Otherwise, it is unlikely to be economically helpful. The fact that spending rarely returns to pre-crisis levels suggests that governments may find it impossible to implement stimulus in the way Keynesians such as Summers would like to see.

[Mercatus Center]

September 5, 2011

CAREFUL AMERICA, YOU KNOW HOW SENSITIVE OBAMA CAN GET: 57% Favor Health Care Repeal, 54% Say Repeal Likely (Rasmussen)

RASMUSSEN: Obama Presidential Tracking Poll:  “20% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -23

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president’s performance. Fifty-five percent (55%) at least somewhat disapprove.

“57% Favor Health Care Repeal, 54% Say Repeal Likely”

GALLUP: Obama: 42% Approval, 50% Disapproval

QUINNIPIAC (Sept. 1): “President Barack Obama’s overall job approval rating has sunk to an all-time low, as American voters disapprove 52 – 42 percent, compared to 47 – 46 percent approval in July, and among whites and men his approval has dropped into the 30s, according to a Quinnipiac University

PUBLIC POLICY POLLING (Far-Leftist polling outfit): “In our national polling for Daily Kos Barack Obama has hit a record low approval rating 3 weeks in a row now. He’s gone from 43/53 to 42/53 to now 42/54 in our poll this week.

What might be most noteworthy is this week’s poll is how bad Obama’s numbers are with a few key and usually dependable Democratic constituencies. He’s under water in union households at 44/47. He’s also under water with voters under 30 at 45/48. The Northeast tends to a pretty dependable region for Democrats but Obama’s under water there at 47/49. Obama’s usually been able to hold his ground with female voters but he’s under water with them too at 45/49. And even with African Americans his approval rating’s down to 76%, about as low as we’ve ever found it.”
September 4, 2011

EGGHEADS DECLARE TEA PARTIERS RACIST, UNEDUCATED RELIGIOUS NUTS

Post-climategate….a group of academics get together and arrive conclusions that align with their view of the world– what could go wrong?!

Gathering this weekend in Seattle for the annual American Political Science Association convention, several professors argued that tea party Republicans are more likely than other voters, and even than most others in the GOP, to harbor racial hostility, as judged by their answers in a broad pre-election survey administered in October 2010.”

Do these Professors ever get together and ask whether Liberals/Progressives are more likely to be clueless, economically illiterate socialists who loathe America? Just asking. Worth looking into, no? Would those same professors decline to do such a study because they find that conclusion too obvious or would they be stuck in the position of “what’s wrong with socialism”?

But like Mr. JacobsonMr. Abramowitz also said they were more likely to harbor racial resentment, which he judged based on their answers to questions such as whether blacks could succeed as well as whites if they “would only try harder,” and whether they agreed with the statement that Irish, Italians and Jews overcame prejudice and “blacks should do the same without any special favors.”

Mr. Abramowitz said tea party supporters were substantially more likely than other voters to question how much effort black Americans are making to advance themselves versus being held back by social factors.”

So questioning the motivation level to work as a cause of racial inequities is in itself racist? Examine the two attitudes below:

So a Tea Party person’s attitude is: “You can do anything you want in the world if you put in the hard work. You’re held back by nothing.”

A Leftist says: “the reason you can’t do anything is because of the circumstances that surround you, and you are completely powerless to help yourself and to change your station in life. Not without government help.”

Which perspective is more empowering? Which worldview harbors more prejudice?

[Read “Academics dub tea partyers devout, racist” at the washingtontimes.com]

September 3, 2011

KEY TO U.S. APPEAL ABROAD ? Forget Barack Obama. America’s Greatest Ambassador Has Always Been It’s Good Ole’ Fashioned (and Unapologetic) American Television Programs

 

September 2, 2011

ZURAWIK: “angry for letting myself believe in the TV imagery of a night in Grant Park in November”

ZURAWIK: “Not only isn’t Obama the gifted TV performer he seemed to be during the 2008 campaign, TV is now one of his worst enemies.

My first fuzzy notion of this idea came while I watched Obama address the nation after the debt ceiling compromise with its crackpot, kick-the-can centerpiece of a so-called Super Committee. Obama had performed pitifully during the crisis, and yet, here he was on TV thinking he could spin the economic embarrassment as “Good President Battles Bad Congress” or Responsible Adult reins in Mean, Selfish Children.”

But as I looked at the screen, I couldn’t help thinking how diminished Obama looked and how thin his voice sounded. I wondered if there actually was something happening physically with him.

So, I went back to a DVD I have of him speaking on election night 2008 in Chicago’s Grant Park.

Of course, I lost myself in a  flood memories as I watched. I remembered how that TV moment sent thousands of college students and others into the streets of Baltimore celebrating. And it was the TV moment, not just the election victory. Young viewers watching him onscreen wanted to share that energy in a communal, physical sense with others.

Viewing him now on TV in his promise-not-realized persona made me both sad for what might have been and angry for letting myself believe in the TV imagery of a night in Grant Park in November.

September 1, 2011

WSJ: Shelby Steele on “Obama and the Burden of Exceptionalism”

STEELE: “Yet there is something more than inexperience or lack of character that defines this presidency: Mr. Obama came of age in a bubble of post-’60s liberalism that conditioned him to be an adversary of American exceptionalism. In this liberalism America’s exceptional status in the world follows from a bargain with the devil—an indulgence in militarism, racism, sexism, corporate greed, and environmental disregard as the means to a broad economic, military, and even cultural supremacy in the world. And therefore America’s greatness is as much the fruit of evil as of a devotion to freedom.

Mr. Obama did not explicitly run on an anti-exceptionalism platform. Yet once he was elected it became clear that his idea of how and where to apply presidential power was shaped precisely by this brand of liberalism. There was his devotion to big government, his passion for redistribution, and his scolding and scapegoating of Wall Street—as if his mandate was somehow to overcome, or at least subdue, American capitalism itself.”

[Read Shelby Steele’s “Obama and the Burden of Exceptionalism” at the Wall Street Journal]