Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Like a bum

Saturday Williamson. Well, okay, Friday; whatevs. The opening quote is perfect.

The emperor-philosopher Marcus Aurelius once observed that if a man knew for certain that he would die the next day, or the day after that, he would care very much about which day it was to be, the difference being so slight, only if were among the most abject and degraded of souls. General Shinseki has nothing in front of him but degradation; a less abject man would already have resigned in acknowledgement of his own failure to meet his responsibilities and as a gesture of atonement to the nation he failed. Clinging to his position at this point can be a source of nothing other than shame. He is on his way out — why not leave with some honor?

Umm…because, since he’s a damned liberal willingly working for an illegitimate government, he has none?

I wrote in passing yesterday that if President Obama or the people of this country had any self-respect, he’d resign over the scandal of the Veterans Affairs hospitals, which needlessly sentenced an unknown number of American veterans to death through their combination of managerial incompetence, medical malpractice, and monstrously cruel indifference to their clients. Other heads of government have resigned for less. President Obama presented himself to the public as an authority in the field of health-care management and as an executive who not only would insist upon but also would in fact achieve the highest standards in transparent, honest, competent government. He has failed, comprehensively. An honest man acknowledges his failures.

Again: the very last descriptor anyone has any reason to be using for Barrack Hussein Obama is “honest.” He possesses not one single discernible shred of it. Even for a Leftist, the miserable worm stands out as the absolute apotheosis of amoral dishonesty.

We are all familiar with the flip side of that: Every time business picks up at a paper-plate factory in Sheboygan, the president attempts to seize credit for the three jobs therein created. If you had attended the 2012 Democratic convention, you’d have thought that Barack Obama personally pulled the trigger on Osama bin Laden and had donned green eyeshades to turn around the financial affairs of General Motors. Strangely, after having bragged about saving GM, the Obama administration wishes to accept no responsibility for the deadly, possibly criminal, andcertainly negligent actions of that firm during a period in which the U.S. government was its principal shareholder. Who knows how many people are dead or injured because GM refused to improve faulty switches? Who knows how many veterans are dead because of the VA?

If you want credit for the happy unexpected consequences of every snail hiccup across the fruited plains, then you have to take responsibility for the actions of your government — the things that are, after all, directly your responsibility.

Well, no; you should, certainly. But the Putz In Chief stands as proof irrefutable that you don’t have to. He doesn’t; he hasn’t; he won’t. Being a “liberal” means never having to say you’re sorry, and always having someone else to pin the blame on for the inevitable failures bound up in your wet-brained ideology. It also means mouthing the words “I take full responsibility” when it’s absolutely unavoidable, without ever having to take a single action that even vaguely hints at actually doing so.

President Obama clings to his sad little throne even more desperately than does General Shinseki. Faced with evidence of the incompetence of his administration, the president pronounced himself outraged, vowed that he would not tolerate it, would not stand for it — he in fact did everything except take responsibility for the actions of his government. The dishonesty and malpractice he vowed never to tolerate were, after all, the actions of his own administration, and the fact that they (may have) happened at some degree of separation from his own sacred person is hardly a defense. We made the head of the VA a cabinet-level position in order that the secretary might report directly to the president. The president, however, must be paying attention. President Obama was not.

It may not be fair, exactly, but one aspect of big-time leadership is that one must bear responsibility even for that which is not necessarily one’s fault. The responsibilities of the presidency did not descend upon an unsuspecting Barack Obama while he was going about his own inexplicable business in Chicago; he sought the office, twice, offering promises about what kind of a man he is, and what kind of leader — and he has failed to deliver.

We know full well what kind of man he is, what kind of leader, and he ain’t much of either.

Resignation is indeed the only honorable course of action remaining to Ogabe. But then again, if he were an honorable man–or anything other than a conniving, self-aggrandizing, egotistical, lazy, pig-ignorant, deceitful shitweasel–he never would have had the hubris and audacity to run for the office in the first place. He isn’t fit for it; in his entire life he’s had no experience whatsoever that would indicate he was. He’s dedicated his entire bootless existence to refuting and destroying everything the country is supposed to be all about. His contempt for the principles of our founding couldn’t be more obvious if he had them tattooed on his forehead in screaming neon colors.

His intent was never to be a good steward of the American legacy, but to destroy and remake it. He had to lie about all that to get votes, and was perfectly willing to do so. What on earth in any of that could possibly make anyone think he was ever going to do the honorable thing should he fail at properly executing an office he so evidently deems to be beneath him, a mere nuisance and distraction, but at the same time a (regrettably) necessary step in his quest for personal power?

Yes, he damned well ought to resign. But the simple fact that he currently infests the office at all, like a one-man plague of rats, is as sure an indicator as anyone should ever need that he won’t, and would never even imagine doing such a thing.

Oh, and in case you hadn’t seen it yet, my title up there is a reference to this.

Update! Dang it, forgot the link. Here t’is.

Share

Halp is (not) on the way

McCarthy, righteously apoplectic…and dead on the money.

You couldn’t help but feel for Robert Lovell. The retired brigadier general is haunted by the failure of AFRICOM, the U.S. military’s Africa Command, to respond when Americans were under siege in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. His congressional testimony this week was somber — no faux “What difference, at this point, does it make?” indignation, no “Dude, this was two years ago” juvenilia for him.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the State Department’s Sean Smith were killed in the early stage of the jihadist attack. By then, the actions that would surely have saved their lives — e.g., an adult recognition that Benghazi was no place for an American diplomatic facility, or at least the responsible provision of adequate security — had already been callously forsaken. It seems unlikely AFRICOM could have gotten there in time for them on that fateful night, though that does not come close to excusing the failure to try.

Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty are a different story. They fought valiantly for many hours after our military learned, very early on, that the battle was raging. Unlike AFRICOM, the SEALs did not stand pat. They ran to the sound of the guns. After saving over 30 of their countrymen, they paid with their lives. The armed forces, General Lovell recalled, knew that terrorists were attacking them. Yet no one came to their aid.

Lovell bears the burden of their abandonment with a heavy heart. His moving testimony made that clear. Still, his version of events is deeply unsatisfying. Why did AFRICOM fail to respond? “Basically,” he stammered, “there was a lot of looking to the State Department.” Unfortunately, we’re told Secretary Hillary Clinton and her minions were unclear “in terms of what they would like to have.” Come again? “They didn’t come forward with stronger requests for action.”

This Foggy Bottom focus had me groping for my pocket Constitution. Sure enough, Article II was as I remembered it. Much as Hillary Clinton may desire to be the commander-in-chief of the United States armed forces, that job does not belong to the secretary of state.

Read the rest of it, which his certainly good, if ultimately futile. Thus:

Benghazi is not about what Hillary Clinton or Leon Panetta or Susan Rice or Ben Rhodes or Jay Carney or Robert Lovell did or didn’t do. The only question is: What was President Barack Obama doing, and not doing, during the critical hours when his sworn duty required decisive action? Mr. Obama owes Americans a detailed answer. Now.

Yeah, well, we’re never going to get it. It would take something along the lines of red-hot branding irons applied to the bottoms of the miserable punk’s feet, and even then he’d probably just lie about it.

Share

The Republic of Texas squares off

Against the insatiably rapacious Imperial Federal government.

After Breitbart Texas reported on the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) intent to seize 90,000 acres belonging to Texas landholders along the Texas/Oklahoma line, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott questioned the BLM’s authority to take such action.

“I am about ready,” General Abbott told Breitbart Texas, “to go to the Red River and raise a ‘Come and Take It’ flag to tell the feds to stay out of Texas.”

Gen. Abbott sent a strongly-worded letter to BLM Director Neil Kornze, asking for answers to a series of questions related to the potential land grab.

“I am deeply concerned about the notion that the Bureau of Land Management believes the federal government has the authority to swoop in and take land that has been owned and cultivated by Texas landowners for generations,” General Abbott wrote. “The BLM’s newly asserted claims to land along the Red River threaten to upset long-settled private property rights and undermine fundamental principles—including the rule of law—that form the foundation of our democracy. Yet, the BLM has failed to disclose either its full intentions or the legal justification for its proposed actions. Decisions of this magnitude must not be made inside a bureaucratic black box.”

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart Texas, General Abbott said, “This is the latest line of attack by the Obama Administration where it seems like they have a complete disregard for the rule of law in this country …And now they’ve crossed the line quite literally by coming into the State of Texas and trying to claim Texas land as federal land. And, as the Attorney General of Texas I am not going to allow this.”

The good AG thinks legal action will suffice to stop the greedy, lawless thugs of the USSSA. I’m not so sanguine about that myself. But best of luck to him anyway.

(Via Insty)

Share

Figure it out already, ferchrissakes

If you truly are, to wit, “speechless, shocked. Stunned. Horrified. Befuddled. Aghast, appalled, thunderstruck, perplexed, baffled, bewildered and dumbfounded” at learning that the Obama administration is chock-a-block top to bottom with brazen liars who have no problem at all with falsifying anything and everything to promote their agenda and consolidate and expand their power, up to and including the Liar In Thief himself–well, sorry to have to say it, but that says a lot more about you than it does about them.

There’s just no possible excuse at this point for not being well aware of exactly who and what they are. I would hardly call McCardle a dope, and I’ve always liked her. But this is just ridiculous. And, frankly, embarrassing.

Update! Related? Yeppers, in that it’s just a restatement of something those of us non-ostriches already knew all too well.

The US government does not represent the interests of the majority of the country’s citizens, but is instead ruled by those of the rich and powerful, a new study from Princeton and Northwestern Universities has concluded.

After sifting through nearly 1,800 US policies enacted in that period and comparing them to the expressed preferences of average Americans (50th percentile of income), affluent Americans (90th percentile) and large special interests groups, researchers concluded that the United States is dominated by its economic elite.

The peer-reviewed study, which will be taught at these universities in September, says: “The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.”

Researchers concluded that US government policies rarely align with the the preferences of the majority of Americans, but do favour special interests and lobbying oragnisations: “When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.”

Yeah, well, that’s just how fascism works. The pitiful fact that some of us still prefer to erroneously refer to it as “crony capitalism” doesn’t change the reality of what it actually is.

You all be sure to vote in the show-elections this and every year, now. Otherwise, sanctimonious idiots will wag their fingers in your face and tell you you have no right to complain as your economic lifeblood continues to be sucked away by Republicrat politicians and the rigged machine they’ve established purely for their own benefit.

Hopeless update! Back to McCardle for a moment here: “I mean, I can certainly think of explanations, but I can’t quite bring myself to believe the worst of them.” Well, there you go, then. No matter how obvious and incontrovertible a plain fact is, if you “can’t quite bring” yourself to believe it, well, that’s all on you, I’m afraid. There are words and phrases useful for describing such an attitude, “willful blindness” being one of the more polite of them.

Share

Ask ’em for a glass of water instead; you might stand a chance of getting that

Okay, this is just hilarious.

House Republicans want Justice Department to provide details of IRS probe, possible interview with Lois Lerner
Two Republican leaders of the House’s investigative panel have asked the Justice Department to hand over information regarding its probe of the Internal Revenue Service’s illegal targeting of conservative groups.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder dated Thursday, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa of California and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, who chairs the panel’s Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee, specifically want information regarding any contact the Justice Department may have had with former IRS official Lois Lerner.

Yeah, well, you ain’t gonna get it. Not now, not ever. Now what are you feeble clowns gonna do about it?

Issa’s committee has been investigating the IRS scandal since last spring, when Lerner admitted her agency singed out groups for special scrutiny that included the conservative buzzwords “Tea Party,” “patriot” or “9/12” in their names.

And they will be for the next thousand years, for all the good it’s going to do and all the results they’re going to get. Gonna take a wee mite more than “asking” for things to get to the bottom of this and get it stopped, boys…assuming that’s even what you really want in the first place, rather than providing an ongoing dumbshow to whip up your dwindling base and keep them excited about returning more GOP enablers to Imperial Federal office instead.

Share

Your masters at play: lifestyles of the nomenklatura

His Royal Majesty King Barrack the Magnificent just declared the end of an “age of austerity” that existed only in his and his handlers’ imaginations. But as with all other dictators, austerity only ever applied to you, not himself and his royal entourage.

Go ahead, tell me again all about how Amerika is a “classless society” and all that rot. I mean, looking at the shots at the second link of nouveau riche Ruling Class swine enjoying themselves on your dime, it’s true all right, but not in the way anyone still capable of making such a ludicrous assertion would think.

Update! I need to include this, from the first link above:

When President Obama took office, debt held by the public equaled 39 percent of GDP. Today, it exceeds 73 percent. That’s its largest share of the economy since 1950, when we were still paying down the World War II debt. If one includes intergovernmental debt (such as the bonds in the Social Security and Medicare trust funds), our national debt exceeds 103 percent of GDP, bigger than our entire economy. Of course, the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare have continued to grow as well. Throw those in and, even using optimistic assumptions, our real debt runs as high as $83.9 trillion, roughly five times larger than our economy. (By some calculations, it’s even higher.)

Austerity? Not so much.

That’s okay. We’ll happily pay any price, bear any burden, to keep our Ruling Class pigs happy in their gold-encrusted wallows. That’s what really matters; I mean, come on, they’re worth it. Right?

Share

L’etat, c’est moi

Apres le deluge.

One question congressional and presidential candidates should be asked is how we should go about restoring the rule of law to our federal government. Not even during the world wars of the last century was the executive branch as brazen in assuming sweeping and unlegislated powers, changing laws without the consent of the legislative branch and ignoring laws it didn’t like.

Lawsuits are certainly one possible avenue to take, but a slow one–which is what the White House is counting on. It will do what it wants, and by the time an unfavorable decision is handed down, it will have done many other things. It will also find ways to circumvent such a decision or just ignore it altogether.

And then, of course, they go on to argue for…wait for it…lawsuits. Anyhoo.

The IRS got caught singling out conservative groups for harassment–and nothing was done. The President, with a straight face, told Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly that there wasn’t a “smidgen” of evidence of any corruption, and the Justice Department has made clear it’s deep-sixing any serious probe. But even worse is the fact that the IRS is readying regulation that will make it legal to deny tax exemptions to predominantly conservative groups, while it turns a blind eye to organizations more friendly to the Administration’s Big Government agenda.

To add insult to injury, the new IRS commissioner has decreed that the agency will pay $62 million in bonuses, declaring, “I firmly believe that this investment in our employees will directly benefit taxpayers and the tax system.”

The unending changes the White House has unilaterally made to ObamaCare have been well documented, the latest being the extension until 2016 of the employer mandate for midsize companies.

The ways in which the EPA has waged its jihad against the eastern coal industry has also been well documented–and science be damned. Forbes.com columnist Larry Bell cites a flagrant example of the EPA’s ignoring inconvenient science: “A group within EPA’s own Science Advisory Board (SAB) determined that the studies upon which that regulation [setting CO 2 -emission limits for new power plants] was based had never been responsibly peer reviewed and that there was no evidence that those limits can be accomplished using available technology.”

The EPA is also set to ban production and sale of 80% of current wood-burning stoves. Who knows what aroused its ire against these innocuous devices?

The fact that they hadn’t meddled nearly enough with them, natch, coupled with the fact that they figure now, they can–with impunity. This is another example of an article that’s difficult to stop yourself from just reposting all of. You’ll want to read all of it. Just the same, there’s one more quibble I need to make, regarding this:

Following the 2014 elections the Senate, which will then be Republican-controlled, can hold serious hearings on what this White House has been doing and can slash the budgets of recalcitrant departments and agencies (the GOP will also increase its majority in the House).

The election losses the Democrats will suffer will chasten a good part of the party, and many will work with Republicans to punish these breaches of trust by the White House. After all, wise Democrats will know that Republicans may well win the presidency in 2016, and they won’t want the new Chief Executive bending the rule of law the way President Obama has done out of habit.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say it: the Republicans have virtually no chance of winning the White House in 2016, and I very much doubt they’ll take the Senate this year. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me much if they lost the House too. I’ll explain all that in a later post; for now, just remember that you heard it here first.

Share

Extremist terrorist takes America hostage, refuses to enact Obamacare as written

If it’s so goddamned great, why is everybody running like hell from implementing it?

On Monday, Obama announced yet another delay to the law’s requirement. Now, in 2015, the penalties will only hit employers who have 100 or more employees. These larger employers will only be penalized if they fail to offer coverage to 70 percent of their full-time employees, rather than the 95 percent previously required. This will push headlines of businesses cutting full-time workers beyond the 2014 elections at a time when Obamacare’s mounting failures are already a millstone around the necks of Democrats.

The employer mandate move is merely the latest in a long list of unilateral changes Obama has made to his signature law. His administration delayed the implementation of income verification requirements for those applying for federal health insurance subsidies; minimized the impact of a “reinsurance fee” on labor union health care plans; and announced he wouldn’t enforce rules in the law that had spurred insurers to cancel millions of health care plans, undercutting his promise that those who liked their plan could keep it.

The actual text of the legislation he signed is secondary to what best serves his political purpose at the time. While Republicans are attacked for wanting to sabotage Obamacare whenever they propose reasonable changes through the constitutional legislative process, it has been deemed perfectly acceptable for Obama to unilaterally make sweeping alterations.

Well, of course. It’s what used to be quaintly deemed “royal privilege.” If Republicans had any balls at all, they’d ram it right down the son of a bitch’s throat by insisting it be implemented exactly as written, precisely on schedule. The American sheeple voted for it; they by God ought to get it, good and hard, all the way to the very hilt.

Share

“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty”

I could go on and on here about our Ruling Class and their fearful, well-armored isolation from the people they rule–up to and including the near-comical level of security provided to our Imperial pResident every time he dares to leave his Palace–but Bill’s question nutshells it nicely: “Wonder why they’re so terrified of the people they’re supposed to be ‘serving?’

Clearly, though, they don’t fear us enough. Yet.

Share

His way or the highway

His Pluperfect Majesty speaks.

President Obama likes to invoke his predecessors in the Oval Office, as all Presidents do, but in one sense he is unlike the others: Presidents traditionally try to reach a rough domestic consensus if they are faced with going to war abroad. Mr. Obama wants to smooth everything over abroad so he can get back to his favorite pursuit of declaring war at home.

At least that’s how it’s gone the last week, as Mr. Obama all but wrapped up that ghastly business in Syria and turned his attention to the real enemy—Republicans. Backed by the good offices of Vladimir Putin and the assurances of Bashar Assad, United Nations inspectors will now remove Syria’s chemical weapons from the battlefield. Congress doesn’t even have to vote on it, and the American people can forget the recent unpleasantness. Peace in our time.

Which means it’s now safe for Mr. Obama to begin the war he really wants to fight. The President spoke Monday afternoon at the White House in remarks pegged to the fifth anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the financial panic of 2008. But the financial crisis was merely an excuse for Mr. Obama’s real purpose, which was to demand unconditional surrender from his domestic opposition.

Mr. Obama did at least once or twice suggest he’s willing to compromise, sort of. He said he’ll call off his domestic strikes if Republicans agree to a framework for political and fiscal disarmament, including another tax increase on top of the one extracted as recently as January.

“As far as the budget goes,” the President warned, “it’s time for responsible Republicans who share these goals—and there are a number of folks out there who I think are decent folks, I’ve got some disagreements with them on some issues, but I think genuinely want to see the economy grow and want what’s best for the American people—it’s time for those Republicans to step up and they’ve got to decide what they want to prioritize.”

With malice for all, and charity toward none. Perhaps to honor Lincoln’s memory, Mr. Obama will suspend habeas corpus for those indecent folks who genuinely want what’s worst for Americans.

Soon enough, bub. Soon enough. But just like America itself–which was embroiled in a war with Muslim terrorists for twenty years before deigning to actually fight back, albeit even then only feebly and half-heartedly–the supposed “opposition” party refuses to notice the scrawny runt yapping at their ankles and kick him to the curb for good. Which means that he’s free to continue biting hunks out of them with perfect impunity, and that the country will continue to bleed from the wounds he’s inflicting.

Journalism 101 update! Read it, learn it, live it, lest your official Federal Journalism License be revoked and you be imprisoned for Crimes Against The State:

The Media Stylebook…
…dictates when Obama refuses to negotiate or compromise, we call that “steely,” “masterful,” and “commanding.” Possibly even “panty-dropping.”

When Republicans do it the media style guide demand it be called “hostage-taking,” “terroristic,” “partisan,” and “ideologically extreme.”

Please update your records accordingly.

Yes sir, I surely will, sir. Thank you, sir. Please, sir, I’ll just be moving along now if I may, sir. *tugs forelock, shuffles on back to J-school*

Share

Hit–and then hope

What you get when you launch a war run by anti-war juveniles who despise the military and understand not one thing about its effective use, having spent their entire lives railing against it rather than studying it.

Outrage is not a strategy. I thought military action always had to have a purpose behind it – so what is the end state here? Hit, and then hope?

I am not sure in what way even limited strikes help the people living in my constituency: how does this further Britain’s or America’s national security?

There cannot be a sane person in Britain who would not think it a good thing for us to get involved in the war in Syria if by doing so it would ease the horrors faced by the Syrian people – and dire risks to people in neighboring countries.

We must be guided not by our alliance to America, but by our duty to understand that military force should only be used in support of a clear purpose and with a clear objective in mind – in support of our national interest. I am yet to be convinced that there is a strong and clear-cut case that military action will deter the Syrian government from using chemical weapons – nor am I convinced that in 20 years time some other tyrant thinking of using chemical weapons will turn around and say to his or herself “Whoops, better not do that: remember what Obama, Cameron and Hollande did back in the summer of 2013”.

The use of chemical weapons was indeed a crime against all of humanity. But by firing one missile we are involving ourselves in a civil war on the side of a fractured opposition which includes people with proud links to Al Qaeda. By striking now, without clear cause and purpose, we risk consequences that we have not even thought of: this is a case of hit – and then hope.

Yon follows up:

Realizing that most Americans and our most trusted allies reject Syrian intervention, President Obama now puts it to the Congress to decide. This provides Obama a backdoor to save face, though it would have been more honest to ask Congress up front, had he truly cared about their opinions.

President Obama backed down and, oddly, is taking refuge behind Congress, when he could have said, “I do not have sufficient support from our allies or from other Americans, and as much as it is right to do this, the UN Security Council, many of our foreign allies, and the people who elected me, have spoken. I am, ultimately, a servant to American citizens. You have spoken. I have listened. There will be no attack at this time.”

Those words would reek of authenticity. Credibility would be bolstered. They are not words of weakness. They would be words of humility, spoken by a President who properly consulted Congress, and who listened to the will of the Republic. They would be the words of a leader.

They would also be the words of someone who understood and revered how the American system is supposed to work, and appreciated the limits on his own power put in place by the Founders of the erstwhile Republic. Fat chance of a putz like Ogabe ever uttering them, or anything remotely close to them.

Unpresidential update! Unfit for the office he swindled his way into, and he always was:

Obama’s proposal to invite Congress dominated the Friday discussion in the Oval Office. He had consulted almost no one about his idea. In the end, the president made clear he wanted Congress to share in the responsibility for what happens in Syria.

As one aide put it, “We don’t want them to have their cake and eat it, too.”

Leadership? pResident Gutsy Call wouldn’t know it if it ripped his bulbous head off his scrawny neck. Coup de grace from Wehner:

Get it? The president of the United States is preparing in advance to shift the blame if his strike on Syria proves to be unpopular and ineffective. He’s furious about the box he’s placed himself in, he hates the ridicule he’s (rightly) incurring, but he doesn’t see any way out.

What he does see is a political (and geopolitical) disaster in the making. And so what is emerging is what comes most naturally to Mr. Obama: Blame shifting and blame sharing. Remember: the president doesn’t believe he needs congressional authorization to act. He’s ignored it before. He wants it now. For reasons of political survival. To put it another way: He wants the fingerprints of others on the failure in Syria.

Rarely has an American president joined so much cynicism with so much ineptitude.

And rarely has the American electorate bought such a bill of goods as it was sold with this feeble knucklehead.

Share

Let’s finish capitalism off for good!

We’ve got it right where we want it.

Over the summer President Obama made a high-profile speech announcing his intention to focus on combating climate change. In his speech, Obama stated, “The question is not whether we need to act [on climate change]. The question is whether we will have the courage to act before it’s too late.” Dismissing concerns of climate-change skeptics, Obama exercised executive authority to direct the EPA to change regulations and limit greenhouse-gas emissions from American power plants.

In the latest of Obama’s environmental directives, the president informed Gina McCarthy, the new EPA administrator, that climate change should be her top priority. The Anchorage Daily News reports that McCarthy said, in reference to climate change, “The president’s main priority for me was to recognize when I was coming in here that this is going to be a significant challenge and one in which the administration was going to begin to tackle.”

“Right now,” she said, “we’re in a fact-finding mode to make sure we get the science correct and we understand the impacts in that area.”

There’s no science to it; it’s all ideology and Leftard religious fervor. We’d all be better off to consult the Farmer’s Almanac instead (via Bill):

The Farmers’ Almanac is using words like “piercing cold,” “bitterly cold” and “biting cold” to describe the upcoming winter. And if its predictions are right, the first outdoor Super Bowl in years will be a messy “Storm Bowl.”

The 197-year-old publication that hits newsstands Monday predicts a winter storm will hit the Northeast around the time the Super Bowl is played at MetLife Stadium in the Meadowlands in New Jersey. It also predicts a colder-than-normal winter for two-thirds of the country and heavy snowfall in the Midwest, Great Lakes and New England.

“We’re using a very strong four-letter word to describe this winter, which is C-O-L-D. It’s going to be very cold,” said Sandi Duncan, managing editor.

Based on planetary positions, sunspots and lunar cycles, the almanac’s secret formula is largely unchanged since founder David Young published the first almanac in 1818.

Modern scientists don’t put much stock in sunspots or tidal action, but the almanac says its forecasts used by readers to plan weddings and plant gardens are correct about 80 percent of the time.

Which compares quite damned well with the warmists/coldists/climate changers’ batting average of exactly: .000.

Think of it: the whole idea of science is to formulate a hypothesis which can then be proven or disproven by its predictive ability…or, in the case of AGW, the complete lack thereof. The Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”) frauds have never yet–not once, not even once–gotten any of their scarifying “predictions” right.

Going back to the idiot Paul Ehrlich back in the 70s, when it was global coldening that was going to kill us all–England would “cease to exist” by 2000, European civilization would have devolved into a barbarian wasteland of starving savages slipping around on a blood-soaked sheet of ice stretching from Lapland to Andalusia, etc–and going right up through this screechy op-ed (from England, in…2000) positing that “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is” (rendered hilarious by this picture from last year), reality has been uncooperative in making good on their sweaty-palmed doom-mongering.

There’s a reason for that: as with so many of their other pet projects, it ain’t really about what they say it is, and it never was. That’s made obvious enough by the simple fact that no matter what the supposed man-caused catastrophe–global warming, the New Ice Age, the “population bomb,” the suburbs–the solution is always, always, ALWAYS the same: more government, tighter regulation of the economy, and redistribution of wealth.

Leftards hitched their rickety collectivist, global-government wagon to the climate-change (Red) star, and all they got for it was the fiscal enrichment of a few slime-slathered porcine con artists like Al Gore. Which is not to say they haven’t been able to do a great deal of damage along the way, and won’t continue to do plenty more as we move, umm, “forward.” Like, for example, this:

Liberals opposed to drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge during President George W. Bush’s administration often argued that it would be decades before consumers would see the result, so why rush? It was an effective tactic. That’s the environmental movement’s default strategy – stall, stall, stall in the hope that opponents will tire and eventually go away.

Now does President Obama’s four-year stall on the Keystone XL pipeline make sense? By some accounts, he was prepared in 2011 to sign off on the project to create a $7 billion, privately-funded pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. But then Big Green giants like the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Fund made opposition to Keystone a litmus test for environmental purity in the 2012 campaign. Bowing to the resulting pressure, Obama formally delayed the project in February 2012. His spinners were careful to say he wasn’t killing it, he was just waiting for more data. He’s been waiting ever since.

And we’ll be waiting forever for cheap, reliable energy provided to us by something other than open or semi-clandestine enemies, at prices those enemies connive to control. Those pitiful few still bitterly clinging to this pipe-dream need to give it up already; Keystone will never happen as long as there’s a liberal-fascist left in Congress to block it, by hook or by crook–and certainly not as long as Ogabe remains de facto emperor. This bit gives the game away:

While these interminable delays have been going on, pretty much every argument against the pipeline has fallen away. It was rerouted to take it away from the Nebraska aquifers that sparked the initial concerns. A steady stream of reports by private groups like IHS global Insight and the National Research Council have found it won’t pollute.

The State Department agreed with this conclusion in a March report and even predicted Keystone would create more than 42,000 jobs during its construction – a real boost to a still-faltering economy. But Obama has dismissed the research produced by his own administration. In July, he told the New York Times that Keystone would create just 2,000 temporary jobs and only 50 permanent positions. Even Politifact had to concede, grudgingly, that Obama misrepresented the facts.

The time is long past for business groups, union leaders and the American public to demand that Obama stop shirking his responsibility. He has all of the information he’ll ever need. He should make a decision and live with the consequences. Otherwise, sooner or later, Canada will stop waiting and instead sell its oil to China, whose unrestrained smokestacks will do far more environmental damage than U.S. manufacturers could ever manage. Somehow, that doesn’t seem like a wise environmental protection strategy. It would, however, hobble the world’s most productive economy.

And there ya go: feature, not bug. Thwart capitalism, assert and expand government power, make gas too expensive for average Joes to afford, thereby restricting their mobility and forcing them onto buses, “high speed rail,” bicycles, and “pedicabs” (i.e., upgraded rickshaws), and out of the ‘burbs and into densely-packed urban hamster cages, where they’re easier to keep an eye on and manipulate according to the Progressivist agenda–for a cheap tin God like Ogabe, what’s not to like?

Share

National joke

Send in the clowns. And then crate them up and send them someplace else.

Where the titans of comedy, the clumsy middle aged men waddling up to the microphone to disgorge their heavily rehearsed stories of bad dates and creepy uncles, their younger counterparts in wire-rimmed glasses playing guitars, did not venture to tread, a lone rodeo clown dived in and got the laughs they weren’t willing to. Call him the Jay Leno of the rodeo circuit, like Leno, his act was unoriginal and his timing was poor, but everyone enjoyed the novelty.

In an industry where telling the first 9/11 joke was a badge of honor, low level scabs who took the jokes that truly couldn’t be told had to be punished. Previous enemies of comedy had included fairway operators who hung photos of Obama at the Jersey Shore and a Greenwich Village bakery that was driven out of business for making offensive cookies.

There’s plenty of room for jokes about rape and the Holocaust, you can even toss in a few of the right racial slurs in your act, as long as you’re doing it in good ironic fun, but you can’t touch Obama. The calculated outrageousness conceals an inner repression. Behind all the shock value comedy are tame liberals who entertain their audiences with things that those liberal yuppies think will offend Middle America, but that they pride themselves on not being offended by. The truly offensive is out.

What can’t be seen on the stage of Saturday Night Live must go underground to the Missouri State Fair. In every totalitarian country, the jokes that can’t be told are told anyway in secret places, between friends and to rural and working class audiences. The Soviet anecdote was born out of such restrictions.

Unlike community organizers, cowboy presidents however are capable of bearing the stings and arrows of rodeo clowns.

Twenty years and a whole other nation ago, a rodeo clown at the Missouri State Fair not only wore a George H.W. Bush mask, but even swapped out a dummy in the same mask that the bull tore apart on the spot.

The nation did not shudder, the politicians did not call for the clown’s head and there was no secret service investigation of a possible assassination-by-bull plot by a gang of rogue rodeo clowns.

But that was America; a strange and different country. It was not perfect, but rodeo clowns, comedians and your neighbor Bob felt free to mock the President of the United States without worrying that the heavy hand of manufactured outrage would descend on their necks.

The new OSSR, that marvelously enlightened empire of wealth redistribution from the working middle class to the government upper class, that beacon of green energy, transgender rights and drive-through abortions, is far too fragile to survive the sort of mockery that the reactionary running dog leaders of the old US were accustomed to.

The mockability of the presidency reminded everyone that the country was more than the man at the top. Like the regularly scheduled elections, it told us that we had a place in the system. The system might treat us like interchangeable parts, but it was democratic for all that because it treated the men at the top in the same way.

It is hard to describe that America to a younger generation that has never lived in it and has never known anything other than the liberal morality mobs of the Obama age eager to pounce on some offense of heteronormative white privilege committed against liberal conformity.

Maybe the best way to describe life in the US, before the dawn of the OSSR, is with another Soviet anecdote.

Well, it would be, wouldn’t it?

Share

We know the truth, they know the truth, and they know we know it

And they do not give a tinker’s damn. There’s a reason for it, too: because they don’t have to.

An Illinois Republican congressman told constituents at a town hall meeting on Wednesday that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton screamed at a fellow member of Congress two days after a U.S. diplomatic station in Benghazi, Libya was destroyed, merely for saying aloud that the attack was carried out by terrorist groups..

The Obama administration later acknowledged that reality.

But White House officials initially maintained that the deaths of four Americans and the firebomb attack on the State Department mission was the result of a spontaneous protest against a low-budget YouTube film that was critical of the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

‘Two days after this attack,’ said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, ‘we were in a briefing with Hillary Clinton and she screamed at a member of Congress who’d dare suggest that this was a terrorist attack.’

‘Now we find out that while it was happening, they knew it was a terrorist attack. These are answers that we’re going to get to the bottom of.’

We already got to the bottom of them. The question is: what are you going to do about it?

A: not a damned thing. Obama will serve out his term and go on to being celebrated for the rest of his life as a Progressivist Messiah at the very worst, and Hillary!™ will most likely be the next president. The degenerate political swine responsible for abandoning American personnel to their hideous deaths at the hands of savages are untouchable and inviolate; they know there is absolutely zero chance of their ever being called to account in any meaningful way, and that’s the ugly truth of it. Everything else is just big talk.

Very telling, too, that we have to read about it in a foreign newspaper, innit?

(Via Insty)

Share

State of the Union

Donald’s onto something here.

Does this ruling bind this president from doing what he wants to do? Of course not. No one in America has both the power and the determination to hinder Obama from doing whatever he wants.

As I was discussing Obama’s totalist ideology this week with a relative, I pointed out that Obama could ask a parallel question of the federal courts that Josef Stalin asked when it was suggested to him that he should treat Russian Catholics better to gain favor with the Pope as the Nazi threat loomed: “The Pope!” Stalin exclaimed. “How many divisions has he got?”

And so with President Obama and federal courts’ rulings: they have no means of enforcing their rulings. As any intemperate two-year old knows, you can do anything you want until someone compels you to stop. And so Obama can order whatever he wishes until he is compelled to stop.

The courts lacks the means of such compulsion. That leaves the Congress to rein in the executive. (Please excuse me while I erupt in peals of derisive laughter.)

Me and you both, buddy. No, I’d say between the Republicrat and Demican wings, the Statist Tyranny Party has got us just about where they want us now. All that remains is the destruction of the private insurance system, resulting in demands for single-payer to emerge at last from the Obamacare Trojan horse and the alacritous (and calamitous) implementation of government “health” “care,” and you can turn out the lights on America That Was for good.

Obama can do this not because the Constitution or law authorize it. Most definitely they actually prohibit it. He is getting away with it because there is no one who can stop him and almost no one who wants to stop him. No one, and I mean absolutely no one, in the Democrat party is in the slightest interested in reining in Obama’s expansion of executive diktat because they know what few of the rest of us are awakening to: the Democrats are never going to lose that executive authority again. Let me be clear, with a promise to elucidate another day: there is never going to be another Republican president. Ever.

I don’t know that I’d go that far myself. There will never be another conservative or classical-liberal president, certainly. But our rulers will quite likely orchestrate things so that another mushy “moderate” GOPer might be allowed to rule as a sort of steam-valve for a term or two, just to keep the Pollyannas who still think “elections” matter pressing on the bar for a few more nuggets of food before they climb back into the wheel for some more exercise. The real question is: why on earth would anyone care whether there’s ever another Republican president or not?

I was going to excerpt more, but you really ought to go read the rest of it.

Update!This is what the first tattered threads of an unraveling civilization look like.”

Share

Ask a silly question

This time it’s Kevin Williamson putting it:

Honest question for Corner lawyers: If the Obama administration can decide, on its own, not to enforce ACA deadlines, and if the attorney general can decide, on his own, not to enforce mandatory minimums, why can’t the city of Albuquerque decide, as it apparently has, not to enforce an increase in the minimum wage passed via voter referendum?

Because the city of Albuquerque isn’t the King, nor is it part of His Imperium. Plus, this decision goes against the grain of preferred liberal-fascist policy, which is perhaps the most important distinction of all.

Share

Some leaks are more betterer than others

And more useful, too.

Reporters at McClatchky and Eli Lake have reported all about the intelligence that led to the current embassy lockdown.

Gee that really seems like the sort of thing we’d not want Zawahiri to know. But here are people on Team Obama blabbing it out all over the world yet again.

They have a real pattern with this. They leaked a lot of important details with regard to Seal Team Six, too. Basically, any time our intelligence or military boys are doing something Manful and Cool, the Obama folks want to talk it up to bask in the glow of other people’s achievements.

But when you ask them about Benghazi, State Secrets Serious You Guys.

Also, when you ask about Fast and Furious and the IRS. Serious You Guys Can’t Comment on an Ongoing Investigation.

But they have no problem spilling actual national security secrets.

It all comes down to one thing: leaks that are helpful to them politically, whether harmful to national security or not, are a-okay. Everything else–absolutely everything else, whether it’s common knowledge, or even actually classified, or not–well, not so much. As always with this rogue, illegitimate regime, all you have to do is ask yourself whether it helps them expand their power. If it does, they’ll do it. If it doesn’t, they won’t.

Share

Small man, big mouth

A closer look at His Majesty.

Conservatives have for years attempted to put our finger upon precisely why Barack Obama strikes us as queer in precisely the way he does. There is an alienness about him, which in the fever swamps is expressed in all that ridiculous Kenyan-Muslim hokum, but his citizen-of-the-world shtick is strictly sophomore year — the great globalist does not even speak a foreign language. Obama has been called many things — radical, socialist — labels that may have him dead to rights at the phylum level but not down at his genus or species. His social circle includes an alarming number of authentic radicals, but the president’s politics are utterly conventional managerial liberalism. His manner is aloof, but he is too plainly a child of the middle class to succumb to the regal pretensions that the Kennedys suffered from, even if his household entourage does resemble the Ringling Bros. Circus as remained by Imelda Marcos when it moves about from Kailua Beach to Blue Heron Farm. Not a dictator under the red flag, not a would-be king, President Obama is nonetheless something new to the American experience, and troubling.

It is not simply the content of his political agenda, which, though wretched, is a good deal less ambitious than was Woodrow Wilson’s or Richard Nixon’s. Barack Obama did not invent managerial liberalism, nor has he contributed any new ideas to it. He is, in fact, a strangely incurious man. Unlike Ronald Reagan, to whom he likes to be compared, President Obama shows no signs of having expended any effort on big thinkers or big ideas. President Reagan’s guiding lights were theorists such as F. A. Hayek and Thomas Paine; Obama’s most important influences have been tacticians such as Abner Mikva, bush-league propagandists like the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and his beloved community organizers. Far from being the intellectual hostage of far-left ideologues, President Obama does not appear to have the intellectual energy even to digest their ideas, much less to implement them. This is not to say that he is an unintelligent man. He is a man with a first-class education and a business-class mind, a sort of inverse autodidact whose intellectual pedigree is an order of magnitude more impressive than his intellect.

The result of this is his utterly predictable approach to domestic politics: appoint a panel of credentialed experts. His faith in the powers of pedigreed professionals is apparently absolute. Consider his hallmark achievement, the Affordable Care Act, the centerpiece of which is the appointment of a committee, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), the mission of which is to achieve targeted savings in Medicare without reducing the scope or quality of care. How that is to be achieved was contemplated in detail neither by the lawmakers who wrote the health-care bill nor by the president himself. But they did pay a great deal of attention to the processes touching IPAB: For example, if that committee of experts fails to achieve the demanded savings, then the ball is passed to…a new committee of experts, this one under the guidance of the secretary of health and human services. IPAB’s powers are nearly plenipotentiary: Its proposals, like a presidential veto, require a supermajority of Congress to be overridden.

Ah, but that reveals not his intelligence but his cunning, which are by no means the same thing. He knows full well that the process is all that really matters; once the mechanism is in place and the process running, it doesn’t matter much what the results are. The crucial thing for any Progressivist tyrant is to get that overlarge and overpowerful bureaucracy in place. Once it is, the mechanism may be tweaked here and there, but the blot on the erstwhile Constitution will never be removed, and the sheep will line up to be sheared, complaining loudly and looking over their shoulders every step of the way, but never once even offering to step out of line.

IPAB is the most dramatic example of President Obama’s approach to government by expert decree, but much of the rest of his domestic program, from the Dodd-Frank financial-reform law to his economic agenda, is substantially similar. In total, it amounts to that fundamental transformation of American society that President Obama promised as a candidate: but instead of the new birth of hope and change, it is the transformation of a constitutional republic operating under laws passed by democratically accountable legislators into a servile nation under the management of an unaccountable administrative state. The real import of Barack Obama’s political career will be felt long after he leaves office, in the form of a permanently expanded state that is more assertive of its own interests and more ruthless in punishing its enemies.

Bingo. NOW you’re getting it. Plenty of useful insight here, not restricted merely to a subject as niggling as Obama the “man,” and it’s another one you’ll want to read all of. It all comes down to this in the end:

But the United States is not going to fall for a strongman government. Instead of delegating power to a would-be president-for-life, we delegate it to a bureaucracy-without-death. You do not need to install a dictator when you’ve already had a politically supercharged permanent bureaucracy in place for 40 years or more. As is made clear by everything from campaign donations to the IRS jihad, the bureaucracy is the Left, and the Left is the bureaucracy. Elections will be held, politicians will come and go, but if you expand the power of the bureaucracy, you expand the power of the Left, of the managers and minions who share Barack Obama’s view of the world. Barack Obama isn’t the leader of the free world; he’s the front man for the permanent bureaucracy, the smiley-face mask hiding the pitiless yawning maw of total politics.

Indeed we haven’t “fallen for” a strongman government; we’ve fallen for something much, much worse–more permanent, more insulated against and resistant to any influence from the ruled, and in the long run, more destructive.

All this didn’t start with Obama, as Williamson mentions; in his usual small-man fashion, he’s merely a bookend. But he’s doing some pretty big things just the same.

Share

Creeping authoritarianism? CREEPING?!?

Seems pretty out-front and in the open to me.

If we learned anything about Barack Obama in his first term it is that when he starts repeating the same idea over and over, what’s on his mind is something else.

The first term’s over-and-over subject was “the wealthiest 1%.” Past some point, people wondered why he kept beating these half-dead horses. After the election, we knew. It was to propagandize the targeted voting base that would provide his 4% popular-vote margin of victory—very young voters and minorities. They believed. He won.

The second-term over-and-over, elevated in his summer speech tour, is the shafting of the middle class. But the real purpose here isn’t the speeches’ parboiled proposals. It is what he says the shafting of the middle class is forcing him to do. It is forcing him to “act”—to undertake an unprecedented exercise of presidential power in domestic policy-making. ObamaCare was legislated. In the second term, new law will come from him.

Please don’t complain later that you didn’t see it coming.

Take a closer look at the Galesburg and Jacksonville speeches. Mr. Obama doesn’t merely criticize Congress. He mocks it repeatedly. Washington “ignored” problems. It “made things worse.” It “manufactures” crises and “phony scandals.” He is persuading his audiences to set Congress aside and let him act.

So too the judiciary. During his 2010 State of the Union speech, Mr. Obama denounced the Supreme Court Justices in front of him. The National Labor Relations Board has continued to issue orders despite two federal court rulings forbidding it to do so. Attorney General Eric Holder says he will use a different section of the Voting Rights Act to impose requirements on Southern states that the Supreme Court ruled illegal. Mr. Obama’s repeated flouting of the judiciary and its decisions are undermining its institutional authority, as intended.

The old saw “scratch a liberal, find a fascist” doesn’t even apply to the Lyin’ King. As I said, he’s been pretty damned upfront about it all along; no scratching necessary with this douchebag. All you really have to do is open your eyes and look.

Promise or threat update! Personally, I gotta go with threat:

President Obama said that if economic prescriptions of the type he supports to increase economic growth and reduce “income inequality” are not adopted, then race relations in the United State may deteriorate further.

“If we don’t do anything, then growth will be slower than it should be. Unemployment will not go down as fast as it should. Income inequality will continue to rise,” Obama said in an interview published Sunday by the New York Times. “Racial tensions won’t get better; they may get worse, because people will feel as if they’ve got to compete with some other group to get scraps from a shrinking pot. If the economy is growing, everybody feels invested, ” he said.

He’s the only thing standing between us and the pitchforks, you know. Why, you would think we’d be saying thank you.

Gotta be pretty complicated to be a tyrant and a sniveling little punk at the same time, but somehow, this cretin pulls it off.

(Via Insty)

Share

Strong message follows

Walsh on fire:

The First Amendment specifically addresses three separate issues: freedom of religion; freedom of personal speech (spoken) and of the press (written); and free assembly. To say that it has been turned on its head by administrations both Democrat and Republican is a commonplace. Atheism has effectively been established as the new state religion; “hate speech” can land you in jail; and “free speech” zones beyond which speech is restricted or prohibited are now routine in our political life, so as not to discomfit our emperors and robed masters as they swan about. If Americans actually cared about their Constitution, there’d be a revolution.

But this is how freedom dies, one “reasonable” restriction at a time, until the whole enterprise collapses under its own artificial weight. There’s a bracing quality to the muscular prose of the Constitution, free as it is of petty legalisms and multiple subordinate clauses. A whole industry, nourished by law schools across the country, has grown up to “interpret” a document that was meant to be read and understood by every citizen, not just lawyers.

Enter the Emperor Hussein.

From the moment he invented the Office of the President-Elect, Obama signaled that his would be a different kind of presidency, one solely dedicated to him and his wishes. (Would we even have noticed if Mitt Romney had become president? He would have been the most invisible resident of the White House since Silent Cal.) America was at last to be “fundamentally transformed,” delivered from its “charter of negative liberties” and brought into the sunny uplands of the Progressive vision of My Way or the Highway. For his vice-president, Obama chose the risible plagiarist Joe Biden, perhaps (only “perhaps” because the competition is so fierce) the stupidest man in the Senate, and very likely the only fellow member who had even less intellectual firepower and record of accomplishment than Obama did.

Read it all.

Share

Not my president–not that he wants to be anyway

One of the Left’s smarmier admonitions to real Americans after their pet neo-Marxist charlatan swindled, defrauded, and lied his way into the nation’s highest office in 2008 was that he was “the president of ALL Americans.” In fact, the Lyin’ King used it himself early on, to fool the gullible into thinking he intended to be a “uniter, not a divider.”

This, of course, was always just another lie.

WARRENSBURG – Ten College Republicans were dubbed a security threat and refused admittance to President Barack Obama’s speech at the University of Central Missouri on Wednesday.

Despite the fact that the students had tickets to the event, security personnel turned them away at the door to the recreation center where Obama gave a speech on economic policy, telling the group it wasn’t about their politics but the president’s safety, State Treasurer of the College Republicans Courtney Scott told The College Fix.

The students, some of whom donned Tea Party T-Shirts and others who wore patriotic or Republican-inspired clothing, had protested the president earlier in the day on campus, but had put away their signs and said they were ready to simply listen to Obama when security shut them down – and even told them to leave the vicinity and stay several hundred yards away from the rec center.

As I said yesterday: pResident Pissypants isn’t in the least interested in “bringing America together” or being “a uniter, not a divider.” He’s interested only in uniting the liberal-fascist 20 Percenters against all the rest of us. The rest of us aren’t fellow citizens; we’re Enemies of the State, to be treated as such when not being used as a big-government ATM, harassed by various government agencies for believing in Constitutional principles, or used as scapegoats for all the ills caused by liberal-fascism itself.

On the other hand, by their ending up not being subjected to Obama’s annoying droning, you could say he did the College Republicans a favor.

Via Glenn, who has a few suggestions as to recourse for the people whose former First Amendment rights were violated. New category, which might not precisely meet the case here but that I should’ve established long ago anyway: Gangster Government.

Share

Ugly (un)American: the God that failed

Ich bin ein donut-head.

Barack Obama bombs in Berlin: a weak, underwhelming address from a floundering president
When John F. Kennedy delivered his “Ich Bin Ein Berliner” speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate on June 26, 1963, 450,000 people flocked to hear him. Fifty years later a far more subdued invitation-only crowd of 4,500 showed up to hear Barack Obama speak at the same location in Berlin. As The National Journal noted, “he didn’t come away with much, winning just a smattering of applause from a crowd that was one-hundredth the size of JFK’s,” and far smaller than the 200,000 boisterous Germans who had listened to his 2008 address as a presidential candidate. JFK had a clear message when he came to Berlin a half century ago – the free world must stand up to Communist tyranny. 24 years later, President Reagan stood in the same spot famously calling on the Soviets to “tear down this wall.” Reagan’s speech was a seminal moment that ushered in the downfall of an evil empire, and gave hope to tens of millions of people behind the Iron Curtain. It was a display of strength and conviction by the leader of the free world, sending an unequivocal message of solidarity with those who were fighting for freedom in the face of a monstrous totalitarian ideology.

In stark contrast to that of his presidential predecessors, Barack Obama’smessage on Wednesday was pure mush, another clichéd “citizens of the world” polemic with little substance. This was a speech big on platitudes and hopeless idealism, while containing much that was counter-productive for the world’s superpower. Ultimately it was little more than a laundry list of Obama’s favourite liberal pet causes, including cutting nuclear weapons, warning about climate change, putting an end to all wars, shutting Guantanamo, ending global poverty, and backing the European Project. It was a combination of staggering naiveté, the appeasement of America’s enemies and strategic adversaries, and the championing of more big government solutions.

Which, in truth, just made it exactly like every other speech he’s ever given. The difference–the sole difference–is the response from misty-eyed juveniles, whose enthusiasm for their personality-cult icon has faded somewhat–just as it always does, and always must. But that ain’t the most delicious part of all this.

This is.

MSNBC host and Obama sycophant Chris Matthews blamed the sun for spoiling the president’s speech in Berlin today.

“I think a lot of the problem he had today was the late afternoon sun in Berlin ruined his use of the teleprompter and so his usual dramatic windup was ruined,” Matthews said immediately after the speech. “I think he was really struggling with the text there.”

That’s because he’s a stammering, stuttering, inarticulate dumbass–an irredeemable clod, a piece of intellectually-negligible fluff that is exposed as such every time his artifices and mechanical subterfuges are stripped away, leaving his trite, witless superficiality naked to the gaze of anyone with integrity enough to look. Which wouldn’t include blibbering suck-asses like Matthews, naturally. I’m mildly surprised Li’l Chrissy Leg-Tingles didn’t puzzle over why his Lord and Savior didn’t conjure up a few clouds, or just dim the sun temporarily with a wave of His mighty hand.

Meanwhile, back in ugly reality:

In Northern Ireland, President Obama repeated an old canard about religious schools being at the root of division there and elsewhere. In reality, hatred comes from state power and poisonous political ideologies.

Sticking his nose in Northern Ireland’s internal affairs at the Group of Eight summit in Belfast, the president pretty much told the Irish to dismantle their Catholic and Protestant schools, on the grounds they’re hotbeds of hatred.

“If towns remain divided — if Catholics have their schools and buildings and Protestants have theirs, if we can’t see ourselves in one another, and fear or resentment are allowed to harden — that too encourages division and discourages cooperation,” Obama told an Irish audience of 2,000, many of whom were children in religious school uniforms.

More boor:

Likening religious schools to segregation–a racist system that forced blacks to attend different schools and use different facilities than whites in the American South–President Barack Obama told a town hall meeting for youth in Belfast, Northern Ireland on Monday that there should not be Catholic and Protestant schools because such schools cause division.

“Because issues like segregated schools and housing, lack of jobs and opportunity–symbols of history that are a source of pride for some and pain for others–these are not tangential to peace; they’re essential to it,” said Obama. “If towns remain divided–if Catholics have their schools and buildings, and Protestants have theirs–if we can’t see ourselves in one another, if fear or resentment are allowed to harden, that encourages division. It discourages cooperation.”

Know what “discourages cooperation,” Barky? Having an arrogant, ignorant foreigner come onto your own nation’s soil and start making pompous pronouncements about the absolute necessity of upending your entire society, based on nothing at all in the way of understanding or knowledge of that society, spiced with a noxious dollop of a carefully-nurtured but wholly unjustified sense of grievance and resentment towards his own land–a land which graciously if foolishly ushered him into its most powerful political office, despite his being absolutely bereft of Qualification One for said office.

Even more meanwhile, Geraghty notes more ugliness in the Morning Jolt e-mail:

Well, at least the president still has the diplomatic skills of his lovely and charming family, who always make a lovely impression upon their hosts.

Uh huh. Always.

Trinity College may have reminded them of Hogwarts, but the Obama children looked like they would have preferred to be at a Harry Potter theme park than poring over dusty documents showing their distant Irish heritage.

The glazed over expressions on the faces of Malia (14) and Sasha (12) during their brief visit to Ireland with First Lady Michelle Obama didn’t go unnoticed by the US media.

ABC’s Good Morning America featured a segment with the reporter noting that “Even the president’s daughters can get a bit bored with history” as they were shown the Book of Kells.

Just as any other spoiled-rotten, over-entitled, ingrate nouveau-riche little brats would have.

Say, where’s that damned “reset” button gotten to, anyway?

Share

Deep roots

The common thread, actually, is Progressivism. But since power, control, and coercion is at the very heart of what Progressivism has always been all about–you can’t build the New Progressive Man and the collectivist “utopia” he’ll live in without bucketloads of them–the abuse of power Glenn cites here amounts to a feature, not a bug. As Moe said the other day: this isn’t a failure of the system; this IS the system.

The NSA spying scandal goes deep, and the Obama administration’s only upside is that the furor over its poking into Americans’ private business on a wholesale basis will distract people from the furor over the use of the IRS and other federal agencies to target political enemies — and even donors to Republican causes — and the furor over the Benghazi screwup and subsequent lies (scapegoated filmmaker Nakoula is still in jail), the furor over the “Fast And Furious” gunrunning scandal that left literally scores of Mexicans dead, the scandal over the DOJ’s poking into phone records of journalists (and their parents), HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ shakedown of companies she regulates for “donations” to pay for ObamaCare implementation that Congress has refused to fund, the Pigford scandal where the Treasury Department’s “Judgment Fund” appears to have been raided for political purposes — well, it’s getting to where you need a scorecard to keep up.

But, in fact, there’s a common theme in all of these scandals: Abuse of power.

It’s the only thing liberal-fascists are any good at all at.

Update! RCP’s headline for this Ralph Peters column: “When Did It Become ‘Cool’ to Betray Your Country?” When “my” country stopped being a Constitutional republic dedicated to limited government, freedom, and individual autonomy and became a snooping, meddlesome, tyrannical liberal-fascist Leviathan-state, that’s when.

Share

Gangster Government: first-hand reportage

I had forgotten about this:

The Obama administration’s free-speech scandals of today were repeatedly and accurately predicted by conservative pundits during the 2008 election. Obama’s first presidential campaign launched a series of novel and troubling assaults on its critics, leading many conservatives to warn that both the press and political speech would come under attack should Obama be elected president. Some of the predictions about Obama made by conservative writers in 2008 seem uncannily on-the-mark today.

The first incident to spur warnings was the Obama campaign’s move in late August of 2008 to prevent the American Issues Project from airing an ad exploring Obama’s ties to former terrorist Bill Ayers. Rather than simply answering the ad, the Obama campaign threatened economic boycotts, federal investigations of the group’s officers and anonymous donors, and criminal prosecutions. Although the ad ran locally, Fox News and CNN were apparently discouraged by these threats from accepting the ad. Kimberley Strassel wrote in the Wall Street Journal last week about the precedent this controversy set for today’s scandals. Yet the dust-up over the Ayers ad was merely the first of several such incidents.

I know, because I was incident No. 2.

That’s the esteemed Stanley Kurtz, who also wrote a little book about Ogabe that, looking back, probably could have gotten him thrown into an O-gulag with a certain inconvenient (actually, all too convenient for Ogabe and pals) anti-Islam filmmaker, still languishing God only knows where for the crime against the State of exercising his First Amendment rights. And may yet.

If you still have any doubts about just who and what the Lyin’ King really is, read it all. Heck, read it all anyway.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix