The Freedom To Destroy Your Freedom!

When you have a pitiful , even worse, a failing record the only thing you can do, if  you are without integrity and your campaign is run by thugs as is Obama's, is attack and create false impressions knowing your adoring nit wits in the  press and media will pick it up in order to sell their fish wrappers etc..

Meanwhile the press and media's interest is in perpetuating controversy not enlightenment.

Attack and garbage is what the Obama campaign is all about and  this is what the leftist liberal press is all about.


Obama's strategy is to destroy the opponent so even if Romney wins, as I am sure he will, his ability to lead is crippled.  This from the  'Music Man' who blew into town promising a mirage of miracles he would perform, ie. a new day of political rhetoric, distancing  lobbying from the doors of the White House, balancing the deficit, ending wars, bringing peace to the Middle East, healing the nation's wounds and the list is endless but the consequences and results all proved  the reverse.

Obama's entire presidency has been nothing but smoke and mirrors , broken promises, lies, incompetent management and incompetent appointees.  His campaign is a mirror of his presidency, ie. Obama's crap about hope and change has morphed into fear and divisiveness.

Re-elect Obama at the nation's peril and there will be nothing left but tears!

But then that is what freedom is also all about. Uniformed citizens acting irresponsibly  have the privilege and the freedom to destroy their freedoms or having made a wrong decision they have the freedom to rectify.

Obama reminds me of a guilty husband who must go to any length to switch the subject.  Clinton was a master at bait and switch.  Is is is! I never had sex ---

Let's face it,  during my lifetime I have only  two presidents I can point to as being truly worthy of the office Reagan and Truman.

Nixon and Clinton were smart and clever lying embarrassments.  Roosevelt was a master at words, manipulation and guile as was Johnson. Johnson was actually a better president than he is given credit for but his poverty legislation proved disastrous.

Kennedy was on his way to learning.  Carter was incompetent and pitiful as is Obama.

Oh, I forget about Eisenhower.  When he talked I never understood him and his Civil Rights record was less than auspicious.

I also forgot about Gerald Ford because he lacked charisma but he had an excellent staff, probably one of the best of any president. Were it not for his pardoning of Nixon and the press and media's success in typing Ford a stumbling bumbling president he would stand higher in pubic estimation because his record was a good one and he ultimatly restored  calm after the Nixon Impeachment.

The two Bushes showed vestiges of greatness but were not the equal of Reagan and/or Truman though GW will rise as historians review his presidency.

I understand why people of caliber and true greatness do not seek the presidency because we have made the office imperial and turned it  into more than any mortal can fulfill and have elevated presidential expectations beyond anything a mortal can deliver. Who, in his right mind, wants to pay the price? Mostly those seeking power, those with enormous egos and those who do not really understand what they are getting into only to find the job is above their ability.

Romney will make a decent president and might even surprise us but he will inherit an impossible Gordian fiscal mess and will have to induce pain to be effective if he is to solve some of these problems and I am not sure the press and opposition will allow it. Nor will those whose oxen must be temporarily and/or permanently gored willingly do so..

And what of the opponents who ran and lost?  Humphrey was a great person and deserved the title "The Happy Warrior" but his liberal policies would have rivaled Johnson.

Stevenson was one of my favorites if only because I loved listening to his speeches. After that, most of the opponents were duds, deserved to be 'tanked' and would have been far worse than their winning rivals in all probability because they were uninspiring and apparently lacked leadership qualities.

Frankly, in the final analysis, the only thing any president can be expected to do is rally the troops, through deft  leadership, to solve their own problems and see to it that Congress does not ruin the opportunity with their petty shenanigans.  Eight years is not enough time to solve over 60 years of mismanagement when presidents have to spend more than half their time on rituals, raising money,  running for re-election and suffering fools seeking patronage and pay back for their out sized contributions etc.
---
Dick