My response back regarding Romney's address: " For what it is worth I thought Romney's address was solid as is the man. Yes, he was willing to leave the soaring rhetoric to the current president who walks on water.
If I have any concern it is the 'marker' Romney laid down about creating 12 million jobs. It might not become the "Read my lips" or " Weapons of mass destruction" tag line but it can be used as a weapon against him by the biased media should he fall short. Furthermore, it could provide a basis for debating where to draw the starting line on employment. Never give nourishment to the nit pickers.
Otherwise, it was the speech Romney needed to make and the nation needed to hear. It was not the speech the Obamaites will find enjoyable."
Last night made my day!(See 1 and 1a below.)
No more fancy talk; that has gotten us nowhere. “What is needed in our country today is not complicated or profound,” he said. “It doesn’t take a special government commission to tell us what America needs. What America needs is jobs. Lots of jobs.”
---
Has America's top General become a gutless weasel completely obeisant to Obama? You decide. (See 2 below.)
---
---
To prove that Obama's Press Secretary, Jay Carney, has his head on his shoulders read below.(See 3 below.)
---
Romney makes a straight talk case according to John Podhoretz. (See 4 below.)
---
I believe the RNC did what it had to do in terms of portraying Obama and his failed presidency. Now on to the debates and then the election.
I do not know what the Democrats have planned for us next week but I believe their Convention will be testier, more a parade of ideologues and mal-contents from every walk of life and Obama will look a lot smaller even if he flanks himself with more and bigger Roman Columns.
As for 'Ole Bill's' Key Note Address, he had to be driven more by ego to have accepted the invitation because this is not his Party. They have lurched too far to the Left even for his taste. Stay tuned.
---
Dick
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
The Condensed Liberal Handbook of Racial Code Words
Thumper the Rabbit's parents always taught him, "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all." If the left's self-appointed Omniscient Diviners of True Meaning have their way, conservatives in the public square won't be left with anything at all to say. Ever.
It's a treacherous business exercising your freedom of speech in the age of Obama. As a public service, I present to you: "The 2012 Condensed Liberal Handbook of Racial Code Words." Decoder rings, activate!
--Angry. On the campaign trail this summer, President Obama has become -- in the words of the mainstream Associated Press -- more "aggressive." But don't you dare call him "angry." According to MSNBC host Toure, that's racist!
"You notice he said 'anger' twice," Toure fumed in response to a speech last week by GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. "He's really trying to use racial coding and access some really deep stereotypes about the angry black man." Or maybe Romney is just accurately describing the singular temperament of the growling, finger-jabbing, failure-plagued demagogue-in-chief. It's about the past four years, not 400 years. Sheesh.
--Chicago. The Obamas and their core team of astroturfers, pay-for-play schemers and powerbrokers hail from the Windy City. This is a simple geographic fact. But in progressive of pallor Chris Matthews' world, it's an insidious dog whistle. The frothing cable TV host attacked Republicans this week who have the gall to remind voters of the ruthless Chicago way.
"(T)hey keep saying Chicago, by the way. Have you noticed?" Matthews sputtered. "That sends that message: This guy's helping the poor people in the bad neighborhoods and screwing us in the 'burbs."
Actually, it's a pointed reminder that the radical redistribution politics of Chicago-on-the-Potomac have done little to alleviate the suffering of impoverished Americans in violence-plagued, job-hungry inner cities everywhere. Racist!
--Constitution. Fox News contributor Juan Williams, who proudly calls himself a "real reporter," has apparently added real telepathist to his curriculum vitae. Earlier this year, he read the minds of Republicans and conservatives whom he accuses of deep-seated bigotry when they show any public reverence for our founding principles, documents and leaders.
"The language of GOP racial politics is heavy on euphemisms that allow the speaker to deny any responsibility for the racial content of his message," Williams wrote. "References to a lack of respect for the 'Founding Fathers' and the 'Constitution' also make certain ears perk up by demonizing anyone supposedly threatening core 'old-fashioned American values.'"
So, if you ever find yourself wanting to hum the "Schoolhouse Rock" version of the Preamble, heed these three words: Stop the hate!
--Experienced. A significant population of American voters believes that qualifications actually matter when running for the highest office in the land. Chilling, isn't it? They might as well sport KKK hoods. In the judgment of one Basil Smikle of The Century Foundation, "experienced" is a dreaded "racial code word."
Intoned Smikle: "Experienced? Does it really mean the time that he spent in the Senate, or does it mean, 'Well, does that guy have the same kind of experience in life that I have?' ... What does inexperience really mean?"
Maybe it just means what critics meant it to mean: "Does this guy have experience beyond the measly 304 days he served when the U.S. Senate was in session before he announced his first presidential bid?" I know: Racist!
--Food Stamp President. At the dawn of the modern federal food stamp program, one in 50 Americans was enrolled. This year, one in seven Americans is on the food stamp rolls. The majority of them are white. Obama's loosening of eligibility requirements combined with the stagnant economy fueled the rise in dependency. "Food stamp president" is pithy shorthand for the very real entitlement explosion.
Democrats fumed when former GOP candidate Newt Gingrich bestowed the title on Obama and decried its purportedly racist implications. But who are the racists? As Gingrich scolded the aforementioned race troll Chris Matthews last week: "Why do you assume food stamp refers to blacks? What kind of racist thinking do you have? You're being a racist because you assume they're black!" Time to find a new code word.
--Golf. This one's a gobsmacker. Beltway barnacle Lawrence O'Donnell appeared on cable TV to decry Republicans who mention Obama's frequent golf outings. He singled out Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's convention speech Wednesday night, which joked that Obama "was working to earn a spot on the PGA tour." The warped racial radar of pasty Lawrence O interpreted this golf joke as "Obama equals Tiger Woods equals RACISM."
Huh? "These people reach for every single possible racial double entendre they can find in every one of these speeches." O'Donnell expertly explained. "Things are getting lower and lower by the day," host Martin Bashir agreed.
I'd say this is all Greek to me. But that's probably racist, too.
--Holding down the fort. Obama's State Department diversity officer now advises us, based on admittedly dubious history, that "holding down the fort" is an anti-Native American idiom that has no place in U.S. discourse. Example: "I know you guys have been holding down the fort." Oops, that was Obama at a Tampa rally in 2008. Next...
--Kitchen cabinet. Radio talk-show host Mark Thompson jumped on Romney for using this phrase -- coined to describe Andrew Jackson's administration in the 1800s -- at the NAACP convention in July. Romney was referring to a close member of his staff during his tenure as Massachusetts governor.
"To talk about being in the kitchen and not talk about an African-American actually being in your cabinet is really not a good metaphor to use with African-Americans," Thompson blasted. Is it racist to ask: Huh?
--Obamacare. Left-wing Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky accused Romney of "race-baiting" by wielding the term "Obamacare." The Beltway shorthand for this behemoth federal spending program exposes Romney as a "spineless, disingenuous, supercilious, race-mongering pyromaniac" because it is a "heavily loaded word," Tomasky railed.
How then to explain the use of the Bull Connor-channeling epithet by none other than the Obama campaign, which peddles "I like Obamacare" T-shirts on its website? Logic is racist.
--Privileged. Stay with me here. Washington Post writer Jonathan Capehart has a problem with Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry calling Obama "privileged." Spotlighting his elite education is tantamount to racial bigotry because it insinuates that "he took the place of someone else through affirmative action, that someone else being someone white."
And here I thought it was a simple description of an out-of-touch academic whose crony Chicago ties of all colors gifted him with access, money and power that the vast majority of Americans don't have.
--Professor. Several progressive black intellectuals excoriated 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin for this statement: "They know we're at war, and to win that war we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern."
"Professor," professor Charles Ogletree said, was code for "uppity." This translation service is available only to credentialed Ivy League eggheads. A saner criticism would be that Obama was never a professor of law, but an untenured lecturer. Racist? Tell that to Hillary Clinton, whose 2008 campaign made that very point.
--You people. Asked last month whether her husband would release more tax returns, Ann Romney told a pack of reporters: "We've given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how, you know, how we live our life."
A chorus of faux-ragers from the Huffington Post to NBC's Andrea Mitchell hammered Mrs. Romney for her double-whammy sandwich of elitism and racism. Apparently, "you people" is the verbal equivalent of putting black people back in chains. One little, teeny-tiny problem: ABC News admitted: "Our ruling after reviewing the original audio is that she did not include the 'you.'"
In other words, it was manufactured out of whole cloth. Give the dog-trombone media another black mark for ridiculous bias denial. "Black mark"? I know: Raaaaaaaaaaacist!
1a)The Problem with Barack
By William L. Gensert
The problem with our inchoate president is not his policies. Throughout history, pseudo-centrist socialists, peddling feel-good, free-lunch crap, while millions of minions worship their messiah's brilliance...have often sought to dominate the discussion.
Yet this man seriously seems to believe he is a king, free to pick and choose the laws and statutes he will obey or enforce, duly empowered to impel or forbid action by executive decree, without legislative approval.
America is a republic. We elect representatives to do our bidding, to govern with the consent of the governed. We have a Constitution, which sets plainly the rules by which the branches of government interact and act on issues of importance, as well as the anomalies of the day.
Barack Obama may be the executive -- in a federal system comprising three equal branches of government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial -- but he is not an emperor. He cannot make law. Or at least, he is not empowered by the Constitution to do so.
Despite having once taught constitutional law, Obama seems not to understand this. Or perhaps he doesn't care, having fallen victim to a common problem often seen in athletes but also prevalent among those in power. They become convinced that they are bigger than the game -- that it's all about them. Hubris, solipsism, whatever it can be called -- the result is the same: a big man aspiring to big things.
The beauty of the U.S. Constitution is that much like capitalism itself, it is an exercise in the adversarial pursuit of self-interest to accomplish goals. In the private sector, the goal is profit -- in government, the goal is supposed to be successful governance, but usually it degenerates into the accumulation of power.
Capitalism is a system where the entirety of humanity is raised by individuals pursuing their best interests, creating opportunities and synergies that reverberate throughout society. Pursuit of profit actually creates a better world. Gordon Gekko was right: greed is good.
The United States' form of self-governance divides power among coequal branches -- they are adversarial and imbued with self-interested hunger for control, because the lure of power is greater than the longing for love or money for many.
Each branch of government works to and for its own interests, guarding power and prerogatives with each and every action. The system is not designed to make it easy to get things done. It is designed to make it difficult. You need to reach consensus. You need to pursue agreement.
Every president has understood this -- well, except for Barack Obama, who thinks it is so unfair that others will not do as they are told -- and that he is restricted in deciding what that is. Free men can suffer and survive almost any indignity or evil, yet for three and a half years, we have been defenseless against the "one's" good intentions -- for he has shown himself willing to destroy the nation for its own sake.
You see, just because something has worked for hundreds of years doesn't mean it's good enough for a man as great as our president.
History is littered with great men of good intention, much larger than life, convinced that only they could save humanity in general, despite never having saved anyone in particular -- transcendent figures, trying in earnest to transform the world in their own image.
It's easy imagining Barack at night, after he has brushed his teeth, in the White House bathroom, staring at his own reflection and asking, "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the greatest man of all?"
Even after acknowledging that a great deal of Obama's greatness is self-perceived, nonexistent, or a function of the meandering musings of minions and sycophants, it is obvious that our president absolutely knows he can solve all the world's ills, if only people would do as he tells them they must. It's easy for a man to convince himself that he is great; it is almost impossible to persuade him that he is not.
He may have no plan, or any idea how to proceed in a second term -- except for giving America more of the same disastrous policies from his first term. Yet...he can't wait, and just as the imperative of "publish or perish" was too great for the great man when he pretended to be a professor, the intricacies and constraints of the Constitution are too difficult for him when he pretends to be president. He may prefer the golf and parties, but he must push forward, to a future built to last.
Executive orders and rule by regulatory fiat suit him just fine -- no down and dirty work involved, and it doesn't delay tee-time. Perhaps, as Mitch McConnell suggested, he would be better-suited to running for the presidency of the PGA.
Yet he is still nothing more than a small man -- so afraid people will see -- a man loath to allow those who would dare the freedom to do what they have always been free to do -- pre-Barack, of course. He knows better, because after all, he knows best. It's always the pretentiously petite and the intellectually bankrupt who scream the loudest and profess to have all the ideas -- just don't ask them what those ideas are.
A realization of reality, a lack of self-confidence, a metaphorical mirror affording him the opportunity to see who he really is, has manifested itself in the manifold narcissism we see in our child king today -- for he is nothing, if not our savior. He understands nothing -- he sees nothing. It's about him. It's always been about him, despite what he says. We are merely pawns in his quest to be recognized as the greatest man to have ever lived -- the one. The oceans will cease to rise, and the planet will begin to heal, because they must...
Media has been codependent in this most extreme of hoaxes. They have accepted Barack Obama as their lord and savior, and they can't walk it back now. He is their man, and as such, whatever he does will be brilliant and transformational, even when he says stupid things like "you didn't build that" and "the private sector is doing fine." The story becomes about how he didn't mean what he said, and if people were just a little smarter, they would know that. He is, after all, all about nuance -- little people don't get nuance.
To those still not smitten, in the end, the depredations, degradations, and depravities inherent in denying the primacy of the one, are better than the indignity our self-respect would suffer for pretending to believe in him. A false god is a false god, no matter his handicap or how well he reads from a teleprompter.
In the end, the truth shines through. History will note that the greatest triumph of Barack Obama will always be that he once convinced a majority of people that he was real.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2)Gen. Martin Dempsey 
Israel Iran nuclear IAEA Binyamin Netanyahu
Israel Iran nuclear IAEA Binyamin Netanyahu
US Gen. Martin Dempsey meets PM Netanyahu in Jerusalem.
In its bluntest message yet, the US administration under Barack Obama, declared that Israel is on its own if it decides to go for Iran’s nuclear program with a military operation. Thursday, Aug. 30, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, offered the view for the third time in as many weeks that an Israeli attack would “clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran’s nuclear program.”
But this time, talking to journalists in London, he added impatiently: “I don't want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it."
Dempsey then astonished his audience by saying he did not know Iran's nuclear intentions, “as intelligence did not reveal intentions.” What was clear, he said, was that the "international coalition" applying pressure on Iran "could be undone if [Iran] was attacked prematurely."
Sanctions against Iran were having an effect, he said, and they should be given a reasonable opportunity to succeed.
The general’s timing on this assertion was unfortunate. As he spoke, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported a 31-percent jump in Iran’s 20 percent enriched uranium to 189.4 kilograms from 145 in May.
It was therefore obvious to the world that Iran has not been deflected by sanctions one whit from its gallop towards a nuclear weapon capacity, a race that will continue so long as nothing effective is done to stop – or even delay - its progress.
The mistimed Dempsey remarks are the clearest sign yet that President Obama is fed up with hearing about Iran and its nuclear aspirations. He wants to be left alone to make his own judgments and decisions on the intelligence put before him – even though he might be too slow to stop Iran becoming a nuclear-armed power.
Israel, which is in direct line of an explicit Iranian threat of destruction, was therefore publicly slapped down by its best friend. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak and their predecessors were shown to have wasted three years in tireless efforts to solve the Iranian nuclear peril in accord with that friend. Washington has just dumped them.
Unless Gen. Dempsey spoke off the cuff (unlikely), he would certainly have been obeying a White House directive – even if Washington later issues a softening remark. That directive may have been prompted by information that Israel is on the point of attacking Iran, which Obama would seek to head off.
The latest IAEA quarterly report published Thursday must have seriously embarrassed the Obama administration by making nonsense of its dependence on diplomacy and sanctions.The top US soldier may have been deployed for an authorative answer.
But Iran’s leaders must be laughing up their sleeves at America’s futile efforts to isolate them, as they race toward their nuclear goal while showcasing Tehran as the stage for the Non-Aligned Summit attended by dozens of world leaders.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)Jay Carney, White House Press Jester and His Pack of Fools
Obama promises that finally, the secret that all America has been waiting for from the White House will be released shortly.
“It will be out soon,” Today.com quotes the president as promising this week in a chat session on Reddit.
No, it’s not the Fast and Furious documents.
No, it’s not Obama’s college transcripts.
Nor even a federal budget that might garner, say, one (1) vote in either chamber of Congress.
No; instead the president continues to treat the country to a reality tour that trivializes the presidency, cheapens the office and makes the White House, perhaps, the most overvalued home since the Obamas’ shady real estate deal with convicted influence peddler Tony Rezko.
“I can tell you from first hand experience, it is tasty,” explained president Irrelevant about the secret documents.
You see, president Distraction’s folks have launched a petition for the White House to release the national beer recipe.
Yep.
Jay Carney, the White House Press Jester has tweeted about it- all while being paid by your tax dollars.
Gee, I wonder just why that economic plan isn’t working?
Yes; THAT plan.
The plan with the motto: “Jobs? Jobs? Let them drink beer.”
The petition, which really and truly is hosted on the White House web site, needs 25,000 signatures to go public. So far, 11,860 people have signed the petition. The signature requires you to give theWhiteHouse.gov your first and last name, your email and your zip code.
The president does promise that he “will not disclose, sell, rent, or exchange the email address you use to create your account to individuals or organizations outside the Executive Office of the President.”
Well thank goodness for that.
Hey wait: Define “outside the Executive Office of the President.”
Nothing says transparency like the light amber bubbles of a White House Honey Ale.
This explains the unexplainable award the White House got two years ago for transparency, the ceremony for which the press was not invited.
The award was for a secret, White House lite beer.
Here’s an item the clowns in the White House might have missed while they were clowning around for the Cooking Channel:
Unemployment claims still are hovering in recession territory at 374,000 new initial claims for the week, while last week‘s claims were once again revised upward.
And the sucking sound you hear in the economy is largely due to POLITICAL problems not economic ones.
It’s really impossible to overstate the responsibility the carnies (pun intended) in the White House share for the poor performance of the economy.
“When people get nervous about the macroeconomic environment, they slow down spending,” William Sullivan, president and chief executive officer of Agilent Technologies Inc. told Bloomberg.
“It’s not supply and demand. It’s not a normal recession,” Sullivan said on an August 15 earnings call, also per Bloomberg. “Given the issues of the euro and what’s going to happen and then you have this financial cliff in the U.S. in January, complete political disagreement in Washington, people are really nervous.”
Not a normal recession; an Obama recession. Nerves, disagreement, fiscal cliffs, all the stuff that a House of Horrors is made up of.
“If somebody agreed tomorrow to say that Europe is going to do a euro bond and the U.S. was not going to have a financial cliff in January, you would have a different outlook,” Sullivan said. “It’s as simple as that.”
Nothing’s that simple while the Obama carnival occupies the White House.
Even the release of a beer recipe takes work. Of course, work without adding any jobs.
Because adding jobs would just be way too foolish for this pack of fools.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4)Mitt’s plain pitch
Straight appeal to swing voters
By John Podhoretz
Mitt Romney did last night what the Republican Convention did all week: He made a potent case to those voters who haven’t yet made their minds up that he’s worthy of their vote. And he did so with an artful touch that’s likely to earn dividends in the days and weeks to come.
This wasn’t a speech for the ages. But it may have been one of the most effective speeches by a presidential nominee in American history.
Romney made no effort at soaring oratory. The speech’s quality was epitomized by the contrast he sought to draw between Barack Obama’s outsized sense of himself and Romney’s plain-spoken common sense: “President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. My promise is to help you and your family.”
No more fancy talk; that has gotten us nowhere. “What is needed in our country today is not complicated or profound,” he said. “It doesn’t take a special government commission to tell us what America needs. What America needs is jobs. Lots of jobs.”
He and his speechwriters didn’t try to pull off a killer soundbite, or to design an individual moment they hoped would lead every newscast.
No, the man himself was the message — the businessman, the man of faith, the patriot, the loving husband, the caring father, the devoted son. The unflashy success story who’s asking for your vote so he can roll up his sleeves and fix what’s broken.
The only real coup came with its surprise tear-jerking moment, when Romney related a heretofore-unknown story about his father putting a rose on his mother’s pillow every day — and told how his mother realized his father had died on the only day in their 64 years of marriage that the rose was not there.
That story, like so much in the speech’s first half, was designed to “humanize” Romney, who lags President Obama by double digits when pollsters ask who is more likable.
(Earlier in the evening, a stunning series of tributes to Romney’s remarkable personal generosity delivered a genuine emotional wallop — and would’ve worked better for him in the half-hour preceding his arrival on stage than Clint Eastwood’s entertainingly bizarre effort at improv comedy.)
Throughout that first half, Romney talked about the importance of women just as his wife Ann did two days earlier — and took no chances he would not be heard. He talked about his mother running for Senate, and the women governors who were on the stage this week, and the heroism of his wife dealing with five kids.
This was nothing less than relentless pandering to undecided women voters. Romney and his people surely knew it.
As a former presidential speechwriter who believes in the elevating power of sophisticated rhetoric, I would’ve preferred a more muted and indirect appeal along these lines, for purely aesthetic reasons if no other. But in his contest against Obama, Romney has a gender gap, and the Romneyites are probably right that subtlety is not going to close it by Nov. 6.
Most important was the overall tone, again consistent with the big speeches of the convention — one in which the failures of the Obama presidency were entirely separated from any criticism of Obama himself or of anyone who voted for him.
Indeed, the buoyant optimism with which so many cast their vote for Obama in 2008 was given its due and then used against Romney’s rival: “If you felt that excitement when you voted for Barack Obama, shouldn’t you feel that way now that he’s President Obama? You know there’s something wrong with the kind of job he’s done as president when the best feeling you had was the day you voted for him.”
America, he said, “has been patient. Americans have supported this president in good faith. But today, the time has come to turn the page.”
Romney said his turnaround plan would create 12 million jobs — by cutting the deficit, fighting for free trade and fighting unfair trade practices, moving toward energy independence by taking advantage of American resources and championing small business by eliminating needless regulation and keeping their taxes low.
These specifics were plain as well — and nervy, since they were specific and since he can be held to account for them if he falls short as president. But the public got to hear what he’d do, without adornment.
The speech’s lack of grandeur was the point. We’ve had enough of grandiosity. He wants to get to work.
There was no big moment. The speech, taken as a whole, was a very big moment indeed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment