Well, well, well. The President is going to give yet another major speech (is there any other kind with this guy?), this time about the war on the Afghanistan and Pakistan fronts. We are finally going to find out what was so hard about coming to a decision per General McCrystal’s request for 40K ot 60K more troops. Before we get to the main thrust of this entry, let us say first of all – it’s about time. Three months you’ve taken Mr. President after McCrystal said that he needed the troops for “the next 12 months.” So three months gone, giving McCrystal the requirement of doing a 12 month job in 9 months. That’s cute, Mr. President.
Second of all, we are looking to see what is so very different from McCrystal’s request and the President’s decision. If the two are nearly the same, with a small variation in troop numbers, we’re going to (a) welcome Obama’s decision for being close to the right one, but (b) we’re going to blast him to hell for taking so long to do what should have been an easy decision. If the variation is significantly different, we’re going to be looking intensely at the stated logic versus the logic of the known situation which is available to the public. For example, if you have a tank and no oil, no amount of bluster is going to make it move. So if Obama’s logic defies the logic of the situation, we’re going to call him on it. (Not that we have any power, but we’re going to express our anger to the hilt.)
The above is just prologue. The thing we’re really going to be looking for is whether the President’s heart is in this fight. We have our doubts. We think that he uses the American soldiers as props for “photo ops”(Obama’s own words!). We believe that he is a Chamberlain and not a Churchill. We believe he is a bully when he can get away with it and a coward when he can’t, which is of course, why we call him the Putz-in-Chief.
So we’re looking for you to go in and kick butt, Mr. President. We’re looking for you to tell the troops to stop holding one hand behind their backs, that you’ve got their backs, that you are in this for just one thing: to win this war. We don’t want to hear about an exit strategy. We want you to win this war. Period.
If you’re heart’s not in it, Mr. President, we want you to bring our troops home. Not just from Afghanistan and Pakistan, but from around the world. We want you to then hoist a white flag above the American flag to show our enemies that you have given up on America being a strong military presence, and that you (not our troops) are really a coward with no stomach to go against your lunatic base of communist thugs. In short, Mr. President, if you’re not going to do it right, show the American people what you really are, and surrender.
We’ll back you if you surprise us, Mr. President. If you come through and do as McCrystal asked or show LOGICALLY SOUND reasons (the real deal – not your political sophistries) why your alternative is better.
If you can’t do it right, Mr. President, then just hoist the white flag and be done with it. And while you’re at it, wrap yourself in it. For you will have no business being within a hundred miles of the American flag.
There are a number of things to say about the raging climate-change scandal that is raging. But cutting through the cheese, we say this:
It is the climate change proponents who are talking about diverting billions (trillions?) of dollars from traditional channels into ones that people like AlGore will make a bundle in. And they do this without any public debate. Real debate. Not comments on a blog. Not a war of words between people in a 3 minute segment on FoxNews. A real debate. But people like AlGore refuse to debate: http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/20873/Why_Wont_Al_Gore_Debate.html
We don’t get it. If proponents are so sure of themselves, so sure that the data is really there to support the massive social, cultural, political, and economic transformations that they seem to want so-o-o badly (and that they wanted even before “climate change” was fashionalbe), then shouldn’t they be EAGER to debate?
We propose a nationally televised debate between Al Gore and a scientific champion of his own choosing and Senator Inhoffe and a scientific champion of his own choosing. We challenge them to meet in a 10 part series of one hour debates on the subject of global warming and climate change. We will think about the rules by which we’d like the debate to proceed. But this is a start. And we’d like to see it televised on C-SPAN – for real. Not Obama’s version of transparency through C-SPAN, which never happens.
So how about it, Mr. Gore. You have opponents EAGER to take you on. What’s the matter? Are ya – chicken?
We found ourselves amused as we began reading Michelle Obama’s thesis for her BA in sociology. Her narcicism was evident back then, though not nearly as robust as it appears today. The entire opening is almost exclusively about her own feelings, and using reality as a backdrop against which her feelings and perceptions are displayed. One passage we found, mmm, interesting was this: “At the same time, however, it is conceivable that my four years of exposure to a predominantly White, Ivy League University, has instilled within me certain conservative values. For example, as I enter my final year at Princeton, I find myself striving for many of the same goals as my White classmates — acceptance to a prestigious graduate or professional school or a high paying position in a successful corporation. Thus my goals after Princeton are not as clear as before.”
- Advancing your educational career or moving into the fast lane with a high-paying position – this is a conservative value? So does that mean liberal values are to stop advancing your education, be as dumb as you can be, and strive for financial ruin America? We suspect that this may be closer to the truth than our derision might suggest. But really – isn’t success a pragamatist’s value – neither conservative nor liberal? Must everything be seen through a racial/politically charged lens?
- Why is the word “White” capitalized?
- It is conceivable that four years in a particular setting might have an affect on you? Say it isn’t so, and Shhh – don’t tell your husband. He thinks that he can sit in the pew at Jeremiah Wright’s church and listen to all the bombast spewed out of that hateful mounth, listen to all the parishoners chanting, “Uh huh, right on,” and other very articulate responses to the Reverand’s rants, without it affecting his views at all. So please, Mrs. Obama. Don’t spoil the President’s hallucination.
We will cut Mrs. Obama a tiny bit of slack here. She may have been just naive pup, as we were when we attended college.
However, she seems to not have stopped being naive; seems to believe that “jobs” exist without businesses that generate the jobs, and seems to be very willing for everything to be all about her (witness her so-called “sales pitch” to bring the Olympics home to Chicago because it would make her daddy happy.)
We will – as time and desire allow, read through this laborious tome of hers. We are so bored with all things having to do with “race” in this country, that we can only take so much of it.
Again – we call on all who have brains: throw away your hyphens. Subordinate your heritage to what’s in your heart, mind, and soul right now. What are your aspirations? What do you dream of for yourself and your family? What do you do that is helpful or at least not hurtful in the neighborhoods where you live? How can you improve who you are as a human being, as a student, or as a business success, etc.
None of these questions need be about your race, ethnicity, religion, or any other hyphen-maker – unless you do it yourself. Throw away the hyphens. Come up to the 21st Century and be welcomed as real citizens of America, instead of your self-imposed, second-rate, tin-plated copies of what it means to be an American.
Apparently “being black” means you’d better live on the Democrat plantation. According to that arbiter of all things good and pure, Jesse “The Race Card Dealer from the Bottom fo the Deck” Jackson has called Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) on his carpet (not the carpet, because we believe that Jackson doesn’t own the carpet), saying “We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.” Check it out.
We’ve seen this done before in the movies. Inherit the Wind had this scene:
Henry Drummond: Is that the way of things? God tells Brady what is good; to be against Brady is to be against God!
Matthew Harrison Brady: No! Every man is a free agent!
Henry Drummond: Then what is Bertram Cates doing in the Hillsboro Jail?
Replace Drummond with Morgan Freeman and Brady with Jessee Jackson, and tell us there’s no similarity. God tells Rev. Jackson what is good for black men. And Jesse Jackson tells other black men. Sigh – this is so bo-o-o-oring.
Give up the blasted hyphens, won’t you? Don’t be a black-American or a African-American. Be an AMERICAN, blast it all! Just that. An American. That is the highest public rank you can have in our society. It is the only public rank that we at O-t-c will ever honor. If you come to us and call yourself a hyphenated American, we’ll toss you on your ear, tell you to read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and look at yourself in the mirror. And if you continue to come to us as a hyphenated American, we’ll reserve a dunce cap with your name on it.
In our view, you’re an American or you’re not. You might be an American with relatively recent African heritage behind you. But what is in your mind, your heart, and your soul? These are the only things that matter to us at O-t-c. What are your intentions? What are your aspirations? Must you be “of the herd” or do you have a mind, heart and soul of your own? Do you really need to live on an idiot’s plantation anymore?
This is precisely why we love Morgan Freeman – a man with darker pigment than many, who has thrown away his hyphen to attain the highest rank avaiable to any citizen: American.
We’ve been following the latest pollywockabobble coming out of the White House and the President’s administration regarding their health care deformation efforts.
A so-called task force has come out with recommendations that women between ages of 40 and 50 just shut up and die. Same for women over 75. The reason? It costs too much and women – you know – all you real women who are supposedly any man’s equal – are really too fragile to deal with false positives coming from breast exams. So rather than go through all that bother of examining yourselves for small lumps that weren’t there last month or for getting yearly check-ups, you should now just accept your fates: in other words – don’t complain. Just shut up and die.
This is Obamacare. This is what you who voted for this assinine community organizer have set into motion.
Anyone but Bush is not a good choice – especially when Bush wasn’t running!
But no. You wanted “change,” without ever having the curiosity about who it was that was going to make the changes happen. You wanted “change” without ever asking what he was going to change. And you still love this guy, don’t you. Oh – you get that tingle up the spine and you fantasize about him having his way with you, don’t you ladies.
But he’s not your doctor. He’s not the guy who’s going to say to you:
Sorry – we can’t perform that mammography you want because your between the ages of 40 and 50 and the government says that you’re healthy. Symptoms? Don’t talk to us about symptoms. You’re healthy. Don’t you understand plain language? Don’t get huffy with me. I’m now a government agent and we have rules to take care of people who are not nice to government agents. Of course I work for the people, but your not the the people. Your a single person and a stupid woman who thinks she knows better than the government what kind of care she needs. If you will not calm down, I will have to call in law enforcement and you will have to pay a fine. Of course the rules have changed. What did you think you were getting when you told Congress you wanted the public option? You thought you’d be treated right? When has the government EVER treated you right if it didn’t have to? And lady, we don’t have to. Next!
We despise President Obama. We think he is the most abominable man who ever sullied the halls of the White House and that takes some doing, what with jerks like Carter and Nixon. Obama makes Carter look competent, which a few months ago we would have considered impossible.
So – for election 2010 and 2012, we have a very simple recommendation: vote for whoever will keep Obamacare from becoming our system. Vote for people who will commit to repealing whatever this lunatic gets passed. Vote for people who cannot be bought by a hundred million dollar hospital for some university in their state. We believe that there are a few – very few good Democrats. We believe there are some terrible Republicans. We are going to do our best to make a recommendations list as Elections 2010 and 2012 near. We will also try to indicate why we make the recommendations we do. But for now, here’s a good rule of thumb. Vote out the Democrats. If there’s a Republican you can truly get behind, do that. But this is mainly an”election against”rather than an “election for.” There are a few exceptions and we will try to indicate who they are. But all other things being equal, vote out the Democrat. Pure and simple.
And then maybe, ladies, you can be assured of maintaining the healthcare that you should be getting and avoid being patronized by idiots in the White House who think of you as fragile little porcelin dolls who can’t handle a false positive. If it’s false that’s a good thing, isn’t it? Sheesh.