Days of Change

Day 453 – McCain Never Cared

January 31, 2010
3 Comments

Focus group expert Dr. Frank Luntz said this on the Fox News Channel today. The most important part of this statement is the context. In Jackass’ attempt to turn back the clock two years and preach bipartisanship, he spoke at a Republican retreat. During an unscripted remark filled with verbal stutters, he saw Frank Luntz and tried to say his focus groups and analysis of speeches was part of the way Washington works.

I see Frank Luntz up here sitting in the front. He’s already polled it, and he said, you know, the way you’re really going to — I’ve done a focus group and the way we’re going to really box in Obama on this one or make Pelosi look bad on that one — I know, I like Frank, we’ve had conversations between Frank and I. But that’s how we operate. It’s all tactics, and it’s not solving problems.

It was all lies. I don’t have a problem calling presidents liars. Obama and Clinton used a lot of legalese. Bush mostly employed lies of omission. In this case, the president went up to Luntz after the event and smoothed things out. On Fox this morning, Luntz said his corporate clients could learn a lot about the way the president uses body language and conversational tools in front of an audience.

What really struck me was the end of the segment. Dr. Luntz pointed out that all of his dial work and focus group information done for Fox was made available to the public. Despite his complaints to the contrary, Obama was very interested in the research throughout the campaign. In the words of Luntz, “McCain didn’t care.”

One must expect that politics is like warfare. The McCain campaign was ill-prepared for the marketing blitz employed by the Obama campaign in many ways. By and large, McCain ran an honest and respectable campaign. It’s what made it easier for PUMAs to vote for him. Obama and his team are transparent liars. Even the most die-hard supporter has to admit that Jackass said many contradictory things during the campaign. They simply chose to believe the lies they liked.

When Jackass tells you he wants bipartisanship, he means he wants the Republicans to bow to him. When he says the media is playing games, he means he wants them to follow his rules. When he talks about all the focus groups deciding issues, he means that he’s using those focus groups to find the right way to fool the public. And don’t bother bringing up Alinsky. This goes back to Machiavelli.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 452 – It’s Not About Anger

January 30, 2010
3 Comments

Jackass made a pretty slick move by saying that Scott Brown, like he, was voted in because of anger and dissatisfaction. It equalizes the president with the Senator. It’s also bull.

I know it’s been almost two years, but I’m pretty sure I remember the 2008 campaign. Jackass won because he preached moderation and bipartisanship. The anger election was in 2006, when Bush didn’t read the people’s anger over staying the course in the Iraq War. Within a couple of moths, bipartisanship meant two Republican (one who switched to Democrat) votes in a stimulus bill and waiting for Al Franken to be certified to get a 60th Democrat-only vote for Insurance.

The reason that only 41 votes can stop this legislation is because it is unpopular. In 1995, the newly-minted Republican majority in the House tried to block the entire Federal Budget from passing because Clinton wanted it too large for their liking. They lost publicly, but they eventually passed one budget small enough to have no deficit. There will be no public outcry about the Republicans stopping this “health” bill because even liberals don’t want it the way it is.

2010 will be about frustration, if anything. There are no jobs, no growth, no change, no end to war and almost no hope. Maybe there is one similarity. People were hoping Jackass would be a good president, even without any evidence of his qualifications. This year, they hope others can stop him.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 451 – Fridays With Obie

January 29, 2010
2 Comments

I remember people who criticized Bush for getting tough with terrorists (or prisoners, whichever). This president seems to be getting weak. I think about Homer Simpson’s boldly submissive speech trying to get hired by Mr. Burns.

If you’re looking for the kind of employee that takes abuse and never sticks up for himself, I’m your man! You can treat me like dirt and I’ll still kiss your butt and call it ice-cream. And if you don’t like it, I can change.

Jackass seems to be laying it all on the line to prove that he can shame the Republicans into joining the political suicide pact that will take down half of the Democrats this year. Luckily, the GOP has reality on their side.

The health care bill (either one) is unpopular with the left and the right, for different reasons. It’s a result of Congress having to thread the needle. Universal single-payer health insurance will not fly in this country. There are too many Democrats who will literally be recalled by their state. The insurance companies employ thousands of people. There are also doctors who came to this country because working in their native lands meant financial mediocrity. Then, there’s the abortion battle. If people didn’t know there were pro-life Democrats, they do now.

The purpose of this speech was crass and insulting. I understand the Republicans had to show up to save face. They don’t have to vote for the insane legislation, though.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 450 – I Want To See a Transcript!

January 28, 2010
3 Comments

Most of the SOTU last night was a rehash of last year with an added “this time I really mean it.” It’s everything Jackass promised and failed to deliver with even more false capitulation to Republicans thrown in. One thing stood out, though. In his populist fervor, the head of the Executive Branch argued against the reasoning behind a Supreme Court decision. Even worse, he was wrong!

Let’s get right to this “Constitutional scholar” crap about Barry. Aside from passing the bar, we have no idea what his credentials are. Everything he’s done with regard to the Constitution has been to change it, not to uphold it. He is not a Constitutional scholar and I even doubt his intelligence until I see some paper from a college that says otherwise.

I’m over the “birther” thing. That’s a term invented by liberals with a vaguely pro-lifer sounding description to discredit them. I think people should start calling themselves Collegiates if they want to see Jackass’ transcripts from college. It sounds educated, like something farming school graduate Keith Olbermann would use.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 449 – Defend the Right

January 27, 2010
3 Comments

The title is a slight mistranslation of the motto of the RCMP but I found it fitting for the State of the Union tonight. This speech draws the line between intellectual liberals and mindless Obots. The president went to the right of his 2008 campaign rhetoric, having nothing left but co-opting the Republicans’ ideas rhetorically.

The bit of MSNBC I saw really drives home the subservience of the channel to the administration. The speech was so “great” because of its conservative message. The Republican response was ignorant of what the president said. The so-called progressives of the media who liked this speech have sold their sold their souls to the campaign devil (ie David Evilrod).

You don’t turn to the right by giving a speech. No, you talk a good game in front of the noobs and when they stop looking, you double down on the statist ideas of the past. This is Grade-A bait and switch. One marginal Republican may choose to work with the president, only to find that offshore drilling and nuclear energy is contingent on passing health insurance modification first. May God forgive anyone who believes the Democrats in Congress will keep their word. The voters won’t.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 448 – America is More Polarized…and It’s all Their Fault!

January 26, 2010
1 Comment

The Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb of political literature, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin of “Game Change” were on the Charlie Rose Show making an absolutely hilarious point. They preached bipartisanship and claimed the Republicans used polarization to stimey the president.

Wrong. Let’s go back to Scott Brown. Conservatives are claiming Brown is the epitome of Tea Party anti-government passion. Liberals propose that Brown’s election was a response to the wishy-washy Republican-light corporatism and that a stong liberal social policy would bring back his huge political base. Neither is true. This special election is the culmination of a year of complete and willful ignorance of ALL voters. The right and the left voted for Brown, but the independents went all in.

The Founding Fathers wanted government to work, not just to do things for the sake of passing laws. Checks and balances exist to keep the government from doing all kinds of crazy crap because it sounds good at the time. The overwhelming majority of the country hate the health insurance bill, either because it was too much tax or too much giveaway to big pharma. The most conservative blue dogs blow away the most liberal Republicans on the role of government. When the administration gave up on bipartisanship, they had to drag along those blue dogs and marry them to the liberal Democrats. The Stimulus and the Health Insurance Bill because another TARP, pork and bribes to everyone to keep them on board.

This polarization may have brought about the greatest effect in politics, the explosion in the number of independents. What’s worse for the parties is that these independents are not swayed by ads or marketing or head games. Maybe our elected officials should try voting with their own will instead of the pressure of their party.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 447 – Another Anti-Cloward–Piven

January 25, 2010
1 Comment

I’ve heard a number of US Census ads now explaining that if you don’t fill out the Census, your town may not get its share of government money and services. That’s says a lot about what this government thinks of you. It’s the kind of attitude that made Ben Nelson vote for an unpopular bill through a bribe. An action that makes him hated in his home state of Nebraska.

Then there’s Rep. Michelle Bachmann. She suggested that the Constitution only requires that citizens tell the government the names and ages of the people in a household. Incomes, habits, attitudes and person information are just data mining by the feds. The administration used threats to say any person who doesn’t fill out all the questions you wouldn’t normally put on any single form would be fined $5,000.

So, fill out your Census form. While you do, think about this. What if, instead of the Cloward-Piven idea of asking for more government money, people didn’t fill out the Census form and their state got less money? Now, you’d have states with a smaller piece of the government pie. In turn, those states would be forced to give out less generous benefits and have lower paid government employees. Funny thing about that. Most states with less government spending have better fiscal stability. The ones with the greatest government benefits and services are the bankrupt California and New York.

So, why do we want our “share” of their money we pay in taxes?


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 446 – The Anti-Cloward–Piven Strategy

January 24, 2010
1 Comment

I’ve read about the idiotic Cloward–Piven Strategy often attributed to Saul Alinsky. The plan was to flood the major cities of the US with people who technically qualify for public assistance  but haven’t applied for or taken it. The goal was to use the crisis (sort of like Rahm Emanuel and the economic crash) to destroy the US economic system and create a minimum income.

What the hell? If every adult is guaranteed a certain annual income regardless of employment status, how will taxes be collected? Why work 40 hours a week for $25,000 if you get $20,000 for sitting on your ass all day? Besides, it doesn’t work. It was tried in NYC. It sure messed up their generous welfare system, but try doing that in Salt Lake City. Besides, when Clinton put in all the new welfare restrictions, Cloward and Piven were at the ceremony cheering him on.

Why let a bad idea go to waste? Smart capitalists can beat dumb socialists. I agree with the movement growing to drug test welfare recipients, but that’s not what I mean here. We should use the refusal of money to bring back the free market.

It’s obvious the Republicans and the Democrats really suck when it comes to supporting candidates. I say forget them. While we’re at it, let’s stop giving to PACs and lists and unions and 527s and all the other beggars out there. Write the check directly to the candidate. The parties use the power of the purse to control candidates. Let’s stop the flood of money to them. If you want someone elected, don’t let some other middle man hand off the money. And if you’ve spent your limit, you’ve probably spent enough.

Let’s make government smaller by making it directly accountable.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 445 – Money

January 23, 2010
2 Comments

The Supreme Court ruling on political contributions has upset a number of people this week. It grants groups the ability to spend an unlimited amount to support (or attack) a candidate as long as they don’t donate directly to that candidate. The focus of this has been on corporations, but it also applies to unions. In the election of Scott Brown, the SEIU was the biggest organization to run ads against a candidate (against Brown, in fact). Brown had no big corporate sponsors. His millions were donated online.

There’s the rub. If you want the money out of politics, how do you do it? Should only individuals be able to donate to a candidate? Can people run a pro-life ad when two candidates are pro-choice? Should donations to a Massachusetts campaign be limited to residents of the state? Should the FEC have made even the slightest effort to investigate the overseas money Obama received illegally online?

Corporations are notorious for hedging their bets. The health insurance industry doesn’t want Obamacare to pass. Yet, even if it does, these companies made sure to get  a benefit out of it anyway. Unions, ACORN and leftist advocacy groups are the ones who throw asymmetrical donations into a campaign.

Even when  “campaign finance reform” was in place last year, George Soros was able to throw money all over the place to create financial splinter cells. Now, I can draw a labyrinth of connections in the political realm, but I’ll simplify it.

Soros
|
v
Obama

Businesses have lost trillions of dollars in the last two years. They get a disproportionate impact when the government legislates them. They also have shareholders. Shareholders are like voters, except CEOs listen to the shareholders once in a while. If a company contributes massive amounts to an issue they don’t like, shareholders can walk away. In a country where states don’t matter and every program is national, the voting citizens don’t have that choice.


Posted in Uncategorized

Day 444 – He’s Not a Man, He’s a Machine!

January 22, 2010
2 Comments

I thought I would modify a quote from one of my favorite movies, Rocky 4. At the pivotal point in the fight between Rocky and Drago, Rocky is finally able to land a punch so bad that it gives Drago a bad cut on his face. Rocky’s trainer tells him that no matter how strong Drago is, Rocky can hurt him. He’s not a machine, he’s a man.

We know the opposite is true in the case of Jackass. He’s more teleprompter than politician. He’s more scripting than statesman. The people who wake up to his incompetence learn that he is not the biography that was marketed to the public. He’s a manufactured political product.

Scott Brown is Rocky. Rocky is no political genius. He’s not smooth with words. He makes mistakes. Still, if I want to take down a communist, that’s who I’d call. People critical of Brown or supportive of Coakley kept trying to make the point that people were only voting for vote number 41 and not any substantive policy issue. Stopping a $2 trillion regulation on every man, woman and child forever IS the more important policy issue and Martha Coakley wasn’t going to do it.

In 2006, Bush refused to change his Iraq strategy until the day after the election when Rumsfeld was fired. Sometimes it takes a whuppin’ to learn a lesson. There were smaller lessons. Last November, two governors were elected from the Republican party, but it didn’t matter to them. They gained a House seat and kept another. No, it took losing their power to break down the enforced discipline in the Democratic Party.

It seems as one man rises, another falls. Glenn Beck has been walking a fine line by supporting Republicans but not throwing his lot in with the Republican Party. He’s infuriated the left by looking into Obama’s past on air. The lessons, however, have been reiterating the same point now. The Tea party movement has been internalized, with the organized demonstrations also covering the same ground. Beck reached a weird point this week by using the MSNBC talking point about Brown’s acceptance speech to criticize him mentioning his daughters were single. Beck went so far as to suggest Brown will end up with a dead intern in his office if he’s not watched.

Scott Brown is not a Founding Father. Glenn Beck is not Patrick Henry. Hillary Clinton is not Abigail Adams. Frankly, the heroes of American history were not perfect themselves. People can be useful and have good ideas without being paragons of virtue. Paragons of virtue can be plain dumb. We all have to make up our own minds. There can only be one Spartacus, but it takes a whole lot of other men to give him power.


Posted in Uncategorized
Next Page »

    2016 Polls

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 15 other followers