Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Sunday, June 16, 2013

The Fine Art of Bullshitting 5: Please do not be mesmerized by this woman.

I am immediately skeptical of anything I hear or read that comes from a conservative news source. Why? Allow me to present an example.

I saw a link to this on my Facebook news feed. (By the way, I'm not sure why so many of the suggested posts I see in my news feed are for conservative Facebook pages. Zuckerberg knows me better than that. He must be trying to sell me something.) According to the author, Kristin Tate,
It must get exhausting constantly dancing around the numerous scandals currently engulfing the White House. President Obama needs a vacation!  
The president and his family are taking a vaca to Africa later this month. It’ll only cost us taxpayers $60 to $100 million — gotta love how frugal those Obamas are!  
Most of that taxpayer money for the trip will go to security for the President and his family. Hundreds of US Secret Service agents will be joining the family in Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania during their extended trip. A Navy aircraft carrier or amphibious ship, fully staffed with a medical trauma center, will also be stationed off shore. Ya know, just in case of an emergency!  
Also on the receipt: military cargo planes, lifting 56 support vehicles into the air. This includes 14 limousines (gotta travel in style!) and trucks fully packed with sheets of bullet proof glass, to cover windows of the first family’s hotels.  
Fighter jets will be flying in shifts giving the family 24-hour security. From airspace, they will be able to intervene if a threatening plane gets too close. 
Where did Tate get all of this information? Tate writes,
The Washington Post obtained a confidential internal planning document, that outlines the incredible security provisions. 
Really? So I did a few simple searches at Google and The Washington Post and found the story here. Could Tate have failed to mention any pertinent information, I wonder? Why, yes, I believe she did! According to the Washington Post,
The elaborate security provisions — which will cost the government tens of millions of dollars — are outlined in a confidential internal planning document obtained by The Washington Post. While the preparations appear to be in line with similar travels in the past, the document offers an unusual glimpse into the colossal efforts to protect the U.S. commander in chief on trips abroad.
So the measures are like those taken to protect previous presidents. Go on.
The first family is making back-to-back stops from June 26 to July 3 in three countries where U.S. officials are providing nearly all the resources, rather than depending heavily on local police forces, military authorities or hospitals for assistance.
Really? And why wouldn't they depend on the locals for the necessary resources?
“Even in the most developed places of Western Europe, the level of support you need for mass movements by the president is really extraordinary,” said Steve Atkiss, who coordinated travel as special assistant for operations to Bush. “As you go farther afield, to less-developed places, certainly it’s more of a logistical challenge.”
Because the locals are not able to provide them. I see. How could the need to vacation justify this great expense, though?
White House officials said the trip was long overdue, marking Obama’s first visit as president to sub-Saharan Africa aside from a 22-hour stopover in Ghana in 2009. The emerging democracies on the itinerary are crucial partners in regional security conflicts, Rhodes said.  
Obama will hold bilateral meetings with each country’s leader and seek to forge stronger economic ties at a time when China is investing heavily in Africa. He also will highlight global health programs, including HIV/AIDS prevention.  
The first lady, who toured South Africa and Botswana without the president in 2011, will headline some events on her own during the week. The stops will add to the logistical challenges, because she will require her own security detail and vehicles, the planning document shows.
So the first family is not going on vacation? They're actually working during this trip? But Kristin Tate told me that it was a vacation! You mean I can't believe everything Kristin Tate tells me?

Still, what about that safari the first family had planned during this trip? That doesn't sound like work to me!
Former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush also made trips to multiple African nations involving similarly laborious preparations. Bush went in 2003 and 2008, bringing his wife on both occasions. Bush’s two daughters went along on the first trip, which included a safari at a game preserve on the Botswana-South Africa border.
You mean W. and the family went on a safari in Africa, just like the Obamas had originally planned? Well, good for them, I suppose.

So, here's what we have. The first family is not going on a vacation. Rather, in an effort to promote the United States' security and economic interests, the first family is going on a diplomatic mission to Africa. Since the host countries cannot themselves provide the resources needed for the trip, the president will bring them with him, and this contributes to the trip's relatively high price tag.

Discovering the true story was easy. All it took was a few searches and some light reading. Yet I'm confident that the fine folks who commented on the story couldn't be bothered to do the slightest bit of research, as the following sampling shows:
Janice Simpson
It would be worth it if they only receive one-way tickets, then lock and bar the doors! 
Kim Triesler · Madison, Alabama
Sounds like they're life style is "Let 'em eat cake!" while the economy is on the skids, unemployment is still way too high (I should know, I'm in that rut myself and it sucks!), and yet they go out and about like they haven't a care in the world. 
Dan A. Zembsch · Washington High School, Cherokee, IA
Come on folks he just wants to take his family to his native country. Maybe he wants to show them where he was born and where the next presidential library will be. 
Eric Kessen · North texas horseshoeing institute
I find it totally disgusting the way they are abusing their positions to get free stuff ! This shouldn't be allowed period ! Besides ; why all that security when all they got to do is go native since they would blend in so well with the locals and according to him guns don't keep us safe ? Lol . 
Walter Sterling · Account Executive at Country Legends Radio
Can't he just stay with his brother in his shack or his family hut that he grew up in? 
Jack Eaton ·  Top Commenter · Truck Driver at Old Dominion Freight Line
Let him go visit his homeland on his own money. He has swindled enough out of us already.
The problem for conservative news sources, however, is that even independents will eventually learn that they are being deceived by the bullshitters, and will no longer trust them. That's one reason why conservatives aren't doing so well in elections for national political office. More and more, the only people who believe what conservative bullshitters tell them are conservative voters, i.e., the people who were going to vote for Republicans anyway. They can thank motivated skepticism for that, along with a bit of racism, I think. (Our former, whiter presidents stayed in hotels and traveled in limousines. This uppity one should stay in a shack and take taxis, I suppose.)

Kristin Tate's most conspicuous redeeming quality is that she would be conventionally regarded as incredibly hot:


(At first, I thought, "This picture is part of an ad for a dating website, right?") So, good for you, Kristin! Now instead of trying to keep conservatives' "partisan donors in a constant state of agitation to keep them ignorant, jumpy and writing checks," why not put your writing skills to good use and stick with the facts?

Gentleman: please do not be mesmerized by this woman. She is part of the conservative media's strategy of shutting your brain down while they shovel the bullshit. Not everything that is beautiful is good and trustworthy. Believe me, I know this from experience.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Blowing It

Here is Romney's new ad:


And this is what the president actually said:
But you know what, I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them. So I’m going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way. We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more. . . .
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t -- look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President -- because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.
Which is a less artfully stated version of this argument from Elizabeth Warren:



“There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory, and it turned into something terrific or a great idea: God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.” ---Elizabeth Warren

Slate's David Weigel calls the sound bite from Obama's speech
a magic word gaffe—a statement that reveals not what a politician believes, but what you already feared, in your bone marrow, that a politician believes. Democrats still can’t understand why Obama’s speech is supposed to offend anyone. Republicans know that he’s a closet socialist, and that this sentiment only comes out when his energy is flagging. 
So, here's the deal: any intelligent voter is going to figure out that Romney has taken this quotation out of context with the intention of misleading voters. And while Republicans believe that the quotation confirms what they already believe about the president, Romney is wasting his time talking to them. Those republicans will suffer from temporary idiocy and eagerly take the quotation out of context and pretend that the rest of the speech doesn't exist. They wouldn't vote for Obama in a million years. Romney should be trying to reach independents. But Romney can't count on independents to share Republicans' preexisting beliefs about the president. And I'm sure that most of them don't like being manipulated by a deceptive politician. So I don't know how this ad is going to do the job.

Hey, Republicans: why should I vote for your candidate when he has to mislead me and resort to fiction to get me to vote for him?

Republicans: your terrible candidate is blowing it.

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Bon appétit

From "The Delusion of Indispensability" by Christopher Badeaux (links added by Φ):
The problem is not merely the corruption of power. It is the flip side of the coin — the delusion of indispensability, a delusion brought a politician’s inner circle, by the legions of his fans (brought closer by today’s mass, instant communication streams), and, frankly, every fawning article in the nominally independent press reinforcing that image. A brave man will stand in the face of the worst storm if he perceives he is needed on the battlements. This, I suspect, is why Anthony Weiner continued for as long as he did. . . . 
As an aside, I suspect this is why President Obama — whose approval rating is trailing, and whose every domestic initiative has either been an expensive failure or an expensively unpopular ratings-killer — is seeking re-election. His fans basically called him the Messiah, and he did nothing to dispel that perception. When he came into office in 2009, he let everyone know that he believed we were essentially in another depression, and when his adoring fans in the press told him he could fix it, you know he cried in his head, Yes we can! His utter failure to accomplish anything is actually totally irrelevant to his self-perception, and that is why he is out now re-enacting Al Gore’s successful 2000 campaign. 
Is the president's approval rating trailing? Well, according to Gallup, it's at 46%, which is up from a low of 41%, and better than the approval ratings of Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter at the same point of their administrations.

Usually when Republicans talk about the president's expensive, job-killing domestic initiatives, they're talking about health care reform. According to Politifact, the law is not job-killing, it does not "[crush] small businesses 'with billions in penalties,'" and it is not "the biggest tax increase ever in the history of our country." Politifact rated Paul Ryan's claim that the health care law "is accelerating our country toward bankruptcy" as barely true:
Almost every expert from every side on the health care law would agree that there's a lot of uncertainty involved in projecting its budget impact. Looking strictly at the CBO's analysis of the budget effect of the health care law, it is a deficit-reducer, both in the short and long term. But Ryan points to several legitimate concerns about the assumptions made by the CBO -- particularly whether reduced Medicare payments are sustainable -- assumptions that even the CBO and Medicare's chief actuary noted may be suspect. The fate of those cuts may largely determine whether the new health care law ends up in the red or black. For now, though, those cuts are law. Congress would have to act to reduce or eliminate them. So Ryan is overplaying his hand when he claims the law is "accelerating our country toward bankruptcy." We rate his claim Barely True.
Last year, Mike Pence claimed that the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill will kill jobs. Politifact also rated that statement as barely true:
Ultimately, even the supporters of the bill we spoke to acknowledged that some jobs will likely be lost, or never created, due to passage of Dodd-Frank. However, many of the experts we spoke to agreed that not passing the bill would put even more jobs in the greater economy at risk, not to mention countless nest-eggs, homes and other non-job-related concerns. Would potential job savings offset job costs? Unfortunately, there is no way to know. Still, Pence's comment ignores the principle that preventing financial shocks is job-saving. On balance, we rate the statement Barely True. 
Badeaux claims that every domestic initiative has been an expensive failure. Just one counterexample is enough to prove that he's wrong.

Did the president claim that we were in another depression in 2009? Well, in December of 2008, he said of the economic crisis, "as tough as times are right now, they're nothing compared to what my grandparents went through, what the greatest generation went through." He did say that "when you think about the structural problems that we already had in the economy before the financial crisis, this is a big problem and it's going to get worse." Well, what the hell do you expect him to say? Should he have declared the economy is fundamentally sound, as his opponent did? Besides, even if we were not in a depression, it was the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. It was very very bad. Perhaps Badeaux doens't remember or simply didn't notice.

Has the president failed to accomplish anything? As the links above show, the president has accomplished much. So Badeaux's ridiculous claim is obviously false.

What I think happens to people like Badeaux is that they repeat their politically motivated bullshit so frequently, to others and to themselves, that they begin to believe it. They assert it freely in their own echo chambers where it goes unchallenged. It is eventually accepted as the gospel truth as a consequence. Bullshitters have no regard for the truth or falsity of their claims anyway, since the whole point of making claims for them is to achieve this or that goal; the truth or falsity of the claims is irrelevant.

Sadly, in the case of Badeaux, we have a man who is not only shoveling the bullshit, but is also gobbling it up.

Bon appétit!

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Two Passages from the Alternate Universe of Lori Ziganto

News conference by President Obama, Strasbourg, France (emphases mine): 
Q: Thank you, Mr. President. In the context of all the multilateral activity that's been going on this week -- the G20, here at NATO -- and your evident enthusiasm for multilateral frameworks, to work through multilateral frameworks, could I ask you whether you subscribe, as many of your predecessors have, to the school of American exceptionalism that sees America as uniquely qualified to lead the world, or do you have a slightly different philosophy? And if so, would you be able to elaborate on it?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism. I'm enormously proud of my country and its role and history in the world. If you think about the site of this summit and what it means, I don't think America should be embarrassed to see evidence of the sacrifices of our troops, the enormous amount of resources that were put into Europe postwar, and our leadership in crafting an Alliance that ultimately led to the unification of Europe. We should take great pride in that.

And if you think of our current situation, the United States remains the largest economy in the world. We have unmatched military capability. And I think that we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional.

Now, the fact that I am very proud of my country and I think that we've got a whole lot to offer the world does not lessen my interest in recognizing the value and wonderful qualities of other countries, or recognizing that we're not always going to be right, or that other people may have good ideas, or that in order for us to work collectively, all parties have to compromise and that includes us.

And so I see no contradiction between believing that America has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world towards peace and prosperity and recognizing that that leadership is incumbent, depends on, our ability to create partnerships because we create partnerships because we can't solve these problems alone.
Lori Ziganto, "Obama Administration and Democrats Kowtow to Other Countries While Scorning Those Who Have Died For Ours":
Since attaining power, everything [Democrats have] done has been an attempt to fundamentally change our “defective” Constitution and country. They are trying to create a federal government involved in and in control of every aspect of our lives, even the foods we eat. They have attempted and continue to attempt to morally equate America with those who wish to kill us . They have actively tried to weaken our military and are attempting to further their belief that America is not special. We don’t need no stinkin’ Exceptionalism! Only, we do. And we are. 
Lori Ziganto, "Obama and His Administration Lament America’s Superpower Status":
Obama does not believe in American Exceptionalism and he is actively pursuing its decline. 
More on the big lie

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Comments from Sarah Palin's new post-racial society

What follows are comments readers posted on "In Photos: President Obama turns 49," an entry in The Starting Point, a Yahoo! News blog. According to the entry, "the president plans no grand celebrations, just dinner with friends and a few fundraising stops."

According to CNN, "The president is celebrating his birthday without his immediate family because first lady Michelle Obama just arrived in Spain for a planned mini-vacation with the couple's youngest daughter, Sasha, while eldest daughter, Malia, is away at summer camp."

And by the way, let's not forget Sarah Palin's recent assertion that "with the election of our first black president, our country [has] become a new “post-racial” society."

Wayne
Wake up America. This guy is here to destroy our country. He is not an American or will he ever be one. He is for himself and what he can get out of this office. He will not be happy until he destroys this country.

Jim Jones
Is the Monkey girl making a delivery to someone in Spain, or , just another vacation, I , think she doesn't like to see a false B-Day Celebration , while she is dropping off Secrets to the enemy.

Johnnymack
any fool who wishes this closet racist,reparation,affirmative action president happy b-day needs to be deported.To kenya. Start packin you liberal anti-American scum.

IAM A REAL AMERICAN
he was bone in east la man!!!!! hope your bi-=tchs plane crashes youscum of the earth just like all muslims hope your cake is made of pig blood

Dean
Jesus warned us about Obama! The one world leader and the one world Government is in the Bible. Obama is Satan in the flesh, can't believe ya'll can't see that!

Duke
do you know why adam and eve wasn't black? did you ever try takeing a rib off a black man !!! LOL

J
Boogety Boogety Boo goodbye Muslim boy Oblahbla. 2012 you go back to the ghetto!!!

J
Great day when this som beeich gets voted out or the light of his life goes out. Which ever comes first. Oh what a great day, I think I'll dance a jig!!

Paul
49, all we can HOPE for is that he will keep on smoking those cigarettes and death would have the AUDACITY to visit Obama early. lol

Cryptkeeper
Looks like a monkey with aids

Offender
hes a liar, and america knows it, some dont care, but most do, remember, cut his legs off in november, maybe we can minimize the damage he can do before we vote his monkey @#$% out

Screw Obama He Is A Thug ...
Obama is a joke. I hope he has a lousy birthday. He is a horrible, hateful, evil monster.

Offender
how long do chimpanzees live?

J
Clearly some of you darkies have gotten way to excited about nothin, and the rest of you upstanding whites that have fallen onto the naegar lovin train, well you need to get off that express, cause its going straight to Africa with our country. If the good decent real Americans (and I mean everybody thats not no dam Paco fresh off the border or no good pot smokin non workin free loadin neeager) don't stand up and vote this som beeich out than we just gone have to get him out by any means necessary. And thats change you can believe in. Now lets get this slogan right "Yes We CAN" "Yes We CAN" get these darkies and jews up out of my country. HE WAS NEVER OUR PRESIDENT AND HE NEVER WILL BE!!

Akira Flight 316
Dear President Barry Soetoro, please dont continue pi$$ on the American people and tell us its raining.

Have a Michelle free (shes in Spain) Birthday. NO PIE 4 U !!!

Speaking of which, why didnt The First Wookie stick around for your alleged birthday?

MgKrebs
Can we spank him 49 times with a Louisville Slugger? Or maybe 57 times. Once for each state.

Steve O
everytime i see a picture of Michelle I think that maybe evolution is possible and maybe we did evolve from monkies

Bill
Lynch that filthy n*gger.

Enrique
I have a birthday present I'd like to give him. It is about 8.5 inches long with a nice circumference. I think if I could plant some Krakatoa sized eruptions deep inside that hot little butt of his, it might settle the arrogant piece of feces down some. He is not qualified to be President. He IS qualified to be my bytch-boy. And for all you libturd fans of his--while we're talking about me planting seed, get a mental image of his face contorted in pleasure/pain and his body writhing in ecstasy while I thrust my member into him. This is the way you should always picture him in your mind. When you seem him on TV, be reminded of this mental image.

Marina
Here is my bday wishes for Obama: BURN IN HELL !!!!

Steven W
Instead of turning 40, i wish this leftist was turning over in a grave somewhere.
He is trying to overthrow America.
Go Fu-K yourself on your birthday, you leftist @#$% hole president

Jason
all you blacks want is more of the white mans money...IT IS NOT OK IT BE ON WELLFARE

Turd
After being the worst president in American history this is the song they sang to me today!!!!!! Happy birthday to you,,,,Happy birthday to you,,,,,,,You lead like a monkey,,,,,,,,and you look like one too!!!!

Jason
is the term "black bastered" racist???? even thou 80% of blacks are in fact fatherless bastered????

David
With any Luck , Maybe He will choke on his Barfday Cake an Croak !.. Just a Random Happy Thought ...I feel better ..

Fire
so, how old was your mother when she died? *counts the days*

Look, Obama, you can pretend to be a hard working president, but all I see is your hideous family jetsetting around the globe every month on some new vacation and living the high life. The only work I have seen you do is hand-shake all the blacks that you can and hand out stimuluses that put us even more in debt. The worst president EVER.

Jeff D
The head lines got it right birthday BOY
LOL

Nancy
What a Waste of fresh air he's breathing.

EDWARD D
HE'S STILL AND IDIOT JUST OLDER AND BLACKER

INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER
Attn to the Chicago area- Due to tonights birthday party we are all out of Chicken & collard greens. There is a run on kool menthols and malt liqour across the street at 7-11

IMPEACH THIS SOCIALIST LOSER

Observation
The only ones on here wishing this illegal squatter a happy b day are either black, illeterate, or gay.

NITE STALKER
Can any one give me instructions on how to gift wrap a watermelon?

Disagreeablejess
he still looks like a monkey to me. just older. go bak to africa! he's not even a us citizen, for crying out loud! who cares what he looks like.

Louise
It's interesting to me that the majority of people that like him don't know how to spell or speak proper English. Those of us that are supporting the welfare leaches DO know how to speak properly and spell. Vote the Dems out and let those of us that work and create jobs get back to doing just that and stop the cry babies that want everyone else to be responsible for them from running the country.

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Step up your game

I really am trying to find something in Lori Ziganto's writing that I can respect.  On rare occasions, I find a little something, like an argument, or a reliable source. But then she publishes more god-awful shit and my hopes are dashed.

Recently, she published this rant about President Obama containing one sweeping, unsupported, undocumented generalization after another. (Sorry, Lori: you can't support your claims by citing yourself and other bloggers.) Here's the lead paragraph:
In the past week, the Obama administration and fellow Democrats have let their true feelings for America known more than ever before. Well, at least more blatantly. They aren’t even bothering to hide it now and have lost all shame. No longer content with merely worshipping at the altar of multiculturalism, they are now going out of their way to boast that they believe that practically any other country is actually superior to America, and that the men and women who have died fighting for our country aren’t worthy of honor and respect.
Now, Ziganto's readers will accept all of the claims in this paragraph, but only if they already believe, as Ziganto does, that Obama is made of concentrated evil. You cannot infer from the mere fact that Obama was not at Arlington Cemetery on Memorial Day that Obama doesn't honor and respect the troops. President Obama did participate in the wreath-laying ceremony at Arlington on Memorial Day of last year, I guess because he hates the United States and the troops. Obama was in a national cemetery in Illinois this year for Memorial Day, obviously because he hates the troops. (My father is buried in a national cemetery, and I don't see anything wrong with choosing a national cemetery as a venue to honor our fallen soldiers.) And, as it turns out, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush all hate the troops, since they also missed wreath-laying ceremonies at Arlington.

What's additionally obnoxious about Ziganto's post is its underlying assumption that Ziganto has the authority to determine who is and who is not a patriotic American.

(And if you really want to know who thinks being with the troops makes for a good photo op, Lori, just ask that prick who preceded him in the White House.)

Today, I was going to publish the following video of Matt Lauer's interview with President Obama:



Ziganto posted an excerpt of this video in which Obama talks about gathering information about the BP catastrophe so that he can find out "whose ass to kick." What follows is a representative sampling of Ziganto's remarks about the excerpt:
  • "Obama cannot pull off that whole cowboy image."
  • "Obama really should have rehearsed that line more; it was painfully obvious to all that he’s never uttered the phrase 'ass kick' before in his ivory tower swaddled life."
  • "Did his teleprompter not let him know that pretending to 'ass kick' doesn’t work when we have all seen his baseball 'pitches' and when we picture him clutching onto a head of arugula, while whining about it’s price at Whole Foods? I now imagine him practicing his tough guy image. Rehearsing with Rahm, saying things like 'You won’t like me when I’m angry! But, may I please finish my yummy waffle and hitch up my Mom jeans first?' Pitifully feigning an attempt at opening up a can of whoop arse also fails miserably when we’ve all seen Obama daintily sip beer, pinkie extended."
  • "Since Obama, by his own admission, can’t figure out 'whose ass to kick' on his own, I figure we should help him out. . . . I suppose even if he and his experts finally figures out a target like, say, the terrorists who want to kill us, he’d merely continue to fail anyway. It’s not like he has any practice manning up nor any practice actually kicking anything, ass or otherwise."
  • "The only asses Obama has kicked have been unintentional. For instance, the candidates for whom he campaigned, the idea that experience doesn’t matter and, well, his own masculinity."
(By the way, Ziganto, it's "ass" around here, not "arse." I guess if I were a conservative prick, I would say, "If you want to talk like the British, why don't you just pack your shit and move to Merry Olde England? We speak American around here!")

Allow me to summarize. Ziganto's primary criticism of Obama is that he is not manly enough. You see, Ziganto would prefer to have a more manly chief executive. Many Americans feel the same way. Every four years, they take the question, "Which candidate would you most like to have a beer with?" seriously.  They want their president to do manly things, like watch baseball, hunt, and make fun of born-again murderers on death row. Obviously, basketball is not a sufficiently manly sport for these Americans, but I digress. Ziganto's latest post really does come down to the embarrassingly juvenile complaint that Obama is not manly enough to be president.

Anyway, I just wonder why Ziganto supports politicians like Sarah Palin and Nikki Haley.  I mean, they're not manly, are they? They're women! As "true feminists," they deserve our support, according to Ziganto, because they were not "busily pant suiting themselves and trying to become men." Indeed, should there ever be the need to kick anyone's ass or even mow a lawn and either Palin or Haley is in charge, Ziganto would have a man do if for them. As Ziganto writes,
I am a staunch Anti-Feminist. Seriously, mowing the lawn is almost as bad as changing your own car tire. Which is utterly unheard of in my mind. Far easier, and more womanly to use your wiles. Work up a good fake cry, pout prettily and watch while a man does the job. Who needs ya, Gloria Steinem? Not I and that is for damn certain.   
If you object to Obama's presidency on the grounds that he's not manly enough for the job, then how could you support a woman's candidacy for public office and yet require of women that they not be manly?

Believe me, no one is more confused about Lori Ziganto's position on all of this than is Lori Ziganto.

And I haven't even gotten to Ziganto's ludicrous claim that Obama has been unable to kick the asses of terrorists. During the presidential campaign, Obama made McCain look like a dove on the issue of attacking terrorists in Pakistan. Indeed, Obama's position on the issue aligned him with . . . Sarah Palin. And Obama's success in targeting and killing suspected Al Qaeda militants is well-known, except to conservatives like Ziganto, apparently. The use of unmanned drones for this purpose has even drawn the ire of the U.N. (So much for kowtowing to other countries.)

Ziganto, step up your game.

Saturday, May 1, 2010

At a certain point, you have made enough money.

 Former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling testifies before Congress in 2002. 

Fox "News," the propaganda arm of the Republican party, is devoting air time to the following quotation attributed to President Obama:
I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.  
I saw them talking about it this morning, with text along the bottom of the screen implying that Obama is making war on capitalism itself.  Think about that.  What would Fox "News" have you believe?  This: the claim that some amount of money is enough for an individual is antithetical to capitalism.  Which is to say that no amount is ever enough.  Not one million dollars, not one billion, not one trillion.  All the money in the entire world isn't enough for a single person.  Is this even plausible?  Does it even make sense?

To endorse the view that no amount is ever enough is to endorse a pointless and evil sort of greed.  I acknowledge that the profit motive is important to capitalism, and I acknowledge the importance of capitalism itself.  But the insatiable desire for more and more money is not necessarily good for capitalism.  In fact, it can be bad, as our recent history has shown us.  Compulsive greed leads individuals to make irrationally risky decisions in the pursuit of money; it blinds individuals to the importance of the health of the economy to their own economic well-being; it encourages a sociopathic disregard for law and morality.  And both law and morality are important to capitalism.  Both Adam Smith and Milton Friedman said as much, no matter what the Republican friends of corporate sociopaths would have you believe. 

Fox's election year maneuver here is just another example of the radicalization of American politics.  What do I mean by this?  Radicals accept general principles without admitting any exception whatsoever to them.  For example, pro-life radicals claim that abortion is never permissible under any circumstances.  The NRA lobby wants absolute rights to private gun ownership and argues fallaciously that any restriction would put us on a slippery slope to complete gun control; meanwhile, the mentally ill make the innocent pay for this freedom with their lives.  Fox "News" radicals claim that greed is always good and should be nurtured and encouraged, without exception.  The Fox "News" audience, without realizing it, comes to accept extremist thinking over time.  Those already inclined to extremist thinking watch Fox "News" for confirmation of their views.  The results are obvious: the health care reform debacle was rife with extremist thinking, and it made finding compromise virtually impossible in the end.

But let's get back to the President's statement.  It is always good to ask about a quotation this brief, "What was the context?"  And here it is (emphasis mine):
We had a system where some on Wall Street could take these risks without fear of failure, because they keep the profits when it was working, and as soon as it went south, they expected you to cover their losses.  So it was one of those heads, they tail  -- tails, you lose.  
So they failed to consider that behind every dollar that they traded, all that leverage they were generating, acting like it was Monopoly money, there were real families out who were trying to finance a home, or pay for their child’s college, or open a business, or save for retirement.  So what’s working fine for them wasn’t working for ordinary Americans.  And we’ve learned that clearly.  It doesn’t work out fine for the country. It’s got to change.  (Applause.)
Now, what we’re doing -- I want to be clear, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned.  I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.  (Laughter.)  But part of the American way is you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service.  We don't want people to stop fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow the economy. 
I’ve said this before.  I’ve said this on Wall Street just last week.  I believe in the power of the free market.  And I believe in a strong financial system.  And when it’s working right, financial institutions, they help make possible families buying homes, and businesses growing, and new ideas taking flight.  An entrepreneur may have a great idea, but he may need to borrow some money to make it happen.  It would be hard for a lot of us to buy a house -- our first house, at least, if we weren’t able to take out a mortgage. 
So there’s nothing wrong with a financial system that helps the economy expand.  And there are a lot of good people in the financial industry who are doing things the right way.  And it’s in our interest when those firms are strong and when they’re healthy.  
But some of these institutions that operated irresponsibly, they’re not just threatening themselves -- they threaten the whole economy.  And they threaten your dreams, your prospects, everything that you worked so hard to build.  
So we just want them to operate in a way that’s fair and honest and in the open, so that we don’t have to go through what we’ve already gone through.  
Now, to any rational person whose thinking has not been distorted by extremist thinking, these are hardly the remarks of someone making war on capitalism.  Why didn't Fox "News" bring any of the following statements to the attention of their viewers?
  • "[W]e’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned."  
  • "[P]art of the American way is you can just keep on making [money] if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service."  
  • "I believe in the power of the free market."  
We all know the answer.  And we all know why the mainstream media has ignored the comment and Fox "News" compulsively repeats it.

Note the laughter after the statement Fox "News" has taken out of context.  Is this the evil laughter of communists plotting the overthrow of American capitalism?  Of course not.  It is the laughter of those who recognize that, at a certain point, the pursuit of money is the manifestation of a mental disorder.  Obama is not targeting the Warren Buffetts of the world: he is targeting the Jeffrey Skillings and the Andy Fastows.

And he's pointing out that corporate executives and those in the financial services industry do not operate in a vaccuum.  As the Great Recession has shown, what they do affects virtually everyone.  Those who in the compulsive pursuit of money behave irrationally and irresponsibly at the expense of providing a good product or service are threats to capitalism, not practitioners of it. But one must resist the extremist propaganda of Fox "News" to see this.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Source of word vomit stream identified as RedState's hysterical Ziganto

The pace at which RedState's Lori Ziganto churns out her hysterical, dimwitted screeds is impressive.  I simply don't have the time to respond to all of them since I work well over 40 hours a week.  And that doesn't include the work I do around the house.

Anyway, according to Ziganto, Obama expressed disapproval of the United States' superpower status in remarks he made at the recent nuclear security summit.  Ziganto writes,
Yesterday at his nuclear conference, Obama said the following:
“Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.”
Whether we like it or not. That’s like what Mommies say when telling you to eat your yucky vegetables. Would he prefer that we be vulnerable and weak? Heck of an American Can-Do attitude, Barry!  
("Barry," by the way, is birtherspeak.  While outing herself as a birther might play well with her readers, it makes her look unhinged to the rest of us.)  The title of her little essay is, "Obama and His Administration Lament America’s Superpower Status."

One finds more predictable conservative shrieking about Obama in her little essay.  Ziganto writes, "Obama does not believe in American Exceptionalism and he is actively pursuing its decline."  Ziganto also writes:
Obama’s entire career path was predicated on the belief that America is icky and needs “fixed.” That America needs to be more like Europe. He goes on apology tours grousing about all our delusionally perceived wrongs, for goodness sake. He can’t even bring himself to ever praise America. 
And she goes on to ally herself with Liz Cheney.  According to Ziganto, she and Cheney live up to the creed, "Walk softly, but carry a big lipstick."  (Say what?  If I disagree with them, will they sneak up on me and give me a makeover?)  That kind of tells you everything you need to know.

Anyway, I wonder why the quotation that sparked Ziganto's touch of word vomit was so short?  Gee, I wonder what the context was? Let's take a look!
I remain committed to being a partner with countries around the world, and in particular hot spots around the world, to see if we can reduce those tensions and ultimately resolve those conflicts.  And the Middle East would be a prime example.  I think that the need for peace between Israelis and Palestinians and the Arab states remains as critical as ever. 
It is a very hard thing to do.  And I know that even if we are applying all of our political capital to that issue, the Israeli people through their government, and the Palestinian people through the Palestinian Authority, as well as other Arab states, may say to themselves, we are not prepared to resolve this -- these issues -- no matter how much pressure the United States brings to bear. 
And the truth is, in some of these conflicts the United States can’t impose solutions unless the participants in these conflicts are willing to break out of old patterns of antagonism. I think it was former Secretary of State Jim Baker who said, in the context of Middle East peace, we can’t want it more than they do. 
But what we can make sure of is, is that we are constantly present, constantly engaged, and setting out very clearly to both sides our belief that not only is it in the interests of each party to resolve these conflicts but it’s also in the interest of the United States.  It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them.  And that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure.
So I’m going to keep on at it.  But I think on all these issues -- nuclear disarmament, nuclear proliferation, Middle East peace -- progress is going to be measured not in days, not in weeks.  It’s going to take time.  And progress will be halting.  And sometimes we’ll take one step forward and two steps back, and there will be frustrations.  And so it’s not going to run on the typical cable news 24/7 news cycle.  But if we’re persistent, and we’ve got the right approach, then over time, I think that we can make progress.
(Emphasis mine.)  Obviously, Obama is acknowledging our superpower status and what he takes to be its attendant responsibilities.  He is also saying that, all else being equal, it is better in the long run that we lead other nations in striving for peace rather than engage them in war.

Only in the mind of an hysterical conservative blogger is acknowledging the costs of war a condemnation of military strength.

Ziganto, you're a f*cking idiot.  There, I said it.

Incidentally, Lori, how do you square your claim that Obama is pursuing the decline of American exceptionalism with Obama's assertion in the very same speech you quote that "because of the steps we’ve taken [at the summit], the American people will be safer"?

I find it funny that Ziganto, who likely supports the Republican Party, claims that Obama is anti-American when it is the Party of No that is so intent on having us mired in a no-can-do malaise—for political purposes, of course.

How can Ziganto, with her overworked, sputtering brain, square what she says in her hysterical little essay with Obama's assertion that "I stand here today as hopeful as ever that the United States of America will endure, that it will prevail; that the dream of our founders will live on in our time"? Or Obama's declaration that "To ensure prosperity here at home and peace abroad, we all share the belief we have to maintain the strongest military on the planet"? Or Obama's message that
in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people. Yes we can.  
Or Obama's statement at the 2004 Democratic National Convention that
Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation not because of the height of our skyscrapers, or the power of our military, or the size of our economy; our pride is based on a very simple premise, summed up in a declaration made over two hundred years ago: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  That is the true genius of America. 
Ziganto, take your snark and boobs and find something that you're actually qualified to do—fast food, say.

Monday, March 22, 2010

The Chickens come home to roost

[T]he notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them—which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration—is ridiculous.  Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward. —Barack Obama, 23 July 2007
A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves. At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo—just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994. [...] This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none. [...] So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours. —David Frum, 21 March 2010

Friday, January 15, 2010

Another example of the fine art of bullshitting

When I think of Rush Limbaugh, the Shit Demon from the film Dogma sometimes comes to mind.

Perhaps you have heard what the prescription drug addict himself has said about the Obama Administration's response to the earthquake in Haiti. If you have not, or if you need a refresher, here's what he said, among other things:
Yes, I think in the Haiti earthquake, ladies and gentlemen -- in the words of Rahm Emanuel -- we have another crisis simply too good to waste. This will play right into Obama's hands. He's humanitarian, compassionate. They'll use this to burnish their, shall we say, "credibility" with the black community -- in the both light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country. It's made-to-order for them. That's why he couldn't wait to get out there, could not wait to get out there.
Clearly, for people like Limbaugh—you know, bullshitters—there is obviously no way for the president to win. If Obama rushes aid to Haiti, then he is only trying to "burnish his credibility with the black community." If Obama does not rush aid to Haiti, then he, like that prick who preceded him in office, doesn't care about the suffering of victims of natural disasters, like all those people in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina hit who made the mistake of voting democratic.

Now, Limbaugh appears to believe that we've helped Haiti enough, so screw 'em. But the president obviously does not and cannot share Limbaugh's attitude. Limbaugh knows that if Obama drags his feat or only half-heartedly comes to Haiti's aid, he will receive widespread condemnation.

Many of us understand that a rapid, massive aid effort is clearly appropriate and required, and that is just what Obama is trying to mobilize. And yet Limbaugh condems the man for it. And that is why I can confidently, and without reservation, classify Limbaugh's criticism as another example of the fine art of bullshitting.

Hey, Rush: go f*ck yourself. And while you're at it, think about all the Haitians whose lives might have been saved if you hadn't convinced people not to contribute to the aid effort.

Friday, October 2, 2009

Republicans: "Hooray! We lost!"

If you were wondering where certain Republicans' loyalties are, now you know.

Chicago won't be hosting the 2016 Summer Olympics. That honor goes to Rio de Janeiro in Brazil.

Both Barack and Michelle Obama campaigned in person for Chicago's bid to host the games. But even their international starpower couldn't prevent Chicago from being eliminated in the first round of voting.

As Politico's Josh Gerstein reports, some Republicans are celebrating.

“Hahahahaha. I thought the world would love us more now that Bush was gone. I thought if we whored ourselves out to our enemies, great things would happen. Apparently not,” wrote RedState.com's Eric Erickson.

Yeah, very funny.

What if the Obamas had not made their pitch in person? For their home town? I'm sure many conservatives would have wondered why Obama had not done everything he could have to ensure that the United States host the games—you know, conservatives being the Country First people that they are.

RedState's Dan McLaughlin got in on the act as well:
I’d questioned Obama’s priorities in making the trip, but now he has a much bigger problem. It’s one thing for the President to make a phone call or two to lend a subtle hand to this sort of effort; that would have been fine with me. But by the President and First Lady both making personal appearances and elevating this to the top news story of the day and a test of personal and national prestige, Obama stood a significant chance of being humiliated, and doing so for what is hard to describe as a critical national interest.
Obama's effort to bring the games to Chicago is nothing compared to the risky gambles made by the previous administration, however. (Remember how we were going to be greeted as liberators in Iraq, even though we were going in with a fraction of the troops the Pentagon wanted for the job?) The important thing for the folks at RedState.com is the party the president belongs to. How do we know that this is pure partisan rubbish? If Obama makes the trip, he risks being humiliated. If he does not make the trip, he lacks the courage of his convictions—an attribute conservatives praised his predecessor for having in spades. (Remember the republicans' insistence that we stay the course and not cut and run? I do.)

If they won't let you win, then they just want you to lose.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Sign the letter

Obama has finally put his name on a version of health care reform. Read about the Obama Plan here. If you support it, please sign the letter.

Search This Blog

Followers

What I'm Following

It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. ---W.K. Clifford

Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. ---Thomas Jefferson