Category Archives: Political polemics

ROCK IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Help me out, I am over 80.  Who is Chris Rock and what do they mean when they say he riffs?  Or is Riffs his last name? It’s capitalized in the headline.  Is this the same dude who was just arrested for grabbing someone’s cell phone/camera away from them and smashing a window with it?

Apparently Mr. Riffs is a very important person because he was invited to a birthday party for the President of the United States at the White House.  He must have had a good time because he said he felt like “he died and went to black heaven,”.  He says the party was filled with celebrity guests like Jay-Z, Tom Hanks and Whoopi Goldberg.  Who is Jay-Z?

The ABC headline reads “Chris Rock Riffs on Obama’s 50th Birthday Party

While Rock called the party an “unbelievable experience,” he said the informal dress code made him feel like the late rapper “Jam Master Jay” at the White House.

Rock also talked about standing with rapper-producer Jay-Z in the audience and watching singer-songwriter Stevie Wonder and pianist-composer Herbie Hancock perform together.

“Me and Jay-Z looked at each other like, ‘Oh, hell no, we’re never going to do shows here,’” Rock said in the video of his club appearance. “The president is never going to go, ‘Yes, ‘Big Pimpin,’ how did you like that?’” Rock said, referring to a Jay-Z song. “That’s never going to happen. Let’s just be glad we’re invited.”

Rock went on to say that after Hancock and Wonder left the stage, the DJ slowly switched the tunes from the R&B group Kool & the Gang to funk innovator George Clinton and that the music got “blacker and blacker.”

The most surreal portion of the night, Rock said, was the moment Beyonce’s “Crazy in Love” started playing. At that point, Rock recalled that first daughters Malia, 13, and Sasha Obama, 10,”came out of nowhere … and started doing the dougie” dance.

Is this our White House?  Stevie Wonder is great but Big Pimpin?  And if it was “Black Heaven” what was Tom Hanks doing there?  It was Obama’s 50th birthday party and the Washington Post says he paid for it, so I guess he is entitled to have whatever kind of party he wants.  As White House parties go, it certainly was different.  It must be part of the total transformation Obama promised us.

ROMNEY 48% – OBAMA 43%

Chris and Ed, those friendly chaps over at MSNBC were a bit less vitriolic this week.  It’s because they have turned giddy, giddy with delight over the sense that the Republicans no longer have a ghost of a chance in November.

The Republican candidates have destroyed each other.  Romney will be the nominee and the Tea Party folks will never vote for him because they think he is a Liberal.  There are serious issues that need attention, the nation is deep in debt, people are out of work and need help but all the Republicans want to talk about is how to stop people from having sex.  Rush Limbaugh, the primary spokesman for the Republican Party, delivered the decisive blow with his disgusting remarks about a female college student.  No self respecting woman, regardless of Party will ever vote Republican after that.

Well now, Chris and Ed, you still don’t get it, it seems.  Still living in that bubble I guess.  I would love to burst your bubble but I can’t.  I tried.  It’s too thick.  Funny thing about that bubble, those of us on the outside can see in, those of us who take the trouble to do so at least. We see what you stand for and we don’t like it.  But you never seem to understand what just what it is we stand for and then you object to it anyhow.  I think you need to get your bubble fixed.

The Tea Party didn’t rise up to promote conservatism.  Its members were too busy enjoying life and family (including sex) to spend time doing that.  The Tea Party rose up to save the country from a complete transformation to the Left.  The Tea Party is what happens when a trend goes too far for too long and needs to be stopped.  The vote will not be for a candidate, though one may wish it could be.  Whoever the nominee may be will not change that.  The vote isn’t even against Barack Obama, though I’m sure you won’t understand that.  The vote will be against the arrival of a collective state and a soft tyranny.  And it’s a vote against bankruptcy as well.  Obama is less a culprit than a culmination.

Rush Limbaugh is Rush Limbaugh; he is unique; he is solitary.  He is not a spokesman for the Republican Party.  Republicans are no more likely to vote Democratic because of some disgusting remark Limbaugh makes and apologizes for than are Democrats likely to vote Republican because of some even more disgusting remarks that Bill Maher makes and refuses to apologize for.

Bye the way, Romney is leading Obama 48 to 43 according to a current Rasmussen poll.  Santorum is not doing so well but he is ahead of Obama.

MAY WE HAVE PERMISSION TO DEFEND OURSELVES – PLEASE?

Leon Panetta, our Secretary of Defense insists we need approval from a consortium of foreign nations or we have no legal basis for military action.  Me thinks poor Leon is trapped between supporting his boss and common sense.

A poll taken by Arianna Huffington’s Pollster.com found 60% of U.S. Army officers identify themselves as Republicans, only 18% as Democrats.  There is no mystery about that.

FOLKS FAINT AT MY MEETINGS ALL THE TIME,

and he says it without a smile. It’s the Messiah complex.

FLASH !!
Breitbart’s Obama tapes to be aired tonight on the Hannity program, 9pm Eastern time.

OBAMA PRAISES THE CHEVROLET VOLT AND REVEALS HE WILL NOT SEEK A THIRD TERM

The cat is out of the bag, so to speak.  President in Chief, B. H. Obama let this remark slip out in a speech to the United Auto Workers union last week.  He vowed to buy a Volt “five years from now, when I’m not president anymore.”  So much for the alarmist’s President-for-life theory.

What occasioned the remark was the then imminent shutting down of the production line for the Chevy VOLT and the ensuing layoff of 1,300 workers by Government Motors.  The President wanted to assure the union workers of his continued support for the car.  The VOLT has been an utter failure in the market place.  Not since Ford introduced the Edsel has a car been such a flop.  Ford’s mistake was to put a toilet seat on the front of the car and then give the car a name like Edsel.  The failure didn’t cost taxpayers a red cent.  The company acknowledged they had launched a loser and discontinued the model.  That decision was just common sense born out of necessity.

GM, however, is only a quasi-private sector company that remains subject to the demands of Obama and his administration.  While a private sector company must manage sensibly to avoid the bankruptcy courts and assure its ultimate survival, no such discipline exists with the government.  The politicians do not pay for their failures; we do.

If the batteries are still good, and he is careful with his speed, Barack will be able to drive electrically up to 40 miles on just one battery charge.  All I can say to that is, “Wow!”  After only 8-10 hours of recharging at home, he can drive on the batteries for another 40 miles, again “Wow!”  Of course, in 5 to 8 years it will be time to replace the batteries.  At a cost of about $15,000 before adjusting for inflation, this effectively sets the lifespan of the car.

Now here’s one for the… you-can’t-make-this-stuff-up… department.  The VOLT is sold in Europe under the name Volt/Ampera.  There are some mighty fine automobiles built in Europe and every year one outstanding example is chosen to be honored as Car of the Year at the Geneva Auto Convention.  This year they picked the VOLT.

The auto show, in its review of the vehicle, called the Volt/Ampera a “mature product, after years of development and perfectioning by General Motors, and the first example of an electric vehicle with extended range.”

Europeans are not normally that dense when it comes to engineering.  It must be racism.  It’s Obama’s car.  Ridiculous of course.  But so is the car.

NETANYAHU’S PREDICAMENT

"Now this is what I want you to do, Ben"

Have you noticed how often Barack Obama puts a condescending hand on another head of state?  Have you noticed the selectivity upon whom the gesture is applied?  To Saudi and Chinese leaders he bows in humble respect.  It is upon the shoulders of Western leaders that he lays the hand of superiority.  A handshake is a symbol of acceptance, respect and equality.  A hand on a shoulder is something quite different; it emanates from a paternal instinct.  It says – I’m your senior, be not concerned, I’ll take care of you.  It is a gesture born of an inner feeling of superiority, not from a sense of equality.

When Obama bestows the gesture upon Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu it takes on the added dimension of a mafioso kiss.  It also troubled me when Obama had his photo taken in the oval office showing the bottom of his shoes while talking to Netanyahu.  In the Muslim world that’s the ultimate demonstration of disrespect.  It troubled me even more when, in an unprecedented move by any U.S. president, Obama refused to dine with the visiting Israeli head of state, relegating his dishonored guest to eating alone.  That’s an insult everyone understands.

It troubles me still to see the Israeli head of state need to stand before this contemptuous president of ours, hat in hand to plead for support.  It would be humiliating for a lesser man.  But the Prime Minister shows no disrespect and does it because he puts the welfare of his people above all personal considerations.  I envy the people of Israeli for having such a leader.

KRUGMAN WATCH – WHAT AILS EUROPE?

We learn from Mr. Krugman that he, and only he has the answer.  There is the “Republican narrative and the German narrative. Neither story fits the facts.”

“The Republican story ….. is that Europe is in trouble because it has done too much to help the poor and unlucky,”  This is a classic mischaracterization of Republican and conservative positions.  Conservatives have just as much compassion for the truly poor and unlucky as anyone.  The objection is to the creation of dependency and an unsustainable welfare state that extends well beyond the poor and unlucky to include a majority of the populace.  The inimitable Denis Miller put it succinctly when he said “We just want some bona fides, that’s all”.

“[C]ountries that aren’t on the euro seem able to run large deficits and carry large debts countries that aren’t on the euro seem able to run large deficits and carry large debts without facing any crises. Britain and the United States can borrow long-term at interest rates of around 2 percent; Japan, which is far more deeply in debt than any country in Europe, Greece included, pays only 1 percent… Britain and the United States can borrow long-term at interest rates of around 2 percent; Japan, which is far more deeply in debt than any country in Europe, Greece included, pays only 1 percent.”

What’s that Paul,“without facing any crises”  There’s the rub.  What must it take to get Mr. K to see a pending crisis?  George Osborne holds the position of Chancellor of the UK, a position similar to that of our Treasurer.

The Government ‘has run out of money’ and cannot afford debt-fuelled tax cuts or extra spending, George Osborne has admitted. In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy. Mr. Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers. “The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said.

As far as the U.S. is concerned we already know Krugman’s position is to keep increasing the level of spending until it gets us out of debt.  It’s my blog but I am a generous chap so I’ll give the famed economist the final word… which is –

“The next time you hear people invoking the European example …. here’s what you need to know: they have no idea what they’re talking about.”

JUST WHEN YOU THINK OBAMA HAS HIT ETHICAL BOTTOM HE GOES LOWER STILL

Imagine this –

Mitt Romney wins the nomination and promptly announces the establishment of a national community organizing machine called White Anglo-Saxons for Romney.  In the launch, Romney urges white people to show their loyalty to the white candidate because white people should support each other.  Preposterous!  Unimaginable!  But is it any more preposterous than Obama’s establishment of a national community organizing machine called “Afro-Americans for Obama” to urge black people to support his candidacy because he is black?

Obama’s television commercial is a clear message to black voters that it is their duty to be loyal to their race and vote for the black man who will balance the past injustices of the white man.  The message is – now it’s our turn.

Once again, the Great Divider seeks to divide us ever wider and use that division to further his own ends.  It is ironic that the descendants of the enslaved and the victims of discrimination are solidly supportive of the party that fought to its death for the ability to maintain slavery, and the same party that fought the hardest against the Civil Rights Act.

WE THE PEOPLE

This powerful video speaks for itself.

MORE ON THE CATHOLIC FLAP

Professor Paul Rahe minces no words in writing More Than a Touch of Malice, an article you can read at Ricochet.  He adds his wisdom to the argument that, far from committing a gaffe, Obama’s riling of the Catholic Church was a deliberate and well thought out step taken to define and solidify his base.

In 2008, when he first ran for the Presidency, Barack Obama posed as a moderate most of the time.  This time, he is openly running as a radical. His aim is to win a mandate for the fundamental transformation of the United States that he promised in passing on the eve of his election four years ago and that he promised again when he called his administration The New Foundation.

In the process, he intends to reshape the Democratic coalition – to bring the old hypocrisy to an end, to eliminate those who stand in the way of the final consolidation of the administrative entitlements state, to drive out the faithful Catholics once and for all, to jettison the white working class, and to build a new American regime on a coalition of  highly educated upper-middle class whites, feminists, African-Americans, Hispanics, illegal immigrants, and those belonging to the public-sector unions. To Americans outside this coalition, he intends to show no mercy.

Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, taught that transforming a nation with a prosperous middle class like the United States into a Marxist socialist society could only be accomplished if approached as a three act play:

Act I – join the crowd, gain respect, acceptance and legitimacy.

Act II – develop the theme, spread discontent, and build a following for Act III

Act III – the act of final transformation which Alinsky says will of necessity, be violent.

Act I is complete.  The Occupy movement opened Act II; there is ample discontent.  It only needs to be channeled, fanned and kept alive.  “Those damned Regressives, now they want to take away your sex life”.  That will do it.  That’s the Catholic flap.

Act III…, there will be no Act III; we will see to that in November.  But if there were, the curtain would open in January with an Inauguration Proclamation declaring, “I, Barack Hussein Obama, am the way, the truth and the light; there is no way out of this mess but by me”.  And America would be on the road to becoming a Marxist Socialist society.

Bob B