Obama has learned his lesson now, I’m sure: always keep to the prompter, or else make sure your people pre-vet for proper Journolist credentials the ink-stained maggots who presume to question you.
(h/t Blake)
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Can’t a President just
eat his waffletake a few vacations?I don’t know if this guy is capable of learning anymore, at least not in the way we think of it.
He has lived his entire adult life in a cocoon , kept safely away from such annoyances as reality and consequences. Wherever he is now mentally, it’s uncharted territory, having long since sailed past mere arrogance and hubris.
The drooling mook in the White House could literally pee in your mouth and claim, with blissful sincerity, that he’s serving you a mature Chablis. Perhaps a Raveneau or a Billaud-Simon, from a grand cru vineyard. And it’s not his choice, but part of what’s necessary to solve shared problems so many folks are sufferin’ across the nation.
Don’t drip on the carpet, he just had it steamed.
By the way, consider this. B. Hussein Obama is going to spend the next thirty years, no matter what happens this fall, smeared across the media telling us how awful conservatives are and how selfish our nation is. He’ll do it with a gusto that will make Jimmy Carter look like a demure wallflower of reticence. And he’ll be paid even more to do this than Bill Clinton. He’ll be richer than Clinton one year after leaving office. Your kids will be forced to read his books in school. His portrait will be put in stone or marble many times in many capitols. He’ll be the object of slavering worship like JFK because the Left must have its saints, and they’ve never a presidential saint of such a rich hue.
In the end, that was all that mattered about this vile hash of noxious bromides and dilettante Marxism poured into a human-shaped suit. If everything about Barry Soetero were the same except he were white, he would never have left the Illinois legislature.
they’ve never had a presidential saint of such a rich hue
Pretty much, George. I often use the example that they’ll rap their knuckles on a coffee table and say, “See this? It’s not a coffee table, it’s a Cadillac “, and they fully expect you to reply, “Oh, okay”.
I use to think of this as exaggerating to make a point. Now, not so much.
That had better be a hybrid Cadillac, fella.
Mother Gaia, and all that.
I refuse to desecrate such a beautiful beast as a Cadillac with hybrid standards . Blasphemy, he screamed!!
“I think [Obama] is great.” — Matt Romney
I know y’all have seen it, but it bears repeating.
“I think [Obama] is great.” — Matt Romney
Would it be anti-Mormon or Visigothy or childishly unhelpful to bring up that old saw about the acorn not falling too far from the tree?
Related note: Rob Long over at Ricochet’s latest podcast is exasperated and tired of hearing all the whining about Romney and his squishiness. “What do you want?!?” he screams in a tantrum.
Long also notes in the same podcast that he still thinks Romney will lose.
Being a pragmatic Republican has its perils in the logic department.
All the Ricochet podcast guys don’t get it on the point that if we continue to vote for squishes that’s all we’ll ever get.
Otherwise I like them.
What do I want? Well, Mr. Long, for openers howzabout if Mittens wasn’t so ‘squishy’.
I wonder if the people behind our President are getting nervous, because it’s getting impossible to cover up just how stupid Obama is.
But does Obama’s arrogance outweigh his stupidity? Magic 8-ball isn’t sure.
I’ve been ignoring the Ricochet gang. There are none so blind as they who will not see.
And Obama as plaster saint? Only until they can find another to cast in Kennedy’s image. Stupid Bubba. If only he’d kept it in his pants, plaster sainthood would have been his forever.
But does Obama’s arrogance outweigh his stupidity?
The only thing keeping Obama’s head from imploding is the degeneracy pressure of his arrogance. If the media keeps pouring adulation on him, he may detonate like a type Ia supernova. At least I hope so.
George, Obama won’t detonate, he’ll melt down completely. One day, Obama’s handlers will find Obama in a corner drooling and ranting and, mysteriously, Obama will start communicating through Michelle via memos.
Being a pragmatic Republican has its perils in the logic department.
From one of the HA pragmatists regarding Hatch telling us to fuck off:
No matter how enthusiastic you may be about “purging the RINOs” from the system, it doesn’t always work. And when it fails, why should somebody like Hatch feel any loyalty whatsoever to the party leaders when it comes time for a close vote? Tick the guy off enough and you’ve got another Olympia Snowe on your hands.
And yet this fool probably also believes America’s best days are ahead.
I think that’s such a beautiful exchange. A news guy, not necessarily not in his corner, wants to give Obama a chance to respond to the complaints that he’s out of touch. Obama acts like the reporter made it up! What complaints?? You can see his contempt, he really thinks the reporter is just pulling it out of nowhere, and Obama is thinking “how could there be complaints when I’m working so hard?”
Fine, go on believing people aren’t noticing.
And all you people complaining about Romney, I don’t care anymore. You have your choice: Obama or Romney. Pick one. Go ahead, gripe and moan all the way to November, but pick one. Keep pointing out Romney’s flaws, of which there are many, but pick one. Point out how stupid the Republican Party is, and how the nominating process is a mess, but in November, you get to pick one: Obama or Romney.
Seems pretty simple to me.
Stranger, one of the Powerline guys got ripped for defending Hatch. Basically, people told Powerline it wasn’t Hatch so much that Hatch has been in office forever and our system was not designed for a permanent political class.
Same argument applies at HA, yet people at HA won’t admit it.
No matter how enthusiastic you may be about “purging the RINOs” from the system, it doesn’t always work. And when it fails, why should somebody like Hatch feel any loyalty whatsoever to the party leaders when it comes time for a close vote? Tick the guy off enough and you’ve got another Olympia Snowe on your hands.
So the way to get conservatism out of Hatch when he leans left is to support Hatch when he leans left.
Okay then.
For a moment there I thought we strove to hold politicians accountable to their party’s policy and above all, the voter. But now I see clearly. We must hold the voters accountable to the politician. And Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
Well BurtTC, for my own part I believe you’re fixated on the wrong problems or questions: i.e., personalities and not political principles. Which, again, in my view, is how the nation has come to this pass and peril.
Many of us will not stop pointing out the pitfalls of Romney’s governance. Many of us could barely stomach G. W. Bush.
But I have always said anybody but Obama and will vote for Mitt. Anybody but Gore in 2000.
Neither Romney nor any other candidate deserves anything but hard scrutiny. They are politicians and in charge of the awful part of society that can legally steal from, restrain, imprison, and kill citizens. They are supposed to be our servants, not our masters, and the moment when their every action isn’t greeted with skepticism is the moment we surrender our notions of liberty.
Basically, people told Powerline it wasn’t Hatch so much that Hatch has been in office forever and our system was not designed for a permanent political class.
The problem IS Hatch. He has a lifetime NTU rating of 72 (only 5 points higher than Murkowski and right there with Lugar and Alexander) and he represents one of the reddest states, if not the reddest.
I agree completely, George. I never understood the personality cults that pop up around politicians (or any celebrities, for that matter).
If I had my way, Romney wouldn’t be the nominee, but at this point I’d prefer to focus my attention on Congressional races. Keep adding to the stack of Congresscritters who are committed to smaller government, and it might happen, even with Romney in the White House.
Not voting for Romney is not a vote for Obama. If you say otherwise you are lying.
True cranky, but a vote for Romney nullifies some stinking hippy commie pinko fags vote for Obama. Why deny yourself that small pleasure in life?
StrangernFiction sez:
…and he represents one of the reddest states, if not the reddest.
Nope. MY state, Oklahoma, is the reddest state. Every single county.
Because a vote for Romney encourages the GOP to continue to back candidates who don’t represent my principles.
We will all be very tired of this way before November.
“We will all be very tired of this way before November.”
Yep, and it’s already way before November.
Nope. MY state, Oklahoma, is the reddest state. Every single county.
It may be, but a state that goes GOP by 40, 46, and 28 in the last three presidential elections is pretty damn red. Too red to be represented by Orrin Hatch.
I’ll agree on that. Orrin Hatch needs to spend more time with his family.
Last month in the Georgia pimary, I found that a vote for Santorum nullified some stinking Establishment “lose more slowly” yellow scum’s vote for Romney. So I already got that “small pleasure” out of the way. The moral agony of having to take responsibility for putting RomneyFail in the White Housewould vastly overwhelm any pleasure I would get from nullifying commies. At least, at the ballot box.
cranky-d says April 14, 2012 at 2:32 pm
“Not voting for Romney is not a vote for Obama. If you say otherwise you are lying.”
There’s probably a mathematical equation we could use to figure this out, but obviously it would be crucial to know what numbers to plug into it.
Here, lemme wing it…
Every election there are any number of cranks (sorry cranky-d) on the right who refuse to vote for the squish Republican. My guess is there are nearly as many lefties who think the D party doesn’t go far enough, so refuse to vote for their guy, or end up voting for somebody like Nader.
Then you have the weirdo middlers who don’t like either guy, so they stay home. Add to those all the morons and nincompoops who blow out their ballot and end up not dangling enough chad or selecting the “do not write in this box” section of their ballot, thus cancelling it out.
So when all is said and done, does not voting for Romney equal a vote for Obama?
Surely not. Probably (and I’m just guestimating, based on the above) more like somewhere between .20 and .60 of a vote for Obama. If we’re optimistic then, it takes about 5 cranky non-Romney non-voters to equal an Obama vote, and that’s not such an awful thing.
Enjoyed the post, BurtTC.
Heh, myself, I’m debating “none of the above”, or writing in “Richard M. Nixon”.
REBEL !!!
Not voting for anybody expresses your total contempt for the whole fucking mess.
Actually, BurtTC, we have another choice. The Founders considered it the reason for the Second Amendment. The only question is when it gets obvious to a critical mass of people (about 15% for the American Revolution).
My political decisions are now predicated on what makes that choice easier for that 15%.
Actually, BurtTC, we have another choice. The Founders considered it the reason for the Second Amendment. The only question is when it gets obvious to a critical mass of people (about 15% for the American Revolution).
My political decisions are now predicated on what makes that choice easier for that 15%.
I prefer secession over revolution, but other than that you have summed up my sentiments exactly! As good as I’ve seen. Well done sir!
And yet another reason to be impressed with this here blog.
Your vote (for or against Obama, that being the bottom-line choice) doesn’t matter if you live in a Red State that will not cast electoral votes to the bastard whether or not how you vote: for example, Tennessee, my home state, will go Red, again, so I can safely write in Sarah Palin and not worry so much. Or so I hope. And if you live in a sequentially Blue State (California, New York, Illinois) your vote for or against the #SCOAMF won’t matter. Or so you hope.
It’s the battleground swing-states that really matter on the run to 270 EC votes: Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, Iowa, Virginia, and perhaps South Carolina, Colorado. So, your vote is more important in those states than mine in Tennessee or Dick Cheney’s in Wyoming. Please, consider where you live before you vote for the other Mickey Mouse.
You have your choice: Obama or Romney.
I reject your false dichotomy; I’m voting for Mike Rowe & Ham Sandwich. As noted above, the national GOP needs to learn that it can no longer nominate a candidate whose first impulse is to use the bureaucracy to make my life “better” more efficiently than the Democrat he would replace.
Until the GOP reforms itself and truly embraces a small government that will leave me the hell alone and pay off the debts accruing to my children, they will not get my support. And I don’t care how bad the other guy is — I will not submit to blackmail, nor will I negotiate with terrorists. Put up a candidate that I can support, or go hang.
If only Romney were actually interested in earning my support, instead of relying on surrogates, supporters, pragmatists, and just-win-baby! partisans telling me the giant douche is better than the turd sandwich.
I’m thinking the appeal of Romney (bear with me here) is tht he is a plain vanilla candidate. He’s handsome, has a lovely wife, five good looking sons with families of their own. He’s a made lots of money. He’s a Christian, even if he is a Mormon—at least he’s not a Muslim. He’s got manners and so does his family, as evidenced by the grace with which Ann handled the whole Hillary Rosen debacle.
Personally, I find the Obamas as exhausting as the Clintons. It’s gaffe-o-rama with them. The clownish outfits. The outrageous spending. The faux pas in foreign lands. Wearing white to the D-Day memorial, Michelle? Clueless much? Kind of like the iPod for the Queen. And on and on.
Romney was my guy last election cycle and he wasn’t my preferred candidate this time. I’ve seen growing numbers of Nobama stickers in town and the Baptists are even warming to Romney and they hate everyone. I think Obama’s popularity is grossly over-stated; I don’t know anyone who has anything positive to say about him and I’m including my libtard brother in Austin.
Anyway: Romney! He’s better than nothing!
A lady has to have her standards I guess.
A superficial candidate for superficial voters, Leigh? I suppose it makes as much sense as anything else the GOP’s come up with in the last 20 years.
With the Obamas, quite the pair, it’s a constant faux pas de deux.
I think that’s about it, Squid. Lord knows we’ve talked it to death on here. No one here is enthusiastic about a Romney presidency. There are a couple of half-hearted cheerleaders, but they get torpedoed most of the time.
I do think a second Obama term would be disasterous not only nationally but internationally.
OT: Where’s Jeff? Is the baby making an early debut? I was hoping he’d address the SS hooker debacle. Personally, I’m calling bullshit on the whole story. Not that there aren’t fellows that enjoy a little female company, but this whole story reads like a bad spy novel.
Excellent, sdferr!
…this whole story reads like a bad spy novel.
Making it distinct from the rest of the Obamination how, exactly?
I do think a second Obama term would be disasterous not only nationally but internationally.
I agree, which is a big part of the reason I’m so very, very angry that the GOP nominated such a girl’s blouse. With such enormous and historic consequences on the line, you’d think the Big Brains would do a better job at picking Teh Inevitable Won.
Squid, they got rid of Cain, the only candidate who could have beaten Obama, so now we’ll have a repeat of Dole and McCain. The October suprise this year will be a real doozy — martial law anyone?