A needed public service right now, and bound to become moreso as the year becomes more mature, I should say.

I can’t remember where I saw this, but somewhere I saw someone say “democrats won the elections, and they just need to learn to deal with that.” That captures it, I think. Never in the history of sore losers has any loser been quite as sore as these winners.

They never seem to run out of excuses. But who asked them for any? They won. It’s their policies…that is the problem. The policies don’t work. Those are the best policies that don’t work; the lesser policies, do damage. And they know it. If conservatives still ran things, barely significant things, somewhere, it would be all their fault. But unfortunately that isn’t the case. And so there is a wandering maelstrom of blame looking for a home. Like a frenzy of hungry sharks with no meat around, or a wild lightning storm without a ground.

I don’t know where in the world I can find a conservative nearly as bitter and angry as the most tranquil and relaxed liberal right now. They snap at their perceived opponents, they snap at their own, they snap at disinterested bystanders. And you’d better believe everyone is a racist.

So I would expect the twelve points of advice are best implemented — after things have calmed down. Just a bit.

1. Establish honesty in admitting failure.
2. Show faith in a higher power.
3. Assist in surrender of control.
4. Help in taking a personal moral inventory – Liberals absolutely hate this.
5. Encourage admission that the previously held belief was incorrect.
6. Help recovering Obama supporter accept defects in judgment.
7. Help restore humility.
8. Establish a willingness to make amends.
9. Assist the Obamican in giving and finding forgiveness.
10. Help recovering supporter maintain his progress.
11. Help develop an action plan – Democrats love action plans.
12. Encourage recovering lefty to follow through on action plan.

If there was a walking demigod that was the very incarnation of pure disappointment, I’m afraid Barack Obama would be the guy. There simply is no way to establish higher expectations of something, or to depress the threshold of actual delivery any further. He’s become the “Phantom Menace” of Presidents…and if you’re old enough to have possessed awareness of your surroundings back then, you have to remember how angry, bitter and heated things got about that. A 12-step program would have been a soothing tonic to purge the aftertaste from pod-racing and Jar Jar Binks, so it’s easy to see it’ll be needed now with regard to our latest disappointment pandemic.

Poor, poor, bitter, sad, angry, disappointed people. Poor hurting people, with their bruised, bloated, brittle egos. Good luck to you all. Don’t get too angry at everyone else, mkay? Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering…and that, of course, is a path to the Dark Side.

Clothes that cost a lot of money, sure. (The quantity of clothing was never something that was spelled out for me; so like many, I was always at a loss for the information needed to make judgment calls as far as bang-for-the-buck.) But her clothes looked nice.

And she wore them while campaigning. It seems like something so non-controversial, or at least something that should be, to say that people ought to look nice when they’re campaigning for something.

Michelle Obama: Volunteers at a food bank, and for said occasion wears one pair of butt-ugly shoes retailing at $540 (hat tip: Rick).

Yeah, but she’s the President’s wife. First Ladies should radiate, I guess, a sense of fashion hip-and-with-it-ness that borders on the surreal…like they don’t know what a dollar is worth, and something is terribly wrong with the universe if they ever have to. Even when rubbing shoulders with the riff-raff at a food bank. Vice Presidents, on the other hand, should be wearing flour sacks, all the time, even when campaigning for the office. That’s a time-honored American tradition. Didn’t you know?

Just go here…and read.

Share it with a tender-ego Obamaton you know & love. Today!

Via blogger friend Rick, we learn of a different take on The Chosen One’s standing after the first hundred days of His rule:

President Obama’s media cheerleaders are hailing how loved he is. But at the 100-day mark of his presidency, Mr. Obama is the second-least-popular president in 40 years.

According to Gallup’s April survey, Americans have a lower approval of Mr. Obama at this point than all but one president since Gallup began tracking this in 1969. The only new president less popular was Bill Clinton, who got off to a notoriously bad start after trying to force homosexuals on the military and a federal raid in Waco, Texas, that killed 86. Mr. Obama’s current approval rating of 56 percent is only one tick higher than the 55-percent approval Mr. Clinton had during those crises.

Perhaps, now, we learn the real reason why the 100-day benchmark is so artificially important: It affords the media a high zenith of latitude in massaging truth. I’ve watched a lot of Presidents take the oath now, and never once have I ever heard any official news agency say anything even similar to: “Okay, on Day One Hundred, we’re going to go after this poll, over here, look at this statistic, and read it this way…” Nope. The 100-day thing, itself, is most often phrased as a question. Or a bunch of questions. What’s The Boss worried about for His second hundred days? What’s He learned? How does it make Him feel when people say nasty things about Him? The approval ratings He has or hasn’t earned…that really was never anything more than one more bludgeon to use against Republicans.

His policies, at a thirty thousand-foot level? Some Americans feel obliged to murmur empty words of support, having bragged just a few weeks earlier about having voted Him in. But our country is generally not too enthused.

Sixty percent (60%) of Americans say the federal government has too much power and too much money, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Just nine percent (9%) say the government has too little power and money. Twenty-four percent (24%) believe the government has about the right amount of both.

Not surprisingly, the Political Class sees things a lot differently. While 85% of Mainstream Americans say the government has too much power and money, just two percent (2%) of the Political Class agree. Nearly one-ou[t]-of-four members (24%) of the Political Class, in fact, believe the government has too little money and power, but 68% say it has about the right amount of each.

While slightly more than half of those working for both the government and private industry say the government is too big, 79% of entrepreneurs feel that way.

Republicans and adults not affiliated with either major political party are far more concerned about the government’s size and wealth than Democrats are. Eighty-eight percent (88%) of Republicans and 62% of unaffiliateds say the federal government has too much power and money. Among Democrats, however, just 35% agree, while 44% think the size of government is about right.

The Republican campaign slogans for 2010 and 2012, they write themselves. I can see the lawn signs now: “Forty-four percent of democrats think government is the right size!” Hey, waitaminnit…what’s a hundred minus 35 minus 44? That means 21% of democrats want more?

Back to the President: Blogger friend Daniel Summers gives the President a charitable D- overall, having failed Him in all the “courses” save for national security. (The pirate head-shot thing…saved His Holy Ass.)

Blogger friend Buck and I have a disagreement about the failed photo op in NYC, the one with the 747 scaring the bejeezus out of Manhattan folks still shell-shocked from the 9/11 attacks all these years later. Buck, and folks like him, are in the “not a news item, move along” camp. They all forget: This was a stupid, sub-rookie, albeit honest mistake — made by folks who are actually pretty smart — and not an isolated incident. So you can’t blame stupidity, you can’t blame insincerity and you can’t even blame chance. How is it that this stupid, stupid thing was done? The political climate. And I’m not talking out here where we’re fighting about conservatives and liberals all week every week. I’m talking about inside the White House…where no mistakes can be made…ever…because the guy at the tippy top is just so wonderful, He has that shimmering halo over His head.

In government as well as outside of it, such a situation leads to brains in the lower echelons that aren’t shut off or dulled down, quite so much as shifted into idle and left there. The Boss has this immunity from criticism, you see, and you’ve inherited some of that. Besides, you aren’t actually owning any one of the chores you’re doing. If it works out great, Mister Wonderful will be there to take all the credit…refer back to the Somali pirate situation, above…and if it goes to crap, some scapegoat will be found somewhere — maybe you, maybe not. Scapegoat-searches are random by nature. They’re just avalanches of crap. They can hit anything or anybody, and there’s nothing deliberate about them.

So the incentive to do a job well, or even adequately, disappears entirely. What vestigial amounts of accountability remain, don’t even match what pulses through your noggin as you make a batch of spaghetti sauce on the stove. You have the presence of mind to say “I’d better not leave the saucepan handle sticking out over the edge of the stove, or someone might come by and knock it off.” Scapegoat Calderon — if, indeed, he really is the poor stupid bastard who should’ve taken the fall for this debacle — didn’t even have that much happening. Check out that film clip one more time. Look at those people. That was happening inside all the buildings, as well. It’s amazing no one got killed, let alone hurt.

And it isn’t an isolated incident. It will happen again and again. If I prepared one of these detailed report cards, that would definitely go in…because to even be on par with our historical barely-adequate presidents, President Obama needs to get a radical new culture-shift going in His White House. And at this point, I doubt it can be done. The problem is inextricably connected to His Greatness. It’s a weakness against which His predecessors have not had to struggle — but it’s also been a campaign asset they haven’t been able to enjoy. And He’s never been shy about exploiting it to the hilt when it suited His purposes.

How else can we gauge His success, or lack thereof, after the first one hundred days? Blogger friend Cassy embeds a video from The NRSC that spells out an important issue: Accountability. On this particular point, student Obama requires some specialized instruction. He simply cannot be relied-upon to perform on this metric independently.

BBC UK embeds a graphic that highlights something interesting: The words used to describe President Obama, upon Inauguration, and in the month of April. “Intelligent”: Down three points. “Honest”: Down four points. “Confident”: Holding steady. “Hope/Hopeful”: Fourteen points before, no longer there. And one particular word I would personally find the most embarrassing, for it’s got “moving goalpost” written all over it. “Trying”: Non-existent in January, now earning twelve points!

This has got to be the saddest thing I’ve ever read, by far (hat tip to Boortz). And yes, I’m including the closing pages of Of Mice And Men in that.

It’s about a woman who thinks highly of herself because she’s “always a fighter” and campaigned tirelessly for Barack Obama…for reasons that, if she can explain them at all, she doesn’t bother. Things aren’t working out too well for her or for anybody else in her town, which is dying. She pulls in seven hundred bucks a month or so, blows it on everybody else’s bills — for reasons that, likewise, are left unexplained — and then lies her ass off to her poor husband, explaining to him that their savings account is diminishing because she’s buying herself new outfits.

[A]s Obama nears the 100-day milestone of his presidency, [Edith] Childs suffers from constant exhaustion. In a conservative Southern state that bolstered Obama’s candidacy by supporting him early in the Democratic primaries, she awakens at 2:30 a.m. with stress headaches and remains awake mulling all that’s befallen Greenwood since Obama’s swearing-in.

On Day 4 of his presidency, the Solutia textile plant laid off 101 workers. On Day 23, the food bank set a record for meals served. On Day 50, the hospital fired 200 employees and warned of further job cuts. On Day 71, the school superintendent called a staff meeting and told his principals: “We’re losing 10 percent of our budget. That means some of us won’t have jobs next year, and the rest should expect job changes and pay cuts.” On Day 78, the town’s newly elected Democratic mayor, whose campaign was inspired partly by his admiration for Obama, summarized Greenwood’s accelerating fragility. “This is crippling us, and there’s no sign of it turning around,” Welborn Adams said.

On Day 88, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that South Carolina had set a record for its highest unemployment rate in state history, at 11.4 percent. Greenwood’s unemployment is 13 percent — more than twice what it was when Childs first started chanting.

“We have a lot of people who live in cold houses, with no jobs and no food,” Childs says.
:
A message near the end causes Childs to wince. It is from Evon Hackett, her younger cousin, who has always reminded Childs a little of herself. Hackett has “never wasted a lazy hour in her life,” Childs says. But now she is desperate and unemployed, and her voice barely registers above a whisper as it plays on Childs’s machine.

“Hey Edith. How ya been? Just calling again to see if you heard from anybody who was hiring. . . . You know me. I’ll do anything. It doesn’t really matter what the work is.”
:
Just before 1 p.m., she pulls into Greenwood’s normally deserted downtown for a few more errands and notices a large crowd gathered in front of the courthouse. More than 200 people are dressed in red, white and blue and are waving miniature American flags. Childs asks a friend for details and learns that it is a “tea party” to protest Obama’s economic policies, one of about 1,000 similar events coordinated on Tax Day across the country.

“Of course it’s going to be a lot of white Republicans, and mostly men,” Childs says as she walks through the crowd and finds a spot alone at the rear of the plaza. “I want to see this, but I’m keeping my distance.”

In a state that voted 54 percent for Republican presidential candidate John McCain, Childs has heard plenty of anti-Obama rhetoric. “Most people around here know where I stand and let me be,” she says. “People are too polite to be nasty.” So she shakes her head in disbelief as she reads the angry messages scrawled on the poster boards in front of her.

“Say NO to Obama and Socialism!”

“OBAMA’NATION.”

“Who cares what Obama says? America IS a Christian nation.”

Childs puckers her lips and listens as Greenwood residents take turns stepping to the podium and shouting through a megaphone. Their speeches revolve around the same themes Childs hears in her phone messages, except what she identified as the solution to Greenwood’s problems is what these speakers now disparage as the cause.

“We all know this president is the major problem,” David O. Davis III says. “I’ve got friends with families who are losing their jobs, getting laid off.”

“We’re struggling to pay our bills and get by,” Cathy Heitzenrater says. “We’re feeling disenfranchised from our own country and disappointed about who’s running it.”

“Vote the bum out,” R.J. Fife says.

After each speaker finishes, Childs retreats a few steps farther from the crowd. A part of her would like to go grab the bullhorn and tell these people to “keep their mouths shut and give Obama a little time,” she says. But she woke up at 3 a.m. again this morning, and she can’t go home for a nap until she pays $100 on a constituent’s bill at the water company and stops by a city office to inquire about possible job openings for Hackett.

“Let them have their tea party,” Childs says. “They’re just looking for somebody to blame. My ears are full.”

She walks away from the courthouse as the crowd joins into chorus to sing the national anthem.
:
Later that night, inside the house on Old Ninety-Six Highway, Childs sinks into the armless chair in her living room. “Don’t bother me, Charles,” she tells her husband. She picks up the cordless phone, where 17 new messages are waiting. One is from Hackett.

“Hi, it’s me,” she says. “Hope you had a good day…No luck over here yet. I’m just wondering if you’ve heard about anything.”

I have a lot more sympathy for that poor cousin than I do for the nurse, the horrible wife, the liar, the thief, the racist. Yeah, I said racist. She’s allowed her disappointments and her exhaustion and her disparaging comments about others, but whoever disagrees with her about who should be President — an issue on which, plainly, she hasn’t bothered to gather any factual information at all, or very little — has to pipe down and shut up because of the color of their skin.

That poor husband. Other than sleeping with someone else, which she more-than-likely is, in what ways can a wife possibly blow it, in which she isn’t already blowing it?

It’s the same old crap from the die-hard radical Obama fan community. I’m a “worker” and a “fighter” because I believe this might-as-well-be-fictional guy is going to solve all my problems. And every week that goes by, wherein real life teaches me this isn’t the right way to go — it’s just all the more justification for my self-righteousness. A little bit of extra license to steal money from my husband and distribute the loot to “poor” people I barely even know.

Meanwhile, the hopey-changey goodness isn’t working out. So when does the time come to admit to a mistake? If the answer is “never”…then who in their right mind wants this kind of person to make a decision about anything?

This is why they’ve been hungering — hungering! — for a Replacement Jesus. Because when the merit of an idea is decided by the authorship of the idea rather than by the content of the idea, then the content of the idea need not be inspected. Which renders all critical thinking obsolete.

Lots of people don’t like critical thinking. They think it’s a pain in the ass.

Far easier to invent a whole new god.

Obama looks pretty good when we pretend we had to make a decision about whose ideas were best for the country. The truth is, we just made a decision about whether ideas matter at all. Real life, of course, consistently counsels us that they do matter…sometimes, we get tired of seeing that…right now, we’re tired. And so we’ll cling to the vision of fantasy and phony new religions, as long as that vision is more effervescent and vivid.

Right now, it’s important to pretend that isn’t what we’re doing. But a year ago it wasn’t nearly that important, and the dimbulbs spoke out unabashedly, and forcefully.

People have always regarded comets as “messengers of the gods”. The meaning ascribed to a comet’s appearance is comprised of many factors, including the mythological story of the constellation that the comet’s path highlights. This past autumn (2007), a remarkable comet, Holmes, appeared in the nightime sky, as a huge blue sphere (larger than the diameter of our sun). It’s path of maximal brightness carried it through the constellation of Perseus, crossing in front of two of that constellation’s stars in particular- Mirfak, and Algol. Pleases join me below the fold to explore this myth’s relevance for our own time.

The constellation Perseus pictures the story of the Hero Perseus, holding the head of Medusa, which he had just severed with his sword. Perseus was greatly aided by the gods in his quest to destroy the Medusa, whose very glance could turn a person into stone. He was given a magic sword, Athena’s shield, winged sandals with which he could fly, a magic cap which rendered him invisible, and the guidance for him to not directly look into Medussas face as he battled her, but to look at her in the reflection of his shield.

There were two stars that were highlighted by the comet’s passage, Mirfak, and Algol. Mirfak is the elbow of Perseus’s sword hand. Algol, Medusa’a eye, has long been seen as one of the most malifec and evil stars in the heavens.

Obama was born with his sun in Leo, and his story exemplifies the quest of the Solar Hero. His father, who joins with his mother on an island, conceives a child, and soon thereafter leaves the child and mother to continue his own journeying. Obama, a ‘special ‘child, left to create his own internal image of ‘father’, and related meanings of strength, protection, leadership, etc.

The Holmes comet appears just as the presidential race is kicking into high gear, illuminating the concept of the hero vanquishing the monster, a monster that turns people into stone if they gaze upon her. Does it not seem as if our country today is all locked up, constricted, restricted, with ever shrinking mobility and freedom of movement?

Perseus had help from the gods. Does it not feel as if some special hand is guiding Obama on his journey, I mean, as he has said, the utter improbability of it all?

The instruction is to not directly look at her, but to look at her reflection in his shield. What is Obama’s shield, in essence? I propose it is his belief in hope, redemption, and his ability to channel the essential goodness of the American people. The Perseus myth clearly indicates he should not confront his opponent by face-to-face, tit-for-tat combat.

Of special significance for me is the star Mirfak, the elbow of Perseus’s sword arm. At some point, he does need to utilize his elbows, and when the moment comes, cut strongly and swiftly.

And lastly, let us not forget that the comet is BLUE.

So let us have hope, the gods are on our side, and the Hero will prevail.

Is this healthy?

Hat tip: Is Barack Obama the Messiah?

Via Gerard: Susan Boyle, the Anti-Obama. William Tate, writing in the American Thinker blog.

I, and apparently millions of other people, have found ourselves watching the video over and over. And I’m struck by our fascination with it.

From the moment she strides resolutely, solidly, on stage, this frumpy Scottish spinster captivates our attention. Not because of her beauty; to call Miss Boyle’s appearance plain would be like saying the U.S. Marines have a lot of firepower. Or her style; she’s wearing a beige dress, dark stockings and white shoes. Not because of her poise; at one point, flustered, she has trouble answering a question from the show’s judges.
:
Then Susan Boyle opens her mouth and sings.

And her voice sends a shiver through you. Just as it must have the audience, even the jaded judges–come on, you’ve heard Simon Cowell called worse than that–on hand to hear it in person.
:
It is a remarkable performance that, even now, gives me goosebumps. As Britain’s Got Talent judge Amanda Cooper says in the clip, we’ve just been given a stunning wakeup call not to judge a person by her, or his, looks.

But I suspect that there’s something more powerful even than that at work, to cause the almost-universal appeal of Miss Boyle’s performance. What we sense is that this plain woman–hair unstyled, eyebrows unplucked, an image consultant’s worst dream sprung to life–is the rarest of things in this age of soundbites and spin doctors and focus groups: a real person, completely lacking in artifice.

At a time when the President of the United States feels compelled to use a teleprompter for even the most minor appearances, when Grecian columns are necessary props for campaign speeches, when public figures are as carefully packaged as your morning cereal boxes, after watching plain Susan Boyle sing with a voice for the ages, you feel like you have witnessed a real person do something that’s real. And right. And good. No, extraordinarily good.

You see what’s happened here? It’s crystal-clear, if only you think on it for a little bit.

Around the 1970’s, it started to become extremely fashionable to indoctrinate school-age kids with the laudable notion that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. Indoctrinate…then brainwash. Looking back on it, it seems quite ridiculous, to me. Rather like one of those protestant customs in which the pastor speaks on behalf of The Almighty, scolding the congregation for all the sins they’ve been committing all week long, without knowing a single thing about the personal lives of any of ’em. Just assuming the worst. This was the same thing: The recess bell would ring, we’d go out and play together in a diversity-utopianist’s dream: Kids of all different colors, pushing each other on the swings, playing tag, nobody giving a single thought to anything so boring as skin color. Then the bell would ring again, we’d be herded back in and we’d listen to a few more lectures. Maybe watch a film. Surreal, as if a yard teacher had just overheard a whole string of racial epithets out there and they decided they had to do something about it.

But the kids weren’t the problem. The kids were socializing together with no stratification taking place anywhere…except perhaps for the gender line, which diminished as the years rolled by. Cooties and all that, ya know.

The grown-ups were, and are, the problem. Did you hire enough Hispanic people in this department. How many women are serving in the Senate. Obama’s gonna be the first black President, I want to be part of this thing.

And Susan Boyle has made us realize something not quite so much refreshing, as spellbinding. Two generations have now been indoctrinated not to judge books by their covers…two generations have become intent on showing off that they don’t judge books by their covers.

And they’ve just been caught doing that very thing. With all the decades of snotty lecturing, it would seem someone has forgotten to teach someone else how to open the “books,” and read what’s in there. In this happy utopia we have been chasing, after all, Boyle’s capable command of the melody, her gifted talent with controlling the pitch and tenor of her voice as she delivers measure after measure that sends chills up the spine — it would’ve possessed absolutely no surprise, no shock-value, for anyone, anywhere.

And yet here we are, so easily distracted. We just got done deciding the most important Presidential election ever, with the least serious discussion about “hard” issues, like policies and proposals — ever. We decided it based on looks. Everyone voted for the black guy so they could show off that they weren’t racists.

Why does Susan Boyle pack such a punch? Because she’s a wake-up call. The decisions we’ve been making, the ramifications of the way we have made them, these are things that require exploration, deliberation, debate. That all has to be done across time, and time mutes the message. Susan Boyle makes us realize — well, those among us who still need to realize it — that the way these things have been decided is badly in need of review. That still leaves quite a bit undefined, but it’s a sharp, staccato one-note. Like a slap across the face.

And so many people voted for The Messiah, and as they did so, they were all so sure of themselves. Never looking back. Not until Susan Boyle opened her mouth, and showed everyone exactly how mistaken a first-impression can be sometimes. In this way, this latest experience is unsettling for some. And that’s a good thing; a very good thing.

What interests me about this article — other than where in the hell the paragraphs are supposed to begin and end — is that it was not written by a tighty-righty wild-eyed conservative, but rather by someone who seems to be among our modern socialists. By “modern socialist” I mean not quite so much a practicing one, as one who seeks to promote socialism by stigmatizing against anyone calling it what it really is. In fact, much of the verbiage is not quite so much an assertion that Obama will be a one-termer…although he does say that…but a rant against the tea party movement.

Again someone rails against the tea party movement with that tired, dishonest, “Where Were You When Bush Was…” argument.

I continue to be amused and amazed: President Change does things that simply cannot be defended, and yet, to some people, they must be. So in grasping at straws to defend the indefensible, they come up with this gem: Here’s something President Change’s predecessor did, that in some ways, could be regarded as similar to what is being done now. President Change can be defended, after all, because President Change is…consistent. President Change is good, or at least, you are not allowed to say or imply President Change is bad. Because President Change is not changing anything.

Raspy sigh. I saw a protest sign somewhere yesterday that said it best: How can debt be both the problem and the solution?

Phil finds a fascinating piece of slobber-fest from the AP…

The U.S. economy is showing only glimmers of life and two costly wars remain in the balance, but President Barack Obama’s “no drama” handling of the Indian Ocean hostage crisis proved a big win for his administration in its first critical national security test.

Obama’s quiet backstage decision to authorize the Defense Department to take necessary action if Capt. Richard Phillips’ life was in imminent danger gave a Navy commander the go-ahead to order snipers to fire on the pirates holding the cargo ship captain at gunpoint.
:
…[I]t goes some way toward dispelling the notion that a liberal Democrat with a known distaste for war — Obama campaigned on his consistent opposition to the Iraq invasion — doesn’t have the chops to call on U.S. military power.

The sniper operation Sunday, with pirate guns aimed at Phillips, was a daring, high-stakes gambit, and it could have easily gone awry. If it had, the fallout would have probably landed hardest on Obama.

Okay, I’m in full agreement with every sentence right up until that last one. It was certainly a test, and Obama did pass it. But President Obama would’ve gotten slimed if things didn’t work out? He’d have taken the fall? Really? On what planet?

Now I realize Obama has been President for less than three months by now. Still and all, it’s a fair question to ask — when has anything “landed hardest” on Obama?

He has a way of speaking that influences the weak-minded — be willing to admit it or not, but that’s some 75%, maybe 85% of us — to come to the opinions He wants them to reach, nevermind how problematic the facts may be. He has this talent, and He uses it. It is why He is where He is.

Things don’t “land hardest” on this type of boss. This is the kind of boss who ends up being the boss, and I think we’ve all had at least one of these…because nothing is ever His fault. No matter what. Ever. No, if this whole thing had gone south it would’ve been on the Commander.

Go on. Find something in that much-discussed community-organizer resume, or even better, in those autobiographies. Prove me wrong.

Update: The best article on the web I’ve seen that illustrates how far removed is this mindset from reality, is at Blackfive. Yes, it would be equally offensive to reality to deny President Obama any credit at all; He does deserve some. And, let the record show, I did give it to Him. Maybe not in the way a democrat voter would like me to, but I did.

Larger version…

Based on an off-line comment (with attachment) from blogger friend Phil, who wanted to make sure I saw this one below, but doesn’t remember where he got it.

Noticing certain common phrases have the letter “O” in them is a little bit generic, kind of like copyrighting the note F-sharp. But the idea is a good ‘un, still, and I do want to give proper credit if it’s possible to do so…so leave a name or link in the comments if you know something.

Comment in thread under Boortz — from commenter Club-a-Liberal:

I can’t stomach hearing this guy [President Obama] talk anymore. I don’t even have to look at the TV anymore to know whether he is reading a teleprompter, index cards, or lying bare on stage without the props.

When on teleprompter, he has the strong, confident tone, with his head up high, looking down his nose on everyone. Off teleprompter, his head is down, eyes are closed, and it takes him 20 seconds to spit out a few words in between the umms and ahhs.

I call him the Milli Vanilli of Presidents. [emphasis mine]

I’ve seen & heard some Obamafans protest that Obama can deliver a speech better without a teleprompter, than George W. Bush can, with one.

I suppose that’s true.

George W. Bush, however, was never (and never would be) offered as a proficient candidate for the office of President, solely because of his ability to give a speech.

Oh and one more little thing — trying to dismiss the shortcomings of your idol based on an off-topic comparison to His predecessor…is practically the very definition of lame-o.

Waiting for the separation-of-church-n-state crowd to pipe up on this one…but not holding my breath.

The 5:20 TBA turned out to be his adoration session with lawmakers in the Cannon Caucus Room, where even committee chairmen arrived early, as if for the State of the Union. Capitol Police cleared the halls — just as they do for the actual president. The Secret Service hustled him in through a side door — just as they do for the actual president.

Inside, according to a witness, he told the House members, “This is the moment . . . that the world is waiting for,” adding: “I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.”

The tip of the hat goes to What’s Wrong With The World, via Becky the Girl in Short Shorts Talking About Whatever.

I’m going to win that $100 and a steak dinner in 2012 when Obama becomes a one-termer. I’m sure of it now. These nasty rumors flying around…that someone in Obama’s camp figured out “Hey, we’d better damn well knock off this Messiah bullshit right now.” Those rumors may very well be true. Someone may very well have pulled their heads outta their asses and put a voice beside what is obvious. It could’ve happened…

…but if so, it’s not having any effect whatsoever. It’s The Symbol. He just can’t stop Himself.

We’re going to have four years of this, and not get a little bit tired of it?

I’m going to look up some steak restaurants right now.

Mister Bossy Himself…

…and that little shit from The Twilight Zone (Original Series): It’s a Good Life. You know, the all-powerful little boy that was wishing people out to the cornfield.

This is not a constitutional separation-of-powers rant. Forget congressional oversight. Think, instead, about subordinates. Or forget about Obama’s subordinates…think about His casual acquaintances. Other than that bigoted asshole preacher of His, I don’t know of anybody who’s given Him any knowledge…or opinions, that’ve managed to sink in…or advice…or anything. Anybody. That means His sainted grandmother, mother, and Michelle.

What He knows, it would seem, is limited to what’s germinated in His cranium.

He is supposed to be heaven-sent to replace His predecessor, His poorly-read Texas-hick predecessor, who is supposed to have been a remarkably incurious man.

As far as curious savants go that are supposed to be taking the place of, and providing a contrast to, incurious village idiots…President Obama does not seem to have learned anything, from anything. And His is the brand of arrogance that can blossom only after a lifetime of having none of His ideas seriously challenged by anybody. He’s the answer to President Bush, who aroused all this anger and angst by casually referring to himself as “The Decider”?

Would you be able to explain that one to a cherubim or seraphim, or to God Himself, or any other cosmic kismet?

I don’t think I would. Like they say, if you want to make the angels laugh, tell ’em your plans.

Victor Davis Hanson explains the actions of The One, who was elected to install a morally clean and fiscally sane government, and is going through money like a horse goes through water and nominating a bunch of druggies, perverts and tax cheats to His top slots:

In just the first 70 days of the new administration, a number of Obama supporters have expressed some dismay at their new president. Some find his ethically challenged appointments at odds with his soaring moral rhetoric.

Others lament his apparent inability to stir up supporters in impromptu speeches, at least in the manner he did with set oratory on the campaign trail. And they worry about his occasionally insensitive remark.

Many cannot quite figure out why, after lambasting George W. Bush for running a $500-billion deficit, Obama has outlined eight years of budgetary red ink that would nearly match the debt run up by all previous U.S. presidents combined.
:
If you believed that highly educated and sometimes distracted liberals occasionally slip on rather mundane questions of taxes, lobbying, and conflict of interest — but not at all in the felonious, premeditated manner of the corporate hierarchy — then it would be necessary to overlook such minor lapses for the greater good of marshalling talented and well-disposed experts into progressive government.

If you believed that socially minded liberals are tolerant and extraordinarily empathetic, then their rather impolite speech is not at all offensive. Constant disparagement of the previous administration, and jokes about fellow Americans — ranging from the physically or mentally impaired, to Nancy Reagan and her séances, to the stereotyped religion and culture of a clinging middle America, to the purported prejudices of a “typical white person” — are not insensitive, let alone callous. No, the evocation of these occasional infelicities reflects the tally-sheet of nitpicking right-wing agitators, keen to bring down a hard-working progressive sacrificing for the people.
:
If you believed that wars, crises, and international tensions are brought about by miscommunications, misunderstandings, and Western insensitivity, rather than by despots trying to advance illiberal agendas whenever and wherever they sense an opening, then you would blame past administrations for our present ills, with all their bellicose and retrograde talk of preparedness, deterrence, and pre-emption. You would grandly proclaim a new age of harmonious relations, and count on your rhetorical abilities and charisma to persuade past rivals and mischaracterized enemies that, at this rare but opportune moment, there are no real differences between us — and thus no reasons for future disputes.

In other words, if you believed as President Obama and many of his advisors do, then you would do what Obama and his advisors are now doing.

Caveat Emptor.

The perils of having elected a President just because He’s a popular guy…not because He would’ve made a good President. That’s regarding this:

I expect the Samuel-Jackson-Secret-Service-Fantasy guy speaks for many.