Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Question of the Moment and more than a little bit likely to become the question of the year:
Do you know of anyone whose opinion of Obama is higher now than when he was elected or inaugurated? Is there anyone on Planet Earth who is saying, “Gee, I voted against Obama, but he’s sure doing a much better job than I thought [h]e would”? Are there any moderates or Republicans slapping themselves on the head saying, “Boy, do I regret voting against Barack Obama”? They may be out there, but they are few and far between.
I certainly recall a lot of people having that notion toward Bill Clinton. Some even toward George W. Bush; just one or two, maybe, and a whole lot more on & after 9/11/01. I myself was wishing like crazy I’d re-elected Bush’s Dad, although a vote cast in California didn’t have much practical application toward something like that.
With Reagan, there were lots of people who voted against him and then saw the error of their ways.
Carter…not so much.
Hat tip goes to Gerard on this one.
What is remarkable about this question, the way it is asked, and the way Mssrs. Van der Leun, Wehner, and myself anticipate it will have to be answered? There is irony, and it is rich irony: Obama was chosen specifically because He was a virtual savior. We were to be assured there would be no regrets on this one.
And that is because the man can sell refrigerators to polar bears. (A more precise, and tragic, metaphor is that he can sell hair dryers to snowmen…the nation being the snowman.) On the democrat side of the aisle, things have always been this way. The democrats put their support behind the quintessential salesman. Obama is John Kerry v2.0; Kerry, who “could not get his message across,” and all that. It’s as if democrats understand, without anyone else pointing it out, that their plans already make precious little sense but at least the appearance will be there that their plans make sense, if everyone everywhere can be conned into executing them.
Rather like the fish that decide to swamp the fisherman’s boat by leaping into it. Woe be unto you if you’re the only fish that goes in on the plan. So all of life is a “Together We Can Do This” thing. The plan has never worked before, ever, but maybe that’s because not enough people were doing it.
Republicans, on the other hand, vote for whoever they’d trust to watch their kids.
That’s where the real split is. Republicans and democrats know Obama and Biden are better salesmen than McCain and Palin.
Republicans and democrats acknowledge it’s better to allow Sarah Palin to take your child, and his entire school class, on a sleepover-field-trip for two solid weeks…than to allow Barack Obama to talk to them for thirty seconds. For the democrats, this can’t be admitted out loud because it would cause damage to one’s social standing within a collective — which is, of course, the entire point. But deep down, everyone with something pulsating constructively north of the brain stem, understands it’s true.
Update 3/23/08: Great roundup (although there will be others) by Instapundit.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
And your next, killer, bumper sticker assignment that just came to me is:
I TOLD YOU SO
- vanderleun | 03/22/2009 @ 14:21There are two kinds of people who voted for Obama: smart people who support His policies, and stupid people who don’t but voted for Him anyways. Neither one of those groups is going to change their vote in the next election.
The stupid people are persuaded by campaign spending, and the trillion dollars Obama and co. have stolen from taxpayers and funneled to liberal interest groups will ensure that they have more than enough money to persuade every idiot in America to vote for them again.
And that’s assuming we’re still around in 2012. Let’s face it; the best thing that could happen is for Texas to secede.
- JohnJ | 03/22/2009 @ 16:09In My Humble Opinion, Mr. Obama was selected because the same folks that hold
the strings of Ms. Pelosiet al knew that an Obama Executive branch would pose no threat of checks and balance to the current Legislative branch that has
cost so much to have elected, and subsequently appointed to their prospective committee assignments.
The suckers that frequent the Chinese private high stakes gambling dens must be feeling a bit chilly right about now. I’m sure Ms. Clinton is up to the job of smoothing things over via. Mall-Wart.
- CaptDMO | 03/22/2009 @ 18:41