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...
I recognize that [President Obama] gave a speech about how badly he wants there to be more jobs. But in it, and afterwards, you will notice that he has proposed a bunch of bullcrap that doesn’t have a damn thing to do with advancing the economy or increasing employment significantly. Some of the reactions to this have accused him of incompetence, political idiocy, or general stupidity; this is exactly the kind of thing I’m talking about. Maybe he’s not incompetent, or stupid, he’s just socialist. He doesn’t want to promote any prosperity if it means strengthening capitalist tendencies – what use is that, if it makes a bunch of people happy with less socialism? Instead he only ‘wants’ to promote jobs via socialist-fantasy methods. Those methods have no chance of working but that’s okay because actually creating jobs isn’t their main goal, their main goal is making him look like he cares and thus (perhaps) keeping him in power four more years to socialize the economy, and meanwhile (to the extent they’re passed) ratcheting up the socialism again.
Most commentary about all this has this blind spot for this man’s ideology. Why is it so hard to admit that he is a true-blue believer in socialism and what that means? This basically gives him a pass because at some point the ‘incompetence’ articles will stop and the ‘he’s learned from his mistakes/comeback kid’ articles will start. But his ideology does not change and has never changed.
One could protest that it doesn’t matter — either way, we’ve seen it in action and The Change Sucks, as they say. But you just know Sonic’s right about the “comeback kid” articles. Sometime after the holidays, when people shopping for Christmas on plastic are getting their first bills, and the cooler temps will help shove The Second Summer Of Jobs further into history. I notice the media tends to think that way: Is three or four months enough to put us into a whole different era of time? Yes if there’s a thirty- or forty-degree swing involved in the seasonal temperatures; no, if not. So sometime after the holidays the question will arise: Geez, this economy stinks on ice, what’s being done about it? Too bad our current President is so incompetent…ah, but He’s been learning from His mistakes! Maybe there’s a ray of hope!
Me, I think President Obama is human just like the rest of us, meaning (lowercase the ‘h’ on purpose here) he operates with competence within a limited and defined scope of concern. The scope of concern, in this case, is P.R., and there is incompetence, by design, addressing anything outside that perimeter. He waits around for something to happen, and when it happens the task to be fulfilled is to dispense narratives. If the thing that happened is a bad thing, the narrative is going to be that it would’ve happened anyway and thank goodness we had the Reinvestment Act to keep it from becoming a total disaster — besides of which, it was the other guy’s bad policies over the last decade that caused it to happen. If it’s a good thing that happened, well then All Hail Caesar. Just like a nightmare boss. Good thing happened, well look at this wonderful thing that happened under my tutelage. Bad thing happens…oh, it’s that klutz [your name here], didn’t implement my policies correctly. Tried to tell ‘im.
As to the central concern of Obama’s socialist ideology: Yes I’ve had this brewing in the back of my head for awhile. It is a case of the fox guarding the chicken coop, is it not? I think the independents side with the conservatives on the desire of what is to happen next: Please let the economy recover without our having to spend any more money since we know there is a consequence to all this. In fact I perceive some of the more reasonable liberals join in that. But will Obama make it happen? Not unless there is something in it for Him; not unless, as the economy is so revived, America fundamentally changes her posturing toward a more socialist bent, like under FDR in the thirties. In left-wing-land, that is how you get into the hall of fame, by creating programs that can never be dismantled, never never not ever, that transfer wealth from people who create it to people who do not — and make it an exercise in futility to work hard. I think Sonic’s right: Any prospect of healing our economy, without getting something like that sold, will be a non-starter with Obama and His administration. Even though that’s exactly what The American People want & need.
Perhaps nowhere is this more clear than in the example (the post is chock full of good solid ones, read it from top to bottom) about gas prices. Nevermind the democrats’ track record on gas and energy prices; just review the archives of their campaign promises. It becomes clear in short order that anyone who supports democrats in the hopes that gas prices will become affordable, or stay that way, has committed a glaring transgression in forming such a rosy prediction. The transgression is not so much having an opinion different from one of mine; it is having an opinion that is supported entirely by non-existent, made-up things.
Maybe the question should be explored, with at least as much energy as the by now routine exercise of prowling through Sarah Palin’s garbage dumpsters whether she’s running for something or not: How about just ask democrat office-holders and candidates whether they intend to bring gas prices down. Can we start with just that? Hey, maybe we can find a new campaign slogan for democrats next year: “Vote democrat in 2012! Keep gas prices really high!” Or, “Re-elect Obama in 2012! Necessarily bankrupt the coal industry!”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I have to disagree on the gas prices thing. The price of gas depends on a lot of factors like “supply and demand” and “massive, hidden taxes” that people simply don’t understand (because if they did, the Democratic party would cease to exist). It’s too easy to bullshit and obfuscate, especially since there’s an easy answer right in their wheelhouse: “We’ll lower gas prices by making sure those greedy oil companies — and their allies like Rick Perry!!! — pay their fair share.”
I think a much better line of attack is Obama’s breathtaking condescension. He doesn’t care that gas prices are high, because if they are, you’ll use less oil. He’s doing it for your own good. Ignorant rube that you are, you don’t understand that private jets and limo rides and non-hybrid cars are only for politicians, celebrities, and other important folk; for you, the hoi polloi, “green energy” is not only good enough, it’s actually much better for you, because, as Mrs. Obama has noted, you’re all a bunch of fatasses who need to get more exercise, and what better way to get your daily workout than walking to and from bus stops?
Like all leftists, Obama is utterly convinced that he’s just plain better than you, and knows what you need better than you do or ever possibly could. And that, of course, is why the media loves him so — like all leftists, they have this weird syllogistic cast of mind that says association with (or slobbering mouth-love of) “smart” people somehow makes you smart yourself. Unless you’ve drunk the liberal kool-aid, though, this comes off as weird and creepy — I don’t automatically become movie-star handsome just because I get Brad Pitt’s autograph — and that’s where the most effective line of attack is with independents, I think.
Of course, pointing out that Obama is one narcissistic s.o.b. will get us labelled racists (we’re saying he’s “uppity”), but since any criticism of Our Magnificent God-King is automatically racist, I couldn’t give a shit… (and if personal experience counts at all, I’m seeing a lot less shit-giving when it comes to that particular charge. I think the left and the media (BIRM) have finally overplayed their hands on that one).
- Severian | 09/19/2011 @ 07:07Not sure where our point of disagreement is. It’s part of their platform to make gas prices higher, they just don’t talk about it. They don’t talk about it because they haven’t been asked about it; until the question is asked, why would they willingly comment? So we have this surreal, weird, inexplicable state of affairs where nobody knows exactly what democrats want to do with gas prices, we don’t bother to find out, and nobody bothers to tell us even when it’s their job.
- mkfreeberg | 09/19/2011 @ 08:15Here’s an interesting take on the topic of your discussion;
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=10904
Interesting when a dogma is supported by cluelessness.
- TMI | 09/20/2011 @ 14:56.