Friday, January 30, 2015

It's Official!

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Mitt Romney will not run in 2016. Whew! One down, how many to go?
  • Let me say what I have said time and time before. I believe that Mitt Romney is a good man. I congratulate and thank him for his prescient withdrawal from the 2016 race. I would love to see Mitt participate in a Republican victory in 2016, and think he could serve the nation well in a number of different cabinet level positions. 
We shouldn't let this good man's experience go to waste. Having said that, he was not my choice in 2008. Truth be told, neither was John McCain. McCain was lacking in conservative bona fides, particularly when it came to economics. I don't know if Romney was done in by his supporters, but there was one Romneybot in particular who frequented Internet discussions and tried to hijack every thread, whenever he came across any meager crumb that favored Romney, and then regaled us with the inevitability of Romney taking the nomination. So, he had the distinction of not only being annoying but wrong. On top of that, instead of challenging McCain's policies, which I would have probably echoed and applauded, he chose to attack McCain personally, his military service, and going so far as calling him a traitor. 

God save us from our friends.

In the end, I supported McCain, not because he was my favorite or ideal candidate, but in my estimate, he would have made a better president than Obama. Fast forward to 2012. Same story. Conservatives fail to find one solid conservative candidate to coalesce around, Romney, slow and steady takes the race. I campaigned against Romney in the primaries. I tried really hard not to violate Reagan's Eleventh Commandment in tempering my criticisms of Gov. Romney, and emphasizing the qualities of those he ran against. Once he was the nominee, I actively supported him, once again believing he'd make a better president than Obama had proven himself to be.

When I heard that he was perhaps considering a third run, I was somewhat alarmed. After eight years of Obama, our nation cannot afford for Republicans to run an "also ran" candidate. If Mitt Romney couldn't seal the deal in 2012, when the nation should have been able to see what an abysmal president Obama had been, how would he seal the deal over the Dems' next "Flavor of the Month"? Maybe touting the "first woman president"?

The train wreck that was 'Hope and Change' will take years, maybe decades to clean up. The sooner we start, the better. We need to clear the deck of vanity candidates and candidates that do not have a prayer, so that we can properly vet our next president. Having twelve guys on a stage posing for soundbites or hoping for an opponent's misstep upon which to capitalize will not accomplish this.

I'm not trying to deny anyone the right to run. The guarantee of free speech does not contain within it a guarantee of an audience, or the size of that audience. Let's weed out the "also ran" candidates as soon as possible. Gov. Bush, Gov. Christie, Gov. Huckabee: follow Mitt's example. For the good of the country, the quicker you get out or not all the way in, the better.

And Mr. Trump? Open your check book and not a campaign headquarters. Just sayin'!

"I Was the Tea Party Before There Was a Tea Party"

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Thursday, January 29, 2015

The Polaroid President

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
You remember Polaroid? The first "instant" camera? You took a picture, waved it in the wind for a minute or two and saw a developed image of whatever picture you just snapped. These were the days when an LCD screen on the back of your camera (or phone) wasn't even a credible dream. Oh, and phones were still plugged into a landline...with a cord.

So, how does that fit with our President Selfie? Today, I was going over the long list of Obama's "accomplishments", and what most of them had in common. You will forgive me if I don't include such things as "Obamacare" as an accomplishment. Sure, he accomplished lying to 300 million people about keeping their plans and doctor, and accomplished the cancellation of millions of insurance policies, causing the victims, er, recipients of his policies to have to purchase more expensive plans, with larger deductibles, with coverage that many of them neither needed nor wanted.

But, consider his handling of the Keystone XL pipeline extension (covered here): Obama dithered and pandered to special interest groups for six years so far, yet, at one point, hauled himself out to a segment of the pipeline that did not require permission from his State Dept. and...had his picture taken there. Problem solved!

In the aftermath of Sandy Hook, he poses in the Oval Office with his head bowed. For Nelson Mandela's funeral, he took a selfie. He celebrated the birthday of Rosa Parks with a picture of...himself on the bus she rode. When pioneering astronaut Neil Armstrong passed away, Obama commemorated his life with a picture of...himself, looking up at the moon.

The Polaroid camera filled the niche of instant gratification. You took a picture, you immediately saw how it looked. Businesses quickly adopted it, because it often saved them the expense of going back a retaking a picture that didn't quite fit their needs. Insurance companies used them to document car wrecks. (Man! How fitting is that??)

So, aside from documenting our national train wreck on a daily basis, how does the Polaroid legacy fit with "The One"? One, it didn't last. Not only was the technology overtaken with a far superior product (Sorry, Polaroid!), but when was the last time you actually saw a Polaroid picture? I think I have one squirreled away in a file cabinet, which hasn't suffered the ravages of age. (The photo, not the file cabinet. The file cabinet looks like it was kicked by a mule, dragged behind a stagecoach and used as a rampart, over which to observe a rocket's red glare!)

The main drawback to the Polaroid was, there was no negative. You couldn't store the negatives away and reprint them at a later date, because there were no negatives. You want a photo that Ansel Adams took of Yosemite? What kind of stock would you like it printed on? You want a Matthew Brady print of the Civil War?  8 x 10 or wallet size??

The parallels are twofold. One is the figurative 'lack of negatives', because the Legacy Mainstream Media didn't do their job as watchdog and played lapdog. The criticism of this guy who should have been vetted by in 2008 both of his character and his qualification was absent, and replaced with fake Styrofoam columns and rhetoric about driving back the ocean's rise. During his six year reign to date, the criticisms have been both tepid and shallow, if at all. Had the press been the unbiased bastion of a free press that they claim to be, Obama would have never seen the inside of the Oval Office, except perhaps, on a White House tour.

The other is that, other than the debt, which is harmful, and a growing bureaucracy to sustain the Federal Leviathan, Obama has left no positive legacy. No "Obama Doctrine" other than appeasement and retreat. No "Louisiana Purchase" other than spending, perhaps an equivalent amount on his vacations, golf outings and celebrity soirees at the White House.

For all of the attempted lofty, and somewhat stilted rhetoric of his speeches, lots and lots of speeches, there is no "there" there. Obama is the ultimate empty suit. On top of that, he has alienated our allies, encouraged our enemies and the single saving virtue of his economy is the economic growth of oil productions on state and private lands, while his policies resulted in a 6% reduction of production on federal land and he seeks to restrict drilling even more.

History will not be kind to the "first black president". His retreat from Iraq created the vacuum exploited by ISIS. We are in the process of sending troops to try to stop the advance of territory we had previously secured, at a cost of human blood and treasure. His imaginary "lines in the sand", which he had not the spine or will to back up, his blustery threats of Russian "isolation" have not deterred Putin in the slightest.

Obama stomping his tiny foot to demand the return of Snowden from Russia, the return of our drone from Iran have suffered the same lack of results. Only the return of Bowe Berdahl differs in that there is a greater negative effect with the release of five Taliban terrorists.

Master trader (I said trader!) swapped one deserter for five seasoned terrorists, proposed a deal with Cuba without appropriate concessions from a military dictatorship known for torture and human rights abuses, entered into negotiations with Iran by removing sanctions before obtaining so much as a single concession from their nuclear program except a promise to talk...sometime...with a deadline...which we extended...twice.

The Obama administration has entered into bad financial deals with Solyndra, which was known to be skating towards bankruptcy, interfered with the GM bankruptcy, illegally passing over the bond holders in favor of rewarding the unions, a solid Democrat voting base. They spent millions (billions?) on the Obamacare website which was late, unreliable and riddled with security holes for anyone who ventures there.

For Obama personally, the legacy will be rich. Six figure speaking fees, invitations to sit on corporate boards and golf. Lots of golf. For his friends that he has funneled money to over two term will fare well as well.

The rest of us? Well, we had the instant gratification of having elected the first black president, who waved in the breeze, depending on which way the wind was blowing, didn't last for very long and was soon relegated to the dusty shelf of fads that seemed good at the time*, but had no long term value.

*See also "Pet Rock President"

Sunday, January 25, 2015

A Coach Whose Name You Can’t Spell

Folks who visit this blog know well my devotion to the Alabama Crimson Tide and the Green Bay Packers.  I’ve said often enough that my devotion to these two teams goes all the way back to the 1960’s.  That’s a damn long time. 

For 35 years, I’ve also been a devout fan of the team America loves to hate—the Duke Blue Devils.

The Great State of North Carolina is home to some of the best men’s college basketball teams in the country—the Tarheels, Wolfpack and Demon Deacons—but Duke, now there’s a team!

A list of some of the Duke players who have gone on to the NBA include Johnny Dawkins (1987), Mike Gminksi (1991), Christian Laettner (1991), Bobby Hurley (1994), Grant Hill (1995), Cherokee Parks (1996) and J. J. Reddick (2007).

Most everyone in North Carolina is a rabid Tarheels fan. I’m a “Dookie” and damn proud of it. That makes me a target of some fierce teasing from friends who simply cannot fathom why I would root for Duke. 

While there is no championship, no conference title or Gold Medal on the line, No. 5 Duke hits the hardwoods against The Red Storm of St. John’s in Madison Square Garden.  It’s the same venue where Coach K became the winningest coach in college basketball history.

On that night his mentor and friend, Bobby Knight, was calling the game for ESPN.  When the buzzer sounded and Duke had defeated Michigan State 74-69, Coach K walked over to the broadcast table and told Knight he loved him.  It was a remarkable moment when the two switched places in the NCAA record book.

The Garden is special to Coach K. “Kids dream, and coaches dream, of playing in this place…Just the way the court is lit, the sound, how the ball bounces, there are different sounds here. The Garden sounds different; the horn sounds different and it’s all good. Those are things that people recall when they think of their playing days, so it’s a great experience for us,” he said.

A win today against 13-5 “Johnnies” would bring his record to an astonishing 1000 wins.  Krzyzewski has led the Blue Devils to 4 NCAA Championships, 11 Final Fours, 12 ACC regular season titles and 13 ACC Tournament Championships.

No matter the outcome of the game today, Coach Mike Krzyzewski is a legend.  I think it’s fair to say his level of achievement is otherworldly. 

GO DUKE!

Saturday, January 24, 2015

American Sniper and the UnAmerican Sniping of it

This afternoon, I had the opportunity to go online and watch Glo Zell interview President Obama, or see American Sniper. Wow! It was powerful and hard hitting! Man, that President Obama sure knows how to give an interview!

Get real! I saw American Sniper and I must say it exceeded my expectations. To do any sort of a decent movie review, I'd have to include a lot of spoilers, and I don't want to do that. I want you to see this movie and experience it as unbiased as possible the first time.

I knew the basic story before I went to see it, but the movie is gripping enough that even when you know how it will end, it keeps you on the edge of your seat.

Much of the film is a character study of how Chris Kyle became the man he was, how he dealt with hardships, and relationships, and sorrow and loss. Also his struggle with the morality of taking a human life, even when it will save the lives of others. And what this does to a man's soul as he looks upon evil and does battle with it day after day. The film also deals with his wife, struggling to maintain her life and family in spite of a husband who deploys for months on end, and may not ever come home.

Some of it is a gritty, sometimes brutal, but realistic telling of what our soldiers endured in the Middle East and what their families endured at home. It is rated "R". It is definitely not a movie for children. The violence is at times quite graphic. The language is the language of fighting men, more fitting for the locker room than the parlor. I did not find it distracting. Some might.

The acting is top notch. Bradley Cooper could be a ringer for Kyle. The director, Clint Eastwood, knows how to get the maximum performance from his actors and how to capture that on film. When the credits rolled, I sat in my seat for a while, wiping away a few tears. It is a moving story about a real, down to earth guy. Not a super hero or super spy, but a real American hero.

As I sat there, I tried to picture how anyone could not be moved by this movie, even Leftist tubs of lard like Michael Moore. One thing that occurred to me, was that there was a lot of truth in this movie. Being confronted with truth may be so foreign to some that they are uncomfortable in its presence.

It was in no way a "propaganda" film. What did they propagandize? "Join the SEALS, go through brutal training, get shot at or blown up, and if you do make it home you may be messed up psychologically, missing a few limbs and have you wife and kids leave you"? Great! Sign me up!

There is one message that Chris Kyle carried, and that was it was important for him to protect his country. That his country was worth defending and even worth dying for. That may have sent Leftist blowhards like Moore, if he ever even saw the film, into a catatonic state. (No, not California!)

Chris Kyle is the Alvin York of our time. If you are of age, you should see this movie. It is a well crafted piece of cinema, and leaving the theater, I was hard pressed to remember any movie I had ever seen that was better than this one or had greater emotional impact.

Still haven't.

If you faint at the sight of blood, don't see it. If violent movies give you bad dreams, don't see it. Wait 'til it comes on TV and they'll edit out some of the language and gorier parts. The rest of you, go to the theater and see it at least once. Soon. In addition to seeing a fine, well crafted movie based on the true story of an American hero, every dollar that it makes at the box office is a big...raspberry (kept it PG-13, didn't I?) to the leftist tools who are trying to discourage people from seeing it.

Vote with your wallets, America, for movies about true American heroes, and maybe Hollywood will finally take a hint about what the American public is longing to see.

Five stars out of five.

The World Will Be Listening To The Voices Of Auschwitz

For five years from 1940 to 1945, Auschwitz-Birkenau became the most infamous Nazi killing center.  So hideous and horrifying was the extermination of the Jews that Supreme Allied Commander in Europe Dwight D. Eisenhower sent a cable to Washington, DC to General George Marshall:
“The things I saw beggar description…The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were…overpowering…I made the visit deliberately, in order to be in a position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to ‘propaganda.’”
Ben Hibbs, the editor of the popular Saturday Evening Post (June 9, 1942 Journey to a Shattered World) wrote, “You have to walk into one of those places and smell the unspeakable stench, not only of the dead but of the living.”

In the book Auschwitz by Deborah Dwork and Robert Jan van Pelt there is this passage:
“[Auschwitz was] the greatest catastrophe of western civilization both permitted and endured, and obscuring the responsibility of the thousands of individuals who enacted this atrocity step by step.  None of them was born to be a mass murderer, or an accomplice to mass murder.  Each of them inched his way into iniquity.”
Army Signal Corps photographs documented the evidence of the sheer mass murder that Americans had thought was impossible propaganda and the narrator in a news reel declared, “The murder that will blacken the name of Germany for the rest of recorded history.”

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 delegations from around the world, including some 100 former prisoners, will travel to Auschwitz-Birkenau to mark the 70th anniversary of its liberation and to honor the survivors, soldiers, reporters and others who bore witness to the extermination of 1.5 million people.

The Telegraph has posted powerful portraits of some of the survivors.  Their horror and sorrow are etched deeply in their faces, their eyes are pools of emptiness emblematic of a life irrevocably altered.

Sergeant Norman Turgel of the British Intelligence Corps wrote, “I remember one morning seeing a man sitting by the gate. He was just bones, and I could see from his features that he was a man, though I couldn’t tell his age. He was wearing the yellow striped uniform. He held his hand up, and as I passed he said the Jewish words of a prayer, and then he died.”

For most members of Europe’s Jewish community, whose family and friends endured the horrors of the Second World War, memories are never too distant. Since then, for the most part, Europe has been a safe place to live but events in Paris two weeks ago have significantly raised concerns for some Jewish communities.

Since the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices and the subsequent targeting of a kosher supermarket which left four Jewish shoppers dead, there have been heightened security measures for Jewish communities in Europe.

The Holocaust teaches us the dangers that unchecked hatred can pose for society—dangers that we must continue to guard against if we are to fulfill the survivors’ vision of “Never Again.”
The New York Times powerfully reminds us that 10 years ago, on the 60th anniversary of the camp’s liberation, 1500 survivors attended.  This year 300 are expected, most of whom are 90 years old and some are over 100.  This will likely be the last time a large number of survivors will be able to gather there.
From now on the site will be organized to explain to generations who were not alive during the war what happened rather than to act as a memorial to those who suffered through it.
Andrzej Kacorzyk, deputy director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum said of the 70th anniversary, “We find this to be a moment of passage.  A passing of the baton. It is younger generations publicly accepting the responsibility that they are ready to carry this history on behalf of the survivors, and to secure the physical survival of the place where they suffered.”
The ceremony will host state leaders from Poland, France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, The Netherlands, Croatia, and other countries. Other notable guests will include film director Steven Spielberg, founding chair of the USC Shoah Foundation; Israeli-American businessman Haim Saban; and other Auschwitz 70th anniversary committee members, but no President of the United States.
Bernadette Meehan, National Security Council spokeswoman, said in an email that, “President Obama will be in India, on a long-scheduled trip.”


Friday, January 23, 2015

ISIS Is Shaking In Their Filthy Pajamas

This blog is called Political Clown Parade; emphasis on the clown, for a reason.  On Thursday, January 22, 2014 The World’s Most Dangerous Community Organizer met with three YouTube™ “stars” in the East Room of the White House.  The brainiacs in the West Wing envisioned an event that would draw a younger audience—the ones who get their news from Twitter and Facebook—hoping to bring public policy to them on a personal level.

One woman, most famously known for eating Froot Loops® directly from a bathtub and opens each of her YouTube™ uploads with, “Hello! This is GloZell! Is you ok? Is you? Good, cause I wanted to know!” joined a 19-year-old whose claim to fame is crafting videos and admitted she “never really followed politics that much” and a guy who hosts a YouTube™ channel with this brother to push his State of Union message.

According to The Daily Mail, not only was it a PR disaster, but the “50-minute YouTube™ interview was a national joke before it was half over.”  The article noted that at its peak, slightly more than 84,000 people were viewing it according to live counts displayed by YouTube™.  The whole thing smacked of the satire of The Onion.

William Jacobson, proprietor of Legal Insurrection, believes the stunt was brilliant “because it put the more-hostile-than-they-were-six-years-ago MSM in its place while turning the dial up on the White House’s cool factor and creating the illusion of accessibility.”

Richard Grenell, America’s longest serving U.S. spokesman at the United Nations and National Security and Foreign Affairs spokesman for Mitt Romney’s last presidential run tweeted this:
At his website, Grenell opines:
“Republicans who mock President Obama’s interviews with the three popular YouTube internet stars make a serious mistake. While the Obama White House is completely incompetent and weak, they know how to spin everyday Americans. The Washington, DC media crowd, including conservative media, preaches to the choir of news junkies. The idea that you can win a modern presidential election without being modern is what should be mocked.” 
“How can it be that some Republicans still don’t understand that young people aren’t watching Meet the Press? In fact, news junkies are watching less Meet the Press. Young people are getting their news from YouTube, Facebook and Ellen. And Team Obama has largely monopolized the playgrounds where Millennials are hanging out.” 
[SNIP]
“Republicans are bound to lose the next presidential election again if they can’t communicate with new voters. Millions of people walk into the voting booth and vote for someone they like. News junkies and DC types casually refer to this as “Who would you want to have a beer with?” The sentiment is accurate but the analogy should be updated to ‘Who do you want to make a YouTube video with?’” 
“I think this President is weak, bored with the office, and an incompetent leader. But he knows how to go around the DC media.”
Because these men are wiser than I am I will acquiesce to their point, but only so far.  While The World’s Most Dangerous Community Organizer spoke to the nation on Tuesday night Iranian-backed Shia rebels seized the Yemeni presidential palace.  Two days later Yemen's President resigned shortly after his prime minister and the entire  Cabinet stepped down.
The threat from ISIS and al-Qaeda continues to grow at an alarming pace.  Russia’s Putin hasn’t stopped threatening Ukraine. In his SOTU speech, TWMDCO boasted “We are demonstrating the power of American strength and diplomacy.  We’re upholding the principle that bigger nations can’t bully the small—by opposing Russian aggression, supporting Ukraine’s democracy, and reassuring our NATO allies.”
“Last year, as we were doing the hard work of imposing sanctions along with our allies, some suggested that Mr. Putin’s aggression was a masterful display of strategy and strength.  Well, today, it is America that stands strong and united with our allies, while Russia is isolated, with its economy in tatters. That’s how America leads—not with bluster, but with persistent, steady resolve.” 

Russia continues to supply troops and advanced weapons to the rebels as battles continue to rage in Donetsk and Luhansk.  You can see the war-ravaged Donetsk airport here.

The president’s remarks did not go unnoticed in the Kremlin.  Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking Wednesday at a press conference said, “We hear from our Western partners that Russia has to be isolated. Specifically, Barack Obama has just repeated that. These attempts won’t be effective.  Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Russia will never resort to self-isolation.” 

I could go on and on about his disastrous foreign policy on a country-by-country, region-by-region basis, but why bother.  Everything is peachy.  How do I know?  Because the smartest, coolest, hippest Preezy of the United Steezy told me so.  Every utterance of his is gobbled up by the mainstream media like it’s a pot brownie.

“I have no more campaigns to run,” he told us Tuesday night.  Still, for two more years the American people and the world will watch and be stupefied by the antics of a sophomoric, thin-skinned little man who cares more about his party and his legacy than the country he took an oath to preserve, protect and defend who possesses an extraordinary and previously undocumented ability to fuck everything up.
ISIS is shaking in their filthy pajamas

UPDATE:

“And Then You Invented Dirt Lumps”— A Bad Lip Reading of The NFL

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

The Curious Case Of The Incredible Shrinking Balls

I realize I may be setting myself up for some pretty harsh criticism from Patriots fans, but I have to express my total disgust with a team that clearly doesn’t think they can win even a single game without cheating.

In a post I published on Sunday, January 18th, I wrote about the history of cheating by the New England Patriots.  Little did I know that very Sunday, the Patriots would be embroiled in yet another scandal on the gridiron.

The NFL, according to ESPN, found 11 of the 12 footballs New England provided for Sunday’s blowout of the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC Championship Game were underinflated by as much as two pounds per square inch of pressure.
Back on November 16, 2014 Indianapolis Colts safety Mike Adams twice intercepted QB Tom Brady and gave each of the balls to the Colts’ equipment manager to save over concerns that those balls were under-inflated according to ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.  Sources confirm that the League was aware of the Colts’ concerns going into last Sunday’s AFC Championship game.

Monday morning following the game, Brady appeared on WEEI’s “Dennis and Callahan Show” feigning surprise that a deflated ball was even an issue.

“I have no idea,” Brady said as he laughed at the question. “I think I heard it all at this point…It’s ridiculous…Oh, God, that’s the last of my worries. I don’t even respond to stuff like that.”
Dan Wetzel over at Yahoo! Sports puts it right where it belongs:
As for ‘[hearing] it all at this point,’ the implication is that Brady had never heard of a ball being under-inflated, let alone his. As such, the suggestion was just ridiculous. Like, say, the NFL accusing him of filling it with helium.”
Through the years, Tom Brady has always been able to remain above whatever the latest fray [was] that engulfed the New England Patriots.” 
“Brady was the quarterback, perhaps teased for his fashion or footwear or occasionally awkward celebrations, but never much on issues of substance. He was the underdog turned megastar, likable and respectable and just oh so good.”
“Bill Belichick played the villain, the supposed win-at-all-costs genius under the ratty hoodie.  When allegations of underhandedness or unsportsmanlike play or anything else hit, it was all assumed to be Belichick’s orders, not Brady’s.”
In 2012, the Saints, after being found guilty of placing bounties on opposing players, Head Coach Sean Payton served a one-year suspension, defensive coordinator Gregg Williams got an indefinite suspension, assistant coach Joe Vitt got six games and general manager Mickey Loomis got eight games. They also forfeited two second-round draft picks and were fined.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has proven he has no stomach for meting out punishments to fit crimes like the brutal assault by Ray Rice on his fiancĂ©. He suspiciously allowed the destruction of Belichick’s “Spygate” videotapes and now he faces yet another credibility problem with a franchise that is a repeat offender of NFL regulations.

He’d better grow a pair and not try to paper over this.  At the very least, Belichick and Brady should be suspended from the Super Bowl.  The club should be fined not thousands, but millions of dollars and they should not have any draft picks for the next two years.  The Patriots need to be taught a lesson.  Get their attention.  If you get their attention, you’ll get the attention of every other player, coach, general manager and owner in the NFL.  Maybe then this deplorable behavior will end.
Am I making a mountain out of flattened balls?  Jerry Rice, 2010 Pro Football Hall of Famer who played in the League for 20 years, had 1,549 career receptions, 22,895 career receiving yards and 197 career TD receptions has an opinion on the matter:

Lame Duck Dynasty

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

SOTU: Ask Not What You Can Do For Your Country, But What Your Government Can Force Other People To Do For You


The World’s Most Dangerous Community Organizer was supposed to enter the well of the House of Representatives at 8:55 PM ET to give his State of the Union address.  As usual, he was late.
By 9:30 PM, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, aged 81, was out like a light.  Michelle Malkin tweeted, “We are all Ruth Bader Ginsburg now.”  The tweet that made me laugh the most was the one that asked, “Is Ruth Bader Ginsburg asleep or is she dead?”
The World’s Most Dangerous Community Organizer spent much of the State of the Union calling for civility in politics—then taunted Republicans over his two election victories, after many of them applauded the looming end of his political career.
TWMDCO issued a broad call for “better politics” that began with common principles, and said his agenda isn’t political, pointing out “I have no more campaigns to run.”
That drew rousing applause from the GOP side of the aisle, which had sat on its hands as he ticked off partisan proposals he wanted to see, and threatened vetoes of bipartisan bills Republicans are trying to pass.
Clearly angered by the applause, the thin-skinned, adolescent, stompy-footed president punctuated his declaration that his campaigns are over by saying, “I know, because I won both of them.”
What a jerk!

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Michael Moore: Doughboy Princess Gasbag

Leftist lard ass Michael Moore injects himself into every conversation he can because he has descended into irrelevancy.  Over the weekend, after American Sniper shocked Hollywood with its box office blowout, smashing virtually every available record raking in $108.7 million to date and counting, Moore began tweeting about the movie:
It got nasty for little Mikey and he had to turn off the alerts on his phone and decided to turn to his Facebook page:
Lots of talk about snipers this weekend (the holiday weekend of a great man, killed by a sniper), so I thought I'd weigh in with what I was raised to believe about snipers. My dad was in the First Marine Division in the South Pacific in World War II. His brother, my uncle, Lawrence Moore, was an Army paratrooper and was killed by a Japanese sniper 70 years ago next month. My dad always said, "Snipers are cowards. They don't believe in a fair fight. Like someone coming up from behind you and cold cocking you. Just isn't right. It's cowardly to shoot a person in the back. Only a coward will shoot someone who can't shoot back." 
So I sent out this tweet today: 
https://twitter.com/mmflint/status/556914094406926336 
And then I sent this: 
https://twitter.com/mmflint/status/556988226486169600 
But Deadline Hollywood and the Hollywood Reporter turned that into stories about how I don't like Clint Eastwood's new film, "American Sniper”. I didn't say a word about "American Sniper" in my tweets. 
But here's what Deadline Hollywood posted (note how they changed "snipers" to "shooters" in their headline):
http://deadline.com/…/michael-moore-american-sniper-oscars…/ 
Hollywood Reporter has since corrected their story: 
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/…/michael-moore-blasts-ame… 
If they wanted to know my opinion of "American Sniper" (and I have one), why not ask me? 
So here's what I think about "American Sniper": 
Awesome performance from Bradley Cooper. One of the best of the year. Great editing. Costumes, hair, makeup superb! 
Oh…and too bad Clint gets Vietnam and Iraq confused in his storytelling. And that he has his characters calling Iraqis "savages" throughout the film. But there is also anti-war sentiment expressed in the movie. And there's a touching ending as the main character is remembered after being gunned down by a fellow American vet with PTSD who was given a gun at a gun range back home in Texas -- and then used it to kill the man who called himself the “America Sniper”. 
Also, best movie trailer and TV ads of the year. 
Most of us were taught the story of Jesse James and that the scoundrel wasn't James (who was a criminal who killed people) but rather the sniper who shot him in the back. I think most Americans don't think snipers are heroes. 
Hopefully not on this weekend when we remember that man in Memphis, Tennessee, who was killed by a sniper's bullet. 
The doughboy princess gasbag has every right to say whatever he wants.  He lives in America where free speech is still the law of the land and good men like Chris Kyle fought to preserve that right.  By the same token, I and everyone else, has the right to call him what he is and even mock his ass unmercifully with a degrading Photoshop™.  Yep.  Now that makes me happy.
  

Monday, January 19, 2015

Jane, You Ignorant Slut!

On Friday evening, January 16, 2015, the Weinberg Center for The Arts in Frederick, MD played host to an American traitor and seditionist.  The Center billed her speaking engagement as an opportunity to address a variety of issues including motivation, health and wellness, business, women’s issues, achievement and perseverance.  There was zero mention of her radical activism, calls for revolution, her support of the Black Panthers or that little thing in Hanoi.

For four decades the actress woman slut known as “Hanoi Jane” has been met with protesters for her propagandist machinations in support of one of the worst regimes in human history.

It all began in 1972 when Jane Fonda traveled to North Vietnam to show her solidarity with the Viet Cong and to collect evidence at the behest of radical activist Tom Hayden that the United States was deliberately bombing river dikes in Nam Dinh.  Upon seeing the aftermath, she asked the VC if she could go on Radio Hanoi to plead with American bomber pilots to stop the bombing.  She broadcast 19 propaganda interviews.  She made a hero out of Vietnamese hijacker Nguyen Thai Binh who was killed trying to seize a plane from Saigon going to Hanoi.
Broadcast on August 9, 1972:  "This is Jane Fonda speaking from Hanoi. Like tens of thousands of other Americans, I'm extremely concerned these days about the betrayal of everything that my country stands for—about the betrayal of our flag, about the betrayal of the very precepts upon which our country was founded: equality for all people, liberty, and freedom." 
"Richard Nixon, history will one day report you as the new Hitler…It is no wonder that you are so cynically manipulating the American public into believing that you are striving for peace, when you are in fact committing the most heinous crimes against the innocent civilians of Vietnam."
Her utterances and movements are a testament to the skilled indoctrination of the Viet Cong and the Communists who were supporting them. To the extent there may be any sympathy at all for Fonda among Americans, it's probably because they’ve never known what she actually said in Hanoi and what was attributed to her.

Excerpted from Mark Holzer’s book Aid and Comfort:  Jane Fonda in North Vietnam:
“Fonda's own words make plain beyond any reasonable doubt the intent and import of her statements. They contained lies about the United States, its leaders, their motives and their acts.  They maligned the President of the United States.  They spouted the Communist propaganda line in every respect.  They sought to undermine the moral and military effort of our soldiers in the field and our prisoners in jungle camps and North Vietnamese prisons.  And her words even encouraged mutiny and desertion.”
Emboldened by her willingness to be a propaganda tool for Ho Chi Minh’s guerrillas, she was taken to visit an air defense installation on the outskirts of Hanoi.  While donning a VC helmet, she hopped onto the seat of an anti-aircraft battery holding a gun. 

The picture quickly circled the globe and by the time she arrived back home proudly wearing a coolie hat and black Vietnamese pajamas, she was heckled and cursed with cries of “Hanoi Jane” and rightly accused of being a traitor.

“What is a traitor? What is a patriot? I cried every day when I was in Vietnam. I cried for the Vietnamese and I cried for the Americans, too,” Fonda said.

Even before her treachery in Hanoi, she had been romantically involved with actor Donald Sutherland, her co-star in the film KluteTogether they took a political vaudeville show called FTA—slang for Fuck The Army—across the country outside military bases and along the Pacific Rim at bases from Guam to the Philippines.  The troupe was under surveillance by both the CIA and FBI.  Fonda’s FBI dossier extended to 22,000 pages.

Eventually, Fonda split from Sutherland, saying she was moving into a “different phase” of her life and she couldn’t share it with just one man. She had always been hedonistic and soon there were rumors of affairs with various activists.  Some time before 1971, Fonda confessed during a feminist consciousness-raising session, “My biggest regret is I never got to fuck Che Guevara.”  Yep, that was her biggest regret.

Now, of course, Fonda would have you believe that she is consumed with guilt about her repugnance for America’s soldiers and her “mistake” at being photographed on that anti-aircraft battery.  She “claims” she wasn’t against them when she visited Vietnam.  Oh no, she wasn’t giving aid and comfort to the enemy.  Not little ‘ol me. “Whenever possible I try to sit down with vets and talk with them, because I understand and it makes me sad.  It hurts me and it will to my grave that I made a huge, huge mistake that made a lot of people think I was against the soldiers.”

Fonda has endeavored, unsuccessfully, to rehabilitate her reputation as a traitor.  By describing herself as a “lightning rod” Fonda demurs, “This famous person goes and does something that looks like I’m against the troops, which wasn’t true, but it looked that way, and I’m a convenient target.”

To this day she maintains, "I don't regret going to North Vietnam. I'm glad I went. I'm glad I did everything I did.”


Civility and the Civilized Man

Our friend William Teach, over at The Pirate's Cove has penned an interesting and thought provoking piece this AM on civility. I am going to quote from it extensively, and if he doesn't like it he can just kiss my... (Take a deep breath! Civility! Ommm.) ah, then, we can simply discuss it like gentlemen! Teach writes:
Should media and other outlets avoid publishing material that upsets others? Not just Muslims, but the targeted group? We’re not talking about forced censorship, but personal censorship. Civility. Respect. Responsibility. In Starship Troopers, Robert Heinlein wrote
“A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot.”
...that always made quite a bit of sense to me. Too often people are willing to forgo civility. With free speech comes responsibility. Much of the world has forgotten this as an attitude that makes everything not just about “me me me”, but infused with an attitude that everyone else is simply an ant. What does that mean? Do you think about all the ants and bugs you step on? No. You almost never notice them. You’re just doing your own thing without regard to the bugs. This is the way so many people think today. When they’re driving along and cut people off, it’s more than just selfishness, it’s a complete lack of regard for what can happen to other people. The fender bender behind them is of no regard as they drive off without knowing they are responsible for causing that accident.

Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should. Was it appropriate when cartoonists were penning cartoons portraying Condi Rice in a horribly racist manner, many which were published in major American newspapers, such as the Washington Post and NY Times. When we do, we should be responsible for doing, be it speech, actions, the pen. We may not be to blame, we we can bear responsibility.
I commented along the lines of: "You cite the racist portrayal of Condi Rice. Those cartoons were vicious and meant to demean her. Isn’t there therefore a difference between those who would use a drawing to ridicule Mohammed as opposed to one that simply portrays him?

(To the non-Muslim, at least.)"

Is it not civil to point out something in someone else's religion that you believe is wrong or in error, or should that topic be off limits? I disagree with Mormons on matters of theology, but I generally do not air them in public. During the 2012 election, some liberal trolls (am I being uncivil in identifying them as such?), mocked Mitt Romney for his "holy underwear", referring to a practice of Mormonism, yet they had never leveled any such criticism at Democrat Harry Reid, also a Mormon.

So, for the case of both Condi and Mitt, the incivility seems to be primarily partisan in nature. Is partisan incivility exempted from other norms of civil behavior? Is it fair game to practice incivility towards one's political opponents? I doubt that the cartoonist or editors for the Post or NYT would have been so gauche as to mock Condi to her face or Mitt to his. And the trolls hide in their mother's basement, sniping at some whose boots they are unfit to lick.

So, how or where do we draw the line? Coincidentally, I woke up this AM thinking along these same lines. Am I being too harsh on those I criticize, and sometimes mock? Michael Moore drew the ire of many on Twitter yesterday, when he tweeted that Chris Kyle, subject of the movie "American Sniper", was a coward. Michael Moore is, on his better days, a vile disgusting human being. Is it not civil to point this out, or is it merely the degree to which one goes to point it out that might violate civility?

Moore spoke about an uncle in WWII who was shot by a sniper. And while I did refrain from asking him if his uncle was also his father, I did ask him if his uncle was shot by an American sniper?

The pudgy, ubiquitous Seth Rogen and a number of other brain dead liberals* (but I repeat myself) took it upon themselves to try to stretch Godwin's Law and compare American Sniper to the ersatz Nazi propaganda film featured in the movie Inglorious Basterds (sic).

Both Moore and Rogen have tried to walk back their statements, to little success, I might add. Michael Moore (Zip Codes 48501-48507, & 48550- 48557)* tweeted:
My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren't heroes. And invaders r worse
After a little bit of blowback, he tried to claim that he never mentioned Chris Kyle by name, so, his comments were just somehow generic "snipers are cowards" remarks that had nothing to do with the fact that American Sniper is setting box office records and is very much in the forefront in the mind of the general public.

Possibly too, the fact that his fauxumentaries, lying dreck that they were, were never a fraction of the box office success of American Sniper, would never cause a noble soul like Moore to be jealous of that success.

Yeah. Right.

Rogen, whose latest movie by nearly all accounts was dreadful, but generated a great deal of support across the country nonetheless after an attempted ban by the North Koreans, gave the following excuse:
I just said something "kinda reminded" me of something else. I actually liked American Sniper. It just reminded me of the Tarantino scene.
To which I replied:
If the critics say your movies remind them of dog vomit, then, they're not actually comparing, right? Just reminded. Right.
I also posed the question over at Pirate's Cove:
Should I self censor if what I write or draw offends a certain group? Do we extend this courtesy to skinheads, 9-11 truthers and the KKK, or is it merely religion that we exempt?
Does anyone get a free ride? Liberals gave liberal Mormons a free ride, but not conservative Mormons. A commenter at PC posited out that 'Islam is not an "evolved" religion', bringing up the point are the less informed or benighted among us free from civility? May we mock headhunters, but not Presbyterians? Radical Islamists but not moderate Muslims? People who are mistaken or downright entrenched in their ignorance??

In a polite society, is it ever correct to be intentionally rude? Even if someone, in your humble opinion deserves it?

Someone once said of George Bush (and obliquely of Barack Obama), that Bush never unintentionally insulted the Europeans.

Consider too, the latest Papal dispensation to civility. Pope Francis responded to the Paris slaughter by suggesting that "if someone curses your mother, he should expect to be punched".

Well, I realize that the whole "turn the other cheek" thing is so 33 AD, still do we get a "one free punch" exception to civility, like the "one free grope" rule given to Bill Clinton to shield him from sexual harassment laws?

I realize this post raises more questions than it answers. I've got a couple of Photoshops coming up on Wednesday and Thursday AM this week. The first is rather tame, mocking the current administration (in quite a clever way, I might add!), but the second, Thursday's,  is a little more biting, directed solely at the President. Let me know if you think I'm being less than civil.

BTW, anything in my blog I am more than willing to tell to the face of subjects of these posts.

Even Thursday's...

Addendum: (Not so much an update as something I meant to reference earlier when I was rudely interrupted by work.)

Last week after Andrew Roman's excellent Before You Argue the Point, Know Your Bible First post, we had a brief discussion about how people forfeit their rights, and that capital punishment was in no way was inconsistent with a pro-life viewpoint. Just as one can love liberty and favor people forfeiting their liberty through any number of acts, one can be pro life and favor capital punishment for those who forfeit their own right to life by unjustly taking the life of another. Which got me to thinking, in this context, do people such as Moore and Rogen (And Obama, and Biden, etc. etc.) forfeit their right to civility by being less than civil? By lying or being duplicitous?/ By being snot-nosed, lying crapweasels*???

*Was that uncivil?? Yes, but pointedly so!

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...