Indicting Obama

“The Buck Sure Doesn’t Stop HERE!

The Truman presidency has been mythologized in many ways. Time and faulty human memory have worked to make the man somewhat of a legend, and as one of the characters in the movie “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” noted, “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend”.

But one thing you have to hand to the man: he took responsibility for everything that took place under his administration. As the sign on his desk said, “The buck stops here”, and he meant it.

Contrast that to the current occupant of the Oval Office, the amateur who refuses to take responsibility for anything that’s happened during his utterly incompetent administration.

As I noted in my last essay, very shortly after his inauguration, in an interview with Matt Lauer, Obama stated, “… I will be held accountable. You know, I’ve got four years. A year from now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

Big words. How do they stack up to reality, you ask? Well… let’s take a quick look, shall we?

The Economy: Four years ago, one of the very few issues Obama actually took any kind of definable stand on was the economy; how bad it was and how he’d “fix” it. That was actually what the Lauer interview was all about.

But what have we heard for the last three years (at least)? “Blame Bush”. It’s all “Bush’s fault” or the fault of “my predecessor”. It’s not my fault. The buck doesn’t stop here. The dog ate my homework. Where’s that accountability he bragged about to Lauer?

One of two things happened: Either he was truly ignorant of what his prediction entailed – in which case he was just plain unqualified for the job – or he lied.

Gas Prices: When he took office a gallon of gas was about $1.87; now it’s over $4.00 out here in Greeceifornia. And, of course, the constant refrain is that the President doesn’t “control” gas prices. While semantically true, the President does control key policies that have a direct effect on gas prices, primarily policies which affect availability, which – according to the irrefutable law of supply and demand – directly determine what oil, and therefore gasoline, are going to cost.

Quite simply, the more there is of something, the less it’s going to cost. Scarcity is what drives up price.

This President has done everything in his power to block domestic access to the absolute ocean of oil upon which we sit, plain and simple. But he won’t acknowledge that; oh, no! It’s always someone else’s fault: Iran, the Saudis, world oil markets, speculators, the e-e-e-e-vil oil companies … everyone under the sun except him. But the reality is that he’s the one person standing in the way of allowing this country to do the one thing that would entirely solve the problem: letting us drill, baby, drill!

Solyndra:  Of course, one of the big reasons Obama continues to block domestic oil extraction is his worship at the altar to the myth of “alternate energy”, from which we got the boondoggle funding of solar manufacturer Solyndra to the tune of over $500 million, after which they promptly went bankrupt.

Naturally, it was simply another “blame Bush” moment. It seems the Bush people had considered that same funding… but what Obama had failed to mention was that they also had decided Solyndra wasn’t a sound company in which to make that investment, so this one ended up being another egg-on-the-face moment for the ObaMessiah. But ya gotta give him props for trying, right? After all, “the buck doesn’t stop here!”, at least if he can help it.

He didn’t even learn from that debacle, repeating it with SunPower and even doubling down, wasting over $1.2 Billion and “creating” all of 15 jobs from a company over $820 Million in debt.

Obamacare:  His “signature” (and just about only) piece of legislation, which is hugely unpopular with the people and on the verge of being ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Of course, that’s not his fault. That will be due to the “partisan” nature of those Justices who decide against it. I guess the ones who find for it aren’t “partisan” somehow. “Partisanship” only seems to be a feature of those who don’t agree with Obama (and liberals in general, apparently. Evidently, leftists are never “partisan”. They must be “principled”).

Bottom line: “The buck doesn’t stop here! It’s the ‘partisan’ Justices.”

Gridlock:  Always the fault of the other party and their obstructive “partisanship”, of course. The buck doesn’t stop with Obama. It’s the fault of the GOP. Naturally.

It doesn’t matter that his own party had complete control of Congress for the first two years of his presidency and could pass absolutely anything they wanted. Somehow or another, the GOP was still at fault. Now, of course, the GOP has control of the House, and so it’s their fault that his proposals go nowhere. Not that anything’s really changed; even when his own party controlled everything, they didn’t bother to pass a budget, even though they didn’t need one single GOP vote to do so. And it doesn’t matter that ObaMessiah’s own budget proposals have been killed in the Democrat-controlled Senate by his own party.

The buck doesn’t stop here. It’s the GOP’s fault.

Rancorous political tone:  Which, of course, only refers to things said by his opponents. When he calls his political opponents “enemies”, that’s not rancorous, of course. Because the buck doesn’t stop here. When Bill Maher calls Sarah Palin a “c***”, that’s not “rancor”, and Maher’s $1 Million political donation is happily accepted.

Operation Fast And Furious:  Early in his presidency Obama tried to gin up a case that gun laws were too lax, allowing thousands of guns to “leak” across the border into the murderous hands of the Mexican drug cartels, leading to thousands of deaths. Hence Operation Fast And Furious was born.

It turned out that those guns were being “walked” across the border through straw purchases as part of a Bureau of Alcohol, Tax and Firearms (BATF) operation purportedly in place to trace and apprehend the end users of those very guns. Only problem was, the BATF lost track of those guns, the Mexican authorities were never informed of this operation, lots of people died – including at least one US Border Patrol agent named Brian Terry – and thousands of guns (enough to arm an Army battalion, literally) ended up in the hands of Very Bad Guys.

When this whole debacle came to light, we saw Operation The Buck Doesn’t Stop Here come into being in a major way. It seems that no one of any authority ever had any knowledge of any such program. It must have been devised and implemented by gremlins. Maybe Santa’s Helpers decided to gift the drug cartels or something, because this whole operation seems to have appeared out of thin air, with no one in charge, or knowledgeable, or having given authorization, or overseeing it, or answerable for it.

The BATF is part of the Justice Department, of which Attorney-General Eric Holder is in charge… except it seems that the guy “in charge” isn’t informed of critical operations, at least according to Holder. The buck doesn’t stop with Holder, the man in charge of his department.

And, of course, Holder reports to Obama, who doesn’t even seem to acknowledge that there’s an investigation by Congress going on about this issue. Utter silence. Because, of course, the buck can’t stop at Obama’s desk if he closes his eyes and refuses to even acknowledge it. His silence is deafening.

The last time I saw this kind of stonewalling was during the Watergate era. A lot of people lost their jobs – including a sitting President – and several went to prison.

White House leaks:  Over the last couple of weeks secrets concerning highly-classified military and intelligence operations have been leaked to the press. The only perceptible beneficiary of those leaks would be Obama himself, as the leaked material seems to be of a nature that would enhance his being perceived as a decisive and tough “war leader”, beneficial during an election year, particularly for an incumbent with big problems to overcome on other issues (maybe like those outlined above? Just sayin’…).

The only way secrets of that nature could be accessible would be if someone very high up – at White House level – leaked them.

Of course… “the buck doesn’t stop here!”, according to the White House.

Of course it doesn’t. No responsible President or his minions would purposefully leak information that could lead to the deaths of agents working on our nation’s behalf in foreign and hostile countries, simply to enhance his political prospects. The idea’s unthinkable… right?

I even had to laugh at that one myself, and I knew it was coming…

“The Buck Does Stop HERE”… Except It Really Doesn’t:  In his desperation to try to cobble together a winning coalition and secure a second term, Obama came out in favor of same-sex marriage a few weeks ago. For his die-hard supporters, that seems to be a little too late on the issue, easily pegged as a cynical ploy to try to regain the LGBT vote that supported him so enthusiastically last time and has been so disappointed by his performance to this point.

More importantly… who cares what a presidential candidate thinks about what is essentially a state issue: the definition of marriage? That varies from state to state, as is proper. So he’s grabbing the buck where it’s irrelevant.

And doing the same thing with his announcement this past week that he’s going to grant work permits to illegal aliens who meet certain criteria. Sorry, Obama, you don’t have the power or authority to do that. You’re sworn to uphold the law as passed and enacted by Congress. Nowhere in the current law is there any authority to take it upon yourself to determine who is and who is not allowed to get work permits as an alien. You have to abide by the law as written and properly passed and enacted. And lawsuits have already been filed against you to address your actions.

Which is particularly ironic in that he had his Justice Department minion Holder file a lawsuit against the State of Arizona over its SB1070 law, which allowed its own police forces to help enforce federal immigration law. Their law was enacted on the premise that the feds weren’t effectively enforcing the extant laws. And here he is, proving their point.

The problem for the ObaMessiah is that he’s not Emperor; he doesn’t get to pick and choose what laws he’s going to have his administration enforce. He’s sworn to enforce the laws on the books as written and lawfully enacted.

So, in this case grabbing that buck he tries the rest of the time to avoid simply doesn’t wash. It’s easily and accurately perceived as nothing more than an attempt at cheap populism aimed at a very specific voter demographic.

Bottom Line:  Except when he gets it wrong, as in the amnesty and same-sex marriage issues, not only is Obama’s slogan “The Buck Doesn’t Stop Here!”, it’s “Buck?… What Buck?”

I indict Obama for dodging responsibility for his actions and the actions of those who work for him; of world-class hypocrisy; for speaking out of both sides of his mouth; for illegal arrogation of power to himself in violation of the US Constitution; and for just basically being the lousiest President since… ever.

The only guy who ever made Jimmy Carter look good by comparison.

© Brian Baker 2012

84 comments on “Indicting Obama

  1. thedrpete says:

    So, you’re sayin’, BrianR, that on balance, this presidency has been a net-negative?

  2. Gunny G says:

    Exactly what I would expect from you Brian, you’ve outdone yourself! This clown should have been impeached long ago.

  3. captbogus@yahoo.com says:

    I don’t believe the ATF simply “lost track” of the guns in F&F. They simply got them to the bad guys and only were interested in the guns turning up at crime scenes. In other words the serial #’s showing they came from the USA was all they wanted. Nor did they want the public to know the guns weren’t purchased and resold to the cartels by American citizens.
    So the whole purpose of F&F was to make Americans believe due to lax gun laws the citizenery were enrichning themselves via legal gun purchases and illegally reselling them to the Mexican criminals.
    Only it wasn’t American citizens doing it. Rather it was the ATF, which has never been an instrument for protecting Americans from anything anyway.
    From its inception the ATF has always been a force to subjugate the people to the will of the government.

    • BrianR says:

      I absolutely agree with you, Buck. I printed the “official” excuse, but I don’t buy it for a second. I’m firmly convinced, like you, that the whole thing was a cynical ploy start to finish to try to create an environment in which they could try to pass more onerous gun laws.

      Which is EXACTLY why no one will take any responsibility for it. Once THAT cat’s out of the bag, Katie bar the doors!

  4. clyde says:

    Great essay.TAKE A BOW. Sums up the BECS’ term precisely. On the question of “did he lie”,I’ll take “He Lied” for $2000,Alex. Not only does he deserve to be kicked to the curb,so does the absolute damnable media,the balless sonsofbitches in Congress,and the MORONS who swallowed hook,line,and sinker the “hope and change” shuck and jive.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Clyde.

      I fully agree. This country allowed itself to be bamboozled by a slick-talking snake oil salesman. Elmer Gantry.

  5. jevica says:

    Brian;

    Love this post. We will never see anything like this calling BHO out in the mainstream press.

    When he was elected I posted/commented he would try to blame Bush as long as he could, I really did not think he would do for almost four (4) years.

    Nothing is ever his fault, either Bush [43], or any other of his staff, or the GOP House, the Republicans, anyone but him.

    BTW I agree with this post all the way. I can’t believe the polls that so many buy into the “It’s Bush’s fault [economy]”

    Again, great post.

    • BrianR says:

      Jev, I wouldn’t put all that much faith in those polls. The only one that counts comes in November.

      In 1980, the polls had Carter beating Reagan, right up to election day.

      Turned out to be a Reagan landslide.

      • jevica says:

        YES, I don’t buy polls, usually, but I mention them to show how unbelievable they are, as in the Reagan/Carter ones.

        What’s up with the arrest in San Fran and the killing of the pimp?

      • BrianR says:

        I’m not familiar with the story.

  6. jevica says:

    Happy father’s day

  7. jevica says:

    Brian;

    Here it is.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pimp-slaying-20120615,0,5329087.story

    “Parents accused of killing daughter’s pimp in San Francisco
    Authorities believe Barry Gilton and Lupe Mercado failed in one attempt and succeeded with their second in killing Calvin Sneed, a known Compton gang member.”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/15/parents-accused-of-murdering-runaway-teenaged-daughters-pimp/

    “Parents accused of murdering runaway teenaged daughter’s pimp”

    • BrianR says:

      Interesting story. Dad’s no angel, according to the LA Times article; he’s a convicted felon.

      Sounds to me like it may be a NHI case; No Humans Involved.

  8. jevica says:

    Brian;

    CA sounds like it’s going real crazy,

    http://reason.com/archives/2012/06/15/california-ushers-in-a-new-era-of-bipart/singlepage

    “California Ushers In a New Era of Bipartisan Plunder
    The Golden State descends to a new low.”

    What a crock, “June 5 was the first election that used the “top two” primary system, a form of open primary designed specifically to elect more candidates who resemble former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who helped advance the idea. He was one of least effective and least principled Republicans to attain higher office in recent years, so let this serve as a warning about what is to come.”

    More like Arnold I pity CA.

    • BrianR says:

      “GOING real crazy”?

      Hell’s bells, we’ve been there for YEARS! Why do you think I call this place “Commiefornia” and “Greeceifornia”? This is the stupidest, craziest state in the nation, bar none.

      Don’t remind me of the Governator. I so loathe and despise that a-hole/douchebag that I can’t even watch my Terminator movies anymore. I’m afraid I’ll break my TV by throwing something at it.

    • BrianR says:

      BTW, how was Vegas? Did you get to shoot full-auto this time?

  9. Gray Ghost (Mississippi) says:

    Except for not mentioning Obama’s constant golf playing, his expensive vacations, and his constant “bad-mouthing” of the US, you have pretty well nailed this administration, Brian. All I can hope is that the rest of the country sees it like you and I do and makes Obama a one term president.

    BTW, NW Arkansas is growing like crazy.New construction every where. The local press says that unemployment is less than 6%. Large corporations (like Price-Waterhouse) are even moving their corporate offices here. I imagine that having the largest corporation in the world (i.e., Walmart) located in this area definitely is a plus.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Gray. Those are other great (?) flaws you’ve mentioned there, but I was focusing in on things he refuses to “take credit” for; there are plenty of those alone. Other things are icing on the cake, so to speak.

      It’s interesting that Arkansas is doing so well in spite of the economy. I wonder what’s driving it? In the Dakotas, we know the impetus: oil and gas.

      • Gray Ghost (Mississippi) says:

        The reason for the growth in NW Arkansas has got to be that Walmart’s corporate offices are located in the area. This morning I spoke to people from Las Vegas and San Francisco who have re-located here. They say that their salaries were increased by over 50% and that the cost of living was less. They also said that they enjoyed the “laid-back” life style of the area. One of these people is in food services and owns a small catering company (8 employees). The other people I spoke to are in construction.

      • BrianR says:

        It’s amazing to me that a single company could have such an impact on an entire state that way, I have to say.

  10. Nee says:

    Yep… Empty suit. On Friday I saw the report about letting young I-2’s have amnesty…and claiming its not political!!! This freak really believes we know nothing. Well, well see how much we know come November. He has broken the law with this one and no one seems to care.

    • BrianR says:

      Yep, he has; and you’re right. No one seems to care. Which means that Bat Ears is right, because he knows his eager acconmplices in the MSM will refuse to point out the obvious.

      I just wrote a comment on an editorial in the NY Slimes:

      http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/17/what-will-change-after-the-supreme-courts-health-care-ruling/striking-down-the-individual-mandate-is-right-and-wrong?comments#comments

      The columnist wrote this as part of her lead: “If the Supreme Court strikes down the Affordable Care Act’s mandate to buy insurance, it will have done the right thing for the wrong reason. The court’s Republican majority will have used the Constitution as an excuse to undermine President Obama. ”

      To which I replied: “What a stupid editorial. If SCOTUS strikes down the mandate, it’s a purely political anti-Obama act, EVEN THOUGH it’s the correct thing to do.

      “Is Angell a mind-reader? SHE’S against the mandate; how come HER opposition isn’t simply anti-Obama in nature? Just because she says so?

      “This is blatant hypocrisy and hysterical finger-pointing.”

      Why didn’t anybody else point out this incredible lapse of logic in her blather?

      • Nee says:

        Brian– Don’t forget, the supporters who have not seen what ruin Obama has created will never, ever call him out and it will always be, just like Obama, someone else’s fault. It’s utterly ridiculous.

      • BrianR says:

        Yep; absurd beyond belief. If you made this stuff up in a book or movie, people would scoff at you (unless it was a Monty Python parody).

  11. clyde says:

    Gray Ghost,you MUST also exhort these people who come there to LEAVE their liberalism where they came from. Seems these bozos have a REAL BAD habit of fouling up an area,then moving to another when what THEY voted in,for,whatever,turns out to be the all-too-predictable disaster.

  12. clyde says:

    Brian,it looks like the writer of this editorial has as much Constitutional intellect as Obama. Must be the editorial board approves of blatant idiocy.

  13. Hardnox says:

    Brian,
    Kudos!!!!!!!! Well done.

    I am waiting for Congress to finally grow a set. Zero has effectively rendered them more useless than usual. I have long wondered if Congress is deliberately waiting until fall to lower the boom since the electorate is so daft.

    Zero has crapped the bed so often it is difficult to keep count anymore.

    We are conducting business as if we were a third world county.

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Hardnox.

      Well, you saw the email in our discussion this morning, but for those who didn’t:

      There are 4 bombs on the verge of going off that are really going to screw Bat Ears’s campaign:

      1: SCOTUS is going to tank Obamacare. VERY bad news for the ObaMessiah.

      2: SCOTUS is going to uphold Arizona’s SB1070 law. Again, bad news for The Chosen One.

      3: Fast & Furious is going to result in contempt of Congress charges, and possibly impeachments and/or indictments.

      4. The White House leaks issue is going to erupt big time.

      I don’t know why all of the “pundits” are ignoring those things. They seem blatantly obvious to me.

  14. clyde says:

    Too many of these pundits are complicit as well. Damn right it’s obvious. So that to me begs the question: WHY the silence from the so-called r “opposition”. A BUNCH of THEM are up for re-election as well.

    • BrianR says:

      That’s really a dmaned good question.

      None of the leftist drones want Bat Ears to help with their re-election bids, so it really is puzzling why the GOPers are so silent on this guy.

      If it wasn’t for Issa in the House and Leahy in the Senate dealing with Fast and Furious, it seems no one would be saying much at all. Even Feinstein, a DEM, has been more critical — about the WH leaks — than the GOPers.

      That really IS interesting. More of the SOP of the GOP being fairly ball-less.

  15. CW says:

    The Reader’s Digest version of this essay would read as follows:

    “Obama’s a leftist. The end.”

    My dream is that some day, that’s all that will need to be said.

  16. Jack says:

    Its hard to see what BHO will offer up to Independents (who always decide elections these days) as an incentive to give him another chance. You can only blame your predecessor so much–esp. when you continue many of his policies that you promised to end. I can’t believe F&F hasn’t gotten more attention either. I don’t think Romney is worth a damn either, but he might look good-enough to I’s standing next to BHO.

    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, Jack. Believe me, there are a lot of things about Romney I’m not happy about. But Obamamama makes him look like the reincarnation of Reagan by comparison.

      I’ll be very interested in seeing what signal he sends by his Veep selection. As fas as I’m concerned, Rubio is off the table as he’s essentially endorsed Obozo’s amnesty BS. I’d like to see someone like Allen West, Santorum, Bachmann… people like that. Someone with true conservative chops.

      As to F&F: stay tuned! Issa gave Holder a firm deadline, with contempt charges right around the corner. I’ve predicted all along — for over a year — that late June or sometime in July would be when the fit hits the shan on that issue. That’s when it would have the most political impact on the upcoming election. So far, that prediction seems to be holding.

      • Jack says:

        According to Bloomberg BHO’s latest immigration stance has gone over well w/voters: “Obama Immigration Policy Favored 2-To-1 By Likely Voters”

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-19/obama-immigration-policy-favored-2-to-1-by-likely-voters.html

        If this poll is accurate it doesn’t portend well for the future of one of Conservatism’s main planks. Reagan’s amnesty deal w/the Dems has REALLY come back to bite us in the keister.

        I WAS surprised w/the WAY Rubio expressed his sentiments: “Marco Rubio says he would come to the U.S. illegally if he had to”

        http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/marco-rubio-us-illegally/story?id=16601077#.T-CtAY5j50c

        How could Rubio NOT know this would upset the base? It REALLY stinks of political opportunism and hyphenated-Americanism to me.

        I have to say, I’m not sure a Social Conservative (Santorum/Bachmann) is what lifts Romney up–I don’t think Independents give a damn about gay marriage and pornography and those two have staked a lot of their reputation on these kind of, imo, irrelevant topics. And, West may be TOO fiery and volatile for primetime. The fact that West joined and remains in the Black Caucus is an absolute DISGRACE imo…another example of ethnic/tribal politics which should have NO PLACE in America. This is the kind of crapola you expect from the LEFT.

      • BrianR says:

        Well, as I’ve often said, I’m not a firm believer in most polls. I have no idea what the questions were, and the article doesn’t say.

        And if we’re just throwing the doors open to illegal aliens, this country’s toast, period, the end. We’ll just be continuing down the path of the Western Roman Empire to our own dissolution and destruction.

        IMO, Rubio’s completely dead to me as a political candidate going forward; that was a killer. To me, there are a few deal-breaker issues, guns and illegal immigration being at the top of the list. He crossed the Rubicon with that one.

        As to the “social conservatives”, they’re ones who also hit the right notes on true non-social conervatism: economy, foreign policy, entitlements, etc. Unfortunately, the one seems to kind of go hand in hand with the other. And West made it really clear that he joined the Black Caucus to effect change from within, NOT because he subscribes to their platform. He specifically disavows their platform; his joining was a form of shoving it in their faces.

        I’m interested in hearing who you think would be a good Veep pick.

  17. Jack says:

    We have to remember that Bush, somehow, won re-election despite being horrible and despite having squeaked-out as controversial a win in 2000 as any in history. I just have a nagging feeling that Romney is gonna be the GOP’s Kerry in 2012–a weak candidate who allows a weak sitting potus to keep his seat.

    • BrianR says:

      Maybe. Politics is always somewhat of a crap-shoot.

      I do believe that, as always, this election is the GOP’s to lose, and they DO have an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Romney sure wasn’t their strongest option.

      But I think Bat Ears is hugely weaker than Bush was; this is more akin to Carter than Bush.

      • Jack says:

        The debates may prove critical in this election. BHO, horrible as he’s been, is one HELL of a speaker…and has proven a very effective campaigner. I still think he’s “cool” to the younger crowd and–of course–will have most of the MSM’s (outside of Fox) support. He needs some luck as far as the economy goes–if nothing major “breaks” between now and the election he’ll have been lucky.

        Agreed on BHO’s weakness. GW, whatever his faults/mistakes, at least retained loyalty amongst his base up until 2004. We can’t say the same about BHO.

        Conservatives HATE BHO more than any other Dem in my living memory…and that hatred will allow many to nose-hold for Romney than may otherwise not have. That’s what Romney has going for him. However, lib HATRED of GW wasn’t enough in 2004. A candidate has to have SOMETHING (charisma, a big idea, ideological purity, speaking chops, etc.) going for him to put him over the top…w/Romney, as it was w/Kerry, I’m not sure what that “something” is. “I’m not Bush” didn’t work for Kerry and I’m not sure “I’m not Obama” will for M.R.

        I’m trying to see things out of the eyes of an INDEPENDENT…many of whom lean Left on some issues. Many I’s aren’t motivated by the kind of hatred Conservatives have for BHO and will be looking at this election through a very different perspective than is realized by folks on Conservative blogs.

      • BrianR says:

        Actually, I think Obozo’s a pretty poor debater. He’s lost without TOTUS. And THIS time he’ll actually have to address real issues with real answers; no more of that vague BS he got away with last time. PLUS he’ll have to defend his record. I’d sure hate to be in that position.

        Here’s the thing about the “hate” and all of that: this country is still a “middle-right” country; essentially conservative. That accrues a benefit to Romney that neither Gore nor Kerry enjoyed. It actually worked against them. It’s always something lefties have to overcome in a race for Prez, and it’s a built-in “home court” advantage for GOPers (except for a-holes like McCain).

        As to the Independants — of which I’m one — take a look at my essay on exactly that topic a few months back.

  18. captbogus@yahoo.com says:

    Clyde: Maybe the reason the (r)’s are not raising questions is because they believe they are bullet proof at the ballot box?????????????

    • BrianR says:

      Whoa… always a bad idea…

    • clyde says:

      They’ll think that to their demise. I think we can all agree the GOP,RNC etc etc have an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. A funny thing happened today,I was out running my errands,get a phone call from the RNC. After the schpiel about having to defeat Obama,he gets around to the REAL reason for the call. My “most generous donation”. I told HIM as soon as I see Priebus,Boehner,McConnell,et al in front of the TV cameras SCREAMING for Obama’s impeachment over his LATEST unConstitutional act, I’d send money. NOT to the RNC,but to Romney directly. If,by now,you’re thinking,did the RNC guy hang up? INDEED he did. Almost ran off the road,laughing at the poor cluck.

      • BrianR says:

        LOL!

        Yeah, the GOPers aren’t doing real well trying to dip into my pockets, either.

        How’d they get your cell number?

      • clyde says:

        Been wondering that myself. The last donation I made was to Romney,and one before that to Santorum. Don’t recall using my cell as a contact either time,and we put both cellphones on the Cell Do Not Call list.

      • BrianR says:

        Yeah, man. Solicitation calls on my cell would tick me off in a big way.

  19. Jack says:

    Brian, I’ll be honest…on VP I have no clue! I’m still not even sure I’m gonna vote at all this November, so I haven’t given it much thought.

    Strategy-wise I think this article makes some great points:

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/17/nation/la-na-veep-20120616

    The list of potentials from the article: Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida; Govs. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Nikki Haley of South Carolina, Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Scott Walker of Wisconsin; and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas.

    If MR were trying to shore up religious support I’d tend to think Santorum or Bachmann would be logical choices, but BHO shored up any weakness on THAT front w/his gay marriage announcement.

    I’m w/you…Rubio WOULD’VE been a great choice prior to his recent gaff, but then again, maybe it wouldn’t hurt MR; maybe MR doesn’t want to be out-shined by his VP either!

    I’m kind of playing Devil’s Advocate here and REALLY trying to see things from an Independent viewpoint…so I could be 100% wrong w/my assumptions. I can only really know MY viewpoint and can only guess at other groups’.

    • Jack says:

      I just want to re-iterate that, imo, MR doesn’t have to worry much about the base. Conservatives and Republicans want BHO gone–period! Hardline Conservatives blew their chance at nominating a real conservative this Primary Season, but they’re still gonna turn out in November, march into voting booths, and pull the lever for Mitt, regardless.

      Liberals and Democrats aren’t so excited about BHO, but I still think most of them will turn out in an attempt to keep a Republican out of office–esp. if they think they’re gonna lose congress again and esp. if Mitt goes w/a hardcore Social Conservative veep.

      As I’ve said its gonna be INDEPENDENTS (esp. those who combine significant portions of Conservatism and Liberalism) who decide the election. And, between MR and BHO, I’m hard-pressed to see what separates them in the minds of INDEPENDENTS. It could come down to one killer gaff or misstep…we’re talking the SLIMMEST of margins here.

      Or, maybe Independents flip the bird to the Republicrats/Demopublicans and cast a protest vote for Libertarian/Gary Johnson…http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-johnson-at-6-in-new-national-poll/

      • BrianR says:

        I’m not so sure about O’s base. His campaign donations are WAY down, which is why he’s constantly flying out here to tap the Holyyweird ATM. The unions are backing away from him big time.

        Also, I don’t see that margin as being as “slim” as the polls suggest, as I just wrote a few minutes ago.

    • BrianR says:

      Well, I like Jindal. I think Condi would be a HUGE mistake. She has absolutely zero experience in elective office. They’d beat them both to death with that. Even LESS experience than Obamamama, and that’s really saying something. Don’t pay too much attention to the LAraza Times; a leftist rag of the worst order.

      Huckleberry’s another pro-amnesty dweeb, and no true conservative. I can’t stand the guy. I agree that Romney needs no help on the religious front with Obozo’s recent anti-religious-freedom actions. He KILLED himself with Catholics.

      Again, never forget that “the polls” had Carter beating Reagan right up to election day. THAT was the only poll that really mattered.

      I constantly scratch my head and wonder why the Establishment GOP hacks think there’s such a thing as “too conservative”, when real conservatism wins almost every single time it’s presented as a choice in statewide and national elections. Jindal, Palin, Scott Walker, Reagan, Jan Brewer, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. It’s the wishy-washy compromisers and RINOs who lose: Dole, McCain, Ford, Papa Bush when he ran for re-election as his RINO self, etc.

      • Jack says:

        All good points, sir. I wasn’t listing the LATimes as a great source, but I thought the idea of a “safe” VP had merit.

        However, as far as “conservatism” goes…I think we have to entertain the idea that “conservatism” has drifted Left w/the rest of the country…also that many “Conservatives” are just as dumbed-down as liberals.

        Any more I’m not even sure how to define it and imo the advance of ‘social’ conservatism has been counter-productive. Fiscal responsibility, adequate DEFENSE for US (not the world), rolling back the welfare-state, adherence to the Constitution and States’ Rights, and sticking-up for national sovereignty are all things I associate w/being a true Conservative. I think we’d have great success if we stuck to these basic premises, but far too often many Conservatives want to go WAY outside of them.

        We used to be pragmatic, but I don’t even see much of THAT anymore.

      • BrianR says:

        LOL, Jack!

        Yeah, the good ole LA Slimes. Last time they cheered McCain on until he won the nomination, then it was “mission accomplished” as they’d backed the absolute worst GOPer, and they were all in for Bat Ears.

        As to “conservatism”, I think the term is misused nowadays and conflated with “right wing”. Like you, I’m of a “small l” libertarian bent, which I consider “traditional American conservatism”.

        I’m not sure the problem is with conservatives. I think the problem lies in the fact that this country — again like the Western Roman Empire — is becoming too dependant on government largesse, with almost 50% of the peeps paying no income taxes at all, a large portion receiving government benefits, etc. This is the stuff of the fall of empires.

        This is an essay I wrote in Feb 2008 at my Townhall blog: http://viewfromtheisland.blogtownhall.com/2008/02/13/bread_and_circuses.thtml

        Take a look.

  20. Jack says:

    One thing Brian…I didn’t say BHO was a good DEBATER, but a good SPEAKER.

    IMO, debate skills based on applying logic and rhetoric in order to make rational and convincing points which cause people to alter their views are sadly irrelevant in today’s politics.

    If DEBATING–old-school, classical use of RHETORIC–was effective amongst today’s American electorate, then Ron Paul would be sailing towards the White House.

    Politics is a popularity contest. Looks, luck, one-liners, effective lying/manipulation, and saying the right line of BS at the right time counts more than anything.

    In a contest of two liars/manipulators/hacks (MR vs. BHO), I’m gonna give the edge to the better liar/hack (BHO).

    • BrianR says:

      You’re right; that was what you said.

      But he’s still dependant on TOTUS. He’s just not very good at speaking extemporaneously at all. Just like his legal education, his speaking skills are always vastly overrated. He’s no more a gifted orator than he is a “constitutional scholar”. (His education, BTW, consists of a JD, which is the same run-of-the-mill law degree every other lawyer in America has. He’s no “professor”, though you notice he never takes the time to correct that misconception. What a shmuck)

      • Jack says:

        Again, agree w/you.

        He just has this weird (I’d say creepy) TECHNIQUE of talking to crowds that seems effective.

        Remember, NO conservative is gonna give him the time of day, but he doesn’t have to convince C’s…he has to convince liberals and hopefully (for him) juuuust enough Independents.

      • BrianR says:

        Yeah, but I don’t think that’ll fly this time. He won’t be able to hand-pick the audience; there’ll be people there hostile to him.

        I think this time around’s going to be VERY interesting as the people see that the Emperor’s buck nekkid.

  21. Jack says:

    Good point about polling too.

    Its a tool…something to base stuff on, but not fool-proof.

    I hadn’t remember Carter outpolling Reagan up til election day.

    • BrianR says:

      Yep, and it was the same scenario: real tight race with Carter having a slight edge.

      Reagan went on to sweep 49 states. Tight race?

      Not so much…

      • clyde says:

        You can poll a ham sandwich and make it think it is roast beef. Bottom line,as far as debates. All Romney has to do is NOT BACK DOWN when going after Obama’s record,and CLEARLY illustrate how he intends to fix what these morons have screwed up so terribly. THAT alone should be enough to do the trick. Get a message,stick to it,and when doofus tries to steer the debate away from HIM,turn it right back into his face. When Obama “punches”,Mitt MUST hit back TWICE as hard,IMHO.

      • BrianR says:

        Yep.

        Reagan’s motto against Carter: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

        It worked then, and it should be just as effective this year.

  22. Jack says:

    “Not so much”…LOL…

    About the “buck stops here” sentiment…man, I wish ONE of these limp-wristed politicos would actually take RESPONSIBILITY for something…its ALWAYS someone else’s fault w/these jerkoffs isn’t it?

    • Jack says:

      These aholes chase after the power to control other people (because we’re, obviously, incapable of running our own lives!) their whole lives and when they get it…they STILL blame us for THEIR mistakes!

      • BrianR says:

        Well, what can you say?

        Who else are they going to blame? Themselves? You mean actually step up to the plate?

    • BrianR says:

      Every single time.

      “Buck?… WHAT buck?”

  23. Jack says:

    Scary stuff at your old article Brian…

    I know the GOP Elites like to push bad candidates on us, but I’m REALLY scratching my head over the last two potus nominees.

    I don’t think I’ve met a single conservative who was excited about Romney prior to his getting the nomination and back in 2008 I don’t think I met one that DIDN’T dislike McCain, but somehow they got enough votes to represent the GOP.

    Puzzling…

    • BrianR says:

      Actually, it’s not really all that puzzling. It’s the age-old conflict between the Country-Club GOPers and the Goldwater/conservative wing now represented by the Tea Partiers. It goes back over 50 years.

      When Reagan got the nod in 1980, it wasn’t his first attempt. He’d tried before and been defeated in the primaries. In 1980, the Establishment (Country-Club) wing fought him all the way; their guy was Bush. The fight between Reagan and Bush in the primaries was absolutely brutal. Bush is the guy who coined the term “voodoo economics” to belittle Reagan.

      Again, a couple of my old essays from my TH blog, if you’re interested:

      http://viewfromtheisland.blogtownhall.com/2006/10/03/a_history_lesson_for_2008.thtml

      http://viewfromtheisland.blogtownhall.com/2007/03/21/are_principles_irrelevant.thtml

      http://viewfromtheisland.blogtownhall.com/2007/02/26/principle_versus_expediency.thtml

      http://viewfromtheisland.blogtownhall.com/2007/11/19/considerations_on_conservatism.thtml

      There are more, but those will give you an idea. Sometimes I feel like Cassandra in Greek mythology: blessed with accurate foresight while cursed that no one will ever believe her.

      BTW, on that fourth one, a week or so after I published it, Limbaugh started talking about the same “three-legged stool” of principles. That’s happened quite a few times with things I’ve written; shortly afterwards, I hear the same ideas being touted by the “pundits”. I’ve often wondered who reads my blogs, or if it’s simply “the time” for ideas to generally germinate.

      • Jack says:

        Interesting about R.L.

        I imagine he and others have researchers/staff who’re always on the lookout for material online.

        I think a big mistake followers of certain talking heads/radio-types make is in overestimating their intelligence.

      • BrianR says:

        Yeah; it’s just flattering to think that they’re reading — and maybe using — ideas I’ve written or originated.

      • Jack says:

        RE: Cassandra

        Well, there’s a reason the Old Prophets (not to mention Jesus being crucified!) were usually stoned to death!

        Unfortunately, people have a hard time accepting hard truths. Its doubly dangerous when those truths conflict w/prevailing PC attitudes and the Ruling Elite interests.

        If I’m a RE, what kind of ideas/ideologies am I gonna promote: those that would tend to decentralize power or the opposite?

        From textbooks, to entertainment, to ‘news’, to economists, etc., the popular message is: “Govt. is good and can solve all of our problems…those people yammering about freedom over there are kooks!”

      • BrianR says:

        Couldn’t agree more, my friend. Exactly right.

        At least nowadays, they don’t shoot the messenger… usually.

  24. Jack says:

    You mentioned Rome, and I have to say that every time I consider today’s vapid and crass entertainment (esp. ‘reality’ TV and ‘gangsta’ rap) out there and how bonkers people go over sporting events (grown men getting million$ to play child’s games being idolized) combined w/the number of folks who make their living directly/indirectly through govt., the phrase “Bread and Circuses” runs through my mind.

    The other parallels w/a declining Rome are amazing too…debased currency, a large welfare/bureaucratic/regulatory state strangling the private sector, over-extended military, idiotic/out-of-touch/psychopathic rulers assuming power, lax border control (as you mentioned)…all hallmarks of a very sick state.

  25. clyde says:

    Since I’m not the brightest bulb in the lamp,can someone explain to me how you can claim “executive priviledge” on something you say you know nothing about?

    • BrianR says:

      Hahahahahaha!

      Yeah, well, great question, Clyde. I guess it’s the same mindset that makes you think you can impose “executive orders” to make imperial fiats to enact laws that have been specifically rejected by Congress, such as his latest grant of a limited amnesty for illegal aliens.

      He’s like Mel Brooks, saying “It’s good to be the king”. He really thinks he’s above the law; that as President he doesn’t have to answer to anybody.

  26. clyde says:

    I was just being fecesious. Intentional spelling,too. Hell,we ALL know why he’s claiming E P. Asshat’s in it up to his lying lips. And the claim,since retracted by Holder himself,that BUSH started this? Good God,these asshats are desparate,eh? The damn coverup is usually worse than the crime,but NO ONE died under Nixon’s coverup.

    • BrianR says:

      Perfect. Exactly.

      “… but NO ONE died under Nixon’s coverup.”

      Nixon lied, NO ONE died.

      BTW… “fecesious”?

      HILARIOUS!
      :-D

  27. I was just searching for this info for some time. After 6 hours of continuous Googleing, finally I got it in your website. I wonder what is the lack of Google strategy that don’t rank this type of informative sites in top of the list. Generally the top sites are full of garbage.

  28. We are a group of volunteers and starting a new scheme in our community.
    Your site provided us with valuable information to work
    on. You’ve done a formidable job and our whole community will be thankful to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s