Dr. Asten: Because you try to portray yourself as a serious political analyst, but you come off as a whiner...
Liberals, and some conservatives, hammer former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, for whatever reason. They dismiss her views as illegitimate and claim her rhetoric bars her from being a serious political analyst. Usually, the same group of people who demean Palin for some of her less than stellar comments, are the ones who've engaged in rhetoric that would make Idi Amin blush. Keith Olbermann's latest Speshul Komint, much like the one he gave after the passing of Prop 8, is being lauded by the usual groups as a takedown of Palin, as well as Glenn Beck. Olbermann went after Palin and Beck for using "dangerously irresponsible" rhetoric, yet remained mum on his "dangerously irresponsible" rhetoric that occurs daily on his show. Olbermann, and the liberals who believe he's "speaking truth to power," and have engaged in their own irresponsible rhetoric have no authority to counsel others about theirs. The sentiment shared by Palin, and several elderly members of the electorate, is not unfounded. They're being told that ObamaCare will create a new bureaucracy, which I erroneously said it wouldn't, and that it would have specific powers in determining which insurance policies qualify as Qualified Health Benefits Packages (QHBP). I should also note while Olbermann was giving a tongue lashing to Palin and Beck about reading the bill, he hasn't read it either...stating that there would be no Health Choices Commissioner, but he didn't read page 41. Say what you will about former Governor Palin, but at least she contributes something substantive to the debate, unlike Meggie Mac, who whines about not being taken seriously.
Meggie Mac writes in a post on The Daily Beast about a statement made by Michelle Malkin about which conservative personality should "shut up." I have said at least once that Meggie needs to stop engaging in catfights with people who are her ideological supporters and take her fight to her ideological enemy. It does her no good to engage in public spats with women who can mop the floor with her in an argument. She doesn't recognize her role as the Obamedia's real life Stephen Colbert, as evidenced by her appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher. The entire conservative movement, save Kathleen Parker and David Frum, welcome moderate conservatives into the debate to counter Obama and his acolytes. The problem with Meggie Mac stems from her idea that she's smarter than the rest of the people in the room, when she's clearly in over her head. Throughout the article, where she's bitching about Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, and Ann Coulter for not being civil, the girl doesn't mind being a little snarky herself, taking shots at Malkin and Coulter's publisher, Regenery. Someone needs to tell her, AGAIN, that taking pot shots at prominent, and attractive women on the Right, to cater to the Left is not going to build trust among the conservative base that really don't trust McCains anyway...except for The Other McCain.
Have a great day...
Showing posts with label Michelle Malkin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michelle Malkin. Show all posts
11 August 2009
03 August 2009
Obama: Don't disturb me while I play my fiddle...
...pour some more of that ObamAid for people to drink!
The conversation I had with my brother got me thinking. Obama supporters leap over obstacles to play moral equivalence to problems during the Bush Years. In a segment on The Spew, Michelle Malkin had to field questions from the resident dingbat, Joy Behar, who still believes President Bush still sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. While the rest of the nation is in reality, people like Behar, and my brother, believe we have to "get the pus out," even though most of that was done by not only Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, et al. It's like an ex-girlfriend who's already gotten what she wanted and more from her ex-boyfriend, but still isn't satisfied.
Let me just call it for what it is. It's a rhetorical dodge from the issues surrounding Obama and Democrats' increase of the federal deficit. The Left tried their damndest to marginalize the Tea Parties that broke out on Tax Day and throughout Independence Day weekend, calling them every name in the book, but these movements against Obama's desire to nationalize the private sector are taking hold. I would caution Obama acolytes, like my brother, to read the political tea leaves and, for once, side with tax payers instead of the emanations coming from the White House. One example is the president's desire to shove ObamaCare on the electorate before Congress' August recess, despite the electorate being largely opposed to it. Ed Morrissey has a few videos of Democratic congressmen who've faced fierce opposition from constituents in their districts, to several provisions in the healthcare bill.
At least the electorate is becoming aware of the bill of goods they were sold. It seems foolish for Democrats to continue to blame the GOP for stalling their agenda, when they have overwhelming majorities in Congress. The people are even more upset at more emanations coming from the White House that a tax increase isn't being ruled out. While Obama wants people to act as if he's had no government experience whatsoever, he also has the gall to claim that he's never signed a bill that's increased taxes. I think my friends who are smokers take issue with that claim...one commenter notes Obama's use of the word "yet," which indicates he plans to do so sometime in the future.
Rush Limbaugh noted in his book, See, I told you so, noted how Obama's predecessor, Bill Clinton promised no tax increase on the middle class during the campaign of 1992, taking a shot at liberals' tricking President Bush 41 into doing so, but raised them shortly after he was inaugurated. The electorate did not like it then either, and I highly doubt the electorate would allow it to pass this time. Obama should pay a political price for demanding the passage of Porkulus and a $33 billion expansion in S-CHIP, then demanding the middle class ante up to pay for it, while his political supporters continue to be drunk on the ObamAid.
Obama's supporters have drawn the line...they're daring us to cross it. They want this crappola passed regardless of the damage it'll cost, what are YOU gonna do about it?
Have a great day...
The conversation I had with my brother got me thinking. Obama supporters leap over obstacles to play moral equivalence to problems during the Bush Years. In a segment on The Spew, Michelle Malkin had to field questions from the resident dingbat, Joy Behar, who still believes President Bush still sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. While the rest of the nation is in reality, people like Behar, and my brother, believe we have to "get the pus out," even though most of that was done by not only Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, et al. It's like an ex-girlfriend who's already gotten what she wanted and more from her ex-boyfriend, but still isn't satisfied.
Let me just call it for what it is. It's a rhetorical dodge from the issues surrounding Obama and Democrats' increase of the federal deficit. The Left tried their damndest to marginalize the Tea Parties that broke out on Tax Day and throughout Independence Day weekend, calling them every name in the book, but these movements against Obama's desire to nationalize the private sector are taking hold. I would caution Obama acolytes, like my brother, to read the political tea leaves and, for once, side with tax payers instead of the emanations coming from the White House. One example is the president's desire to shove ObamaCare on the electorate before Congress' August recess, despite the electorate being largely opposed to it. Ed Morrissey has a few videos of Democratic congressmen who've faced fierce opposition from constituents in their districts, to several provisions in the healthcare bill.
At least the electorate is becoming aware of the bill of goods they were sold. It seems foolish for Democrats to continue to blame the GOP for stalling their agenda, when they have overwhelming majorities in Congress. The people are even more upset at more emanations coming from the White House that a tax increase isn't being ruled out. While Obama wants people to act as if he's had no government experience whatsoever, he also has the gall to claim that he's never signed a bill that's increased taxes. I think my friends who are smokers take issue with that claim...one commenter notes Obama's use of the word "yet," which indicates he plans to do so sometime in the future.
Rush Limbaugh noted in his book, See, I told you so, noted how Obama's predecessor, Bill Clinton promised no tax increase on the middle class during the campaign of 1992, taking a shot at liberals' tricking President Bush 41 into doing so, but raised them shortly after he was inaugurated. The electorate did not like it then either, and I highly doubt the electorate would allow it to pass this time. Obama should pay a political price for demanding the passage of Porkulus and a $33 billion expansion in S-CHIP, then demanding the middle class ante up to pay for it, while his political supporters continue to be drunk on the ObamAid.
Obama's supporters have drawn the line...they're daring us to cross it. They want this crappola passed regardless of the damage it'll cost, what are YOU gonna do about it?
Have a great day...
16 July 2009
Zandar Versus The Stupid: Wingers can't read...
...and neither can I...
There is much buzz around the blogosphere about the 1,000 page bill outlining ObamaCare. Investor's Business Daily, reported that there was at least one "uh oh" provision in the bill that prohibits citizens, who have had private insurance in the past, from applying for private care if they lose it due to job losses or if they decide to become self-employed. If a person is currently insured by a private insurance company, they will be allowed to keep their coverage. Under ObamaCare, a citizen will only be allowed the option of private insurance coverage if, and only if, the public option is available. In an effort to prove that "wingers" are stupid, the Zandar at Zandar Versus The Stupid decides to go off on a tirade against those who are calling ObamaCare a blatant attempt at damaging the private sector. And a side note, if I am reading the text of the bill correctly, those who are covered by private insurance companies before this bill goes into effect, or Y1, the private insurance company has five years to comply with those plans created after Y1.
I guess none of this gives Zandar pause, he views it as Obama Derangement Syndrome (ain't it funny how the Left is stealing ideas from the so-called dumbasses on the Right?). The Congressional Budget Office is predicting that unlike the delirious projections coming from the White House, ObamaCare will not save the federal government any money, and will increase the deficit, as Doug Elmendorf, the director of the CBO, told a senatorial committee. Blue Dog Democrats, who are feeling the heel of San Fran Nan's shoe in their collective chests, believe that ObamaCare will do nothing to insure that healthcare will remain affordable and in the long run, may cost people their jobs. Commenters at Media Matters see no problem with the deficit increasing with this bill, they claim it's all for a good cause (even though no one who read the bill sees it that way)...unlike the Global War on Terror, which as of February 2008, cost roughly $700B, or about $100B a year. ObamaCare, according to the CBO has a price tag of about $1T and climbing.
Allahpundit reminds us that it's been exactly a month since Mr. Elmendorf testified that ObamaCare, with all it's promises of unicorns and gooey gooey gumdrops, will still leave a large number of Amuricans uninsured, not to mention waste even more taxpayer money. Can I just say something here? When the "Spendulus" bill was forced down our throats, we were told that this money would shore up the economy and we'd be well on our way to economic solvency. We were promised transparency and a full accounting of the money spent. "Our money," we were told, "would be spent responsibly." Now, once Obama's felt the heat from the wasteful spending of Porkulus, he claims that the $787B was to be spent over the course of two years. Apparently, this "crisis" wasn't one atall. He wants to do the same with our healthcare system, calling the number of uninsured, a "crisis," and we must do something about it NOW.
But at what costs, Mr. President?
Have a great day...
There is much buzz around the blogosphere about the 1,000 page bill outlining ObamaCare. Investor's Business Daily, reported that there was at least one "uh oh" provision in the bill that prohibits citizens, who have had private insurance in the past, from applying for private care if they lose it due to job losses or if they decide to become self-employed. If a person is currently insured by a private insurance company, they will be allowed to keep their coverage. Under ObamaCare, a citizen will only be allowed the option of private insurance coverage if, and only if, the public option is available. In an effort to prove that "wingers" are stupid, the Zandar at Zandar Versus The Stupid decides to go off on a tirade against those who are calling ObamaCare a blatant attempt at damaging the private sector. And a side note, if I am reading the text of the bill correctly, those who are covered by private insurance companies before this bill goes into effect, or Y1, the private insurance company has five years to comply with those plans created after Y1.
I guess none of this gives Zandar pause, he views it as Obama Derangement Syndrome (ain't it funny how the Left is stealing ideas from the so-called dumbasses on the Right?). The Congressional Budget Office is predicting that unlike the delirious projections coming from the White House, ObamaCare will not save the federal government any money, and will increase the deficit, as Doug Elmendorf, the director of the CBO, told a senatorial committee. Blue Dog Democrats, who are feeling the heel of San Fran Nan's shoe in their collective chests, believe that ObamaCare will do nothing to insure that healthcare will remain affordable and in the long run, may cost people their jobs. Commenters at Media Matters see no problem with the deficit increasing with this bill, they claim it's all for a good cause (even though no one who read the bill sees it that way)...unlike the Global War on Terror, which as of February 2008, cost roughly $700B, or about $100B a year. ObamaCare, according to the CBO has a price tag of about $1T and climbing.
Allahpundit reminds us that it's been exactly a month since Mr. Elmendorf testified that ObamaCare, with all it's promises of unicorns and gooey gooey gumdrops, will still leave a large number of Amuricans uninsured, not to mention waste even more taxpayer money. Can I just say something here? When the "Spendulus" bill was forced down our throats, we were told that this money would shore up the economy and we'd be well on our way to economic solvency. We were promised transparency and a full accounting of the money spent. "Our money," we were told, "would be spent responsibly." Now, once Obama's felt the heat from the wasteful spending of Porkulus, he claims that the $787B was to be spent over the course of two years. Apparently, this "crisis" wasn't one atall. He wants to do the same with our healthcare system, calling the number of uninsured, a "crisis," and we must do something about it NOW.
But at what costs, Mr. President?
Have a great day...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)