Friday, August 29, 2008

What'choo Talkin' 'Bout, Barack?
Okay, read the text (and watched the YouTube) of 'The Speech', the one given in front of the faux-Acropolis, amongst the hordes of democratic party cherubim, which was the Ascension of Barack to Heaven, and I have one question....

How much did it cost to have all that fuss made for a speech in which absolutely nothing was said?

"I will give you specifics...." And then there were none. There was a lot of standard boilerplate: soak the rich, soak the Oil Companies, bribe the Unions...

More biographical crap with no context: Okay, we know your grandfather marched with Patton...why is this important? Do you expect that since you've never served that having a relative that did makes you an expert on military affairs or foreign policy?

How about this gem (paraphrased because I'm lazy): " grandmother who was a secretary, and who worked her way up to middle management, despite being passed over for promotion because she was a woman..."? Did that mean that your grandmother (VP of a bank, mind you) was discriminated against because she was a woman --- or did your grandmother, who came from humble origins, starting at the bottom, rising to achieve some level of prominence in a bank -- actually achieve the American Dream -- which you then somehow imply was denied to her?

How about that part about men taking responsibility for their children, and fulfilling their obligations as both men and parents? Amazing how you didn't mention what color a great many of those irresponsible and uncaring men are. Hmm, seems to me the African half of your heritage wasn't involved in your life in any meaningful way. Who raised you, Barack? You white mother, your white grandmother and grandfather. How about calling a spade a spade, as it were (no pun intended)? Oh, forgot...according to you and Reverend Wright, black folks can't do anything wrong. And deserve everything.

Points scored for the Iraq thingy. Yeah, the Iraqis want us gone, but that's really only so Maliki can work on becoming the next Saddam. Amazing how when the interests of two self-serving politicians coincide, it's suddenly good politics.

I have watched speeches from Billary, both Obamas, Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi this past week. I still haven't heard anyone make a case for Barack Obama beyond "he's new and he's black", and most of the compliments that have been tossed around by the democratic (small 'd' intentional) elder statesmen are of the sort you would usually hear being applied to your retarded cousin -- the one who humps the living room furniture, and eats boogers if you don't keep a very careful watch on him.

What I've seen this past week firmly convinces me that the democrats are going to lose. And they know it. They have a candidate who, by all rights, isn't qualified to be a City Councilman in New York City, let alone a Senator from Illinois. A candidate who can spout platitudes, but then not give them any definition. He is supported by a cast that so obviously have their knives out for him (the Bill and Hillary tag-team of 'vote for him, but remember we warned you' speeches made that obvious), but who have decided that the best thing to do is to go down with the ship, smiling, appearing to be faithfully standing beside their captain as they slip below the waves. Bunch of phonies.

Having invested so much emotion in Barack Obama (and that's all this is -- unbridled emotion), the democrats have decided to chuck reason. All they have left is emotion. They 'feel' that there needs to be 'change'. They 'feel' it's time for the country to elect a black man. They 'feel' that when Barack engages in genuine democratic party gibberish that he's speaking to and for them, and not just at them -- even to the point where what he says doesn't even matter anymore. They will now attempt to 'feel' Barack Obama into office. The concentrated emotions of millions of people do, any democrat will tell you, have a mystic power all their own. If enough people 'feel' something, then it becomes reality, you know.

Of course, when their opposite numbers engage in a similar emotional experiment (except that they refer to with that quaint old expression...what was it? Oh right....'prayer') it's just a bunch of mentally-unbalanced, superstitious people who believe that an invisible spirit will solve all their problems. When they do it, it's a political movement. Go figure.

Only the democrats will come soon to realize, when he loses, that Barack Obama was an invisible spirit, too. The speech was great television, but it was rotten politics.
Big, Brass Ones...
Back in May of '07, I wrote a poisonous little note here on the relative (de-) merits of one former Senator and ex-Presidential contender named John Edwards (See: John Edwards: The Gift that Keeps on Giving). In that screed, I'd stated, probably for the 1,756th time, that I thought the man was a scumbag and extremely shallow. In my estimation, John Edwards is merely something that keeps a suit from falling to the floor. For all intents and purposes, he might as well be invisible. John Edwards is a liar, a philanderer, a grandstanding-self-interested egomaniac, and worse, a trial attorney. 'Nuff said.

Now, the purpose of that blog was that Edwards, who was busy preaching the endemic and widespread poverty of the blasted American heath (you would have thought this was Uganda or Laos from his rhetoric), was to point out that the man who got $400 haircuts, and who had a $2 mil a year job at a hedge-fund was perhaps not the best advocate for the poor (he certainly had very little in common with them), especially not when he could get people to pay him 55k a pop for a speaking engagement. Which is what really pissed me off, at the time: the University of California (Davis) was paying Edwards 55k to make a speech about poverty -- talk about not being able to see the irony!

Nowadays, Edwards is disgraced, with the revelation of an affair, and the possibility of paternity for an out-of-wedlock birth. His life in American politics, if it wasn't over before (as it should have been) is almost assured now (although most democrats probably consider adultery to be a virtue). But although Edwards may be publicly disgraced, he apparently has no sense of shame, as evidenced by this:,CST-NWS-edwards29.article

Nice. You can get 55k a speech for talking about something you obviously know nothing about, and then, after you've embarrassed yourself, disgraced your dying wife, and insulted the intelligence of an entire country by having your life displayed in the National Enquirer, you can now ask for 65K...with a straight face. And Barack Obama says this country lacks opportunity?

I couldn't understand it before, but I do now. I know what drives the die-hard democrats who will continue to defend, and pay, this man for the rest of his life. It is the same dialectic at work that brings 80,000 weepy, mind-numbed robots out to stand and cheer when another con-man can stand in front of them and shout "I will now give you specifics" -- and then not give any. And they love him for it, still.

I have finally understood that there are some people in this country (and their numbers seem to be growing) who don't have any all. They must all eat paint chips.

It is for this growing class of truly stupid people that we have to gone to extremes: we put instructions for use on a can of soup or bottle of shampoo. We must have a warning label on a can of furniture polish that says "do not spray directly into eyes". Or we have to provide government programs to warn people of the dangers of a crushed-glass-rusty-razor-blade diet. But, it seems that no matter how far you go to protect them from themselves, they still find Hillary Clintons and Barack Obamas to comfort them, and let them know that being a moron is a virtue they regard highly...or a Mansion-living-expensive-haircut-getting-adultery-committing-super-wealthy-lawyer-who-helped-break-the-health-care-system John Edwards' to pay $65,000 an hour to, to say....what, exactly? Do you actually believe that he can actually say anything still worth listening to?