Thread: Au Revoir, Mr. President
Results 1 to 9 of 9
#1 Au Revoir, Mr. President11-03-2012, 01:54 AM
By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 11.1.12 @ 6:11AM
We shall be getting a new government next week.
WASHINGTON -- Reviewing the last few months of this tumultuous presidential campaign, I see the debates as having a wondrous salience. The first was the most momentous since Nixon vs. Kennedy, though that 1960 confrontation was mostly a matter of cosmetics. Listening to it on radio, many in the audience came away thinking that the participant with the five-o'clock shadow had won. That would have been Richard Nixon.
In debate this time around, Mitt Romney hammered Barack Obama mercilessly. Under the ongoing assault Obama's knees buckled and he repeatedly looked glassy-eyed. If the contest were a prizefight, the referee should have stepped in. Actually, I felt sorry for Obama. My tax-bracket notwithstanding, I did not want to see Mitt hit him again, but he did: the economy! the national debt! joblessness! However, the debate was not a prizefight. It was the first of three presidential debates, and though restrained in the next two contests Romney accomplished just what he wanted. The debates left him looking reasonable, informed, competent, and presidential.
During these final two debates all Romney had to do was continue to look presidential. He glided suavely through them, as his opponent snarled, looking spiteful, petty, mean-spirited, and second-rate. In sum, Obama looked like the challenger and not a very gifted challenger at that. In the end, most Americans went away feeling that Romney has the right stuff to be president, and some wondered why a majority ever elected Obama president in 2008. Obama's presidency proves that not just anyone can serve in the country's highest office. In 2012, the charisma of a showman has about exhausted itself as a qualification to lead America. Only the Washington press corps still hankers for a "thrill going up the leg" or "a perfectly creased pant leg" or whatever other literary device was meant to convey a pundit's enthrallment to the community organizer from Chicago. How about a fast-beating heart or tummy flutters?
Obama has come across as an amazingly close approximation of Jimmy Carter, complete with a slow-growth economy and a foreign policy disaster, though one of Obama's empty boasts was he understood the Arab world especially well. His backup team of David Axelrod and David Plouffé serve as second-rate Jody Powells and Ham Jordans. Frankly, I preferred Jody and Ham.
I must in all humility admit that it took me all of two weeks into his presidency to recognize that Obama was over his head. On February 5, 2009, I said in this space that Obama's presidency was doomed. I pronounced him a dud, unlikely to be reelected president. Said I, "…with the economy in crisis and American national security in the hands of a starry-eyed novice, one can argue that we are in for a reprise of the Carter years complete with the self-righteous pout." Well, I argued this for almost four years and today I rest my case. Next week President Obama goes into retirement. I hope he will consider Hawaii.
Given my perspective, it was an easy case to call. A few months back I published my findings in The Death of Liberalism. In that book I noted that in the conservative deluge of 2010 independents combined with conservatives to turn the Liberals out. The independents do not always share the conservatives' social values, but they are very ardent for prudent economic policies. The growing debt and unbalanced budgets (both state and federal) had roused the independent vote. I said they would vote with the conservatives for years to come, because Obama and his cohorts in Congress were going to pile up trillion dollar deficits for years to come. Along with the conservatives and independents, next week will come the "uncommitted" voter. The uncommitted always goes with the challenger.
There are two numbers that have been relatively underemphasized in this election, 18 percent and 24 percent. Eighteen percent is the standard cut the federal government takes of GDP. Twenty-four percent is the cut that Obama's government is taking. He says that to pay for this engorgement of the federal government all we need to do is raise taxes on the rich. The conservatives and independents recognize that there is not enough money earned by the top percentage of taxpayers to pay for it and probably not enough down below. Pithily put, we cannot afford Liberalism. That is why we shall be getting a new government next week.
Let not thy gate smite thee in the ass false messiah.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
11-03-2012, 10:51 AM
Tyrell has very good points as to why Obama should be defeated. He should have been beaten like a drum. But it hasn't been a cake walk. Wonder why?Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown
The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
11-03-2012, 11:04 AM
The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
11-03-2012, 11:09 AM
It is really a shame that for some people if something goes wrong, their only hope is the government. That is an awful predicament to be in.The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
11-03-2012, 02:39 PMI must in all humility admit that it took me all of two weeks into his presidency to recognize that Obama was over his head. On February 5, 2009, I said in this space that Obama's presidency was doomed.
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
Why did it take people so long to see it? It was obvious in the 2008 primaries!
11-03-2012, 05:30 PM
I said God no, wouldn't think of it. The other woman said that she had just moved from New Jersey and had always voted Democrat and would do so again. I mumbled something about did she always vote for a Dem who lied and let the ambassador and others die in Libya like that. She didn't have a clue. She was a pleasant enough person, but was so clueless, said that she would NEVER lost the health insurance she loved because she was working for a company and they wouldn't drop it. I said if Obamacare stays in place, count on joining one of those exchanges. After that I shut up, as it didn't do any good arguing with them.
The old lady was 90 years old. She said that she thought Romney was a brat and other miscellaneous nastier remarks. I don't know how Romney can hold the high road, as I was getting really annoyed.
Then there was the old guy clutching his card from the dems, telling him how to vote. He was drooling, literally, and really didn't look like he was aware of his surroundings. There was another seasoned citizen who absolutely didn't know what he was doing. By the time he got to the voting booths, they were trying to determine who could read the lengthy ballot to him, as he was absolutely clueless.
There were the people with shirts that said "I love people" holding their Obama lit, the hippies, the evironmentalists wearing their shirts proclaiming that (plus clutching their Dem literature).
All I can say to anyone in a state where they don't have early voting, don't believe Dick Morris when he says the Dems aren't motivated. They must have been pulling some out of the ditches (from the way they looked) and out of mental wards. They are bringing in their constituents big time to vote.
BE SURE TO VOTE THIS TIME IF YOU'RE VOTING FOR ROMNEY, OTHERWISE VOTE ON THE 7TH IF YOU'RE FOR OBAMA. LOL. (i know it's a groaners).
" To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world."
"A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"
11-03-2012, 07:06 PM
To the county and states credit, the voting was smooth. If the ballot hadn't been filled with so much other crap we would have been in & out in 2 minutes.
If you were prepared and had read the example ballot ahead of time the voting was still quick, if not...May the FORCE be with you!
11-03-2012, 10:08 PM
- Join Date
- May 2008
Exactly! He offered no viable math to support his promises. No specifics. Nothing but "feel good" lip-service. All that was required was to make note of who he hung out with. (Unlike some family or co-workers that you sometimes must tolerate.). But, Rev Wright, Bill Ayers, etc. should have been all anyone needed. Obama didn't have to associate with these people. He CHOSE to!!! THINK DUMBASS!
I admit to having a hard time with people who were fooled by Obama. I'm not Einstein but, I couldn't miss the bullshit.
It scares me that most of these people can legally operate a motor vehicle.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|