Where I tip my cap to Maureen Dowd, who rips Barack Obama a new Zero: "One and Done"

This is a major fire-starter, trust me on this. A fuse lit under a certain under-performing President's leading-hind-most's backside, from one who is a professional at the task.

Get you some of this, Barack Obama. I present the New York Times' Maureen Dowd, leftist, ripping Mr. Obama to shreds...

ONE day during the 2008 campaign, as Barack Obama read the foreboding news of the mounting economic and military catastrophes that W. was bequeathing his successor, he dryly remarked to aides: “Maybe I should throw the game.”

I'm'a gonna analyze this from the top down. All emboldenings mine.

The first paragraph throws back to BHO's beginning; heady times indeed, the Man from Nowhere, with Zero qualifications (barely a Senator, an uncompleted term, but that smooth voice!) knocks Hillary Clinton up better than Bill could, and seizes the moment; rides a wave of HOPE and CHANGE into the White House, and...stalls.

Next, Maureen...

On the razor’s edge of another recession; blocked at every turn by Republicans determined to slice him up at any cost; starting an unexpectedly daunting re-election bid; and puzzling over how to make a prime-time speech about infrastructure and payroll taxes soar, maybe President Obama is wishing that he had thrown the game.

The leader who was once a luminescent, inspirational force is now just a guy in a really bad spot.

Yeah, he's got me all torn up inside too, Maureen. Not because I didn't want him to fail (I did) but because his failure has damaged this Republic to such a degree that it may be unrepairable. I'm torn up because we didn't do more to stop his guy when we had a chance. I blame McCain, for becoming the nominee when it should've been Fred Thompson.

Oh well, we are now where we are now. Where are we, Maureen?

His Republican rivals for 2012 have gone to town on the Labor Day weekend news of zero job growth, using the same line of attack Hillary used in 2008: Enough with the big speeches! What about some action?

Polls show that most Americans still like and trust the president; but they may no longer have faith that he’s a smarty-pants who can fix the economy.

We are at Zero, Maureen. This President's capabilities to fix anything economic are Zero. Speech or no speech, there's gonna be Zero done-for on this economy until BHO's gotten the boot.

So, Maureen, who's fault is it? Take your best shot...

Just as Obama miscalculated in 2009 when Democrats had total control of Congress, holding out hope that G.O.P. lawmakers would come around on health care after all but three senators had refused to vote for the stimulus bill; just as he misread John Boehner this summer, clinging like a scorned lover to a dream that the speaker would drop his demanding new inamorata, the Tea Party, to strike a “grand” budget bargain, so the president once more set a trap for himself and gave Boehner the opportunity to dis him on the timing of his jobs speech this week.

Obama’s re-election chances depend on painting the Republicans as disrespectful. So why would the White House act disrespectful by scheduling a speech to a joint session of Congress at the exact time when the Republicans already had a debate planned?

Nice of you to notice.

Barack Obama doesn't care about anyone but himself, Maureen. He didn't even ask Boehner if he could call a joint session of congress (that's a privilege in our country: we are NOT a top-down King in Command dealio here, he had to ask permission to address Congress). Arbitrarily choosing a date and expecting everyone to go along wasn't a very Presidential thing to do, not so smart at all, but symptomatic of his narcissistic me-first-always style.

Maureen...

And why is the White House so cocky about Obama as a TV draw against quick-draw Rick Perry? As James Carville acerbically noted, given a choice between watching an Obama speech and a G.O.P. debate, “I’d watch the debate, and I’m not even a Republican.”

The White House caved, of course, and moved to Thursday, because there’s nothing the Republicans say that he won’t eagerly meet halfway.

No. 2 on David Letterman’s Top Ten List of the president’s plans for Labor Day: “Pretty much whatever the Republicans tell him he can do.”

I'm emphasizing those, because they bring a smile to my stone face.

More...

On MSNBC, the anchors were wistfully listening to old F.D.R. speeches, wishing that this president had some of that fight. But Obama can’t turn into F.D.R. for the campaign because he aspires to the class that F.D.R. was a traitor to; and he can’t turn into Harry Truman because he lacks the common touch. He has an acquired elitism.

'Aquired', Maureen? Better read up on Mr. Obama, Maureen.

"Yet his haughty demeanor, his stilted language when off the teleprompter, his cultural likes and dislikes, bespeak an upbringing in an environment at once so upscale and so leftist that it makes him almost a foreigner to ordinary Americans."

Nothing acquired about his elitism, Marueen. He was bred to it, indoctrinated in it, and we suffer for it. 

Carry on... 

MSNBC’s Matt Miller offered “a public service” to journalists talking about Obama — a list of synonyms for cave: “Buckle, fold, concede, bend, defer, submit, give in, knuckle under, kowtow, surrender, yield, comply, capitulate.”

And it wasn’t exactly Morning in America when Obama sent out a mass e-mail to supporters Wednesday under the heading “Frustrated.”

It unfortunately echoed a November 2010 parody in The Onion with the headline, “Frustrated Obama Sends Nation Rambling 75,000-Word E-Mail.”

“Throughout,” The Onion teased, “the president expressed his aggravation on subjects as disparate as the war in Afghanistan, the sluggish economic recovery, his live-in mother-in-law, China’s undervalued currency, Boston’s Logan Airport, and tort reform.”

Now you're just piling on, Maureen. You've beaten BHO to within an inch of being a clean rug, so, please! you're giving me apoplexy. Or something.

But she' not done...

You know you’re in trouble when Harry Reid says you should be more aggressive.

If the languid Obama had not done his usual irritating fourth-quarter play, if he had presented a jobs plan a year ago and fought for it, he wouldn’t have needed to elevate the setting. How will he up the ante next time? A speech from the space station?

No, Maureen, won't be any speech from the space station. Barack Obama shut down NASA, remember? We can't even go up to low-earth orbit anymore. There's word that the space station might be in jeopardy of falling to earth (much like BHO's presidency). Oh, and we've a comet (C2010 X1, Elenin) passing astronomically very close to Earth; a shame we can't get any closer to it before it swooshes by. We're stuck on this mudball forever, it seems.

You've the floor, Maureen...

Republicans who are worried about being political props have a point. The president is using the power of the incumbency and a sacred occasion for a political speech.

Obama is still suffering from the Speech Illusion, the idea that he can come down from the mountain, read from a Teleprompter, cast a magic spell with his words and climb back up the mountain, while we scurry around and do what he proclaimed.

The days of spinning illusions in a Greek temple in a football stadium are done. The One is dancing on the edge of one term.

Just, wow. All of Barack's symbolism, piled in a heap and set afire by Maureen Dowd. Great job of it! Hell, I can't recall when I've bashed his Greek columns, his Teleprompter and his expectant, lordy speeches all in just a couple paragraphs.

This is why the NYT pays her the big bucks, don't you know.

Let's finish with Maureen...

The White House team is flailing — reacting, regrouping, retrenching. It’s repugnant.

After pushing and shoving and caving to get on TV, the president’s advisers immediately began warning that the long-yearned-for jobs speech wasn’t going to be that awe-inspiring.

“The issue isn’t the size or the newness of the ideas,” one said. “It’s less the substance than how he says it, whether he seizes the moment.”

The arc of justice is stuck at the top of a mountain. Maybe Obama was not even the person he was waiting for.

Ka-ZING!

You can see why I'm impressed with the Dowd this morning. She's put together a flaming barb and launched it square on target.

But all those words, Maureen! We've already set up a nice little six-letter acronym that would suffice: SCOAMF.

All of that you wrote and you could've been boiled down and presented in just 6 letters.

But don't get me wrong; you are right about all you've posted, just a bit windy is all.

Do keep up the good work, Maureen.

---

Read more ...

Paul Krugman, ANOTHER Leftist, wonders why we don't believe in 'their' AGW

Mr. Perry (and many Conservatives; a majority I would surmise) realize that the climate is changing. But what we deny is that it's caused solely by human activity.

Having the Left embrace the notion of human-caused (AGW) climate change didn't help convince us. The worst possible happenstance for nascent scientists was that failed left-wing politician Albert Gore embraced the notion of human-caused climate change after his bitter defeat in 2000.

Now, we have the Left pushing AGW as one of their weapons of ideological CHANGE: AGW used as a world-wide tool, used as a weapon by the haters on the Left, against free enterprise.

When you say that 'deniers' only do so because they are ill-informed, you should realize that many of those who are doing the informing are not considered by Conservatives to be of any use or value; and that the AGW believers, to have embraced these left-wing spokesmen, to help shove the notion of human-caused climate change down the world's throat, wasn't such a good idea.

Worse: there's an as-yet unspoken (but they are itching to speak it!) meme circulating around the Left's environmental movement that, given their belief that humans have caused this problem, the real solution is to force the human population down to 1/3 or so of it's current numbers. That's what these Al Gore sorts want: far fewer people on this planet. If there is a civilization-turning point, then these wackos may well celebrate the dying of billions of people, to avenge their 'Mother Earth'.

Look around you, ask yourself: is the Left's ideology served by supporting the notion of AGW climate change?  Do these ideological bedfellows 'fit' with you, for your own left-wing desires and purposes?

How far are you willing to go with this, Krugman?

---

Read more ...

'Wesley Mouch', New York Times editor, excels in cluelessness yet again!

One doesn't get to read an editorial that is this steeped in cluelessness and is as disconnected as is this one very often. 'Wesley Mouch', you've exceeded your own limitations!

Firstly, there is no business who should willingly come riding to the aid of Leftists. Your policies, collectively, are anathema to this nation's success; your actions (including the over-regulating of industry, embedding your Party with corrupt Unions, your meme-speak that demonizes Corporations as 'not even people' and demonizes the 'rich' as 'not paying their fair share') are plain-spoken enough: Leftists who now control the once-proud Democratic party desire only to buy votes and support from community-organized Moochers using Other People's Money. There's no consideration given to the needs of businesses or corporations until you 'want' more from them, to wrench away more taxes used to expedite your causes.

Secondly, the policies you are begging monies for are doomed anyway. The various social welfare programs won't last: Social Security is, as all realize, doomed to fail. Medicare and Medicaid, and this newly-created monstrously damaging program ObamaCare, will drain this Republic's treasury dry (wait..they already have).

Mr. Koch responds to Mr. Buffet, and indirectly, to you:

“Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending. I believe my business and non-profit investments are much more beneficial to societal well-being than sending more money to Washington. — Charles G. Koch, Chairman and CEO, Koch Industries, Inc.

So, that for your pipe. Enjoy your smoke!

---

Read more ...

"What is Business Waiting For?" asks Joe Nocera, a Person of Left-Liberal-Progressive Persuasion

In order for businesses to seriously consider the sort of framework you've proposed, hiring for hiring's sake and not for a business' proven 'short-term' best interest, the framework of Government must also change...back. Back to what, you ask? Hasn't Government always been much like this current paradigm?

No, it hasn't. Government has grown...monstrous, and social. Government has encroached into every facet, into every tiny detail of commerce and industry. Isn't that a good thing, you ask? Don't we need as much Government as possible, to ensure that every Citizen is treated equally and fairly, and succeeds in life?

No, we don't. Such thought is the problem. We cannot bake individual success into our little Republic's responsibility to it's Citizens; and it's people like you who think Government is the solution, and more of it is better, that is the problem.

A Left Liberal Progressive Government is anathema to thriving business and full employment. Mark that in stone; it's solid fact, and can't be altered, no matter how much 'social need' there is that you desire to address with Government, at the expense of your economic engine.

You've got to put this monster down; control your desire to have Government micromanage to the point that you smother growth and Capitalism. You must curtail the ever-increasing expansion of Government, so that this Republic's economic engine can again run smoothly.

You've got to appease me. Who am I, you ask?

Why, I am John Galt, and I'm not a lone figure. I'm everywhere, signing your paychecks.

Or not, as the case may be.

---

Read more ...

New York Times' editor 'Wesley Mouch' demands that Obama get busy and make JOBS!

A 'Jobs Agenda', 'Wesley Mouch'? Don't you mean another (sure-to-fail) stimulus program where monies are diverted to certain chosen Left Liberal Progressive sorts of peoples and causes, as were the other 'stimulus' programs?

We've been there, done that. The previous $800 billion stimulus program didn't work, couldn't work as promised; the promise being to limit unemployment rates to below double-digits isn't much mentioned anymore, is it? 'True' unemployment is well up into the double-digits; some categories of people suffer true unemployment at well above 20%.

To get employers to hire more and to move forward this stagnant 'Obama' economy, government should try to become more minimalistic: we MUST reduce burdensome regulations (are you listening, EPA?); government MUST let go of the Unions (most jobs that go overseas do so because Unions have demanded too much from our home corporations in comparison to other nation's workers).

The best and most helpful Mr. Obama could be is by proposing slashing burdensome government mandates and regulations; he should stop his Party from accepting donations from the various Unions, and try to just get out of the way of private enterprise. Oh, and he could open up the offshore drilling he's still marginalizing. And allow (even subsidize) the immediate construction of some 80 to 100 new nuclear power plants (there's some shovel-ready jobs!).

None of those things will happen, because being a Left Liberal Progressive means you are counter to job creation. Unless it's a government job, of course.

---

Read more ...

Did Charles M. Blow just call Herman Cain a 'monkey' ?

He's at it again, the New York Times' favorite racialist, on a tear regarding the TEA Party.

Charles M. Blow, you and your cabal of LeftLibProggs have no right to discount the 20% of Americans who are TEA Partiers; how do you feel when you, part of the bed-wetting 20% of far-Left Liberal Progressives are marginalized with words? Most of the TEA Partiers are well-educated, older people who've seen this Republic in better times, and absolutely hate the way that the new neo-Marxist Progressive Left has taken over the Democratic Party and has all but driven the United States of America out of business and into default.

Over 40% of Americans don't pay a cent of income tax; some of those non-payers receive 'Earned Income Credits' for doing absolutely nothing. Where does this money come from? Why, from the "Taxed Enough Already" (TEA) folks who comprise the TEA Party. Why do you think that you, or your flock of moochers, deserve any more of monies you haven't earned? And if you do manage to get more, you'll simply want more; who is to pay for it?

There is no nirvana coming 'round in this Republic that you, you far-Left Liberal Progressives, can create to your satisfaction. You can't force working people to work for those who do not want to work. It's come to this: the failed socialisms introduced by FDR and LBJ will die in America, as these same social -isms have died or are dying every where else they've been implemented. Everyone who isn't equipped with partisan blinders realizes we're in the end game here; we are spiraling down to another civil disaster. We will fail; this Republic can't take what you Democrats demand. It's the transition to post-failure you'll find most troubling I'll warrant.

Oh, and before you start calling people 'monkeys', next time look around to see who is in your blast radius. There are good men and women who support the TEA Party; Herman Cain is one of them.

Meanwhile, where is the guy who's supposed to be leading this here Republic ?

Golfer-In-Chief

Either he's on vacation, or dreaming of being on vacation.

---

Read more ...

Balrog of State

I like these Tea Party monsters-as-metaphors you've indulged in, Ms. Dowd, but in a good way! I am glad they are on my side; the side of the American people who've had enough of this debt-creating Progressive Blob that's all but destroyed this Republic.

Seems the 'monsters' you describe, the Tea Party Patriots, are the Good Guys and Gals: small Hobbits who are facing down the whips of the Balrogs of Empire United Statism. These Balrogs are, with Obama, Reid and Pelosi driving them, pushing an agenda that's engulfed a once-proud Republic; ensnared this now-fragile Republic in bondage to it's own spending and debt. Seems that instead of desiring to Cap, Cut and Balance our finances, these Balrogs of State only desire to spend more and more and create more and more regulations and debt, to take monies they haven't earned to give to their Orcish, moocher-like voters and to redistribute to their fiendish supporters.

Lawmakers, just short decades ago, and those who were present at this nation's inception, would never have DREAMED of borrowing and owing more money to a Communist country than exists in the Treasury; of having to beg faceless credit ratings agencies (who, BTW, have not and will not judge so favorably our political leader's lack of fortitude in actually strongly challenging our real problems: the out-of-control spending and the massive, unsustainable debt) to allow us to retain (undeservedly) our AAA bond ratings. This BLOB (there's a monster metaphor you missed!) of Government and Statism should never have been allowed to propagate unchecked; thanks! FDR and LBJ and successive generations of bleating far-Left Liberals and Progressives for keeping it alive and growing.

But back to Earth: there's no monsters in Washington, you Statist Democrats, except those you've voted in.

The Tea Party will be seen by history long after this Republic is finished, liquidated and gone as those who came to challenge the Blob of State, but were too little, too late to save her.

Balrog of the United Statisms vs. a Tea Party Patriot

---

Read more ...

Krugman: "[Debt Deal] a Political Catastrophe for Democrats"

...to which I respond, "crocodile tears". Democrats haven't lost anything except a trillion (stolen) dollars given to their moocher base in lieu of votes; and a chance to kick the can down the road for a little while longer.

But, let's savor the reactions found at the Old Gray Lady for just a bit, shall we?

Dr. Paul Krugman, Economist, Nobel Prize Winner, Keynesian, is beside himself.

"the deal..is a disaster." Quit yer whining, toad. This is the best you can get, and likely better than you deserve. Your Keynesian stimulus plans failed to restart this economy; your desire to Eurosocialize this nation to French status will never work. We tried to take even more; this little pittance off the top may not satisfy the credit agencies as it is. You've Moody's and S&P's to worry about, not just your moocher base you trapped using Other People's Money.

"[the deal] will take America a long way down the road to banana-republic status." We are but one more economic crash away from that status anyway, Krugman, thanks! to this nation's spending habits.

"And then there are the reported terms of the deal, which amount to an abject surrender on the part of the president." He too got more than he deserved to get. If Barack Obama hadn't listened to the likes of you, Keynesian economists, and overdid the Spendulus plan (which didn't work, but did serve to line the pocketses of churlish Democratic supporters) then we wouldn't be having to raise the debt ceiling so quickly and by so much. Let Barack Obama suffer politically for what he's 'accomplished', which amounts to, bottom-line, costing this Republic more than he's worth.

"Make no mistake about it, what we’re witnessing here is a catastrophe on multiple levels. " Whine all you like. While you're whining, remember your attacks on the Tea Party, and how you posited that unless we raise the debt ceiling, the Nation would Collapse. So, accept what you've got, shut the fuck up and go on about your LeftLibProgg ways - none of which are helpful to this Republic's survival.

Here's a quick and dirty word cloud of Krugman's editorial this morning; capturing the essence of his despair:

disaster, damage, worse, extortion, depressed, slash, reduce, weaken, surrender, collapse

Oh, I'll leave you with this graph, found at Director Blue's blog, showing the spending broken down 1981-2012, crediting the Congress (NOT the president). Note that Clinton's 'spending' wasn't really 'Clinton's spending' after all; and Bush's spending post-2006 was actually spent by a Democratic Congress.

• The vaunted "Clinton Surplus" was, in fact, the work of a GOP House that was willing to fight for fiscal sanity (current Ohio Governor John Kasich was one of the architects of the surplus); in addition, two events conspired to turbocharge the economy -- in spite of Clinton, not because of him.

• Liberals like to talk about Reagan's deficits, but they ignore the fact that every budget Reagan ever sent to the Democrat-controlled House was declared "dead on arrival". Reagan supported a Balanced Budget Amendment, sought to eliminate useless agencies like the Department of Education, and otherwise believed in the U.S. spending within its means.

• Since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, they have jammed through the most fiscally irresponsible spending programs in world history (I won't use the word "budget", because they've refused to propose a budget for roughly 822 days).

All's that matters now is who can cut the most spending, because obvious to anyone who isn't a moocher, we've spent too much.

---

Read more ...