1. You can't kill Bin Laden twice.
2. Food prices.
3. Gas prices.
4. Stock market uncertainty. A palpable malaise.
5. Commodity prices.
6. Voter remorse.
7. The GOP will have a stronger candidate than John McCain this time around.
8. For the first time in his life, Barack Obama will have a record to defend. Good luck, Barry.
9. Unemployment rate.
10. Housing market malaise.
11. October surprises. Ever see a baseball game where three players assemble and then let a pop fly hit the ground? $25 million in talent lets a lazy pop up hit the ground. It happens. But you can't plan on it happening this time around.
12. The electoral college. Obama can win the popular vote and lose the electoral college. The polls conveniently skip the stormy forecast for SS Hope And Change.
13. The 2010 elections. Some states are now requiring photo ID to vote.
14. The fleeing of the trendy voter. The Obama fad is fading fast. Obama worship is alive and well amongst the rich and famous but it's no longer cool to profess one's undying love for a stuffed suit.
15. Voter fraud is coming under closer scrutiny.
16. Soros et al might see the handwriting on the wall and ask Barry to pull the chord on his golden parachute. It might be easier to invent a new Barry than to prop up the old one.
17. CBS, NBC, ABC have lost viewers since 2008.
18. Obamacare. This could move up the list but it will probably be overturned by Supreme Court and forgotten by election time.
19. Curleycue light bulbs. There will be an effort to repeal this mandate and I doubt if the prez does the right thing.
20. Cash for Clunkers.
21. General Motors (No I am Not repeating myself.)
22. The Gulf drilling moratorium.
23. A lot of illegal aliens/voters have gone home because of our awful economy. This is not a snide remark. This is a sad, sad fact.
24. Overspent European countries will once again surface in the news and offer us grim reminders of America's fate should we stay the course.
25. Oprah has left the building.
This is a shortened version of what could be a long list. The 2010 elections could yield a dozen subtopics. So too, the October surprises. As the list grows, we will update them.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Cut and Paste Blogging.
I concur, btw. I lifted this quote from the link below. The quote follows the link.
http://visiontoamerica.org/1244/criminal-complaint-details-barack-obama-birth-certificate-forgery/
Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can understand them. This quote came from the Czech Republic.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
http://visiontoamerica.org/1244/criminal-complaint-details-barack-obama-birth-certificate-forgery/
Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can understand them. This quote came from the Czech Republic.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
Dumbass Sarah Palin Department
Alaska has a $12 billion surplus. That is surplus, not deficit. Surplus. As in $16k per citizen surplus.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a7793258-6ba2-11e0-93f8-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OZAxqh4e
See how much the surplus has grown since she resigned! See! See! See! It was only two thirds that amount when she left office. Dumb ass!
If Palin had attended Princeton or Columbia or Harvard, do you think Alaska would currently have a budget surplus?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a7793258-6ba2-11e0-93f8-00144feab49a.html#axzz1OZAxqh4e
See how much the surplus has grown since she resigned! See! See! See! It was only two thirds that amount when she left office. Dumb ass!
If Palin had attended Princeton or Columbia or Harvard, do you think Alaska would currently have a budget surplus?
Monday, June 6, 2011
Is the Ability to Speak Extemporaneously a Gauge of One's Passion?
Rush Limbaugh prides himself on his ability to speak loudly, longly and lovingly without so much as a note card. He addressed the C-PAC crowd in 2009 naked except for his clothes. He attributes this skill to his unbridled passion.
Beck. Palin. Bachmann. Gingrich. They can wing it without a teleprompter even if Sarah might write notes on her hand. Rubio can also go a mile a minute without memory aids. The speakers we like and believe can speak off the cuff.
But maybe extemporaneous speech is just a freakish skill. Like whistling or rapping or rhyming. We don't usually think of these things when we measure a speaker's commitment. Is extemporaneous speaking just one more gimmick?
We have all been in a position where we knew what we thought but we just could not make our point. A universal experience. We were passionate about A, B, C and D but we could not make our point.We have all been there.
I have some sympathy for Walter Mondale, though I would never have voted for him. Fritz is Exhibit A of the politician who could not project his personality to an audience. Believe it or not, Mondale's private persona was warm and carefree. He liked to wear a silly hat and smoke a cigar and crack jokes as he manned his backyard grill. The consummate host. But put in the spotlight, Fritz became Walter and Reagan won by a landslide.
Obama is notably weak on anything impromptu. His reliance on the teleprompter is a national joke. But he is not the best speaker for us to gauge passion because he never really says anything. His speech is mostly void of content so how can we assess if he believes what he is saying? One has to actually say something before we can determine if a person believes what they say.
Which brings us to Mitt Romney. Three miles away from here, Romney announced that he was a 2012 candidate. He used a teleprompter to do so. Ding! Mitt the Flip. Romneycare. Mr. Ethanol. Mr. Farm Subsidy. Mr. Corporate Welfare. Our teleprompter is better than your teleprompter.
A lot has been made of Reagan's thespian background and his application to the political world. Point taken. Maybe he was the great communicator because of his polished skills. Then again, maybe he found public speaking easy because he really believed in what he said.
Whatever else can be said about Romney, I don't see his as the Anti-Obama. Nope. He might be the better of two choices but can he inspire? Can he get the apathetic or the independent or the undecided to vote for him? For that matter, can he inspire his own party to stand behind him?
Until we have that battle of the teleprompters, I will give a long look to any candidate who can speak from the heart. Cain. Bachmann. Even Newt deserves another chance. Hope and change is what we need. More importantly, we need a candidate who can speak those passions without reading them.
Beck. Palin. Bachmann. Gingrich. They can wing it without a teleprompter even if Sarah might write notes on her hand. Rubio can also go a mile a minute without memory aids. The speakers we like and believe can speak off the cuff.
But maybe extemporaneous speech is just a freakish skill. Like whistling or rapping or rhyming. We don't usually think of these things when we measure a speaker's commitment. Is extemporaneous speaking just one more gimmick?
We have all been in a position where we knew what we thought but we just could not make our point. A universal experience. We were passionate about A, B, C and D but we could not make our point.We have all been there.
I have some sympathy for Walter Mondale, though I would never have voted for him. Fritz is Exhibit A of the politician who could not project his personality to an audience. Believe it or not, Mondale's private persona was warm and carefree. He liked to wear a silly hat and smoke a cigar and crack jokes as he manned his backyard grill. The consummate host. But put in the spotlight, Fritz became Walter and Reagan won by a landslide.
Obama is notably weak on anything impromptu. His reliance on the teleprompter is a national joke. But he is not the best speaker for us to gauge passion because he never really says anything. His speech is mostly void of content so how can we assess if he believes what he is saying? One has to actually say something before we can determine if a person believes what they say.
Which brings us to Mitt Romney. Three miles away from here, Romney announced that he was a 2012 candidate. He used a teleprompter to do so. Ding! Mitt the Flip. Romneycare. Mr. Ethanol. Mr. Farm Subsidy. Mr. Corporate Welfare. Our teleprompter is better than your teleprompter.
A lot has been made of Reagan's thespian background and his application to the political world. Point taken. Maybe he was the great communicator because of his polished skills. Then again, maybe he found public speaking easy because he really believed in what he said.
Whatever else can be said about Romney, I don't see his as the Anti-Obama. Nope. He might be the better of two choices but can he inspire? Can he get the apathetic or the independent or the undecided to vote for him? For that matter, can he inspire his own party to stand behind him?
Until we have that battle of the teleprompters, I will give a long look to any candidate who can speak from the heart. Cain. Bachmann. Even Newt deserves another chance. Hope and change is what we need. More importantly, we need a candidate who can speak those passions without reading them.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
To Parapharse the Vice President, "It's a Big Deal!"
We might be witnessing the biggest historical event of our lives. Yes, the biggest event we have ever seen might just be Sarah Palin's bus tour. That's right. The bus tour.
All our lives the priveleged news media have treated us like children. They decided what was appropriate for us to see and not to see. Their wisdom, such that it is, mediated every facet of public discourse. To get our points across we had to grovel before our overlords and if we were good, they might pat us on our heads. The kindly, responsible parents sometimes admonished us for our silly ideas and sent us outside to play.
It wasn't just too long ago that office seekers were required to bow before their lords and ladies and beg for their approval. Was approval granted in a fair and reasoned manner? No! Our social superiors weeded out candidates who did not espouse politically correct positions. It was for our own good, after all. Their judgment is always better than ours.
But then DARPA developed the Internet and the Internet begat Youtube and Facebook and Twitter. Now more than ever, the old media are obsolete. Sarah Palin recognizes their obsolesence and no longer speaks to them. This is significant. This is profound. This is a earth shattering.
If Sarah Palin runs for president, she will be the first serious candidate to deliberately bypass the news media. If the alphabet soup can no longer tilt the table for their favorites, it is a new era. With each passing national election, the media grew more overtly biased. The referees had become the superstars. The 2000 national elections were all about the media. The 2004 elections, even more so. The 2008 elections more than we thought possible. It was all about the pretty boys and their seven (and eight) figure salaries.
Palin stops playing by their rules and the shills go apoplectic. To ignore them is to disrespect them. Who the hell does she think she is? She obviously does not know her place. Their indignation knows no bounds. In 2008, they were the masters of the universe. In 2011, they are wallflowers. Hell hath no fury like a spurned Has Been.
Palin, with the help of social networks, has possibly ushered in a new era. Since the genesis of our republic, we have been at the mercy of the gate keeper media. Now, the gate keeper era might be coming to an end. In the words of Joe Biden, "It's a big fluffy deal."
All our lives the priveleged news media have treated us like children. They decided what was appropriate for us to see and not to see. Their wisdom, such that it is, mediated every facet of public discourse. To get our points across we had to grovel before our overlords and if we were good, they might pat us on our heads. The kindly, responsible parents sometimes admonished us for our silly ideas and sent us outside to play.
It wasn't just too long ago that office seekers were required to bow before their lords and ladies and beg for their approval. Was approval granted in a fair and reasoned manner? No! Our social superiors weeded out candidates who did not espouse politically correct positions. It was for our own good, after all. Their judgment is always better than ours.
But then DARPA developed the Internet and the Internet begat Youtube and Facebook and Twitter. Now more than ever, the old media are obsolete. Sarah Palin recognizes their obsolesence and no longer speaks to them. This is significant. This is profound. This is a earth shattering.
If Sarah Palin runs for president, she will be the first serious candidate to deliberately bypass the news media. If the alphabet soup can no longer tilt the table for their favorites, it is a new era. With each passing national election, the media grew more overtly biased. The referees had become the superstars. The 2000 national elections were all about the media. The 2004 elections, even more so. The 2008 elections more than we thought possible. It was all about the pretty boys and their seven (and eight) figure salaries.
Palin stops playing by their rules and the shills go apoplectic. To ignore them is to disrespect them. Who the hell does she think she is? She obviously does not know her place. Their indignation knows no bounds. In 2008, they were the masters of the universe. In 2011, they are wallflowers. Hell hath no fury like a spurned Has Been.
Palin, with the help of social networks, has possibly ushered in a new era. Since the genesis of our republic, we have been at the mercy of the gate keeper media. Now, the gate keeper era might be coming to an end. In the words of Joe Biden, "It's a big fluffy deal."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)