Wow… Talk about outlandish, can you believe the absolute inanity of some people? When will people start giving other people the benefit of the doubt, especially when the charge is so ugly and impactful? If it were me, I’d consider filing charges of slander and defamation of character!
Read it and weep….
Man accuses grocery store of racism because of tipped water basin
After Presidential Debate #2 we find ourselves again with a President parsing words that does the truth a grave disservice. What’s even more atrocious is the fact the Presidential Debate Commission’s choice of Candy Crowley let her journalistic objectivity fail.
Although there are a number of issues with this event; first, this makes two debates in a row where the moderator failed to be impartial in ensuring no candidate consumed more than his allotted time. The second, however, is one of those glaring examples equivocation and falsehood on the part of the President and faux self-righteous indignation combined with the moderator taking sides when she should have kept her mouth shut rather than make a judgement call where her bias would obviously influence her. Of what am I speaking? I’m speaking about the moment when Governor Romney mentioned that President Obama and his administration were late to the game in confessing their failure in the Benghazi, Libya attacks, and avoiding labeling it a terrorist attack. In fact, this administration is so discombobulated that it’s only today, over one month after the incident, that someone has finally stepped up to the plate and said “the buck stops here”– no, not Mr. Obama, but Secretary of State Clinton.
The President contended in the debate, along with the inaccurate affirmation by Crowley, that he refered to the Benghazi attack as a “terror” attack during his statement on 9/11 and the Benghazi attack.
This is in fact just plain dumb wrong (pardon the Texan colloquialism ). The President had a Rose Garden Ceremony that addressed the Benghazi attacks and the anniversary of the original 9/11 attacks on the 12th of September– one day after the Ambassador and three others were murdered by an organized terror attack. He simply called these attacks “outrageous”. Rightly so. But no mention of the word terror. This is from his official statement on the Benghazi attacks (see the image here).
When you listen to the speech in the Rose Garden, it’s pretty clear that he did not call Benghazi attack an act of terror. Now, you may be able to attribute this to poor articulation since the administration also spoke of the 9/11/01 attacks as terror attacks– maybe he meant both, but it sure doesn’t seem that way. If so, why wouldn’t he mention this on his official comment about the Benghazi Embassy attack in his specific statement? If so, why wouldn’t he or his administration call it a terror attack explicitly rather than to drag a admittedly offensive film to Muslims into the discussion?
It is clear– the Administration willingly avoided calling the Benghazi attack a terror attack until it was painfully aware that it could no longer do so and still appear half-way credible. The sad fact is that, even when it became blindingly obvious that it was a pre-planned attack, the president still couldn’t bring himself to leave his truth-killing mantra of a non-existent protest in Benghazi over an unheard of (and mostly unwatched) film. Take a look at the relevant transcript of his conversation with David Letterman on the 18th of September, one week after the attacks:
Obama: You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, a sort of shadowy character who is extremely offensive video directed at Muhammad and Islam.
Letterman: Making fun of the Prophet Muhammad.
Obama: Making fun of the Prophet Muhammad. And, so, this caused great offense, in much of the Muslim world. But, what also happened was extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.
Again, attributing this to a film, but finally starting to use the word terrorist.
Anyway you cut this– the President is obviously prevaricating at the worst, and deceitfully obfuscating at its best. This truly is a sad state of affairs.
If a wise man has an argument with a foolish man, the fool only rages or laughs, and there is no rest.
A self-confident fool utters all his anger, but a wise man holds it back and stills it.
– Proverbs 29:9,11
I started to watch the Vice Presidential debate this evening, and within a few minutes found myself asking my wife if she wanted to watch a Sherlock episode (the clean BBS version). Why, for a political junkie like me? Well, I honestly couldn’t stand the constant glare from those white teeth (my wife calls them dentures, but I digress). I really was trying to watch and listen, and when it came time for Congressman Ryan speak, all I could see was the glare– not from the bald head of an older opponent, but from the shiny gloss of those pearly whites! Honestly– I killed the C-Span webpage and loaded up Netflix. Ugh.
I thought that perhaps I was just agitated at the Bide for being so utterly disrespectful to Ryan or perhaps I wasn’t being as objective as I thought I should. But alas, after finishing The Hounds of Baskerville, I jumped back over to C-Span, and there were the closing remarks. The Smiling Man was just finishing his closing remarks and the Quiet Bookkeeper was about to start. Then, as luck would have it, the streaming feed hung. What to do? Peruse the news sites! So that’s what I did. I perused the news sites and realized that it wasn’t just my impression– it was everybody’s impression! Wallace and Krauthammer had hit it spot on! The Vice President was not acting very Presidential (nor Vice Presidential for that matter)– he really was being a jerk.
Now that it’s over, I don’t know if I can watch the whole thing– certainly not at this time. But the one thing I could and did do– I watched the closing comments. To me– the choice is clear. We need to put wise economic and social policies in the White House and Naval Observatory. Not the foolish trappings and railings of the ambiguous “Forward” that does nothing but take us backward– or worse, down a path that those that have escaped Eastern Europe has already proven is mortifying.
Have you heard this before? Perhaps in a cliché, but seeing it in action is truly inspirational and uniting– something that has been sorely missed in these United States over the past forty or so years, with a brief exception after the horror of September 11th, 2011.
And why has the United States been so divided? In my assessment, because of “Power Politics” and the co-opting of a great movement that struggled for nearly a hundred years. It briefly saw the light of day under President Teddy Roosevelt, but was pushed back into the cellar until it was free at last. I’m talking about equal rights among all Americas– the great Civil Rights movement of the last century. But what happened to this movement? Sen. Everett Dirkson (R-IL) pushed for Civil Rights legislation for a decade (’57, ’60, ’64, ’65, ’68). But alas, Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Democrats decided to take credit for the effort, thus securing he and his party’s place as a Civil Rights champion, even though he and his party’s past behavior was clearly not as dedicated as Republican Sen. Dirkson. The fact is, the Civil Rights movement transcended Democrat and Republican politics– Dirkson was a proponent, and Sen. Barry Goldwater (author of “The Conscience of a Conservative”) voted against it (not necessarily because of racism, but more on his principle of reduced Federal government). In fact, when you look at the actual records, you’ll notice that a greater number of Democrats opposed the various pieces of civil rights legislation (e.g., LBJ, John F. Kennedy, Al Gore, Sr., Robert Byrd, et al) than Republicans. Here’s the breakdown (and links to the information can be found here and here):
House of Representatives: Democrats for: 152 / 61% Democrats against: 96 / 39% Republicans for: 138 / 80% Republicans against: 34 / 20% Senate: Democrats for: 46 / 69% Democrats against: 21 / 31% Republicans for: 27 / 82% Republicans against: 6 / 18%
The National Black Republicans Association (http://www.nbra.info) has some great information available, if you’re willing to be enlightened. I’d recommend reading the character assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. article.
But I digress– regardless of it’s history, one has to wonder why Americans of African descent feel so beholden to the Democrat party. In my opinion, it is because of myth and mental conditioning by many of its leaders since the famed 1964 vote. Consider this– the rights that were newly granted to our black American brethren was largely implemented by a Democrat administration that administered the laws in the sixties. So if the Democrats are the implementers of this new freedom, it’s just human nature to naturally credit them with altruistic motivations in doings so, not just because of the law. And to make matters worse, many Civil Rights activists were quite upset with Barry Goldwater, the conservative face of the republicans, because of his opposition to the civil rights legislation (though it is argued his motives were due to libertarianism, not racism). This is a pretty powerful elixer, after all. This is all speculation on my part, but it seems fairly accurate. Regardless of how we got here, consider how your attitude would be if you were told all of your life that Republicans are evil and racist and that Democrats are the supporters of Civil Rights by people who you were told to trust (Pastors, parents). You’d probably be cynical of Republican attempts to set the record straight too. It’s amazing to me that people like Jesse Jackson, Sr. and Al Sharpton hold such sway among many in the Black community when their behavior is so anti-thetical to the very nature of the morality that drove the Civil Rights movement. If you don’t see the Civil Rights movement as something that is based upon the Judeo-Christian moral code, then you truly have missed the most basic elements of the Civil Rights movement. Remember King’s “I Have A Dream” speech? This was more like a sermon and the very clear and very strong illusions to Moses and the Bible, and the fact King carried the title of Reverend should put this matter to rest.
Enter a new age– I’ve just been exposed to The Blacksphere– Kevin Jackson, a blogger, author and speaker, whose slogan is “Ending Identity Politics”. If you haven’t subscribed to his Facebook page, you should do so! Kevin recently publicized the Exodus Now! movement as well.
I’ll leave you with this… a video from Exodus Now!
Yes, I know, it’s been quite a while since I’ve updated the site. What can I say?! EXACTLY! Nothing. Just like I did for the past year.
Well, if you must know, life has been happening. I moved into a new role at my company, making more money in theory, but quite a bit less in reality… I guess that’s the life of a salesman (yes, I moved from technical training to technical sales). And besides that, my daughter was born June 4 of last year– notice my last entry and the low quality of it? Let’s just say life happens when one doesn’t sleep so well. And, I thought one of the companies that I admire was going to buy my website (DailyTalker.com is a really cool domain name, ain’t it! And I’ve owned it for the past six years), but alas, after they contacted me several times, but they must be really busy, as when I try to contact them, it seems my query falls through the cracks (after all, my website isn’t like a DrudgeReport.com or Townhall.com or anything). Part of me is wondering– are they really serious? Well, perhaps my wit, sarcasm and common-man political analysis will catch fire and the site will become a hub for political discussion! I’m still a man of eternal optimism!
Regarding my tardiness in writing– believe me, I’ve thought about writing an entry several times, but just haven’t made the time. However, with the upcoming presidential election and the way that it’s being covered by the news media, I am honestly aghast at where our country is heading in terms of it’s governing style. Have we really increased our welfare rolls by so much in the past year? And our national debt? We’re over 16 trillion now– I thought we were at like 13 Trillion last year when I made my last entry (but I could be wrong– a lot off other things to keep track of).
I was really liking Herman Cain– but then the media torpedoes him (or should I say Clarence Thomas-ed him), and it successfully brought down his bid. Though Romney isn’t my first choice, he certainly is better than what America’s feel-good vote from 2008 has given us. And we still don’t know a lot about him other than he is an American citizen, and a disgruntled one at that who seems to prefer to blame others for every unpopular result his policies give us. Have you heard these before? “It’s Bush’s fault.” “It’s the mess I inherited.” “It’s Bush’s fault.” “If only I had more time.” “It’s Bush’s fault.”<Californian Surfer Dude Accent ON/> “Mr. Prez! Dude?! What *have* you been doing the past three years? Man-up and take some ownership!” </Californian Surfer Dude Accent OFF>
I’m sorry Mr. President, but you’ve had your shot, and it’s evident that you don’t have a clue as to what makes the world go around, especially in the world of work and economics. The definition of redistribution is nothing more that shared misery. We don’t need more government redistribution, we need less. We, as Americans, need to go back to when we, as individuals, shared our resources with our fellow men in need. This hold-over of President Johnson’s failed “War on Poverty” has been, and continues to be, an abject failure. It has caused to major detriments to American society and the American psyche– it has created a dependency, almost victimhood mindset and an “I can’t do it alone” mentality that has never permeated Americans before. The results are self-evident– more poverty. Being someone that started out making only $8.36/hr, I know what it’s like to be poor and may no income taxes– not fun. But I never took a dime from the government– when in need I relied on the traditional American resource– myself and my family. Stop the redistribution! Scale it back! Stop taking more money of those that pay takes, and start taking less! This will allow us to share our funds through the existing private charity organizations and through economic activity. STOP THE MADNESS! Now, with ObamaCare, my family, with me as the sole income earner in my household, are just getting by. Why with ObamaCare? Because thanks in a big part to the additional health care benefit costs that my company now charges, my total disposible income has been reduced to near zero.
So, as Mr. Eastwood said several weeks ago– I think it’s time that we let The Man go, as it’s just not working out.
If you haven’t seen this Washington Times article, you need to take a look.
This is not only relevant to the current debt discussions, but I believe spreads across the spectrum of anything on the Obama agenda…think “Health Care Reform”, “Immigration Reform”, et cetera.
Are the blinds coming off of the American people? This is a good start. Now– will the White House release the President’s college transcripts and papers? We’d really like to know his world-view and ideology in college– Hillary didn’t have a problem with it– why does Obama?
— The Daily Talker
EDITOR’S NOTE: As this blog is a part-time effort, my updates and proofing are not as regular or complete as I would like. Thank you for your patience and forgiveness as my full-time work load is heavy around this time of year (EOQ).
One hundred seventy two thousand and two hundred dollars per year. In the arabic numerals, that looks like $172,200/yearly. That’s the salary of Mr. Robert Gibbs, who is set to resign as the White House press secretary in early February. And how is this salary described by the current chief executive? Modest.
Don’t get me wrong, Mr. Gibbs may be worth every cent– I don’t, nor would I begrudge anyone for making the most money that they possibly can, especially in a work environment that is truly political and can turn at any instant. The thing that I am incredulous at is the President’s adjective in describing the level of salary that the press secretary receives. $172,200/year is modest? I would call this well paid. This is just another example that Washington is truly out of touch with the rest of the nation.
And it is this mindset that has gotten us to not blanche at our current federal debt, which is up from $4 trillion dollars to $14 trillion dollars in just over two years. Yes, we’re at war, but we had been at war for seven years in the previous administration as well, with nothing near this kind of expansion of the debt. And now, we are event talking ‘trillion’ in terms of the federal budget deficit rather than what was once ‘billions’.
Consider this– another way of saying one billion dollars is to say one thousand million. Now we’re getting comfortable with saying trillion– that’s one million million dollars. That could make the city of Austin, Texas populated with only millionaires if we were to spread it around. But, as I understand it, thinking in this fashion is the new vogue way of being modest.
P.S. – Take a look at the Heritage Foundation’s report by James Sherk on the salary differences between federal workers and their private counterparts in an article entitled “Private Subsidies for Government Workers“.
With all the commotion currently surrounding the topic ‘immigration’ recently, and the stated intent of the current president of the United States to focus on what he is terming ‘comprehensive immigration reform’, it’s worth while examining what the federal government is currently doing with the existing laws and what types of reforms are really needed. With that in mind, consider the immigration imbroglio as evidenced by the cases of Ms. Zeituni Onyango, Mr. Mosab Hassan Yousef, and Mr. Robert Krentz. Continue reading »
Continue reading »
So, the ‘progressives’ have completed one of their main goals– foisting a government run health care program upon the American people. Why do I use the word ‘foist’? Because a majority of Americans didn’t ask for or want this monstrosity and actively campaigned against it (54% against, 41% for, 4% unsure). Now, even more want it repealed (55%). This isn’t surprising given the fact that even the main ramrod for this legislation in the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco, CA), said that it had to be passed before people could find out what’s in it outside the ‘fog of controversy’. Give me a break! In fact, the leadership in the House passed the Senate version, unabridged, in the foggiest environment that they could possibly manufacture. Although it wasn’t quite in the dead of night– no, wait– it was! It was also on a Spring Break weekend, and on a Sunday! So this is the Democrat’s version of ‘the most transparent Congress’ in history, eh? Reminds me of a George Orwell novel.
Continue reading »
Continue reading »