Right Wing Nut House



Filed under: Bailout, Chicago East, Financial Crisis, Media, OBAMANIA!, Politics — Rick Moran @ 9:28 am

The game of softball has two incarnations. Most of the country plays the 12″ variety that features a fairly hard ball that the player needs a leather glove in order to catch it.

But around these parts, when one says “Let’s play softball,” we are talking about a great big 16″ “mushball” that you don’t need a mitt to catch it and is easy to hit. Much more conducive to playing spinoff games like “Beer Ball” and other variations, the game is marked by the painlessness involved in catching the ball due to its lumpen shape and forgiving texture.

Hence, the term “softball question” which apparently has its origins in questions asked certain Machine politicians in Chicago in the 1970’s. The exact date and origin of the term are unknown but anecdotally, I recall the great Chicago columnist Mike Royko using the term to describe the witlessness of Chicago beat reporters at City Hall who were a most incurious lot when it came to Machine corruption. This may have been unfair of Royko due to Mayor Richard J. Daley’s notorious hatred of reporters and the vengeance he would take against any who crossed him.

But the reference is to the 16″ variety which, unlike the more popular 12″ game is played with a true “soft ball” and is seen mostly in Chicago and its surrounding suburbs and ex-urbs.

No doubt Barack Obama is very familiar with the 16″ variety of the game. And after last night, he is now intimately familiar with the term “softball question:”

Question: Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier today in Indiana, you said something striking. You said that this nation could end up in a crisis without action that we would be unable to reverse.

Can you talk about what you know or what you’re hearing that would lead you to say that our recession might be permanent when others in our history have not? And do you think that you risk losing some credibility or even talking down the economy by using dire language like that?

Batter up! Play ball!

Announcer: Here’s Obama at the plate. So far the president is 0 for 3 with two strikeouts and a weak pop-up to the second baseman. He’s also been credited with a sacrifice when he lifted a medium deep fly ball to left field that advanced catcher Hillary Clinton to third.

Here’s the first pitch … it’s an underhand delivery from Jen Loven of the Associated Press who couldn’t decide whether to rush to the plate and kiss the batter or simply grovel at his feet. Obama takes a mighty swing…and misses!

Obama: That’s why the figure that we initially came up with of approximately $800 billion was put forward. That wasn’t just some random number that I plucked out of — out of a hat. That was Republican and Democratic, conservative and liberal economists that I spoke to who indicated that, given the magnitude of the crisis and the fact that it’s happening worldwide, it’s important for us to have a bill of sufficient size and scope that we can save or create 4 million jobs.

I doubt too many conservative economists recommended a bill that contained such a lopsided ratio of spending to tax cuts. He is either being disingenuous or lying. I have seen plenty of conservative economists say we need a stimulus bill but of “sufficient size and scope?” That’s one on me and it would be helpful if the President could give us the names of those economists. Not just to check his story but also to scream at any fools who would have recommended such idiocy.

But back to the game…

Announcer: Obama steps out of the box for a moment. He adjusts his immaculate uniform - evidently his cup is slightly out of place. He daintily spits into his government-funded, Taiwanese built spitoon that he insists on bringing with him to the plate (life must be hell for Barak ever since his wife forced him to quit smoking and switch to chewing tobacco). Time is called as Obama insists that the spitoon be emptied and out comes a stimulus funded worker, the Designated Spit Chucker, to take care of the problem.

Obama steps back in. The rookie looks nervous as his spikes paw at the dirt. He squeezes the bat and awaits the pitch from Karen Boeing of Reuters. Here it comes …oooooh a brushback pitch that narrowly misses Obama’s enormous ear:

Question: Thank you, Mr. President. I’d like to shift gears to foreign policy. What is your strategy for engaging Iran? And when will you start to implement it? Will your timetable be affected at all by the Iranian elections? And are you getting any indications that Iran is interested in a dialogue with the United States?

Obama gives us all a lesson in how to say absolutely nothing in 1000 words or less.

And my expectation is, in the coming months, we will be looking for openings that can be created where we can start sitting across the table, face-to-face diplomatic overtures, that will allow us to move our policy in a new direction.

There’s been a lot of mistrust built up over the years, so it’s not going to happen overnight. And it’s important that, even as we engage in this direct diplomacy, we are very clear about certain deep concerns that we have as a country, that Iran understands that we find the funding of terrorist organizations unacceptable, that we’re clear about the fact that a nuclear Iran could set off a nuclear arms race in the region that would be profoundly destabilizing.

So there are going to be a set of objectives that we have in these conversations, but I think that there’s the possibility at least of a relationship of mutual respect and progress.

As long as Obama is willing to grovel at the feet of the Iranian government by “apologizing” for all the naughty things we’ve done in Iran without them having to apologize for their support of Hezbullah and Hamas, then I have no doubt that a relationship of respect and “progress” (whatever that means) can be achieved.

Just tell our diplomats to be careful what they say. Iran has already committed one act of war in taking and holding our personnel as hostages. No doubt they would probably find it efficacious to have a repeat performance.

Let’s pick up the game where we left off…

Announcer: Obama is getting up slowly and dusting himself off after the high heat put him on his ear. He glares at the pitcher but restrains his inclination to go after her with a bat. Obama appears to be disgusted that his uniform is dirty and may call for his valet to brush him off. I believe - yes - he is asking the ump for permission but Nester is having none of it. He points to the box and orders Obama to resume.

Obama looks determined now. His steely gaze is concentrated on Chip Reid of NBC as he goes into his windup. Here’s the pitch…it’s an eephus pitch that Obama slams deep to left. Back she goes…back…back…IT’S OUTA HERE!

Thank you, Mr. President. You have often said that bipartisanship is extraordinarily important, overall and in this stimulus package, but now, when we ask your advisers about the lack of bipartisanship so far — zero votes in the House, three in the Senate — they say, “Well, it’s not the number of votes that matters; it’s the number of jobs that will be created.”

Is that a sign that you are moving away — your White House is moving away from this emphasis on bipartisanship?

And what went wrong? Did you underestimate how hard it would be to change the way Washington works?

Not only does Reid set the ball on a tee for the president, he actually gets him started toward trashing his opposition while being able to appear “bi-partisan:”

As I said, the one concern I’ve got on the stimulus package, in terms of the debate and listening to some of what’s been said in Congress, is that there seems to be a set of folks who — I don’t doubt their sincerity — who just believe that we should do nothing.

Now, if that’s their opening position or their closing position in negotiations, then we’re probably not going to make much progress, because I don’t think that’s economically sound and I don’t think what — that’s what the American people expect, is for us to stand by and do nothing.

There are others who recognize that we’ve got to do a significant recovery package, but they’re concerned about the mix of what’s in there. And if they’re sincere about it, then I’m happy to have conversations about this tax cut versus that — that tax cut or this infrastructure project versus that infrastructure project.

But what I’ve — what I’ve been concerned about is some of the language that’s been used suggesting that this is full of pork and this is wasteful government spending, so on and so forth.

First of all, when I hear that from folks who presided over a doubling of the national debt, then, you know, I just want them to not engage in some revisionist history. I inherited the deficit that we have right now and the economic crisis that we have right now.

There may be some lonely back bencher (Ron Paul) who may want to “sit back and do nothing” about the economic crisis but to try and say that this opinion is even a minority opinion in the GOP is a lie and he knows it. And this is even worse:

Number two is that, although there are some programs in there that I think are good policy, some of them aren’t job-creators. I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say that those programs should be out of this particular recovery package and we can deal with them later.

But when they start characterizing this as pork, without acknowledging that there are no earmarks in this package — something, again, that was pretty rare over the last eight years — then you get a feeling that maybe we’re playing politics instead of actually trying to solve problems for the American people.

I’m sorry but $4.2 billion for “neighborhood stabilization activities” - much if which would go to ACORN and other partisan Democratic organizations smacks of a Hugo Chavez type of political program where organizing people at the neighborhood level, getting them dependent on those government programs earmarked for the purpose, and then when election day rolls around, actually paying ACORN and their sister organizations to get the grateful citizens to the polls would cement the Democratic majority in many states where big cities make up a sizable segment of the vote.

Here are 49 other “destimulating facts” about the bill (many of which I agree with Obama should be included but many others we can clearly do without).

It’s not that we expected the press to challenge Obama and ask him tough questions. There’s no opportunity for follow-up and the president calls on the reporters like a teacher calling on students in class. The modern presidential press conference has become a drama starring the President of the United States and featuring recognizable talking heads from the various networks, bit players from the dead tree media, and a cast of hundreds of extras. It is a political speech disguised as a press conference and the transparent willingness of the press to play their designated roll was nauseating.

No questions about Gitmo? What about Obama’s keeping some Bush era policies on rendition and the Terrorist Surveillance Program? Poor Glenn Greenwald has his panties in a twist because Obama won’t let the terrorists free in downtown Washington with an apology for inconveniencing their jihad by incarcerating them for a few years.

The fact is, there was not one question that discomfited him, not one challenge to a decision he has made. No questions about his cabinet picks who have backed out or his breaking his pledge not to put lobbyists in positions where they would have jurisdiction over the areas where they lobbied, or any questions on breaking his promise to wait 5 days before signing a bill into law in order to get feedback from his adoring public.

Announcer: Obama is circling the bases in triumph, women are swooning in the stands, men are weeping, and reporters are running next to him trying to get his autograph. Our hero-savior-president has triumphed and his enemies have been temporarily silenced.

Ain’t softball a grand game?


  1. Really fantastic. (When do you sleep?)

    When I write, of course. Actually, my writing time has been cut to shit because of my two jobs. I write some on AT and a column a week for PJM. My only chance to have fun is on this site.


    Comment by clarice — 2/10/2009 @ 10:43 am

  2. Did you expect anything different?

    The media has been in the tank for Obama since almost the beginning of the two year long campaign season. They aren’t going to put any fire to his feet this early in his reign.

    Comment by Dale in NJ — 2/10/2009 @ 10:45 am

  3. Obama’s Labradoodle press :http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j157/Topsecretk9/Lapadoodle.jpg

    Comment by clarice — 2/10/2009 @ 11:00 am

  4. “Ain’t softball a grand game?”

    As my older brother likes to say: Softball is for pussies.

    He should see some of the league games they play in the city. I wouldn’t be calling on of those monsters “pussies” where they could hear him.


    Comment by sara in va — 2/10/2009 @ 11:15 am

  5. Just love how he absolutely cannot rid himself of the “it’s all Bush’s fault” rhetoric with his remark insisting he ‘inherited’ this economic crisis. Then again for all intents and purposes he did spend his entire 2-year Senatorial term on the campaign trail with only the occasional stop in DC to cast another ‘present’ vote, so I guess he can somewhat honestly claim he had no hand in the making of this mess. But the utter gall to bemoan having to hear from people “who presided over the doubling of the national debt” when he is going double it again (and probably triple it or worse) in under one month on the job is what truly proves to me that the man has absolutely no understanding of economics whatsoever. And Rick, kind of disappointed you didn’t mention Helen Brown’s utterly inane question about Pakistan and nukes … then again, that was more moonbat ball than softball. Regards.

    Comment by Michael S. — 2/10/2009 @ 11:44 am

  6. I dunno. The guy talked for an hour and didn’t make me cringe or feel embarrassed. He took whatever questions were asked. I’d call that progress. Unfortunately, ‘better than Bush’ doesn’t really set the bar very high.

    heh - true enough. Except I flinched when he lied about tax cuts causing the financial crisis. That’s insane. And his lie about the GOP “only” wanting tax cuts is another whopper. The Republican alternative has both spending and tax cuts in it.


    Comment by Chuck Tucson — 2/10/2009 @ 12:02 pm

  7. Don’t know about you Chuck, but I cringe every time he goes on his ‘this is a stimulus, no I mean a spending, no it’s all the same thing’ jag. And more so that he gets so obviously annoyed by the very question. In all seriousness though, what is all you guys take on his use of an obvious pre-selected list of journalist’s to call on for questions. I’m have no doubt previous presidents all had their ‘favorite’ reporters that always seemed to get picked to ask questions … is this any different? Is he really just such a rookie that he doesn’t actually know the faces and names of the usual suspects in the White House reporter pool? Or is there something intentional going on here? Sure you already saw this Rick, but check out …

    Comment by Michael S. — 2/10/2009 @ 12:31 pm

  8. “If it looks like shit, smells like shit, and feels like shit, you don’t have to actually eat it to know it’s shit.”
    Seth Eisenberg
    but then we already knew that… didn’t we?

    Comment by jambrowski — 2/10/2009 @ 12:33 pm

  9. He also lied about there being no pork in the bill. Outside of AP, how much air time do you think that lie will get?

    Comment by BubbaJ — 2/10/2009 @ 1:03 pm

  10. It was awful the way Obama kept answering whatever questions were put to him in a detailed, comprehensive, non-condescending way. I’ve never been so ashamed. Doesn’t he know he’s just supposed to puff out his chest, babble something in his own made-up version of English and angrily announce that he’s The Decider?

    Did someone say “babble?” To wit; JFK answered 37 questions in a 45 minute press conference. Obama answered 13 in a 1 hour press conference. This is something you would have immeditately noticed if your head wasn’t so far up Obama’s butt you could smell his small intestine.


    Comment by michael reynolds — 2/10/2009 @ 1:37 pm

  11. And this surprises you?

    The Obamamessiah’s press conferences are little more then staged propaganda events. He only takes prearranged questions from pre-approved “journalists”. That way the Obamamessiah can script his replies and try to memorize them seeing as he can’t use a teleprompter at a “press conference”.

    Where do I show the slightest inkling of surprise? Why do ignoramuses continually try to rewrite my posts for me?


    Comment by Ennis — 2/10/2009 @ 1:48 pm

  12. I spent 24 years serving with the U.S. Navy. Not once in those 24 years did I feel that my Commander in chief was a lying two faced son of a bitch.( Well maybe with Clinton, at least on personal matters) I honestly don’t think I would have continued to serve if I had been on active duty when Obama was elected. I haven’t trusted him from the start and his weasel like slithering and avoiding of answering questions as well as his butt kissing acolytes are a scary phenomenon. As he once said, you can put lipstick on a pig but it’s still a pig.

    Comment by Kenny Komodo — 2/10/2009 @ 1:51 pm

  13. As long as Obama is willing to grovel at the feet of the Iranian government by “apologizing” for all the naughty things we’ve done in Iran without them having to apologize for their support of Hezbullah and Hamas, then I have no doubt that a relationship of respect and “progress” (whatever that means) can be achieved.

    You’re optimistic. Clinton and Albright both apologized to Iran, to no discernable effect — aside from encouragement.

    Comment by Karl — 2/10/2009 @ 1:54 pm

  14. If tax cuts caused the crisis, why was so much of his campaign focused on tax cuts for 95% of taxpayers (sic)? It’s almost as if he doesn’t believe what he’s saying.

    N’ah. Can’t be.

    Comment by EBJ — 2/10/2009 @ 2:43 pm

  15. He was addressing complex issues in detail. I realize you may be happier in the sound bite, “Bring ‘em on!” world of Republican political speech, but unfortunately the mess your party has made now requires the full-time efforts of actual adults who must deal with complex matters and attempt to explain same to American public over the bleats of GOP sheep.

    If you want pithier answers in pressers maybe you could prevail upon future Republican presidents to f— up in less spectacular fashion. Then Democrats would have a chance to utter simplistic slogans and inanities.

    Comment by michael reynolds — 2/10/2009 @ 2:56 pm

  16. Yeah…the Washington press corps is terrible…totally part of the never ending Obama campaign…but people are noticing.

    Talk to your friends who don’t follow the news much…mention the press corps to them and watch them snicker…folks are not being fooled.

    Comment by Increase Mather — 2/10/2009 @ 3:24 pm

  17. Michael Reynolds,

    I believe, that you believe, that leaders on your side believe, that they are the only “actual adults” in the room.

    This belief explains why your party wants to stick its nose into every facet of our lives. Just like mom and dad would make every decision for a 5 year old who can’t yet think for himself. Your party thinks the country is made up of ignorant children who, if left to their own devices, would surely kill themselves and others.

    Here’s the drama, playing out in wide-screen format, and we all get to watch it.

    Will mommy and daddy be able to keep the children locked in their rooms, with the parental lock on the TV (no reason to let the kids know what’s going on behind closed doors, it would just confuse them)?

    Or will the “full time efforts of actual adults”, like the drunken missions of raging alcoholics, burn the house down, with the children screaming in the back room, virtually ignored?

    Comment by sara in va — 2/10/2009 @ 3:58 pm

  18. Sara, you might consider brushing up on your analogy skills.

    Comment by Chuck Tucson — 2/10/2009 @ 6:13 pm

  19. Sara in va:
    It’s your party that stuck its nose in Terry Schiavo’s hospital room and wants to stick its nose in every gynecologist’s patient rooms. It’s your party that sees nothing wrong with eavesdropping on phone calls between citizens without bothering to go through the FISA courts. It’s your party that wants to go into America’s bedrooms and determine what sexual activities it will allow and what people can purchase for their own private pleasure. It’s your party which takes glee in imprisoning millions of our citizens for smoking a little weed, even when it’s used by chemotherapy patients for medicinal use. It’s your party which is opposed to any type of death with dignity for terminal patients. And this is your party, too:

    “Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them….

    “This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg’s book. I’d like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn’t get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered. I hope others do the same. It’s the only way we can rid America of this cancerous pestilence.”

    “I thought I’d do something good for this Country Kill Democrats til the cops kill me….Liberals are a pest like termites. Millions of them Each little bite contributes to the downfall of this great nation. The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is to kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather. I’d like to encourage other like minded people to do what I’ve done. If life aint worth living anymore don’t just kill yourself. do something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals.

    Comment by James Adkisson — 2/10/2009 @ 7:04 pm

  20. DDT was banned on false premises.
    Tens of millions died unnecessarily.

    The spotted owl was protected based on speculative and false information that killed an industry.

    32 days straight of Abu Ghraib stories by the likes of the NYT insured a decline of global opinion of America and probably incited regular people in the Arab world to jihad.

    AGW hoax was spawned based on media misinformation.

    The favor ability of an ill-prepared politician must now be maintained by the “Wasted Talent Media”


    Our educational institutes and media are causing destructive actions by people who adopt insane positions without real actual information.

    The resultant situation of the America of today is that, we have an unpredictable and unstable future, with an under qualified leader, in a very dangerous world.

    On the bright side we have blogs like this to come to and vent!

    Comment by liberty4usa — 2/10/2009 @ 7:53 pm

  21. Michael Reynolds,
    Were you listening to the same press conference as the rest of the world did ? He was not addressing a damned thing - he was setting up incredibly dumb strawmen agruments all conference long.

    If you think this is what passes for the “adult”, it shows your maturity is not any better than that of a 15 year old.

    You may want to read Jay Cost’s analysis of the press conference at RealClearPolitics

    Jay Cost is not a partisan by any stretch of imagination and conveys a genuine sense of disappointment of how Obama had strawman arguments the whole fricking evening.

    Comment by Nagarajan Sivakumar — 2/10/2009 @ 8:00 pm

  22. Rick,
    Since you seem to be such a baseball fan, does it ever cross your mind that the biggest celebrity fan of the team that you root for is this slimebag ?

    Kind of like Red Sox fans who didnt really want Ben Affleck any where near Fenway or representing them ?

    Comment by Nagarajan Sivakumar — 2/10/2009 @ 8:04 pm

  23. Chuck #18
    What’s an analogy?

    James #19

    For a minute I thought I was reading something from Bill “Kill Your Parents” Ayers, but realized he doesn’t talk like that anymore since Obama gave him the back door key to the White House.

    Point is, there are nutcases on both sides of the aisle. Bill Ayers doesn’t represent mainstream liberal thought (I hope) just as that weirdo you quoted doesn’t represent the religious gun clinging patriots I know.

    However, Congress represents current liberal thinking. And it is quite clear to many of us that Nancy and Harry et al are enjoying their Adventures in Babysitting.

    BTW here’s an appropriate quote from that (hilarious) movie.
    Chris: [to Joe Gipp] Where are we going?
    Daryl: To hell! Kind of exciting, don’tcha think?

    Comment by sara in va — 2/11/2009 @ 6:37 am

  24. Nagarajan Sivakumar, you suggest I read Jay Cost who asks the following:
    Who’s arguing that “tax cuts alone” will solve this problem? Even if some are, is this the median position on the Republican side?

    Thirty-six out of 41 Republican Senators voted for the proposed DeMint amendment to the stimulus bill which provide for:
    1)Permanently repeal the alternative minimum tax once and for all;
    2)Permanently keep the capital gains and dividends taxes at 15 percent;
    3)Permanently kill the Death Tax for estates under $5 million, and cut the tax rate to 15 percent for those above;
    4)Permanently extend the $1,000-per-child tax credit;
    5)Permanently repeal the marriage tax penalty;
    6)Permanently simplify itemized deductions to include only home mortgage interest and charitable contributions.
    7)Lower top marginal income rates from 35 percent to 25 percent.
    8)Simplify the tax code to include only two other brackets, 15 and 10 percent.
    9) Lower corporate tax rate as well, from 35 percent to 25 percent.

    So there you have it. 87% of Republican Senators, which includes the median, support the position that the President attacked. That is not attacking a strawman.

    And sara in va:
    Please sleep comfortably tonight as you do not have to worry about Bill Ayers. He does not have the back door key to the White House. Really. He doesn’t.

    And I most certainly do represent the religious gun clinging patriots you know. Don’t call me a weirdo.

    Comment by James Adkisson — 2/11/2009 @ 8:11 am

  25. I had no idea that “JFK answered 37 questions in a 45 minute press conference.” Not having heard this amazing outburst of summarized coherency, I am left to wonder if the press deliberately asked out 35th President yes or no questions! Did JFK always do this well, especially in press conferences happening in times of crisis? Certainly he had more than 1 press conference on which to base his legacy…

    Seriously though, myself and 75% of Americans were not even born when this event happened, so why shouldn’t we relate to a Clinton or Bush press conference instead? Obama is still in his honeymoon phase anyway, so of course he was going to get a free pass. Besides, having complex thoughts (even if they are bogus) spoken by our leader is such a novelty, seeing that it hasn’t happened in 16 years!

    Comment by Surabaya Stew — 2/11/2009 @ 8:42 am

  26. Rick, do you ever ask Terry in how he can keep a straight face in remarking that Obama’s honeymoon period is already over? He will always have a honeymoon period with the MSM. Terry was shamefully deferrential to the big “O”. He never asked one tough question. Not one.

    Comment by Jim Princiotta — 2/11/2009 @ 1:34 pm

  27. Let’s accept for the moment that the press corps is 100% the tank for Obama for the moment . . .

    How do the “the Obamamessiah just gets lobbed softballs” people here feel about his “town hall meetings” with non-screened citizens? Sure, there are some “You’re the greatest” people, but I’ve also heard a few critics call him out (like the “how can we trust your Admin when your top picks can’t pay their taxes” lady). Didn’t dodge the question, defended the askers when the partisans in the crowd booed, and took the issues head-on.

    Setting aside whether or not you liked the answers, how do you all feel about the process itself, and does it display any “leadership” qualities? Granted, a president willing to talk to citizens isn’t/shouldn’t be very impressive, but as was noted above the bar has been set pretty low.

    Comment by busboy33 — 2/11/2009 @ 3:40 pm

  28. #27 busboy

    Non-screened citizens? You really think that?

    If you were trying to give the impression that you were ready for anything, a true “for the common man” guy, the first thing you’d do would be to allow some “harder” sounding questions to be worked in the mix. Oh! Swoons the press, didn’t he handle that tough questioner so calmly! Not a bead of sweat on his gorgeous brow!

    But, of course, you would know the question and would have prepared the answer in advance.

    This is a campaign that takes special care in placing people in designated seating for camera angle purposes. There ain’t no way they leave the questions up to chance.

    Comment by sara in va — 2/12/2009 @ 5:47 am

  29. @ Sara:

    Thank you for your answer. I don’t know if I agree with your conclusion necessarily (I’m trying to decide if I’m being overly cynical or overly optimistic), but I appreciate your answer and your comments.

    If you’re willing to put up with another question(s), do you think that the public questions are rigged is because we’re talking about Obama (he’s a lying weasel), or because wer’re talking about a politician (they’re all lying weasels)? And is there anything that Obama (or politicians, depending on how you feel about the prior question) could say or do that would convince you it wasn’t staged?

    Comment by busboy33 — 2/12/2009 @ 3:27 pm

  30. busboy

    Any politician in high office has perfected the art of politic’n (acting skills) and so, yes, I do take a cynical view of public performances just as a given.

    Why would Obama suddenly give up the stage show that his handlers have perfected and that has allowed him to craft the illusion he wants? The dude is a complete control freak. His image is the most valuable thing he has. The answer then, is: No, nothing would convince me that it wasn’t staged.

    Any lawyer knows never to ask a question if you don’t know the answer. It also goes without saying, don’t answer if you don’t know the question.

    Think about it. All these people treating him like a savior, and he does little to dispel the notion. Is it because he wants them to believe that he is their Savior - or because HE actually thinks he IS?

    As long as he can appear to be able to produce manna, people will be willing to believe. It only takes a mistake or two -a big slip-up on a surprise question - for people to lose faith. Once that happens, he might be up on the mountaintop receiving his carved stone tablets, but the believers will be back on earth, carving new idols.

    (Rick, thanks for allowing the back and forth using your personal blog…).

    Comment by sara in va — 2/13/2009 @ 6:11 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress