So you want good news? You want predictions? You want to forget that there are still two more years of incessant boobery from stinky B.O.? We’ll put a pink glow on your cheeks.
Close your eyes and imagine a president who spoke a tough truth to a tough audience on a tough topic instead of taking a three week vacation. Hey! We found the president. It’s the president of Egypt.
On New Year’s Day the president of Egypt lambasted Muslims much like we have for a long time. We’ve got us a president!:
Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi made an extraordinary speech on New Year’s Day to Cairo’s Al-Azhar and the Awqaf Ministry calling for a long overdue virtual ecclesiastical revolution in Islam. This is something no Western leader has the had the courage to do, certainly not Barack Obama, despite his Muslim education.
Accusing the umma (world Islamic population) of encouraging the hostility of the entire world, al-Sisi’s speech is so dramatic and essentially revolutionary it brings to mind Khrushchev’s famous speech exposing Stalin. Many have called for a reformation of Islam, but for the leader of the largest Arab nation to do so has world-changing implications.
Today is the first day of jury selection in the Bastard Boston Bomber trial so we will quote just a tasty morsel of the President’s speech:
Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!
I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now. [snip]
I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.
The president of Egypt is kicking ass. The asses he is kicking are known to kill presidents of Egypt (such as Sadat) so it takes some whole lotta courage to say this to that audience. We’re not expecting much in the way of results from this one speech. We suspect Egypt will have to chop Muslim Brotherhood necks before long. But we’ve called for Muslims to stand forcefully against the Muslim creeps and we therefore applaud the Egyptian president.
Now, contrast and compare the president of Egypt with a certain boob currently occupying the White House and various government owned golf courses. Does the Boob regularly applaud Nigerians in America who place a high value on education and regularly excel? Does the Boob isolate the Eric Garners and Mike Browns who threaten their communities with criminal acts? Or does the Boob prefer to elevate fellow race-baiter and shakedown artist Al Sharpie:
Want to influence a casino bid? Polish your corporate image? Not be labeled a racist?
Then you need to pay Al Sharpton.
For more than a decade, corporations have shelled out thousands of dollars in donations and consulting fees to Sharpton’s National Action Network. What they get in return is the reverend’s supposed sway in the black community or, more often, his silence. [snip]
“Al Sharpton has enriched himself and NAN for years by threatening companies with bad publicity if they didn’t come to terms with him. Put simply, Sharpton specializes in shakedowns,” said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal & Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog group that has produced a book on Sharpton.
And Sharpton, who now boasts a close relationship with Obama and Mayor Bill de Blasio, is in a stronger negotiating position than ever.
“Once Sharpton’s on board, he plays the race card all the way through,” said a source who has worked with the Harlem preacher. “He just keeps asking for more and more money.”
Sharpie has shaken down companies and governments on behalf of gambling interests, car companies and just about anything a scam artist can devise. We recall the Sharpie attempted shakedown of Sony Music for millions with desperate Michael Jackson charging “racism” and claiming that his extortion attempt would help all black people.
Because Boob Obama does not denounce criminality so as to not upset his fanboys and fangirls we get the comedy of the Brunch Bunch. The Brunch Boobery involved restaurant disruptions which likely only antagonize L.A. and New York liberals grazing on light fare and mimosas. It would have made some, not much, but some sense if the Brunch Bunch swarmed a Chick-fil-a. But of course these protests are not about common sense.
According to a Reuters report, this Monday a New York judge will hear arguments on whether to disclose grand jury testimony in the Garner case. We hope the judge agrees to violate the sanctity of the grand jury in this case just so that we can be proven correct in our immediate analysis that the initial news reports on this case would once again be proven to be entirely erroneous. Pants up, don’t loot.
Good news? Well, global warming or climate change or whatever we are supposed to call it now is still paused at best/worst. The “pause” started in 1998 and still paused. Should we give credit to Bill Clinton? Or should we castigate and spit on Bill Clinton or whoever it was that hit the “pause” button? That darn Bill Clinton might be the death of us all if global warming is not a killer but a savior. Say whaaat????:
“While the climate of the earth has changed over the millennia as a result of natural factors – principally changes in the tilt and orientation of the earth’s axis and rotation, and in the shape of its orbit around the sun – those changes occur far too gradually to have noticeable effects over a period of mere decades. In their current phases, moreover, they would be gradually cooling the earth – taking us to another ice age – if they weren’t being more than offset by human-caused warming.”
That’s the White House Science Adviser John Holdren talking. So now, if we accept global warming should be blamed on human activity, we should be glad because the man made global warming has stopped glaciation and an ice age? So is the politically correct response to global warming (in the beginning of January as the cold sets in) a hearty Yay!??? Or is the politically correct answer a shivering “bring on the cold extinction of humanity”??? We’re as confused as Al Sharpton at a tax audit.
Speaking of tax audits, if you are oppressed by ObamaCare, prepare for a tax audit of your subsidy. ObamaCare will continue to provide many laughs this year. The first comedy on ObamaCare published this year is a history of ObamaCare from Steven Brill, with the apt title “America’s Bitter Pill”:
Brill devotes fifty pages to another Obamacare shortcoming, the early malfunctioning of the Web site. He originally thought that the site would be a showcase for what government could do. But, on the train back from his initial round of interviews in Washington, he glanced at his notes and realized that he had been given seven different answers to the question of who was in charge of the launch of the federal exchange, including an “incomprehensible” organizational chart with four diagonal lines crossing one another and forming a “lopsided” triangle:
Should we be amazed, and disappointed, at how Obama treated the nitty-gritty details of implementing the law as if actually governing was below the pay grade of Ivy League visionaries?
Absolutely. This failure to govern will stand as one of the great unforced disappointments of the Obama years.
There’s a sucker born every minute and Brill must have been born on the two second mark. How anyone who purports to be smart could have thought that ObamaCare would float like a lotus on the lake is astounding. But there’s one born every minute… and that’s how Obama was elected.
Fools voting for a boob. Politico politely uses the word “donkey” but the subtext is “ass”:
The Democrats’ Donkey in the Room
Their biggest headache in 2015? How to talk about Obama.
It’s a typical Politico article written by an O.D. who was once and maybe still is on Hopium. There’s a bitchy title that masks the flattery of Obama in the text itself. For instance:
Democrats are grappling with the reality that the Obama presidency is nearing its end, and they don’t know what to say about it. That question, more than any other, will likely define the Democratic Party debate in 2015 as the next presidential race gets underway.
If President Barack Obama had approval ratings safely above 50 percent, and the middle-class was flush, Democrats would have no hesitation wrapping themselves in the Obama banner. Conversely, if Obama were presiding over an economic collapse, failed war or White House scandal, there would be as many proud Obama Democrats as Hoover Republicans.
Instead, Democrats will face an Obama record that can be interpreted as either a historic advance of liberalism or a colossal disappointment, and on which the public mood appears to be shifting back and forth across the line. Most recently, building on an improving economy and a decisive series of post-election moves like the new opening to Cuba, he has climbed back to dead-even in approval ratings, Gallup reported, after 450 days in negative territory. The choice depends on which data points you emphasize and, more importantly, where you think the trend lines are headed.
It escapes the notice of Politico that Obama’s numbers generally improve at every year end of his presidency. Maybe the rise in popularity is due to the weeks of vacation in December. But this we know, in every year of his presidency Obama’s numbers are in free-fall by March. In Summer’s heat Obama melts away. In 2012 Obama was saved in November by a savage attack campaign against an hapless Romney and hundreds of millions of dollars to fool the public. But even after reelection in November, by January 2012 Obama was once again in the toilet and not even memories of the recent Sandy Hook massacre could get a gun control measure passed.
Still Politico agrees with us that the issue in 2016 will be Barack Obama:
Should Democrats marshal all the positive data available to make the case that Obama’s record proved activist government worked, bolstering the case for an extra helping of liberalism to solve outstanding problems? Or should Democrats keep Obama at a distance, and treat the past six years as just another chapter in the decadeslong assault on the middle-class, proving that Obama’s watered-down compromises were incapable of eradicating the rules rigged for the top 1 percent? [snip]
Elizabeth Warren is presently leading Team Half-Empty. In her major speeches, such as her 2012 convention address, her July 2014 Netroots Nation keynote and her most recent Senate floor slam of Citigroup, Warren doesn’t cite much of the Obama record outside of the creation of her signature Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She goes as far as suggesting the problem of Wall Street dominance has gotten worse on Obama’s watch, saying things like: “Now the biggest banks are even bigger than they were when they were too big to fail in 2008.” Warren’s populist ally Sen. Bernie Sanders looks past Obama to rip “the status quo, which includes a 40-year decline of our middle class.” Neither excoriates Obama personally, but their rhetoric treats him at best as an impotent bystander to corrosive corporatism and his record as useless to the progressive cause.
Another voice inside the pessimist camp is Sen. Chuck Schumer, who recently made headlines at the National Press Club second-guessing Obama’s decision to prioritize health care reform before the economy healed.
Quo Vadis Hillary?
As the presidential race shifts into gear in 2015, much rides on how the expected Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton navigates these various poles in the Democratic big tent. Assuming she runs and maintains her wide lead among Democrats, she will have more say than anyone as to how Democrats define their post-Obama future.
The bitter 2008 primary fight has conditioned observers to look for daylight between Clinton and Obama, and surely she will pick her spots. But in an October appearance at The Economic Club of Chicago, she sounded like an Obama surrogate. The American economy “currently is the envy of the world,” she insisted, saying “the very hard choices the president and his economic team made early on in the administration laid the groundwork, both to prevent worse economic consequences and to begin the climb out of the deep hole we were in.” (Yes, she even turned her “Hard Choices” book title into praise for her former rival.) If she sticks to that message, she will be moving the Democratic Party away from both Warren and Schumer, tying it to a robust defense of the Obama record.
To say the least and in the most tepid manner possible, that seems like a loser strategy.
The writer of the Politico article is Bill Scher, a “senior writer at the Campaign for America’s Future” who is well connected. What is Bill Scher shilling for? What is the new “progressive” answer from the left to economic woe? What is the new “progressive” recipe for the economy?:
As the New York Times’ David Leonhardt wrote in November, the Democrats have lacked a clear “short-term” economic plan, because their inclination is toward reforms that lack immediate bang for the buck. “Some of the policies that Democrats favor, such as broader access to good education, take years to pay off. Others, like reducing medical costs or building new roads, have an indirect, unnoticed effect on middle-class incomes.” The same can be said of any unrigging of rules such as installing new bank regulations or eliminating corporate tax breaks. Leonhardt’s recommendation for a lightning strike is a middle-class tax cut. The Washington Post’s populist columnist Harold Meyerson proposes it be a payroll tax cut.
A MOTHERFU*KING TAX CUT!!!!!!! That’s the progressive answer to the excuses of why nothing Obama has done works so do what the Republicans suggested back in January 2009 – A MOTHERFU*KING TAX CUT!!!!!
Exit laughing. It’s gonna get funnier folks. In 2015 Obama will boob and boob again. That’s our very safe prediction.