Po’ Obama

Thank GOD for Kevin Jackson.

I’ve been admirer of his since the first time I saw him appear on The Glenn Beck program on Fox early in Obama’s first term.  He’s a fearless black conservative and he has written a piece (just another in a long line) reflecting that.  I heartily recommend it.  It’s at American Thinker (which I have recommended many times before as mandatory daily reading.)  He tackles what I’ve observed for YEARS about Democrats: they’re all STILL the same bunch of racists they were during slavery!  The “soft bigotry of low expectations” undergirds everything they believe in:  blacks are, according to them, less capable, less able, than others of different pigmentation to get a picture i.d., compete with others of different pigmentation without being spotted points, or, monolithically, it seems, able to assume personal responsibility for a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g.

I have this mad notion that blacks are every bit as capable of thinking, learning, and functioning like everyone else, but that, it seems, make ME the racist.

*sigh*

And makes Kevin Jackson an “Uncle Tom,” a “sellout,” etc… which kinda brings me back to my original point:

Democrats haven’t changed a bit.

::
How the Left Treats Obama Like a Child

By Kevin Jackson
::

“Compared to What?”

Classic Alinksy/Progressive tactics on display from radical anti-capitalist Representative Ellison here. It’s textbook stuff if you’re a student of it (and you’re willing to stomach 6 minutes of it).

Take 63 cents of every dollar you earn? That’s “fair,” he says. Keith is math-challenged, of course. See a previous post of mine on that, but now, witness his skill with:

Isolate. Demonize. Talk over. Marginalize. Straw men. Relativism. “Compared to what?”  

The problem with relativism of course, is that in the this scenario, in particular, you can always point to some human suffering somewhere that somebody else’s money might alleviate. Always.

Funny – They never talk about increasing the tax deduction for giving to local charities so that you can be a good, unselfish, patriotic American that way. It’s always tax & grow government.

A reasonable person might wonder if it’s really not the alleviation of human suffering they’re after… but their own aggrandizement.

Hint:  Charity is not spelled T-A-X.

Sally Kohn: Traffic Court = Supreme Court

The new Soros muffin Fox recently hired as a “balanced” Contributor just made a truly stupid argument – a.k.a. packed full of Proggie dishonesty and vapidity – from the standard Commie a-la-carte menu of straw-men, benevolent despotism, etc. comfort food – in defense of Obama’s ghastly Federal overreach into the Church by saying that (I can’t believe she’s this stupid, or thinks we are. She actually seems like a good scout, though I feel link screaming every time I listen to her shallow reasoning.) “the state compels people to do things all the time, like stopping at stop signs.”

Okay, chickie, but:

1. Not stopping at the stop sign won’t get me or the other guy pregnant.

2. Not stopping at the stop sign will not violate the religious beliefs of any religion I know of.

3. Not stopping at a stop sign is a good way to get killed, so one doesn’t really need the state to tell you to do it except as a method of revenue collection.

4. It’s LOCAL not FEDERAL.

I could go on, but I’ll stop there.

It reminds me of the mandate argument libs used during the health care debate:  “You have to buy insurance for your car!”

Yeah, well, I wasn’t born a BUICK.  Driving is a privilege, not a right.  It is enforced by the STATE, and the insurance is for THE OTHER GUY, not ME IN CASE I hit them – it is RISK based, as it is, by definition “insurance” – not COVERAGE which is what ObamaCare is…

*sigh*

(While typing this, I have the White House Daily Press Briefing on. Carney just said he didn’t want to tell the Senate how to do its business in response to a question about how Harry Reid is leading the Senate… not 3 minutes after he told the Catholic Church how to to its business by forcing them to pay for what is literally murder in their minds – the morning after pill.  Must be nice to be an amazingly elastic liberal.)

A.Colmes Questions How Santorum Grieved Newborn, Says Showed "Lack of Judgement"

UPDATE, Tuesday, January 3, 2011: Evidently, Colmes apologized. I suspect he was pulled aside over at Fox with the phones ringing off the hook and told to do it, or maybe his wife talked some sense into him, but video lives forever, and I’m betting this is a segment he wishes he could have back…

Just before 1pm Eastern today, I turned on Fox.  I caught Rich Lowry (rightly) dressing down Alan Colmes for questioning how Rick Santorum grieved his dead newborn.

Evidently they held him for 2 hours…

Colmes found this to be evidence of a “lack of judgement.”

I find questioning the manner in which any parent grieves the death of a newborn to be an appalling lack of judgement on COLMES’ part and am frankly, shocked…

…Speechless…

MAJOR Consultant Predicts CAIN as NOMINEE

Forgive me for not providing a link to the video clip I am about to describe.  I have other matters that need my attention this morning, but this was important enough for me to throw up a quick post.

Last night I had a rerun of Friday’s FBN’s Freedom Watch on.  The Judge had a major political consultant on.  I wish I could remember his name, but I remember thinking the guy had chops & was sufficiently credentialed to be credible.  In short, he impressed even me, who believes most of these guys are full of sh*t.

He predicted Herman Cain would be the nominee.  He did this based a few smart criteria, but also on what I have been feeling my gut all along, and he cited it.  Remarkably, it’s the very same gut-check criteria I heard an old Marine express to Bill Bennet on his radio show this morning: Herman’s a guy you can follow into battle.

Why?  Because you know he won’t put you in harm’s way unless it’s real, and serious.  This old Marine even mentioned his son, a young Marine, specifically, as an example of the precious cargo he would entrust to a Commander-in-Chief Herman!  Got that? Worthy of the title of Commander-in-Chief. Think about what that means coming from an old Marine and father of a current Marine!

This, unlike the Poseur Commander-in-Chief Bam-Bam, who is bringing the troops home for Christmas as a political choice, not a military choice – because it sounds good, like a Hallmark card – even though the Generals on the ground are screaming that it’s lethal – the middle of the fighting season and with every troop gone, the troops remaining are grievously imperiled“Who are you going to ask to be the last man to leave” to quote the perfumed gigilo the Democrats almost elected in 2004.

Remember the great scene in Jaws, when Quint is describing floating in the Pacific after delivering “the bomb, the Hiroshima bomb”?  He said the scariest part wasn’t the event that threw him in the water, or even the hours he spent treading water watching his buddies get eaten alive by the circling sharks.

No.

He made a point to say that the scariest part was the last few minutes, when the rescue ship was there, waiting for his turn.

That’s what Barack Obama is doing these poor guys in Iraq & Afghanistan by “rescuing” them while the sharks are circling in the middle of the fighting season.

So, while this political consultant’s prediction was made prior to Saturday night’s Commander-in-Chief debate, I doubt there was anything that happened there that would have changed his mind, for a reason I’ve stated before:

There’s nothing Herman lacks as a man of deep, abiding principles, that he can’t learn from a briefing book, versus Obama, for whom there aren’t enough briefing books in the world…