Truth in Advertising
Everyone's favorite RINO (isn't he term limited yet?) gave, in the midst of an ostensibly favorable analysis of POTUS, a fairly insightful analysis of both the President and the problems our economy faces now. It's not exactly the definition of perspicacity; that would require acknowledging that since government's the problem perhaps the solution lies with less government. But it is, at least, a bit of truth in advertising as well as an idictment of those who are surprised by the direction he has pulled the country.
Exit Quote:
Obama never said he would be anything other than what he is now.
Just who is really teabagging?
John Simpson at "Big Hollywood" explores this question:
So Lefties revel in their psychoses. What else is new? Yet I seriously doubt teabagger is an epithet conservative Republicans will embrace. Who would? But then it occurred to me. Who’s doing the real oral servicing here? We Tea Partiers, who object tooth and nail to every major scam and power grab liberal Democrats and the President are trying to shove down our throats? Or liberal left-wing mouthpieces who can’t open wide and fast enough for Obama’s Chocolate Munchkin Donut Drop?
Let’s face it. When the White House emails you on the air to correct you, there’s some serious dunking going on there. Funny. Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann, who foisted that term in full measure on the public consciousness in mid-April, spent two and a half hours in secret with the President and some other major Obama microphones a few days ago. From what little we hear, the President spent some time railing against FOX News and Glenn Beck, but lips have been sealed very tight around the rest of what went on there. Could it be it was “time to take the dough nuts�
Take a moment and read the whole thing. It'll give you something to smile about next time you hear anyone glibly accusing you, or another, of being a "teabagger".
The “intellectual incuriousity” of the MSM
Most of us in the blogosphere are aware of the growing clamor this past week over the controversial views, memberships, and statements, both in the past and more recent, of Obama’s “green Czar†Van Jones. So why then do all of the largest MSM organizations seem to know nothing at all about it? Nor it seems do they want to!
Of course, one can’t be certain, but my conjecture is with the polls looking the way they do, they’re more interested in throwing Obama a life preserver than another anchor!
But, 2 things are certain. 1) There’s noooooo bias in the MSM… 2) I’m clearly a racist for criticizing Jones or Obama; or for even bringing this matter up…
What a difference a (D) makes!
If you have a moment, take a look at this video. It presents, in some galling detail, the difference with which the MSM treats economic metrics, depending on whether their preferred, correct,  occupant is currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue...
I know it's nothing we didn't know already, but, sometimes affirmation can be gratifying!






