Wishful Thinking

(I swiped this from Campaign Spot because it’s a slow news day, and I’m lazy, and there’s nothing easier than posting silly pictures).

A quick thinking NRO reader took a picture from his local news broadcast and sent it to Jim Geraghty who has a good snark about it, which I almost swiped, too.

Linked by iOWNTHEWORLD, and Weasel Zippers, and Ruby Slippers, thanks!

Share

Advertisements

Iraq Vs TARP: Which One Was More Worth Spending Billions On?

According to our President, one was necessary, one was “dumb”:

“…when I ran for president, I promised I wouldn’t just do what was popular – I would do what was necessary..”:

“If there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans — and everybody in between — it’s that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. You hated it.” — President Barack Obama, Jan. 27, 2010

***

“I don’t oppose all wars. … What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.” — Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama, Oct. 2, 2002

So is the President right?  Was TARP a success, and the Iraq War a failure?

Read on.

Share

Democrats vs The Revolting, Bitter Clingers

Charles Krauthammer perfectly encapsulates the Dems’ condescending attitude towards voters in his oped, this morning:

…after stunning Democratic setbacks in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, Obama gave a stay-the-course State of the Union address (a) pledging not to walk away from health-care reform, (b) seeking to turn college education increasingly into a federal entitlement, and (c) asking again for cap-and-trade energy legislation. Plus, of course, another stimulus package, this time renamed a “jobs bill.”

This being a democracy, don’t the Democrats see that clinging to this agenda will march them over a cliff? Don’t they understand Massachusetts?

Well, they understand it through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.

Liberal expressions of disdain for the intelligence and emotional maturity of the electorate have been, post-Massachusetts, remarkably unguarded. New York Times columnist Charles Blow chided Obama for not understanding the necessity of speaking “in the plain words of plain folks,” because the people are “suspicious of complexity.” Counseled Blow: “The next time he gives a speech, someone should tap him on the ankle and say, ‘Mr. President, we’re down here.’ ”

A Time magazine blogger was even more blunt about the ankle-dwelling mob, explaining that we are “a nation of dodos” that is “too dumb to thrive.”

Obama joined the parade in the State of the Union address when, with supercilious modesty, he chided himself “for not explaining it [health care] more clearly to the American people.” The subject, he noted, was “complex.” The subject, it might also be noted, was one to which the master of complexity had devoted 29 speeches. Perhaps he did not speak slowly enough.

Then there are the emotional deficiencies of the masses. Nearly every Democratic apologist lamented the people’s anger and anxiety, a free-floating agitation that prevented them from appreciating the beneficence of the social agenda the Democrats are so determined to foist upon them.

Really, you’ll want to read the whole piece, from beginning to end. Especially, Krauthammer’s dry observation that to Democrats, the expression, “the peasants are revolting” is a pun. That would be you and me, the PUMAs, the independents, the “bitter clingers of guns and religion”, the “effing retards”, (wait, no…those would be liberals, according to Emanuel).

How many Americans really have anything to gain from this grotesque expansion of government that is happening before our eyes? Perhaps a few of the neediest among us?… while everyone else is brought down. Is it revolting of us to suggest that the government can not create prosperity? Are we being stupid and bitter when we suggest there’s a better way?

Hat tip: Pundette

Share