Like Slimey Cockroaches & their crooked President, Liberals Spread Disease

[Warph]

     

What's Behind Hatred of Obama?

By Jonah Goldberg
8/21/2012

What drives Barack Obama's "doubters and haters"?


So asks Obama biographer David Maraniss in a recent op-ed article for the Washington Post. By doubters and haters he means the people who think Obama wasn't born in the U.S., that he's a secret Muslim or that he's a closet socialist.

He has an answer: "Some of it can be attributed to the give-and-take of today's harsh ideological divide. Some of it can be explained by the way misinformation spreads virally to millions of like-minded people, reinforcing preconceptions. And some of it, I believe, arises out of fears of demographic changes in this country, and out of racism."

True enough! Some people are no doubt driven by such motivations and anxieties; "some" is a gloriously accommodating word.

But that hardly settles things. For an essay titled "What Drives the Obama Doubters and Haters," Maraniss offers no explanation until the last paragraph (the quote above). And even then he offers no evidence, just assertions.

I think Maraniss is a great reporter, and I don't believe for a moment he is in on a cover-up of Obama's "real" place of birth or his secret Muslim faith. (Nor do I think either allegation is true.)

As to Obama's closet socialism, I've never found it unreasonable (never mind racist or paranoid) to think Obama's more comfortable with European-style social democracy (aka socialism).

Still, let me add two culprits to Maraniss' list: The first is Barack Obama. The second is the journalistic establishment that worked so hard to get him elected.

As Maraniss demonstrates quite effectively in his book, "Barack Obama: The Story," Obama's identity has long been a cultivated political project. Much of the poetic license -- to use a kind phrase -- Obama deploys to tell his own story is plausible only to those eager to take him at his word.

Maraniss couldn't authenticate Obama's tales of racial hardship as a young man. His grandfather being tortured by the British, the bigotry of his high school basketball coach? Untrue.

Moreover, Obama's explanations about the aspects of his past that have managed to become controversies have always seemed insufficient to people not disposed to root for him. Bill Ayers -- a former domestic terrorist -- was "just a guy living in my neighborhood." Obama's word that he wasn't a member of the radical New Party was enough for the press corps to stop digging for evidence that he was (as reported by my National Review Online colleague Stanley Kurtz). Jeremiah Wright? Only right-wing crazies care about him.

Even Obama's more recent embellishments about, for instance, being outspent and outgunned in his previous political races strike many people as the sorts of fibs that would create journalistic frenzies if uttered by a Republican.

And then there's the huge divergence between the president Obama said he would be and the president he's actually been. In 2008, Obama insisted that he was a unifier, a pragmatist and a non-ideologue. You don't have to be a birther or a secret-Muslim conspiracy theorist to feel like that was all a big con job. That's politics and not deceit (a subtle distinction!), but dismay at how Obama has governed doesn't amount to racial panic either. And blame for the widespread feeling that we were sold a bill of goods by a cheering press does, in fact, belong to the press.

Yes, Obama also signaled to his base that he intended to be a "transformative" president, a progressive Ronald Reagan. But that message was intended only for his base. Whenever conservatives picked up on those notes -- when he said he wanted to "spread the wealth around," etc. -- the immediate response from the Sunday talk show crowd was that conservatives were being paranoid for misreading Obama, the pragmatist.

It's fine to beat up on conspiracy theorists, but journalistic muckety-mucks who are mystified by their ever-shrinking credibility -- and profitability -- might wonder what they've done to fuel a climate of distrust. There's a reason why ABC's Jake Tapper is one of the few nonconservative reporters respected on the right: He's stayed as skeptical of Obama as he was of George W. Bush.

Meanwhile, it's fascinating how much attention the conspiracy theorists get. It's almost as if some journalists want to use them as bogeymen to discredit all criticism of Obama. That's some journalists, not all.

[Warph]

79% of GM's sales for month of June 2012 was government purchased!

http://pushbacknow.net/2012/07/12/79-of-gms-sales-last-month-was-government-purchased/

Excerpt: Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM's sales last month was government purchased.... Americanvision says "That's like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids.  You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers and then buy most of the lemonade yourself."

[Warph]

Romney Ad Calls Obama Liar, Dishonest..obama thinks he can just lie about anything he wants without consequence, but it doesn't work that way in realville...

Just like he did against Hillary Clinton, President Obama now continues to spread dishonest attacks about Mitt Romney to distract from HIS failed record.  Even though fact check after fact check have found his claims to be false, he continues to not tell the truth to the American people.  It is no wonder why our country has lost confidence in his leadership.


 "I'm Mitt Romney and I appove of this message!"....  

   

[Warph]

                   

       The Obuma Bullshit Campaign dismisses Romney
convention speech, says 'there was  no big idea here'

       


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/30/obama-campaign-reacts-to-romney-convention-speech/#ixzz256hb9D9H

[Warph]

What Is A Liberal





Liberals are all about love. They love poor people... as long as they stay poor.

They love choice... as long as it's not in education, energy, healthcare, or commerce.

They love rights... as long as we're not talking about the rights of the unborn. They love black people... as long as they stay on the Democrat plantation.

             

Alfonzo is my new favorite Republican.–Ann Coulter, social/political commentator

Alfonzo represents the rugged individualism this country was founded on. Every time I watch one of his videos I want to stand up and salute. I see in him the same stuff the founding fathers are made of. He's one of the most multi-talented, multifaceted, and one of the bravest bastards I know.–Andrew Breitbart, late political maverick

Zo's distillations are breathtaking and so funny... I was stunned for hours by the most provocative, riveting and cohesive social statements I've read in the last twenty years. Zo touched, in some way... everything... with such focus and force... I laughed so hard on the plane people thought I was crazy!–Dwight Schultz, Actor: A-Team, Star Trek

Zo has powerful things to say, and he says them in such a straightforward, honest, and truthful way that the sound you hear ringing in your ears is simply the ring of truth, clearly and bravely uttered.–Bill Whittle, social/political commentator

Zo's message is always creative, inspirational, informative, and entertaining. Whether he's singing it, preaching it, or just telling it like it is, he's not only "right" but right on time. We're blessed to have him on our side.–Al Sonja Schmidt, former writer for In Living Color

What's always fascinated me about Zo is the fact that he's funny without ever making jokes. Most of the time he's just disassembling the opposition with a sort of good-natured logic. I don't even know why it's amusing, but it is. Maybe because the left's reasoning is so silly that, when Zo exposes it, its natural absurdity comes out. In any case, the guy is just a pleasure to spend time with.–Andrew Klavan, best-selling author[/font][/size]

[Warph]

                       


Liberal Media Brings Out the Hockey Pucks

By Jonah Goldberg
8/31/2012

In 2004, Arnold Schwarzenegger, then a popular figure in the Republican Party, gave an exciting, upbeat and surprisingly funny speech at the GOP convention. He covered a lot of territory: the story of how he came to America, how he became a Republican after listening to Richard Nixon, and other highlights of his life story.

Afterwards, then-CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported that Schwarzenegger "slapped John Kerry around like a hockey puck."

The only problem: Schwarzenegger never mentioned John Kerry, not even once.

I bring it up because it's hardly news that much of the press likes to report the convention as they want it to be rather than as it is.

It's also somewhat less than a thunderclap revelation that the press and the Democratic Party tend to see things the same way. Which is why it's unremarkable that the "fact-checkers" and Democratic Party press-release writers are on the same page.

Hence the relentless coverage of vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan's "lies" during his convention speech. His story about a Janesville, Wis., GM plant, in particular, has stirred up a journalistic fuss:

"A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: 'I believe that if our government is there to support you ... this plant will be here for another hundred years.' That's what he said in 2008. Well, as it turned out, that plant didn't last another year."

The Associated Press fact-checkers were among the most restrained in their "correction."

"The plant halted production in December 2008," the AP explained, "weeks before Obama took office and well before he enacted a more robust auto industry bailout that rescued GM and Chrysler and allowed the majority of their plants -- though not the Janesville facility -- to stay in operation."

The first problem is that Ryan wasn't referencing the bailout at all, but the sorry state of the overall economy and President Obama's record of over-promising and under-delivering.

A bigger problem is that the AP didn't even look up its own reporting about the Janesville plant. "Production at the General Motors plant in Janesville is scheduled to end for good this week," the news services reported on April 19, 2009. "GM spokesman Christopher Lee says operations at the southern Wisconsin plant will cease Thursday."

And there's the small matter that everything about Ryan's statement was true if you go by the plain meaning of the words.

Or consider the media's obsession with the alleged racism of the GOP. The folks at MSNBC are particularly obsessed with the race angle. New York Magazine political reporter John Heilemann and "Hardball" host Chris Matthews concluded the other night that the word "Chicago" is racially loaded code.

"They keep saying 'Chicago,'" Matthews said. "That's another thing that sends that message -- this guy's helping the poor people in the bad neighborhoods, screwing us in the 'burbs."

Heilemann nodded, adding, "There's a lot of black people in Chicago."

One standard cliché is to bemoan the fact that there are so many "white faces" among the delegates. This potted observation is usually brought up in connection with some chin-pulling insight about the GOP's problems reaching out to minorities.

Many an hour can be wasted listening to the gang at MSNBC expressing their deep concerns about this pressing issue and how the GOP must adapt to a more diverse America. Perhaps the GOP would do better if allegedly serious people stopped going on national television and saying that even the use of the word "Chicago" is now racially loaded.

Meanwhile, one thing the GOP could do is put forward some really attractive and compelling minority speakers to deliver its message. Indeed, that's what the GOP did on its first night of the convention -- and the concerned folks at MSNBC opted to stop covering the speeches whenever a minority took the stage.

If the coverage of this convention is an indication of the trajectory the media will follow for the rest of the campaign, you can be sure of three things,: 

.....lies will be defined as facts that are inconvenient to President Obama,

....racists will be understood to be Republicans who are winning an argument,

....and truth will be slapped around like a hockey puck.   

[Warph]

         

5 Reasons "Negro Spotting" At The Republican National Convention Is (Really, Really)Stupid

By John Hawkins
8/31/2012

http://www.rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/5-reasons-negro-spotting-at-the-republican-national-convention-is-stupid/

Have you heard of "Negro Spotting?" It's a liberal game on Twitter.


http://thegrio.com/2012/08/28/negrospotting-an-amusing-trend-emerges-on-twitter-during-rnc/#.UD0zUYXJyw0.twitter

Libs see a black person at the Republican National Convention and they laugh and laugh at the hilarity! Why, there aren't a lot of black people there! That must mean Republicans are racist! Ha, ha, ha! This actually tells you a lot about how liberals think -- or more accurately, don't think.

1) "Negro Spotting" is a sign of how little racism the Left can find: Most liberals believe deep down in their bleeding hearts that conservatives are evil, bigoted racists! Yet, there's no racist rhetoric coming from the stage at the Republican National Convention. Worse yet, from their perspective, is the vast number of minority speakers. Among others, Tim Scott, Mia Love, Lucé Vela Fortuño, Brian Sandoval, Ted Cruz, Nikki Haley, Artur Davis, Francisco Canseco, Ricky Gill, Sher Valenzuela, Luis Fortuño, Susana Martinez, and Marco Rubio were able to speak. Percentage-wise, there may be more minorities speaking at the Republican National Convention than at the Democratic National Convention. Yet, since liberals can't admit the obvious truth, that the Republican Party isn't even remotely racist, they have to invent ever more ludicrous phony examples of "racism" to keep the cognitive dissonance from shaking their puny little minds apart. So, they claim that words like Chicago are racist dog whistles and the fact that there aren't a lot of black Americans attending the RNC, which is hardly a surprise given that 90% of black Americans regularly vote for the Democratic Party, is evidence of racism.

2) How white is the Republican National Convention VS. The Occupy Movement And Netroots Nation? I've been to Netroots Nation, which is the biggest independent liberal conference in America, and guess what? It's pretty white. How white is it? Like a snowstorm in Maine white. Like Grand Ole Opry in Alaska white. Like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man diving into a giant vat of whip cream white. The same could be said for a lot of Occupy rallies. When you consider that 90% of black Americans and roughly 70% of Hispanic Americans vote Democratic, you have to ask why there's no soul searching going on in the Democratic Party. After all, you wouldn't logically expect a lot of black and Hispanic Americans to show up at Tea Party rallies or at the RNC given the racial demographics, but why are the vast numbers of minorities in the Democratic Party shying away from Netroots Nation and the Occupy Movement? Maybe they heard the way that white liberals talk about black conservatives and concluded they wouldn't be welcome there?

3) The fact that libs are reaching this far tells you a lot about Obama's record: If Obama's stimulus had worked and unemployment was 5 1/2 percent, the economy was roaring, Obama had kept his promise to cut deficit spending in half, if he'd secured Medicare instead of taking 718 billion dollars out to fund his unpopular Obamacare plan, if the taxpayers hadn't lost 25 billion dollars on the GM and Chevrolet bailouts, and if Obama had been a successful President instead of a bailout-loving, dictator-bowing, hyper-partisan, far left wing lying machine, we'd never hear the words "Negro Spotting." "Negro Spotting" is what you have to stoop to when you're embarrassed by the terrible performance of your candidate and you want to talk about ANYTHING other than his performance in office. It's like the old saying goes, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullflop."

4) Liberals are myopic when it comes to black Americans: Is it racist to oppose an extension of early voting? Only if you make the racist assumption that black people are too incompetent or irresponsible to make it to the polls in the same period that people from every other race can arrive. Is it racist to ask for voter ID? Only if you make the racist assumption that black Americans are too helpless and dumb to get an ID, just like people from every other race. Also, you'd have to assume that banks, ABC stores, bars, groceries, dance clubs, car rentals, and airports among many other places that require identification are also racist. The same goes for mostly white and black attendance at events. How many white people show up for a Jay Z concert? How many black Americans show up at Comic Con? Does that mean they're racist? Of course, not. Jay Z would love to have 10 times as many white fans showing up because they'd be putting more money in his pocket. Comic Con would undoubtedly feel the same about black Americans. The Republican Party would LOVE to have more black people going to Tea Parties, getting involved in local Republican politics, and showing up at the RNC because it would mean more black Americans would be voting for the GOP. But contrary to what Joe Biden says, Republicans don't want to put anybody in chains; so although black Americans are always welcome at Republican events, we can't force them to attend.

5) Liberals say "Where are the minorities?" https://twitter.com/johnhawkinsrwn/status/240832959404466176

....at the RNC & then smear, racially demean, & attack every minority who does speak: If you're not a straight, white male, liberals think they own you. So, the moment that conservatives who are black, Hispanic, female, or gay get any sort of attention, liberals try to destroy them to keep them from inspiring others with their example. It's no different with the way the Left reacts to the GOP convention. Liberals yuk it up because they don't see a lot of black Americans in the crowd; then they hurl disgusting abuse at every minority conservative who gets on the stage. Just to name one of many all too typical examples, after Mia Love's speech,
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/29/mia-love-wikipedia-page-vandalized-with-slurs/#ixzz253Y7623V

her Wikipedia page was edited to say that the deeply religious, married mother of three children is a "'dirty, worthless whore' who sold out to big business,' Fox News observed. '
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/29/mia-love-wikipedia-page-vandalized-with-slurs/#ixzz253Y7623V

Another section again called her a 'sell-out' to the 'right wing hate machine,' before accusing her of being exploited 'like the House N—– she truly is.'" Maybe there aren't a lot of black Republicans at the RNC because they're afraid liberals will call them "dirty, worthless whores" or "House N—–" and they're trying to save themselves the abuse.


****************************************************************************************

2012 DemocraticCharlotte, NC - National Convention - September 4th - 6th

                                 

http://www.demconvention.com/speakers/

[Warph]

                     

              How Obama Succeeds By Failing

By Jeffrey Lord on 8.30.12 @ 6:08AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/30/how-obama-succeeds-by-failing

Ryan on the American Tipping Point: "It's the socialism, stupid."

"Perhaps you and I have lived with this miracle too long to be properly appreciative. Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again." -- Ronald Reagan, January 1967


Why did Obama fail?

Or has Obama actually succeeded?

The debt soars to $16 trillion. Millions are out of work to the tune of an 8.3% unemployment rate, with the CBO predicting it will keep on climbing to 9% by 2013 -- now only five short months away. One could go on, yipping and yapping about everything from the price of a gallon of gas (already headed north to four bucks a gallon, it spiked again Wednesday from a nickel to as much as 14 cents in the wake of Hurricane Isaac) to the crony capitalism of Solyndra.

So the question isn't "has Obama failed"? No, the real question is:

Why did Obama fail? And in the world of socialists and progressives, isn't this failure a success?

And the second question? When will the GOP begin linking Obama's results to Obama's beliefs?

Let's return to the 2008 Democratic primary debates when then-Senator Obama was asked about raising taxes on capital gains. ABC's Charlie Gibson asked Obama:

Gibson: And in each instance, when the [capital gains tax] rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

Obama: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

In spite of the fact -- say again the hard fact -- that lowering capital gains taxes brought in more revenue, what was driving Obama was "fairness."

Let's turn to one of GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan's favorite economists -- the Austrian Ludwig von Mises:

Any advocate of socialistic measures is looked upon as the friend of the Good, the Noble, and the Moral, as a disinterested pioneer of necessary reforms, in short, as a man who unselfishly serves his own people and all humanity, and above all as a zealous and courageous seeker after truth. But let anyone measure Socialism by the standards of scientific reasoning, and he at once becomes a champion of the evil principle, a mercenary serving the egotistical interests of a class, a menace to the welfare of the community, an ignoramus outside the pale. For the most curious thing about this way of thinking is that it regards the question of whether Socialism or Capitalism will better serve the public welfare, as settled in advance -- to the effect, naturally, that Socialism is considered good and Capitalism as evil -- whereas in fact of course only by a scientific inquiry could the matter be decided. The results of economic investigations are met, not with arguments, but with ..."moral pathos" ...and on which Socialists and (Statists) always fall back, because they find no answer to the criticism to which science subjects their doctrines.

In other words, a rigorous scientific examination of socialism repeatedly shows it to be a failure.

A disastrous failure.

Which is what explains the debt, the high unemployment, the high gas prices, Solyndra, the halting of production on the Chevy Volt and all the rest of the last four years of disaster.

Here's Larry Kudlow of CNBC, a former Reagan colleague, explaining the basics of this latest try of socialist economics, this time as tried by Mr. Obama.. "If it was going to work," says economist Kudlow of Obamanomics, "it would have worked."

Clearly, it didn't. Or did it?

Kudlow made his remarks at former Speaker Newt Gingrich's "Newt University" -- a convention-long rolling seminar on the challenges facing the country in the 2012 election.

Most impressively at Newt U., here is small businessman David Park, a Korean-American, discussing his hard won American success as a capitalist. At one point he notes the famous photograph of the Korean peninsula at night taken by a NASA satellite. South Korea -- the capitalist half of Korea, is ablaze in light. North Korea, the socialist half, is completely black other than a dot of light that marks the capital of Pyongyang. Assessing Obamanomics, Park says the obvious: America is being led away from the light of capitalism towards the dark side that is socialism, with all the dire and quite predictable results socialism delivers.


[/font][/size]
Yet people fall for socialist economics over and over again through the decades because it is always presented by its advocates as a matter of "fairness." Any question of whether it works in practice are waved aside with questions of morality. Either that or the outright fabrication that amidst all the obvious resulting disaster -- why yes, it really is working!!!!! As a matter of fact, here is President Obama insisting just that. "We tried our plan and it worked," he says, illustrating vividly in real time today precisely the socialist denial Mises was talking about over 80 years go!

     

But is Obama really in denial? Or, from the stand point of a leftist in bringing the American Experiment to ground, isn't he succeeding?

What Mr. Obama is doing right now -- he has in fact spent his entire career doing. Where are all those glowing media stories about how much better off the South Side of Chicago was after the famous community organizer departed? There are none, of course. Because it simply didn't happen.

Or did it? Isn't creating a community of perpetual economic misery throbbing with racism and thuggish union leaders part of the eternal leftist plan?

In fact, now that we're down to an Obama-Romney race it's not only accurate to say but embarrassingly accurate to note that Mitt Romney has created more jobs with the creation of Staples -- just one Bain Capital project! -- than Obama did with all of his community activism.

Yet this game of socialist fairness and morality versus the greedy, evil capitalists is played repeatedly. Leftist economics is all about fairness -- and the facts of the resulting disaster are simply ignored. Or trumpeted as a triumph.

Why is this important now?

Because this election cannot be allowed to generate into a personality contest between two men.

It is not enough to defeat Barack Obama with Mitt Romney.

Are there people out there who are angry with Obama? I'll say. Are all these GOP Establishment types right that there are independent voters out there who are simply disappointed with Mr. Obama? That they like him, but they are disappointed at his results? Doubtless.

This Americans for Prosperity commercial for Romney tries to capitalize on that feeling of disappointment. Listen carefully here. These people are saying things like:

They voted for Obama the first time with "no reluctance." Obama had presented himself as "something different." A woman says she hoped Obama would bring "new jobs." They had bought into the "hope and change" mantra.

OK. Fine and dandy.

But none of this says to the watching television audience why all these views of today's voters were inevitable. They were inevitable because based on Obama's belief system the results could not possibly be otherwise.

There is no connecting the dots between Obama's fundamental beliefs and the results Americans are now witnessing. Make that suffering.

Fundamental beliefs now more than obvious as expressed in Obama's book Dreams from My Father. Beliefs seen as repeatedly nurtured in his associations with the socialist Weatherman radical and bomber Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, the black liberation theologian and longtime Obama pastor the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his youthful mentor the Communist Frank Marshall Davis.

If in fact running through the long litany of Obama's associations with far-leftist extremists makes GOP consultants wince, at a minimum there needs to be a direct connection made between Obama's belief system and the results of his presidency.

It is simply not enough to say, as Governor Christie did in his keynote speech, that:

"It doesn't matter how we got here."

I confess to hear this from Governor Christie of all people was nothing short of astonishing.

It most certainly does matter how we got here.

We got here because left-leaning housing policies on everything from Fannie Mae to Freddie Mac to the Community Reinvestment Act caused "the mess" that Mr. Obama inherited. Elected amid the resulting disaster, the new president was instantly true to his own leftist radical roots.

Everything that has poured forth from the Obama Administration since Day One in terms of both policy and personnel-- the stimulus, Obamacare, the high unemployment rates, the cost of gas, the Van Jones kerfuffle, the $16 trillion debt, the conduct of the Holder Justice Department on illegal immigration and the refusal to prosecute the New Black Panthers -- every last bit of this and more can be sourced directly to the core beliefs of socialism and radical leftism.

Let's let the GOP's new vice presidential nominee, Congressman Paul Ryan, explain why this matters. In his book Young Guns: A New Generation of Conservative Leaders (co-written with Congressmen Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy) Ryan recognizes the need to connect the dots between Obama's beliefs and Obama's results when he says this (bold emphasis Ryan's) of what he calls "The Tipping Point":

In fact, Washington's self-proclaimed Progressives see the crisis in spending and debt coming just as clearly as we do. The difference is, they're not interested in applying the brakes. They want to see America hurtle past the point of no return. They welcome the level of government spending and the level of government control in our lives that's necessary for a European-style welfare state. Their paternalistic philosophy calls for a self-reinforcing expansion of government. This isn't just a narrow political ploy on their part, although an ever-growing population dependent on government is good for the party of government. In advocating government-controlled health care and a national energy tax, Progressives are showing the zeal of their ideological convictions. They truly believe the best course for America is to abandon the idea for a model much like the European Union.

Ryan has it exactly right.

And his presence on the Romney ticket is a hopeful sign that this campaign has now been permanently lifted out of the shallow waters of personality and professional background -- and connected permanently to a theme of core beliefs and results.

The Obama presidency is not a failure because Barack Obama is an incompetent man. He is far from that.

The Obama presidency is a failure because his belief system necessarily results in failure. A failure in creating jobs, lowering unemployment, and keeping gas prices down, to name but three.

But in the world view of the Left, just as Congressman Ryan has said, Obama's failure isn't failure at all.

It's success.

So it is now up to the Romney-Ryan ticket -- and the GOP campaign apparatus -- to educate Americans on the game Obama and company are playing.

While finally shattering -- at least for a generation -- the political viability of the Leftist belief system that undergirds it.[/font][/size]

As that sign read on Ronald Reagan's Oval Office desk:

"It CAN be done."

And for America's sake -- it must be done.

[Warph]

           

The Condensed Liberal Handbook
of Racial Code Words

By Michelle Malkin
8/31/2012

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/08/31/the-condensed-liberal-handbook-of-racial-code-words/

Thumper the Rabbit's parents always taught him, "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all." If the left's self-appointed Omniscient Diviners of True Meaning have their way, conservatives in the public square won't be left with anything at all to say. Ever.

It's a treacherous business exercising your freedom of speech in the age of Obama. As a public service, I present to you: "The 2012 Condensed Liberal Handbook of Racial Code Words." Decoder rings, activate!

--Angry. On the campaign trail this summer, President Obama has become -- in the words of the mainstream Associated Press -- more "aggressive." But don't you dare call him "angry." According to MSNBC host Toure, that's racist!

"You notice he said 'anger' twice," Toure fumed in response to a speech last week by GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. "He's really trying to use racial coding and access some really deep stereotypes about the angry black man." Or maybe Romney is just accurately describing the singular temperament of the growling, finger-jabbing, failure-plagued demagogue-in-chief. It's about the past four years, not 400 years. Sheesh.

--Chicago. The Obamas and their core team of astroturfers, pay-for-play schemers and powerbrokers hail from the Windy City. This is a simple geographic fact. But in progressive of pallor Chris Matthews' world, it's an insidious dog whistle. The frothing cable TV host attacked Republicans this week who have the gall to remind voters of the ruthless Chicago way.

"They keep saying Chicago, by the way. Have you noticed?" Matthews sputtered. "That sends that message: This guy's helping the poor people in the bad neighborhoods and screwing us in the 'burbs."

Actually, it's a pointed reminder that the radical redistribution politics of Chicago-on-the-Potomac have done little to alleviate the suffering of impoverished Americans in violence-plagued, job-hungry inner cities everywhere. Racist!

--Constitution. Fox News contributor Juan Williams, who proudly calls himself a "real reporter," has apparently added real telepathist to his curriculum vitae. Earlier this year, he read the minds of Republicans and conservatives whom he accuses of deep-seated bigotry when they show any public reverence for our founding principles, documents and leaders.

"The language of GOP racial politics is heavy on euphemisms that allow the speaker to deny any responsibility for the racial content of his message," Williams wrote. "References to a lack of respect for the 'Founding Fathers' and the 'Constitution' also make certain ears perk up by demonizing anyone supposedly threatening core 'old-fashioned American values.'"

So, if you ever find yourself wanting to hum the "Schoolhouse Rock" version of the Preamble, heed these three words: Stop the hate!

--Experienced. A significant population of American voters believes that qualifications actually matter when running for the highest office in the land. Chilling, isn't it? They might as well sport KKK hoods. In the judgment of one Basil Smikle of The Century Foundation, "experienced" is a dreaded "racial code word."

--Intoned Smikle: "Experienced? Does it really mean the time that he spent in the Senate, or does it mean, 'Well, does that guy have the same kind of experience in life that I have?' ... What does inexperience really mean?"

Maybe it just means what critics meant it to mean: "Does this guy have experience beyond the measly 304 days he served when the U.S. Senate was in session before he announced his first presidential bid?" I know: Racist!

--Food Stamp President. At the dawn of the modern federal food stamp program, one in 50 Americans was enrolled. This year, one in seven Americans is on the food stamp rolls. The majority of them are white. Obama's loosening of eligibility requirements combined with the stagnant economy fueled the rise in dependency. "Food stamp president" is pithy shorthand for the very real entitlement explosion.

Democrats fumed when former GOP candidate Newt Gingrich bestowed the title on Obama and decried its purportedly racist implications. But who are the racists? As Gingrich scolded the aforementioned race troll Chris Matthews last week: "Why do you assume food stamp refers to blacks? What kind of racist thinking do you have? You're being a racist because you assume they're black!" Time to find a new code word.

--Golf. This one's a gobsmacker. Beltway barnacle Lawrence O'Donnell appeared on cable TV to decry Republicans who mention Obama's frequent golf outings. He singled out Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's convention speech Wednesday night, which joked that Obama "was working to earn a spot on the PGA tour." The warped racial radar of pasty Lawrence O interpreted this golf joke as "Obama equals Tiger Woods equals RACISM."

Huh? "These people reach for every single possible racial double entendre they can find in every one of these speeches." O'Donnell expertly explained. "Things are getting lower and lower by the day," host Martin Bashir agreed.

I'd say this is all Greek to me. But that's probably racist, too.

--Holding down the fort. Obama's State Department diversity officer now advises us, based on admittedly dubious history, that "holding down the fort" is an anti-Native American idiom that has no place in U.S. discourse. Example: "I know you guys have been holding down the fort." Oops, that was Obama at a Tampa rally in 2008. Next...

--Kitchen cabinet. Radio talk-show host Mark Thompson jumped on Romney for using this phrase -- coined to describe Andrew Jackson's administration in the 1800s -- at the NAACP convention in July. Romney was referring to a close member of his staff during his tenure as Massachusetts governor.

"To talk about being in the kitchen and not talk about an African-American actually being in your cabinet is really not a good metaphor to use with African-Americans," Thompson blasted. Is it racist to ask: Huh?

--Obamacare. Left-wing Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky accused Romney of "race-baiting" by wielding the term "Obamacare." The Beltway shorthand for this behemoth federal spending program exposes Romney as a "spineless, disingenuous, supercilious, race-mongering pyromaniac" because it is a "heavily loaded word," Tomasky railed.

How then to explain the use of the Bull Connor-channeling epithet by none other than the Obama campaign, which peddles "I like Obamacare" T-shirts on its website? Logic is racist.

--Privileged. Stay with me here. Washington Post writer Jonathan Capehart has a problem with Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry calling Obama "privileged." Spotlighting his elite education is tantamount to racial bigotry because it insinuates that "he took the place of someone else through affirmative action, that someone else being someone white."

And here I thought it was a simple description of an out-of-touch academic whose crony Chicago ties of all colors gifted him with access, money and power that the vast majority of Americans don't have.

--Professor. Several progressive black intellectuals excoriated 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin for this statement: "They know we're at war, and to win that war we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern."

"Professor," professor Charles Ogletree said, was code for "uppity." This translation service is available only to credentialed Ivy League eggheads. A saner criticism would be that Obama was never a professor of law, but an untenured lecturer. Racist? Tell that to Hillary Clinton, whose 2008 campaign made that very point.

--You people. Asked last month whether her husband would release more tax returns, Ann Romney told a pack of reporters: "We've given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how, you know, how we live our life."

A chorus of faux-ragers from the Huffington Post to NBC's Andrea Mitchell hammered Mrs. Romney for her double-whammy sandwich of elitism and racism. Apparently, "you people" is the verbal equivalent of putting black people back in chains. One little, teeny-tiny problem: ABC News admitted: "Our ruling after reviewing the original audio is that she did not include the 'you.'"

In other words, it was manufactured out of whole cloth. Give the dog-trombone media another black mark for ridiculous bias denial. "Black mark"? I know: Raaaaaaaaaaacist! 

[Warph]

Hey, Obuma.....

"I'm your Huckleberry"