Daily Archives: May 21, 2012

So much for dissenting voices

The Mayor of Newark, Cory Booker, dogs his fellow Democrats and Obamunists for their senseless and ineffective attacks on Mitt Romney.

The result?

Cory, bus; bus, Cory.

And for you others, the beatings will continue until morale improves. The most serious crime against the glorious revolution is counter-revolution; the second most serious crime is dissention.

As for the criticism that the Team Obama’s Bain attack is part of “nauseating” political discourse with which Booker has become “very uncomfortable,” Axelrod said, “on this particular instance he was just wrong.”

Booker is not the only Democrat to question the aggressive, negative portrayal of Romney’s work in private equity.  Former Tennessee Rep. Harold Ford Jr. said today he agreed with “the substance” of Booker’s comments and “would not have backed out.”

“I agree with him, private equity is not a bad thing. Matter of fact, private equity is a good thing in many, many instances,” the Democrat said in a separate appearance on MSNBC earlier in the day.

Former Obama administration economic adviser Steven Rattner made similar comments last week, calling a new Obama campaign TV ad attacking Romney’s role in the bankruptcy of a Bain-owned steel company “unfair.”

“Bain Capital’s responsibility was not to create 100,000 jobs or some other number. It was to create profits for its investors,” Rattner said.  ”‘It did it superbly well, acting within the rules, acting very responsibly. … This is part of capitalism, this is part of life. I don’t think there’s anything Bain Capital did that they need to be embarrassed about.”

The good news for the Obama campaign is this kerfuffle keeps the nation from focusing on the unemployment rate, the national debt, Taxmageddon, and a nuclear Iran (among other things).


Why are so many of Obama’s records sealed?

Why are so many of Obama’s records sealed?

Simple: if they were unsealed they would (or could, if properly investigated) reflect poorly on him.

For example:

  • As a student the following concerns might be in play: Obama’s college admission was a result of affirmative action and was not based on merit; he could have claimed to be a foreigner in order to receive additional diversity bonus points (as if Elizabeth Warren had claimed to be from India as well as claiming to be an Indian) or to benefit from receiving financial aid set asides for foreigners; poor ACT/SAT scores; poor GPA; non-rigorous course of study; sophomoric papers; student discipline may have been imposed for misbehavior or academic ineptness. Of course, all these could be embarrassing to both Obama and to the schools he attended.
  • Selective service registration: perhaps Obama didn’t register per Selective Service deadlines? Or there was somehow a “problem” with his Social Security number? He was living outside the United States when he registered? It’s difficult to speculate on this one because the form itself is quite benign.
  • Medical records: his records might reveal signs of far more serious drug use than he’s admitted to; Obama might have had embarrassing treatment for one or more sexually transmitted disease; might have a serious medical concern which could affect his ability to perform presidential duties, for example, brain-damage.
  • Illinois State Senate records: never did anything useful; was frequently absent and took his duties lightly, etc.
  • Law client list: Obama may have done work, to include pro bono work, for embarrassing clients like William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, the ACLU, the New Black Panther Party, Communist Party USA, unions of all sorts, etc. The work itself could also be embarrassing: late-term abortion “rights,” purging Christianity from the public sphere, pro-homosexual marriage work, “harassment” lawsuits against broadly accepted and appreciated institutions (taxpayers, churches, the NRA, Wal-Mart, businesses of all sorts, Salvation Army, etc.).
  • Baptism record: didn’t use the name he now goes by, adding to voter confusion as to just who this person really is.
  • Birth certificate: might reveal Obama was stillborn, born brain-dead, or that despite protestations to the contrary, that his birth was not the result of immaculate conception.

The above speculation is representative, but cannot be considered all-inclusive.

Bill Maher

Administration-approved misogynist Bill Maher (who along with Joe Biden, serves as one of the left’s thought leaders) says Liberty University is not a real school.

Q: How do you know you’re getting to the left?

A: When they give up trying to defend their positions and instead pursue ad hominems.

As for me, I instead prefer to bring attention to Maher’s nose: after all, it’s the best thing about him.

(Awesome image via The Looking Spoon.)

Why No Chinese Version of “Red Dawn”?

red dawnHollywood has largely run out of ideas, airspeed, and altitude.

That’s why recycled pap, sequels, and prequels often rule the day.

But there hasn’t been a re-make of Red Dawn with China cast as 1984’s USSR.

Well, there has. It’s been made and was ready for a 2010 release (with China as the antagonist), but the movie needed to go in for some post production changes. What sort of changes?  A massive storyline alteration needed to make the North Korean the bad guys instead of the Chinese.


Money. Chinese money. Consider Chinese ticket buyers and also Chinese distribution fees.

Prediction: with Chinese control of AMC, copyright and intellectual property enforcement becomes more important issues to the Chinese government. Expect to see the issue on the UN’s radar before too long.

The Washington Post On Obama’s Lobbyist Lies

From the Washington Post:

The [White House] visitor logs for Jan. 17 — one of the most recent days available — show that the lobbying industry Obama has vowed to constrain is a regular presence at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. The records also suggest that lobbyists with personal connections to the White House enjoy the easiest access.

A regular presence, eh? Snip.

The White House visitor records make it clear that Obama’s senior officials are granting that access to some of K Street’s most influential representatives. In many cases, those lobbyists have long-standing connections to the president or his aides. Republican lobbyists coming to visit are rare, while Democratic lobbyists are common, whether they are representing corporate clients or liberal causes.

The President’s promise to ‘change the culture of Washington’ is a joke. Actually, maybe he has changed it: he’s made it worse. That’s what happens when we have to suffer under the most inexperienced, inept, unexplainable, partisan grifter to sit in the Executive Office.

Are we shocked to discover this self-evident truth? No.

Are we shocked to see it in the Washington Post? Yes.

November 2008: America fooled once, shame on Obama. November 2012: if America is fooled a second time, shame on us.

Uncle Walter, Fraud

A book review by Howard Kurtz of much-revered newsman Walter Cronkite is available at the Daily Beast. The book was written by Douglas Brinkley and carries the title Cronkite.

The review is revealing—Cronkite was not all that; far from it—and brings up the question of confirmation bias, that is, why is it our minds are disinclined to discarding facts that conflict with our perceived reality? In this case, the perceived reality is that Cronkite was a man of unshakable ethics and was politically neutral. The facts show he wasn’t.

But first, how do icons like Walter Cronkite even come to be?

This question is unexplainable except through speculation about random success and marketing. I mean while Cronkite had a particular way of presenting himself that was well received and the competition to read the news was very limited, those don’t explain Cronkite’s development into an icon. Big events like the Kennedy assassination and the space program are part of the myth as well, so maybe it’s a cumulative effect. Or maybe if you hear “America’s Most Trusted Newsman” or something like it often enough you’ll believe it.

Next, how do guys like Uncle Walter get a pass for their myriad indiscretions, bias, and unethical behavior?

This is easier to answer. Over time, Cronkite had accumulated huge amounts of personal power and influence. This was enough to cause others to look away his indiscretions; ignore or explain away his bias; and finally, CBS needed to protect a revenue stream/well-branded product (that is, he brought in money and/or some sort of network-level prestige).

It would have been useful if these revelations—that is, that Walter Cronkite was a biased and flawed human (as we all are) who somehow ended up in a position of significant authority and influence—had been useful to have been exposed back in the day.

Like another Walter, NYT Pulitzer Prize winner Walter Duranty.