My last . . .

. . . Political statement

At least for this week, because I am just totally pissed off at ignorance and hypocrisy.

Party of NO

I am sick of hearing this tired cliché. Barry O has offered his menu only, then has the gall to whimper about the lack of bipartisanship when the offerings are declined. On Tuesday, he discovered that majority of the people in the country are de facto members of the Party of NO.

We're too stupid, Chapter 2

Barry O said that he hasn't been able to successfully promote his economic-rescue message to anxious Americans. He also said he recognizes now that "leadership is not just legislation." "It's a matter of persuading people, and making an argument that people can understand."

Dude, I told you on Wednesday that calling the folks too stupid to understand your magnificent policies is not a winning strategy. It didn't work in this election, and it won't work in 2012.

Vanity Fair - or not?

The general anti-Obama rage out there is palpable. But it’s no more virulent than the anti-Bush sentiment that has pervaded the country for much of the past decade—although this being America, there’s an attendant hatred for Obama that has more to do with race than anything else. What makes today’s fury more worrying is the fact that angry right-wing extremists tend to carry guns in disproportionate numbers to their liberal counterparts. - Graydon Carter, Vanity Fair, December 2010

Graydon, you twit, Socrates has a message for you: "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." As someone who takes pride in refusing to vote, your rhetoric rings a mite hollow. If you're not willing to help fix it, quit whining about it.

I find it interesting that the preponderance of those crying "racist" are those who are trying to convince themselves that he took a standing eight-count because he is black. I assume that allows them to rationalize that the policies weren't really that bad. Well, believe what you will. On the other hand, the demographics suggest that more people voted for Barry O because of his race than voted against him for the same reason.

The throw-away gun argument is so specious that it hardly deserves comment. However, I submit that the "liberal counterparts" are much more of a risk to the republic with their policies than the "angry, gun-toting right-wing extremists" are with anything tucked away in their locked gun safes. This election was won at the ballot box, not at the O.K. Corral.

Belaboring . . .

. . . the obvious

President Barack Obama furiously worked the phones to urban-format radiostations Tuesday, arguing that his agenda would be "all at risk" if Republicans trampled Democrats.

Uhhhh . . . Dude, isn't that the point?

Windy . . .

. . . innit?

Multi-tasking . . .

. . . or just plain rude?

Do you work for or with someone who keeps working on their computer when you come to ask questions?

Do they talk to you, but continue typing and not look up from the screen?

It has happened to me now and again, and I consider it rude and dismissive.

How about you? Have you ever done that? Do you do it consistently?

Or, do you do the right thing, and either:

a. Say "please give me just a moment so I don't lose my thought," or,

b. Turn and face your visitor and give them your attention?

Be honest now.

Dazed . . .
. . . and confused

The U. S. electorate, that is.

At least that's what Barry O is telling us.

In Boston, Barry said: "People out there are still hurting very badly, and they are still scared, and so part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now, and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time, is because we're hard-wired not to always think clearly when we're scared."

Translation: It's not my policies. You're just too scared to listen, or too stupid to understand.

Here's a news flash, Barry. Jimmy-the-peanut-farmer's "Crisis of Confidence" didn't save him either. Calling the populace too ignorant to see how much you have helped them just may not be a winning strategy.

I think Charles Krauthammer's assessment is right on target. Barry has diagnosed the populace with "Obama Underappreciation Syndrome."

This self-important egomaniac . . .

. . . can go sod himself.

He's nothing more than a cyber-terrorist wolf in the sheep's clothing of a savior of humanity. I would state my reasons, but those who disagree would not accept them, and those who agree don't need them.

Orwell . . .

. . . Returns

To the UK, that is.

From: The Times

Ministers are considering spending up to £12 billion on a database to monitor and store the internet browsing habits, e-mail and telephone records of everyone in Britain.

GCHQ, the government’s eavesdropping centre, has already been given up to £1 billion to finance the first stage of the project.

Hundreds of clandestine probes will be installed to monitor customers live on two of the country’s biggest internet and mobile phone providers - thought to be BT and Vodafone. BT has nearly 5m internet customers.

I don't live in the UK, but this concerns me. Whether it was Wilde or Shaw or Russell or Churchill, we are indeed two countries separated only by a common language.

Although the UK has no constution, per se, and therefore no bill of rights, certain rights of individuals are assumed - whether by statute or convention. Beyond that, peoples in a "free" country have evolved a zone of comfort about that which the government may or may not control.

I am very interested in the outcome of this proposal. Are the citizens of the UK willing to have every communication recorded in order to provide some (perceived) higher level of security?

If that happens, have not "They" won?