Obama Takes a Bow on 9/11

I didn't see this. Every time some program would cut to Obama reading a passage of Scripture, I turned away. This man may be able to read from a teleprompter (unless the word is "corpsman"), but the two instances I cannot bear to hear his whiny drone is when he tries to read Scripture, which he clearly was not taught at the feet of Reverend Wright, because he tells us for twenty years, he did not listen! The other, is reading the citation of brave men picked to receive the Medal of Honor. I've heard people read the phone book with more passion and enthusiasm.

Had Mr. Obama more familiarity with either the Scripture or with warfare, he might have known the passage he was reading referred to a bow, as in "bow and arrow" as opposed to the bow he routinely makes in front of every known head of state.

Next Sunday, if he can be dragged off the golf course, maybe Michelle can elbow him in the ribs whenever he starts to nod off during the sermon?

H/T Gateway Pundit

Dick Cheney and the Bitter, Frustrated Book Reviewer of Doom

I was reading an article by Christopher Hitchens over at Slate. Now, while Hitchens is a liberal, he has demonstrated that uncommon quality among liberals of being sane, so, while I don't always agree with what he says, I respect his honesty.

On the sidebar, there was a link to this Washington Post story:

‘In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir’ by Dick Cheney. Only the link was titled "Dick Cheney's Self Serving Memoir".

Question for all you non-rabid, intellectually honest people out there: Has there ever been a "memoir" that was not in some way shape or form "self serving"? Anything from "this is how I remember or perceived events at the time" to "the publisher gave me a nice fat advance on the book"?

And even though it is in the "Entertainment" and "Books" section of the Post, don't read Robert G. Kaiser's column to find an analysis of the book, as one might expect in a "book review", but rather you can see Kaiser's bitter partisan take on Cheney the man, not the book.

Far be it for an "honest liberal" (stop laughing!) like Kaiser to analyze the book on its merits or lack therof, and allow the reader to draw his or her own conclusions.

If I had to sum up this review in six words, it would be "Move along! Nothing to see here!"

Avarice By Any Other Name...

In beautiful downtown Pasa Robles, on my way to dinner, I got behind a BMW, and though it's nameplate was partially missing, I noticed that the car was an "Avarus". I'd never heard of one before.

And I couldn't help but wonder if it was pronounced the same way as "avarice"?

What? Was "Gluttony" already taken???

You Say "Pop Icon"...

I hear, "Popeye Con"!



I yam what I yam.

Quote du jour

"...have you noticed that you can't spell socialism without cialis?"

-Hal, commenting on Blonde Sagacity

"Leaders", "Political Rhetoric" and USA Today

There was a letter to the editor of USA Today today, that was mildly interesting (not interesting enough for you to go out and actually purchase the paper!), from some guy, whose name I won't mention, since he is obviously quite enough of an embarrassment to his mother, who took exception to a Cal Thomas editorial which apparently, compared violent TV shows to "violent" political rhetoric. I didn't read the editorial in question, but listen to this except from today's letter:

"Violent TV shows are a form of entertainment and don't really have any long-lasting effects on the public at large."

Oh, really? I can remember certain episodes of The Rifleman and Have Gun, Will Travel as if they'd aired yesterday. That's a pretty long time ago, for not having any "long-lasting effects".
And there was a film they showed at a parent/teacher conference when I was about six that scared the beejeebus out of me. Oh, yeah. Violent imagery is nothing like political rhetoric!

Now listen to this next rambling sentence in search of a thought:

"However, political rhetoric comes from our nation's leaders, who have been entrusted with the responsibility to give us facts, not empty language."

"Empty language"? You mean like "Hope and Change"? Note to the Irony Impaired: Have you ever seen any language as empty as that sentence?

This guy thinks that if one of our "leaders" proclaims something, that it somehow takes on more believability or impact than a dramatically created image on TV or in the movies? And whether or not it is their responsibility to give us "facts", look at what they've given us! Barack Obama may have given us more empty promises in his campaign than any previous president. And, as far as being "entrusted", Sarah Palin is currently an Alaskan housewife. Does that mean her rhetoric is not political or that because she is not our "leader" she has no "responsibility" to give us facts? That lets her off the hook for a lot then, doesn't it?

No. In fact, political rhetoric is not the exclusive purview of "leaders", elected or otherwise, but also those that are supposedly being led. It is a dialogue, not a monologue, no matter what Obama's teleprompter might be telling him. And how would a "non-leader" ever become a "leader" without political rhetoric?

Political rhetoric is the cry of the powerless as well as the powerful. And in some Utopian world, our politicians might give us nothing but facts, here on planet Earth, our politicians often lie to us. Other times they may be merely mistaken. But, to say that my statement, if I believe that Senator Foghorn's policies are so bad for the country he "should be horse whipped", has a longer lasting effect on society than say a Quentin Tarantino movie, you'd be quite mistaken.

And would anyone think for a moment that I literally meant for Senator Foghorn to be horse whipped? Hardly.

"Politicians are our leaders and they should be mature enough to have informed honest discussions and debates without the rhetoric."

First of all, stop laughing. And maybe I should have started out with this, I don't know about you, but I don't have any "leader". I am a citizen, not a subject. I think for myself and stay informed, so that I can make good , well informed decisions for myself. As far as the country goes, the guy currently warming the chair in the Oval Office is a community organizer, not a leader. And I, for one, refuse to be "organized". At least, not according to his model.

True leaders have a moral authority that comes from inner character. Honesty is part of that inner character. Something sadly lacking in the present administration. Next is a shared vision. A leader inspires people to follow, he doesn't need to use coercion. Unless, he is a dictator. (See: bad leader)

"Debates without rhetoric" is like asking for speech without words. There is good rhetoric and bad, factual and dishonest, inflammatory and calming. It's the people who wield the rhetoric that need to be held accountable for what they say, more so than how they said it.

But please! A call to repeal legislation that is "killing" jobs is descriptive. If the legislation were merely "mildly annoying" the creation of jobs, then why repeal it? "Target" politicians for defeat at the polls? You betcha! Only a moron or a liberal pundit (but I repeat myself) would confuse this with actual violence.

A culture of death has coarsened the nature of our society. A little hyperbole in political discourse will not bring down the Republic. Pussyfooting around the real issues might.

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

"Our Nation's Greatest 'Drum Major for Justice' - the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr."

In perhaps the most bizarre turn of phrase meant to honor Dr. King since his birth, Attorney General Eric Holder referred to MLK, Jr. as 'our nation's greatest "drum major for justice".'







Drum major for justice? I guess all the good metaphors were taken.

"Cross Hairs" - Tempest in a Tea Party

Tim Pawlenty jabs Sarah Palin over 'cross hairs'

The term "Cross hairs" is a bit of an anachronism, a throwback to the days when actual hairs were used as reticles in optics.

Reticle
   /ˈrɛtɪkəl/[ret-i-kuhl]
–noun Optics .
a network of fine lines, wires, or the like placed in the focus of the eyepiece of an optical instrument.

And, though they are found in rifle and pistol scopes, they are not exclusive to them. If you've ever seen a surveyor's transit, a similar reticle is used to take precise measurements. It is not synonymous in and of itself with assassination or death. And the difference between superimposing a reticle on a map as opposed to a target or a "bullseye" (as Democrats and liberals have done in the not too recent past) is negligible. A tempest in a tea pot. Hypocrisy of the first order.

Why are we not surprised?

Update: It seems that Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos fame, who asked why Palin scrubbed the "surveyor's mark map from her website if she was not ashamed of it, has been scrubbing his own comments. Specifically, one about a t-shirt showing Palin's face in crosshairs that are "not a surveyor's mark".

They should be ashamed of themselves, if only the Left were capable of shame.

Update II: A larger version of this can be seen at Free Republic


H/T Memeorandum\

Cross posted at LCR.

Small Tempest, Attractive Teapot*

Is the term "anchor baby" really offensive? Fox News had a story speaking of Penelope Cruz's desire to have her baby in the US as an "anchor baby".

A Republican Hispanic group, Somos Republicans, objected, saying, in part:

Penelope Cruz is admired world-wide, and comparing her unborn child to an inanimate object is demeaning.

"Comparing her unborn child to an inanimate object"? I think this may be a bit of PC run amok. Does anyone get upset when Walter Cronkite or Dan Rather was referred to as an "Anchorman ? When someone calls Katy Couric a "News Anchor", are they comparing her to an inanimate object, or describing her position in a news organization?

"Anchor baby" describes the role that an infant, born in the US to non US citizens, can play in establishing US residence and citizenship, and the possibility of additional "chain migration" of relatives. Now, those relatives are no more "chains" than the infant is an "anchor" as far as inanimate objects go, but it is descriptive of the relationship.

Now if Somos Republicans want to object to the characterizations of her motives, that's fair game. But to object to the comparison of "her unborn child to an inanimate object" is simply abusing the language.

* FYI, I am not comparing Penelope Cruz to an inanimate object. It's an analogy.

H/T News Real blog

Cross posted at LCR.

Grandma Got Run Over By a Connotation

Ever hear the song, "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer?



To me, the song was funny! I had never met any of my grandparents, at least, not while I was old enough to recognize them, and "Grandma" was pretty much just an intellectual concept, not especially tied to any concrete reality. (Think: the Democratic Party!)

My ex-wife, on the other hand, had lived with grandparents for a while, dearly loved her grandmother and it was in an entirely different connotation that she heard the word "Grandma". For her, the song was not as funny! She had a different perception of the word "Grandma". "Grandma" was a real person.

Which, reminds me of one of my favorite college texts, Sleepy Sam Hayakawa's Language in Thought and Action. The map is not the territory. Language, the map, is not a perfect representation of the territory it describes. It leaves...room for error in communication. Not only about grannies getting "run over".

When you consider that what I say is not exactly what I think I said and what you hear is not exactly what you think you heard, it's a wonder anyone understands anybody at all.

So we rely on secondary clues, on context, on facial expressions, on tone of voice...anything to make it all make sense. Owen Wister's Virginian said, "Smile when you say that", because an insult offered with a smile has an entirely different connotation that one given with a sneer.

The Internet, credited with giving us near instantaneous communication, can be very bad for that very reason. It is stripped of clues and inflections that might otherwise illuminate the meaning of the words. I can think of several examples where I offended someone or someone offended me by something that could be taken more ways than one. Adding a smiley face or a frowny face is a poor substitute for hearing the sound of one's voice. (Was that "sarcasm"? Was he being sarcastic? I couldn't tell!)

So, if you're offended by "grandma getting run over by a reindeer", you're probably looking at "grandma" in the concrete rather than the abstract. And if "Grandma in the concrete" gives you images of cement overshoes, well, then... welcome to my world!

In whichever language you call your own, however you perceive it, may you and yours have a happy, reindeer incident free holiday and a prosperous new year. Merry Christmas!

Quite the Shellacking...

One of the words most commonly used to describe the effect of the midterm elections on Democrats was "shellacking". And, although I knew exactly what was meant by it, I'd never stopped to wonder why shellacking had taken on the meaning of beating soundly and thoroughly.

So, I looked up the etymology of the word and the explanation seems simple enough...it's a pun!

Shellac was used to "finish" wood, pre-polyurethane. So, to be "shellacked" is to be "finished".

I like it!

Bonus Quote du jour

I heard this on the radio yesterday and can't identify the author, but the sentiment stands out:

"Clinton popped us out of Mogadishu like a champagne cork!"

Great Minds Think Alike

From the "Great Minds Think Alike" Department, I was listening to Mark Levin this afternoon, when about halfway through the first hour, he referred to the Obama administration as a "Potemkin Village Presidency".

If you'll check down on the Proof Positive glossary, you'll find:

Potemkin President: Barack Obama, carefully staging events with hermetically sealed, friendly audiences as props.

I'm not saying it influenced him, or that he even reads the blog, but great minds do think alike!

One Nation - One Folk

Left Coast Rebel presented us with a piece on the "progressives" (I like to call them "progressieves", because their ideas won't hold water!) and their attempt to unify themselves after the disastrous (even for them) eighteen months of Barack Hussein Obama.

In an effort to replicate the tea party's success, 170 liberal and civil rights groups are forming a coalition that they hope will match the movement's political energy and influence. They promise to "counter the tea party narrative" and help the progressive movement find its voice again after 18 months of floundering.

The large-scale attempt at liberal unity, dubbed "One Nation," will try to revive themes that energized the progressive grassroots two years ago. In a repurposing of Barack Obama's old campaign slogan, organizers are demanding "all the change" they voted for -- a poke at the White House.

- Washington Post

Considering the Balkanization promoted by various left wing groups, the thought of a perfect and single minded unity must be scaring the socks off some of these folks...if they really believed what they are saying. They don't. It's a marketing ploy. The only "unity" these people believe in is a unity of power, to be doled out among the competing ideologies of their coalition. When they speak of "repurposing Barack Obama's old campaign slogan", their purpose is the acquisition and retention of power, nothing more.

Here's a thought... if it's unity they want, how about we unify our "One Nation" with a common language..English? Let's see how many of the "One Nation" folk would be in favor of making English the official language of the United States?

We could teach English primarily in our schools and offer other languages as electives, not as parallel tracks of learning.

We could print all our election materials in one language only...English. We could pass along the cost savings of translation and printing, either back to the public in the form of lower taxes or use it to fund public works projects, approved by an electorate at least mildly conversant in English.

And while we would not want anyone to abandon their culture and heritage, a proficiency in English would open the doors to the American culture, a fusion of those ideals of those who came before us, flavored with our own.

Yeah. One nation wouldn't be a bad thing. Too bad the progressieves are always fighting against it!

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Headline du jour

"Halter Topped"
-on the defeat of Blanche Lincoln's opponent.

Quote du jour

Like tar balls on a Pensacola beach, doubts about Pres. Obama's leadership are beginning to accumulate even among his most avid supporters...

-Mark Finkelstein

Inert Napolitano

I was scanning quickly across a story about Janet Napolitano, when one of those weird, closure kind of Freudian slips takes place, and I thought I read her name as "Inert Napolitano". How apropos!

in·ert
 
 /ɪnˈɜrt, ɪˈnɜrt/ Show Spelled[in-urt, ih-nurt]
–adjective
1. having no inherent power of action, motion, or resistance (opposed to active): inert matter.
2. Chemistry. having little or no ability to react, as nitrogen that occurs uncombined in the atmosphere.
3. Pharmacology. having no pharmacological action, as the excipient of a pill.
4. inactive or sluggish by habit or nature.

Yeah. That sounds about right!

Cross posted at Say Anything

"Capital Beyond the Control of the Capitol"

Obama can be thought to be less than presidential, or he can open his mouth and remove all doubt!

Then again, in terms of candidates for a perp walk, there were pretty slim pickings: Many of Wall Street’s leading luminaries stayed away, perhaps out of pique at the notion that mere elected officials would have the gall to tell Masters of the Universe how to run their affairs. Unless your business model depends on bilking people, there’s little to fear from these new rules. Yet there is so much fear abroad in the land, or at least up and down Wall Street, that the big financial institutions are shelling out millions to try to torpedo the reforms.

"Perp walk"? "Masters of the Universe"?? "Unless your business model depends on bilking people..."??? Who's writing your material these days, Mr. President? Keith D'Oh-lbermann??? This might make good "boob bait for the bubbas" among your party faithful, but seriously?? Is there no one in your own administration that might be a "candidate for a perp walk"? Does the name TurboTax Timmy Geithner, your current Treasury secretary ring a bell? Did you invite Tom Daschle, who failed to pay more than 100 grand in back taxes to Washington to a "perp walk" or to be part of your administration?

Mr. President, you walk softly and carry a big "shtick"!

Your sneering characterization of bankers as "Masters of the Universe" only seems to bother you to the extent that they are encroaching on your turf! These men are responsible for accruing and managing capital which is beyond the control of the capitol! That is to say, money that can be lent to businesses for expansion and creation of jobs, growth instruments that might provide for someone's secure retirement funds, and money to lend consumers for education, (scratch that! The government already consumed that part of the economy!), for home improvement (without a government contractor providing the services), for a new car, perhaps even one not built by Government Motors?

And did you notice the false dichotomy? Either you are a con man, bilking your customers or you have "nothing to fear" from Obama's new rules. When exactly did you stop beating your wife, Mr. Obama?
Perhaps, the bankers do not wish to "torpedo reform" as much as to torpedo your "reforms"? Maybe the bankers could object, not on the grounds that they currently do or ever had intentions of "bilking people", but on the grounds that these men are professionals who are managing multimillion enterprises, whereas you, Mr. President, have never managed as much as a lemonade stand, and yet you proceed to lecture captains of industry as if you had!

They don't object to your "gall" Mr. President, although you have plenty of that. No, I think they object to your incompetence and your willingness to have the government take over large portions of our economy with the same hope of efficiency and success that we've seen with the Post Office, Medicare, the VA, Social Security and the D.M.V.

I think that Obama's "pique" is directed at any "capital beyond the control of the Capitol". He's not greedy. He just thinks government should have it all!

Cross posted at Say Anything

Headline du jour

Not the actual one as written, but the one that should have been! The WSJ has an article (I won't link to it because it's on their "subscriber only" page) with the stirring headline:

"Man and the Volcano"

I would have titled it:

"The Average Joe Versus the Volcano"!