Wednesday, September 25, 2013

I Can't Speak For My Peers But......

Yesterday in town, when talking to a number of my peers about our current political landscape, it became obvious to me the majority of them are apparently obtaining their information from a common source, in as much as the tenor, emphasis, phrasing and overall rhetoric of their positions, for the most part, were near synonymous-, liberal and conservative alike! Upon enquiry that source was divulged to be TV's "talking heads", transmitted from the major networks: CBS, NBC, FOX, their associates and/or derivatives! It was the exception when someone referenced an unbiased source or a less biased source, engaged in factual debate, cited a relevant supporting statistic, a confirming historical precedence, drew a cogent comparison, attempted to see and evaluate the ramifications of actions or inactions in counter arguments. It appeared in short, they were closed minded and have no intention of changing their political stripes, but merely seeking reinforcement of their preferences, prejudices and biases. As a young man the New York Times, Walter Cronkite, Edward R Merrill were thought, at least by me at the time, to be the bastions of journalistic integrity, if they wrote it or said it.., it was gospel. Sure, as I grew older I came to realize there was some subtle spin in their advisories, sometimes more spin than fact, but by an' large they, in most instances brought out all the salient points of an issue allowing the listener, the reader, the prerogative if you will, to formulate an opinion of their own. Not so today,The Times along with the main stream media: print, radio, TV, the now cyberspace media as well all have a committed socioeconomic as well as a strong political component agenda. Journalism in the sense of attempting to report the truth, all of the truth...,nothing but the verifiable truth has given way to editorial spin in all of its reporting. The listener, the reader is left to discriminately or indiscriminately pick and choose his or her information platform accordingly..., there in lies the rube! Is the reader or listener interested in ferreting out the truth to formulate his or her opinion, or to reinforce his or her political preferences through selective hearing and reading? Ergo, are we truly mulling over the issues of dealing with our budget deficit, affordable healthcare, immigration, Benghazi, Syria, Iran, Russia, NSA, IRS et al in our machinations to discern the best course of action for our country and it's citizens, or is our primary motivation to serve our political dogma whatever, no matter? When listening to President Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, what do you think their motivation is? Can you get past their politics, our politics, and make an informed decision as what we think is best for our country, our citizens? I'd like too think I at least try.    

Thursday, September 19, 2013


 It is perplexing how the liberals can continue to support a President who is making an  international  spectacle of himself as we speak. It is amazing to me that Bush and Romney were accused of "flip-flopping" on the issues a short time ago only to have the same media continue to give this President of ours a pass on his embarrassing fish impersonation on Syria. Putin is making him look like an amateur, and despite 60 Minutes trying their best,Obama sounded like he was fabricating, and fabricating poorly when allowed to rebut Assad's argument this past Sunday.  When McCain and Boehner start defending this president you have to suspect that even they are embarrassed for America. Yesterday's WSJ editorial said it best when they remarked that Obama is "allowing" Putin to take control of weapons that Assad says he does not have and Putin says he did not use. You can't make this stuff up and the punch line is apparently over the heads of the majority of the American public.
  It seems that the conservatives are constantly, in measured fashion, pointing to statistics, facts, and hard data whereas the liberals continually resort to feelings and opinion, almost always followed by personal, demeaning attacks.  So to repeat verifiable data released by even the most reliable of sources is engaging in an entirely different exercise from repeating the opinions of the liberal media. Not unlike the difference between Ryan and Biden in the vice-presidential debate: serious data-based arguments against the theater of the absurd.  Infuriating.  But never, ever underestimate the gullibility of the public. Remember, nearly 50% of them do not have the wherewithal to be gainfully employed without government assistance of some sort.

Monday, September 16, 2013

I Poked a Liberal Friend Today

.....and got an unexpected and disappointing response. This friend lulled me into suspecting a fresh perspective on the current political landscape in advising of his intellectual honesty in viewing both sides with "equal distain" only to simply spout the undocumented, and currently fashionable liberal position that the Obama administration's woes are a result of conservative Republican "obstructionism" and the media working against him because he is a black man in the White House. I could have gotten that line of wholesale fabrication and distortion from every malcontent that voices his or her opinion in the Huffington Post. It's lazy, it shows ignorance of the issues beneath his capacity to absorb and analyze-,  worse an ability to totally disregard failed policy making from a president that has no foreign diplomatic experience, no working knowledge of the private sector, no hands on management skills, a suspect intellect-, and demonstrates it on a near daily bases! What did I expect you might ask? From this friend, although I knew embraced socialism, an intelligent appraisal, perhaps a reappraisal of his party affiliation in light of the events of the past five years of the Obama administration. What I got was the same old liberal Democrat pap, no factual argument, no substance-, just conjecture and recriminations. Sad as well as disappointing, I regret to no end being baited into the encounter.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013


"I drew the line...., I didn't draw the line...., I did draw the line," so says our ever precise and articulate President. And, to quote our equally ever brilliant Secretary of State John Kerry, in so many words (mostly his own)..."It will be such a small attack, why not just let us do it and get this whole thing behind us! " It's amateur hour in Washington D.C when political thugs, religious zealots, dictators and terrorist rule the day! Are we covering ourselves in diplomatic glory for all the world to see, or what! Can we be more humiliated, more belittled....stay tuned folks, we've got a cast of characters representing us to assure a never ending saga of pratfalls and miscues to end all political vaudeville! Who would have thought such humiliation and embarrassment could befall this great nation of ours..., so swiftly, so profoundly! Who would have thought a man of such little record for good (or evil for that matter) along with his legion of malcontents and subversives work such havoc on this thought to be impregnable democracy of ours? And he and his do it so blatantly, so manipulatively, so naturally, we become mesmerized and paralyzed in a malaise of awe and confusion. I really don't  think it's because we are so stupid, but that we can't bring our selves to believe people of this ilk can be so subversive, so committed to destroying our country, their country, for personal and/or political gain. Are we being done in by our own naiveté, by our own special brand of American golly-shucks, near juvenile naiveness, born of our struggle to be an equal opportunity society, above all political-incorrectness and biases? Are we a "Ninny Nation" personified!

Saturday, September 7, 2013

Assad Or Not Assad

Admittedly this Syrian situation is complex and froth with disaster if mismanaged. Unfortunately we have simpletons managing it for us i.e. Obama, Kerry, Hegel. If Assad employed poison gas as a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) should he be punished accordingly? In my estimation the answer is unequivocally yes! It is a crime against humanity that can not be tolerated. However, unequivocally is Assad guilty of the crime? Neither Obama or Kerry made the accusation stick beyond the shadow of a doubt to my satisfaction. Further to add to my speculation if he did, why hasn't everyone risen up in indignation of the atrocity? Poison gas in many ways is more insidious a WMD than an atomic bomb! The very air we breath potentially being indiscriminately lethal! Having said that, so what if the rest of the world chooses to sit on their hands can we in good conscious follow suit, especially when our President said in so many words ..if you do, you will suffer dire consequences at our hand! What I've drawn here is a classic Catch 22 scenario: If Assad used poison gas what should our response be, collectively or unilaterally short of igniting WWIII. A shot across the bow of the accused, as our President suggest appears wholly inadequate. Again in my estimation, our response must not only be incisive but decisive and profoundly debilitating to the perpetrator, so much so, that any one else contemplating weaponry of this devastation can anticipate similar if not greater retaliation! Are you listening Iran, North Korea? What say ye The United States? President Obama's inaction and inability to garner support for his proposed military attack ( whatever that might be?) should give us all pause!