Category: 08 Presidential Campaign

Posted on

Reflections on a Category B Personality Disorder

Note: Although I dislike reading “stream of consciousness” crap, I seem to write the stuff easily enough. Witness the SoC jumble below. *heh*

With a little distance from last night’s “debate” (I still avoid thinking of such an event as an actual debate) Barry Hussein Soetoro/Obama kept reminding me of something… now what was it exactly? Oh, that’s right: DSM-IV, Cluster B: Narcissistic personality disorder: “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy”. More specifically, he reminded me, with his consistent pattern of lies designed to do nothing but avoid facing up to his alliances with those who hate America, his hunger for the blood of children*, etc., even more of a once-proposed subcategory of narcissistic personality disorder: evil.

In “People of the Lie, The Hope For Healing Human Evil,” M. Scott Peck proposes a means of discerning human evil that is remarkably simple for those who have eyes, ears, a functioning brain and that ineffable, almost indefinable sense of revulsion when in the presence of human evil. Ah, but it is that last that is often so difficult to come by nowadays, because our sensibility to evil is now so blunted by its daily occurrence in our lives. McCain apparently cannot recognize it; he calls Obama, “a good man” with no obvious flinching.

But what did Peck say about human evil that reminds me so much of Obama in particular? That, “…lying is both a cause and a manifestation of evil. It is partly by their lying that we recognize the evil.” Massive coverups, deceptions and active attacks upon those who speak the truth: these are all hallmarks of human evil as described by Peck. In fact, as Peck develops the theme, one can see an image emerge, a Portrait of the Politician as a Young Man, as it were, firming up to reveal the mature evil: Barry Obama-Soetoro.

Yes, evil. He simply cannot open his mouth without lying. And not just any lies but lies designed to do one thing: puff up his image and protect his false image from truth, no matter the cost to others. In fact, the more it costs others, the more valuable the lie seems to him.

Now, do I think Peck dived off the deep end in his proposal of human evil as a psychological disorder? Well, yes. Peck is apparently unable to think in any terms but his psychological framwork and so posits everything inside that. Still, his points are well taken. If Barry wins this election, one thing I’d suggest is that you go out and find a copy of Peck’s “People of the Lie” and read it. That way you’ll be able to read a more perceptive “biography” of “President Obama” than any collection of lies he approves about himself.

*Hey! If he can lie about voting against protecting children who survive abortions, I can characterize his votes and lies any damned way I want.

Trackposted to The Pink Flamingo, , Conservative Cat, and Walls of the City, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Who Are You Voting FOR?

Perri, of the eponymous Perri Nelson’s Website, asks, “Shouldn’t we look at why we want to vote FOR a candidate when we’re choosing one?”

Well, of course we should ask ourselves that, Perri! In fact, it’s usually the first thing I do ask myself when looking at candidates for office. Unfortunately, I have rarely found a political candidate who offered me much in the way of valid reasons to vote for them. In fact, I think I can count on the fingers of one hand the total number of political candidates–national, state and local–who have offered me much in the way of legitimate positives in their candidacy or persons.

Ronald Reagan was one such. After voting in several other presidential races for the “least bad” choice (and being monumentally wrong with one, to my shame–and no, I’m not referring to votes cast for Nixon), my first vote for Reagan was a relief.

Bob Xxxxx–(in a local race). Good guy, Honest. Does his office credit.

Kevin Zzzzz–yeh, not an interesting speaker, but a decent man for a state senator.

Ummm, just about running dry here. I guess I could include our district’s Representative to the House. He’s a blowhard who gives me a rash, and he has his head up his _____ on several issues, but overall, he’s been an “honest politician” (that is, he’s stayed bought). I’ll vote for this blowhard again this time based on his (few, IMO, though in one case profound–his son’s turned out to be a better man than he is) positive accomplishments and the fact that his opponent’s a snake.

That about covers the pols who’ve given me valid, positive reasons to vote for them in the past.

Perri notes some positives for McWhatsisname, and I have to admit they exist, though some of the ones he mentions as reasons to vote for McWhatsisname are negatives in my estimation. A commenter on Perri’s post mentions his reasons for supporting The Obamassiah. Funny thing, none of his reasons involve any actual accomplishments or anything else I’d count as a positive.

Frankly, I’d like to embrace Perri’s idealistic search for reasons to vote for political candidates and avoid voting against a candidate for the candidate’s negatives, but while I always look for positive reasons to vote for a candidate, in the last 4 decades, I’ve found few. Perhaps that’s just my natural ability to spot flaws–an ability that has served me both well and ill in the past–but almost every time I hear a politician speak my B.S. meter pegs out, and that can’t be a good thing. *heh*

(Of course, it’s the rare, exceedingly rare instance when a Mass Media Podperson doesn’t overload my B.S. meter, but that’s another problem.)

For now, I think I’ll concentrate on dumbasses who proclaim themselves “undecided” and fools (yes, fools–those who aren’t themselves active poisoners of the body politic) who have swallowed the Obamassiah’s sugar-coated cyanide capsule and attempt to compare and contrast those few McWhatsisname’s and Sarah Palin’s (many more than McWhatsisname’s) positives with the truckload of poisoned B.S. from The Obamassiah.

That’s about as positive as I can be about this election cycle’s presidential offerings, and frankly, one-on-one, the method has shown some apparent success. I’ve had former Obamaites and Obama-leaners come back to me with negatives they’ve discovered on their own once their eyes were opened… and in one case, simply pointing an Obamaite to facts about the McWhatsisname health care proposals opened blind eyes to the lies Obama’s been spouting about that. That alone was enough to persuade one more vote for McWhatsisname/Palin.*

Heck, that’s about as positive as I think I can be in our local (Sheriff/County/City) and State (rep/senate/etc.) races this year. Well, perhaps a bit more positive about the Democrat running for governor in my State. In fact, he could well be my fifth candidate in the last 40 years I can actually vote for in good conscience. (Heck, even my dad has had good experiences with the guy, and he lives in another State!) I don’t even have to think about what a snake the Repugnican’t candidate is.

Politicians *spit*. Can’t live with ’em; can’t live with ’em. I’d be happy to live without ’em. Heck, a constitutional monrchy could scarcely be as bad as the mess we have now. I’d probably be better. See the header quote on this blog for a part of the reason…

Continue reading “Who Are You Voting FOR?”

Posted on

Who Is Barry Soetoro?

As I have said before, I do not know if there’s a fire just because there seems to be some smoke to the question of Barry Hussein Obama-Winfrey’s citizenship, but since The One refuses to release a certified copy of his birth certificate, it’s no wonder folks continue to have questions.

The question about Obama’s citizenship–who knows the answer? Apparently Obama does, but he’s not saying. Why?

Trackposted to Mark My Words, , , Faultline USA, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, Shadowscope, The Pink Flamingo, Democrat=Socialist, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Trout in the Milk?

Of course, circumstantial evidence isn’t equivalent with being caught red-handed, but if there’s a trout in the milk, one may be safe in assuming the milk’s been adulterated, eh?

I’ve noted before that The Obamassiah’s long alliances (not mere association) with communists, terrorists and folks who express open hated of America are obvious disqualifiers for any public office, let alone the presidency, but that’s all in the past, as he might say: some guy he knew when he was a youth (whom he has described as greatly influential on his own belief/value system); another guy he saw around in his neighborhood (who got him his first big-time job out of law school and to whom he funneled millions of dollars for his radical “education” initiatives); some preacher (who was The One’s pastor for 20+ years and whom The One described as his spiritual mentor), some “community group” he’s had dealings with in the past (ACORN–the bigtime vote fraud group, a subsidiary of which the Obama campaign has paid $800,000 for “get out the vote” efforts).

All in the past. Nothing to do with now or future plans, right?

But there’s a trout in the milk, folks. Every single solitary proposal that is a constant amid the forest of Obama hand-waving is right out of the Frank Marshall Davis/Jeremiah Wright/William Ayers playbook. If all these people who were identified as Obama himself as influencing his values, with whom he worked for years are not still influencing his policies and procedures, then why does everything he proposes sound like and agree with their viewpoints?

Just wondering if we can catch and fry up that trout…

Hammer away on the theme articulated by Dick Morris:

“Rezko was his financial adviser, Wright was his spiritual adviser, and the guy who gave him his first job used to blow up government buildings.”

Trackposted to Mark My Words, , , Faultline USA, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, Shadowscope, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Birds of a Feather

A good introduction to one of Obama’s questionable associations.

Ask yourself: what do Obama’s past associations indicate about what kind of people he would tend to appoint to positions of power and influence? Look at the Alinsky methods of societal reform in which Obama is thoroughly schooled and ask if the goals and methods of such organizations as ACORN–with whom Obama has a long working relationship which he now claims he has not had–are what you want to see operating from the highest office in the land.

From the Baltimore Sun, letter to the editor, October 5, 2008:

Let’s quickly review ACORN’s recent history related to voter fraud: In July 2007, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington state. Seven ACORN volunteers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter registration forms.

Three ACORN hoaxers pleaded guilty to voter fraud last October. A King County, Wash., prosecutor called the group’s behavior “an act of vandalism upon the voter rolls.”

The group’s activity in Washington state is not isolated. ACORN has been implicated in similar voter fraud schemes in 14 other states.

In March, Philadelphia elections officials accused the leftist pressure group of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. The charges are pending before the city district attorney’s office.

Also see here and here.

Obama: endorsed by the CPUSA for a reason…

THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂

If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Posted on

Speaking the Unspeakable

OK, someone has to say it: Anyone who is undecided at this point about who to vote for come November for Senator, Representative or President is an idiot or profoundly lazy or both.

Local races could be either easier or harder to decide, but the national offices? [Assuming–a radical and possibly unwarranted assumption–voters have the basic intellectual capabilities to do their homework on candidates and issues] Either folks have been doing their due diligence and studying the candidates and issues or they’ve been slacking off and don’t really deserve the franchise at all.

There. Now I’ve said that the “Emperor of the Undecided Electorate” is walking around in blissful, lazy, naked cluelessness can we move on to a discussion about how to alleviate the problem of stupid, lazy, dumbass so-called “undecided voters”? (Personally, I think a quick civics exam at the polling place followed by handing those that don’t pass a ballot that WILL NOT PROCESS is a good place to start…)

Posted on

You say “Po-tay-to,” I Say “Po-tah-to”…

…let’s call the whole thing off, eh?

I’ve not made a big deal of this in the past, but this is interesting, to say the least. (h.t., America’s Right via Walls of the City) Apparently, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is allowing the suit by Phillip J. Berg challenging The One’s constitutional qualification to stand for office to… proceed.

(Click the pic for larger view)

You can download or read the entire thing here.

This may seem a bit far-fetched, but what if? What if the Dhimmicraps have nominated a man for the highest office in the land who is not even qualified to serve under the qulaifications lined out in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution? What shall we make of the court ordering Obama to produce his birth certificate, his certificate of citizenship and his oath of allegiance? (If he actually does produce the latter, wouldn’t it “automagically” prove Berg’s case? That is, wouldn’t that demonstrate Obama’s naturalization? Hmm, further reading on Citizenship matters reveals that speculation was hasty. Still, waiting on Obama’s response to the court order. Is he going to attempt “Kerrying” it?)

Hmm, it would seem the Mass Media Podpeople’s Hivemind is silent on this one… of course.

Trackposted to Blog @ MoreWhat.com, , The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, CORSARI D’ITALIA, NN&V, and Democrat=Socialist, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Stop the Presses! Joe Biden Claims to Have Independent Thought!

*heh* One of the highlights of the veep “debate” was Biden trying to play “Me too!” when Palin riffed on McCain’s openess to her independent thinking on some issues. I could swear I heard Mr. Plagiarism claim The Obamassiah valued his counsel for his independent viewpoint, or something along those lines. Was so shocked I neglected writing it down immediately.

While I really, really do wish Palin had dealt directly with a couple of questions, her method of avoiding them was magnificent. “I’m going to talk to the American people”–great line, especially since it came off as authentic.

Didn’t like her “global warming” response, though it beat Joe “I’ll Repeat Whatever I heard Last” Biden’s dumbass certainty.

Did NOT like her softness on Dhimmicrappic reponsibility for Fannie n Freddie.
1. Every. Single. Piece. Of Frannie and Freddie legislation has been Dhimmicrappic policy pushed by Dhimmicrappic legislators (and weakly, if at all, resisted by Repugnican’t legislators) and

2. signed into law by Dhimmicrappic administrations.

3. Almost all the calls for more stringent regulation and oversight of Fannie and Freddie have come from Repugnican’ts and

4. darned near all the roadblock and rhetoric done to stymie more stringent regulation and oversight of Fannie and Freddie have come from Dhimmicraps.

5. The chief beneficiaries of mismanagement and fraud at Fannie and Freddie have been people like Franklin D. Raines (D-Corruption, D.C.) and Jamie Gorelick (also, D-Corruption, D.C.).

6. Top piggies at the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac corruption trough? #1 Dodd, Christopher D $165,400; #2 Obama, Barack D $126,349. Gee, at $31,587.25 per year, in only 4 years of part-time Seante “work” The Obamassiah has nearly overtaken “Piggy” Dodd’s couple of decades plus… And that’s not even counting the fact that he only worked part time at the job for a couple of years before taking virtually ALL time off to run for president.

7. Way, way down on the list? #70 McCain, John R $21,550, averaging not quite $900/year for his Senate years.

Would have been nice if those notes had been in her briefing.

But aside from those three weak points, the rest of her showing tonight was pure gold. Connected. “Say it ain’t so, Joe”–yeh, I was waiting for it.

Biden? I almost went ballistic when the “lawyer” royally screwed up Article I of the Constitution (Article I, Section 3), but then he cheated his way through law school, anyway, didn’t he? What. A. Maroon. Wish Palin had had the assurance to call him on that, but her response was actually better.

I was ticking off factual misstatements by Biden and lost track. Fortunately, I decided to stick around and listen to the talking heads and Fox had Fred Thompson and later Karl Rove to list ’em for me. If Only I’d taken notes. *heh* As usual, Biden was full of it. Oh, and lied through his teeth about his “No coal plants here in America” comment. Just flat out lied.

All-in-all, a good showing from Palin. Joe was sweating and I rather wish we’d had another half hour with him under the lights, since he looked like he was starting to lose it toward the end. Would have been fun to watch him with more Bidenisms than simply the many factual misstatements, the one verifiable, outright bald-faced lie and his “Bosniacs” in reference to the people of Bosnia. (How much do you wanna bet no Mass Media Podpeople will mention the “Bosniacs” reference?)

Update: Ace has Biden’s 14 Lies

THIS is an open trackbacks post. Link to THIS post and track back. 🙂

If you have a linkfest/open trackback post to promote OR if you simply want to promote a post via the linkfests/open trackback posts others are offering, GO TO LINKFEST HAVEN DELUXE! Just CLICK the link above or the graphic immediately below.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Posted on

Condemn Racism: Vote McCain/Palin

SEE THE UPDATE BELOW!

I’m growing weary of (read, “getting royally pissed off by”) Mass Media Podpeople, Academia Nut Fruitcakes, leftard politicians *spit* and others of their ilk telling me that because I strongly disagree with The Obamassiah’s policy statements, even more strongly dislike his lies and deliberate, slanderous distortions, false accusations of lying against people who simply reveal his record, lack of basic historical-political (apparently no idea of Russia’s role in the Security Council), geographical (“been to 57 states” [with one more in the Continental states to get to] but not “allowed” to go to Alaska or Hawaii–at that time–IOW, thought the U.S. to be comprised of 60 states!) and cultural (“clinging to guns and religion”) knowledge, and contempt for middle America, and more–because of all that, I am a racist.

*throws the bullshit flag*

The Loony Left Moonbat Brigade (weak swisher-sister inheritors of the Red Brigade) wants an unqualified liar, slanderer, communist and apparent racist to be elected on the Affirmative Action/Racial Quota ticket. Now, if that’s not blatant racism, what is? As Paul Jacob said in a recent Common Sense episode (no, I didn’t listen, but I read the transcript*):

…would it not be racist, condescending, unjust, and downright stupid for us voters to treat a black man’s qualifications for the job of president as irrelevant, just to prove we’re not racist?

Indeed it would be racist to do so, and so it is the leftards who accuse non-racist folk like me of being what they themselves are: racists.

Ahhh, play on false guilt to enable expansion of the “feddle gummint’s” plantation. Sneaky, dishonest and sure to play well with the sheeple.

*sigh*

So here’s the only response people who despise racism can make to this sort of racist Affirmative Action/Racial Quota campaign: Vote McCain/Palin.

UPDATE: Another example of racism, bias and The Hivemind in the tank? See Michelle Malkin (h.t. The World According to Carl) for the story. Malkin suggests calling the organizers of the debate (202-872-1020) or emailing Janet H. Brown (jb@debates.org to express your views. Here’s what I emailed:

Dear Ms. Janet H. Brown:

Are you aware of the strong conflict of interest Gwen Ifill has that seriously impairs her appearance of impartiality in tonight’s scheduled Biden-Palin Vice Presidential debate? You are aware, are you not, that she has an hagiographic book about Barack Obama (“The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama”) scheduled for release on January 20, 2009? The publisher’s blurb, including such comments as, “THE BREAKTHROUGH is a remarkable look at contemporary politics and an essential foundation for understanding the future of American democracy,” alone should be enough to cast serious doubt on Ifill’s capacity to be an impartial moderator.

May I respectfully suggest replacing Ifill before the reputation of your organization suffers irreparable harm, and that, in the future, a better job of vetting moderators be done?

(Alternatively, I do like the suggestion of some that Governor Palin open her remarks by congratulating Ms. Ifill on the upcoming release of her book and ask her to tell everyone the full title… Oopsie. :-))

*re: NOT listening to radio talk, etc. Try it. Stop only listening to so-called “news” and commentary on radio and TV. Find the transcripts and read what was said. It’ll be an eye-opener. Absent vocal (and with TV, visual) distractions, content becomes king, and often better understanding of what was said ensues. Heck, when something reads a bit hinky, diagram the sentence(s) out and note the actual relationships of words. Yes, sometimes listening can reveal more, but at the very least read what was said as well. (*heh* Anyone who didn’t twig to Clinton’s manipulation of the truth when he said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman. *pause* Miss [yes, that is what he said, and not one single feminista objected to that any more than they did to his sexual predation] Lewinsky,” just wasn’t paying attention. Indeed, every. single. time. he uttered that lie, he placed that very significant pause in exactly the same place. Think about it. So yes, sometimes listening can be helpful. See here, the last 35 or so seconds.)

Trackposted to Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Pink Flamingo, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Wolf Pangloss, Democrat=Socialist, The World According to Carl, and Shadowscope, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.