This is the teaser from Drudge: "NOONAN: OBAMA BECOMING 'CREEPY'..." But what is she really talking about? She begins:
Something's happening to President Obama's relationship with those who are inclined not to like his policies. They are now inclined not to like him. His supporters would say, "Nothing new there," but actually I think there is. I'm referring to the broad, stable, nonradical, non-birther right. Among them the level of dislike for the president has ratcheted up sharply the past few months....She presents the evidence that we're letting go of this notion that we really, really like him. He's so likeable. This is conventional wisdom that supposedly keeps Republicans fettered. They're not supposed to criticize him personally. But there were always Obama opponents who wanted the restrained Obama opponents to break loose and take the chance of triggering the impulse to protect the charismatic politician that we've like so much, as a person. Does Peggy do the trick here?
Not for me. I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual, and obviously he's failed to transform the American culture and bring us a new era of peace and unification that some of those of us who like him really hoped we could have.
I'd rather look to why we're supposed to find Romney unlikeable. I find Romney very likeable. It seems to be this meme: Romney is somehow devoid of human feeling. Where does that come from and why do conservatives submit to that defeating characterization? How about reframing the template? All those things about Romney that are supposed to be off-putting? Tell me why they are actually charming and loveable! I'm sick of these sadsack Republicans, always acting like they're the unpopular kids. That's not making you likeable. It's making you toxic. No one's going to want to sit at your lunch table. Now, comb your hair, stand up straight, put on some lipstick, and look in that mirror and say: I am beautiful.
Posts
82 comments:
I've never thought he was "likable." He's always seemed like a bit of an a-hole to me. Maybe Noonan is just now catching on.
Althouse: "I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual..."
Thank goodness. Were he less feckless, just think of the hole we'd be in.
But don't worry -- Obama's going to dig us out of this hole.
The "creepy Mormon" will be the next meme they push. Which is odd, since the few Mormons I've met have been some of the warmest, most personable people I've known.
No. 1 thing that people won't like about Romney: he doesn't get carried away. He doesn't display "passion". He mostly keeps his private feelings private. Like an executive, he separates his work (politics) from his personal life.
But I can't complain, 'cause I'm the same way.
Pretty creepy stuff, Althouse. Wath out else you may soon be sullied as the creepiest creep around.
a new era of peace and unification that some of us who like him really hoped we could have.
Good Lord.
Even the Era of Good Feelings was anything but. Even during the Good War we weren't unified.
None so blind as those who will not see.
Which sadsack Republicans are you talking about?
Peggy Noonan is pretty well invested as a MSM columnist and Obama supported.
Failure as a writer. If you make your living writing, and you're using a cliche like he's creepy, you've pretty much admitted you're phoning it in.
Thank you so much for this highly informative, very factually-based essay!!
The one thing that I love about the Althouse blog is its emphasis on facts over opinions and impressions. It's one of its shining strengths
I'd rather look to why we're supposed to find Romney unlikeable. I find Romney very likeable.
The inability noted in the above sentences to identify phoniness is enough to choke a horse. Even a dog can tell when a person isn't being straight with him. Maybe that's why he as to cruelly resort to strapping a defenseless animal to the roof of a car while driving all the way to another country.
Romney (the Etch-a-Sketch candidate) is severely whatever you want him to be.
He defines his own phony irrelevance every time he opens his phony mouth. The Obama Campaign doesn't even have to do anything. You've heard how certain jokes just write themselves. Romney openly declares his own lack of integrity with every statement.
He might as well just say: "I'll do anything if you make me win!" But that would be just a little too obvious.
Romney is so square he is cubic, but not "creepy."
I think some folks, though not Althouse apparently, are catching on to it that Obama's ideas of what the U.S. had ought to be is a bit different from theirs under that "nice" surface.
And I do not agree that Obama is "ineffectual," nor do I think he would, if it was possible to get a straight answer from him.
Romney 2012: "I'll do anything you want for me to win!"
Please, I'm BEGGING you, America! I'm down on my knees!
I'll suck your cock!
Romney doesn't have a body man teaching him how to dap or introducing the cool-ish music to his iPod. He doesn't talk constantly about whatever sports he played in high school.
It's just plain creepy to have a candidate who is not desperate to look cool because he's black.
What I hate is when Republicans glom onto the "bullying" charge that the wimpy therapeutic left likes to throw around. Any tough customer, hard bargainer or rude person is a "bully" now. Pathetic & cringe-worthy.
Obligatory link that joins this post with the previous one.
I believe the idiomatic expressions/cliches at play are as follows:
Obama = empty suit
Romney = stuffed shirt
He's so likeable. This is conventional wisdom that supposedly keeps Democrats fettered. They're not supposed to criticize him personally.
/fixed
Contra Prof. Althouse: I very much hope Romney that will not put on lipstick.
A president is in effect the CEO of the nation. I don't care if he is likable or pasionate or feels my pain. I just want him to be be effective in doing his job. But then again, I am a grownup and not a liberal.
As per usual the fake Brasilian outs his assholery in full display, just like a peacock.
I guess people are capable of believing and/or saying anything, but Romney is not only not creepy he is about as down the middle as a person can be. Boring maybe but the antithesis of creepy.
Neither is Obama creepy. It's his arrogant ignorance that has worn out his welcome with all except true believers.
I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual, and obviously he's failed to transform the American culture and bring us a new era of peace and unification that some of those of us who like him really hoped we could have.
How naive can one person be?
The idea that any president's job involves enforcing a cultural change is an incredibly fascist one.
Better to just expose the conservative rot in our cultural dysfunction for what it is. Or better yet, allow it to foment to the surface and expose itself.
On that score, Obama's doing a splendid job.
Ritmo sure has turned into a pathetic little troll.
Pity is the leading cause of death for trolls.
Time to get a new sockpuppet, Ritmo. This one is now impotent.
Ms Noonan wants us to forget she jumped ship last time.
Ain't
Gonna
Happen.
Here's why people are put off by Romney.
1. He's not gushing with smarmy false-compassion and 'feel-your-pain' nonsense.'
Emoting compassion for others is what attracts badly damaged souls to politics. They've realized that they can get power by telling others how much they care, when really they are wolves in sheep's clothing. Romney isn't a damaged soul.
2. He's doesn't seem arrogant enough for a guy that is as smart and accomplished as he really is.
Humility and competence are so rarely found together in our culture that we are confused when we see it.
3. He doesn't believe in or practice scorched earth politics, which makes him seem soft or weak or insufficient ideologically pure.
In the world where sides and conflict are the presumption, Romney's solution based approach (rather than side based approach) seems too centrist.
Ironically, he is likely closer to what we thought Obama was than Obama is.
3. He doesn't believe in or practice scorched earth politics, which makes him seem soft or weak or insufficient ideologically pure.
Lol. Not so long as it doesn't involve huge expenditures of cash directly outsourced to a media mercenary. Actually saying what he means to your face is not one of his strengths, or as you call it, it's a weakness.
Sooner or later you guys will start to get what sucks so bad about your candidate, your rotten contribution to the political culture and the direction in which you've insisted on taking your party.
OK, Romney's aloofness is impressive.
Romney seems to have all under control, pre-planned and his ducks are always in a row.
That is an attractive ideal. I like those kind of people.
The only problem is that they seldom like me unless for a season they can control and pre-plan our relationship and line up my quacking duck for their benefit. And how long does that last?
Oh well, nothing lasts very long these days. I wonder what shade of lipstick to use to complement my boxer's nose?
My college roommate had a father that was a real estate developer. This was in the mid-50s and his father had gone broke and made millions in a continuous cycle. For example, he sold the land that became the UCLA campus in WestWood (The old UCLA campus is LA City College) and the land that became the LA Farmers' Market in Hollywood. Fortunately for my roommate, he father died in one of his rich cycles.
One rule his father had: Anyone who he did essential business with, who he had to depend on for honesty and competence; it had to be a Mormon. He would not consider a non-Mormon doctor, lawyer or accountant.
Interesting. My accountant is Morman and reminds me a lot of Romney, who I've met.
Romney = stuffed shirt
No, maybe he’s just Faith Hilling.
Peg is noticing the reptilian eye coming out from under the once smiling and brilliant Obama face.
Why she ever thought Obama wanted to do us any good is the question.
Noonan is quite creepy and her voice is damn annoying. She's so dainty and low key as to not even exist!
"Not for me. I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual, and obviously he's failed to transform the American culture and bring us a new era of peace and unification that some of those of us who like him really hoped we could have."
What a rube.
Another thread where Althouse and her flock tries to rationalize the awkwardness of mittens.
Enjoy!
Anyone who he did essential business with, who he had to depend on for honesty and competence; it had to be a Mormon. He would not consider a non-Mormon doctor, lawyer or accountant.
Careful, pardner - it is just this kind of thinking that attracts the worst kinds of snakes and con-men to become or be Mormon.
My policy - some of the best people I know are Mormons, and some of the worst.
There is nothing that says "satan" more than a really upstanding, good, clean, honest-looking religious gentleman that robs from the widows and fatherless.
Or as one of Mormonism's most obviously loyal scholar and biggest gadfly once said:
"...the worst sinners, according to Jesus, are not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their precious concern for status-symbols, their strict legality, their pious patriotism."
"Longhairs, beards, and necklaces, LSD and rock, Big Sur and Woodstock, come and go, but Babylon is always there: rich, respectable, immovable…"
"We want to be vindicated in our position and to know that the world is on our side as we all join in a chorus of righteous denunciation; the haircut becomes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules by appearances."
shiloh said...
Another thread where Althouse and her flock tries to rationalize the awkwardness of mittens.
As opposed to President Mom Jeans, the guy who throws like a girl?
Bathtub swabbie and his friends have been trying to rationalize GodZero's whiteness for 4 years.
I don't think I'll even have to come up with more criticisms of R-Money. (Although he makes it easier than anybody). The comments in this lovely piece yesterday in the Times are effective and original enough.
RCNew Hampshire:
"Romney has no soul. Literally. And I think he is capable of a slip-up like Santorum's yesterday, where Santorum let his true, disgusting feelings leak out by stopping just short of calling the President the n-word.
So here's to hoping that the GOP continues to let their foul, racist IDs ooze out as November approaches and the entire nation finally sees them for what they are: an organized group of bigots whose true objective is to get rid of our intellectual, urbane - but most of all - black President."
SteveRPhiladelphia
"I disagree. Mr. Romney has shared his personal and continues to do so. He is a person who makes $10,000 bets. He has an elevator in his garage. His wife has two Caddys. He is not worried about the poor. Although we don't know a lot about his hobbies - firing people provides him with a sense of enjoyment. He is the most flexible person running for President.
I think we have seen quite a bit of Mr Romney's personal side."
It looks like America has quite a bit to say about the "up-close", human (barely) and personal side of Mr Phony R-Money.
I'm a broad, stable, non-radical, non-birther rightie, and I've never liked Obama. Why? I knew his act and didn't want to watch.
The problem I have always had with his is he's such a bland, bland, phony. He's one of those who, if you told him what you thought, would nod sagely and say "Is that so?" and act wise by giving you no indication of what he really thought.
On those rare moments where he opened the curtain and let in what he really thought, it was extremely unlikable, so I understand why he cultivated such an air for so long in his life. I'm reminded of his reflection of working in corporate america, where he felt like a spy working behind enemy lines. I think he's always been that person, never really identifying with anyone and always presenting a toneless personna to hide that fact.
I guess if you wanted to see your own values in him, maybe you would buy what he was selling from the start, and became disillusioned and grew to dislike him because of it. Having never liked him, I can't speak as to that. I'm not at all disillusioned by the man, he's exactly what I expected him to be.
I've never like Obama, I don't see how people think he is likable. I think Romney is likable. The fact that he isn't a natural politician doesn't mean he isn't likable.
Hi, Ritmo. Happy Easter to you! You missed Meade's birthday two days ago.
I wondered where you have been for the last few days.
I really needed your style of humor to draw some of the heat off me from my attempts to reason with the Offended Claque about the Trayvon Shooting.
I believe that I have been relegated to your 1% and also outed as an NPR listener.
LauraBradley
"Mr. Romney is "simply not there". I initially liked Mr. Romney then... He started to remind me, in so many scary ways, of the character Patrick Bateman in the book (and movie) "American Psycho". If you've seen the film or read the book there is one line that sums up the "real" Mitt Romney:
"There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity, something illusory, and though I can hide my cold gaze and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping you and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable: I simply am not there"
In due time we'll all see the "real" Mitt Romney and it's not ugly or awful or dark and complicated. Mr. Romney is simply an abstraction. He's playing a part that has been rehearsed so many times in his life. The real Mitt is deep down inside and most likely he's a scared little boy who doesn't really like people very much. His wife knows this and a few people around him suspect this and the American people will see this in due time.
Personally I'd like to see him win just to see how the right reacts. Could be fun."
"strapping a defenseless animal to the roof of a car."
"the awkwardness of Mittens."
I see the bush leaguers have arrived to flush this thread down the toilet. As good a time as any to log off for the weekend.
Ciao, as the cool kids say.
Hey there, TG! Good to see you and Happy Easter to you, too.
I've got no problem with you being in the 1% and congrats on choosing a media outlet that doesn't mind waxing factually from time to time.
Myself, I've been a bit too busy to argue with the epistemic closure crowd - but some fun things going on as well.
See ya around and feel free to steal my jokes any time. Some of my ample assets I'm a bit more secure with than R-Money is with his.
Ann Althouse wrote:
I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual...
Somewhat ineffectual? As in lacking effect? Most of your observations on this blog have excellent merit. You are one astute cookie, Ann Althouse, there's no denying that. But somewhat ineffectual is just ridiculous. Just look around, look at the state of the nation, the state of the world... Obama has had a tremendous effect, that the effect is almost uniformly disastrous is evidence of the ineffectiveness of President Obama if and only if he sat in the Oval Office like some later day Silent Cal, vetoing bills left and right, practicing and encouraging Puritan self-reliance and thrift. This of course is nonsensical. Obama is not the reborn Calvin Coolidge, he's an activist President. He promised to be so, and you voted for him as such. It's what you wanted. You wanted change and you got it. Worse is different from bad, That's change isn't it?
So he's not ineffectual, unless you expected him to succeed where Canute failed and turn back the tide, in which case I'd have to pronounce your brain dead on arrival. So he is effective, the question remains whether the effects he has are intentional or accidental. He's either so wedded to his ideology that he cannot abort his program of so-called reforms for fear of collapsing said ideology into a heap of rubble, or he's succeeding marvelously at his actual goal of bankrupting the nation, corrupting the Constitution, reducing the United States to a third-rate power, and generally consigning the American Experiment to the ash heap of history.
Ineffectual he's not. Your choices are stupid or malignant.
This is an interesting take. Yes, Romney is likeable compared to the grumps like Gingrich, Delay et al.
But he's not likeable in the sense that he's so plastic and fake-seeming on the campaign trail. He doesn't seem to have any "regular guy" in him or even know how to fake it. I'm on the left, but it's not even a political issue: the persona he projects is weird and wooden.
As opposed to someone like Christie or even Ron Paul who though I'm sure I would disagree with, would be interesting to sit down and talk to socially. With Romney, if feels like there's no there there. (Even though of course there is b/c he's smart, well-educated and had a lot of experience.)
I use to like Peggy Noonan and even defended her via email for what I thought was an unfair attack by one of the Powerline guys. After her sorry elitist performance in unfairly attacking Sarah Palin, I decided she wasn't worth my time though I still read some writer/pundits I still admire who occasionally attack Palin. A lot of those people are more concern with what their friends think and of course their careers.
I'm on the left, but it's not even a political issue: the persona he projects is weird and wooden.
But maybe such a persona is thought by Republicans to be the epitome of personhood. The kind of character they all wish to strive for.
By 2048 I'm pretty sure they'll be nominating fully functional robots.
Republicanism revisited:
Outsource, downsize, ROBOTICIZE!
Ritmo's link to YouTube at 12:05 PM CDT: I'll suck your cock
Given the tenor of your comments here over the years (you change your handle and avatar from time to time, but we know who you are) I take it that the video at the link was meant as a snark directed at Romney. (Just how eludes me, as does most of what you deem to be cogent argument) However, it's an EpicFail moment you ought to regret if you have any scruples, because it reveals you to be both a racist and a homophobe. (Gee, I love that spellcheck still wants to correct that to homophone)
Romney comes across as plastic
I think he's just a little socially awkward in big speech venue type things. I've never seen him up close -- maybe if ^H^H^Hwhen I win MegaMillions tonight I will -- so he might be completely different in person, one-on-one.
Our programmers wish to inform you, the voter, that due to a lack of availability of human parts and other human qualities, we have provided you instead with a non-human alternative as the perfect Republican candidate. His name is Hal. Say "hello" to the nice voter, Hal!
(Hal smiles and waves)
Hal has been programmed to be completely devoid of any human emotion that could be remotely construed as compassion, which is the downfall of humanity and a quality that Republicans must avoid at all costs. Further, he was designed to look physically flawless, right down to the roots of his supple and numerous hair follicles. There is no way that Hal will let you down!
Everyone knows that Republicans are superficial, visually-oriented creatures who crave uniformity and can't stand to think for themselves. By providing a robot candidate, we remove the fear that they might have nominated a being with the capacity for independent thought.
We hope to provide many improved versions of this prototype in coming election cycles. The only problem is figuring out whether they should be depreciated rather than improved due to the Republican penchant for retrogression and an electorate that has become used to robot candidates and further lessened their expectations of complexity as a result.
However, it's an EpicFail moment you ought to regret if you have any scruples, because it reveals you to be both a racist and a homophobe. (Gee, I love that spellcheck still wants to correct that to homophone)
Familiarity with and a refusal to negatively judge movies or other forms of cultural expression because they contain black characters is only racist if you hate blacks, and trading sexual favors at the expense of any self-worth or specific desire is only homophobic if you labor under the idiotic misapprehension that prostitution is an enterprise that excludes heterosexuals.
Pretty dumb ideas there, but maybe that's why you're trying to convince yourself to go with the robot-candidate. Don't think for yourself, Quaestor. Robo-Mitt will make it all easy for you.
Quaestor:
Are you saying that Mitt would resent the accusation (if taken literally) that he is above homosexual prostitution as a way to gain votes?
I didn't realize that he was so open-minded. What would his "traditional marriage" wife say?
So, you are saying that you are not only unphased by homosexuality, but a proponent of legalized prostitution?
What would his "traditional marriage" wife say?
If so, you are one very progressive Republican.
But what would his "traditional marriage" wife say?
I'm perseverating in anticipation of a future where Republican robo-candidates have become the norm.
Hey, I'm an equal opportunity offender! Not only will R-Money suck the American cock in exchange for the crack of political success, he will make his ass available for grabbing by America's women!
(Or at least pretend to do so, phony that he is.)
Seriously, is there ANYTHING good that can be said about this vaguely humanoid thing? You guys really don't seem to have realized how low you've all sunk.
Re: Quaestor
Somewhat ineffectual? As in lacking effect? Most of your observations on this blog have excellent merit. You are one astute cookie, Ann Althouse, there's no denying that. But somewhat ineffectual is just ridiculous. Just look around, look at the state of the nation, the state of the world... Obama has had a tremendous effect, that the effect is almost uniformly disastrous is evidence of the ineffectiveness of President Obama if and only if he sat in the Oval Office like some later day Silent Cal, vetoing bills left and right, practicing and encouraging Puritan self-reliance and thrift. This of course is nonsensical. Obama is not the reborn Calvin Coolidge, he's an activist President.
I think he's ineffectual in the sense that he himself seems to be mostly a bit player, even in all the things his administration does. Obamacare, for example, was less driven by the President (who I think was barely aware of what was in the bill, and cared only that some bill get passed), than by the Democratic leaders in Congress -- Pelosi above all -- who did the real work of setting up the policy framework and then twisting arms to get it done, come hell or high water. Obama's role was basically (1) whining that if they didn't pass something he'd look like a fool and (2) signing the bill when it was presented to him.
And there's anecdotes suggesting that the President lacks the will or intellectual heft to control policy in his own administration. E.g.:
Orszag told Suskind, according to the book: “Larry just didn’t think the president knew what he was deciding.”
Meeting over dinner at the Bombay Club one night, Summers told Orszag that “we’re really home alone,” according to the book. “I mean it,” Summers said. “We’re home alone. There’s no adult in charge. Clinton would never have made these mistakes.”
And descriptions of his decision-making process strongly suggest that he's just passively responding to whatever his aides choose to feed him, which strongly suggests that the real decision-making is taking place elsewhere within the administration.
Ritmo, the racist and anti-Mormon bigot wrote:
Seriously, is there ANYTHING good that can be said about this vaguely humanoid thing? You guys really don't seem to have realized how low you've all sunk.
Writing as you do from the very bottom of the intellectual heap here at Althouse I must admit you know the quality of low, living with the despair and shame as you do -- day to day without hope of elevation. BTW, sorry about the homophone jibe, as one who is forever gazing up longingly at my ass as it hovers about you on the Ladder of Life it must have a ironic sting to be described as such.
"Not for me. I see Obama as somewhat ineffectual, and obviously he's failed to transform the American culture and bring us a new era of peace and unification that some of those of us who like him really hoped we could have."
Well, put that in the context of the Administration leaking intelligence information on Israeli military activities in Kazakhstan. That was basically stabbing an ally in the back.
Creepy is the wrong word, though. Chicago thug wannabe is more like it in my opinion.
Both Obama and Romney suffer from mission creep. -CP
So Queastor admits that he can find nothing positive to say about R-Money, before arrogantly huffing off with nothing but a proclamation of his grandiloquent superiority.
Very mature and convincing. Is that the kind of fucktard attitude that will cost his vacuous candidate the election, too?
Watching the reactionaries throw tantrums and devolve into their vestigial, three-year old selves is interesting. The few remaining defenders of R-Money seem to be saying: "I don't care if he's got absolutely nooooo substance! He's just plain BETTER!!! And so am I! Waaaaahhhh!"
A party of children is what these people have become. Or maybe they always were.
And even then, I know children with more grounded psyches than them.
I think it's probably because he comes across as artificial and plastic. Not saying he IS that way, but it comes across that way via television.
Looking back in electoral history, Thomas E. Dewey's candidacy for the presidency was hurt by his appearance being described as "the little groom on top of a wedding cake." It's such a hard thing these days. Those who heard the Nixon/Kennedy debates on radio thought Nixon won, while those who watched on television thought Kennedy won, no doubt by Nixon's appearance and sweaty upper lip.
Romney comes across as way too polished. If he can find a way to let his hair down a little, that might help.
Yawn, Ritmo.
Nap time already, EMD?
Your blog definitely seems to get more yawns.
And so you didn't even bother quoting Noonan's use of the word. Here it is: "When he knew he'd been caught [with a hot mic], the president tried to laugh it off by comically covering a mic in a following meeting. It was all so . . . creepy."
The subject Obama was caught in a hot mic moment was nuclear armament with Russia. I find his behavior indeed creepy. It's like he's outside of himself observing himself from some distant place and chuckling at how he devious he can be. Creepy. It's accurate.
The president of the United states has said that Trayvon, would look like his own son. To the benefit of the doubters, he is saying it's a tragedy. But one has to look at the other audience. The incensed audience, demanding Zimmerman's head on a platter, and note, they are relishing this, hoping for it. Skin color polarized organizations have violated the law by publishing a bounty. These people know the President's words are a wink and a nod by this most powerful man in the world. Righteousness on their side. A young, beautiful black man has been killed. The tragedy of a white lynching by a Hispanic man.
Even those who view the president's comments favorably would have a very difficult time explaining how, in a such a heightened frenzy, the president's words are unifying and calming.
The real purpose is to create a political tool by destroying the efforts of those who seek racial unification, by inflaming old angers. Some may say the president is a compassionate man, and is misguided. To those I say, then he is an incredibly incompetent man who should never have been elected. I don't believe he is incompetent: I think he knows exactly what he is saying, and to whom he is saying it.
The second, visceral point in Noonan's article regards the open mic words to the Russian President. The obvious interpretation is that missile defense technology will be transferred once "I'm" re-elected again. Americans do not want the expensive defensive technologies given to countries like Russia. They do not trust Russia.
Is it creepy if the guy you trust is doing things to hurt you, and to make you vulnerable? I don't know. What about all the stuff we don't know about?
It's not creepy to me because he was never my boyfriend, and I never felt the urge to tongue his balls. But for those who did, thinking that he actually disdains you, your family, and everything you hold dear, well, it might be a bit creepy. I hope.
The only way to win an argument, in business, is to avoid one, much of the time. Dale Carnegie talks about this in How To Win Friends and Influence People.
Republicans generally know this, extrapolate it to politics and the Democrat Law Complex of Sophistry ruining the country, and then get their asses kicked time and again trying to do the smart thing -- business-wise and morality-wise. There are a bunch of shithead Republicans too of course, which doesn't affect my argument in the slightest. Shithead Republicans are a problem, Democrat's are the problem, in that their influence toward anarchy with chaos is, all unction aside, greater than William F. Buckley Jr.'s influence toward the opposite.
Of all the surreal events of the past three years, I can't help but think of individuals, educated I presume, actually claiming the Tea Party, with it's focus on balancing the budget, was in effect threatening to blow-up America and all she stands for, leaving the adult-in-the-arena Democrats to attempt rational debate with these madmen, but seeing little chance of hope.
Democrats wanting empathy, money, and more power because of terrorist, racist Teabaggers wanting fiscal sanity is par for the course for the Democrat Party.
The Tea Party, wanting a balanced budget, was such a radical proposal that the idea a reduced deficit could help the country, and all of its citizens, over the long term wasn't conceived in the Democrat womb* (*DANGER LIES THERE! SORRY ABOUT NOT PUTTING THIS WARNING ON THE BOTTOM OF THE POST PER STANDARDS OF "*" BUT DANGER!!! LIES IN DEMOCRAT WOMBS).
Of course, were soon-to-be-babies not conceived, then there would be no reason to kill that life, and hence little formal reason for the Democrat Party to exist as it is (although Democrat parties will always exist, and are quite fun).
The thing to do is follow William F. Buckley Jr.'s lead and defeat evil arguments with the understanding many, if not indeed most, of the people making the arguments are too stupid/damaged to understand the fallacies their thinking is structured on, and are also unable to respond to rational arguments in good faith, but are not bad people to be hated because of it.
Ted Kennedy was a horrible, bad person decent folks, and any institution affected by the divine to the point the Catholic church is, should have changed through any moral and legal means possible.
Ted did do us all the favor of setting a great example of what not to think, how not to live, and how the wisdom of the bible takes time to be seen, even by those looking as hard as they can.
Obama is more than "creepy" he is scary! He lives in a bizaro world. I think Romney, his wife Ann & kids all very likable! I get the perception from the MSM that if you are "white" and attractive & successful that that is somehow unusual. They just lie. Romney is plenty likable & I rather have a Coke with Romney then a beer with Obama.
"Romney is plenty likable & I rather have a Coke with Romney then a beer with Obama."
So he probably has your vote and the 80/90% who post on this blog who are conservatives. Good to know lol.
>
One of mittens many problems is he inspires no one, so he has no ground game. Heard recently he has one campaign office in WI, whereas Obama still has several. Which should also help Dems in the Walker recall. I digress.
Again, why did Obama win Indiana? He had (44) campaign offices. McCain had zero!
Presidential politics really isn't all that complicated ...
mittens one plus is he'll have a lot of unregulated PAC $$$ to run negative campaign ads which is the main reason he is now leading Santo/Newt (2) train wrecks! But again, negative campaign ads inspire no one and actually have a negative effect on voter turnout.
Such is mittens general election conundrum.
Obama ~ Yes We Can!
mittens ~ No we can't!
er boehner ~ Hell No We Can't!
>
But yes, the conservative 34% who voted in the last (2) presidential elections, will probably vote for mittens regardless whether they like him or not. :D
SandyMSantiago...You need to be sure to order Mitt caffein free cokes.
Romney is a caffein virgin, and a 12 oz. real coke might keep him awake, which would give him circles under his eyes that would make him look Nixonian, and then he will lose. What's wrong with you, girl?
Obama is creepier than the Shepard Fairey posters. And he's stiff and cold-blooded - say, has anyone ever seen his reflection in a mirror?
The idea that any president's job involves enforcing a cultural change is an incredibly fascist one.
Out of the mouths of babes and progressives.
Our current resident is indeed a fascist. Of the Italian sort.
Alan said...
Obama is creepier than the Shepard Fairey posters. And he's stiff and cold-blooded - say, has anyone ever seen his reflection in a mirror?
No, but I've seen the neighborhood he organized for. It's still a shithole.
You know what's creepy?
The 53% of the population who voted for this zelig because,"it was time we had a black president."
buncha putzes
Romney wears a suit, doesn't do drugs or alcohol to excess, is sincerely religious without being an ass about it and has stayed happily married with a big family for what, 40 years? And he is a successful businessman.
Yea thats CREEPYYY!!!
If you're a idiot, leftist, hipster douche.
Post a Comment