Handy Resources

Understanding the 2012 Election

My Sister's Blog New!

The Desktop Dyno

Salem Gravity Gran Prix

Jordan's Eagle Project.

Duke Boys Car Chase

LoL Cartoons

Logic Primer

Gymkhana Practice

Compass Course Spreadsheet

Complete Orienteering Course Files

Things you may not know about Sarah Palin

Amazing Grace on the Sax

Obama's Magic 8 Ball

Oh, wait . . . that's from an alternate universe

Refresh to get latest blog entry

Who would've known? I just barely get through discounting Rush's theory about how Obama operates, then I find evidence that supports it.

I clicked on the Billy's Blog link and it took me to this blog.

---

Listen to what [Obama] says in his speech bashing Republicans in Ohio.

No, really, you have to listen to it. I couldn't find the clip, but the whole self-serving diatribe is here. The part I'm talking about is 10:27 into the rant. (Fair warning--you will smash your monitor if you listen longer that 90 seconds.)

Listen to the tone. Listen to the hate in his voice. It's just dripping with vitriol.

"Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess ... "

---

There it is. Obama himself laying out his political tactics by accusing Republicans of it. "Smart politics to sit on the sidelines . . . "

I still maintain that most of the sitting around that the man does is because he's a lazy celebrity and doesn't feel like working, not because it's a calculated strategy.

Omigosh . . . is that a punch line, or what? He's like the crazy relative that runs around disgracing the family name. You just wish you could tell the world "Please--please don't judge our family by him. We are so sorry. Please understand his viewpoints and behavior are not representative of our family."

What a waste of skin.

You’ve heard the Limbaugh Theorem. In a nutshell it says that Obama is consciously avoiding governing so that he can't be held accountable for anything. He wants to be seen as campaigning rather than governing. If you tune in to Rush's show today, or tomorrow, or the next day, you'll hear him cite examples that support his "theorem."

Monica Crowley has a similar take on the matter. She points out that Obama was "above" the stimulus. He was above the gun control debate, he was above the debt ceiling debate—he keeps himself detached from legislation so that his fingerprints are not on any of it. He doesn't get his hands dirty.

Those explanations work. They meet the scientific method requirement of explaining the observed phenomenon.

But they're wrong.

Here's what's going on. Obama's not crafty and scheming and executing a strategy. He's lazy. He doesn't do any of that stuff 'cause he doesn't feel like doing it.

Obama is not a leader. He's not even a politician. He's a celebrity. Celebrities don't roll up their sleeves and get involved in that kind of nitty gritty work.

Let's walk through a movie scene where you have a handsome lawyer working on a big case.

You see everyone at the office passing his door. "You coming out to drinks with us?" "Nah, I've got that big Putzenheimer case I've gotta' work out." You see a scene of him in the law library with a stack of books, tie loosened. You see an outside view of the building with only his office light burning. Then you see him rubbing his eyes in front of the vending machine, suit coat off. Then back to the library with him leafing through books and taking notes.

Then we see him on his computer. Then leaning back in his chair rubbing his eyes, then standing up putting his hands in the small of his back and stretching. Way back. Man is he ever beat! Then we see him in the file room with scores of file boxes and papers in piles around him.

Cut to morning, and he's dashing into the partner's office with a yellow binder and a file folder, tie hanging loose, shirt un-tucked, suit coat nowhere to be seen. He's cracked the case! His hard work paid off!

Total time on screen: 2 minutes 30 seconds.

Total caloric expenditure for the actor: 32.

That's what celebrities do.

Any effort beyond the clips for the camera Obama is not going to put out. He's just not.

Obama is going to be there to give the speech about how great things are going and how hard he's worked. But he's not going to work. There's golfing to do and other celebrities to party with and TV shows to be on.

See if that lens brings it into focus better than the Limbaugh Theorem.

Sorry, Rush, love you, man, but you're way overthinking this. You're giving way too much credit to someone who is just a garden variety loser with a good stage presence.

The other day I was going into the gym the and noticed that my shoelace had come loose—out of the eyelets. I hurriedly threaded it back in, tied it and carried on. About halfway through my workout it came untied and I noticed that the lengths were all funny—one side was much longer than the other. That's odd, because I'm sure they were the same length last time I took them off.

You know what happened. I threaded the wrong end through the empty eyelet. So the same amount of lace was there, but the lace that was supposed to go on one side ended up on the other side, using up more than its share of length, and leaving the other lace end with excess. The thing is, that kind of transposition error doubles itself, 'cause it not only takes from one, but adds the taken amount to the other.

It occurred to me that that's what had happened in the election.

The right number of votes were cast, but some of the ones intended for one side just ended up on the other, leaving one side short and the other long. The length of the shoelace hadn't changed--just what side it ended up on.

You know how the election went down. The votes Obama got were not about his ability to do the job. But the morons were less excited about "making history" this go around, and a lot of them stayed home. On the other hand, our side was much more energized, 1) having a very good candidate, and 2) having seen what a disaster The Amateur has been.

You know I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but I have a really hard time believing the numbers from that election. Maybe it's just mental self-preservation. To believe the numbers would be to accept that it's an accurate representation of the mental capacity of the American people. That's as scary as a rigged election.

What? Why not? The technology doesn't exist to do it, or the democrats are too moral to do it?

Rush had a different take on it this morning. Apparently some guy named Caddell or something spoke at CPAC and was explaining how useless the consultants are. I heard it best said on a brilliant blog called . . . what was it? Oh, yeah, Leany on Life. "The same consultants who were guaranteeing we would win the election are now telling us what we did wrong to lose."

Rush's analysis (and Caddell's) is that the idiot consultants lost us the election by telling Romney to go easy on The Amateur after the first debate in order to not alienate the independents. Romney gave the waste of skin a complete pass on Benghazi and lost the election. Oh, but we beat the Phony in Chief by double digits with "independent" voters. The theory is that the conservatives stayed home because they were so disgusted by Mitt Romney's kid gloves approach to dealing with the Anti-Christ.

But their take is based on the premise that the election numbers were right—something I don't disbelieve or believe—I wouldn't be shocked either way.

I don't know why I feel guilty for never posting here. It's not like it contributes anything to my sustenance or yours.

Blogger Dean: I just get really tired of letting down people who care about me.
Dramatic pause
Elliot Ness: Oh, cry me a river, you nancy pants. Are all hunters in the future as soft as you?

Uh . . . trust me. Supernatural watchers are laughing at that one.

"I'm not exaggerating, Barack Obama said that sequestration was going to be 'Armageddon.' Armageddon! 'End of freedom as we know it.' So after the sequester, I looked around to see if there were any asteroids falling or some cracks opening up in the earth. Turned out it was a nice day. Birds were chirping. Folks were strolling down the Mall."

I'm sure you got the reference. That quote is adapted from what Obama said the day after Obamacare passed. He was like the alcoholic who took a drink, looked around, and lightning hadn't struck, so he figured he could keep getting plastered without any consequence.

You get it. You know that the reason he was so desperate to avoid it was because we'd find out that he was crying wolf. It's like the parent who says "Or else . . . " The kid is trembling; doesn't want to find out what that "or else" is. No sir. The parent is trembling worse than the kid, hoping he doesn't find out there is no "or else."

Funny thing . . . The fact that he was he was screaming that disaster was looming makes me feel pretty good that it happened. If Obama hates it, it must be good for America.

You remember the whole Clinton government shutdown thing. I've outlined it elsewhere, but Clinton decided to shut down the government, refused to sign any budgets the Congress gave him, refused to tell Congress what he wanted, let the government shut down, then signed a budget that wasn't any different from any of the ones that Congress had submitted.

You wondered what the whole point of that was . . . until the next year. An election year. When he pinned the blame on the Republicans.

Politics is making yourself look good, and that often means making others look bad. At its heart, Politics is the art of placing the blame.

Clinton didn't give a crap about workers that didn't get paid. His whole purpose was to blame the Republicans.

That's what sequestration is for Obama. It's just a way to blame the Republicans for something. Just like Clinton didn't care about who got hurt by his tactics, neither does Obama. In fact, it's more helpful the more people get hurt, 'cause you are, after all, blaming someone.

The difference is that Obama was a lot more klutzy about it than Clinton was. But it doesn't matter.

Obama will never be blamed for anything. Not ever

Maybe this should go under the "Dead Horse Department," 'cause it's more the of the same thing you've already heard here . . . multiple times. But it's a new way to say it.

This morning a new phraseology occurred to me.

Nothing Obama says, does, or believes will cost him support, because that's not what earned him support.

That says it better, don't you think? I was struggling to convey the concept, which is so good in my mind that I'll Westonize it here. Obama has a free pass to say, do, or believe anything he wants without worry about losing support, because no one voted for him based on anything he's ever said, done or believed.

You remember my buddy Weston. Whenever he delivered what he considered was a pretty good zinger, he'd do us the courtesy of repeating it to make sure we all got it.

"Dude, I'm all 'So's your mother!'" Dramatic pause. " 'So's your mother!' Hah! Get it? 'So's your mother!' "

So, with reference to the Republicans who refuse to acknowledge why we lost the election, let me just say:

Dude, I'm all "Why are you looking for your keys in the kitchen when you know you dropped them in the toilet?"

You understand the danger of Obama. It's not that he's a radical, which he certainly is. But so was Bill Clinton. But Bill Clinton had to modulate his positions for his political survival.

The danger of Obama is that he will never be held accountable for anything. He has immunity.

You should listen to Michael Medved. He is as smart as Mark Levin, but his delivery is much more measured. He thinks in practical terms, which includes couching things in reasonable language to maintain credibility. He's careful to stay away from radical views.

Medved is almost always right. Years ago he was wrong (Ann Coulter was right) and when he realized it he acknowledged it. But the other day he was wrong again.

A caller was giving his analysis on something or another having to do with the sequester and Medved said (I'm paraphrasing) "Obama will not do that, and the reason he won't do that is because if he did he would get blamed for the sequester."

When's the last time you saw Obama get blamed for anything?

It doesn't happen. It will not happen. It cannot happen.

The danger of Obama is that no matter what he ever says, does, or believes, he will never be held accountable or blamed for anything.

Billy Shakespeare once said "there is nothing new under the sun." True it is.

That's the basis for the random news generators I have popping up here and on my main page. Anything you hear, you've heard a variation of it before. Democrats will always be evil and Republicans will always be too stupid to counter their evil plans.

The democrats [insert evil tactic here] and the Republicans got blind-sided by it.
The recent shooting at [insert public place here] raises concerns about gun ownership in America.
Another study by [insert organization here] contradicts everything the last study said about nutrition.

Someone has even developed technology to continue sending tweets from people after they're dead. The program just tracks the way the person thinks and how he talks and his approach to various topics, and extrapolates that into what he would say on any topic that might come up.

So I got to thinking I should do that. I'm not going anywhere, but I might as well be for how often I post. But I don't really need to post on everything—you know how I think. You could write a program that would accurately write this blog for any given current event given what I've already said about other events. That would save me the trouble of writing posts, and I could actually have a life instead (oh, ha-hah. I slay me!) so it would be blogging while I have a life--the converse of tweeting from beyond the grave.

In fact, here it is:

---

Nothing New Under the Sun

---

Since I never update this thing, just click on the random link that appears above and read some of my past stuff. A lot of it is boring crap, but hey, you might find a jewel in the sewer somewhere.

That way you get a "fresh" blog and I don't have to feel guilty for not delivering material to this blog that contributes so much to my sustenance . . .

Blogger Dean: I just get really tired of letting down people who care about me.

Dramatic pause

Elliot Ness: Oh, cry me a river, you nancy pants. Are all hunters in the future as soft as you?

Supernatural watchers might get the reference . . .

Oh, and you'll have to go to Townhall.com to get your cartoons now.

---