Dictionary definition of "delusion": Believing that no one connected with Obama talked to the governor of Illinois about Obama's Senate seat.
Why would Obama not talk to the governor of Illinois about the vacant Senate seat, or at least make sure that he was aware of what was going on, and that the governor was aware of Obama's wishes. Is Obama really saying that he was uninterested in who would take his place, and did not even want to know who the governor was going to name. If yo believe that, you are either a member of the mainstream media, or I have a brdge to sell you in Brooklyn (or Chicago). I don't even see what is wrong with Obama wanting to know who the governor intended to appoint. I would have. the fact that Obama insists on lying about it merely calls into question his entire conduct. If any of you who read this disagree that Obama had to be interested in who was going to be appointed, I dare you to comment and explain that delusion. Obama guru David Axelrod clearly thought it was natural for Obama to be interested, when he said that Obama had talked to the governor about it--a statement not denied at the time. Now Axelrod says he was mistaken (the guru!!!). Explain all of this if you can.
Now we come to the mainstream news media delusions. What "talking points" have leftists, and the leftist media, developed to "distance" Obama from a scandal involving the governor Obama supported, as recently as this "sit in" of workers in Illinois blackmailing Bank of America--with the governor's support? Easy, the media is now almost universally suggesting that the governor of Illinois is "delusional", and mentally unbalanced. This is the governor that Obama, and many other Democrats, supported. The suggestion now is that this governor was "off" for a long time. That did not stop Democrats in Illinois, including the obviously stupid Obama (stupid for not realizing how "delusional" the governor was), from presenting this Democrat to the voters of Illinois as a fully capable governor. Who is delusional? Is it the governor, or the media and Democrats trying to sell this whopper?
Rush Limbaugh ran a montage, on his rado program, of multiple mainstream media people adopting the Democratic/lefits "line" that the governor is simply out of his mind. But I did not need Limbaugh. I already heard an ABC News "delusional, hypocritic, dishonest (add your own adjectives) "reporter" go on Laura Ingram and try to suggest that the governor was "delusional", in an effort to suggest that the governor's words raise no questions about Obama. You need no more evidence that ABC news is dishonest, and not worth watching. that applies to the rest of the mainstream media. Now I don't ordinarily listen to Laura Ingram (I do often listen to Rush), because she just does not impress me. However, my radio is set to that station when the alarm goes off (which is why I occasionally hear bits of that leftist political hack, Alan Colmes, at night before I go to bed). Thus, I heard this attempted ABC dismissal of this scandal as an aberration of an unsound mind, rather than a reflection of Chicago corruption. Good luck on that one, corrupt, dishonest media people!!!!!
As a lawyer, a;tjpigj retored. ;et me educate you on the law of "conspiracy". You can't "conspire" with yourself, and you can't convict someone of conspicacy without at least one "ovbert act"--taken in furtherance of a conspiracy of more than one person. In other words, the governor of Illinois cannot be convicted of conspiracy without others sharing his "delusions", and without doing acts to actually put his "delsusions" into effect. Remember, the governor did not actually succeed in selling the Senate seat. Intending to sell the Seante seat is not a crime. Delusional fantasies, and words on tape, about selling the Senate seat are not crimes. Now "journalistic" delusions to support a political agenda are not crimes either, although perhaps they should be. So the only punishment for people like those at ABC is your complete and utter contempt. They have earned mine.
Now Obama has said (liar that he is) that no one on this "team" even talked to the governor of Illinois about a "deal". Jesse Jackson Jr. has said the same thing. Exactly how do you convict this governor, then, of fantasies apparently only in his own mind (lol). You cannot, it that is the situation. Someone had to be approached, and some people had to be conspiring. The mainstream media is ignoring this point, because they are delusional political hacks with an agenda.
Where does my brother come into this? Is he one of those non-existent people (fantasy and delusion, remember?) who the governor approached in order to sell Obama's Senate seat? Nope. At least my brother has not revealed that to me. I don't pretend to know about all of his connections and dealings.
This brother is the co-owner of the trucking company who needs forbearance from banks, and a mere 1 million doallrs in "bridge loans", to save 200 jobs and his trucking company. My brother is doing his best to save the compnay anyway, but he could use a little help and forbearance, especially from General Electric and a few banks. What should my brother do?
Well, the Illinois governor, with the apparent approval of Obama and the media (before it became convenient to label the governor as "delusional") has shown my brother the way. Obviously, my brother should induce his employees to hold a "sit in", like those employees of Republican Windows (or whatever company that was). Unfortunately for my brother, the Illinois sit in did not apparently save the company, but it did extort money out of banks (it being the "delusional" position of leftists, Obama, and the Illinois governor that banks are obligated to give money to workers that banks know they will not get back). Thie Illinois governor was not labeled as "delusional" when he intervened on behalf of these workers--thereby endorsing the idea of extorting money by illegal acts.
Is it worth a try for my brother? Should he suggest a "sit in" by his employees? Is the governor of Tennessee "delusional", like the governor of Illinois. Certainly, GE has to be at least as unpopular as Bank of America. And GE has failed generally to work with my brother to help him save his company.
See my previous entry on how the proposed bailout numbers for the automakers would save 25,000 companies like those of my brother, and save 5 million jobs. Now my brother should curse the governor of Illinois, now that the media is calling him of unsound mind. That may call into question my suggested tactic here. However, the media was perfectly willing to go with the governor, until he became a liability to Obama. Maybe Obama would jump on my brother's bandwagon, to avoid the implicatiion that he was ready to join the governor of Illinois, and Illinois workers, just because he is a Chicago politician from that culture of corruption.
It is an idea, anyway. Why should Illinois workers of a company dooomed to failure deserve more consideration than my brother's workers, who are working for a company that can be saved? I have already asked the question of why General Motors (another company that probably cannot be saved from eventual bankruptcy) deserves help more than my brother. The examples just keep multiplying. Once you start bailing people out, and suggesting that banks are obligated to act in the public good, there is no way to explain how my brother does not deserve aid as much, or more, than the next person.
Or would the delusional media suggest my brother is being delusional about the unfairness here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment