Tuesday, February 10, 2009

President Barack "World" Obama: Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate Points at YOU!!!

Yes, President Barack "World" Obama is the recimpient of last week's Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate award. As the readers of this blog know (all two of you), the Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate is this blog's unauthorized reincaration of the old "Laugh In" award for outstanding stupidity and/or evil in the previous week--represented by the (virtual) statuette of a pointing INDEX finger.

Why did President Obama receive the award for last week? You know that as well as I do,. It is almost self-explanatory.

What else can you do with a President who takes the Republican/Democratic "simulus" bill from last spring (checks went out last summer), plus repeating the same type of selective bailouts of the Paulso plan, that both failed, and now repeats the same type of "solution" and same use of fear to sell it (Armageddon results if we don't pass this bill, and justify te further bailouts). Except, Obama made the previous failed "solutioin" worse by including almost every Democratic spending or regulatory program known to man, including a stealth attempt to edge toward universal health care in a "stimulus" bill (a stealth approach that has been going on for some time, as chronicled in entries in this blog).

Two recent quotes by Obama sum it up:

1. "Doiong nothing is not an option." Actually, it is the first option. It is also the second optioin. It is also the third option. In other words, the heavy burden is on people who advocate drasic government, central planning action, to prove that their "solution" will make this country ultimatelly better instead of ultimately worse. Obama never made this case on this spending bill (as I don't believe President Bush did no his "stimulus" bill (a ttotal failure), or Pauson's Democratic bailout bill (another apparent failure that both McCain and Obama endorsed).

2. "The private economy is too weak now to recover on its own. Only the government has the resources to lead a recovery (in other words, to "save" us with central planning--Five Year Plan anyone?). This ignores one simple point, that central planning leftists always ignore. The government has NO "resources" except those that the people have (broad definition of "private" resources). The idea that central planning is better than private individuals and businesses using their own resources (not taken fromt hem by government taxes or government dominatioin of the economy) is bizarre. It is a betrayal of the philosoophy this country was founded on. President Obama himself said that very same thing on January 28, when he got all of those businness CEO's together to say that only business and the people could "save" us, because in the end the government can only create a faovrable climate for private iniative (Reagan tax plan--my comment, and not Obama's). You are right if you think that Obama does not remember, or care, whether what he said yesterday is consistent with what he says today.

The only further thing you need to sum up the Obama failure (yes already, even though it is what the country voted for) is to review the comments I made in the previouis entry ("Wall Street: The Stupidest People on Earth"). I am talking about the comments concerning Obama's "town hall" meeting, and the attitude expressed there (apparently with Obama's approval, although he is smart enough not to endorse the specifics of absolute idioucy). This is the attitude that the Federal Government is the "soulutioin" to ALL problems, even though central planning has been discredited both theoretically, and by history. That "Five Year Plan" referred to above was the standard Communist method of "planning" the economy of the Soviet Union. The plans did not work, and economic Communism does not work--for that very reason.

The above does not even come close to covering it . Obama had about the worst two weeks any President ever had. His Treasury Secretary does not pay his taxes unless he is forced to pay them. Then there are all of the other appointees who did not pay their taxes , That may explain why Democrats have no problem with taxes. They don't pay them anyway. There were the foreing policy gaffes. The "stimulus" bill originally had "buy American" in it, which is the protectionist mistake that most say was a major cause of the Great Depression. Besides, it got Britain and Europe mad at us. Thre was the Soviet Union saying we had to get rid of bases used for Afghanistan, becuase they are in the old Soviet "empire". There is Idnia calling Obama an officious meddler (in effect), when Obama said something like that he could solve the old Kashmir problem between Pakistan and India. The list goes on and on. It cincludes LOSING the debate on the "stimulus" package, which shows what Republicans could have done if the Republican establishment (Bush and the Repubicans in the Seante) had not sabotaged Repubicans and conservatives (if you think I am going to start talking kindly about Bush's last four years, you are mistaken).

Oh, then there is "bipartisanship", which "Total Failure" Pelosi disavowed, as basically did Obama by answering every request for compromise with "we won" (the only area in this entry where Pelosi and Obama are basically right, except the deceptioin of "bipartisansip" the media uses only against Repubicans). Obama managed to do the impossible. He totally unified the Repubicans in Congress. I am not wrong on that. Specter, Colllins and Snow are not Repubicans. Every single Republican in the House voted against this ridiculous pork spending bill, and every single real Republican (and some of them are not) voted against the bill in the Senate (after the deception of increasing the House bill, and then coming back to the same price tag--subject to conference committee). Now that Senate vote was on the procedural vote to stop a filibuster. However, to show that Senate Repubicans have not really acquired a "spine", Senate leader Mitch McConnell indicatd Repubicans were not going to filibuster anyway--a spineless and stupid comment. See why my accuracy rating is 99.2%? I call them correctly without party politics affecting what I say.

Award Ceremony (a ceremony totally in the imagination--not even really "virtual, since I have no graphics, which is why I suggest you use the image of Dick Martin presenting the old "Laugh In" award as a visual aid):

Imagine Dick Martin thrusting the statuette of the pointing Finger at the cameral, and saying: President Barack "World" Obama, this is for you. You deserve it, for having the worst two weeks of any President in the history of this country (in memory, anyway). In fact, your first month may yet prove to create urrevicabke diin fir this country.

P.S. I, Dick Martin, disavow that last doom and gloom sentence. As you know, I am not really part of this ward, and have not approved anything done in my name here. Words are put in my mouth by the blog author--a confirmed cynic and pessimist. So I am inserting this message from my present location (wouldn't you like to know) to avoid a stain on my name because of the unreasonable pessimism and negativity of the blog author--may he rot in Hell (as I have been assured he will).

No comments: