Blogmocracy in Action
Guest Blogger: Diplomad
As noted before, I began my career in the Foreign Service during the Carter presidency, and ended it during the Obama presidency: two horrific bookends.
Jimmy Carter should not have been president. He was incompetent beyond belief; angry about America’s success in the world; wanted us to get our comeuppance; and was and is a mean, reptilian and graceless little man. Being out of office has made him even angrier, meaner, smaller, more anti-American, and more anti-semitic. He was and remains a repellent creature; if anyone ever could make me ashamed of my country, he could. I can’t forgive him for that.
He caused the United States a considerable amount of damage. His economic policies were almost non-existent. He, in fact, never seemed to have an interest in the economy except to the extent that our dire economic performance during his term seemed to fit his view that we were being rightfully punished. He wanted Americans to live small, and see the future as a bleak struggle for atonement for past sins. His foreign policy was disastrous. The USSR and its vassals were on the march throughout the world, including in Latin America and the Caribbean, with virtually no resistance from the United States. His administration gutted our intelligence and covert capabilities; our military was a hollow shell; our international alliances were badly frayed; terrorist organizations and states, with Soviet-bloc support, operated openly in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America; and the insane Imams of Iran turned a major ally into a major enemy.
Along came Reagan. He laughingly rejected the Carter premise that America deserved its “punishment” and that we could do nothing about the economy, the decline of American power, and the rising might of the Soviet empire. Reagan waved off the honking flocks of “intellectuals” who called him out-of-touch and dangerous. He connected with the American people and the great traditions of our country. He slashed taxes and our economy turned around; he took seriously the Constitution’s main role for the president: national defense. Our military might came roaring back; he outmaneuvered the Soviets and brought them and their vast evil empire to their knees. It was a masterful performance. Reagan managed to fix most of the damage done by Carter–the Iranian disaster, however, continues to haunt us over three decades later–and he restored faith in America as the indispensable nation in the world.
We now are saddled with another abomination as president: one worse than Carter. The damage Obama has done to our economy and global standing, while immense, can be relatively easily fixed. The real damage he has done is more pernicious and perhaps permanent. He has participated fully and deliberately in undermining the essence of what it means to be an American. Let me explain.
Anybody remotely interested could know Carter, what he had done with his life, and what he advocated. He had an easily accessible public record. Obama, of course, is the most secretive and closed off president we have ever had. Only after years of badgering did he even release his birth certificate. We are not allowed to know about his education except that, like the absurd Elena Ceausescu, he is “brilliant.” How did this self-admittedly mediocre high school student, from a relatively modest background, growing up in remote Hawaii and Indonesia as part of an apparently very dysfunctional family, manage to get into three expensive and “elite” universities? How did he come to their attention? Who vouched for him? Who paid? Did he claim to be a foreign student? What were his courses and grades? Who were his friends and teachers? In a celebrity obsessed world where we know everything about Tom Cruise and Britney Spears, we know next to nothing about the man who encumbers our presidency.
His political rise is shrouded in mystery. After Harvard, he suddenly moves to Chicago. Why? He becomes a “community organizer” there, and rapidly rises in the corrupt and crony-filled Democratic machine. He becomes the darling of gangsters such as Rezko, close friends with known terrorists and hate-mongers, and presto he is taking down opponents right and left and soon is in the White House. We can’t ask anything about it all. To do so risks charges of racism. His ascendency is a liberal Hollywood fable and it must remain unquestioned and unexamined. He is our anointed leader. He is our Athena.
This is the first bit of damage he has done. It is now considered by the majority of the media and the other honking “intellectual” geese as off-limits to question Obama’s life, his claimed achievements, or note the contradictions in what he has said and what he says now. Free speech is no longer so free. If you question the President, you are a racist, insane, a danger to democracy, hate the poor or all of the aforementioned. If you still hold the same views that he purported to hold up to a few weeks ago, e.g., the traditional definition of marriage, and failed to “evolve” when he did, then you are a hopeless homophobe; your business should be banned and ruined, and your employees bullied. This is not unlike Orwell’s 1984, “We have never been at war with Eastasia . . . ” You must keep up with the changes in Dear Leader’s views. He will tell you when you can favor gay marriage; when you can raise closing Guantanamo; when the war will end; when the deficit must be cut with more spending. New Think is here.
Obama has become the incarnation of a troubling trend in our country that has accelerated over the past 40 or so years. He has become the head of what passes for modern progressivism: the alliance between tax-supported university faculties, lawyers, government bureaucrats, journalists, NGO “activists,” and Hollywood. This alliance has promoted the politics of envy and resentment, and launched a sustained attack on traditional American values. Our country is now filled with the half-educated idiots who emerge from our universities with no real knowledge but with feelings of entitlement and resentment. We should stand in awe of people with PhDs regardless of whether what they say corresponds to the reality we see, because they know what’s good for us. They are the “experts.”
One should not underestimate the power of Hollywood in forming what passes for thinking by these impressionable morons. What many of our youth, and foreigners, think they know about America and American history, comes from movies and TV shows. Hollywood bombards us with the viewpoint that rich evil conservative white men (RECWM) are behind all of our troubles, and those of the world. Our heroes should be the brave lawyers who sue corporations; the brave journalists who expose the nefarious plots of the RECWM conspiracy; the brave activists who stand up to the “violent” gun nuts of the Tea Party; the gutsy abortion clinic workers who live in fear of their lives; the brave public servants, e.g., cops and perky assistant district attorneys, who protect us from the RECWM who, of course, are what all of us fear to encounter when we are in a dark parking lot.
Obama has captured this movement and its view, and represents and promotes it better than anybody else in living memory. Unlike Carter, Obama is not incompetent in promoting his hatred for America’s traditional values and in embedding it into our institutions, e.g., the ruinous Obamacare, the rapid expansion of the federal dole, the insistence on apologizing for our successes, the disastrous “stimulus” spending, the glorification of the “victim” culture, promotion of envy and cynicism, and denigration of individual effort and success (“You didn’t build that!”) That is the real threat posed by what Obama represents. Overcoming that threat will take years of sustained effort. It begins, of course, with voting Obama out of the White House next November, but does not end there.
In case anyone wants something to hum along with the thread.
re: Obama has become the incarnation of a troubling trend in our country that has accelerated over the past 40 or so years. He has become the head of what passes for modern progressivism: the alliance between tax-supported university faculties, lawyers, government bureaucrats, journalists, NGO “activists,” and Hollywood
joke is on them we ran out of money, and with that we ran out of patience…
U.S. Postal Service Losing A Mind-Blowing $42,335,766 Per Day…
Good article and well written…Obama is nothing more than failed ideology masked behind polished arrogance, a shallow skill set of pretentious and insidious shrillness that preys on the weakness and insecurities of fools.
From your mouth to Bobby Jindal’s ears.
Great summary and comparison of these two miserable failures. Failures at least as far as being President of the US and upholding the intent of the office; they were both outstandingly successful in their true objectives to diminish the power of the US and do as much damage to liberty, freedom, and our economy as possible.
waldensianspirit wrote:
Hey I don’t want to be called a racist but maybe just maybe we have more civil servants than we need?
@ brookly red:
Like:
Government Agency Fighting “Climate Change” Operates 9,516 Vehicles For 11,605 Employees…
My Peanut has a first name, it’s J-I-M-M-Y,
My Peanut has a second name, it’s C-A-R-TE-R.
Oh I hate to eat them every day
And if you ask me why, I’ll say….
‘Cause…
Jimmy Carter has a way
Of Messing Up The USA!
OT
Just a heads up. Diary of Daedalus is holding strong at No. 3, Lady Gaga’s been knocked down to No. 5 by Uncyclopedia, and The Blogmocracy moved up to No. 6.
http://tinyurl.com/9gvqdzx
You may continue.
@ Bunk X:
I saw that…I was surprised that LGF had fallen to 6,551, right beneath the Harry Reid tiny penis blog!
gibsonz wrote:
Not only that, he’s a wuss.
OT
This is just sad.
NYT Magazine cover story -- What’s So Bad About a Boy Who Wants to Wear a Dress?
@ gibsonz:
Breitbart’s gonna need a new spinoff blog: Big PENIS PENIS PENIS LOL.
@ huckfunn:
Yes indeed…and a big one to boot!
@ huckfunn:
Sununu had Ed Rendell cracking up with that
@ Bunk X:
Too funny…
waldensianspirit wrote:
Sununu was using material from Rendell’s book.
@ gibsonz:
I don’t think the Uncyclopedia Penis is a threat, I suspect that more folks don’t care about Lady Gaga’s Penis.
Urban Infidel wrote:
from a prior thread here:
While we’re on the subject, you may perhaps have wondered, in an idle moment, why “transgenders” are included in the LGBTQWXYZ alphabet soup. After all, “transgenders,” who claim to be “born the wrong sex,” are the very negation of the whole concocted “gay and proud” political identity—for what could be less “gay and proud” than someone who will mutilate his own genitals to be able to engage in a same-sex union?
The “transgenders”—and the political “gays”—will counter that these are not “gay people” but rather, truly persons who are “born the wrong sex.”
This is not merely nonsense—it is the ultimate negation of fact. It is the declaration that someone’s “feelings”—which is to say, their mental and emotional delusions—are more powerful a determinant than physical configuration and DNA. If one really, really believes one’s self to be Napoleon, one is still not Napoleon—even if one wears a Napoleonic uniform, tucks one’s hand in the overcoat, and speaks French. Likewise, if one really, really believes one’s self to be a man when one is a woman, or a woman if one is a man, that does not make you one—no matter how you choose to mutilate yourself to appear to conform to your fantasy.
The “transgender” delusion, and the mental-health professionals’ response to it, shows the impotence and uselessness of the mental-health profession. But “transgenders” are very, very useful to the gay-rights movement, even though they clearly stand as a reproachful negation of its tenets:
First, because they provide an outer margin of weirdness which makes even some of the most over the top behavior in the “gay community” appear normal.
Second, because they represent the ultimate negation of fact—and that is extremely important to a movement which is merely a political identity based upon 19th-century pseudoscience.
Third, because “transgenders” are the stealth shock troops by which the gay-rights movement hopes to make same-sex marriage general; the “transgenders” demand recognition, using the endorsement of the most dubious wing of the medical profession.
Once they get such recognition from the political establishment, mutilated women can marry women and mutilated men can marry men. It is a short step from that to the generalization of same-sex marriage.
@ Bunk X:
Well you never can tell Bunk! A small penis and a bag of Cheeto`s can go a long way when coupled to a lack of talent and a willingness to follow the prevailing winds..
@ Bunk X:
And just how IS Mr. Lowell doing these days? 8)
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I read that on the other thread Buzz…good post and spot on.
@ Macker:
He’s hangin’ out.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Incisive observations as always, buzz.
The little boys wearing chiffon and toenail polish in the ‘gender variant’ summer camp slide show, are in for a life of pain and confusion. Their parents should have their own heads examined for encouraging this.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
@ Urban Infidel:
The gender mutilation thing is just another form of mental illness and now it’s supposed to be mainstream. There’s also a group (can’t think of their name) that wants to mainstream pedophilia and there are a growing number of judges who are letting those sickos walk. Disgusting.
@ Urban Infidel:
@ buzzsawmonkey:
@ huckfunn:
It’s also a mental illness on the surgeon’s part to think he/she can compete with G-d in function and artistry
This is tangential, but it does relate to just why Carter gained so many votes among the ignorant conservatives of that time. And it revolves around religion.
I was barely alive, but somewhat aware of the damage the SDS types had done to the universities. The news was old, but I had from my father what it meant and some measure of awareness.
I once heard a preacher say- that the Jesus Movement of the 60′s was the opposite and vanguard to the Free Love, Don’t Judge Me influence of the 60′s radical movement.
Gather all that in your political pipe and prepare to take a toke.
Carter was able to use religion, and used it quite effectively to gain office. The Conservatives at the time—in a time where there was a heavy influence of faith based blocks touting him— turned on their heels and voted this sad sack into office.
And I say this with disgrace. Being a young convert I was also suckered in to voting for him. Just because he claimed to be a Christian.
That will never happen again. But hey,. I was only 19. But that is no excuse.
@ huckfunn:
You might be referring to NAMBLA, the North American Man Boy Love Association. It makes me sick just typing the words.
@ Urban Infidel:
I thought it stood for, “North American Marlon Brando Look A-likes.”
Flyovercountry wrote:
LOL!
@ Urban Infidel:
Emasculation has been in vogue since the 70s, when girls were taught that being a mother equates to slavery. That nonsense was promoted by women who had slim chances of experiencing motherhood (NOW).
http://jwa.org/system/files/mediaobjects/bella-life-mag-cover.jpg
@ huckfunn:
NAMBLA and LGF.
song_and_dance_man wrote:
I must confess, that my first President was Ronald Wilson Reagan, whom likewise I voted for him it was for pretty much the same reason. I was a young convert to Christianity and Reagan was a Christian who was not ashamed of being a Christian or of aspiring to great things.
waldensianspirit wrote:
It’s very arrogant when you think of it, changing your sex via surgery. Because you don’t change anything, you are simply removing the offending flesh. And for kids to be so highly sexualized at that young age is a shame.
I wasn’t exactly a tomboy as a little girl, but I never liked ‘girly’ things like the color pink or barbie dolls either. I never wanted to be a princess or dress up like a fairy. When I reached puberty, I was very content in that netherworld of non-gender and as my femininity crept up, almost against my inner protestations, there I was a blossoming female and I had to learn to live with it. Being a woman is a lot to take on, I’m not sure why a man would want to become one.
@ Urban Infidel:
@ Flyovercountry:
@ Bunk X:
Gawd, but I hate all this perverted crap. Sadly, parents have been going into debt for the past 40 years to have their kids go to college to learn this nonsense. And now it’s codified.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
qwerty
I find the whole idea of sex to be a non-issue, unless one is trying to justify the practice of it in a skewing way. The practice of fidelity and holiness is the essential thing. Feelings are the things that all experience whether they wander into some area the Law is vague or rather adamant about, or find some other justification outside of it.
The most important thing is to keep our eye on the ball. The ball being God.
well heck does that mean
when me and my buds go to the
the Turkey shoots this fall
we can wear our man panties?
back to the closet/
**SPIT** I can’t even stand to talk about this shit anymore. There’s an actual NFL preseason game on so I’m gonna go watch.
Talk to y’all tomorrow.
@ song_and_dance_man:
I wavered at the time, because I thought that I could get free money by voting for Carter, and I was relying mostly on television for my news source. I was ignorant of basic economic principles, and ignorant of the blatant propaganda.
I voted for Reagan instead, mainly because the media was mocking him with bullshit, and realized that Reagan was being Goldwatered.
@ song_and_dance_man:
God is a ball. There. I said it.
@ Bunk X:
I am spinning in circles after that remark Bunk…but I still have direction…lol!
@ huckfunn:
The College bubble will burst. Too much debt incurred and not enough payback. Studying 3rd World World Lesbian Literature doesn’t get you a good job.
ADMINS-- Looks like there’s no OOT scheduled. Give me a coupla minutes.
doriangrey wrote:
You are saying that like it’s a bad thing. I hope I’m misreading that.
Urban Infidel wrote:
There was one of those where I work. Divorced his (its?) wife after the change, thus making it look like a woman was divorcing a woman. Screwed up their 5 year-old child for years. … and some dunderheads where I work were admiring “how brave he (it?) was to have stepped forward and made this bold decision”. Yeah, brave and selfish. The number of people this person hurt by its selfish actions was large.
@ Bunk X:
OK
@ AZfederalist:
Brave would have been for him to remain a man and be a father to his child.
doriangrey wrote:
Ronaldus was my second POTUS vote, and what can I say other than ‘Where the heck is the gold star on my voting record chart?’.
The Lesson was learned.
I was working, during the Carter debacle, at a firm that had me, as a driver, to get gas outside of the odd even lines of the station we had contract with. Yeah it was nice to get gas when we needed it, but it was a piss off for those who were waiting in line to get their fill.
And to think the (D)’s are going to use this Malaiseian hut building, Lefty cum-rather Lately to deliver a speech at the DNC shindig is a slouching towards disgrace as je ne sais quoi.
@ Urban Infidel:
Bingo! Apparently some in our society no longer admire those who set their own desires aside to function well in the position in which they have been placed.
Bunk X wrote:
the gist was mist
@ Rodan:
A SCOOP OF FLAMING HOT OOT IS UP!
@ gibsonz:
@ song_and_dance_man:
@ Rodan:
LOL. That’s one of the funniest things I read on the internest today.
gibsonz wrote:
It’s the inertia of faith. It moves until it is bumped by, hopefully, the right force.
@ gibsonz:
@ song_and_dance_man:
Don’t read too much into it.
I heard a priest say something to the effect that if you ever hear a clergyman of any religion claim that he has no doubts about his beliefs, believe him to be a liar. Faith is always tested.
@ Bunk X:
the test is the man, and what he does with his faith
what it conforms to, in goodness, is the measure of it
love your fellow man as though he were you, and do for him as you would want hi to do for you
This is the ball
AZfederalist wrote:
Only a bad thing in the sense that in that my reasoning for voting for Reagan was less than complete and rational when I first decided to vote for him. Oh I went in whole hog for Reagan, attending rally’s, passing out fliers, campaigning, the whole 9 yards.
By the time I actually voted for him I had good sound logical and rational reasons for voting for him, but my original impetus for voting for him was based on my perception of him as a Christian. I have since learned that mere assertions of being a Christian do not a Christian make one.
Ronald Reagan did not just talk the talk, he walked the walk as well. Bush Sr, Billy Jeff and Obama have all made the claim to being Christians, but the policies that they implemented do not reflect that assertion to have any veracity.
I am no longer as naive or trusting as I was at 18. Just claiming to be a Christian doesn’t impress me as much as it did back then. I am no longer as concerned with the religion an individual claims to practice as I am the personal moral and ethical standards that that individual lives their life by and specifically regarding politicians, that they make their polity decision by.
By the time I voted for Ronald Reagan I knew what his personal moral and ethical standards were and was able to look at his tenure as Governor of my own State to have an idea of how they would affect his policy decisions.
@ doriangrey:
Thanks for your reply. I now understand where you are coming from. “By their fruits you will know them”, something to be kept in mind when listening to those who profess one thing, but behave in a manner inconsistent with that confession.
AZfederalist wrote:
Yes, and what might be forgiven in a lowly average nobody like me, simply cannot be overlooked in someone whose actions will affect the entire moral, ethical and financial fabric of a nation.
doriangrey wrote:
Also, that doesn’t mean that we expect perfection and lack of failings; that’s not possible here on this earth. It is the persistent, unrepentant acts and behavior, inconsistent with their confession that is the issue.
AZfederalist wrote:
Yes, exactly.
Urban Infidel wrote:
From your mouth to God’s ears.