Well, fine - i'll update - I guess no one liked my idea that I thought was so great about telecommuting congress-- and i left it up there through SO SO much retarded ridiculous BS and interesting stuff I'd have loved to write about (LOL@Barack Obama winning the nobel peace prize) - but I guess that'll just have to be lost to history. Ah well.
Nothing all the huge has gone on recently- Prop 8 is up for trial, which I have alot of thoughts on which I dont have time to go into now, but will soon - Limbaugh though.
The left is being accused of Mccarthyism, and its fairly true, but really, I think the whole limbaugh debacle is actually going to end up being a really good thing for the republican party and for limbaugh too, because I cannot IMAGINE, that if he has any sort of responsible or decent attorneys, that he would NOT sue for defamation/slander/false light.
This is something I think alot of people forget about when they go on public tirades about people - and that is that yknow, you cant actualy tell blatant lies about people with impunity, when such blatant lies impute to those people immoral and/or other reprehensible characteristics that would damage the reputation of the figure. Its illegal, and the damages are presumed, which means you don't even have to prove up damages, damages are presumed, and the defendant has to DISPROVE damages.
Slander is not a nice thing to be sued for, and its not an easy case to win, but its winnable and if I was Limbaugh, I think I'd run it.
LOL@all those people who are like "oh limbaugh is always lying and this and that" -- How nice would it be able to say WELL GUESS WHAT? AT LEAST LIMBAUGHS NEVER BEEN SUED FOR SLANDER, AND CHRIS MATTHEWS HAS BEEN! AND BY LIMBAUGH OF ALL PEOPLE!
So for the love of Christ Rush, sue those fuckers for defamation - and have your lawyers look up the tort of "false light" which is slightly different than defamation, and which may not apply to someone as famous as you, but it really depends on whatever jurisdiction you'll be suing in, which is another horribly difficult question to figure- but hey, now that your not buying the rams, you can hire a team of attorneys to figure it out for you!
Please email me for my resume if interested, thx.
PROPOSITION 8 - is something that i will have to get to later, but is something which i take a lot of heat for, by people on both sides of the fence, for my position on it and how i voted on it. Meh.
IM NOT CRAZY THEYRE ALL CRAZY
imo
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
My amazing article/idea that no one wants to publish
So i got a pretty sweet idea and made an editorial article outta it, and submitted it to everyone and thier mom and thier grampa and thier little dog too, and no one seems to want it. Ive published stuff that is like not even close to as good as this, and this, which i think is groundbreaking, nobody wants. WSJ, Investors daily, Am. Thinker, and all the rest of you guys, you are a bunch of F'ing noobs for not seeing the potential in this, I say!
So imma post it here, cause i think its good enough to cause a possible political groundswell. Anyone who reads it and likes it, please pass it on because (and i hate to sound like a certain asshat whose name i wont mention, but who is definitely an asshat)-- i think it could bring some hope and change!
THE CONGRESS OF THE NEW MILLENIUM
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 57% of Americans, if they had their druthers, would boot the entire legislature and “start all over again”, and according to the same poll, Congress has a disapproval rating of 75%.
Rep. Massa (D.-NY) said he would “adamantly vote against the interest of his constituents. Dick Durban (D-Ill.) said town halls are not “a productive use of my [his] time.” Rep. Murtha (D. NY), a 16 term incumbent, calling his constituents a bunch of rednecks, and still got re-elected just three months later.
While August Recess 2009 seems to have brought some measure of accountability, it also illustrated quite a bit of blatant disregard of constituents, and made our elected reps look more than ever like fish out of water in their own hometowns—driving home the inconvenient truth that loyalty to constituents is on the decline, and, we can only assume, loyalties to other political forces/special interests back home in Washington is increasing.
And this is exactly the problem—our reps are now at home in Washington, and Washington is where their livelihoods are—coming back one month a year to talk to their people is just a dreary chore that they’d just as soon avoid (like Sen. Durban). Wouldn’t things be better if, when our reps came back to face the much-deserved August music—they never left? While previously impossible, technology has not only made this possible, but viable. Consider the idea of a legislator—who telecommutes.
A simple theater room such every self-respecting bigshot has in his house anyway nowadays, along with a virtual-teleconferencing system and the proper networking hardware and software -- would make a” virtual session” of congress function almost indistinguishably from a “real” session. Committees could easily meet in private by clicking the other members names and closing the session. Backroom deals between anyone on the server could be similarly performed, without the need to even find a back room to retreat to. Any legislator could easily establish a “virtual presence” in congress from anywhere in the U.S. via basic conferencing software, and a wireless network with an intercom system, both of which undoubtedly exist in Congress buildings already. Anyone who thinks this impossible has likely never seen gotomeeting.com, or watched their teenagers play “Worlds of Warcraft”, an interactive computer game where tens of thousands from all over the world are online and communicating at once. Hell, even the newest Sony Playstation, could do this.
Legislators “working from home” would have two effects. First, it would cause them to be tied to their home districts in a far more meaningful way than they currently are. Instead of coming home once a year and spending the rest of their time in D.C. airing campaign commercials on local TV stations which they themselves haven’t watched in years, Reps would walk out of their offices and take lunch with their people, live among their people, do business with their people, and send their kids to school with their peoples kids.
Put in the simplest terms: Animals do not defecate where they eat and sleep, and neither do human beings—not even politicians. So if you want them to diligently attend to the needs of their homes, make them eat and sleep there.
Secondly, the onset of such a practice would likely cause an influx of new and “higher quality” political blood: People who are tied to their communities by family and careers and who have the desire to serve the communities but no desire to uproot themselves and their families and their businesses and go to Washington-- The type of people for whom public service is an ends in itself, rather than the a stepping-stone in a “political career. “ People who view politics as a “career” will treat it as a career: they will do what they have to in order to advance to the top. This type of political structure—our current one—is in many respects repugnant to dutiful public service, as it is so highly subject to the innately corruptive influence of power and ambition upon the human heart.
While “work from home” legislation would face the same difficulties as term limits legislation, consider the power of a candidate imposing such a requirement on himself—running on a platform of “I’m actually one of you, and to prove it, I’m going to have my office right here on Main street and I am going to stay there all year, and have town halls once a month”. Issues aside, this candidate would have what the polls show almost no politician has anymore—credibility—the people’s trust. This advantage alone could prove so decisive for a candidate in an election that his opponent would be forced to make the same concession to “work from home” or face certain defeat. If the idea of such a practice were to catch on, a sort of “domino effect” could rapidly cause the work-at-home model to go from being a far-out exception to being the norm.
Until the first candidate with the guts to truly tie his own fate into that of his people rises out of the political ashes, legislative telecommuting is an untested hypothesis. But let’s face it: When 42% of people would entrust congress to random people out of phonebooks over current legislators (with 16% not sure) and 50% think that rigged elections are the reason that incumbents win at the rate they do (90% per the article) then disenchantment is at an all time high, and the age of the “work from home” legislator may very well be upon us.
Who knows-- by 2014, the great old marble buildings in Washington may have become concert halls, bringing in revenue from events like celebrity weddings and Britney Spears concerts, finally enabling the Government to turn a profit at something.
So imma post it here, cause i think its good enough to cause a possible political groundswell. Anyone who reads it and likes it, please pass it on because (and i hate to sound like a certain asshat whose name i wont mention, but who is definitely an asshat)-- i think it could bring some hope and change!
THE CONGRESS OF THE NEW MILLENIUM
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 57% of Americans, if they had their druthers, would boot the entire legislature and “start all over again”, and according to the same poll, Congress has a disapproval rating of 75%.
Rep. Massa (D.-NY) said he would “adamantly vote against the interest of his constituents. Dick Durban (D-Ill.) said town halls are not “a productive use of my [his] time.” Rep. Murtha (D. NY), a 16 term incumbent, calling his constituents a bunch of rednecks, and still got re-elected just three months later.
While August Recess 2009 seems to have brought some measure of accountability, it also illustrated quite a bit of blatant disregard of constituents, and made our elected reps look more than ever like fish out of water in their own hometowns—driving home the inconvenient truth that loyalty to constituents is on the decline, and, we can only assume, loyalties to other political forces/special interests back home in Washington is increasing.
And this is exactly the problem—our reps are now at home in Washington, and Washington is where their livelihoods are—coming back one month a year to talk to their people is just a dreary chore that they’d just as soon avoid (like Sen. Durban). Wouldn’t things be better if, when our reps came back to face the much-deserved August music—they never left? While previously impossible, technology has not only made this possible, but viable. Consider the idea of a legislator—who telecommutes.
A simple theater room such every self-respecting bigshot has in his house anyway nowadays, along with a virtual-teleconferencing system and the proper networking hardware and software -- would make a” virtual session” of congress function almost indistinguishably from a “real” session. Committees could easily meet in private by clicking the other members names and closing the session. Backroom deals between anyone on the server could be similarly performed, without the need to even find a back room to retreat to. Any legislator could easily establish a “virtual presence” in congress from anywhere in the U.S. via basic conferencing software, and a wireless network with an intercom system, both of which undoubtedly exist in Congress buildings already. Anyone who thinks this impossible has likely never seen gotomeeting.com, or watched their teenagers play “Worlds of Warcraft”, an interactive computer game where tens of thousands from all over the world are online and communicating at once. Hell, even the newest Sony Playstation, could do this.
Legislators “working from home” would have two effects. First, it would cause them to be tied to their home districts in a far more meaningful way than they currently are. Instead of coming home once a year and spending the rest of their time in D.C. airing campaign commercials on local TV stations which they themselves haven’t watched in years, Reps would walk out of their offices and take lunch with their people, live among their people, do business with their people, and send their kids to school with their peoples kids.
Put in the simplest terms: Animals do not defecate where they eat and sleep, and neither do human beings—not even politicians. So if you want them to diligently attend to the needs of their homes, make them eat and sleep there.
Secondly, the onset of such a practice would likely cause an influx of new and “higher quality” political blood: People who are tied to their communities by family and careers and who have the desire to serve the communities but no desire to uproot themselves and their families and their businesses and go to Washington-- The type of people for whom public service is an ends in itself, rather than the a stepping-stone in a “political career. “ People who view politics as a “career” will treat it as a career: they will do what they have to in order to advance to the top. This type of political structure—our current one—is in many respects repugnant to dutiful public service, as it is so highly subject to the innately corruptive influence of power and ambition upon the human heart.
While “work from home” legislation would face the same difficulties as term limits legislation, consider the power of a candidate imposing such a requirement on himself—running on a platform of “I’m actually one of you, and to prove it, I’m going to have my office right here on Main street and I am going to stay there all year, and have town halls once a month”. Issues aside, this candidate would have what the polls show almost no politician has anymore—credibility—the people’s trust. This advantage alone could prove so decisive for a candidate in an election that his opponent would be forced to make the same concession to “work from home” or face certain defeat. If the idea of such a practice were to catch on, a sort of “domino effect” could rapidly cause the work-at-home model to go from being a far-out exception to being the norm.
Until the first candidate with the guts to truly tie his own fate into that of his people rises out of the political ashes, legislative telecommuting is an untested hypothesis. But let’s face it: When 42% of people would entrust congress to random people out of phonebooks over current legislators (with 16% not sure) and 50% think that rigged elections are the reason that incumbents win at the rate they do (90% per the article) then disenchantment is at an all time high, and the age of the “work from home” legislator may very well be upon us.
Who knows-- by 2014, the great old marble buildings in Washington may have become concert halls, bringing in revenue from events like celebrity weddings and Britney Spears concerts, finally enabling the Government to turn a profit at something.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Thank you Joe Wilson
So as most people that keep up with all the political BS of the day know, some guy named Joe Wilson, A freshman Rep from South Carolina, yelled out "you lie" in the middle of Obamas health care speech in front of the joint session of congress.
Besides the fact that the guy was telling the truth, outside of that i think what he did was great because it served the purpose of stealing whatever thunder obama's speech had. (it really didn't have much, cause as I said in my previous post, I am fairly convinced that no one really wants to hear him or listen to him anymore, whether they agree OR disagree with him)...
But to the extent that anyone was listening/caring/looking forward to seeing what he had to say, this guy really just, with two words, stole the entire show from the President.
the news stories today make that abundantly clear-- i cruise around the news sites and i see NOTHING in the top stories about any of the content of the Obama speech.
Now I'll grant you that there was no content worthy of making a big deal over, but really, there never was any content worth reporting on in an Obama speech (they were always totally empty) --but that didn't stop everyone from trying...
This time, the top news stories are:
Yahoo: "Speeches defining moment") [Wilson comment discussion obviously]
CNN mainpage: ABOVE the entry about the Obama speech, the headline "Wilson remark Spontaneous" appears.
CNN Politics page: the cover story is an angry picture of Representative Wilson pointing a finger and (presumably) yelling at the president, the headline "Town hall anger echoes in congress"
DrudgeReport: (okay the drudge report is right leaning ill admit it but still): Middle of the page headline, huge letters "YOU LIE"
CBS News (as left wing as it gets): Doesn't have the Wilson thing up specifically, but has a collage of presidential "brawls" saying "Wilson has alot of competition" ---
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... they are trying to diffuse what Wilson did by saying "hey look theres all these other guys that REALLY ripped into a president, Wilson a'int nothin'! " -- LOL, nice try.
So basically, it seems like the Republicans are finaly learning how to use the press-- whether its iwttingly or unwittingly, they are starting to get louder and starting to force even the mainstream media to cover what they do, and thus sabotaging their own interests, with ore without realizing it.
Well done, Mr. Wilson. I know you meant what you said, and I believe you when you say it was spontaneous.
that just goes to show that sometimes the best things you can do are totally unplanned-- because your two words pretty much stole the entire evening away from Obama. I bet David Axelrod is thinking to himself: "DAMMIT! Genius! Sheer genius! Exactly what I would have told someone to do! "
Again, well done sir, well done. Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire.
Besides the fact that the guy was telling the truth, outside of that i think what he did was great because it served the purpose of stealing whatever thunder obama's speech had. (it really didn't have much, cause as I said in my previous post, I am fairly convinced that no one really wants to hear him or listen to him anymore, whether they agree OR disagree with him)...
But to the extent that anyone was listening/caring/looking forward to seeing what he had to say, this guy really just, with two words, stole the entire show from the President.
the news stories today make that abundantly clear-- i cruise around the news sites and i see NOTHING in the top stories about any of the content of the Obama speech.
Now I'll grant you that there was no content worthy of making a big deal over, but really, there never was any content worth reporting on in an Obama speech (they were always totally empty) --but that didn't stop everyone from trying...
This time, the top news stories are:
Yahoo: "Speeches defining moment") [Wilson comment discussion obviously]
CNN mainpage: ABOVE the entry about the Obama speech, the headline "Wilson remark Spontaneous" appears.
CNN Politics page: the cover story is an angry picture of Representative Wilson pointing a finger and (presumably) yelling at the president, the headline "Town hall anger echoes in congress"
DrudgeReport: (okay the drudge report is right leaning ill admit it but still): Middle of the page headline, huge letters "YOU LIE"
CBS News (as left wing as it gets): Doesn't have the Wilson thing up specifically, but has a collage of presidential "brawls" saying "Wilson has alot of competition" ---
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... they are trying to diffuse what Wilson did by saying "hey look theres all these other guys that REALLY ripped into a president, Wilson a'int nothin'! " -- LOL, nice try.
So basically, it seems like the Republicans are finaly learning how to use the press-- whether its iwttingly or unwittingly, they are starting to get louder and starting to force even the mainstream media to cover what they do, and thus sabotaging their own interests, with ore without realizing it.
Well done, Mr. Wilson. I know you meant what you said, and I believe you when you say it was spontaneous.
that just goes to show that sometimes the best things you can do are totally unplanned-- because your two words pretty much stole the entire evening away from Obama. I bet David Axelrod is thinking to himself: "DAMMIT! Genius! Sheer genius! Exactly what I would have told someone to do! "
Again, well done sir, well done. Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
First Entry
Well, Okay. This is officially my first foray into the dreaded....the infamous....the "sewer of unfiltered information" ...the right wing blogosphere. Some asshat mainstream media guy (dont keep up with those guys names or anything) was recently interviewed by some other asshat mainstream media guy, and they were whining about how horrible the internet was because of all the misinformation out there. You know all that nasty misinformation... the nasty sites that go around spreading evil rumors about how Obamacare is actually NOT going to let you "keep your old insurance if you like it" and how it actually WILL probably cover illegal immigrants, inspite of what the mainstream media and the adminstration both want you to think.
It's that nasty evil thing that liberals call 'misinformation' but which us benighted souls who went to public schools and colleges instead of ivy leagues commonly referred to as 'the truth.'
In any case, something interesting happened today, which shows a lot of what is wrong with barack obama. More to the point, it illustrates tidily exactly what it is about him that makes him different from most every other democrat out there, and what makes him such a horrible threat and a liability to his party, and really, i almost hate to say it, but an asset to Republicans.
Because I cant stand listening to Barack Obama talk, as his speech came onto the radio, I went next door to the ole liquor store/deli to get some food, 1/2 expecting it to be on TV there anyway, since they have CNN on there a fair bit. The owners there, gregarious persian guys, have known me for some years, and are pretty much my buddies. Politically, they call themselves independents-- they didn't like Bush much, but never cared for Barack Obama either, but were willing to give him a chance, because for some reason they think that whenever Republicans are in control, the economy tanks.
So I go in there, and women's tennis is on, and they are talking in Farsi to each other. I said to them
"Hey guys, why arent you watching Hussein Obama?? He's giving a healthcare speech y'know."
and one of the guys just groaned and the other looked aggrivated and said: (accent included just because)
"Yoo know vat? Dat guy geeves a speech every f***ing day, you theenk i vanna hear dat guy talk??? Dat guy needs to shut de hell up."
I just laughed and agreed that women's tennis was much more entertaining, and we watched it as I got my sandwich. It was definitely much more interesting.
The above exchange is a really great example of what will destroy Barack: He is in love with himself-- and that is a really grating personality trait. He really beleives that he can convince anyone of anything that he beleives in, just because he is oh-so-intelligent and because his teleprompter is oh-so-elopquent. And man- that kind of grandiosity just plain annoys the hell out of people-- on either side of the fence.
Consider some of his pompous, presumptuous shenanigans that have just ended up making him look asinine:
---Parading around Europe, before he was even elected President, acting as though he was the President already and calling himself a citizen of the world, and apologizing for americas mistakes.
---Thinking he could 'talk' Akmedinijad, a muslim wacko extremist whose regime still executes gay people, into being a friendly guy and peacefully co exist with us;
---Thinking he could do the same with Chavez in Venezuela
---Thinking he could have a 'beer summit' and somehow, over a beer, mediate a dispute between a black fundamentalist race-baiting harvard elitist professor, and a white cop who said professor beleives deprived him of his civil liberties.
---Most recently, targeting students in a speech telling them to stay in school and be responsible (they hear this all the time, and he thinks his wonderful speech is going to turn the class dope-smoker/screwball into doogie howser-- a hopeless and silly thing to try and do, at the risk of a ton of political heat, as NO parents like the idea of some demagogue telling thier kids what to do-- even if its the right thing.)
Essentially, it is clear that this man is in love with himself. He has such a grandiose opinion of himself that he gives WAY too many speeches, makes WAY too many appearances in front of the cameras, and makes WAY too many brash claims and sets up WAY to many unrealistic expectations of himself-- and it is becoming more and more obvious, to the point where people are just getting sick of him. Nobody likes a narcissist. Look it up. Somewhere in the "filthy sewer of unfiltered information" you will find a filthy, unfiltered source called wikipedia where they will explain (in a filthy, unfiltered way of course-- which is just how we like to take our truth here in the right wing nuthouse) how a narcissist behaves, and how it affects peoples perceptions of him, and damages his personal relationships, eeetc.
He just never gets it-- he maks one bad political move after the other -- one big appearance after another, in front of a populace thats
(a) sick of seeing his face on TV;
(b) Sick of hearing his voice ;
(c) Sick of hearing his same ideas, which we have already made clear we dont like very much\.
And Rather than try to to some politickin' -- back pedaling, waffling, doubletalking, changing his ideas, etc. etc. he keeps keeps right on truckin' ... trying to convince us that we want things that we don't want, and that he knows better.
And his approval numbers show that yes, people are starting to realize what an asinine narcissist he is.
And man, am I glad he is this way. The Republican Party was in some trouble--If he was another Bill Clinton, he really could have capitalized on it. Instead, just like he did in his campaign when he threw away an early 15+ point lead, to let a crusty old, slightly post-traumatic-stress-afflicted John McCain actually get ahead of him for a second there by making one dumb mistake after the other, he has thrown away a 70+ percent approval rating, by talking too much, too often, about too many things which we tell him over and over again we dont like, but which he keeps on thinking he can convince us of.
And I don't know about you, but he's about as likely to turn me into an Obamacare supporter as as he was likely to turn Akmedinijad into a Jehovah's witness.
But just like with Akmedinijad, it isnt stopping him from trying. And thank God for that. Keep trying sir, the more you talk the less people want to listen-- and your results with the American people will be just as successful as your results with Akedinejad (that result being complete failure, in case anyones wondering).
And finally, it'll get to the point where when he finally does have the 'moment of clarity' and decides to make a speech with minimal help from the teleprompter which back-pedals on some of his terrible polcies, it'll be too late -- everyone will be tuned into tennis instead.
I dunno. There's still a major battle out there, but im optimistic. After all, these are the days of hope and change, are they not????
It's that nasty evil thing that liberals call 'misinformation' but which us benighted souls who went to public schools and colleges instead of ivy leagues commonly referred to as 'the truth.'
In any case, something interesting happened today, which shows a lot of what is wrong with barack obama. More to the point, it illustrates tidily exactly what it is about him that makes him different from most every other democrat out there, and what makes him such a horrible threat and a liability to his party, and really, i almost hate to say it, but an asset to Republicans.
Because I cant stand listening to Barack Obama talk, as his speech came onto the radio, I went next door to the ole liquor store/deli to get some food, 1/2 expecting it to be on TV there anyway, since they have CNN on there a fair bit. The owners there, gregarious persian guys, have known me for some years, and are pretty much my buddies. Politically, they call themselves independents-- they didn't like Bush much, but never cared for Barack Obama either, but were willing to give him a chance, because for some reason they think that whenever Republicans are in control, the economy tanks.
So I go in there, and women's tennis is on, and they are talking in Farsi to each other. I said to them
"Hey guys, why arent you watching Hussein Obama?? He's giving a healthcare speech y'know."
and one of the guys just groaned and the other looked aggrivated and said: (accent included just because)
"Yoo know vat? Dat guy geeves a speech every f***ing day, you theenk i vanna hear dat guy talk??? Dat guy needs to shut de hell up."
I just laughed and agreed that women's tennis was much more entertaining, and we watched it as I got my sandwich. It was definitely much more interesting.
The above exchange is a really great example of what will destroy Barack: He is in love with himself-- and that is a really grating personality trait. He really beleives that he can convince anyone of anything that he beleives in, just because he is oh-so-intelligent and because his teleprompter is oh-so-elopquent. And man- that kind of grandiosity just plain annoys the hell out of people-- on either side of the fence.
Consider some of his pompous, presumptuous shenanigans that have just ended up making him look asinine:
---Parading around Europe, before he was even elected President, acting as though he was the President already and calling himself a citizen of the world, and apologizing for americas mistakes.
---Thinking he could 'talk' Akmedinijad, a muslim wacko extremist whose regime still executes gay people, into being a friendly guy and peacefully co exist with us;
---Thinking he could do the same with Chavez in Venezuela
---Thinking he could have a 'beer summit' and somehow, over a beer, mediate a dispute between a black fundamentalist race-baiting harvard elitist professor, and a white cop who said professor beleives deprived him of his civil liberties.
---Most recently, targeting students in a speech telling them to stay in school and be responsible (they hear this all the time, and he thinks his wonderful speech is going to turn the class dope-smoker/screwball into doogie howser-- a hopeless and silly thing to try and do, at the risk of a ton of political heat, as NO parents like the idea of some demagogue telling thier kids what to do-- even if its the right thing.)
Essentially, it is clear that this man is in love with himself. He has such a grandiose opinion of himself that he gives WAY too many speeches, makes WAY too many appearances in front of the cameras, and makes WAY too many brash claims and sets up WAY to many unrealistic expectations of himself-- and it is becoming more and more obvious, to the point where people are just getting sick of him. Nobody likes a narcissist. Look it up. Somewhere in the "filthy sewer of unfiltered information" you will find a filthy, unfiltered source called wikipedia where they will explain (in a filthy, unfiltered way of course-- which is just how we like to take our truth here in the right wing nuthouse) how a narcissist behaves, and how it affects peoples perceptions of him, and damages his personal relationships, eeetc.
He just never gets it-- he maks one bad political move after the other -- one big appearance after another, in front of a populace thats
(a) sick of seeing his face on TV;
(b) Sick of hearing his voice ;
(c) Sick of hearing his same ideas, which we have already made clear we dont like very much\.
And Rather than try to to some politickin' -- back pedaling, waffling, doubletalking, changing his ideas, etc. etc. he keeps keeps right on truckin' ... trying to convince us that we want things that we don't want, and that he knows better.
And his approval numbers show that yes, people are starting to realize what an asinine narcissist he is.
And man, am I glad he is this way. The Republican Party was in some trouble--If he was another Bill Clinton, he really could have capitalized on it. Instead, just like he did in his campaign when he threw away an early 15+ point lead, to let a crusty old, slightly post-traumatic-stress-afflicted John McCain actually get ahead of him for a second there by making one dumb mistake after the other, he has thrown away a 70+ percent approval rating, by talking too much, too often, about too many things which we tell him over and over again we dont like, but which he keeps on thinking he can convince us of.
And I don't know about you, but he's about as likely to turn me into an Obamacare supporter as as he was likely to turn Akmedinijad into a Jehovah's witness.
But just like with Akmedinijad, it isnt stopping him from trying. And thank God for that. Keep trying sir, the more you talk the less people want to listen-- and your results with the American people will be just as successful as your results with Akedinejad (that result being complete failure, in case anyones wondering).
And finally, it'll get to the point where when he finally does have the 'moment of clarity' and decides to make a speech with minimal help from the teleprompter which back-pedals on some of his terrible polcies, it'll be too late -- everyone will be tuned into tennis instead.
I dunno. There's still a major battle out there, but im optimistic. After all, these are the days of hope and change, are they not????
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)