Jim-Rose.com

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 17 Apr 2016 02:51:00 +0000

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 22:15:00 +0000

#JeSuisCharlie

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:30:00 +0000

Wishing You And Yours A Happy Festivus!

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 23 Dec 2014 18:39:00 +0000

Postmodern Culture Goes To 11

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:49:00 +0000

A lot of us in my family like to joke that no matter what we say within the family, we're wrong. For example, if at a family gathering, one family member says "I'm cold," chances are another family member will say "No, you're not." We somehow found a way to meld opinion and fact and feel the need to rule on opinions as though they are facts. Not being able to afford a team of psychologists, this habit will remain a mystery amongst the Rose family.

However, this practice seems to have invaded our culture. There's a lot of head-shaking over the fact that former Baltimore Raven Ray Lewis, a man who pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a murder case, is offering opinions about a possible cover-up by the Ravens organization and the NFL in the Ray Rice case. How can Lewis possibly offer unbiased commentary on the subject being a former Raven and being a former criminal who covered-up a crime? However possible, it's happening and ESPN is letting it happen all the while acting like Lewis's past never happened.

This is partly due to the postmodern culture of which we live. Postmodernism is mostly based in irony and criticism of realism and any and all belief in absolute truth, but Ray Lewis takes us into uncharted territory.

I'm reminded of the classic mockumentary (see?) Spinal Tap: (start at 3:43)

These goes to 11. It's not really louder than 10, it's just numbered differently, but to Nigel...it goes to 11.

For Ray Lewis, his "goes to 11" moment came when he stated this:

“There’s some things you can cover up,” Lewis said Sunday about the Rice situation. “And then there’s some things you can’t. This is a sad day for me because the reputation I left in this organization, this isn’t it.”

Those of us still clinging to "realism" will shake our heads or scream at the TV, but in the ultra-postmodern culture we've gone from irony to straight-up denial where Ray Lewis is pure, Nigel's amp goes to 11 and I'm not cold at a parent's house...and if you try to say otherwise, well, you're just not fitting in.

I wonder where this road will lead...

Baser Instincts and The NFL

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 10 Sep 2014 22:33:00 +0000

Rush Limbaugh hit on the heart of the matter yesterday when he said the outrage over the Ray Rice videotape proves that feminism is "artificial." The bottom line is when we see a woman get punched, we see it differently than a man getting punched. Thus, proof that men and women are not the same...they are different in the eyes of all human beings.

This is what I believe happened with the NFL. They knew what happened with Ray Rice and they may have seen the video beforehand, but once the video went public, they knew what the reaction would be. Forget the feminism malarkey, they knew people would be outraged at seeing a woman get her clocked cleaned. If it had been a guy, we'd still be outraged but not in the same way. Despite what our pop culture tries to dictate, you can't change baser instincts. Women are the vessel of the species and we revere them. You don't hit a woman if you are a civilized man. Men hitting men has a lot of extenuating circumstances (especially if it's over a woman), but hitting a woman, not so much.

The NFL brass knows this and that's why they panicked and handed down the indefinite ban of Ray Rice. The release of the video to the general public screwed up their initial plan to just ban Rice for two games to protect a talented player from having his career destroyed and the Baltimore Ravens season from being ruined. Let's face it, there are a lot of Ray Rice's in the NFL. "Protect the Shield" also means don't ban the NFL out of existence. This is the quandary the league faces.

So that's what I believe happened. And now the NFL is trying to figure out how to explain themselves without resorting to the cold, hard truth.

Joni Ernst and Company You Keep

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 22:06:00 +0000

Some are speculating that Joni Ernst may be the first Senate candidate to do a quasi-Akin as it was revealed that she supported a bill in Iowa that grants "personhood" to an unborn child at the moment of conception. It's theorized that this is a bridge to far for the general public which is split on the issue of abortion.

To me, it points out an important facet of the human condition. We like to tell ourselves that we love our fellow man and have compassion for all living things and, in a sense, we do, but when it comes to riding to the rescue, human beings only really care about those they live with. Blood isn't even accurate enough in this scenario. "Family" are the people that you live with, eat with and are part of your daily life. After that, it's not really your problem.

I'm not saying this is great, I'm saying this is the way it is. I feel bad for homeless people, but I'm not out building them houses. If my brother was homeless, then I'd be building a house. That's natural...that's the human condition.

The abortion issue splits a lot of people, but I suspect most are agnostic. The more you know about the procedure, the more disgusted you are, but how many people are prepared to stop it at all cost? Only if it's in their family.

That's why I laugh when liberals claim to be horrified that so many Iraqis died in the Iraq War "thanks to George W. Bush." Don't see that much bleating from the left about the Iraqis dying at the hands of ISIS (ISIL?) or even way back in the day when Saddam was doing the gassing. It's all politics. Nobody really cares about anybody except their inner-circle.

That's a pretty damning statement, but I've yet to hear a good counter-argument.

A Rare Smart Move By The White House

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 21:39:00 +0000

In between rounds of golf (and part of me doesn't care he golfs so much...less time governing), President Obama and his team of mutants have decided not to illegally grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants via executive order. As Ace aptly pointed out a while back (hat tip: @redsteeze), the idea, no, the FACT, that this act would be illegal doesn't even come into it with the MSM and they merely worry about Obama's Odysseus-like journey through life rather than the rape of the Constitution.

Anyway, they've decided not to do anything until after the elections in 2014. A good move. This election, to paraphrase Harry Reid, is lost from the Democrat's point of view. There's still time for the GOP to blow the Senate, but they will make some gains regardless (Montana, South Dakota, West Virginia) and definitely hold onto the House, so why make things worse and guarantee (maybe) the Senate flips by granting amnesty now?

Simple solution is to wait until after the election when the next ballot box is two years away which gives the public plenty of time to forget and the Democrats plenty of time to get these amnestied folks on the voter rolls either legally or illegally. Simple. Easy.

See? Journalism!

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 01 Sep 2014 18:56:00 +0000

When in doubt, what do you do? You get younger. Obviously you can't do that for yourself, but you can with your NFL team, your company, your news organization.

With Diane Sawyer leaving the anchor desk for ABC's World News Tonight, the network decided to to turn the seat over to a young hotshot named David Muir. Forty-years old soaking wet, Muir has served his time overseas and as Sawyer's fill-in, so the network decided, hey, why not put a young guy in there and see if we can get a younger audience, especially women, and if and when the numbers tick up we can say, "See? Journalism!"

It's no secret that the evening newscast, once your only source of up-to-the-minute news, are as good as dead in the age of the Internet and 24-hour news. However, networks like ABC will cling to the old format as long as they can and continually scratch their heads wondering what's wrong?

What's wrong? Stop me if you've heard this, but the major networks, sans Fox News, have made the decision they'd rather die than serve the interests of the non-liberal populous. MSNBC and CNN are glad to be a distant second and third in the cable race. It's a far better fate than hiring people who do actual journalism and give conservatives a fair shake.

So congratulations to David Muir. It's a cushy job and I'm sure he worked hard for it. The Correspondents Dinner will be fun, joking with the president while the world burns. Kudos.

First Openly Gay NFL Player Treated Like Any Other; Cut

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 22:38:00 +0000

Michael Sam has been cut by the St. Louis Rams. After competing for a spot with the team he came up just short. Coach Jeff Fisher treated Sam like any other player. He had his opportunity (and still may have one with another team) and it didn't happen; the same scenario that played out for thousands of other heterosexual players before him.

In the face of it, he was all class:

Again, he was treated like anyone else. Isn't that the definition of tolerance?

Not for the culture warriors:

Yeesh.

And Why Not?

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 22:12:00 +0000

We're back.

After the reelection of Barack Obama in November of 2012, I had a blogger nervous breakdown. I retired the Libertarian Popinjay, moved to Wordpress and posted rarely. I've seen many elections in my life, some with good results, some with bad results, but at the very least I understood them all. Not so in 2012.

But that was then and this is now in the "new normal" or whatever you want to call it. I'm back home. I may hate Google despite using it all the time (hypocrite!), but Blogger, with all it's flaws, feels more comfortable. I've dusted off some old designs and I'm gonna try to pick up where I left off. Can't promise I'll post as often as I used to, but we'll see how it goes.

I can promise that it'll get weird more often than not. These are indeed weird times.

Pres Obama said “The world’s always been messy … we’re just noticing now in part because of social media."
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) August 29, 2014

Yeesh.

Cult of Personality: Then and Now

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:43:00 +0000

Trying to explain history is no small task. You have to try. Part of being human is the search for understanding; the search for meaning. In the mid-90's, journalists Ron Rosenbaum set out to explain Hitler or rather he set out to explain the explainers in his extraordinary work of scholarship (aptly titled) Explaining Hitler. In the book, Rosenbaum looks at the historians and scholars who have spent a lifetime trying to explain what makes a person like Adolph Hitler. It boils down to the question 'Does evil know it's evil?'. Also, 'Are you born with evil or is it a learned behavior?'. Not surprisingly, no one has definitively cracked the case, but not for lack of trying.

After the fall of Hitler came the Cold War as the USA and USSR took their positions at loggerheads for the next 46 years. A fairly new book, Roosevelt’s Lost Alliances: How Personal Politics Helped Start the Cold War by Frank Costigliola, seeks to explain just how the Cold War started and how it might have been avoided. Unfortunately, Costigliola, like many scholars, is blinded by a cult of personality for the now fabled FDR as a savior of mankind. A reading of history that is all too familiar in this age of Barack Obama.

In his review of the book, Stuart Reid at the New Republic writes that Costigliola's main argument is that the sheer winning personality of FDR might have prevented the Cold War:

The more glaring problem with Costigliola’s argument, however, is that it places far too much stock in Roosevelt’s personal touch. Costigliola gives Roosevelt credit for “cultivating personal ties, playing to emotional dispositions, minimizing ideological and cultural differences, and restraining explosive emotions” and argues that “the Truman administration might have gotten further with Stalin had it addressed the dictator’s apparent emotional needs.” Although Roosevelt may have picked up more manners at Hyde Park than Truman did in Missouri, the book never explains just how greater sensitivity would have changed Stalin’s geopolitical calculus.

To put it bluntly, Costigliola believes that given more time, FDR might have been able to convince Stalin to not be, well, Stalin. With his "personal touch" Roosevelt could have prevented the Soviets from ravaging Eastern Europe.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Idol worship of political figures is a very dangerous thing. I hope it's not too late to reject this most recent cult of personality.

The Libya Scandal Unbound

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 17:28:00 +0000

Mitt Romney made the right play in the last debate with President Obama which centered on foreign policy. While many like myself and even the cool cucumber Charles Krauthammer would have loved to see Romney go at Obama with a Louisville Slugger on the Libya debacle, it would have taken the debate into the tall weeds. As I've said many times, candidates running for president actually deserve our sympathy because they have to spend so much time - most of it in the home stretch - convincing really stupid people to vote for them. Maybe that's a little harsh but what you have to remember about "undecided" voters is that they have no real ideology. They never spend their time doing any deep thinking, of giving much consideration to things outside of their domestic bubble. Romney's message of "we'll be a strong nation (i.e. safe) abroad by being a strong nation domestically (i.e. economically)" was a stroke of genius considering who he has to win over in the final days. A broad, macro approach to foreign policy appeals to moderate or undecided voters who he can put him over the top on November 6th.

That being said, us political wonks know that what has happened in Libya is a "big f-ing deal" to quote our Vice President who isn't just an idiot, he's an unfeeling and callous individual. I'm the type of person that speaks my mind and occasional bends the rules of decorum, but asking a dead-soldier's father about his son's balls is the height of social ignorance and utterly contemptible. You see, to Obama, Biden and Hillary, we aren't even real human beings, we're like game pieces, but not in a game of kings like Chess or even Risk. I'm afraid we're all playing Sorry.

Be that as it may, all the evidence and ass-covering of the past weeks points to only one conclusion. President Obama left our people in Libya defenseless. The only question left is why? Was it a purely political decision? an avoidance of a possibly failed military mission before an election? Certainly the ghost of Jimmy Carter's ill-fated rescue attempt of the Iranian hostages is still with us. But even if that's so, it's maddening to think that Obama and his inner circle would think that something like this could stay a secret.

The Home Stretch

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:26:00 +0000

Been very busy at work so posting has been non-existent, but with the day off I'm taking the opportunity to get back up to speed.

I'm naturally a pessimist when it comes to elections and the chances of my guy winning, but I'm finding less and less to be pessimistic about in the case of Mitt Romney's run for the presidency. Right now, the smart money is on him to win this election. The polls are breaking his way and no matter what verbal slips a Senate candidate makes or what nothing-burgers Gloria Allred comes up with, nothing out there seems to be able to stop Romney's momentum. People are paying attention and waking up. Newspapers that endorsed Obama in 2008 are flipping for Romney thus adding to the wave. I'm not saying I'm 100% convinced victory is in hand, but it's looking damn good.

That being said, Romney is going to need every vote. There will be fraud and there may be bad weather. If you have early voting in your state, do it. If there's rain forecast for election day, invest in poncho. Do what you have to do to cast that vote. Here in Nevada, I voted last Saturday. I had the voting machine print out my ballot so I could double-check it had the right names. Ultimately, that's all you can do.

Second Debate: My Take

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:12:00 +0000

Didn't get to see all of last night's debate due to prior commitments but saw enough and various clips to get a good feel for it.

First, here's two opinions from two bright men of the right.

Charles Krauthammer:

“Obama clearly had a good night,” Krauthammer said, asserting that on points, President Obama won the debate. “When Romney went large he did well, when Romney went small [...] Obama got the better of him.”

Mark Levin:

Charles Krauthammer and his followers today are wrong. Obama did not win the debate on points or edge out Romney. Based on what? Obama could not defend his awful record, which Romney repeatedly hammered. In fact, Obama lied about his supposed role in increasing oil and gas production. He lied about creating jobs. He lied about Romney’s position on women’s access to health care. Does that give Obama the edge?

Obama sounded like a fool on the terrorist attack on Libya. Candy Crowley tried to rescue him with her own dishonest statement and intervention. But Romney nailed Obama. In fact, Obama’s false assertion and Crowley’s abuse of her role are the big topics of discussion this morning. And Obama was often angry and disregarded the rules and the clock.

So, on what basis did Obama edge out Romney? This debate changes nothing and Obama is stuck with his record.

Here's the thing: they're both right. Sounds wishy-washy but they're coming from two different, yet correct, perspectives. Krauthammer is giving the perspective on how the debate will play with the public as a whole both rational and irrational; a public that looks at things not always based on facts but rather like a boxing match where a punch is a punch even if there's not much power behind it. Levin on the other hand is analyzing this from a purely logical point of view looking at the facts and less the presentation.

Bottom line, Romney went into this debate ahead of the game. He just had to not lose it in order to keep his momentum going. Obama excited his base but that's chump-change in the grand scheme. All Obama has to worry about with his base is turnout. To win this election you need to get the independents and even with Obama's "fiery" performance, Romney still wins them over on economic issues. As important as I think Libya is, the economy is still where this race is gonna be won or lost. After last night, advantage is still Romney's. Now he needs to run some effective ads that make the points he wasn't able to make at the debate.

Early voting starts Saturday here in Nevada. Get out there!

UPDATE: Great minds...what do they do? They think alike.

The Romney Surge: A Theory

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 00:45:00 +0000

If I weren't such a pessimist, I would be inclined to say that the signs are there that Mitt Romney is pulling away from Barack Obama. He's picking up steam in the swing states and the crowds coming out to see him are huge.

The campaign started rolling after Romney's debate with President Obama. It was watched by 67 million Americans...a spectacular number and his performance gave a sterling first impression to the many who had, for all intents and purposes, seen him for the first time.

We hear every presidential election that "most" voters don't really start getting into the race until October unlike us wonks who are into it 24/7 and can't figure out how no one has made up their minds yet. However, this old cliche may have proven out, but (spoiler alert!) the MSM is to blame.

Let's look at these people that supposedly were seeing Romney for the first time. To be more precise these were people that had, of course, heard of Mitt Romney, but up until that point, they knew him as a caricature. And who, dear reader, creates said caricatures? You guessed it.

As with any major political event, we get an endless stream of stupid "Do ____ Matter?" articles from the MSM. In the case of the Obama/Romney debate we got plenty of "Do Debates Matter?" write-ups and pontifications after the debate since it was clear their guy Obama got his clock cleaned.

So to answer this question: Yes, debates do matter...for Republican candidates, thanks to you, MSM. If the American people had had a real, unbiased representation of Mitt Romney from the media since he secured the GOP nomination, they wouldn't have gone into the debate knowing him only as some rich guy with great hair who had something to do with the Olympics and might have injected some woman with cancer. But despite the MSM buffoonery, the debate wouldn't have mattered as much if Romney hadn't done as well as he did. If he wins in November, we may have to stop talking about the first Kennedy-Nixon debate as the most significant presidential debate in history.

Romney has the momentum right now, let's just hope it's enough.

Let It Come Down

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 17:23:00 +0000

Admittedly, I'm still very nervous about the election. I watched the debates the other night with my heart racing. I wanted Mitt Romney to do well. It's like a football game: you're watching the clock, your team has the lead...can they can hold on? In that last 10 minutes, I knew Romney had "won the game" and was hoping he didn't give up too much to Obama in "garbage time."

Lot's of tricks upcoming. Ridiculous unemployment numbers; a bin Laden movie; maybe some wagging of the dog in Libya. It could all work. Obama could still pull this out and after that, you can bet he'll be out for revenge for suffering the indignity of being challenged.

But while my mood still swings slightly with the good and bad news day by day, I am developing a sense of peace over November 6th. Either way, we'll know. We'll know where we stand and where we're headed. If Romney wins, there's some hope for America returning to normalcy. If Obama wins, well, we'll know where we stand can adjust accordingly. While I still pray it doesn't happen, a second Obama term will be like the biggest boxing match a fighter has ever faced. The American Idea will have the opportunity to see what it's made of; if it can withstand the biggest challenge of its life. It's almost thrilling to think about; to be taken to the precipice. The rational part of my brain says "We can't let it happen, we won't survive." while the more philosophical side says "Let this be our final battle."

Right now, we're in a state of limbo like I've never personally experienced. If the only path left is through the looking glass, then...let it come down.

First Debate: My Take

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 04:07:00 +0000

The biggest problem with presidential debates is they tend to be all about the zingers in the end. In fact, there was a story floated by the media this week that Mitt Romney has prepared a playbook of zingers for the debate. I think after tonight, that story was bunkum, however, the story that Romney had been preparing like crazy for this debate is very believable. And that's good news. What better quality could you ask for in a president than excellent preparation? (i.e. He does his homework.)

Yes, it's true that the challenger usually does better in the first debate as he tries to land a punch, but it was more than that. Romney was prepared, he was aggressive but not a bully, he took control of the room and answered allegations with lists of counterpoints (Paul Ryan influence?). Obama wouldn't make eye contact with Romney for about the first 30 minutes, seemed to get some kind of rhythm after that and then coasted the rest of the way trying to run out the clock. The MSNBC cabal was forlorned. Obama spokespeople blamed Jim Lehrer.

Deep breath.

Romney won the debate and Obama suffered by not having a teleprompter and more importantly being out of shape debate-wise. As many pointed out on Twitter, he hasn't been challenged, really challenged, in four years (if not longer). If the media actually put him through his trials once in a while he might be better prepared.

I agree with Krauthammer that this isn't a 'total game-changer, it's over, Romney is President' performance but it is a serious boost to Romney's campaign. One more month with this kind of energy and he can win this thing. The next debate will be much different as Obama will be more prepared (right?), so don't get cocky but stay the course you've set tonight.

On another note, Lehrer is gonna get a lot of grief from the MSM, but this is the best debate I've seen in years, and not because Romney won. What's been missing from debates with their stupid town-hall formats, with scripted questions from "real" people, is interaction between the candidates themselves. Lehrer got run over by Romney and later Obama but that was a good thing. The accidental format of "here's the topic: discuss..." was the best thing that could have happened. These two men are the warriors the country has chosen for the final battle in November. Many of us are dying for a little bit of "This is Sparta!" We (at least us red state types) got some of that tonight.

Tape Drops: A Theory

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 19:48:00 +0000

The nation's editor, Matt Drudge, has tweeted a scoop about a tape drop tonight:

Curious tape dropping tonight. NOT from MOTHERJONES. Will cause controversy,ignite accusations of racism -- in both directions!
— MATT DRUDGE (@DRUDGE) October 2, 2012

Perhaps, but look at everything we've seen this campaign season. Obama would have to murder an underage prostitute before the polls would show a significant blip while Romney has had everything and the kitchen sink thrown at him.

I marvel at the idea that there's any piece of video tape at this point in the campaign that can have any effect. We accuse politicians and the media of living in a bubble, but I'm fear the general public may itself have been engulfed inside the bubble. What will it take to shock us to the core? I'm highly doubt we'll be seeing it tonight, and that could be a bigger problem for our country than anything actually on the tape.

UPDATE: Well, here it is. Will it make any difference? My gut reaction is no. It should, but it won't.

Jockeying For Position On Election Day

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 23:22:00 +0000

It's anathema to a blogger to say "I have no idea." Why blog then? Well, it's about more than just being a soothsayer, but right now I, and many others, face the dilemma of having no idea how the election is going to shake out. We are literally (hat tip: Joe Biden) sinking in a flood of media misinformation with more polls coming out every day either showing Obama winning or the race a tie. This has led to arguments over whether these polls are skewed or not. Limbaugh says this is all for the sole purpose of dispiriting Romney voters while Erick Erickson says the polls are correct and Romney needs to up his game or it's over. While I respect Erickson, I don't think he has any idea but is playing the pessimists so as to have something to hang his hat on in an Obama second term. If he's wrong, we'll all be too excited/relieved to care.

I'd like to think the public is still as angry as they were in 2010. Yes, I said angry. The late Peter Jennings called the 1994 Congressional elections a national "hissy fit," but that was to be expected from a journalist who used to date a PLO mouthpiece. But despite his snark, he was right. People were mad. They elected in 1992 a supposedly moderate Democrat who went full socialists for two years so they reacted accordingly. Now we look on the Clinton years as the good ol' days when small businesses were at least allowed a chance to survive. America had it's "Hissy Fit II" in 2010 but it wasn't enough. We need to go full-blown conniption in 2012.

The Future Of Blogging (Here At Least)

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 23:31:00 +0000

Readers of this blog will note that I went all minimalist this weekend. I've been pondering whether to continue blogging at all as I fear the the medium itself may be dead or dying. Of course, not for everyone, but the gap between the great blog sites and the second-tier sites has widened and with the ascension of Twitter, many of us (myself included) have left our blogs to rust while we spend our days sending out little quips in the forms of tweets and retweets.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. Twitter fits my personality which has always been to make quick, off the cuff remarks. Manifestos have never been my strong suit. But there is a place for blogging when one wants to make a larger point. I've decided it's time to scale back on the site, get rid of the useless widgets and make this blog more of a daily journal in the style of James Lileks. Of course, that will take some commitment as well, but nothing ventured...

I'm also on the fence as to whether I should even call myself the Libertarian Popinjay anymore. While I'm still libertarian in spirit, should Obama win another term I may end up embracing existentialism (assuming that is what I think it is).

How pretentious. Hope you'll join me.

This Week In Racism

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 01:42:00 +0000

I have seen the future and it is ugly indeed. African Americans need to hold themselves in readiness and prepare thy selves for the coming armageddon.

Race war? In a way, yes, but not in the way you might imagine.

This week we saw a YouTube video headlined on Drudge of a black woman in Ohio talking about how President Obama gave her a free phone. Her delivery was very, shall we say, street or ebonical (if that is such a word). While her facts were a tab askew, her message was not. In a nutshell, "Obama gives me free stuff, Romney don't, next issue!" Once the video had gone viral many Romney supporters were galvanized while many Obama supporters sought treatment for a severe case of the Cringes. (Ask your doctor about once-a-day "Cringatol.") The Atlantic magazine, home of renowned gyno-journalist Andrew Sullivan, was the first publication from the left-wing media to blow the race-whistle asking "How Racist Is The Obama Phone Video?"

Hell of a question. The Atlantic saves valuable time by simply skipping stage one where we ask "Is it racist?" and puts all their eggs into the stage two basket where it's already decided, yes, it is.

The "Obama Phone" video is not being used by the Romney campaign. So we can't say that it's a racist attempt to get votes in the election. Right now, it sits in the middle ground between "stuff on the Internet" and "serious political issue." But it took one big step toward becoming a serious issue when, on the same day, Rush Limbaugh played it repeatedly on his radio show and the Drudge Report posted it at the top of his page. They'd probably call it humor? Limbaugh finds a lot of things funny about Democrats, like how fat Michelle Obama is. And an Obama voter who seems to be dumb? That's comedy gold, or as he described the "Obama Phone" video, "That's not Saturday Night Live. That is a real Obama voter." Because a video of a black woman with bad teeth and a poor grasp of the history of the Universal Service Fund proves that Democrats are stupid, lazy, and, oh, black. "That is a real Obama voter." We say, that's racist.

Mmm! Lot's to do here. As expected from an outfit like The Atlantic, they take the words of a conservative and addend them with some of their own. Limbaugh points out the whole crux of the issue: this isn't a parody, this is real. And when he says "This is a real Obama voter." a true fact, that statement is racist.

It's a nice try and the standard stuff we see on an almost daily basis but I have to think that the wizards of smart have to be getting worried. There are a lot of video cameras out there. Every day bloggers are shooting video of real voters, real politicians with their tempers and there's no place to hide. The Atlantic says Limbaugh's statements are racist; I say, why stop there? Aren't we all racists by simply watching the video? Let's face it, once we hit the link on Drudge, it was the point of no return. We are all racists now. And since this video was not a parody, but in fact a real person, I have to think the biggest racist of all in this whole story is the woman in the video herself.

The left-wing media has made racism a cause célèbre, attacking conservatives, Tea Partiers and the like with charges of racism over some of the tiniest, most arcane statements you can make. Just this week a Charlotte, NC newspaper did an editorial cartoon with depicted black Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton with a "Hello Kitty" t-shirt under his uniform. The inference: he's a pussy. To Stephen A. Smith and many in the media, it was racism.

So what's my point in all this? Well, as I said at the top of the post, it's time, maybe past time, when African Americans need to prepare for the day when liberals (left-wingers, progressives, et al) decide that black people must be eliminated or at the very least quarantined, for their very existence is in itself a racial stereotype. Is this not where we're headed? Yes, I'm illustrating absurdity by being absurd, but answer me this: where does it all go from here? It wasn't Limbaugh saying the woman had bad teeth nor, I believe, did he say she was stupid or lazy (though this video is good evidence). No, The Atlantic just inferred that in their tsk-tsking article. You see? No one is safe from falling into the racist trap!

This country is screwed.

This Week In A Nutshell

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:11:00 +0000

Via @AnthonyCumia

Peace For Our Time? Report: NFL And Referees Close To Deal

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:05:00 +0000

Per Chris Mortensen via PFT.

Just, Wow

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:25:00 +0000

More here.