posted June 14, 2010 04:21 PM            

Let's see, Stalin had statues and gigantic posters all over the Soviet Union.

Mao had his mug pasted all over communist China...with statues to boot.

Saddam Hussein had gigantic posters and statues all over Iraq.

With O'Bomber, he's on television ever day with his blathering unconstitutional twaddle to the degree most Americans are fed up seeing his mug and hearing his blather.

Great Socialist minds think alike.

Ruin the economy, fail in every foreign policy initiative and rule against the wishes of the people.

O'Bomber takes it one step further and like Nero, fiddles while figurative Rome burns to the ground.

Parties, golf, vacations, entertaining...while oil gushes into the Gulf, the economy fails, his jobs program fails, banks fail and his hand picked crew of incompetents actually impede any progress in cleaning up the messes he's made and continues making.

Gee, I wonder if O'Bomber's Socialist pals in Congress actually think they're going to get reelected running on the O'Bomber agenda of utter failure.

posted June 19, 2010 09:45 AM            

I want O'Bomber to be omnipresent on television...as a constant reminder to all those who voted for him that they made a colossal mistake in judgment.

posted July 09, 2010 11:28 PM            

I wrote recently about the political dangers to President Obama when people stop liking him. Many of us, me included, found it impossible to like Obama as soon as it became clear that he was a disciple of prophets of evil like Saul Alinksy. Many Americans (too many, in fact) are mesmerized by television. Good-looking, relaxed, well-spoken people have a big advantage in national politics.

This does not mean that the leftist establishment media does not create false images which enhance the likability of leftist politicians. Camera angles, editing, selection of questions asked, choice of news covered, and a dozen other tricks can make a candidate more likable. Magazine covers treat Obama like a rock star and show adoring photos of his wife and children. Marvel Comics, Tiger Beat, Vanity Fair, GQ, Rolling Stone, and Vogue are magazines supposedly not connected with partisan politics, but Barack and his family find their photographs in good poses, smiling amiably at readers of those magazines.

Conservatives know how politicized all of American life has become. The propagation of leftism in America means that Obama is never shown in unattractive poses or losing his temper at underlings. He answers few questions, and when he deigns to talk to his subjects, it is always through a safe, politically correct organization. A fair and objective media would have pulled Obama's likability down long ago, but even with fawning coverage, nearly all polls show a steady erosion of personal support for Obama, artificially obstructed by the leftist establishment.

Obama will become unlikable as people tire of fluff news stories or smiling photos of Barack and Michelle on the cover of Vogue. Much worse for Obama than becoming unlikeable is becoming boring -- and he will become more and more boring every day. Why? Marxists like Obama have nothing new to say. The whole sum of human problems, according to the goateed gurus of radical socialism on college campuses, is the unfair distribution of wealth, and the only solution to this "problem" is coercive redistribution.

It is hard to overestimate just how dull, dumb, and monotonous radical socialism is to people who are forced to listen to it all the time. The Marxist-Leninist paradise of Soviet Russia died of poverty, of party privilege, of suppression of nationalities, of many things -- but perhaps the most underrated cause of its implosion was sheer, mind-numbing boredom. No one, from the members of the Politburo to the local party bosses, actually believed the drivel of capitalist exploitation. Slavish, ritual expressions of the brilliance of Marx were simply a way of culling out honest and interesting people and insuring that only power-hungry hacks ever had any power in the Soviet Union.

The grotesque curiosity of living Marxism on American campuses will inspire future historians to compare these mad and malicious men to Nazi racial theorists or Hindus who compelled widows to immolate themselves or Aztec priests building mountains of human hearts to appease savage gods. It is no coincidence that both Nazism and Fascism, so different in other ways, both were conscious derivatives of Marxism. This evil, stupid doctrine seems to be the sole catechism of Obama.

That dooms Obama to descend into uninteresting, unhip, and utterly predictable rhetoric. Already we see signs of this slow political death. People are simply not watching his television addresses as much these days. A story of Obama sitting down with Medvedev to eat a hamburger is no longer thrilling or even interesting. Americans are not so much angry at Obama as indifferent to him. Most presidents have had a grand objective to their administration. Eisenhower wanted the interstate highway system. JFK wanted a man on the moon. Nixon wanted realpolitik engagement of China and Russia. Reagan sought to win the Cold War. George W. Bush tried to bring democracy to West Asia. These may not all have been good ideas, but they were at least novel ideas.

Obama seeks nothing more ordinary than an acceleration of Fabian Socialism long after most socialists had given up on their hoary doctrine. He has all the originality of a Young Communist reciting a lecture on the brilliance of Lenin to his fellow communists. He has all the glamour of Brezhnev reading the next Five-Year Plan to the Central Committee of the Communist Party. He has all the stirring insight of aging leftists in Hollywood pontificating about the evil of the land they choose to live and to prosper in.

The worst curse in modern politics is the yawns of voters. When no one wants to watch you, when no one really listens to you, and when most people do not even bother to dislike you anymore, then you (and your party) face a case of slow, terminal consumption. Obama is a fast-fading comet, and his party, having foolishly linked its fate to such an anachronism, may face with him extinction. Barry is becoming boring.

posted July 09, 2010 11:53 PM            

do you have an example of this fawning stuff actually going on? or just media use of an attractive presidential couple to move units?

i remember jackie o on the cover of vogue, i remember her doing the white house tour on tv, i remember her being in the headlines and fashion rags for ... what? 45 years? was jackie, that stalwart patrician and relative of european nobility also a leftist?

nancy reagan and "just say no"...oh and what i do remember very well of reagan himself was a recurring skit on a satirical program in england called fluck and law...featuring how his brain, kept in a jar next to his teeth while he slept, kept trying to escape and causing national security issues. as i recall it didn't dent his popularity one wit(sic).

posted July 10, 2010 08:46 AM            

On the off chance I read bits of the "thinker" it has proven useful to read the parts- that are not bolded.

quote:

---

It is hard to overestimate just how dull, dumb, and monotonous radical socialism is to people who are forced to listen to it all the time.

---

In this instance I would substitute the word

*listen*

for the word ~read

posted July 10, 2010 09:21 AM            

He's "omnipresent" as I said. If O'Bomber's drooling press knew how fed up America is with O'Bomber and the leftist loons he's surrounded himself with, they'd start hiding O'Bomber from view.

O'Bomber was on the cover of Time 14 times and on the cover of Newsweek 12 times...in one year.

Even so called journalists admit the press coverage of O'Bomber is excessive. That's the reason the so called press is called the drooling press. Chris Matthews even gets a tingle up his leg when he hears O'Bomber speak...The Messiah, his master's voice no doubt.

Surely, you can find something which is untrue to complain about in what I post...can't you? If not, you put yourself in the position of complaining about that which is manifestly TRUE.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Obama appeared on half of Time covers

In light of Barack Obama (predictably) being named Time's Person of the Year, First Read took a look back to see which magazine -- Time or Newsweek -- won the battle of who put Obama on the cover the most in 2008.

Drumroll. The winner is... Time.

Time has featured Obama on its cover 14 times since Jan. 1. Newsweek was close behind, featuring the now-president-elect on 12 of its issues. Time has had 52 issues in 2008, so Obama has been featured on more than one-in-four of its covers, or about 27% of the time.

That number, though, goes even higher if you include how many times Obama has appeared in the "skybox" -- 11 times.

That means Obama's face or name has somehow made it onto the cover of Time just about half of the time this year (25 out of 52 issues -- 48%)

Newsweek has had 49 issues this year so far (through Dec. 22), so Obama has been featured on about a quarter of its covers as well.

In contrast, the Republican nominee, John McCain, made the cover of Newsweek just four times the entire year, and twice he shared it -- once with Obama and once with Sarah Palin.

In fact, Palin made the cover by herself as many times as McCain did -- the entire year. She did it twice (Sept. 15 and Oct. 13). She also shared it with McCain once (Sept. 8). McCain was on the cover solo way back in February during the primary (Feb. 11 and 18).

So, during the general election the Republican vice-presidential candidate was on the cover of Newsweek more often than the guy at the top of the ticket.

McCain appeared on the cover of Time five times in 2008, three of which were shared with Obama. The Republican standard bearer had the cover of Time to himself just twice the entire year. His running mate was on its cover just once -- da solo on Sept. 15th.

And say it ain't so, Joe. Vice-president-elect Joe Biden gets no love. He wasn't featured on Time's cover at all in 2008, and made Newsweek's just once.

On that one, he was standing with, you guessed it, Obama.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2008/12/17/4432215-obama-appeared-on-half-of -time-covers

The Campaign Spot
55 Percent of Likely Voters Find ‘Socialist’ an Accurate Label of Obama?
By Jim Geraghty
July 09, 2010 9:13 AM

The latest poll by Democracy Corps, the firm of James Carville and Stan Greenberg, has Republicans leading on the generic ballot among likely voters, 48 percent to 42 percent.

Deep in the poll, they ask, “Now, I am going to read you a list of words and phrases which people use to describe political figures. For each word or phrase, please tell me whether it describes Barack Obama very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.”

On “too liberal,” 35 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama “very well,” 21 percent say “well,” 21 percent say “not too well,” and 17 percent say “not well at all.” In other words, 56 percent of likely voters consider Obama too liberal.

When asked about “a socialist,” 33 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama “very well,” 22 percent say “well,” 15 percent say “not too well,” and 25 percent say “not well at all.”

In other words, 55 percent of likely voters think “socialist” is a reasonably accurate way of describing Obama.

posted July 10, 2010 10:00 AM            

The photographed walks at the 487 days Bush spent at Camp David?
The hunting at Crawford....
Which earned him the Nick "Vacation President"
not to mention all the r&r trips that were also covered by the press.

But wait...what about Ronnie?

quote:

---

August 2006
"Bush has spent more than a year of his presidency" at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. On August 19, 2005, "he broke Ronald Reagan's record of 335 days for America's most vacationed president and went on to take the longest presidential vacation in 36 years," Dale McFeatters wrote August 8, 2006, in a ScrippsNews editorial.

---

The premise that Obama is favored for the photo op- or mag covers is hilarious.

The President is in your face because he is president, like all who have come before him.

--------------------------------------
Surely, you can find something which is untrue to complain about in what I post...can't you?

posted July 10, 2010 10:42 AM            

I didn't say other presidents got NO press coverage. I said O'Bomber is omnipresent on television, in newspapers and so called news magazines....every single day.

O'Bomber and his drooling lame brained press corps are attempting to substitute video tape and live coverage of O'Bomber for the omnipresent posters and statues found in Stalinist Russia, found in Maoist Communist China and found in Saddam's Iraq and...it's not working.

posted January 25, 2011 10:00 AM            

It's summed up in the last 2 words of the following article.

January 25, 2011
What Obama Will Not Say at the SOTU
By John Fricke

The annual take-a-stab guessing game of what any president will say at the State of the Union address is now on. If I might, I would like to play the other side of that card. Here is what President Obama will not say in his SOTU speech.

-- That he has heard the American people clearly. That he understands the concerns about government-run health care. That he knows now that liberals forcing a government takeover of the health care system threatens serious economic problems and worse threatens individual liberties.

-- That forcibly making individuals buy a product is un-American. That all Americans do have access to health care; it's just that some cannot afford health insurance.

-- That our national debt is, in fact, a crisis and a national security issue.

-- That printing money and spending it lavishly on Democratic political interests and even on himself through parties, vacations, and golf was wrong.

-- That his party's polities overseeing Fannie and Freddie were, in fact, the core problem in the housing crisis. That government-ordered housing for all is a massive failure.

-- That government takeovers of private companies are problematic, to the tune of socialistic.

-- That his policies punish private companies and American workers by using phony scare tactics to stop and prevent us from becoming more energy independent.

-- That his Jeremiah Wright-taught knee-jerk reaction of automatically assuming racism in this country was beyond wrong. That white cops should not be automatically presumed guilty of racism. That black radicals are not automatically assumed innocent of voter intimidation. That he has failed beyond measure in improving racial relations, that he and his party have strained racial relations even farther, and worse, that his party has done so intentionally.

-- That many states are now in economic peril, and even critical fiscal danger, because of unfunded pensions of public workers handed out mostly by Democratic politicians seeking not only to buy votes, but to own those votes forever by bribing individuals into a lifetime on the government dole.

-- That individuals in economically viable conservative states will be forcibly taxed to pay for the gross excesses in economically unstable liberal-run states.

-- That the continued lack of success in government-run public education is due in large part to teachers' unions that place job security as a first priority. That school vouchers do work, and that the grossest hypocrisy in our nation comes from the elite liberals who send their children to private schools while protecting unions by standing against vouchers.

-- That Mexico is a near-failed state. That our southern border is at great risk of spinning out of control. That our federal government has failed in one of its core duties: to protect our borders. That the states being forced to act individually to protect themselves are, in fact, right to do so.

-- That our porous border leads to serious felonies that endanger our citizens through narcotics traffic and human smuggling and even permits aid to foreign terrorists.

-- That the New START offered to Russia puts our country at great risk. That all but abandoning the space program puts us at the mercy of the Europeans, Russians, and even Indians to even get into space to advance our objectives and protect our interests.

-- That Americans should never bow to foreign leaders. That Great Britain is special to us. That we will, as we should, stand behind Israel. That our allies matter more than our enemies.

-- That offering at least vocal support of liberty to those seeking it, as in the case of the Iranian uprising, is in our best interest, and that a failure to do so is tremendously damaging. That in great part, his foreign policy has put us at a disadvantage.

-- That the United States' military's main goal is not to act as an experimental social and cultural club.

-- That making "Muslim outreach" a part of the mission statement of NASA was pointless, feel-good blabber.

-- That freedom is far, far more important than "fairness."

-- That liberty is far, far more important than equality of outcome.

-- That changing the verbiage of "global warming" because it's been so cold, to "global climate disruption" does not change the falsity of the claim that man is responsible for the weather.

-- And that it is leftists' rage and propaganda that are the most uncivil acts in our country.

In other words, what the president will not say in his state of the union is...the truth.

posted February 11, 2011 10:36 AM            

Now, we find the omnipresent O'Bomber and his merry little band of Marxist screw-ups promoting the inclusion of Muslim Brotherhood into the new government of Egypt. Muslim Brotherhood, a group of Islamic jihadists which spawned the terrorists groups al-Qaeda, Hamas and Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya. AND O'Bomber wants these jihadists included in the makeup of the Egyptian government.

Once again, O'Bomber and his Marxist Socialist screw-ups...what other kind of Marxist Socialist is there...shows there's nothing but a void of vacuum between their ears.

By now, one would think O'Bomber and his drooling stooges in the so called main stream press would have come to the conclusion the omnipresent O'Bomber should be consigned to the bell tower or attic loft where the crazy uncles are kept. Neither seen or heard.

February 11, 2011
Obama's foreign policy disaster
Leo Rennert

Barack Obama is turning himself into a case study of how a U.S. president should not conduct foreign policy. With his propensity to constantly seek the spotlight, Obama has morphed into commentator-in-chief when it comes to the still unfolding crisis in Egypt. Instead of keeping a low profile, weighing developments and not sticking his neck out amid fast-changing events on the ground, Obama feels it necessary to issue a spate of public pronouncements that are quickly overtaken by what's really happening in Cairo and other Egyptian cities.

The self-made hubris that afflicts Obama was dramatically illustrated on Feb. 10 when, in anticipation of a public address by Hosni Mubarak that the media touted beforehand as a formal farewell, Obama didn't even wait to hear what the Egyptian leader would say and, during a trip to Michigan, began exulting that Mubarak was about to follow the script Obama had devised for him. So Obama told the world that we were about to see history unfold before our eyes and witness a historically transformational moment.

Instead, nothing of the sort actually happened. A stubborn Mubarak announced that he would not step down before elections in September and, while he would delegate authority to his vice president, Omar Suleiman, Mubarak would not surrender his presidential prerogatives in the meantime. The White House reaction: Gulp!

Obama has been too quick to put all his weight behind the protesting mobs, a motley collection of genuine democrats and radical Islamists. At the same time, he has been on a slippery slope of accepting a major political role for the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamist outfit that spawned Hamas and other terror groups. But, given Obama's repeated miscues, what can you expect from an administration whose national intelligence director, James Clapper, tells a congressional committee that the Muslim Brotherhood is a collection of ''secular" activists. Here's Obama's top intelligence adviser blind to the Muslim Brotherhood's inherent Islamic theocratic beliefs and agenda. The brotherhood wants nothing less than an Allah-branded caliphate in Egypt, throughout the Middle East, and eventually around the globe.

American influence is a cherished commodity that shouldn't be frittered away. Under Obama, it is disappearing at a quickening pace.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/obamas_foreign_policy_disaster.html

posted February 11, 2011 10:36 AM            

From Josh Gerstein at Politico :

During a House Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called Egypt's branch of the Muslim Brotherhood movement "largely secular."

In response to questioning from Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) about the threat posed by the group, Clapper suggested that the Egyptian part of the Brotherhood is not particularly extreme and that the broader international movement is hard to generalize about.

"The term 'Muslim Brotherhood'...is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam," Clapper said. "They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera.....In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally."

The Brotherhood uses the slogan, "Islam is the answer," and generally advocates for government in accordance with Islamic principles. The movement has as a broad goal unifying what it perceives as Muslim lands, from Spain to Indonesia, as a "caliphate."

From the people who brought you the term "man-made disasters," "overseas contingency actions,"; and who have done everything in their power to disabuse people of the odd notion that there is such a thing as "Islamic terrorism" (see their reaction to the Fort Hood shooting, for one example) comes the perverse and dangerous idea that the Muslim Brotherhood is "largely secular".

posted February 11, 2011 01:23 PM            

and whether they are secular or not, the muslim brotherhood are the peaceful antidote to al qaida, who become unnecessary if this kind of change can be effected without terrorism.

posted February 11, 2011 02:11 PM            

You are hopelessly misinformed or uninformed katatonic.

Muslim Brotherhood creed:

posted February 11, 2011 02:18 PM            

where did you get this "creed" from? the ever honest rush limbaugh? the man who has manufactured more ghosts under the bed than any other single entity this century?

posted February 11, 2011 06:56 PM            

The way that the Brotherhood portrays itself through English and other languages is not completely telling of its origins and intentions.

posted February 11, 2011 06:57 PM            

Here, let me help you out katatonic. Just type...Muslim Brotherhood creed, jihad is our means....into your search engine and take your pick of sites.

Oh btw, the Muslim Brotherhood wants to spread Shiria law all over the earth...here too. You might look good in a burqa katatonic.

Oh btw, the Muslim Brotherhood also came out for dissolving the peace treaty with Israel..recently. Nothing could be better than antother Arab/Israeli war. Right katatonic?

posted February 12, 2011 03:13 PM            

whereas the muslims protected the christians in that crowd as equals. that says quite a lot about their intentions to grind out all non-muslims.

posted February 12, 2011 08:33 PM            

So katatonic, did you pull that non-factoid out of the same well as most of the rest of what you say here...or, do you have a credible source you wish to share?