Category: Blithe Spirit

Bringing up Barack Jr.

More on the 2016: Obama’s America movie, about his upbringing. Red diaper baby indeed:

In 2008, I was initially disturbed by Obama’s bizarre hero worship of his absentee Kenyan father which sometimes bordered upon pagan idolatry. During the same 2008 campaign, by virtue of reading British newspaper articles, I was aware of the fact that Obama’s father was less of an outstanding academic and renowned economist and more of a violent alcoholic and bigamist. He was also a Marxist who believed that a tax rate of one hundred percent could be justifiable.

Equally as chilling are the backgrounds of Obama’s leftist mother and his maternal grandparents. Obama is truly a “Red Diaper Baby.” Scarier still is association with Frank Marshall Davis, a card carrying member of the Communist Party, selected by Obama’s grandparents to serve as Obama’s mentor and surrogate father figure.

This is another part of the d’Souza film that hits hard.

2016: Obama’s America, not for the liberal faint of heart

Dedicated libs should not be allowed to see “2016: Obama’s America,” now showing in Chi area; it would be a health risk for them, because of its blasphemous nature as they would see it, regarding their hero Obama. Others? See it, soon.

Dinesh d’Souza has put together a film that offers a fresh framework for viewing Obama — anticolonialism. A key interview is with a Kenyan writer and activist who tells d’Souza about Barack Sr.’s anticolonial feelings and convictions. Israel is “a Trojan horse” for The West in the Middle East, for instance. And Barack Jr.? He and his late father, of “Dreams” fame, are as one in their thinking. Barack Jr. is an anticolonialist in his father’s mold.

Which after an hour or so of building his framework, d’Souza illustrates, telling us what to expect in 2016 if Obama is re-elected: sharply diminished role for the U.S. in the world scene because of unilateral nuclear disarmament and because of its crippling debt, which has ballooned already and will reach five times its current level by then.

It’s an effective campaign film here. The Yorktown AMC theater audience sat quiet as mice throughout — allowing for some candy-wrapper crinkling by a young person to my right. The crowd at this 11:50 showing pretty much filled the tiered “stadium seating.” Yesterday, Sunday.  Above link gives all Chi-area showings, including AMC Showplace Galewood, just off Central north of North Ave. a few minutes drive from Oak Park.

So stay away, committed Obama-supporters; it will be too painful. But flock to it, ye Obama-objectors and -suspectors and -neutralists in the matter. Eyeful and earful awaits ye.

Why not to call the president a communist

The provocative Cliff Kincaid wonders why “self-styled conservative media personalities feel it necessary to protect the President”:

“With more than four years of research into Davis, and more revelations coming, the burden of proof is on Barack Obama to prove that his communist connections, which continued from his growing-up years in Hawaii to college to Chicago, were the result of innocence or naïveté.
 
That will be hard for him to do, since he concealed the identity of Davis in his memoir, Dreams from My Father, calling him just “Frank” and depicting him as a poet and writer.
 
He knew that Frank Marshall Davis was an associate and mentor and that he had to protect his communist identity from public scrutiny.”

It’s the audience, stupid.  Everyone has one, and everyone limits himself to what’s acceptable to it.  The wider the audience, the more severe the limitation.

Or, as I just tweeted, the author Paul Kengor is given huge audiences — by Hannity and O’Reilly — and Cliff Kincaid complains.

2016: Obama’s America is in town

This big anti-Obama movie, 2016: Obama’s America, is in the Chi area beginning tomorrow, 8/24. 

Oak Parkers and other west suburbanites and West Siders, it’s at Yorktown Mall. 

Rated PG (!) and starring Obama himself, it “completely surprised” one fan reviewer, who had “thought it would be an emotional exhortation to get out the vote against Obama” but instead was “a factual, unemotional documentary of Obama’s life and cultural influences.”

One might come away from feeling “somewhat empathetic to Obama’s goals and dreams,” even as it presents “objective truths of Obama’s anti-colonialist influences learned first hand from his father and mentors who were card-carrying communists, Weather Underground radicals, and the like.”

The trailer is here.

Chickens home to roost on new religious egg

What we have here is the start of a new state religion, replete with doctrinal imperatives:

Dogma #1: A woman has the right, the unrestricted right, to make arrangements for the killing of her unborn child whenever such course of action is convenient. [I would add that abortion thereby becomes a sacrament.  Shades of Moloch.]

The others have to do with:

social recognition for romantic attraction . . . the people’s hero, Barack Hussein [as sovereign pontiff] . . . Christian faith [and especially the] Catholic Church [as new prime enemy] . . .

It’s from a St. Paul MN pastor.

 

Was Romney jiving us, as Obama said?

On July 17 in Cincinnati, Obama took as a talking point, without denying it had been said, the question of Romney as felon, offering in the process a malapropism of some magnitude:

When asked whether he thought Romney’s actions were criminal as a top aide implied a few days earlier, the president steered away. “I think that the issue here is simply for Mr. Romney to talk about his business background in a way that jives with the facts,” he said. [italics added]

Jibes.

Moreover, discussing in this interview what makes the economy work, he opposes Romney for saying if big investors do well, everyone does well, offering his position that if middle class does well, everybody does well — probably a fair capsule statement of supply-side vs. consumption-side economics. 

Question is, however, what makes middle class do well?

The Sgt. Friday approach to knowing things

Have been wondering about fact-checking operations, which claim to have the strict facts when it’s often a matter of argument threads, as opposed to spelling a name or getting a date right — except, of course, when there’s argument about a name or a date. 

Hence, I much support this from Red Statesman Erick E. in piece about Rep. Todd Akin’s rape comments.  (And is E.E. sure about spelling of his first name?) 

Erick (sp?):

Politifact disagrees with the statement about Obama and infanticide, but as is often the case, Politifact is obfuscating what Barack Obama said to help a Democrat. Politifact is, after all, the Walter Duranty of fact checkers complete with a Pulitzer Prize.

Oh, and would Sun-Timeswoman Lynn Sweet, recommender of Politifact, take note?  Thank you, Lynn.  And Lynn, please broaden your list of resources.  Better recommend rabid promoters pro and con any position, keeping in mind Norman Mailer’s comment to Chicago 7 judge Julius Hoffman many years ago, “But Your Honor, facts without nuance are nothing.”  

Another point, Hegel, and Plato long before him, had it right about dialectics.  It’s a jungle out there, full of charges and counter-charges.  You have to be good at sifting things.  These fact-checkers claim a lot for themselves but sometimes offer a cookbook approach, comforting to some, indeed a naive approach. 

What we have here is a problem of communication, true, but more specifically one of epistemology. 

Think about it.

Argument detective caught in act

Faulty principle proposed by faulty-argument detective:

. . . why does the rarity of the issue have any sway in this debate? Especially when we’re talking about rape victims? Your justification for controversial action should not be: “Well, it only affects a very small minority of the population.” Instead, you should stop dodging the question and give a firm answer with rationale justification. Otherwise you are just using extremely faulty logic which shouldn’t be taken seriously . . .

Rarity-sway matters often, as when rarity-threatened public funds are allocated to prevent occurrences of a problem or even to remedy effects of bad thing.  Which is where big problems deserve more attention.

It’s a public-policy question that should not be dodged.

A mere bagatelle for smutty Tribune

Trib writers Rick Pearson and Monique Garcia having fun in story about Gov. Quinn and pension reform:

Back in the 1970s, Quinn was a populist organizer known for launching petition drives to cut the size of the Legislature and starting tea-bag protests over legislative pay.

And:

Perhaps in an era of tea party politics helping to drive Republicans in the national debate over the size and cost of government, the Democratic governor and his tea-bag protests may be back in vogue after all.

Urban dictionary definitions?

Tea bag:

(v). To lower your body as to dip the testicles into her mouth as the woman is tonguing the scrotum.
And:
(n. or v.) To place testicles in someone’s mouth and proceed in a up and down motion.
And:
Placing your testes inside someones mouth and raising and lowering them to look like you are making tea.
As in:
I proceded to tea bag the homeless man.
Enough.  You get the idea.  Nice going, Chicago Tribune.