Administration Spokesweasel Jay Carney gave the Whitehouse Press Corps a major (if somewhat prissy) scolding this week, telling the assembled reporters that they are guilty of "sloth and laziness" for "buying into the BS that you hear about spending" with regard to Barack Obama.
Carney then went on to explain to the newshounds that (and we're paraphrasing ever so slightly here) if they'd get off their dead asses and do a little fact-checking, they'd not only discover that federal spending is rising at the slowest level since Dwight Eisenhower... they'd also discover that Barack Obama's wife is actually named "Mamie."
All of which the reporters eagerly scribbled into their notepads because most of them are not only slothful and lazy, they're also drooling morons.
Or at least, they are if they don't take a close look at the tortured numbers which Carney is using to make his preposterous assertion. In a nutshell, Carney is claiming that every cent spent during Barack Obama's first year in office (2009) - including two titanic (in every sense) "stimulus" bills - has nothing to do with the current president, and needs to go on the books as being entirely the fault of President George W. Bush.
Once that little financial sleight of hand has been put in place, Barack Obama could spend as insanely in 2010 as he did in 2009 and have a net "rise" of 0%! And though total expenditures went up even more in 2011, the statistical net "rise" was still just an itty-bitty number of the sort that made voters enthusiastically proclaim "I Like Ike" way back when political slogans were cute, memorable phrases instead of existential Zen koans.
To put it simply, Obama is spending money like no president - indeed, no human being - has spent since the dawn of time. An amount which, symmetrically enough, will be virtually impossible to pay back through the end of time.
But that's not keeping the mainstream media from gleefully reporting that Obama's spending spree has all been an illusion, and that there's no need to elect fiscal conservatives to solve a financial problem that doesn't actually exist.
Frankly, as long as Jay Carney's whoppers were playing so well for the gullible Whitehouse Press Corps, we're surprised that he didn't also simply announce that employment has never been higher, Americans have never been happier, gasoline has never been cheaper, and that the national debt has been wiped out by the skyrocketing value of the president's Facebook stock.
But instead, Carney ducked into the stage wings and - unseen by the reporters - began clopping coconut shells.
You can read all about it from the reporters who were in attendance: "Carney Delivers Great News About Frugal President...Rides Away On Unicorn."
Readers- I'm still fighting a summer cold and taking a cough syrup which is basically some form of tutti-frutti black tar heroin. As a result, I'm keeping today's entry short and (hopefully) to the point! -Stilt
Frankly, Barack Obama's ads attacking Mitt Romney sound almost identical to the ads which support Mitt Romney - the most significant difference being that Obama's team plays the theme from "The Exorcist" under Romney's long list of accomplishments.
Seriously, look at the things Romney is being accused of: having earned significant wealth, making businesses more efficient (including downsizing when necessary - a concept utterly foreign to Washington), a proven record of executive experience as a governor (not as a "community organizer"), and a quietly dedicated churchgoer who apparently believes in everyone's freedom of religion including Catholics.
Of course, in the world of politics, there's nothing new about attacking your opponent's strengths... but this strikes us as something truly different.
Why? Because the Obama campaign is attacking Romney's virtues because they are "virtues"...with the expectation that these laudable qualities and traditional American values are abhorrent to those on the Left. And Obama's campaign strategists have made this decision based on their candidate's own repeated rejection of those values.
So far, Obama's "hate the American dream" attacks aren't doing much damage to Romney - and are causing confusion about just what the president stands for.
Or, more accurately, they're clearing up confusion about what the president stands for...and that may prove to be a devastating miscalculation when it comes to winning the hearts, minds, and votes of Americans who increasingly want a job-creating executive in the Whitehouse instead of a smug Marxist on the golf course. -
Although humans and dogs have a great deal in common, there are some key differences.
For instance, when a male dog is taken to the vet and the knives come out, the pooch is said to have been "fixed." However, when a politician like Barack Obama fails to be vetted (and no knives are taken to unsubstantiated "facts" surrounding his past), we then say that the election was fixed.
Which is why Hope n' Change Cartoons is so delighted to see the folks at Breitbart.com, among others, truly vetting Barack Hussein Obama in a way that the mainstream media didn't do last time, and is trying their best to bury this time.
As a case in point, Breitbart recently produced a 1991 publicity brochure for a book (which Obama never actually got around to writing) which described the alleged author as being "born in Kenya." Which could seem like a harmless error except for the fact that Breitbart has produced evidence that Barack Obama himself may have written that description (as all other authors working with the publicity company were required to do).
Breitbart doesn't offer this as proof of Obama's non-citizenship. Rather, it suggests that Obama probably lied about being Kenyan to make his personal biography more interesting. But the mainstream media isn't touching the story - nor looking into claims that Mr. Obama (or "Barry Soetoro" as he called himself at the time) may have also falsely claimed to be Kenyan to help him get into college and land scholarships intended only for foreign students.
Similarly, other parts of Barack Obama's political autobiography are getting closer scrutiny than they did last time around. Four years ago, the MSM thrilled to the story of the exotic Mr. Obama finding Jesus and good old heartland Christianity thanks to his dear spiritual mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.
But that facade is cracking this time around. Jeremiah Wright, no doubt unhappy about being thrown under the bus by Obama four years ago (and being offered $150,000 by Obama's team to shut up and disappear until after the election) is now being surprisingly candid about the president. Specifically, Wright describes Obama as someone who was "steeped in Islam" when they met...and added that it's "hard to say" if the president actually ever converted to Christianity or not.
The list of unanswered questions about just who Barack Obama is goes on and on: his past is hazy, his acquaintances few, his records (including college transcripts, travel records, medical records and more) are sealed, and his personal history is so confusingly contradictory that it increasingly seems like the story must have been changed by Mr. Obama himself on multiple occasions.
All of which was utterly ignored in 2007 by the liberal media in order to sweep their "clean, articulate black man" into office with as few troubling questions as possible.
But even as the twin myths of "Hope" and "Change" have failed - spectacularly - since Mr. Obama's election, so too is his personal myth now unraveling. And the ability of the mainstream media to cover up for him a second time is now considerably degraded.
So if a new round of vetting leaves the president feeling like he's just left the vet's office with his testicles in a carry-out bag, that's just too bad.
Because it's a dog-eat-dog world out there. Especially for presidents who eat dog. -
