As Barack Obama's traditional defenses (Jay Carney, Eric Holder, and 95% of the media) crumble in the face of his worsening scandals, the president has chosen to exercise the so-called nuclear option and bring out his ultimate weapon: The Frowny Face.
The Frowny Face allows Obama to look solemn, thoughtful, and presidential while simultaneously not saying anything out loud which could add to the length of his eventual prison sentences.
So rather than comment on the Benghazi lies and deaths, the IRS's attack on political conservatives, the Justice Department's attack on freedom of the press, Eric Holder's lying under oath, the loss of America's defense secrets to Chinese hackers, and his own declaration that the War on Terror is "winding down" because it sounds better than just saying "I surrender," the president is touring the country and trying to look immensely sad while actually thinking about golf.
Of course, even that isn't easy for him. On Memorial Day, when he was told that he would be laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns, he assumed that the crypt contained the authors of the Constitution.
He then traveled to storm-ravaged Oklahoma to view tornado damage, stand at the site of a fallen school, and wrap a consoling arm around distraught citizens while assuring them that he was going to personally cut through the red tape to make sure that federal aid was expedited, and that the people of America would be there for the folks of Monroe, Oklahoma.
Which would have sounded good if he wasn't actually in Moore, Oklahoma - but hey, all of those flyover cities look the same, especially when they're reduced to rubble and weeping white people.
Finally, the saddest president in the world traveled to New Jersey to sympathize with the storm victims of Hurricane Sandy, and share their outrage that the red tape which he'd promised them he would cut hadn't actually been cut after all. The president assured the long-suffering victims that Eric Holder would conduct a thorough investigation into the lack of red tape cutting just as soon as he wraps up his current investigation to find out who the hell is in charge of the Department of Justice.
Should the intensity of the scandal investigations continue to grow, we can expect to see a lot more of the president parading around the country pretending to be desperately sad about things he doesn't actually give a damn about. A spectacle which will only end when he is either impeached...or runs out of nose hairs to pluck to produce insincere tears on demand.
Note: In the commentary above, we posted a link to a story about Obama "winding down the War on Terror." That link takes you to a superb article called "Stupid" by PJ O'Rourke and Hope n' Change highly recommends it.
38 comments:
LOVE O'Rourke in general, and that bit WAS, indeed, brilliant.
As I am fond of pointing out, "we" did not START the Islamist War of Terror on All Civilization, "WE" can NOT *stop* it - short of killing all who want to wage war on us. As I see it, we can kill them there, or kill them here - frankly, I think my Mom, nieces, nephews are safer if we do it THERE. Forgive me if I am less concerned about THEIR Moms, nieces, nephews. If they (the concerned ones, not the ones dedicated to starting WWIII because they think that Armageddon is the express rout to Paradise)- if THEY are so concerned about the 'collateral damage' then they can a) help us kill 'the radicals' more efficiently b) stamp out the radicalism that is driving all this.
Also, we should take all the confiscated "illegal" guns, and give them (with ammo) to the oppressed women in some of these Islamo-facist dungheaps. Sure, most of them would wind up in the hands of the men, but some would do some good, some REAL good..
Just sayin'
To be clear, by confiscated illegal guns, I'm referring to gangbangers, drug lords / dealers, the population of Chicago, that sort of thing. You know, the ones they melt to make silly 'disarm, and be at peace' statuary.
SOB has nothing on me. I've been sad since 2008. Really sad, not fake sad.
I sent the following to the Whitehouse on Sunday:
*******
Mr. President,
A correction if you please, sir, regarding a recent speech you gave about history advising that wars must end: History dictates that a war ends when the enemy is defeated, not before then, and certainly not just when someone thinks enough time has passed. Please watch the news, sir, (which seems to be where you and I both get our current event information from). If you do, you will see beyond reasonable doubt that the enemy has not yet been defeated and is, in fact, expanding the battle fronts.
Respectfully,
*******
I expect the Audit to begin any time now.
For the record, the "Respectfully" applies to the office, not the person currently in the office.
Stilton --- Do you have a "Kindly Old Gepetto" cartoon where you can make Pinocchio out of Jay Carney?
The think the panels would write themselves!
@Stilton,
Once again, you have astounded me on your ability to say so much in such a short post. Brilliant! And keep 'em comin' please! I suspect President Frowny Face would have rather taken another long and expensive vacation right now, but maybe even The King of Disconnectedness thought better of that plan.
@Chuck,
Nice letter; hope you enjoyed the time you have, like, OWNED stuff such as a house, a car, clothes... And it's tough to respect the Office of the Presidency when the President doesn't even respect the Office of the Presidency. To him it is merely a means to the end, and I'll bet he'd secretly like to wipe his ass with the portraits of those racists Washington and Jefferson.
... Oh, and I hope everyone had a happy Towel Day
http://www.towelday.org/
@Colby:
...and a happy National Brisket Day as well.
Just to let you know the lib circle jerk over at fark.com has listed your comic today in their elitist political tab, here's a link.
http://www.fark.com/goto/7771112/http://hopenchangecartoons.blogspot.com/2013/05/good-grief.html
I have always had a soft spot for P.J. O'Rourke dating back to his days at the "National Lampoon". One of my favorite P.J. quotes is, "Giving money and power to politicians is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
On the same subject here is a quote from a Jonah Goldberg article at the Patriot Post.
"They say all is fair in love and war (I'm skeptical), but that doesn't mean war and love have much in common. When it comes to love, both parties need to be in on it. In war, all it takes is one to tango. Sure, if the non-belligerent party doesn't want to fight, it can try to talk, or cut a deal, or even surrender. But it's up to the guys willing to kill to decide how things will proceed.
This is particularly relevant when two parties are at war and one side wants to stop. As legendary Marine Gen. James Mattis has said, "No war is over until the enemy says it's over. We may think it over, we may declare it over, but in fact, the enemy gets a vote."
@Pete(Detroit)- Barry is "winding down" the war on terror by creating (in PJ O'Rourke's words) stupid rules of engagement which will make it harder to deter terrorists. He's turning denial into policy.
@TrickyRicky- You and me both, brother.
@Chuck- Trust me, you were going to get audited anyway. And that was a good letter.
It seems odd, to say the least, that Barry would be suggesting that the war is largely over when there are still victims of radical Islamic terror recovering in Boston hospitals.
@The Doktor- I don't think Carney is a marionette with strings as much as a puppet with a hand up his tailpipe.
@Colby- I've seen reports that the first lady is considering taking an "extended vacation" on the taxpayer dime, but Barry's advisors are apparently telling him that he needs to continue pretending to be presidential between golf games for awhile.
@Colby & CenTexTim- Actually, combining Towel Day and Brisket Day makes a lot of sense (hey, that barbecue sauce gets everywhere).
@Anonymous- The link you posted actually comes back to this page, but here's where to go to see the comments - and how Hope n' Change is viewed by liberals. When I looked there were about 150 comments calling me an unfunny asshole, and about 5 comments from people which were actually somewhat thoughtful and interesting.
Those more insightful comments made some good points, including the fact that liberals can't even begin to understand conservative humor, nor can conservatives understand liberal humor because we're coming from two totally different worldviews. This would explain why conservatives don't find it funny when Bill Maher refers to "cunts" and "niggers," but liberals laugh their asses off.
Another commentor said of me that "this guy can be funny" but that there was too much anger in my work. I can't disagree with that - I am angry and getting angrier every day. And that's going to be offputting to a lot of people, which is frequently the case with satire.
Many of the comments over on Fark suggest that I'm simply hallucinating about the scandals mentioned in today's commentary. In Liberal Land, these scandals and issues don't even exist. People either haven't heard of them or, hearing about them, have chosen to dismiss them.
And for those few who admitted there just might be some problems in the Obama camp, a quick chorus of "But Bush was worse" was all the palliative needed to reinforce their smug sense of denial.
Fark did refer to Hope n' Change as the "most popular conservative web comic," which was nice (albeit debatable). In return, I'll say that "Fark" is the second most popular four-letter word beginning with an "F" and ending with a "K."
@It's No Gouda- Great quotes and absolutely right. The enemy does get to determine when a war genuinely ends.
Stilt - re: the fark commentators, as Oscar Wilde said, "You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies."
Congratulations! If you're pissing off a large number of woefully uninformed and non-thinking liberal zombies then you're doing something right.
@CenTexTim- I'd like to think that's true, but I'm afraid that the namecalling and sheer dumbassery of most of the comments on the Fark page don't really allow me to feel very smug about the caliber of my ideological opposition. Having stupid people hate on you isn't invigorating, it's just depressing.
I'll note that some 170 people over there claim to have looked at this site and found it easy to dismiss. However, none of them left the safety of their peer group and dropped by the comments section here to engage in reasonable debate about the sad facts in today's commentary (though the offer remains open - I'll always be at least as civil as anyone who wants to engage in honest disagreement on this page).
For starters, I invite any Fark readers to tell me where Barack Obama was (and what he was doing) while our mission in Benghazi was in flames.
But they don't know, because no one knows. And unlike us, they don't care.
@Readers- A quick update: the comments section on Fark now contains my request for ANY of them to step forward and say where Barry was when Ambassador Stevens was being killed. They're mocking me and the question - but none of them have stepped up to answer it.
Namecalling is fun, I suppose. But when we want to discuss facts, those on the Left desperately want to change the subject.
I'll say that "Fark" is the second most popular four-letter word beginning with an "F" and ending with a "K."
fuck, funk, folk, fork, flak
you're just a fool, sorry
@Anonymous- I think I'd already made the point that the Fark folks were simpleminded, but I appreciate you taking the trouble to provide additional proof.
And now that the four-letter words are out of your system, why don't you really put me in my place my telling me where Barack Hussein Obama was, and what he was doing, while our people in Benghazi were being killed by terrorists (including Al-Qaeda operatives)?
Surely you can find the answer at MSNBC or Daily Kos or even Fark, right? I'll be waiting.
you stated: 'I'll say that "Fark" is the second most popular four-letter word beginning with an "F" and ending with a "K."'
i know you were trying to be funny, but you fell flat on your face. you see, you sacrificed the truth, as well as any insight, in trying to be funny. but because you sacrificed truth and insight only an idiot would find your comment amusing. anyone with half a brain would think it was a poor attempt at humor. that's what you do with your cartoons, too.
when you are picked up on the fact that you are factually incorrect, you try to blame others, whilst attributing to others what you demonstrate - eg: "when we want to discuss facts, those on the Left desperately want to change the subject."
you try to blame others to make up for your own short-comings.
that's fair enough. you probably see making money off your baseless nonsense as a worthwhile career - and obviously you will try to defend yourself. you know that your audience are the kind of people to get dangerously excited by birth certificates, teleprompters and every other manufactured outrage pushed by talk-radio, fox news and blogs like yours, and whilst they are kept in a constant state of anger by you they will keep lapping up your tragically inferior product.
that's great. good for you. rather than expecting people to come here, though, perhaps you should get an account on fark and see how far you get. i'll wager you won't get far with those who haven't bought into your manufactured outrage
here's the fark sign-up page:
http://www.fark.com/newuser
fark has a far greater audience than your silly little blog and, seeing as you are pretending you have something incredibly important to say, i look forward to reading your posts on fark in the future
take care
/and do try to be more honest - it can only improve your "work"
@Anonymous-We are still waiting.
http://www.fark.com/newuser
free your mind
or don't, if you don't want to. stay on the losing side
@Anonymous- You claim I try to change the subject when someone picks up on the "fact that (I am) factually incorrect." But you don't state an example of either my being factually incorrect, or changing the subject.
You, on the other hand, went on a babbling rant about things which we weren't talking about (just your low opinion of conservatives, which I'm sure we all find terribly fascinating).
But you were asked what should be a very simple question, related to today's cartoon and commentary: where was Obama when Americans were being butchered in Benghazi, and what did he do about it?
Don't change the subject by opining about the size of my blog. Don't change the subject by claiming that Fark is where the real glory is. Answer the question.
Otherwise you're not just a troll, you're a boring troll who's managed to display his ignorance in front of a lot of better-informed people.
factually incorrect:
I'll say that "Fark" is the second most popular four-letter word beginning with an "F" and ending with a "K."
you were factually incorrect. stop squirming. 'fark' is not the second-most popular four-letter word beginning with an 'f' and ending with a 'k.' flak, folk, fork, fuck, and funk are all far more popular.
you thought you would try to be clever and ended up looking a fool
you are catering to the lowest common denominator. your cartoons are offensive, unfunny, and they are not clever, even if they are the best you can do
now, stop calling other people ignorant or simpleminded or trolls, because it looks like projection, and, if you believe your views have any legitimacy whatsoever, either get yourself over to a forum that doesn't exist wholly within a propaganda network, or start focusing your cartoons on truth rather than some second-rate attempt to get rich from even greater fools than yourself
@Anonymous- And this is what happens when I try to give a liberal a fair hearing (or a troll enough rope). You want to debate whether a joke I made about the exact popularity of the word "Fark" is factual, while ignoring all of the important questions which you can not answer either out of ignorance or the inability to admit that you're wrong - not just about Benghazi, but about every major political issue.
You didn't want to talk about grownup issues (or quite likely couldn't) - and you rather pointedly did not question the factuality of Obama's apparent dereliction of duty (and giving cover to Al Qaeda), Eric Holder lying under oath, the IRS oppression of political speech, or any of the rest of it.
And on a final note, I don't create this blog to make any money (there are no paid ads on this site - just some links to friends of mine, or people whose work I admire). Hope n' Change is one of those patriotic, non-profit entities which seem to scare the living hell out of those on the Left who are afraid of free speech.
And should be.
@Anonymous: if by "free your mind" you mean "give up any and all cognitive functions, ignore the man behind the curtain, and just go with the flow", I'll take a pass. It may be easy for your ilk to simply look to the goody bag and ignore all else, but those of us who actually think for a living find it rather hard to turn off when we step outside of the workplace (Workplace? You know: the place where conservatives go to toil the day away so that there's money to fill the goody bag.)
That you would focus on a rather silly joke as the basis for your indescribably shallow argument demonstrates the depth to which this illness of which you and the nonthinking herd suffer goes.
Fark, indeed.
Anon - Ok, we GET it, you WIN. "FARK" is the 10th 'most popular word'. (What an idiot, does not realize when being paid a compliment...)
Now, care to address an issue?
A REAL issue?
ANY 'real' issue?
The wasted money and croneyism of Stimulus Spending? (as separate from "green energy" scam cronyism / waste) The "cost savings" of BummerCare? The 'we have to pass it to see what's IN it' attitude, in re BummerCare? Being 'more flexible' for Putin? The recidivism rate of GitMo releases? New Black Panther voter intimidation, and the not prosecuting thereof? Giving guns to Mexican drug lords, just so he can go to Mexico and say w/ a straight face "we know the guns are coming from the US"...
See, you have LOTS to choose from, not "just" "where the FARK *was* he, what was he doing, and WHO gave the orders to 'stand down'"...
But I'm sure you (and your other Fark buddies) will take the cowardly, intellectually lazy escape, and just fork off into the distance. It's OK, it's easy to spot a troll by the funk.
Anonymous,
Whew! I'm sort of surprised you didn't claim your dick was bigger than Stilton's. Lighten up, dude! What makes you so farking angry?
Close your eyes for a minute; take some deep breaths, and ask yourself this. Pretend it's 2004. Bush is running for his second term. One of our U.S. Embassies is attacked and four American citizens were brutally murdered. Bush decides it is not worth his time and goes to bed to get some sleep for his fund raiser in Vegas the next day.
You, sir, would have had a farking anuerism! You would have been shouting "IMPEACH BUSH" at the top of your lungs, along with most of the media (and rightly so I might add). ANY President should be impeached for putting his political career above a foreign attack on U.S. soil.
This is a blog for Conservatives (duh), which is run by kindly old Dr. Jarlsberg as a means of venting frustration and sharing Conservative ideas. He makes no money at it, nor makes any claims that this blog is some sort of giant media juggernaut like the world famous zark or frack or whatever the fuck it's called.
I would also suggest that if this blog offends you so mightily, you not visit it anymore. Personally, I find it quite easy to NOT watch Chris Matthews and the like.
@Emmantaler, Pete(Detroit), & Colby- Thank you for your eloquent words. I know I should just nuke posts by trolls, but I keep hoping that one of them - some day - will actually be willing to have a dialogue about facts in a civil fashion. Clearly, Anonymous isn't that person.
Nor, despite a clearly worded invitation on that Fark comment thread, has anyone else from that site come over here to explain where their president was while Americans were dying in Benghazi.
These people (as exemplified by Anonymous) lack seriousness, intellectual rigor, or even basic curiosity. Forget Trayvon Martin, they are Obama's children.
@ Dr. J, Exactly... fark is what happens when you give misinformed/uninformed children incapable of adult intellect i.e.;logic, rational thought, and (gasp!) "Real life" experience, access to a computer.
It is beyond me why you even bother to engage these prating cancerous babies in conversation, or hold out in the hope at least one of their ilk will provide a rebuttal that doesn't immediately devolve into the "I know you are, but what am I?" mantra of the kindergarten playground they still mentally inhabit.
To paraphrase a past commentator, "0bongo and his cronies are the boils on the @ss of this nation, and his followers (like anonymous & the rest of the fark crew) are the puss that fills said boils."
I do however appreciate that you allow their childish rants from time to time. It provides a disturbing window into how twisted the libtard psyche truly is, and why we conservatives must remain stalwart in our fight for the truth.
Especially the truth about how this plague of willful idiocy is destroying our great nation.
I've been following this blog for a little while now. I normally try to avoid posting anything on the internet, but this was just too delicious to ignore.
Watching anyone perform the intellectual equivalent of soiling their own pants in order to prove that they're actually way smarter than anyone gives them credit for is always something special to watch.
@Necron99- I try to give an ear to the occasional liberal because I used to be one. Not because I embraced all that liberalism stands for, but because I was a young dumbass and didn't bother actually thinking. Instead, I just heard the common labels: Liberals were the good guys who were for peace and civil rights and fairness and rainbows, and Conservatives were bitter Scrooge-like figures who hated everyone and everything except wealth.
Again, I was a dumbass. But I got better. And I would have gotten better sooner if someone had politely asked me to either defend liberalism, or challenge conservatism - because I couldn't have done either. So I keep hoping that I'll run into some liberal whose mind is open just enough that they might actually be drawn to truth when they become aware of the lies they've been fed.
Unfortunately, this will only work for those who have a greater desire for truth than self-satisfaction (which is the near-masturbatory goal of all things liberal).
So I really wasn't letting Anonymous rant just to show his intellectual weakness; I was over-optimistically hoping he might be saved or at least awakened when he had to admit to himself that he has no answers to some very basic, very important questions.
But as the old saying goes, "There are none so blind as those who will not farking see."
@Gothmog- You put that nicely; I'd been tempted to say the same thing in more scatalogical terms.
On this blog (and especially in the comments area) we really do try to get into important detail about important issues...so an oxymoronic argument about whether "fark" or "funk" is more popular is flat out surreal. But sadly, that seems to be about the level of most political discourse I see on the Left.
Wasn't President Obama in the White House at the time of the attack? Not sure how that's pertinent, but there you go...
@Anonymous- Your vague answer would be right up there with Beavis & Butthead saying "during Benghazi, Obama was in AMERICA, huh-huh! Huh-huh!"
But even taking your assinine answer seriously, WAS he in the Whitehouse? For the entire time? There's been no proof offered to support those positions.
But of course the actual question, which you're rather clumsily dodging, is "was he in the situation room at any time?" "was he on the phone to anyone?" "Did he give orders to supply military assistance - or deny it?" or even "why, after being informed that the mission was under attack and Ambassador Stevens was missing, did the president not even make a subsequent phonecall to enquire about the status of the firefight or the whereabouts of our Ambassador?"
Are you going to play word-parsing games with these questions, too, because successful terror attacks on Americans are just a game to you...as they are to your disastrous president?
FAIR WARNING: If you have something substantive to say, I'll air it here. Go ahead - say something brilliant and true, and blow us all out of our shoes. But if you're going to insist on dropping by just to fart in your own bathtub, snap at the bubbles, then laugh until you fart again - I'll nuke your post. That crap may fly at Fark, but not here.
@ Dr. J, Amen!
@Stilton: You get a pass. Winston Churchill once famously said:
“If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
(However, I have to point out, Dear Readers, that, to this yardstick, I've never had a heart. My first opportunity to vote was for Reagan, and it wasn't because his name sounded Irish. Nor was it the "R" next to his name. Having been a productive, wage earning, tax-paying member of society - without fail - from the tender age of 13, I have never been able to conceive of why my wanting to keep what I earn is greedy and criminal while the liberals' desire to take the fruits of my labor at gunpoint isn't either of those.)
@Necron99- Always good to know I've got support from the choir! (grin)
@Emmentaler- It's easy to be a liberal when you're young; in fact it's damn near mandatory, and never has it been truer than in our current culture.
But you get married, get a job, buy a home, and (especially) start a family - and you start to pay attention. You start thinking about a bigger world, and the future your children will live in. And if you're still a liberal at that point, well, you're just too lazy or too stupid to understand the important issues in our nation.
Although in fairness, some people can be both - as we've recently discovered.
Nicely done, SJ! I agree, if a lib is willing to make the attempt at intelligent discussion, give him the opportunity. But as Anonymous so clearly demonstrated, they will contort themselves like gymnasts to avoid answering the question!
Post a Comment