Monday, February 17, 2014

Executive Ordure

hope and change, hope n' change, obama, obama jokes, cartoon, humor, political, washington, lincoln, presidents day, vacation, golf, conservative, tea party, stilton jarlsberg

Today is President's Day - a day for us to celebrate the births of two great American Presidents, and to mourn the fact that we're currently stuck with a miserable little weasel turd who is pretending to be king while systematically dismantling our country.

Barack Hussein Obama (tantalizingly known to his many radical Islamic relatives in Africa as "Our American Cousin") is solemnly observing this historic occasion by wrapping up a three day golf holiday "with the boys" while his wife and daughters take yet another vacation on the slopes of Aspen...no doubt thinking about how much fun George Washington could have had at Valley Forge if he'd only had the foresight to pack skis.

For the rest of us, the day largely boils down to two things: no mail and President's Day sales.

Which, when you think about it, rather perfectly symbolizes the current officeholder: a lack of government services and, thanks to his "if you like your health insurance you can keep it" promise, the biggest and sleaziest sales job in our nation's history.

25 comments:

Geoff King said...

Ahhh, yes. President's Day. A day set aside to honor America's greatest leaders. Also a day in which those poor overworked and underpaid bankers and government employees get yet another paid holiday while it is business as usual for the rest of the real world. No doubt Øbama has toyed with the idea of creating another national holiday by Executive Order in his birthday month of August called Dictator's Day. BTW, Washington's teeth were actually made of ivory, not wood. That, like the cherry tree story, is just another endearing myth about the man that refuses to go away.

Judi King said...

Ronald Reagan's Birthday is also in February. I believe he should be included in the most honored presidents. He's #2 in my book.!! As for the "dic" in residence, who knows WHEN he was born?

Emmentaler Limburger said...

I don't know. I view "Presidents' Day" as a study in contrasts. Though I do respect and admire Lincoln, I view the Civil War era very differently than our "educational" system, and most who are a product of it. I do believe that slavery was and is horrifically sinful - a truly black (no pun intended as more than just blacks were and are kept as slaves) stain upon the fabric of the human race, and I support that it needed to end in the US, as it does everywhere else. However, that was not the true result of the Civil War.

So, on this day, I contemplate the contrast between Washington, a president adamantly focused on the preservation of individual state's rights and Lincoln, a president who was willing to fight a war to abrogate state's rights in order to enforce his outward goal: abolition.

When viewed in only that light - the willingness to sacrifice the right of the states to determine their own destiny in exchange for some other purpose - it lays considerable credence to Øbama's claim that he is much like Lincoln. Though the morality of the desired outcomes are diametrically opposed, the violence against the Founders' vision and the constitution is the same. Frankly, the federation of the states the Founders envisioned was just one of the ~750,000 casualties of that war.

Judi King said...

That's why I put Reagan # 2 (after Washington), not Lincoln.

Geoff King said...

Actually, some states recognize President's Day as only a celebration of Washington's birthday. Others as Washington's and Lincoln's. Still others to commemorate all past Presidents.

Judi King said...

Many presidents don't deserve to be honored or commemorated. In fact, most don't.

Anonymous said...

President's Day: That's when the President walks outside the White House, and if he can see his shadow, we'll have another year of bull poop.

American Cowboy said...

@ Emmentaler Limburger

Like you I believe that Lincoln was perhaps not the shining example of benevolence that revisionist history has painted him to be.

In much reading of that period of American history I have seen that the issue of slavery was in fact just a very small, yet incendiary, part of what the war between the Confederacy and the Union was. As you stated it was primarily a war between American citizens who believed in the right of states to self-govern, and a larger centralized union of states that wanted power consolidated in the nations capitol.

A little known fact I discovered in reading copies of Lincolns decision to write the Emancipation Proclamation, was that he believed the freed Negroes would in their gratitude flood north and fill the rapidly dwindling ranks of the Union army. In his own written words it was more about government benefit than a sense of humanity towards the black man.

In that sense, as you said, there are many similarities between Lincoln and the current resident of the White House. Just my two-cents.

Emmentaler Limburger said...

I like Anonymous' analysis :)

Sparky said...

Wonderful commentary as usual Stilton.

I've gotta quote from another communist Dictator bouncing around in my head today that fits our "dic" to a golf tee:

Excerpts from a speech by Secretary of Agriculture under the Eisenhower Administration, Ezra Taft Benson (November 1956):

"Your children will live under communism." Khrushchev said.
"On the contrary," Secretary Benson replied, "My grandchildren will live in freedom as I hope that all people will."
Khrushchev then retorted: "You Americans are so gullible. No, you won't accept Communism outright; but we'll keep feeding you small doses of Socialism until you will finally wake up and find that you already have Communism. We won't have to fight you; we'll so weaken your economy, until you fall like overripe fruit into our hands."

I'd say America is already there.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Geoff King- I have no doubt that there will eventually be some sort of holiday declared to honor Barry. I imagine that it will involve festively colored douche nozzles.

And I knew that Washington's teeth weren't actually wood, but "splinters" is funnier than "little shards of ivory."

@Judi King- You make a good point; the last thing Barry wants at the moment is to give people another reason to question his actual birth date.

@Emmentaler- Good points throughout. As convenient as it is to think of Lincoln as the great emancipator, it doesn't really accurately reflect the whole story.

Meanwhile, Barry's lackey in the DOJ, Eric Holder, is now saying that refusing to let felons vote is racist and a return to the days of slavery, since black people are (ahem) "over represented" in the population of felons.

@Anonymous- I'd be delighted if it was just one more year of bull poop.

@American Cowboy- Good points. And when you talk about Lincoln's hope that the freed slaves would come to his service, I can't help but think about all the recent talk about how Obamacare is "freeing" the wage slaves. For which, of course, the Dems expect their votes.

@Sparky- Hey, you don't boil the frog all at once.

JustaJeepGuy said...

I thought Lincoln stated his goal from the first: to preserve the Union. Abolition of slavery wasn't his main intent; that would have followed naturally even if there hadn't been a war. Slavery wasn't really economically viable. Most people in the South might have expressed lofty goals of states' rights, but Nathan Bedford Forrest asked why they were fighting, if not to keep slavery. Personally, I'm torn as to the "greatness" of Lincoln as a president. He was infinitely superior to Barack Hussein, though!

Colby said...

Lincoln's motives aside, he fought tooth and nail with his fellow Republicans to end slavery, and the mighty foes they fought were the Democrats. Call me a racist, but I will go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of the slave's decendents are totally clueless who REALLY freed their ancestors.

I do believe Lincoln was not eager to tromp on he 10th ammendment to further his goals, but he did it nonetheless. The true reasons for his actions died with the man. Was he in favor of centralized government, or was he just willing to pursue what he perceived to be the lesser of two evils?

Marine4Ever said...

Robbed and reblogged at I’m NOT Drinking Obamohammad’s Kool Aid!

Anonymous said...

Stilton-never saw what you named you new dog, what was the final pick?

CenTexTim said...

"Today is President's Day - a day for us to celebrate the births of two great American Presidents..."

According to MSNBC, that would be Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.

Wiregrass Steve said...

We'll never know what Lincoln's motives were for dragging the nation into a war that started the destruction of the Constitution but the fruit of his actions are abundantly clear today. As the old adage goes, history is always written by the victors so the vile deeds of the conquerers are swept under history's rug. The Union Army's systematic destruction of the Southern States and war against it's civilian population is a fact. Southern civilians were burned out, their live stock slaughtered and their personal possessions pillaged by Sherman's troops with the blessings of Lincoln. In today's world he would be considered a war criminal. His reasoning seemed to be one that the ends justify the means but whatever his reasons, a Pandora's Box of evils was loosed on the rule of law.

The presidency of Comrade Zero is just one result.

Marine4Ever said...

Perhaps, Wiregrass, Lincoln's motive for dragging the nation into a civil war was exactly that -- to start the destruction of the Constitution. It's taken a while, but Obamohammad seems to be doing a damn fine job of fanning the flames for another civil war and finishing the destruction of the Constitution.

Sparky said...

@Wiregrass Steve & Marine4Ever ~ Well put both of you and totally agree!

John the Econ said...

Kudos to @Emmentaler Limburger for a little historical perspective on Lincoln, and the real issue behind the Civil War. By the latter half of the 19th century, slavery was already on its way out economically, and was only temporarily revived by the invention of the cotton gin, which made growing and the laborious processing of cotton profitable again. Purchasing and owning slaves was a very expensive endevour, and the massive influx of immigrants willing to work for less than what owning and maintaining slaves cost eventually would have rendered slavery issue moot.

So the real question should be: Was it worth 3/4-of-a-million lives to put an end to something that would have disappeared on its own within a decade or so?

If your average liberal answers "Yes", then ask them how that would related to our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. See if they get it.

John the Econ said...

Oh, and happy "Stimulus Day". It was 5 years ago today that Obama signed the "stimulus" into law to put an end to the unemployment recession by spending the better part of a trillion dollars on "shovel ready" projects. What we mostly got in exchange for another trillion in debt was shovel ready, alright. 5 years later, we're at a historical high for people not-working and living off food stamps. Democrats today celebrate this as it's made possible people spending more time with their families and starting garage bands.

Duke Mantee said...

Who has any money left, after paying for gas, utilities & healthcare, to spend on President's Day sales?

Colby said...

@CenTexTim,
Actually, according to the "Best President" poll posted by Grumpy Curmudeon last Friday, O'liar is the 5th best president. Pretty surprising, eh?

Emmentaler Limburger said...

@John: Every time I think about that "spend more time with their families" meme the democrats have rolled out, I lapse into unconsciousness. If that's the silver lining they're finding in what the rational world would qualify as the abject loss of hope through a changed and decimated economy where quite literally no-one can find a job, then they are truly reaching...

They are clearly all reading from Ayn Rand's script.

John the Econ said...

Well @Emmentaler, the CBO had more inconvenient truth for the Obama Administration today, when they dropped their latest estimate that Obama's Minimum wage hike will cost another half-million to a million jobs. (Or roughly 1/3 to 2/3rds of all current minimum wage recipients) The upside is the 1/3rd of minimum wage earners who get to keep their jobs get a wage. The rest will be rewarded by more time with family.

Of course, what I haven't seen come up yet is how many of those who will be getting their minimum wage hike will see whatever money they make lost when they lose their ObamaCare subsidy.

And you're right: Ayn Rand is shaking her head at all this.