Posts Tagged ‘wrong direction’

If Hillary Won The Debate, Trump May Have Won The Argument

September 29, 2016

Kind of interesting.  I didn’t watch the entire debate as I had my hike to go on and so had to pull myself away from the debate spectacle – and so I didn’t get to see Lester Holt incredibly unfairly “fact check” the Donald on at least five major issues without ever ONCE bringing up ANY of the myriad of “fact-checkable” dirt on Hillary – but at the time I turned off the TV, it sure seemed to me that Hillary was more prepared for that debate and was doing a better job emphasizing her points.  While Trump was in my view coming across as being too argumentative and frankly squandering opportunities and failing to score on the points he was making.

But then again, what do I know?

Frankly, the very idea of “debates” is actually kind of silly.  We’ve been doing it for well over a century and all, but what’s really the point?  You remember when the President of the United States debated Vladimir Putin?  Oh, wait.  Me neither.  Because it’s never happened.

It would be a better demonstration of presidential fitness to put a knife in the hand of each party’s candidate and push them in a room together and lock the door.  And don’t open it until one of them comes out alive and the other one is a gashed pile of bloody meat on the floor.  I mean, at least we’ve got to see that kind of drama played out by Harrison Ford in “Air Force One.”

I’m just saying I don’t know what “winning” a debate really means, other than the pinky-in-the-air class getting to snort at the candidate that doesn’t suit their ideology very well.

Everybody is saying Hillary won the debate.  And like I said, I don’t blame them.

But maybe Donald Trump lost the debate but won the argument.

Take a look at one of the polls that came out after the debate (and which coming from the LA Times is NOT fond of Donald Trump):

New Poll Since Debate Shows Shift In Trump’s Poll Numbers
Highest poll participation …
by Jack Davis September 28, 2016 at 9:01am
After millions of Americans watched Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton debate on Monday night, a new poll shows support for Trump is increasing.
The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Daybreak tracking poll, which tracks Americans’ support for the presidential candidates on a daily basis, showed that as of Tuesday, Trump is leading Clinton 46.7 percent to 42.6 percent.
The poll, which unlike other polls tracks the same population over time, represents a significant comeback for Trump, who as of Aug. 14 was trailing Clinton 46.3 percent to 41.6 percent.
The national poll tracks the voting preferences of 3,000 participating voters, but not every voter participates every day. Participation in the wake of the debate was at 90 percent, making it one of the highest participation days since the poll began in July.
Trump has significant leads in many demographic groups.
He now leads Clinton among voters aged 18-34, 44.7 percent to 39.2 percent. Clinton had led among this group throughout the early part of the campaign.
Voters between 35-64 years old also side with Trump 45.5 percent to 43.5 percent. This group has changed preferences repeatedly. Trump also continues to lead among older voters with a 49.5 percent to 44.7 percent lead among voters 65 and over.
From the start, Trump has held a vast lead over Clinton among voters with a high school education or less, and trailed her among college graduates. Among voters with some college education, Trump posts a lead of 48.3 percent to 40 percent.
Among white voters, Trump leads 54.8 percent to 33.7 percent. Although his current 18.2 percent support among black voters is an increase from the summer, Clinton still has a strong showing among black voters with 74.3 percent. Clinton also leads among Hispanic voters, but by a narrower margin of 56.8 percent to 31.8 percent.
Clinton had led among women from the start, and currently leads Trump 50 percent to 38.8 percent. Among men, Trump leads Clinton 54.9 percent to 35.1 percent.
Voters with incomes under $35,000 have favored Clinton throughout the campaign. She leads Trump 49.5 percent to 39.2 percent among these voters. Voters with incomes from $35,000 to $75,000 favor Trump 51.1 percent to 37.6 percent. Upper income voters support Trump 47.9 percent to 43.2 percent.

That poll result goes hand in hand with this:

Post Debate Poll: Clinton Won on Performance, Trump Won Votes
September 27, 2016 By PPD Elections Staff

A Post Debate Poll conducted after the presidential showdown at Hofstra University finds Hillary Clinton put on the best performance, but Donald Trump won votes. While voters 47% to 44% think that Mrs. Clinton “won the first presidential debate,” Mr. Trump won over undecided voters who changed their mind by nearly a 3 to 1 margin.

Nine percent (9%) were undecided on the question of who won the debate.

Among those who were undecided (5%) before the debate, 31% changed their mind and now say they’ll support the New York businessman. By comparison, only 11% of previously undecided voters said they will now vote for the former secretary of state.

The results were noteworthy, considering more voters than not thought Mrs. Clinton gave a better debate performance. Authenticity, honesty and trustworthiness played and will continue to play a big role in voters’ preferences ahead of November.

“Voters are looking for Donald Trump to basically give them permission to vote for him, fair or not,” says PPD’s senior analyst Richard Baris. “If he improves in the next two debates, which he did during the primary, things could get really ugly really fast for Hillary Clinton.”

Regarding the debate, which most mainstream pundits gave to Mrs. Clinton, most voters expected her to be polished on stage. But they were watching to see if Mr. Trump could pass the presidential bar.

“He was restrained, He came off much more natural,” said Shaun Ellis, an independent voter from Hopington, New Hampshire. “Hillary looked weak on the economy,” adding he decided “we need new blood.”

[…]

I don’t know for sure if this is all true.  There is such a tendency for people to see what they want to see and view reality through the prism of their ideology.

We’ll have to see what other polls are saying.

But I DO know what I think happened if the above is correct: I believe that Hillary won the debate on the rhetorical side, but Trump successfully won the argument by pounding home the fact that this country is and has been sliding in the wrong direction and Hillary represents the status quo (i.e. further and faster slide in the wrong direction).

The latest Rasmussen Poll says that 67% say that America is heading in the wrong direction, versus a Kim Jong Un-loving 28% who are happy with the direction Obama is taking the country in.  That strikes me as something of an obstacle for Hillary, who is more connected with “the wrong direction” than any candidate in modern political history.

And as the above article points out, people are just trying to see if the “change candidate” is sane enough and stable enough to take a chance on, given that the alternative of Hillary Clinton is just so damn reprehensible.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is a walking corpse counting on Barack Obama to drag her over the winner’s line.  But one little, tiny thing just happened: Obama just suffered a 97-1 smackdown in a bipartisan Senate that was united against our Disgrace-in-Chief.  And the House was just about as brutal in overturning Obama’s presidential veto in an IN-YOUR-FACE move by Congress.

Obama, meanwhile, continues to claim that everybody on planet earth is wrong and political and partisan save he alone because as our creator god he and he alone is all-wise.

That’s more than just a flesh wound, as they say.  And that’s gonna leave a mark, as they also say.

Hey, THAT would have been a nice question from Lester Holt for Hillary: do you agree with basically everyone, or do you agree with Obama that everyone but him is political and not willing to do the right thing???  But again, no toughies for Hillary from Lester.

I know, I know: the debate society types think Hillary won and that should be all she wrote about who should be president.  But the people who don’t give a damn about debates and just want a halfway-decent LEADER just don’t see it that way.

 

Advertisements

Why I Have Come To Believe That Donald Trump WILL Be Elected President in November 2016

May 31, 2016

There’s a lot of stuff swirling around in the media right now.  And it’s pretty much a wash.  On the one hand, Hillary Clinton is SO damn guilty by any reasonable standard of both outright criminality and indifferent incompetence it is beyond unreal.  Too bad the Washington Post decided to unleash thirty reporters to dig into Trump’s dirt rather than dig through Clinton’s emails, but this IS the age of Goebbels, after all.  I’ve come to realize that one of two things is going to have to happen for Hillary Clinton to get indicted regardless of her obvious guilt: 1) the FBI from Director Comey on down promise to resign in mass and publicly expose Obama as being the Stalinist thug traitor that he is which would force him and his lawthug attorney general to allow true justice to take its course, OR Obama actually has a plan to allow Clinton to be indicted and then step in and declare that Donald Trump is such a threat to America and to democracy and to world peace that he has no choice other than to follow the path of the worst dictators in history and order the election (that Trump would have won) suspended.

On the other hand, we’ve got all these polls that say Trump is going to have an impossible time winning enough women, Hispanics and blacks to possibly win the election.  To which I say that by now the entire media establishment has so thoroughly and completely discredited their ability to prognosticate what will actually happen that they have made themselves a joke.  Trump has proven these fools wrong so many times it is beyond unreal.  Their last giant mistake was the worst, when they gleefully predicted a vicious GOP feud leading up to a broken and brokered GOP convention and the entire Republican Party unraveling over Trump.  And of course just as gleefully predicted smooth sailing for Hillary Clinton who would be crowed queen dominatrix over the space-time universe.  And that was only two months ago.  And what is happening now is the precise OPPOSITE of what all the damn experts said would happen, and now Democrats are wringing their hands and publicly worrying that Bernie Sanders is destroying Hillary Clinton’s chance to win.

I’m going to make a prediction that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with either of the above two paragraphs.

Allow me to state the twofold basis of my prediction succinctly: 1) Donald Trump will win because roughly 3/4ths of the American people believe we are heading in the wrong direction as a nation, and Hillary Clinton represents slogging down the path of that same wrong direction; versus Donald Trump who vows to shake things up.  And every time Clinton tries to fearmonger the American people with her demagoguery that Trump is a “loose cannon,” Trump says “That’s right.  And I’m going to start firing that cannon at everything that is preventing America from becoming great again.”  Obama just played that game – in a reckless, bitterly partisan, demagogic attack on foreign soil no less – claimed that overseas leaders are “rattled” by the prospect of a Trump presidency.  Without being able to name even ONE such leader, mind you.  And ignoring the fact that every ally of the United States has been way more than “rattled” by the OBAMA presidency.  And Trump heard that and basically said, “Good!  These leaders have been abusing and exploiting America for years, and it’s a damn good thing if they’re rattled.”  You want more of the wrong direction, Hillary is your candidate.  She’ll lead you straight to the hell you and your family deserve to rot in.

That thesis is well explained here by a liberal who realizes that prospect of right-direction versus wrong-direction.  And is frightened by it.  I wrote my own take on that article here.

Obama has utterly failed this country.  Obama and Democrats keep boasting of this low 5% unemployment rate.  But it has been based month after month with three and four times as many Americans just giving up and abandoning the hope of every getting a job for every American who actually finds a job.  The labor participation rate – measuring the percentage of working-age Americans who actually have a damn job – reflects that reality: it has sunk to the lowest level since the nadir of Jimmy Carter’s failed presidency; and things are actually far WORSE than when Carter was president, because most a far larger share of American women stayed at home and managed families and households rather than trying to enter the workforce back then.  And if the labor participation rate were what George W. Bush had left Obama in January 2009, we would have double-digit unemployment.

As CNBC reported recently, “the rate for the unemployed, the underemployed and the discouraged remains stubbornly above prerecession levels.”   You need to understand that the “Great Recession” officially ended in June 2009, no thanks to anything Obama did because nothing he’d done had actually done a damn thing by then.  And you put those two facts together and Barack Obama’s presidency has not only done nothing for the unemployed and underemployed, but actually made things far WORSE for them.  He never helped them at ALL!  The Federal Reserve recently reported “that 22% of workers were juggling two or more jobs last year, higher than what government jobs data would suggest. And nearly one out of three Americans said that they have no retirement savings or pension.”  They reported “that nearly half of U.S. households reported they would have trouble meeting emergency expenses of just $400.”

Meanwhile, the income-gap has EXPLODED under Obama.  The rich have gotten richer and the middle class has vanished under this failed fool.

The people of Venezuela tried socialism and their reward is SEVEN HOUR LINES for groceries with the government-supervised result being empty shelves when you get there.  People are eating out of garbage cans because that’s all Obama’s socialist friends can provide for them.  THAT is the assured result of continuing to travel in the direction Obama has set for us and Hillary Clinton has vowed to keep us heading in.

Between the colossal failure of ObamaCare, the horrible taxation rates and the godawful regulations and impositions on businesses, people simply cannot find a decent full-time job anymore.  And Hillary Clinton promises you that she will take that crap ball and run down the manure field with it and spike that crap ball in the poop zone for a sh*tdown.

I’ll put it this way: there are a lot of people who will ultimately think, “Donald Trump can insult me all he wants.  I just want to have a damn job and be able to work without some stupid jackass fascist liberal making that impossible.”  And so a lot of people are going to say, “I hate Trump and I’m scared of Trump, but he’s better than a sure thing when that sure thing is a lump of sh*t – and that is exactly what Hillary Clinton is.”

I’ll give a personal story to add truth to that above paragraph.  Recently, my 94 year-old next door neighbor – who had lived in that house for over forty years – was heartbroken and devastated when liberal government forced her to dig up her beautiful green lawn that she had her deceased husband had cultivated over all those years.  It’s now gravelled and the only water allowed is the tears of an elderly widow.  And that’s because some activist liberal turd drove by, saw that lawn, and became offended that somebody was happy on her own property and that was evil.  Meanwhile, night after night after night I walk past a government indoctrination center that passes for a “public school.”  And night after night after night I see the total indifference of government to do what it forces helpless citizens it oppresses to do.  The water main right alongside the sidewalk is just spraying water and has been doing so for MONTHS.

Leak_School

There’s a good ten cubit feet of soil around that main that is just SATURATED from the all the damn wasted water from that constant leak.  And no jackass fascist bureaucrat gives a flying damn about it.  There are two public schools side-by-side – an elementary school and a middle school – and they BOTH routinely have so many water issues it’s beyond disgusting.  But it doesn’t matter who I’ve contacted or what I’ve done; nobody fixes these things for months.  Because it’s so far easier for a bureaucracy to harass and oppress an elderly widow than it is for those same jackbooted jackass bureaucrats to get off their own unionized asses and do their damn jobs.  Because what’s right for me to impose on thee is to hard to comply with for me.  Liberalism is about forcing OTHER people to comply with what they themselves don’t bother to do and then seizing OTHER people’s money to pay for it.

And I’ll tell you what: when my neighbor buckled under the threats of the liberal government, she had to fire her Hispanic gardeners who were paid to come twice a month and take care of that lawn.  Because heavy-handed leftist fascist government thugs who are hypocrites to their lying cores took their jobs from them.  And who should they vote for???  Should they vote for the liberals who will protect the Delta Smelt at all costs no matter how many human lives and jobs they destroy, or should they vote for the people who would not have cost them to lose their job in the first place???

California liberals – the same damnfools who are responsible for refusing to fix water leaks that cost thousands of gallons a year of wasted water – just where I am walking by – are the same damnfool people who have dismantled dams and emptied reservoirs that we desperately need because of environmentalist policies that are literally just evil.  Our water management system is fifty years old and the Democrats who have controlled California politics have steadfastly refused to do ANYTHING to modernize our ability to harness and channel rainfall and snowpack runoff.  “Climate change” is not a big deal; it is as old as planet earth and humanity has dealt with it for thousands of years; the true menace to the human race is liberalism and the fools who time and time again put bugs and fish and vermin above human lives.

Vote for Hillery.  Vote for hell.  Vote for more regulation that is going to strangle more jobs.  Vote for more and bigger government that is going to be completely unresponsive to anyone who is not “in” with the politically-connected class.

So that’s one.  And it’s a doozy.  Hillary promises you that the exact same failed solutions that drove this country into a ditch will get us out when it will dig us even deeper into that ditch.  Trump says he’s created tens of thousands of jobs by himself and he understands what entrepreneurs like him need to do the same for millions of Americans who just want to work rather than have a nanny-state give them welfare on the backs of other people.

Here’s two:

I thought back over the last fifty years plus and I realize that the American presidency is largely a popularity contest going back to when Kennedy defeated Nixon.  In that election, a singular moment defined the trend I am describing:

It’s now common knowledge that without the nation’s first televised debate — fifty years ago Sunday — Kennedy would never have been president. But beyond securing his presidential career, the 60-minute duel between the handsome Irish-American senator and Vice President Richard Nixon fundamentally altered political campaigns, television media and America’s political history. “It’s one of those unusual points on the timeline of history where you can say things changed very dramatically — in this case, in a single night,” says Alan Schroeder, a media historian and associate professor at Northeastern University, who authored the book, Presidential Debates: Forty Years of High-Risk TV. […]

What happened after the two candidates took the stage is a familiar tale. Nixon, pale and underweight from a recent hospitalization, appeared sickly and sweaty, while Kennedy appeared calm and confident. As the story goes, those who listened to the debate on the radio thought Nixon had won. But those listeners were in the minority. By 1960, 88% of American households had televisions — up from just 11% the decade before. The number of viewers who tuned in to the debate has been estimated as high as 74 million, by the Nielsen of the day, Broadcast Magazine. Those that watched the debate on TV thought Kennedy was the clear winner. Many say Kennedy won the election that night.

In other words, if you were listening to that debate – and allowing your mind work unencumbered by your lying eyes – Nixon won.  But add in all the visual whiz-bangs, and the image of a handsome, vigorous Kennedy, and Kennedy wiped the floor with Nixon.  Because the facts were irrelevant and the image was everything.

And my thesis is that it has been that way ever since.

So let’s go down memory lane, from Reagan v. Carter in 1980.  Who had more personality?  More charisma?  The actor kicked peanut farmer ass.  Same thing when the actor destroyed Mondale in 1984.  Then we get to his successor, H.W. Bush vs. Dukakis in 1988: well, it wasn’t like H.W. Bush was a “best personality” winner, but compared to the turnip someone named Michael Dukakis?  H.W. in a landslide.  But then that same H.W. Bush met Bill Clinton in 1992, and the handsome, vigorous man who slickly played saxophone on the hip show Arsenio Hall took the win.   And we get to 1996, and who had more personality and charisma?  Bill Clinton or Bob Dole, who looked like the angry old man yelling at neighborhood kids to get the hell off his lawn?  That brings us to George W. Bush versus the wooden cigar store Indian otherwise known as Al Gore in 2000.  And “Dubya” won.  Or put it this way: “close is no cigar.”  Same thing when “Dubya” took on John Kerry, who sounded like the stiffest and most pompous ass imaginable in 2004.  Which brings us to our current national nightmare when a young, hip, charismatic, enigmatic figure named Barack Hussein Obama took on an old, white-haired decrepit named John McCain in 2008.  And then took it away again from the GOP’s answer to the aforementioned wooden cigar store Indian when he defeated the chump known as Mitt Romney.  And I can only wish that Romney had displayed the fire in his belly against Obama that he has recently displayed trying to take down Trump.  And all that Romney has proven is that if you don’t like boring establishment Republican RINOs, vote for Trump because Romney proves Trump aint one.

I’m just saying that the American presidency is largely a personality cult, and who has more personality and charisma: old hag Hillery – whose been a lying politician since dinosaurs walked the earth – or Donald Trump the hero of reality T.V. that brings us back full circle to Kennedy winning because of fake reality television to kick it all off???

I’m declaring that when people start looking at Hillary and The Donald, Trump will exude so much more personality and charisma than the screaming witch that the American people will cast their lot with him.  Hillery is actually and able debater, but she simply fails to connect with people because at her core – as her email mess and her secret server proves – she is a paranoid fascist who frankly can’t stand people being able to see her for what she truly is.

We just learn something very telling here through Hillary Clinton’s emails that the FBI managed to save after she tried first to delete emails that she was required by law to preserve and then to try to wipe her secret server that she stored them on to try to bypass any and all public accountability under things like the Freedom of Information Act: namely, she is so paranoid about revealing who she truly is it is beyond unreal.  She is THE most tightly scripted control-freak who ever ran for president by far.  This is a truly paranoid woman who demanded that her staff be able to examine a high school kid’s introductory remarks before a Clinton appearance.  She wants to have tight control over EVERYTHING, including what questions get asked and who gets to ask those questions.  Which is why this paranoid, fascist woman has refused to do a single press conference in over half a year (more than 180 days!).  Hillary Clinton knows that if you knew who she really was, you would reject her.  Whereas Donald Trump is out everywhere talking to anybody.

Hillary Clinton has proven over her entire career that she is the same “Fiefdom Syndrome” heartless, indifferent, tone-deaf lifelong bureaucrat-technocrat politician – especially as epitomized by Benghazi – who couldn’t be bothered to deal with the leaking water mains under her governance.   It boils down to the five words, “What difference does it make?”

And the answer is “None at all; IF you want to go in the same miserable failed direction that leads to hell.”  Otherwise it makes PLENTY of difference.

And so I predict Hillary will lose.   Not because she’s is GODAWFUL (which is WHY she should lose) but because she is BORING.  Because of a mindset that has been around for fifty years which has worked for and against both parties and to the betterment as well as the harm of this nation.

 

 

Americans More Pessimistic About US Outlook Than At Any Time Since Start Of Obama’s Failed Presidency

April 22, 2011

As much as the mainstream media propaganda tries to pretend otherwise by restating Obama’s talking points as if they were facts, things are NOT going well for the U.S. economy.

And the American people know it:

Americans hold dim view of U.S. economic outlook: poll
Thu Apr 21, 10:54 pm ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Americans are more pessimistic about the U.S. economic outlook than they have been since the start of the Obama administration and most believe the United States is on the wrong track, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released on Thursday.

The number of Americans who think the economy is getting worse jumped 13 percentage points in just one month, to 39 percent, the poll suggested.

Just 23 percent said they thought the economy was improving, down 3 percentage points from the previous month.

Seventy percent of respondents said the country was heading in the wrong direction and most think neither President Barack Obama nor Congressional Republicans share their priorities for the country, the poll showed.

The dour mood is dragging down performance ratings for President Barack Obama and both parties in Congress with the 2012 election season already underway, the poll found.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents said they disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy, while 75 percent said they disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job.

While Washington is consumed with debate over deficit-reduction proposals, Americans seemed uncertain about the impact of cutting the deficit on the U.S. economy.

Some 29 percent of those polled said cutting the deficit would create more jobs, while 29 percent said deficit-cutting would cost jobs and 27 percent said it would have no effect on the employment outlook.

The poll found considerable support for Obama’s proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy — 72 percent of respondents approved of that idea as a way to address the deficit.

Obama’s job approval stood at 46 percent, while 45 percent did not approve of his performance in office.

More than half of poll respondents, 56 percent, said they did not have a favorable view of Republicans in Congress, as opposed to 37 percent who said they did.

The Democratic Party fared somewhat better, with a 49 percent approval rating versus 44 percent disapproval.

The telephone survey of 1,224 adults was conducted Friday through Wednesday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

According to Standard & Poor’s, “we believe the risks from the U.S. financial sector are higher than we considered them to be before 2008.”  Which is to say that all of Obama’s financial fascism has made the American economy more vulnerable to total collapse than it has ever been.

If you saw an Obama election victory after the Republican and Democrat Party national conventions in August of 2008 and abandoned the stock market in favor of gold and silver, you would be closing in on about a 90% profit on the gold, which would pale in comparison to the more than 250% profit you would have made in silver. 

I’ve watched the market go up and down, but the numbers reveal it has clearly generally gone up.  But I’ve also noticed that most of the trades are held for a matter of minutes or even seconds and that the low volume that has characterized the market pretty much mean it’s only major-league institutional investors that are making the lion’s share of the profits.

In the market itself, two things are happening: one is that banks are able to borrow money at nearly a zero percent interest rate and then reinvest it in bonds for a safe and easy profit without those risky and pesky loans to small businesses.  The other thing is that there are virtually zero bankrupties of major business and financial sector entities because they can borrow money at the aforementioned artificially low interest to keep themselves alive no matter “artificial” that life is.  The moment we start to see interest rates go to their natural levels, you are going to see a giant swath of reorganizations (which is a fancy word for bankruptices).  It’s coming.

I’ve also watched as QE2 (that’s Quantitative Easing, the Obama Fed plan to manipulate interest rates by creating bogus money based on the government essentially borrowing from itself) has fed this big player stock market gluttony with artificial money creating artificially low interest rates.  The last time quantitative easing ended, the market lost about 16% of its total value in about two weeks.  QE2 is scheduled to end in June.  You do the predictive math about what’s going to happen in June/July.

I am reminded of a rather chilling 7 minute video about a fictional scenario which is starting to look more and more like a prophecy:

The plot of the highly realistic video is that Obama’s announcment of QE4 is met with the world market finally realizing that Obama is a clueless idiot.  And it proceeds to detail the unravelling of the entire financial system.

We are almost certainly going to see QE3.  The only way we WON’T see QE3 is if the “experts” rename what will be virtually exactly the same thing.  The liberal/progressive/socialist powers that be simply don’t have any other plan.  And whether it’s QE4 or QE5, at some point the world markets will come to the same conclusion that they arrive at in the fictional video above.

Last year, Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner actually used the power of the government to launch an investigation into Glenn Beck for pushing gold.  Media Matters mocked Glenn Beck, as usual.  A poster calling himself blk-in-alabam wrote on May 19 (8:08 pm ET):

“Beck cult members probably bought more gold today.  He tells they must taste the hair of the dog that bit them to get over the money they have already spent on gold.  Glen Beck tells them to hurry and buy gold before the facist socialist government take away their right to be used and suckered.”

If you were one of the Beck cult members who bought gold, congratulations: you made ($1,503 – $1,192) $311 an ounce – a 26% profit – without even leaving your house.  Not a bad profit for a paranoid cultist.  I wonder how much blk-in-alabam made on his portfolio, assuming he isn’t living in the basement of his mom’s house and “investing” all of his allowance on video games???

Here’s my question: has there been an investigation of Anthony Weiner for demonizing gold???

The American people are totally confused and divided, which is exactly what you would expect from “No, no, no.  Not God bless America.  God DAMN America!”  The other thing you’d expect from God damn America is that wicked and foolish people will continue to make poor choices and poor decisions.

Obama Government Like Red Giant Sun About To Explode

September 14, 2010

Obama is a grandiose narcissist, so in a way I’m doing him a favor by comparing the government which he has recreated in his own image to the sun.

But let me assure you, I’m not being complimentary.

Like the U.S. government, the sun is the largest thing in our world by a whole bunch.  It’s huge and it’s powerful.  And it will go on and on, as long as things work the way they’re supposed to work.

But toward the end of a sun’s life, things start to go very wrong.  And it’s that “very wrong” direction that Obama has hugely accelerated us in.

As long as a sun is burning its legitimate source of hydrogen fuel, it is incredibly stable.  But then there comes that point where the hydrogen is burned up, and it starts to feed on itself.  It grows bigger – more than 200 times its previous stable size – and to an ignorant eye, it would appear that the sun was much more powerful than it had been before.  But in reality it is dying; it is burning the wrong kind of fuel; in reality it is about to explode.

That’s where Obama has taken us.  We’re burning through debt-spending at an astonishing and frankly astronomical rate.  For the last six decades we’ve grown huge with deficit spending; but never anything like what we’re seeing now.  Like the red giant sun, we’ve massively expanded beyond what is healthy or sustainable.  And it doesn’t take an astrophysicist to see that we’re nearing our end.

FDR massively expanded our federal government in his day; and it has been growing and growing and growing ever since.  But now Barack Obama has entered the scene and:

There’s little question that the anvil will fall on the US economy due to the near doubling of the national debt as Obama adds a projected $9.7 trillion to the $11.7 trillion black hole of debt we’re already in.  Obama is borrowing 50 cents on the dollar as he explodes the federal deficit by spending four times more than Bush spent in 2008 and in the process “adding more to the debt than all presidents — from George Washington to George Bush — combined.” And most terrifying of all, Obama’s spending will cause debt to double from 41% of GDP in 2008 to a crushing 82% of GDP in 2019.

What will be the result of all this insane spending, and not very far off? A quote from a CNS News story should awaken anyone who thinks the future will be rosy:

By 2019, the CBO said, a whopping 82 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) will go to pay down the national debt. This means that in future years, the government could owe its creditors more than the goods and services that the entire economy can produce.

and:

By comparison, from the day Mr. Obama took office last year to the end of the current fiscal year, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the debt held by the public will grow by $3.3 trillion. In 20 months, Mr. Obama will add as much debt as Mr. Bush ran up in eight years.

and:

In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.

and:

Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period.

As in “$800 billion a year.”  Every year from then on.

But it will likely be even more frightening than that:

The Obama administration is desperate to minimize the size of the budget deficit, which has become a huge political liability. It is gambling that interest rates will stay low. But, as I argue in “Boomergeddon,” the 30-year era of declining interest rates on sovereign debt is coming to a close. Interest rates will rise sharply in the decade ahead. And thanks to Treasury’s short-term actions, there will be very little to buffer the country from massive increases in interest on the debt. Between the mounting size of the debt itself, rising interest rates and short maturities, the interest burden could quadruple — perhaps even quintuple — by the end of the decade. By 2020, the U.S. could well be paying $1 trillion a year in interest.

$1 trillion a year in interest, only ten years away.  That amounts to paying for 1.16 Obama stimulus programs every single year, until we go the way of the Dodo bird.

Only we won’t just go away.  We’ll implode as an economic system and as a society, and then we’ll explode.

Near the end of a sun’s life cycle it turns into a red giant.  When our sun does this, it will grow so large that it will expand a minimum of 200 times its present size, and the planet Mercury and probably even Venus will be completely swallowed up.

To the uninformed, it would probably look as though the sun has become bigger and stronger than ever.  But to those who know, they will recognize that the red giant sun will be living on its last gaps before its collapse.  When it explodes, it will take most of the solar system – and very definitely planet earth – with it.

That’s the way our government is now, I believe.  Our government – especially under Barack Obama – has grown so huge beyond its legitimate or sustainable capacity it is simply unreal.  Someone who doesn’t understand the reality might think that we’re too big and powerful to explode.  But as our sun itself proves, the bigger we are, the harder we’ll fall.  We have either got to cut back the size of our government, or it’s expansion will consume itself and it will collapse before not very much longer.