Obama's Address of National Issues (updated 31aug12)

"Y'all can't get the water to clear up, until you get the turd out of the creek."  East Tennessee wisdom.

George Rebane

A leading local leftie commented again at length on ‘Behold a Pale Horse ...’.  There he lamented that viewing and discussing the films I reported on will keep people from hearing those few Republicans who are still willing to debate Obama on important national issues “like the future of American tax policy, a national energy plan, reducing debt, national enfranchisement, economic development, trade, national security …”.  And then he goes on to blame Romney for being off issue in a display of the most convoluted logic seen for some time from a progressive pulpit.  Another timely application of the Alinsky Alternative by the Left.


Now if I correctly recall the last year or so, Obama has run like a scared rabbit from talking about his record and approach to important national issues.  He prefers to spin (aka ‘lie about’) Romney using capitalism to kill people while at Bain, Romney’s offshore investment accounts, Romney’s tax returns, …, and for good measure he has Romney accused of being a felon.

As a counter, Romney and his running mate Ryan have put forth detailed plans for the next four years and more (see Russ Steele’s report here), while Obama has avoided saying anything about what he’ll do if re-elected.

By now you’re probably wondering what in hell is the above pictured contraption, and what is it used for.  Well, a friend and correspondent sent me the picture and an accompanying explanation which I have edited slightly.  It will go a long way to clarify what we have experienced in this presidential campaign so far, and what is forthcoming a fortiori – that’s fancy talk for ‘in spades’.  All I can say is ‘Maudie, brace yourself!’

The tobacco enema was used from the 1750s to about 1810 to infuse tobacco smoke into a patient’s rectum for various medical purposes, primarily the resuscitation of drowning victims.

A rectal tube inserted into the anus was connected to a fumigator and bellows that forced the smoke towards the rectum.  The warmth of the smoke was thought to promote respiration, but doubts about the credibility of tobacco enemas led to the popular phrase “blow smoke up one’s ass” to describe all manner of bamboozling speech.

This instrument has enjoyed an even longer history of service in Washington D.C. by politicians and bureaucrats of all stripes.  Having already seen extensive use on the stump in 2008, it was again pressed into service as the main medical device needed to sell Obamacare, the President’s new healthcare program.  Most recently its application has had a widely witnessed resurgence when it was discovered to be the only effective tool in use by the Obama campaign during this election year.

[31aug12 update]  As an example of the kind of smoke Obama has been blowing up where the sun don't shine, we reprise the nearby image from a literary promo that was not purged from the record, and has been pooh-poohed by the Left ever since - 'you know, just kidding'.  Our liberal friends need to be reminded that the lamestream's crack journalists never came upon this in their extensive research into Obama's background - you know the kind that professionals always do on national candidates.  So here's the puzzle, was Obama already an accomplished smoke blower back in his Harvard days, or is that a recently acquired talent, or maybe he didn't blow smoke at all.  Any ideas?  (H/T to a reader)

Comments

[George Rebane]

TomK 218pm - You might be a mite modest here. I would say that that has been the stock progressive accusation since the Tea Parties started. It is also the stock application of the Alinsky Alternative.

[TomKenworth]

One final note on the Tea Party Birthers. Maybe if they had spent the energy at the Reno Airshow, instead of on President Obama, they might have caught the 74 year old flyboy posing as a 59 year old flying a plane with shortened wings (how could have other experienced pilots have missed that?) that killed 10 people and wounded 70 others.

"Nope, he's rich, so he must be honest."

[George Rebane]

TomK 815am - This instance of liberal reasoning could/should in itself make an exemplary post in RR's Liberal Mind category. For now we'll just let it serve to explain away some of the other dots that you have connected.

[Paul Emery]

TomK-huh?

[TomKenworth]

Paul, check yesterday's or Monday's The Union, and see how the hubris of a rich 74 year old set himself up to murder 10 people at last year's airshow in Reno, using an illegally and undeclared modified P-51. He obviously used a false birth certificate somewhere along the line.

[TomKenworth]

BTW, the outstanding photograph of the P-51 in a vertical dive is the perfect symbol for the Republican party.

http://thecritical-post.com/blog/2011/09/remembering-jimmy-leeward-the-galloping-ghost-p-51-nx79111-after-the-reno-airshow-crash-tcpchicago/

Apparently NTSB did not find God responsible, and this aspect is discussed in the article and especially in the comments.

[TomKenworth]

Why bother with The Union? Here's the AP story, complete with moment of impact image.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ntsb-to-review-findings-of-sept-2011-crash-of-aircraft-into-spectators-during-reno-air-races/2012/08/27/36c5a9c4-f017-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_story.html

[billy T]

Rich envy or pilot envy? Or rich pilot envy?

[TomKenworth]

Envy the arrogant lying dead murderer with the phoney birth certifcate? I don't think so. On your side, over sympathizing with over accomplishment by any means necessary, regardless of results, is no evil? This campaign is very quickly sinking to new lows:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sv3tadz5Q3o

[billy T]

We can do better.

[George Rebane]

TomK 853am - In the quest for clarity, and if not, then only for understanding your comments - what is your definition of 'murder'? You apparently have a unique sense for that word.

[TomKenworth]

Getting behind the wheel with double the legal limit of alcohol, and anything else similar. If dome methhead modified a vehicle and took it on a public highway and a wheel flew off and it caused a crash that kill members of your immediate family, you'd have no trouble calling it murder. Here the drug seems to have been too much money and power, and too little time, not unlike the drug speed.

[billy T]

Medicare is going broke. Its now or never. We must do better. Come to the light. We will do better, we can do better. Yes we can. Forward as we leave the guy stuck in the ditch and regain America. Hope with change.

[George Rebane]

TomK 843am - First, the crash you describe members of my family would be killed would NOT be called murder by me or anyone who thinks like me. But true to form, as corroborated by Dr Gage (see 'The Liberals' Intellectually Baseless Ideology'), you didn't define murder but attempted an issue or example based explication.

Murder is a term that has traditionally been reserved for the illegal and intentional killing of a human.

[billy T]

Phew, that airplane topic sure came out of left field. Moral equivalent to exactly what? Rich folks? Old folks? Old rich folks who own planes? Tom, you can do better. The new normal is adnormal, even for you. We must do better. Come to the light. Yes, its time to prune the tree of dead wood. Fear not. BART awaits you if things become too real.

[TomKenworth]

So the methhead or drunk gets off with manslaughter? Don't think that is true anymore, at least not for 2nd degree murder:

http://www.shouselaw.com/watson-murder.html.

[George Rebane]

TomK 111pm - Don't ever confuse the definitions from the legal lexicon with what is accepted in the normal world. Legal definitions are bizarre by perfidy and design - go ask OJ about 'double jeopardy'. (BTW, I think your link is broken.)

[TomKenworth]

http://www.shouselaw.com/watson-murder.html period by force of habit.

[George Rebane]

TomK 218pm - thanks Doug. Here's what's required to prove 'DUI 2nd degree murder' - "In order to convict you of DUI murder in California , the prosecutor must prove the following three facts (otherwise known as "elements of the crime"):

1. the death resulted from an intentional act,
2. the natural consequences of that act are dangerous to human life, and
3. you knowingly acted with conscious disregard for that fact.

It should be noted that there is no "intent" to actively kill another person in second-degree murder, which is what distinguishes DUI homicide from first-degree murder."

With definitions like these, what would prevent tomorrow's legal profession from blaming the subsequent death from lung disease (cancer, etc) of someone exposed to second hand cigarette smoke admittedly from the accused?