Wednesday, August 26, 2009

More Questions for President Obama

From Robert Ringer:

None of the criminality of the Obama administration would be possible without the explicit (or, at the very least, implicit) approval of the media. Can you imagine a presidential press conference where, instead of asking Der Fuhrbama about his dogs or his latest beer summit, they asked him questions such as:

"You told Joe the Plumber that you believe in spreading the wealth around. Since the Constitution doesn't allow you to do that, from whom did you acquire the moral authority to take people's earnings by force and arbitrarily hand them to others?"
"You are on video in 2003 saying that you believe in a single-payer healthcare system. Why are you now telling the American public that you merely want a 'government option' added to our existing system? Were you lying in 2003, or are you lying now?"

"How do you reconcile the fact that, within a short space of time, you said that the Medicare system is a perfect example of how well government programs can work, then turned right around and said that Medicare is broke?"

"Why would you appoint an avowed communist, Van Jones, as "green czar?" Did you know that he was a communist before you appointed him? Was he properly vetted? Since communism seeks to destroy capitalism, isn't his appointment a clear indication that you would like to destroy capitalism?"

"Throughout your life, you have, by your own admission, associated most closely with people like Frank Marshall Davis (another communist), Reverend Jeremiah Wright (an advocate of "black liberation theology"), Bill Ayers (a convicted terrorist who stills says that he wished his group, the Weather Underground, would have done more), and Marxist professors (in college). Given these associations and your extreme liberal voting record in the Senate, weren't you being disingenuous with the American public when you tried to position yourself as a mainstream American in the last presidential election campaign?"

"Who, exactly, writes these thousand-page bills that keep getting rammed through Congress on short notice, and why do you not insist that all congressmen and women read them before voting on them?"

"Most of what you have done since you gained office is in violation of the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment specifically states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." In other words, the federal government has no powers other than those specifically granted to it by the seven Articles of the Constitution. Knowing this to be so, how do you justify violating the Constitution on a daily basis?"

"Since thousands of creditable scientists throughout the world say that global warming either does not exist or, if it does exist, it is not manmade, why are you determined to push through a cap and trade bill that will kill American businesses and jobs, dramatically raise taxes, and increase the cost of energy?"

"Why is Tom Daschle, whose tax problems were apparently so severe that he withdrew his nomination for Secretary for Health and Human Services, still coming to the White House and giving you advice on a regular basis while at the same time working for the law and lobbying firm of Alston & Bird and giving advice to UnitedHealth, the nation's largest health insurance company?"

Robert Ringer's full column is here.


  1. Ah nice...

    As Dilbert said it in one of cartoons:

    (pointy-haired boss): "Stop ruining my slogans with your logic!!"

  2. When did Obama admit that he associated most closely with people like Bill Ayers?

  3. Far as I know Obama has never really admitted his full association with Ayers - calling him just a guy who lives in the neighborhood.

    However, Obama launched his political career in Ayers living room, a highly credible PhD has done extensive analysis of Ayer's and Obama's writing styles and concluded that Ayers made significant contributions to Obama's Dreams of My Father, and finally (but not all I'm sure) a founding member of Ayer's old organization, the Weather Underground, helped write the stimulus bill in his new position as a member of the Apollo Project.

    The enemy within.

  4. Thanks for your response, Jilly65. Now we have a dialogue. Let's examine:

    "You are on video in 2003 saying that you believe in a single-payer healthcare system. Why are you now telling the American public that you merely want a 'government option' added to our existing system? Were you lying in 2003, or are you lying now?"

    Are these truly mutually exclusive? There are at least two possible scenarios without any lying:

    1. He changed his mind.
    2. He still believes in a single-payer system, but realizes it is not a viable option in the current environment. He is therefore only asking for "half a loaf."

    Neither of these scenarios involve lying.

  5. Mark,

    Good one. A guy like Obama really deserves the benefit of the doubt when it comes to lying, because he hasn't demonstrated proficiency in lying on any other topics and he simply has the best of intentions, regardless of his results, right?

    Apologia for evil.

  6. Not exactly, Taylor.

    Everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt in every accusation without compelling evidence to the contrary. Jumping to conclusions is the enemy of honest intellectual engagement.


  7. Mark,

    Your strategy is ignorant and unreasonable. You will spend your time carefully considering each proposal of every individual on earth until you go deaf, dumb and blind from old age. Meanwhile, all the crooks and liars will have taken you for all you're worth and emptied your pocket books.

    Humans possess a special capability that many other animals do not: the ability to look upon past experience to make quick (often life-saving) predictions about future events.

    Obama and other career politicians do not deserve patience or careful consideration with even one of their "government for all problems" suggestions. We need know only two things:

    1.) Government is force
    2.) Obama, et. al., have lied fragrantly about their intentions and/or the predicted results of their proposals numerous times in the past.

    Using those two bits of information we can readily surmise that Obama and co. are most likely lying to us yet again, and even if they are not, what they propose to do is re-order society and the distribution of wealth through governmental force.

    I don't know about you, but I don't reason with people trying to reach into my pocket in search of coin.

    Seriously, you're wasting time trying to "give truth a chance" with Obama and co. You fool no one with your caricature of the man of patient inquiry.

  8. I think I understand your point: Using the rules of evidence and logic is "ignorant and unreasonable." Using the Hasty Generalization Fallacy, jumping to conclusions, and making any accusations without compelling empirical evidence, on the other hand, is reasonable.

    Thanks for the lesson!

  9. Mark,

    "Everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt in every accusation without compelling evidence to the contrary."

    Right. And as I pointed out, the "compelling evidence" we humans, who can call on past events to inform predictions of future events, might call on is the multitude of things Obama has lied about in the past, as well as the fact that as a career politician, he's made it quite clear that he believes force is THE primary way to achieve social harmony.

    "Jumping to conclusions is the enemy of honest intellectual engagement."

    No, political force is the enemy of honest intellectual engagement. You seem to be too naive to understand this.

    Politicians don't want to engage you "honestly" or "intellectually." When they can't convince you with their lies and their glitter and best intentions, they pull out a gun and say "Argument over. I win." The political system is not about seeking the truth of the matter. If it were, there would be no need to eventually resort to force to end the debate.

    Stop being such a tool, Mark.

  10. Tool? Unlike most bloggers, I have extensive professional experience in intelligence analysis.

    As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I am researching political disinformation. I am familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory's misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the “deliberate misrepresentation” of the Iraqi threat this century. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation.

    Jumping to conclusions with inadequate evidence is a hazard taught early in intel schools. Unfortunately, this basic principle was ignored in the Iraqi WMD debacle. Unfortunately, some people have yet to learn this lesson.

    "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
    - Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860)