Today I gave a confab on FOX thirty seconds off mute, the sofa-panel talk was about Republican candidates having sufficient time in upcoming debates for discussion of their own economic plans and ideas. The conversation switched right then to their token liberal invited to goof up the conversation from his liberal fun mirror carnival corner. The guest said, "Well, it looks like the winner of the upcoming debates will be Barack Obama because none of these candidates have anything in place, just disjointed ideas nothing coherent, nothing in place, whereas Obama presents a solid economy with 1 million new jobs *click* Such a nice round number for ass-pulling, don't you think? Maybe he said 8 million, some government provided number when we all know by following closely for years and discussing along the way that the numbers themselves are jacked and too bogus to be useful anymore long ago to conceal what matters most to economists. Bogus numbers flowing glibly expertly memorized and presented dazzlingly to imply intelligence and impress a false tale.
It is not Obama's economy. He can have blame but no credit. They help only by stepping away. Presidents do not create jobs. Unless you want to say outright that presidents create government jobs as Bush did in a gigantic and unacceptable way, and that always takes from the economy and never contributes. The president can jack the economy. The president can gravely affect the economy by assisting friends and inhibiting what he does not like as this president has. Presidents can wreck economies much more easily than they can assist portions of healthy economies. All that a president need do to improve economy is get out of the way. This administration however does the reverse, Obama binds up the economy with torrents of new regulations. Any US president can do very well with a slash and burn attitude toward his own government departments. Gina McCarthy exemplifies the problem of government department overreach and incompetence and disruption. Her activism like Arne Duncan's activism in Education threatens their own government departments being pared back to reasonable size and to reasonable function so the economy can function without its hinderances.
Comments are not complimentary to Jazz Shaw's pice on Hot Air about Gina McCarthy busting a move on air conditioners. The Hot Air post is fronted with this photo on their front page. Gina's down-y mouth caught my interest. That's all. I'm that superficial. I keep thinking, you know, there are face exercises that can correct the loose muscles over time without surgery. C'mon, Gina, let's do some together. Gina's mouth does not have to hang down like a hound dog. Trump does that, do you notice? He sets his jaw and assumes a practiced visage, he knows what he's doing with his face. He assumes the position behind desk, behind podium, behind table, of a bullfrog. He actually juts his jaw and sets his face in place. He does the same bullfrog pose repeatedly. He knows it's disarming, challenging, impenetrable, amusing, judgmental, confusing, so there! All at once. It is an odd and remarkable pose and his face now faithfully obeys, his whole body, actually, falls into place. Just like Gina's face obeys, we're on first name basis after all this intimate face talk, her face faithfully conforms by being decades impressed to accurately reflect her dominate state of mind.
6 comments:
All Administrations load up their cabinets w/ butt boys and girls. Obama has taken it to a new level, Chicago style.
In college my goal was to work for the EPA. I majored in Environmental Science and Engineering, and I loved the field and coursework. In my senior year I dropped out. First, because my appetites outpaced my discipline, but also because Reagan was just elected and was poised to cut the kind of jobs I was going for.
Since then, I've come to respect Reagan and hate the EPA. Like unions, they accomplished some major good early on, but eventually became what they we're designed to oppose. They became large money burning behemoths that put profit (salaries) and organizational growth above all else. They stepped on the small and weak, and coddled the large and entrenched. They are modern day robber barons, drunk with power and ambition. Their objectives now are designed to get control of the few things they don't already have their thumb on, just like every organization that eventually does more harm than good. They need a serious haircut.
I read a line somewhere that Republican candidates are being careful not to talk about job growth.
Trump will be great for the economy. Why ?? Because he said so
Someone want to tell me why all these radical marxist leftists look the way they do? Janet Reno, Janet Yellin, Gina McCarthy, et al. They all have that short cropped gray hair, and they wear Maoist style clothing. Oh wait, I just explained it. NVM
Turn that frown upside down. The EPA is here to help! Fuck up everything and blame you.
Old leftists all look the same. Grim-faced and angry. Fighting logic and objective reality is hard work and heavy lifting. Long(er) hair on the men, short hair on the women, as a general rule. Beards and mustaches for everyone, of course. Their generation reversed the outer trappings of gendered looks and practices but didn't quite advance to complete gender-reversal and absolute abnegation of sex. Forward!
Post a Comment