The Tonight Show With Jay Leno
So far for Halloween, sales of Obama masks are 30
percent higher than the sales of Mitt Romney masks.
That makes sense. I mean, what's scarier than four
more years of this economy?
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Senior citizen's joke
BEST EVER SENIOR CITIZEN JOKE
A little silver-haired lady calls her neighbor and says, "Please come over here and help me. I have a killer jigsaw puzzle, and I can't figure out how to get started."
Her neighbor asks, "What is it supposed to be when it's finished?"
The little silver haired lady says, "According to the picture on the box, it's a rooster."
Her neighbor decides to go over and help with the puzzle.
She lets him in and shows him where she has the puzzle spread all over the table.
He studies the pieces for a moment, then looks at the box, then turns to her and says,
"First of all, no matter what we do, we're not going to be able to assemble these pieces into anything resembling a rooster."
He takes her hand and says, "Secondly, I want you to relax. Let's have a nice cup of tea, and then," he said with a deep sigh ............
(scroll down)
"Let's put all the Corn Flakes back in the box."
A little silver-haired lady calls her neighbor and says, "Please come over here and help me. I have a killer jigsaw puzzle, and I can't figure out how to get started."
Her neighbor asks, "What is it supposed to be when it's finished?"
The little silver haired lady says, "According to the picture on the box, it's a rooster."
Her neighbor decides to go over and help with the puzzle.
She lets him in and shows him where she has the puzzle spread all over the table.
He studies the pieces for a moment, then looks at the box, then turns to her and says,
"First of all, no matter what we do, we're not going to be able to assemble these pieces into anything resembling a rooster."
He takes her hand and says, "Secondly, I want you to relax. Let's have a nice cup of tea, and then," he said with a deep sigh ............
(scroll down)
"Let's put all the Corn Flakes back in the box."
Newsweek Expose' ... and the death of Newsweek
Finally, Matt Patterson and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is
timely and tough. As many of you know, Newsweek has a reputation for being
extremely liberal. The fact that their editor saw fit to print the following
article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek,
makes this a truly amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last,
the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through
the “protective wall” built around him by the liberal media.
___________________________
I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
By Matt Patterson ( columnist – opinion writer)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.
Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.
The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles.Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
___________________________
I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
By Matt Patterson ( columnist – opinion writer)
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer;" a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.
He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.
Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.
The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles.Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
… AND ….
NEWSWEEK IS DEAD … LONG
LIVE FOX NEWS.
Denver Post Endorsement Critique by Mike Rosen
As expected,
the liberal Denver Post has endorsed Barack Obama in this election.
Denver’s
popular radio host, Mike Rosen, has rebutted elements of the Denver Post
editorial that announced that endorsement. Here are some extracts from
his rebuttals:
Rosen:
The endorsement is loaded with left-handed compliments. Barack Obama is
the worst president in our history. This guy is aggressively bad as a
president because he is leading the country in the wrong direction. Four
more years of Barack Obama, and he will set in place irreversible programs and
create such a level of government dependency from which we will never recover.
You will not recognize this country after four more years of him. His
agenda is simply wrong. Other presidents have been accused of
running an imperial presidency, such as Nixon, but none exceed Barack Obama’s
abuse of executive orders, and his refusal to include Republicans in this major
passage of health care reform. He is the most arrogant, naracisstic
president I can ever recall, and his foreign policy is absolutetly
terrible.
Post:
There have been notable accomplishments. He rescued the auto industry.
Rosen:
He did not rescue the nations’s auto industry. Much of the nations
auto industry, with the exception of GM and Chrysler, have been doing
relatively well, and done relatively well without being plagued by the auto
workers unions and their contract. Had GM and Chrylser been allowed to go
into a normal, traditional bankruptcy, they weould have recoverd from that bankruptcy
in a muych stronger position than they are right now without sacrificying the
bond holders who lost their investments while the unions were protected and are
still a huge financial problem for the companies.
Post:
Passing comprehensive (though contentious) health care reform.
Rosen:
It was not only contentious, it was wrong.
Post:
Obama is responsible for taking out Osama Bin Laden.
Rosen:
All the people and procedures that were responsible for taking out Bin Laden
were in place before Obama took office.
Post:
Less impressive are his efforts to tackle the debt and deficit, reducing
unemployment, and bolstering the housing market. A largely intrasagent
Republican Party shares in the blame however such as in the Jobs Act.
Rosen:
The so called Jobs Act was not a jobs act. It was more of the
same kind of deficit spending stimulus program that produced produced crappy
results the first time around. I don’t call the Republicans as
intransigent. I describe them as the loyal opposition, and thank you
loyal opposition for preventing Barack Obama from making things worse.
Post:
Romney has not shown that he is the kind of leader who will bring his party to
the center at a time fwhen that is what the country needs.
Rosen:
It is Barack Obama who moved his party way too far to the left and needs to
come to the center from his far left positions. I don’t see the
Post calling on Obama to come to the center as Bill Clinton did after the
1994 election when the Republicans took control of Congress because the body
politic thought he had moved too far left. Barack Obama didn’t move
to the center after the 2010 election cost him his Democrat majority in the US
House. But the Denver Post has moved so far left that it thinks
Mitt Romney is too conservative. You may recall that the Post
called Paul Ryan “radical.” That is absurd! Paul Ryan
is a mainstream conservative. Barack Obama is much further left of center
than Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are right of center.
Post:
Obama has shown throughout his term that he is a steady leader who keeps a
broad array of Americans in mind.
Rosen:
Baloney! Steady leader, my foot. If there is one thing he is not,
he is not a leader.
Post:
From running to the far right on immigration and women’s health issues in his
campaign and saddling his campaingn with Paul Ryan’s extreme and
unrealistic budget, the Romney nominated in this election is not the Romney
elected governor of Massachusetts.
Rosen:
First, “far right” is not a term that applies to Mitt Romney, and why doesn’t
the Denver Post use the term “far left” to describe Obama? Because the
Denver Post is left of center. Just because the Post is left of
center doesn’t mean that Paul Ryan is far right. Ryan’s plan
is not extreme. In fact, he has been criticized by a conservative group,
Club For Growth, because Ryan’s plan doesn’t balance the budget anytime within
the next 10 years.
Post:
Romney’s plan is for tax cuts for all.
Rosen:
No! It is for tax rate cuts. There is a huge difference. Whoever
wrote this endorsement editorial is either woefully ignornant or so committed
to Obama as to stretch the truth.
Mike Rosen website:
Watch much TV as a kid?
|
Below are the right answers:
1. D - Wonder Bread
2. G - Cassius Clay
3. B - He Is us
4. A - Good night, Chet
5. G - When you brush your teeth with Pepsodent
6. D - Maynard G. Krebs
7. C - Pants on fire
8. F - The American Way
9. C - It's Howdy Doody Time
10. E - Oh my
11. D - Over 30
12. C - Joe Namath
13. G - A little dab'll do ya
14. G - On Blueberry Hill
15. B - Mary Martin
16. G - John, Paul, George, Ringo
17. D - Who wrote the book of Love
18. B - Cause I eats me spinach
19. A - Smile, you're on Candid Camera
20.. F - Melt in your mouth not in your hand
An Open Letter to Obama Voters
Did you vote for Barack Obama in 2008? A lot of people did –
obviously.
What a time. There’s still room for improvement, but what a
testimony to just how far we as a nation have come in terms of racial harmony,
tolerance and diversity.
Only decades earlier a man like Barack Obama – a black man –
couldn’t even drink from the same water fountain as a white man, let alone
become president of the United States. A hundred years prior to that, and he
may well have been counted another man’s property.
On Nov. 4, 2008, millions gathered at the ballot box to prove,
once and for all, that, in large measure, we as a nation have healed from our
disgraceful, self-inflicted wounds of racial abuse, bias and division.
That we could elect an African-American to lead the free world is
indeed a very good thing.
We just happened to elect the wrong African-American.
In life, we sometimes find that the idea of a thing is far better
than the thing itself. As a boy, I once ordered, from a comic book, a pair of
X-ray glasses that promised to allow me to see the bones beneath my hand (my
motives were a bit more ignoble). The two weeks it took for the glasses to
arrive seemed like an eternity.
Once they did arrive, I ripped into the package and put them on,
darting my head to-and-fro. It’s difficult to express my level of
disappointment. As I quickly discovered, the glasses merely formed a halo
effect around objects, creating the illusion of transparency. I felt
embarrassed. I got took.
Barack Obama’s presidency has been a halo effect. Like I did so
many years ago, in 2008 America fell victim to false advertising. As the past
four years have demonstrated beyond any serious debate, the idea of President
Obama was far better than the reality of President Obama. We were promised the
world. We were promised transparency; but we were sold an illusion. We got
took.
Indeed, during the 2008 campaign, a then-Sen. Barack Obama
promised us that, if elected, we would look back upon the moment he took office
and “tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care
for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of
the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when
we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best
hope on earth.”
That was the idea of President Obama. That was what many good,
well-meaning people voted for. That was the hope offered and the change
promised.
That was not what we got.
Though it’s certainly not a comprehensive analysis, during the
second presidential debate, Mitt Romney, in response to Mr. Obama’s attempts to
gloss over his mounting leadership failures, summarized a few of the big ones.
While addressing an audience member who, perhaps like you, voted for Obama in
2008, Romney observed, in part, the following:
I think you know better. I think you know that these last four
years haven’t been so good as the president just described and that you don’t
feel like you’re confident that the next four years are going to be much better
either. …
He said that, by now, we’d have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The
difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans without
work. …
He said he would have, by now, put forward a plan to reform
Medicare and Social Security, because he pointed out they’re on the road to
bankruptcy. He would reform them. He’d get that done. He hasn’t even made a
proposal on either one.
He said in his first year he’d put out an immigration plan that
would deal with our immigration challenges. Didn’t even file it.
This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he’d
do. He said that he’d cut in half the deficit. He hasn’t done that either. In
fact, he doubled it.
He said that by now middle-income families would have a reduction
in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year. It’s gone up by $2,500 a
year. And if Obamacare is implemented fully, it’ll be another $2,500.
The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a
president who has not understood what it takes to get the economy working
again. … [T]he number of people who are still looking for work is still 23
million Americans.
There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in
poverty.
How about food stamps? When he took office, 32 million people were
on food stamps. Today, 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the
growth of the economy? It’s growing more slowly this year than last year – and
more slowly last year than the year before. …
The president has tried, but his policies haven’t worked.
Recently, my wife and I attended an outdoor festival in central
Virginia. Although the event was not political, there were people from both the
Obama and Romney camps handing out campaign stickers and other items. I suspect
that if a poll were taken, liberals out-numbered conservatives by about
two-to-one.
That’s why I was so taken aback. Although we saw dozens of people
wearing Romney stickers, we only saw one man wearing an Obama sticker.
We walked up to a fellow with a gray pony tail, John Lennon
glasses and Birkenstocks. He was wearing a Romney sticker.
“Mind if I ask why you’re voting for Mitt Romney?” I asked. “I
assume you are.”
His reply – and these were his words, not mine – was short and to
the point: “Because I refuse to be that stupid twice.”
Changing one’s mind doesn’t always reveal a tendency toward
indecision. Sometimes, changing one’s mind reveals a tendency toward wisdom.
by
Matt Barber (@jmattbarber
on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as
Vice President of Liberty Counsel
Action. (This information is provided for identification purposes
only.)
Saturday, October 20, 2012
It just occurred to me---
It
just occurred to me: Money.
It just occurred to me; with all the noise the media is making
about Romney's wealth, I don't recall such bluster and hand-wringing over the
Kennedy fortune. Or, for that matter, John Kerry.
Or the fact that John Kerry gave virtually nothing to charity
while Romney gave something on the order of $4 million, in addition to his
entire inheritance from his father.
Biden gave less than 1.5% of his income to charity.
Biden gave less than 1.5% of his income to charity.
And Obama pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Buffett Rule?
Oh. wait, I just remembered. Romney is Republican. Kerry and the Kennedys are Democrats.
Also, Romney worked for his money.
Kennedy inherited his.
Kerry married his.
And Obama spends yours on vacations.
Never mind. Nothing to see here folks.
Oh. wait, I just remembered. Romney is Republican. Kerry and the Kennedys are Democrats.
Also, Romney worked for his money.
Kennedy inherited his.
Kerry married his.
And Obama spends yours on vacations.
Never mind. Nothing to see here folks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)