â€œAre some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?â€ Well it is the Obama regime...sooooo…
Somethingâ€™s amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, â€œAre some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?â€
Fictional book authors operate in a convenient world, unconstrained by facts and experiences of the real world. The antithesis of works of fiction are scientific findings solely based on provable facts and experience. For agenda-driven environmental science, facts can sometime prove inconvenient. Itâ€™s far easier to advance an agenda with agreeable science, even if that means creating science fiction or fictional science. Fictional science thus becomes the pseudo-reality of environmentalistâ€™s absolutism and any science that disagrees with their predetermined conclusions of man-made harm to the environment is ignored or distorted. Now we learn that in some government agencies, scientists who question the veracity and validity of scientific evidence used to formulate environmental regulations and policies are shunned, kept quiet, and purged.
The purpose of fictional environmental science is to sway public opinion through what amounts to propaganda. Intransigent purveyors of â€œgreenâ€ propaganda know their greatest enemy is truth. One of the most famous propaganda experts was Germanyâ€™s Joseph Goebbels, who taught that if a lie is repeated often enough it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels also knew that truth has to be suppressed if it contradicts the objectives of the propaganda.
Goebbels wrote, â€œIt thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.â€
(Fox Nation) –A YouTube video released by Senator Jim Inhofe’s office shows a top Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official admitting that the whole point of President Obama EPAâ€™s air regulations was to kill coal and that this decision was â€œpainfulâ€ because it causes coal communities in states like Pennsylvania and West Virginia to â€œgo away.â€
Curt Spalding (New England Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Boston, MA) speaking at:
“Healthy Communities: Green solutions for safe environments,” Beyond Pesticides’ 30th National Pesticide Forum, March 30-31, 2012, Yale University, New Haven, CT
“But know right now, we are, we are struggling. We are struggling because we are trying to do our jobs. Lisa Jackson has put forth a very powerful message to the country. Just two days ago, the decision on greenhouse gas performance standard and saying basically gas plants are the performance standard which means if you want to build a coal plant you got a big problem. That was a huge decision. You can’t imagine how tough that was. Because you got to remember if you go to West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and all those places, you have coal communities who depend on coal. And to say that we just think those communities should just go away, we can’t do that. But she had to do what the law and policy suggested. And it’s painful. It’s painful every step of the way.
Full video here.
Push back: On May 8, 2012, one in three West Virginia Democrat primary voters choose an imprisoned convicted felon over Obama.
“Obama lost 41% of the vote in the Democratic primary in West Virginia â€“ a state heavily reliant on the coal industry â€“ to a convicted felon and current federal inmate.”
The chairman of the WV Democratic Party blamed Obamaâ€™s poor showing on his stance on coal energy. â€œAÂ lot of folks here have real frustration with this administrationâ€™s stance on coal and energy,â€Â said state Democratic chairman Larry Puccio. â€œThey are frustrated and they are upset, and they wanted to send Obama a message.â€
Filed under, promises Obama is more than willing to keep. For instance, his promise to bankrupt the coal industry:
“If somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can, it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted. That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel, and other alternative energy approaches.”Â – January 17, 2008
“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
of their own conscience.” ~ C. S. Lewis
Outstanding video by Free Market America inspired by Paul Harvey’s classic essay,”If I were the devil”.
(FreeMarketAmerica) –The environmental agenda has been infected by extremism it’s become an economic suicide pact. And we’re here to challenge it.
If I wanted America to fail …
To follow, not lead; to suffer, not prosper; to despair, not dream — I’d start with energy.
I’d cut off America’s supply of cheap, abundant energy. Of course, I couldn’t take it by force. So, I’d make Americans feel guilty for using the energy that heats their homes, fuels their cars, runs their businesses, and powers their economy.
I’d make cheap energy expensive, so that expensive energy would seem cheap.
I would empower unelected bureaucrats to all-but-outlaw America’s most abundant sources of energy. And after banning its use in America, I’d make it illegal for American companies to ship it overseas.
If I wanted America to fail …
I’d use our schools to teach one generation of Americans that our factories and our cars will cause a new Ice Age, and I’d muster a straight face so I could teach the next generation that they’re causing Global Warming.
And when it’s cold out, I’d call it Climate Change instead.
I’d imply that America’s cities and factories could run on wind power and wishes. I’d teach children how to ignore the hypocrisy of condemning logging, mining and farming — while having roofs over their heads, heat in their homes and food on their tables.
I would never teach children that the free market is the only force in human history to uplift the poor, establish the middle class and create lasting prosperity. Instead, I’d demonize prosperity itself, so that they will not miss what they will never have.
If I wanted America to fail …
I would create countless new regulations and seldom cancel old ones. They would be so complicated that only bureaucrats, lawyers and lobbyists could understand them. That way small businesses with big ideas wouldn’t stand a chance — and I would never have to worry about another Thomas Edison, Henry Ford or Steve Jobs.
I would ridicule as “Flat Earthers” those who urge us to lower energy costs by increasing supply. And when the evangelists of commonsense try to remind people about the law of supply and demand, I’d enlist a sympathetic media to drown them out.
If I wanted America to fail …
I would empower unaccountable bureaucracies seated in a distant capitol to bully Americans out of their dreams and their property rights. I’d send federal agents to raid guitar factories for using the wrong kind of wood; I’d force homeowners to tear down the homes they built on their own land.
I’d make it almost impossible for farmers to farm, miners to mine, loggers to log, and builders to build. And because I don’t believe in free markets, I’d invent false ones. I’d devise fictitious products — like carbon credits — and trade them in imaginary markets. I’d convince people that this would create jobs and be good for the economy.
If I wanted America to fail …
For every concern, I’d invent a crisis; and for every crisis, I’d invent the cause.
Like shutting down entire industries and killing tens of thousands of jobs in the name of saving spotted owls. When everyone learned the stunning irony that the owls were victims of their larger cousins — and not people — it would already be decades too late.
If I wanted America to fail …
I’d make it easier to stop commerce than start it — easier to kill jobs than create them — more fashionable to resent success than to seek it. When industries seek to create jobs, I’d file lawsuits to stop them. And then I’d make taxpayers pay for my lawyers.
If I wanted America to fail …
I would transform the environmental agenda from a document of conservation to an economic suicide pact. I would concede entire industries to our economic rivals by imposing regulations that cost trillions.
I would celebrate those who preach environmental austerity in public while indulging a lavish lifestyle in private. I’d convince Americans that Europe has it right, and America has it wrong.
If I wanted America to fail …
I would prey on the goodness and decency of ordinary Americans. I would only need to convince them … that all of this is for the greater good.
If I wanted America to fail, I suppose I wouldn’t change a thing.
In other words, every move the progressive cabal has ever made.
And a little something about his calling for the “striking of a grand bargain” with the Big Three automakers –taxpayers “picking up the tab for retiree health care costs in exchange for the car companies using that savings to invest in more fuel-efficient cars.”
Obama speech: Energy Independence: A Call for Leadership
TOPIC: Oil & Alternative Fuels
September 20, 2006
Now that summer’s over and gas prices have finally come down a bit, there’s a temptation to put any discussion about energy on the back burner until the next crisis arises. Gone are the days when the President would make sweeping pronouncements in his State of the Union about America’s addiction to oil – today there is far more political mileage out of questioning Democrats’ commitment to fighting terror than by affirming America’s commitment to energy independence.
But as the President may or may not have learned by now, simply ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away. Because while headlines about price gouging and gas lines have temporarily faded from the news, new headlines have emerged that should have us every bit as concerned about the addiction we just can’t seem to shake.
In just the last week, two in particular caught my eye.
One is from the Detroit Free Press, and it talks about how Ford Motor Company plans to cut 30,000 hourly jobs, 14,000 salaried jobs, and close sixteen plants by 2012.
Now, there are plenty of reasons for Ford’s financial troubles, but one of the most glaring has been their inability to compete with foreign counterparts by transitioning to the fuel-efficient and hybrid vehicles that represent the future of the auto industry.
200,000 of these hybrids are driving around China today, a country that already has a higher fuel economy than we do. Over in Japan, Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this year. But at Ford, there are plans to make only 20,000 Escape Hybrids in 2006, and GM’s brand won’t be on the market until 2007. Meanwhile, the waiting lists for a hybrid car in this country get longer by the day.
These foreign auto companies are out-innovating and out-competing us, and if we do nothing to help U.S. carmakers, tens of thousands more jobs and billions in business will be heading overseas in the months to come.
Unfortunately, job losses and foreign competition are just the half of it. Because the second headline that caught my eye was in Saturday’s New York Times, and it read, “Suicide Attacks Foiled at 2 Oil Sites in Yemen.”
This news is disturbing, but not surprising. For years, Al Qaeda has been trying to attack Middle Eastern oil refineries as a way to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy. Osama bin Laden himself has said, “Focus your operations on oil, especially in Iraq and the Gulf area, since this will cause them to die off [on their own].” In the past, even minor attacks have caused global prices to jump $2 per barrel in a single day. And a former CIA agent tells us that if terrorists ever succeeded in destroying an entire oil complex, it could take enough oil off the market to cause financial catastrophe in America.
More than anything else, headlines like these represent a realization that goes far beyond the temporary rise and fall of gas prices. It’s a realization that for all of our economic dominance – for all of our military might – the Achilles heel of the most powerful country on Earth is the oil we cannot live without.
The President knows this. That thousands of autoworkers are losing their jobs. That we spend $18 million on foreign oil ever hour. That our climate is changing and global temperatures are rising.
And yet, for someone who talks tough about defending America, actually solving our energy crisis seems to factor pretty low on the President’s agenda.
And that’s because as much as George Bush might want to defend America, he also needs to defend his vision of government – and that’s a government that can’t, won’t, and shouldn’t solve great national challenges like our energy dependence.
That’s why the President’s funding for renewable fuels is at the same level it was the day he took office. That’s why his budget funds less then half of the energy bill he himself signed into law. That’s why billions of tax dollars that could’ve been used to fund energy research went to the record-profiting oil companies instead.
And that’s why it’s time to stand up for a new vision of government this November.
You see, it’s this timidity – this smallness – in our politics that’s holding us back right now. The idea that some problems are just too big to handle, and if you just ignore them, sooner or later, they’ll go away.
But that’s not where the American people are. They still believe in an America where anything’s possible – they just don’t think their leaders do. They still dream big dreams – they just sense their leaders have forgotten how.
There’s a reason that some have compared the quest for energy independence to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo moon landing. Like those historic efforts, moving away from an oil economy is a major challenge that will require a sustained national commitment.
During World War II, we had an entire country working around the clock to produce enough planes and tanks to beat the Axis powers. In the middle of the Cold War, we built a national highway system so we had a quick way to transport military equipment across the country. When we wanted to beat the Russians into space, we poured millions into a national education initiative that graduated thousands of new scientists and engineers.
If we hope to strengthen our security and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs, we can offer no less of a commitment to energy independence.
With technology we have on the shelves right now and fuels we can grow right here in America, by 2025 we can reduce our oil imports by over 7.5. million barrels per day – an amount greater than all the oil we are expected to import from the entire Middle East.
We start by producing cars that use less oil. The auto industry has not been asked to raise fuel economy standards in seventeen years, and lately we’ve just stopped asking them to.
Today, we have no choice. Starting in 2008, if we raised CAF’E standards a modest 3% a year over the next twelve years, by 2020 passenger vehicles would average 40.5 mpg and light trucks would average 32.6 mpg. This is by no means a dramatic increase – five years ago, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that raising CAF’E to 33 mpg for passenger cars could easily be done without compromising passenger safety.
Not only would this reduce America’s oil consumption, but it would increase profits for the auto industry. Yesterday a University of Michigan report came out that said if the Big Three automakers took proactive steps to increase the fuel-efficiency of their vehicles, they would stand to gain up to $2 billion more in profits per year. But if they continue on their current path, they could stand to lose up to $3.6 billion in profits.
Of course, auto executives are right when they say that transitioning to these more fuel-efficient automobiles would be costly at a time of sagging profits and stiff competition, and that’s precisely why the federal government shouldn’t let the industry face these costs on their own.
We should strike a grand bargain with the Big Three automakers where the government [TAXPAYERS] picks up part of the tab for their retiree health care costs – a tab that ran almost $6.7 billion just last year – in exchange for the car companies using that savings to invest in more fuel-efficient cars.
Beyond raising CAFE, however, it’s time we replace oil altogether as America’s fuel of choice. This doesn’t just mean singing the praises of ethanol and hoping that it finds its way into our fuel supply on its own. It means taking major steps now to put a national biofuel infrastructure in place.
Already, some cars on the road have the flexible-fuel tanks necessary for them to run on E85, a cheaper, cleaner blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. But millions upon millions of cars still don’t have these tanks.
It’s time for them to install those tanks in every single car they make, and it’s time for the government [TAXPAYERS] to cover this small cost, which currently runs at just $100 per car. We should also make sure that from now on, every single automobile the government purchases is a flex-fuel vehicle.
It’s also a time to start making E85 fueling stations more available to the public. Currently, only 681 out of 170,000 fueling stations in America offer E85 pumps. This is not acceptable. Every American should have the choice to fill up their car with E85 at any fueling station. And oil companies should stop standing in the way and join us in making this happen. If the big oil companies would devote just 1% of their first quarter profits this year to install E85 pumps, more than 7,000 service stations would be able to serve E85 to hungry motorists.
Finally, we should reduce the risk of investing in renewable fuels by providing loan guarantees and venture capital to those entrepreneurs with the best plans to develop and sell biofuels. And we should create a market for renewable fuels by ramping up the renewable fuel standard and creating an alternative diesel standard in this country that together would blend 65 billion gallons of renewable fuels into the petroleum supply each year.
In the days and months after September 11th, Americans were waiting to be called to something bigger than themselves. Just like their parents and grandparents of the Greatest Generation, they were willing to serve and defend their country – not only on the fields of war, but on the homefront too.
This is our chance to step up and serve. For decades, we have heard President after President call for energy independence in this country, but for decades, we have fallen short. Well it’s time to call on ourselves. We shouldn’t wait for the next time gas hits $3 a gallon - and we shouldn’t accept any more headlines that talk about a dying auto industry or a terrorist plot to use oil as a weapon against America. We should act – and we should act now.
Now is the time for serious leadership to get us started down the path of energy independence. Now is the time for this call to arms. I hope some of the ideas I’ve laid out today can serve as a basis for this call, but I also hope that members of both parties and all levels of government can come together in the near future to launch this serious quest for energy independence. Thank you.
President Ronald Reagan understood. God rest his soul, he was a traditional American. Obama and his anti-American progressive cabal are not by a long shot. One simply can not loathe America and all that she stands for and be a traditional American. Traditional Americans who value liberty, are the backbone of this great country. Always have been. Progressives headed by wannabe despot Obama, want to literally rip our freedoms from us and cut America off at the knees.
Is it any wonder that in these polling results released yesterday by Gallup, Ronald Reagan came out on top? Note the net rating percentage points of Reagan versus Obama. Quite the wide margin wouldn’t you say? In fact, take careful note of Obama’s numbers across the board. Far from stellar.
Come November 2012, vote the bastard â€“OUT. I donâ€™t care who eventually wins the GOP nomination â€“get OUT and VOTE. Your vote will be AGAINST Obama, not for the candidate of your choice. That is the â€“POINT. Sure, they each have their negatives. BUT the alternative, a second term for O (a FRIGHTENING thought), should be more than enough to motivate you.
Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do to save your country.
Vote as if the American way ofÂ life depends on it â€“because it DOES.
Update: Bonus Reagan video.
Reagan responds to Obama and his supporters
This video is from back in 2009, but since the Obama is running for reelection I figured it would not hurt to post it. As it is still as relevant as it was in 2009.
BOB&TOM TV: “Obama Man” by Greg Morton
H/T PennyThawtz at Expose the Media
Obama ‘Candy Man’ linked below in related posts.
…It’s A Bullsh*t Artist.
Cato Institute scholars Malou Innocent, Chris Edwards, Neal McCluskey, Ilya Shapiro, Jerry Taylor, Dan Mitchell and Dan Ikenson respond to President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union Address/campaign speech.
He concluded with a deserved salute to the extraordinary work of SEAL Team Six in killing Osama Bin Laden. His description of how they did it was gripping — until he decided to claim that it had something to teach us about America:
“No one built this country on their own. This nation is great because we built it together. This nation is great because we worked as a team. This nation is great because we get each other’s backs.”
It is a tragedy for this nation that its president believes this. America is great not because it’s a team. America is great because it is a nation whose founding documents elevated the rights of the individual.
Aside from his poor record, this misunderstanding of the US is Obama’s gravest weakness as a general-election candidate, and the Republicans running for president should take heed and go at it.
Susan Duclos at Wake Up America reports:
The AP, via Seattlepi.com, takes a look at Obama’s rhetoric Tuesday night during his State of the Union address and how it fits with the facts and political circumstances and it takes them three pages to fact check what Obama said and compare it to reality and finds Obama’s version of the state our country to be lacking, containing half truths or misinformation.
Read WaPo’s fact check here.
President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address again rated at an 8th grade comprehension level, on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test — the third lowest score of any State of the Union address since 1934.
The University of Minnesota’s Smart Politics conducted an analysis on the last 70 State of the Union addresses and found that President Obama’s three addresses have the lowest grade average of any modern president. “Obama’s average grade-level score of 8.4 is more than two grades lower than the 10.7 grade average for the other 67 addresses written by his 12 predecessors,” they conclude.
“Here at this site, Solyndra expects to make enough solar panels each year to generate 500 megawatts of electricity. And over the lifetime of this expanded facility, that could be like replacing as many as eight coal-fired power plants. It’s also worth noting, to achieve this doubling of our share of solar capacity, we actually need to make four times as many solar panels, because other countries are adding capacity, too. Nobody in this race is standing still.”
~ Barack Obama –Solyndra INC. Freemont, California May 26, 2010
Obama’s pet green shell company went belly up after having received over a half of a BILLION dollars in taxpayer monies. And adding insult to injury, they have now been caught on tape destroying MILLIONS of dollars of parts.
And YOU PAID for IT.
CBS San Francisco has the scoop:
FREMONT (CBS 5) — After filing for bankruptcy last year, Fremont solar company Solyndra still owes American taxpayers half a billion dollars. But CBS 5 caught them destroying millions of dollars worth of parts.
At Solyndra’s sprawling complex in Fremont, workers in white jumpsuits were unwrapping brand new glass tubes used in solar panels last week. They are the latest, most cutting-edge solar technology, and they are being thrown into dumpsters.
Forklifts brought one pallet after another piled high with the carefully packaged glass. Slowly but surely it all ended up shattered.
And it’s not a few loads. Hundreds of thousands of tubes on shrink-wrapped pallets will meet a similar demise.
Solyndra paid at least $2 million for the specialized glass. A CBS 5 crew found one piece lying in the parking lot. Solyndra still owes the German company that made the tubes close to another $8 million.
So why is a bankrupt company that owes a fortune to creditors, including American taxpayers, throwing away millions of dollars worth of assets?
Image source: Solyndra ‘Green’ Executives: $100,000+ In Obama Donations And 20+ White House Trips- Sad Hill News
(Related posts below, automatically generated)
Rush Rant: Obama Pretends to Care About the Middle Class but Lives Like a King at the Public Trough [Audio]
Transcript via Rush Limbaugh:
Now, here‘s what Romney doesn’t do, all this talk about Romney, 15 percent, his speech income, he doesn’t know how much, how little and so forth. Let me tell you what Romney doesn’t do. Romney has not played over 90 rounds of golf in three years while everybody is suffering. Romney has not flown all over the world on the federal government’s dime. Romney has not had lavish parties and concerts on the public’s dime. Romney has not lived like a king on other people’s money. He has sent his wife on government jets four hours ahead of him to the same destination. Romney is not responsible, nor is any other Republican, for the 16 percent unemployment, real unemployment in this country. Romney is not responsible for increased fuel and food costs. He’s not responsible for any of this.
That would be Obama, who pretends to care about the middle class but lives like a king at the public trough. Mitt Romney’s not the problem. Newt Gingrich isn’t the problem. Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, not the problem. We find ourselves in this mess because of Barack Obama. And here come some people who want to dramatically change course, reverse course. And all we get in the news media is what a bunch of reprobates they are, when every one of them is a fine human being. Every one of them is a decent person. Every one of them is an average American in their own ways. Obama is not, his wife is not.
Now, if the left wants to discuss this kind of thing and the media wants to talk about it, let’s talk about it. What financial sacrifices have the Obamas made? What money of theirs do they have that is theirs, that they have earned? How many no-show jobs has Michelle Obama had? How many people get to spend other people‘s money like they do and then act like they’re entitled to do it, in the midst of so much economic suffering throughout the country? Mitt Romney‘s not up there telling people don’t go to Las Vegas, don’t go to resorts. Mitt Romney’s not up there promising to focus laser-like on jobs and then not do it. Mitt Romney hasn’t grown the federal budget by $5 trillion.
Do you realize that Barack Obama has already spent the federal budget for the two years of the next administration, whoever’s in charge of it. He’s already spent it. The entire federal budget for fiscal 2013 and 2014 is already spent.Ã‚Â That’s how much money Obama spent. Romney hasn’t spent a dime of it. Nor has Newt Gingrich. The entire federal budget for two years after Obama loses in 2012 is already spent, folks.Ã‚Â How much money did Mitt Romney throw at Solyndra?Ã‚Â How much of your money did Mitt Romney throw at Solyndra and all of these other green energy companies?Ã‚Â How many automobile companies did Mitt Romney take over with your money and then demand they start making cars that nobody wants?
Did Mitt Romney turn down the Keystone pipeline?Ã‚Â Is Mitt Romney responsible for rising energy costs and depleting energy supplies?Ã‚Â All of this is Barack Obama.Ã‚Â Every ounce of misery, economic misery in this country is directly traceable to the Oval Office and the offices of Pelosi and Reid, and every other Democrat on Capitol Hill, and every Democrat staff member.Ã‚Â Mitt Romney‘s tax rate is not responsible for one deleterious thing that’s happened to any person in this country.Ã‚Â Mitt Romney has done more to empower and enrich individuals with Bain Capital and the other things he‘s done at the Olympics than Barack Obama could ever hope to do because Barack Obama’s done nothing but ruin people’s lives.Ã‚Â And we want to talk about Mitt Romney’s 15 percent tax rate and how much he makes on speeches, while we don‘t talk about Bill Clinton’s $82 million in speeches, his average fee of $181,000 a speech.
Mitt Romney had nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis. Mitt Romney had nothing to do with the bottoming out of the housing market. Mitt Romney had nothing to do with half this country losing the value of its number one asset, its home.Ã‚Â And nor did Newt Gingrich, and neither did Rick Perry or Rick Santorum.Ã‚Â What are we talking about here? Mitt Romney has not traveled to a foreign country and apologized for America any time, anywhere, anyplace. Nor has Newt Gingrich, nor has Rick Santorum or Rick Perry. Not one decision that has led to economic disaster in this country, the decline of this country, has been made by Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney or Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann or Jon Huntsman, any of the others that have sought the Republican nomination.
And in all of this economic downturn I ask you: What financial sacrifices have the Obamas made? See, one thing Romney could say: “If I’m elected president, I will actually be taking a pay cut, but for Barack Obama the presidency was a path to becoming a millionaire.” The presidency is going to cost Mitt Romney money. The presidency was a path to wealth for Barack Obama and for Bill Clinton. Now, you want to talk about morality and decency and who’s a good guy and who cares about the little guy and so forth? This is all a crock, folks. This is all the way this silly game is played. Of course, it‘s frustrating for us that there’s (groans) apparently not a candidate that thinks like I am articulating things here.
I know it’s frustrating, but this is what happens when there’s not a genuine conservative. Newt comes close, in his moments where he shines. If somebody said something like this in a debate, the standing O [ovation] would never end. The moderators would lose total control of the debate. Plus, everything I said has an added benefit: It’s all true. None of it is made up. In fact, I just scratch the surface. Nobody ever says this kind of stuff to Obama’s face. They asked Jay Carney yesterday, “Well, what about the Clem transcripts?” Carney said, “Well (muttering). It’s not important. It’s not relevant! What do you mean? He’s the King! He doesn’t have to tell you that.”
That’s just their attitude.
Michelle ‘Antoinette’ Obama image source: InstaPundit