Maybe Obama should get a new speechwriter
Richard Fernandez, that is.
My favorite line: “There’s no problem so pressing that you can’t forget it by changing the subject.”
It’s a brilliant, brilliant piece.
[Hat tip: commenter “J.J.”]
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
Oh yeah, it’s a great piece.
He absolutely skewers Obama by way of mockery.
Even the humor these days saddens me.
Ymarsakar:
Agreed.
Satirizing a dangerous person is not laugh-out-loud funny. The speech is too close to the bone, and Obama is doing too much damage. Nevertheless, the piece is absolutely brilliant. Something about the tone of it is pitch-perfect.
“So we must choose our enemies carefully. For the foreseeable future, the most direct threat to America, at home and abroad, is Climate Change. You might be saying WTF? But consider that it’s a whole lot easier than fighting al-Qaeda. Who would you rather go up against? Mark Steyn or Zarqawi. I rest my case.”
I’ve read it three times now and keep ROFLMAO. It is a classic!
In the comments on the Fernandez piece, “Subtotai Bahadur” points out:
“I ran across something tonight. They have codified and updated the guidelines for using military force against civilians inside the US. They call it DSCA Defense Support for Civil Authorities.
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdf
That’s the public version. Y’all know, and I know, that there are classified annexes.”
Official DoD stuff, not make-believe hysteria. Dates to 2010.
Neo has it exactly right. The Fernandez piece is so accurate it is not funny. Not even a little bit.
Twagiclly herlarious.
http://tinyurl.com/yqynjo
Never forget the fate of the Bonus Army. DC is more than willing to run roughshod and kill all who appear to be a threat to their power as they seek to subjugate the hoi polloi. Sooner or later they must give ground or there will be blood on the ground. 30,000,000 against 3,000,000 and by an large we are better shots and know our local terrain better than them. Still, I hope for an amicable divorce.
The title started me thinking. You know, I’d prefer Arafat. And that he go there, personally, to interview him. Maybe one of the Kennedy boys. All a one-stop shop. He’ll get there eventually, but a voluntary trip would be soothing to everyone.
Expect perhaps the tale of Moby Dick. The crew (progressives) will think mutiny but not come even close, and then, the ship and whale will disappear into the sea. The ship is Obama and “transformation” and the whale is the tea party’s United States of America.
The whales survived.
The average progressive looks at this and says ” Well yes its all exactly the opposite of whats been done by stodgy old white presidents. It has to work because the world has been unfair and imperfect for far too long.”
maybe obama will be the smartest man in the padded cell, I pray they put him in.
Contrast Bush’s cheering reception in 2008 at West Point to Obama’s reception.
I hope that Obama has the mental ability to realize how much he is mocked and detested.
Stalin had a quote about how he loved arranging the fates of his enemies, while he slept peacefully and safely at night.
“Something about the tone of it is pitch-perfect.”
Oh Yeah! It is Obama’s monotone cadence which makes it pitch-perfect and brilliantly done. The concluding zingers at the end of the paragraphs had me laughing out loud.
Though we are living in times where moral idiocy seems to be ruling the masses sometimes laughing is the only way to stay sane.
The funny thing is that I think Obama himself would much more enjoy giving the Fernandez speech than the one he actually gave at West Point. I watched a bit of the video of that speech and was struck by how lackluster and going-through-the-motions he came across in that. The Fernandez version would give him just the zip he needed.
Seriously, I think he could really do a good job delivering lines like these: “We’ll win by losing. You have to be smart, as smart as I am, to see it. The question used to be not whether America would lead but whether it would triumph. Ever since George Washington the answer was ‘yes’ to both questions. But check your privilege. Now I ask you to change the question: survive? win? What for?”