Sunday, September 27, 2015

Obama... The UNPresident

Sometimes, bloggers get lucky. I was struggling with finding something to write about and then Obama addressed the U.N. Thank you, Jebus! What Obama said was utterly stupid.

Let me start by mocking what Obama’s opening act John Kerry said. Kerry said, “It would be a complete understatement to say that we meet at a challenging time.” In other words, grade us on a curve. Well, let me ask His Weakness which of the following challenges faced by others Kerry and Obama are currently facing:

Are the Nazis or Commies sweeping through Europe? Hardly. Are the people rioting in the streets in every capitol? Nope. Is the Clinton-weakened military struggling to fight multiple wars as a disloyal opposition offers aid and comfort to anyone who opposes the administration? Nope. Are we losing a war in Southeast Asia as American colleges burn and American soldiers revolt? Nope. Do our enemies threaten our annihilation with nuclear weapons? No. Is the flu or AIDS killing millions of people? Is an entire continent starving while another is ravaged by civil war? Does the second most productive continent on Earth lie in post-war smoking ruins? Nope.

So what exactly makes this time so challenging other than the fact that Kerry/Obama are too stupid to solve simple problems? No curve for you, loser.

Now Obama. Obama wants to spend trillions of dollars over 15 years to end poverty around the world.

First, commies always go for 5 year plans. Going for 15 sounds like weak borscht to me. As for spending trillions, we already did that in the US and guess what? According to the left, there is more poverty now than ever in the US. So clearly, that is not the answer. Or is the left lying about American poverty?

Also, why in the world should we accept that Obama has a clue how to solve poverty when it’s gotten so much worse under his watch. Plus, he already spent all of our money, so too bad suckers. Don’t take a check from this man ==>

Anyways, he calls this “not charity but instead is one of the smartest investments we can make in our own future.” Uh, no. It is charity because Obama is just proposing handouts. And it certainly doesn’t help my future. It’s no skin off my ass if a bunch of Syrians butcher each other or if some person in Bangladesh doesn’t have a job. Besides, looking at lives as an investment is cruel and evil and business-y... isn’t it? It is when other people do it.

Obama is justifying his plan on the basis that 800 million men, women and children scrape by on less than $1.25 a day and that billions of people are at risk of dying from preventable diseases. He particularly noted the “moral outrage” that many children are just one mosquito bite away from death.

But again, what about the 40 million who live in poverty here? He’s done nothing for them in the last eight years. As for the preventable diseases thing, see Obamacare for why you don’t want Dr. Obama tampering with your health care. And as for the mosquito thing, it was Obama’s people who banned DDT before places like Africa could be made safe. What’s more, it’s interesting that he should pick that particular example when groups like the Gates Foundation have made fools of the groups Obama likes to laud by managing to nearly solve the malaria issue those other groups couldn’t dent for decades. So yeah, low credibility here, Lord O.

Sensing this, he tries to jam Syria and war in there as an excuse. First, Obama warns us that “development is threatened by war.” Really? Where. Outside of Syria and Iraq and a couple other minor places, the world has never been more stable. And frankly, it’s not like Syria or Iraq were ever very developed or contributed much to the world economy.

He then said that Syria is the greatest refugee crisis since World War II and that other countries “that can, must do more to accommodate refugees,” but added that those efforts must be matched by diplomacy. I’ve been pondering this quote and it seems like nonsense. Was this refugee crisis really the result of a lack of diplomacy? Or was it the insane assholes who are killing everyone they come across that they don’t like? What’s more, he’s implying that there is a diplomatic solution. Does he really think that? What exactly is the diplomatic middle ground between “I will kill you savagely” and “I don’t want to die!”?

Anyways, he wants you to think that pouring trillions down the toilet will stop war and end mosquito-related deaths. But why should we believe it when it’s never worked before in the past?



Critch said...

The Lefties always want to spend our money overseas to: stop poverty, promote the rights of man, promote the rights of women, promote the rights of minorities, promote the rights of's the rub. When they don't get their way, they wait for the next war or genital mutilation, or whale killing, you name it and pounce on it as though they could have prevented it. They couldn't have, but they will tell their dumbass supporters that it was all the conservatives fault.

tryanmax said...

Party of the rich?

"We really could use some more hands down at the orphanage."
"Lovie, bring me my checkbook, please."

Which party does that sound like?

tryanmax said...

Of course, the analogy is flawed, because when it comes from the left, it's never their checkbook, is it?

AndrewPrice said...

Critch, That is the game and I find it truly annoying. They let problems arise... in fact, I would argue that they interfere with preventing them... and then they act self-righteous about how they would have solved them. And then, when given the chance and they fail (as they inevitably do) they whine about these being "special" problems or circumstances somehow.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, the Democrats are the party of the rich, even as they swear they aren't. Too bad their followers aren't smart enough to see through that.

Anthony said...

Obama's policies are absolute failures but it has been a while since anyone has covered themselves in glory on the international policy front and I see no reason to believe that will change in the foreseeable future.

Speaking of the future, given that Obama is a lame duck facing a hostile Congress, his long range plans mean nothing.

BevfromNYC said...

This is a parable that I have used for years that explains the difference between the Liberals and Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans etc.

Scene opens in a forest
A liberal and conservative are walking in the forest when they hear someone yelling "Help me!!!, Help me!!!". Going toward the voice, they soon find a man in a deep hole.

Liberal: "Oh, no, a man in a hole. We must help him!"
Conservative: "Hey, Man in hole, we will help you! What do you need? Are you hurt or injured?"
Hole man: "No, but I would really like t get out of this hole and I don't know how! I have been calling out and calling out for for days now!"
Liberal: "Oh, WOW, Hole man, so what you need are lots more people yelling for help! I've got it! I will jump down into that hole and help you yell! [And before Conservative can stop him, Liberal jumps in hole.]
Hole Man: Gee thanks, maybe now we can be heard and others will come. Btw, got anything on your to eat?
Conservative: Uh...well...that was an interesting idea, Liberal, but I have another idea. I am not strong enough to now lift BOTH of you out of your hole alone, but I can give you tools so that you can build a way out yourselves...while I go get more help. Here's a some tree limbs and some vines I found over there. Start building a ladder while I go get more help.I think I see the steeple of a church over behind those trees. I hear they have lots of people who like helping people get out of holes.
Liberal: Hey, I have a better idea! Just call DC...they'll send out someone out right away!
Conservative: Yeah. I'll do that, after I go get real help from that church right over there across the street from this hole....


Anthony said...


Given that the Republicans swear they are the party of the rich and the Democrats swear they aren't, one can't blame voters for being confused. I'd say the rich do extremely well by both parties for slightly differing reasons.

BevfromNYC said...

I wish that Obama would stop trying to be relevant and actually BE relevant. Never in my lifetime has any President seemed so small and insignificant on the national stage. Even Carter looked better.

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, I would say that Obama's policies are pretty much DOA.

And yeah, no one has been very good at foreign policy since probably Bush the Elder, but Obama strikes me as having been particularly bad. I can't think of anything he's done well to date.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Good parable, but I think it lacks the constant stream of insults and accusations from the liberal about the evil conservative not caring about helping them and then whining that nobody could have known that their solution of jumping in the hole wouldn't have helped.

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, I know. It's a bizarre mess. The GOP needs to start being the party of the middle class and small business and stop being the party of the rich, and they need to pin that on the Democrats because it betrays all their rhetoric.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Obama just doesn't have that mindset, He sees leadership as making bold pronouncements about changes he'd like to see and then walking off to let others sort out the details. He's clearly never heard the idea that if you want something done, do it yourself.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew, btw that was supposed to say "small and insignificant on the INTERnational stage", not "national"... but it works either to me.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, It works either way. I'll bet he's the same around the house.

"Over the next five years, I firmly believe that someone should change the dead light bulb in the living room."

BevfromNYC said...

So now that Obama has given Putin the upperhand, what next? Didn't even Carter keep the Ruskies out of the Middle East?

Post a Comment