atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#2107: AHH HA HA HA HA HA! Obama's going to kick--HAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Boss Tweek wants to know "whose ass to kick!"


...and bonus laughs for this quote: "Nice use of apostrophes by Chuck Todd to show O strainin’ to connect to the common man." There's a new rule: "When Sarah Palin omits the terminal G of her gerunds, she's fakin' it in a cynical attempt to make herself look like an ordinary person. When Obama does it, he's attemptin' to connect with the common man."

If I actually thought Obama was capable of doing anything even remotely approximating "kicking ass" I might take this seriously, but he's not going to do squat. What he's going to do is use the power of the federal government to punish people.

Michelle Malkin guest blogger Doug Powers gets it right:
One would hope Obama would be consulting experts so daddy can plug the hole, but if he’d rather utilize the education and time of engineers and oceanographers to figure out whose ass to kick, hey, he’s the president.
The only holes Obama knows how to plug with his own knowedge and experience are the holes in his nose. ANd as for "kicking ass"? This comment sums my attitude:
Obama wants to know whose ass to kick?

Must be hoping to find an eight-year-old girl responsible. Anyone tougher and he’d call out his union thugs.

malclave on June 7, 2010 at 8:17 PM
Geeze louise. I mean, when Obama won the election in 2008 I knew it was going to be bad, but I didn't think it would be...bad!

At least Carter pretended to give a rip about his responsibilities. Obama studiously avoids anything he doesn't feel like doing, and in fact the entire reason he's now trotting out this nonsense about kicking ass is that he's come to realize that everyone sees that he doesn't give a rat's ass about the BP spill in the gulf.

Except, of course, how it can be used to further the liberal Democrat agenda. The longer that thing's leaking, the better it is for banning the exploitation of offshore oil deposits. Until his poll numbers began to tank over this, Obama was faced with a win-win: he had an ecological crisis tailor-made for doing exactly what he wanted to do, and because the United States government didn't have to lift a finger to help with the spill (by, just for example, smoothing the way for technological assistance from foreign countries) it didn't.

Problem: despite the most fervent wishes of the Democrat party leadership, the people of the US persist in having their own ideas about things (must be getting them from that pesky Internet thing) and think that the President should do SOMETHING.

Can you blame them? The US public was lambasted for years over the Katrina disaster; the news media endlessly harped on the perceived inaction of President Bush, and it was hammered into the public's collective head that the President is supposed to do something in these situations, and hard enough that a lot of people still think so.

Although he did what he could as quickly as the law allowed, Bush was blamed for the Katrina disaster. The Democrats are shocked and dismayed that the public is applying the exact same reasoning to Obama and the BP oil spill, particularly when Obama appears not to care one whit about the situation.

...and so Obama's handlers are now having him "get tough" about it. It's belated to a laughable extent: why is he only angry now, rather than two months ago?

It was said by many (including me) before the election that Obama was completely unqualified to be President due to his complete lack of experience. He has never made anything, fixed anything, produced anything, or indeed done anything whatsoever that was connected with any kind of real-world objectives and limitations.

What? "He wrote a couple of successful books?" When you write that kind of book--I speak from experience--you're not beholden to anyone but (possibly) your editor. There's no boss hanging over your shoulder demanding to know why the work's not done and why you made so many mistakes in the last chapter and how come you're not putting in the required overtime? ...while paying you as little as possible.

What job has Obama held where he had to report to a supervisor and had to produce something of value in order to retain his job? Has he ever had a job like that? Has he ever been responsible, say, to stockholders of a corporation for his mistakes? Has he ever had to go to a meeting and tell people, "Okay, here's what's wrong," and then explain to the people what he did and why his mistakes aren't worthy of immediate termination?

I don't think so.

What elected office did Obama ever hold where he had the responsibilities of an executive? None. He got elected as a state Senator in Illinois; before his term was up he ran for (and won election to) a Senate seat in D.C. And before he'd been in that office very long he ran for President. Forget executive experience! He's never even completed a single term in any office he's held.

And you know who's paying for that now? We are. We have a completely inexperienced and incompetent buffoon for a President and we're stuck with him until 2013 at the earliest.

* * *

Unless, of course, the Sestak scandal leads to his impeachment and removal. And wouldn't that be a fun time, with the inevitable inner-city riots and the berserk blood-crazed screaming from liberals that would engender? (They are mad at Obama; they really are...but let him be threatened with removal from office and they'll come back to support him lickety-split. Trust me.)

* * *

*sigh* Okay, on to something that doesn't matter as much to the everyday lives of people.

I'm not sure what to vote for.

I support the idea of building ever-larger particle accelerators. Basic research always yields dividends, and the more we know about how the laws of physics work, the more we can bend them to our advantage.

On the other hand, I think string theory is bunkum. There is absolutely no experimental evidence supporting any of its assertions which have not already been demonstrated other ways.

Well, building a super-LHSC would let us learn new things; and in science a negative result is still a result. (Ehh, except for climatology. In climatology if you get a negative result, it's considered proper to alter or make up data which will affirm your theories.)

* * *

Dang, I don't want to do anything today; and unfortunately it's not up to me. *sigh*

* * *

That web site with all the LOLcat pictures has several divisions, one of which being "Epic Kludges". They posted this today:

This ain't no kludge, boy. That is some mighty fine fab work. Look at the rear window!

If you look at the image name it's saved as "VW-WAT" but I had intended to write "VW-WANT" and didn't bother to rename after missing the "N".

I first came across a concept drawing in an issue of VW Trends of a Bug converted into a pickup truck sometime in like 1988 or so, and it was awesome-looking. This guy went a different way, making a flatbed instead, but it's still damn cool. I wouldn't mind having one.

  • #8322: Finally got to try it!

    Anyone who reads Knights of the Dinner Table will see frequent references to Faygo soda, and specifially their "Rock & Rye" flavor. Today Mrs.…

  • #8321: FLOP

    So, after the last post, I had a hankering to reread all the "Garfield Minus Garfield" strips I generated, and I wanted to reread the "Evercrack…

  • #8320: Factionalism

    It's everywhere. It's also entertaining. Amnesty International didn't get the memo. They're upset over Ukraine using human shields. To be fair, I…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.