No sensible man ever imputes inconsistency to another for changing his mind.
- Cicero, Great Roman Orator, Politician, and Philosopher (B.C. 106-43)
ZoNation: Obama Represented and Won (With Full Transcript)
What’s up, y’all? How’s your butt? You need some ointment? I ain’t got any. This peace is a truck load of I told you so, if you don’t want to hear it, you might want want to tune into something more fluffy like a speech from John Boner.
[Off camera, “It’s pronounced, ‘Bay-ner’, Zo.”]
It’s spelled Boehner!
[Cue intro montage.]
Okay, to those who are wondering why Obama won, I’m going to tell y’all the same thing you ignored when he won the last time – he’s a Hollywood-marketed representative of the liberal idea when they downplayed Romney for being a salesman.
Keep in mind, y’all, it wasn’t really about Obama being a leader, it’s about what he represented to his base and I get sick of Republicans talking about us needing real leadership. I don’t need a politician to lead me. I need representation in office to keep our freedom in check so we can remain free to lead our own persuits.
Anyway, liberals are very excited about their head representative. Democrats have their guy. The liberal culture has long cultivated this figure and has been ready to plant him into power. Can Republicans say that about the guy we ran? No!
Republicans can’t even get excited on what conservatism is, let alone run one to be excited about. Democrats were brain-flippin’ excited about their authentically liberal candidate. So much so that even after four years of failure, there was still enough of that excitement left over to get him elected for another term.
I told y’all, it’s not the nominee who will run against Obama, it’s the culture we’re up against. It doesn’t matter who you would have run. Romney ground and pounded Obama’s brain in the first debate to make a lasting impression. If Gingrich was the nominee, I would have probably offer to donate blood to Obama after Newt Gingrich got finished with him. But a victorious debate would not have secured the presidency for Gingrich either.
I told you this during the primaries, not Rick Santorum, not Rick Perry and not Ron Paul, none of these figures, including Romney, is not who it took to win against Obama and his supporters. Obama represents the liberal culture. It’s them we have to beat.
We all understand that Obama was elected because he’s black, right? But I told y’all years ago the significance of that back in the day. Many of y’all think that it was based mostly on white guilt. That’s superficial. The strategy of the Democrats was to elect Obama and filter their Socialist agenda through him, and if you challenge him on it, you will be seen as a racist and the more you challenge him, the more public opinion will raised be against you.
It was an obvious strategy the moment I heard he was running.
I told you that back in the day, and what was your answer in 2008? To run the oldest, doughyist Republican runner who’s not even really a conservative to run against this tall, elegant and charasmatic black man.
What? Y’all didn’t think Alan Keyes would have made a better president than Obama?
And I don’t think Republicans passed over Alan Keyes because they’re racist but because too many are really naive and do not really respect what conservatism is.
Jump to 2012, y’all – we end up running the guy who stepped aside for McCain to run. Now, here’s the part where those who stuck around to hear me say I told you so can really roll your eyes when I say, you should have ran Cain.
Oh, I’m sorry for bring up the past, but as the saying goes, those who don’t know history are doomed to have it sneak up behind them and beat ’em in the butt with a nine-iron.
If race is such a driving factor with the Democrats, if we agree that the reason that Democrats wanted Barack Obama is because he’s black, which we all see is the case, don’t you think it might have been good idea to run Herman Cain to blow a hole in their strategy? Not for the sake of saying, “Hey look, here’s our black guy against your black guy,” but I remind you it’s because the Democrats would have shown their true racist colors in a very hard to deny display – colors that haven’t been more vivid since Tom Wolfe introduced Electric Kool-Aid.
When all those racist attacks would have mounted against Herman Cain, all Republicans would have had to do was point them out, substantiating the case that all the institutionalized racism that Americans have been so angry about from slavery to the KKK to Jim Crow, etc., has been Democrats
It would have opened the door for you to relate to them with conservative values. As many of y’all know, many Blacks and Hispanics tend to have more conservative values but they’re not going to side with you because they don’t want to be associated with a party who’s perceived as racist white Republicans.
You have to take that stigma off you and put it back on the real party of institutionalised racism. You’re not going to win them all over, but you better believe that it would have been enough to tip it in Cain’s favor to win us a conservative Republican president. That is the effect on the culture that was much needed.
Am I wrong? Liberals are always making race an issue, right? That’s their big gun, right? Yet when you have the opportunity to destroy their Death Star, instead of sending in Lando Calrissian, you send in C3PO. Oh, and in case you forgot Lando Calrissian is the one who destroyed the Death Star.
You let liberals steal your weapons, you let them take out Herman Cain.
Now don’t get me wrong, I defended Cain. But I draw the line on him having this relationship of thirteen years that involved him giving some woman money without his wife knowing about it.
[motions tisk, tisk, tisk, tisk, tisk with fingers]
But I ain’t trying to let the “do it if it feels good” liberals pass judgement on Herman Cain and let them push me into giving up on the only candidate, I repeat, the ONLY candidate that could have caused the culture shock to short circuit Obama’s reelection.
What’s wrong? Herman Cain wasn’t sophisticated enough for y’all? I hear a lot of Republicans talk all the time about wanting them a down-to-earth, good old fashioned common sense conservative and yet when one shows up and doesn’t sound like policy poindexter, you throw him under the bus.
Oh, Herman Cain wasn’t worthy because he hasn’t held public office? Oh, is that what you want, Republicans? Somebody who’s experienced at being a double-talking politician?
Don’t even give me some crap about, they should have some public office experience. Sarah Palin was a mayor, a high-rated Governor and a succesful businesswoman and y’all looked for every excuse to throw her under the bus.
Nothing makes you people happy, and you end up with a candidate that is a dull representative of so-called conservatism to go up against a Democrat candidate who is a glowing representative of liberalism to his base.
Y’all, this isn’t about me crying over spilled milk. I’m trying to remind y’all that politics is downstream of the culture and by running John McCain and then Mitt Romney against Obama shows that y’all either don’t get that, or you just refuse to.
I’m Alphozo Rachel with ZoNation and I look forward to 2016 when the GOP really learns their lesson and shows that they’re really ready to fight when they dig up Captain Kangaroo to run against Jay-Z.
[end of transcript]
Herman Cain was my guy, I was more fired up about him and his prospects than any of the Republicans in the campaign. I was ecstatic when he was leading in the polls and ready to root him all the way to the nomination and the White House. Then came the lynch mob that the media formed as they went out to destroy a good black man who just so happened to be *gasp* a conservative.
It was amazing how the lynching of Cain came from the same media who gave Obama a pass at every turn, from the fact that Obama launched his career in the living room of avowed terrorist Bill Ayers, to his sleazy Chicago land deals with slumlord and convicted felon Tony Rezko to revelations that he spent 20 years in the congregation of Reverend Wright, listing to and admiring his hateful preaching of black liberation theology. It was only after there were over a million views of Wright’s sermons on YouTube that the media finally, begrudgingly reported it and then did the best they could to quickly sweep it under the rug and move on.
The double-standard the media showed between its treatment of Obama and Cain was disgusting. It was witnessing the death of journalism right before our eyes.
Republican primary voters did show they were full ready to have Herman Cain represent the party, he was the front runner for a month, way up ahead in the primaries until the media went on all-out to destroy Cain, running more stories on Cain’s promiscuity problem in six days than the all the stories they ran on Ayers, Resko and Wright COMBINED during the entire 2008 campaign.
So Republicans got a weak stomach and figured, though they loved Cain, they didn’t feel he could ever get a fair shot at beating Obama were he nominated. Listening to Zo, now I wish we would have stuck with Herman Cain and said to hell with you, Obama State Media. We’ll nominate Cain regardless and let the rest of America decide between Cain and Obama.
Click here to subscribe and never miss out!
Founded in 1933 by a former Time magazine editor, I’ve been told Newsweek began as a pretty good journalistic publication until it was purchased by The Washington Post Company in 1961. It was with WaPo’s acquisition that the magazine’s began an unrepentant path towards a new hard partisan left-wing agenda wrapped under the guise of “news.” Newsweek prospered for a while, but the undeniable bias eventually began to take it’s toll in the magazine’s credibility and circulation in the years to follow. This disease of activism under the pretense of journalism is now wisespread all across the mainstream media, with the results being a dwindling of circulation, readership and viewership with every year that passes.
Newsweek’s extreme partisanship plunged the magazine lower and lower to the point that when an offer was finally made to save the magazine, it came in the form of Sidney Harman buying the publication for exactly one dollar in exchange for assumming the massive liability and debt Newsweek had accumulated over the years.
When you sell your entire publication for the some of one measly one dollar, you don’t need a doctor to tell you your days are numbered. Sure enough, the ultimate result of Newsweek’s abandonment of journalism for activism has ended in a magazine that will disappear from newsstands by the end of 2012.
Ah, Newsweek – what can you say about a weekly American “news” magazine that made a conscious decision to abandon all pretenses of journalism, choosing instead to become a dedicated propagandist publication in the old tradition of Soviets and their state-controlled mouthpieces in newspapers such as Pravda and Tass?
What can you say about a Newsweek who buried Michael Isikoff’s stroies on both Paula Jones and Monica Leweinsky, trying to shield their beloved President Clinton as a philanderer and a man who repeatedly perjured himself in front of a grand jury? Thank goodness for the rise of the New Media and the Drudge Report forcing the stories and sordid details into the national conversation.
What can you say about a Newsweek with the blood on their hands of riots and seventeen deaths across the Muslim world for running a bogus story of Korans being flushed down toilets at Guantanomo Bay (a ridiculous assertion considering the fact that size of the Korans given to the prisoners simply don’t fit down toilets at Guantanomo Bay.)
Worst of all, what can you say of a Newsweek publication which repeatedly used it’s covers for misogynist attacks against Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin, using it’s covers twice trying to paint a WII fighter pilot and war hero George H.W. Bush and a successful businessman Romney as “wimps?” What can you say about a magazine featuring covers which seriously ask such things as “Why Obama’s Critics are So Dumb,” claim that Obama’s the “God of All Things” and even goes so far as to photoshop halos over Obama’s head?
Even beyond the propagandist covers, Newsweek, never ceases to humiliate itself with it’s obvious commentary presented as “news” with a straight face, commentary that weaves its way through with every line written and seeps its way insidiously even more so between the written lines. Newsweek is an abomination to every journalistic principle of objectivity that journalism students were supposed to hold as sacred upon graduating.
I will not shed a single tear when Newsweek disappears from our newsstands and the tables at the doctor’s offices.
But an interesting thing often happens when a person (or in this case, a magazine) winds up on their deathbed. In their final days, they are given a chance to look back at their lives behind them on Earth and begin to feel a compulsion to confess the burdens they have carried for all the wrongs and injustices they have inflicted upon the world around them.
Special thanks to Monika for passing along this article / deathbed confession from Newsweek.
I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
By Matt Patterson (Newsweek 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.
[mp3j autoplay=”y” track=”http://www.mikecornelison.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/hit-the-road-barack.mp3″]
Click here to subscribe and never miss out!
Libyan Rebels kill Gaddafi, if American liberals want respect they better stop listening to Aretha & kill Sarah Palin(:
— Orlando Jones (@TheOrlandoJones) October 22, 2011
You’re probably asking yourself, who is Orlando Jones and why is imploring his fellow liberals to kill Sarah Palin, a woman who was governor of Alaska and the second female V.P. candidate in American history?
As to who he is, Orlando Jones is an American comedian and film and television actor, notable for being one of the original cast members of the sketch comedy series MADtv and for his role as the 7 Up spokesman from 1999-2002.
More important than who he is, however, is the “why”. Why would a seemingly rational man call for the assassination of Sarah Palin?
It’s more common than you would imagine, in fact, you probably know someone just like Orlando Jones – a person who imagines themselves, as a liberal, to be inherently open-minded, the epitome of tolerance, and yet at the very mention of two words, “Sarah Palin”, witness this very same person become a hate-spewing zombie for no reason other than the fact that Sarah Palin happens to hold different values and political beliefs than they do.
Orlando Jones and hundreds of thousands like him suffer from Palin Derangement Syndrome: an ugly affliction and virulent disease running rampant throughout entire sections of the left-wing community.
Please pray with us that all the poor souls suffering from PDS can turn off the MSNBC, find a qualified doctor and get treatment for this mentally debilitating disease.
Click here to subscribe and never miss out!
From multi-million dollar movie deals, to (allegedly) violating probation on a grand theft charge over a $2,500 necklace, the life of Lindsay Lohan is one of the great celebrity train wrecks of all time. As someone who has wrestled with a few personal demons of my own, however, I’m rooting for Linday to turn it around and get it together.
You ever hear the saying, “If life gives you lemons, make lemonade?” Well I don’t watch a lot of TV, but here’s one reality show I would definitely tune in for:
If they could clear it with the warden, those ratings would be sky-high!
Click here to subscribe and never miss out!
A friend of mine, a guy who was my teacher almost 30 years ago and a man I’ve considered a friend ever since, was posting on Facebook hours after the tragedy in Arizona and I was dismayed to see his first response was to start spreading the hate in trying to pin the blame for the shooting on Sarah Palin.
How much do you have to hate someone to see a horrific shooting happen and that’s your first response, blaming the shooting in Arizona on the former governor of Alaska?
So I reply to his post asking how it is that he hates Sarah Palin so much that his very first response was to post on Facebook how “targeting” candidates and using the word “reload” made Sarah Palin the one responsible and not the shooter? Why all this hate for Palin? Is it simply because she has a different set of values than you? Whatever happened to the so-called “liberal tolerance”?
I may have been strongly worded in saying that I thought it was sad and pathetic to start up with the political blame game so soon after the tragedy, but strangely enough, it was only after I told him I thought he should cleanse his heart of all this hate that he unfriended me at Facebook.
So I emailed him:
That’s messed up that you would unfriend me . . . over politics. Sad.
And he replied:
You crossed the line and got personal with your “cleanse your heart Bob”. I don’t need to cleanse my heart. Someone else does, and who in the world would defend “that lady” and her “i’m right and you’re evil” philosophy. Most artists and creative types are a little more liberal that your stance and I wonder if “we” would even be welcome on the palin express. you’ve done a grreat thing with your sobriety and congrats for your transcription book. Have a good life,
HAVE A GOOD LIFE???
I ask you to cleanse your heart and stop hating Sarah Palin simply because she has a different set of values than yours and your answer is “Have a good life”? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry over this.
“Have a good life!” LOL. All I can tell you is, nothing in this world would make me end a friendship over not seeing eye to eye with a friend on politics. You never see conservatives renouncing friendships over politics. So much for the lie about “liberal tolerance”. I myself value friends who think differently than I do even more than my like-minded friends because it’s the friends who see the world differently who I might be able to learn the most from. It really is sad to see how many liberals, deep down in their hearts, actually detest the free exchange of ideas and would rather surround themselves with people who think just like they do. I can only imagine the fun you must have, surrounded by friends who hate Sarah Palin just as much as you do, trying to come up with the latest list of 101 ridiculous reasons why your hatred is so justified.
Was that harsh? I meant to be positive. I have many conswervative/Republican friends, but even they are skepical of Sarah Palin. She cost McCain the election. She’s not veyr bright, she quit her governor’s job and she ran a mean-spirited administration that used her political clout to personally bully a State Policeman who was divorcing her sister. She had no knowledge of basic U.S. History and might have been within a “heartbeat” of the Presidency if McCain had been elected. But every political pundit show for the past two days have pointed out her use of words like lets “reload” “take aim” and directing those terms to members of the opposition. May friends on FB include the Chief Counci to the Senate Budget Commitee!!! He tells the Senators what to write when writing bills. The lion’s share of my friends are musicians from the SC Band or HS Band or even Lobo Band members. You kept repeating imsulting remarks that flew in the face of simple logic.l
Love that whole, “Some of my best friends are Republicans” thing!
I may have lost a friend, but at least I gained a great post for my blog. What a perfect example of how a typical liberal could get so emotional about politics, they’d be willing to write a friend of over 20 years off completely, “Have a nice life!”, over what? A political argument over Sarah Palin?!?! LOL.
You’re going to be famous!
Dude , that’s not cool…I didn’t give you permission to post that private email on your blog! When did you cross over to the dark side? Just remember I supported you and thought you guys were the best (Fullerton Club). I didn’t change. And I’m not emotional. I was clinical and direct about why I and 70% of America are unhappy with that lady. But are you paraphrasing my comments or reposting it word for word which would be a criminal act!
I think it’s a very important post that has to be shared, if you value your friendships, it’s important to remember that many of your liberal friends are too emotionally unhinged when it comes to politics to have a rational discussion without putting your entire friendship in jeopardy. An open debate? Ha! Most liberals would prefer an echo chamber of agreement to having their beliefs actually challenged. That whole notion of liberal tolerance? Reality is, liberals are often the most intolerant people you can imagine when it comes to how deeply they hold their hatred for people with different political points of view.
But don’t worry, you’ll only be referenced in an anonymous way . . .