Book of Oppositions | Pocket Full of Mumbles |


This world is one big game of "Go"-- Black against White, Light against Darkness --and we all have a choice to make: Do we war FOR the Light?

...or against it?

To Obama: Wimps Don't Win

--Dick Morris

Moving to the center is not a two-dimensional process. It has a third dimension-- the difference between strength and weakness. In the course of coming in from the cold of his extreme far-left positions, the president looks like a wimp, abandoning his long-held views in the face of electoral defeats, adverse court rulings, recalcitrant Democrats and strong, united Republican opposition.

And wimps don't win.

When Bill Clinton moved to the center, he arrived in triumph. After vanquishing the Republican Congress during the government shutdown of 1995-96, he agreed to a balanced-budget deal with Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott. But it was his deal, along his lines, on his principles. When he signed a welfare reform bill, he did so after beating back and vetoing two Republican bills that coupled reform with harsh cuts to Medicaid. After he got a bill on his own terms, he signed it.

Barack Obama's "compromise" with the Republicans over the Bush tax cuts is no more of a compromise than was the deal Emperor Hirohito cut with Gen. Douglas MacArthur on the deck of the battleship Missouri after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was a surrender, not a compromise. It was submission, not triangulation.

Obama is checkmated as long as Republicans hold firm, challenge him on solid grounds anchored in public opinion and remain united. He can either lose the election of 2012 because he is an obstinate ideologue who won't compromise and won't abandon his socialist principles or he can lose it because he does surrender and is too weak to be president.

He does not have a third option -- winning the budget fights and winning reelection-- as long as the Republicans properly mount their challenge, because public opinion, the essential element for victory, is not with him.

• Americans want spending cuts, not tax increases

• Americans believe that cutting spending is more important even than cutting the deficit (see Rasmussen)

• Americans oppose ObamaCare

• Americans are against letting the Environmental Protection Agency impose carbon dioxide restrictions without consulting Congress.

• Americans are against unilateral National Labor Relations Board action to eliminate the secret ballot in union elections.

• Americans oppose earmarks

• Americans do not want the Federal Communications Commission to limit or censor talk radio.

These are the grounds for our battles in 2011-2012. It is on this turf that the Republican House majority must fight. The fearful "moderate" Democratic senators will cave in. And then Obama will be forced to surrender because the Force-- public opinion --is not with him. You can govern by ignoring what Americans think if you have a majority. But not if you don't.

And with each surrender-- over his desire to raise the debt limit without mandated spending cuts, over his support for bailing out states in trouble, and over his demand to raise taxes in the 2012 budget --Obama will get weaker and weaker.

His inability to fight and win the war on terror and his choice to become mired in Afghanistan with no real plan for winning will contribute to the image of weakness.

In 2012, he will face America denuded of all the programs he passed in 2009-2010, with an economy only slightly improved but with at least 7-8 percent unemployment, and with a manifest inability to measure up to the job of president.

Most presidents face a challenge of weakness. With Eisenhower, it was his refusal to stand up to Joe McCarthy. With Kennedy, it was his inability to pass legislation. With Nixon, it was his inability to get ahead of the Watergate scandal. With Ford, it was his helplessness in the face of inflation. With Carter, it was the hostage crisis. With Reagan, it was his failure to control the Iran-Contra affair. With Bush-41, it was his passivity on the economy. With Clinton, it was the flip-flopping early in his presidency. With Obama, it will be his retreat in the face of the Republican counterattack of 2011.


Curiously, in that last paragraph Mr. Morris left out George W in his list of presidential blunders/signs of weakness. No doubt liberals could dredge up any number of subjective 'weaknesses,' but the only one that would really fit here is George Junior's steadfast refusal to defend himself against the press who, beat him incessantly over the head with, primarily, lunatic objections to the man they zealously despised-- which had nothing to do with the man's policies, but rather the 36 days following the 2000 elections which ultimately decided the presidential race against their guy, vice-president Gore.

Bush allowed the liberal press and democrats to carry the ball-- he was not in control of the message. On many occasions Bush allowed the press to accuse him personally, and his administration, of out right lies and fantasies, without any rebuttal from the White House. That, undoubtedly, was a major contributing factor to his dismal poll numbers toward the end. But however dismal his poll numbers congress' numbers were abysmal.


As to the man of the hour, president Barack Obama, moving to the center has never been his strong suit, and I have to agree with Morris: Obama's moving to the center is done not out of strength, but weakness. The liberal press and democrats will undoubtedly say otherwise-- they have no real choice if they have any hope of retaining the White House in 2012 --but the electorate that trounced his party last month won't be buying it. Furthermore, any democrat Senators with a modicum of desire to be reelected next round will, in all likelihood, abandon their democratic positions to vote with Republicans against anything that smacks of drawing too much Tea Party ire... they'll be job scared.

So Reid may have retained his majority leader status, but his party will not control the senate, in any larger sense. Republicans will be the de facto leaders in the senate.

There are 21 democrats up for reelection in the senate in 2012 :

All Democrats, plus Independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.

There are, obviously, some pretty safe seats on this list. The question is: how many democrats will lose in 2012 because of Obama's weakness? Republicans will only have to pick up, what? 4 seats? Anyone?

Read the entire article...

posted by Eric @ 2:38 PM, ,

What's Wrong With American 'DISEASE' Care

Not a question, but a statement...

What is wrong with disease (not 'health') care in the U.S. is our rejection of commonsense basics. We glibly recite the mantra 'You Are What You Eat,' but we reject everything it implies... or at least the most important parts. It's not enough to eat 'health' foods. What we should be eating are 'healthy' foods. And the only truly healthy food is one that comes in its original raw state.

I own this DVD and it is an eye-opener, to say the least. I've been moving toward a raw diet for a year now, and believe me, it hasn't been easy. But I'm almost to the 50% raw point (currently 40-45%). The goal is not to make sure each week or month's intake is 51% raw foods; the goal is to make sure each MEAL consists of at least 51% raw. And trust me, that is a very tall order for someone who was raised on cooked food, and lived by cooked food for near 50 years. But this is the answer to disease and illness. It's not a pill, or an injection, or a shot of radiation. It's fresh, organic, nutrient rich, foods. Your body has the amazing capacity to heal itself, even of cancer, if you give it all the nutrients it needs.

I highly recommend this video. And, if you act before the end of this month (Dec 2010) they have a half price deal going on... you can get this video for 10 - 12 bucks. That's not a bad deal at all.

Read the entire article...

posted by Eric @ 2:53 PM, ,