The Other Problem

I’m going to try something different. I’m a little tired of talking about Obama, the greatest threat to freedom and the Constitution this century. He gets his share of time, and everybody can’t seem to stop complaining about his daily assaults on the country.

So today I’m making an exception. I want to talk about the other major problem, the one who gets almost as much criticism as King Barry. Well, its not one person but a group. No, I don’t mean the Islamic Jihadists. It is even a greater target of criticism than that.

This time I want to talk about that group that is always in season. No matter how much criticized, there can not be enough time or energy focused on them. It never gets old attacking them. It is a daily if not hourly task and there still can’t be enough said about the subject. I know you are getting real warm now and ready to boil.

Okay, pardon the generalities and don’t mind my broad-brushing them because who cares about them anyway? I know I’ll be granted wide berth here. It is simply those regular folks out there. Yea, your stereotypical conservatives, regular Joe’s, libertarians, Republicans, the evangelicals, Christians, right-wingers, cultural conservatives, social conservatives, value voters, Black conservatives, moral majority, white conservatives, vast right-wing conspirators, homophobes, Tea Parties, neo-cons, business owners, on and on, activists et al. I know I left some out. I want to refer to all of them by one label. What shall it be? I’ll just generically call them “the problem”, when I’m referring to their whole lot.

Now, I started by asking myself some central questions: Why is it always an opportunity to criticize or attack the “problem”? Why can there never be enough animosity or scrutiny directed toward this group? Why do their actions and motives always deserve the toughest scrutiny we can muster? Why is what they do always suspect even if they explain their motives? Why do we need to probe any differences between sub groups? Dice, sort, and compare them any way you like.(no rules)

And no matter what they do and say, why do they need to be examined under a microscope using the toughest standards? No, I don’t attempt to answer these questions, nor should you. Suffice it to say that is just the way it is. Let’s just agree on that. And that is the starting point. It doesn’t demand volumes of proof. It’s just the way it is…. an established phenomena. Why do these toughest standards only apply to the “problem” group. And why aren’t they routinely granted some benefit of the doubt, like others?

See you won’t get disagreement that they deserve serious scrutiny, and they do get it. Even within the “problem” group, many of its members will take them to task any time they see a good opportunity. The “problem” is a universal target for anyone.

Moderates, RINOS and liberal Republicans are also part of “the problem” –fodder for critique based on association with the whole — but the same standards do not apply, and they are not subject to the same results in the end. We can be less critical of that sub group. They must be included for relative criticism of others.

Remember Reagan and his 11th commandment?

While popularized by Reagan, “The Eleventh Commandment” was created by then California Republican Party Chairman Gaylord Parkinson. In his 1990 autobiography An American Life, Reagan attributed the rule to Parkinson, explained its origin, and claimed to have followed it:

“The personal attacks against me during the primary finally became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It’s a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since.” – Reagan

The goal was to prevent a repetition of the liberal Republican assault on Barry Goldwater, attacks which contributed to Goldwater’s defeat in the 1964 presidential election. East Coast Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller labeled Goldwater an “extremist” for his conservative positions and declared him unfit to hold office. Fellow Republican candidate for Governor George Christopher and California’s liberal Republicans were leveling similar attacks on Reagan. Hoping to prevent a split in the Republican Party, Parkinson used the phrase as common ground. Party liberals eventually followed Parkinson’s advice.

Autopsy

Picture an Autopsy

It is not a new phenomena either. There’s been a feud among Republicans for many decades. It plays out frequently, in campaigns, primaries, conventions, among Republicans, on the airwaves, and in news media. Now it is just a given fact, like gravity. It is accepted and anticipated by every political pundit and strategist, even trying to play/use it to their advantage however they can. It’s a favorite pass time to examine the right.

Better yet, its a game everyone can play. It is called smack the right. Left-leaning and liberal Republicans love to play it, even right-wing conservatives indulge. (also contagious) It’s a group sport or an individual one, whatever your preference. It’s something like whack-a-mole. But anything is fair game. Whatever comes up, as long it is in any way part of that “problem” group: attack it, probe it, question it, hold it to any level of accountability you want. No rules, really, just do it – the more the better. Make a career over it. Really, who cares? Yes, the Left can play right along side the Republicans, conservatives, and moderates. Attack, attack, get the message? Question anything at all as often as you can. Compare and distort, who cares?

Many Republicans and the “problem” group repealed the 11th amendment long ago, if it was ever ratified to begin with. So they do the same.

Now I’m not a fierce adherent to the 11th commandment myself. I take my shots when justified. But for some of us with wiser scrutiny about it, our justified complaints are depreciated by the mountains of attacks or criticism from everywhere nowadays. You can do it wherever and whenever the urge strikes. Don’t worry, you will never be out of place or shunned for it. It is acceptable across the spectrum. Scrutinize the “problem” — and the problem with anything always comes back to this group, somehow.

Why is it that, no matter what the current problem/issue, this group deserves blame or is labeled the real “problem”? Again, no answer, its just the way it is. All problems are directed back at them because, somehow or another, they are the problem. And conventional wisdom is you cannot deal with any issue without dealing with them, or taking aim at them. So they are dragged into every issue and every battle like a hostage. Who else gets the ire, the criticism, suspicion, and sheer attention this problem group gets? What other segment demands that treatment?

They’ve turned the process (for lack of a better word) into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Through all the blame and critique of the “problem” group, they have really become the one universal problem. Only not in the way that all the critics see it. It has so divided the “problem” that no one within it can unify and agree. You have to believe that was a chief ojective by some all along. If there is no unification, then there can be no unified action coming from them. Thus, they are not a unified political threat either. This is contrary to what we see in the left. They will always unify over the worst, leftist positions. Its a natural habit for the cultural Marxists.

Just to contrast all this with the progressive Left. It operates on what I call the Gestalt principle, meaning the effect or momentum is greater than the sum of its parts. On the right, the effect or momentum is only as great as any of its smaller parts. Even where several of the parts agree, the differences are emphasized. And the strength thereof lasts only as long as the differences do not win. The left could unify over a crap sandwich, and often does. (…for the sake of it)

Gestalt (Webster) – psychology : something that is made of many parts and yet is somehow more than or different from the combination of its parts; broadly : the general quality or character of something

[Photo – painting Author:Rembrandt; Title: The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp]

RightRing | Bullright

Obama in Trauma

Over the last weeks we’ve seen the roll out of scandals like a parade. I’m not sure if it is all coincidence or not, or maybe all his offenses are just catching up with him.

In the IRS series, we found there was a planned effort, between Lois Lerner and Steven Miller, to break the news by having a question planted before the investigation broke it. Sure they were trying to soften the blow; but it was also an effort to get ahead of it and a scheme to say ‘we had this problem and we’re already working to fix it and are putting it behind us.’ That is offensive, since it was going on until recently, and it was an IRS problem.

That little ploy is just like the campaign tactics Obama uses. Is that by coincidence? But they had done little if anything to fix it. Then we find a key operative “sat in” on every employee interview the I/G did.

Polls released show Obama’s approval has dropped, especially among younger demographics. Even more important his credibility and honest has really taken a dive. I don’t think that bounces back so easily.

Charles Krauthammer called him a “bystander” of his own presidency. I’d say he acts like Chief Spectator in all these events. When the scandals break one by one he claims to be just as shocked as we the people. Then he claims he will get to the bottom of it. So we hear his administration is investigating it. Its better than a circus act.

The media continually calls it a trifecta of scandals, completely leaving out Fast and Furious. But its more like an avalanche of scandals and no one knows when it will end. Obama is sitting right in the middle saying “what avalanche?”

(Wall Street Journal)

Obama’s Credibility Gap and the 2014 Midterms

There’s an opening for the GOP—if it offers a growth agenda and is not just obsessed by scandals.

By Karl Rove

A June 2 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows the damage. Fifty-eight percent of those surveyed say the Benghazi and Justice Department scandals “raise doubts about the overall honesty and integrity of the Obama Administration,” while 55% say the same about the IRS targeting.
A plurality holds Mr. Obama responsible for each scandal. A combined 41% say he is either “totally or mainly responsible” for mishandling the Benghazi attack while 19% say he is “not responsible at all.” On the Justice Department’s seizure of reporters’ phone records, 37% believe he is “totally or mainly responsible” versus 14% who say the president is “not responsible at all.” On the IRS targeting of conservative groups, 33% hold Mr. Obama “totally or mainly responsible” while 24% say he is “not responsible at all.”
The president’s overall job approval has been adversely affected. According to a Gallup poll on Wednesday, his standing is at 45% approve and 47% disapprove, compared with 52% approve, 44% disapprove in January. With congressional investigations in their early stages, the scandals will continue to be in the news, and the president’s approval numbers are likely to fall further.
/..
Mr. Obama is being hurt by more than the scandals themselves—there’s also the administration’s hapless messaging. Stories change and high-ranking officials continue saying things that are patently untrue, even after the facts have come out.
More: http://rove.com/articles/478

Even if Obama fashions himself a “bystander” president, more and more people directly connect his leadership and credibility to the scandals — and the problems with Washington. Maybe its like when a person is in the state of shock, he/she does not feel the full effects.

Obama the handyman — not

I’m going to forget what other incompatible explanations and BS on IRS Obama spewed this week, one thing he said loud and clear.

The good news is we can fix this,” Obama said.

I can’t think of any problem he ever fixed. Oh really, “fix it”? That should scare the hell out of anyone. Oh, “We can fix it?” How do you “fix” a problem like this? You can’t.

How can you fix all the problems it caused to all those people? Or the vast amounts of money it cost them? Fix it, Obama???

We the people need to “fix” the real problem before it gets even worse. But Obama fix anything? You’re kidding aren’t you, Barry?

‘Go ahead, Fix Me! I double dare you.’

 
Reference: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/16/obama-to-meet-with-treasury-officials-over-irs-scandal/#ixzz2ThJ6kjGi