Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Piers Akerman, Obama, Chicago, Chairman Rudd, and the emotional maturity of 13 year olds


(Above: Obama, a socialist fiend, entirely lacking a sense of humor, and the Olympic spirit, and as well as being treasonous, has been associated with child prostitution, not to mention a failed Olympic bid for which only Chicago politics is a satisfactory explanation. How so? Read Akker Dakker to find out).

''Cheers erupted'' at the headquarters of the conservative Weekly Standard, blogged a member of the magazine's staff, with the headline ''Obama loses! Obama loses!''. Rush Limbaugh declared himself ''gleeful''. ''World Rejects Obama'', gloated the Drudge Report.

So what did we learn from this moment? For one thing, we learnt that the modern conservative movement that dominates the modern Republican Party has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. (Paul Krugman,
Obama bashers are losing the plot).

Hmm, where in the antipodes could we find a commentariat columnist with the emotional maturity of a bratty thirteen year old?

Say no more. Come on down Piers Akerman with Chicago's loss brings Obama back to earth:

Worshippers of US President Barack Obama may have been stunned by the International Olympic Committee’s rejection of Chicago as host of the 2016 Games despite personal lobbying by the US leader and his wife Michelle at the count in Copenhagen.

They should not be.

The IOC runs to a different set of rules and is, at least historically, even more corrupt than the Chicago Democratic machine which last year delivered Obama the US presidency.


You see, it wasn't the voters of America that delivered Obama the US presidency, it was the corrupt Chicago Democratic machine. Oh foolish American voters, to be pawns in the hands of the Chicago mob, drinking moonshine and howling at the moon. But damn it, even the Chicago mob couldn't fix the mob running the IOC:

Obama put a lot of capital on the line for his home city but found that the international selectors weren’t as impressed by his fanzine popularity as are his spruikers in the media.

Again, the global media - which almost without exception adores Obama - is apparently out of step with those who know him best, the people in his own nation.

Now follow that logic closely. The United States lost to Rio, which is all the fault of the IOC, but also Obama, because international selectors aren't impressed with him, but the international global media is out of step with those who hate him best, the people of his own nation. Or perhaps the fruitloop thirty per cent of Republican maddies who'd rather lose the Olympics than see Obama score a win.

Once upon a time, that kind of behavior in an adolescent girl with a razor and a tendency to self-harm would have been thought of as rather shocking, even a little sick, the product of a gothic romantic disturbed paranoid hallucinatory imagination.

But can anyone even remember the time when it was vital to hate the Bush haters? And the way vile liberal progressives were the haters? Boy, did those haters have a lot to learn about hating.

While the women’s magazines fawn over the White House fashions and debate such world-shaking issues as Mrs Obama’s decision to bare her arms or wear shorts on the presidential jet, ordinary Americans are coming to grips with her husband’s more fundamental and more wide-reaching agenda.

But, but ... who buys fawning women's magazines? Ordinary Americans. Gee, there's something deeply schizophrenic going on here.

Well let's even more bizarrely pursue Akerman down another rabbit hole, whereby he uses the recalcitrant Obama to brow beat another pet hate - Chairman Rudd:

The Obama administration has already said that it won’t have a climate change bill ready by the time the world’s leaders meet in Copenhagen in December, which makes Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s barrage of ultimatums on this topic look even weaker.

Further, the Obama administration has also signalled that the energy industry and agriculture will be exempt from its climate change legislation, when it finally has something to offer.

Under the take-it-or-leave-it legislation Rudd wants to push through Parliament in time to take to Copenhagen, Australians would be even more worse off than Americans could ever be if the Obama legislation is passed in its strongest form.


That’s why climate change is barely on the political radar in the US.

Phew, that's a relief then, it means America's doing the right thing by ignoring climate change, which doesn't exist anyway, so what's the fuss all about?

No, no, no! As usual you've got it all wrong. America is stuffed because of FDR, Jimmy Carter, Clinton, and of course Obama. Never go looking under a Bush when the truth is right there in your hands.

It doesn’t rate because the US has no plans to cripple its already weakened economy with yet another level of needless taxation.

Obama's ruined America, that's why nothing's happening, and he's ruined health care too.

The big issue for Obama is his health care reform and that, too, is rapidly falling apart because of the perception that it is being driven by the left wing of the Democratic Party.

The US media, a handful of outlets excluded, has been clamouring for a universal health care plan since Hillary Clinton failed to deliver results when she was given the job in her husband’s first administration in 1993.


Ah that clamouring US media, it's all their fault. Americans just love the current kind of health care some of them get, except of course Glenn Beck, who described it as a kind of hell on earth (phenomenally bad, melt the brain of the CEO of this hospital, give him a wake up call, don't care about the president of GE, why should they care about the schlubs that are just average working stiffs, and so on and so forth).

Resistance to Obama’s plan has not been underpinned by racism as former US resident Jimmy Carter initially claimed (then denied) in recent days. The opposition has come from people who either see his plan as a form of socialist wealth redistribution or as superfluous to their needs or as just the wrong plan.

Well yes, but what about armed insurrection to defeat this insidious socialism? Where does Akker Dakker stand on that?

Carter’s reaction to the rejection of the Obama health care plan, as with Chicago’s reaction to the IOC’s rejection of the Obamas’ lobbying, shows how out of touch many Obama supporters are with reality.

Why Obama, who can deliver a mean speech when his teleprompter is working, should be assumed to be capable of much more, is something of a mystery to all but dedicated readers of romantic fantasies.

Yep, you can feel it brewing, a gnat gnawing at the ankle. It's trash Obama time, never mind the quality, feel the width:

Before becoming president, Obama had served just 142 days in Congress as the favoured candidate of the notoriously corrupt Chicago political machine.

This machine is so crooked that once Obama became president and vacated his Congressional position, the machine attempted to sell the seat to his successor.

Apart from some university achievements, Obama’s only experience was as a community organiser - and it is notable that the foremost community organisation which worked for his election is now itself under investigation for offering to assist undercover reporters who sought to import child prostitutes from Third World nations.

With no history to speak of, the media could find no negatives and they pushed Obama’s tilt at the presidency as an agent of change. Now more and more Americans are asking, change to what?

Yep, the media and importers of child prostitutes are responsible for Obama!

While health care in the US appears to outsiders taking a cursory look as if it is a major disaster, the polls indicate that between 71 per cent and 81 per cent of Americans have health insurance, much of it employer provided, with which they are very satisfied.

Except Glenn Beck after his operation!

Under the Obama proposal, a single provider is envisioned with a healthcare program which would inevitably be rationed as the UK system now is.

The IOC may have delivered Obama’s first defeat, but it certainly won’t be the last. Having once soared in the polls, he is now experiencing the flip-side of popular opinion and the picture is not pretty.


The best bit about this bit of Obama (with associate Rudd) bashing is not that it could have been said in a few words: I hate Obama (and Rudd) and everything they stand for. That would have been succinct, but lacking in hate-smoked flavor.

No, it's that some misguided possum tried to set the record straight:

Wow, Piers. My eyes hurt from your rapid whiplash-style writing. So much invective, so little time. Boy, I don’t envy your job! Every day I am thankful I don’t get paid six figures per annum (or is it seven?) to write a few hundred words of stream-of-consciousness unedited “prose” every couple of days!

Whatever. Blah blah. The jury’s out on Obama. Blah blah. Climate change. Rudd. Obama. Left-wing. Blah blah.

Hey, look at that! Maybe I could be a Murdoch/Liberal Party pseudo-journalist as well!

Now we just wait for people to respond to my comments with phrases such as “latte-sipping” “Rudd-lover” etc etc. (Dinsdale Piranha of Luton Airport).

Well how would a thirteen year old boy reply to this kind of stuff, when after all he didn't smear anyone, he just mentioned Obama and child prostitution as if they were somehow magically linked?

Dear Dinsdale Piranha, this is hardly invective. Invective is what gushes forth from poor souls like you when you cannot muster a coherent cogent argument against an opinion you are innately opposed to.

Nyah, nyah liar liar, pants on fire. Yep, turn to the Daily Terror for sophisticated analysis of the world scene ... by a thirteen year old ...

Oh please, Chairman Rupert, give us all the opportunity to pay for Akker Dakker's rants ...

(Below: back in the good old days of pants being on fire, with more Nicholson cartoons here).



No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.