“Who Scored a Body Blow?” Asked the Bloviators at Fox ‘News’ about the Ridiculously Shallow Debate

“Who scored a Body blow?” on of the mouths at Fox Cable News asked his camera audience this morning.    The nation didn’t become better informed about any of the candidates and the perilous issues facing this fading Obamaruled country of ours.   Fox presented it as entertainment looking for a knock out.

Unfortunately, the players agreed to play  the games.    They had little chance to disengage unless they all or all but one disengaged.

I would have preferred each to have been interviewed with everyone of them having the same questions……but one can dump this gotcha game the leftwing media has invented for American entertainment.

I am not a fan of Fox News except when it is compared to MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and so on ad nauseum in the arena of American news reporting.    I can accept the general slants of events presented at Fox, but I can’t stand the bloviators who deliver the slants, led by Bill O’Reilly, the puff adder Eastern Conservative.

At least the news at Fox News has only a slant, and in general,  it is my slant.   I object to the way it is presented, but it is not foul as at other news sources.

The show they put on last night….the so called debate and its hype was a disgusting display o f hens pecking at each other.   If the Republican Party had any taste, leadership, and a degree of power, its brainiers would put and end to all this conservative dancing on thin ice.

I admit that Barack Hussein Obama has a well developed talent…..that of jawing the the blab to match his Marxist obsession, ie, his determination to develop  a large enough leftwing government body to force economic equality and therefore social, educational, religious, and every other kind of equality on the nation’s citizens……and the teeth, a well developed police,  force to ensure Obama’s Marxism.

I suppose there are those who might claim the performances at these shallow ponds of debate will help any winner from the pack better his chances to match Obama’s talents.

But Obama’s speaking talents are tops only when his head swishes left to right, right to left, left to right, dizzily attempting to follow his teleprompter rhythms.   When on his own,  stutters and short tempers begin to fly.   People are liable to see the  hates and contempt developed in  the man after his 22 years of worship in his father figure, Jeremiah ‘Goddamn America’ Wright’s church of racism in Chicago while community organizing Marxist style.

But the circus last evening is a performance of the shallow…….an American kind of a performance for other entertainment perhaps, but an event not worthy of the democratic process of selecting the best candidate for the high office of the presidency.    

Last presidential election season I supported Mitt Romney.   His biggest problem then as now was and is his determination to please……especially the folks around him.   I think a decent man, a conservative on most matters, and probably the best debater with the quickest tongue to challenge Obama’s slippery tongue and gestures.   But, even after all these moments in public, I still don’t have confidence that this man is a conservative with the devotion to lead the country to a smaller police state capability by slicing up some of the behemoth government monsters such as the Department of Education and  the Environmental Protection Agency and countless anaconda type leftwing bureaucracies used to tie up the American dollar.

I hope the field is soon cut to three and that these three will not continue to play gotcha….and that these three will be Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, and Herman Cain, who will agree to take charge of the event by discussing in depth  as fellow conservatives their positions on issues, and then with courtesy question each other regarding their differences with the purpose of informing the public of where they differ and why……without gotcha machine gunning.

The Republican Party should insist upon a format which will minimize the rancor among the candidates, by giving them the opportunity to speak to the public why they believe what they believe.

If they are good teachers of their subjects of importance to their American fellow citizens, the citizens will better like their brand of American life.

Slippery Bill Clinton Slips in Jabs at Barry O., but then……….Pirouettes!

Bill, Hillary and Barack

By Cheri Jacobus     at the Hill

“Slick Willy does it again! He has now managed the fancy footwork of both agreeing and disagreeing with President Obama at the same time, but on just one issue. In this case, Obama made it easy. 

Bill Clinton publicly said that Obama and Congress should not raise taxes during these tough economic times. This is the polar opposite of the position Obama announced Monday when he proposed funding yet another spending spree along with $1.5 trillion in tax hikes. But Clinton knows how to get around this little conundrum. He can legitimately say he agrees with Obama — the 2009 Obama, that is. In short, Barack Obama was against raising taxes before he was for it.

In 2009, Obama expressly stated precisely what Bill Clinton stated this week — that a recession is not the time to raise taxes. Newsmax reports the former president said in an interview while hosting his Global Initiative’s annual meeting in New York this week that a tax increase should not be under consideration while we are in the current debt and economic crisis. 

While Obama defenders have been quick to point out that Clinton also said he did not recommend cutting spending to solve the problems with the economy, I would urge them to read Clinton’s comments more carefully. He merely said that while he would normally say cutting the federal government’s spending would help, he doesn’t promote it as the panacea for our fiscal woes and doubts we’d get the big return we might have in the past, under different circumstances. However, all but the most far-left ideologues agree that government spending is out of control and must be reined in for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is moral grounds. That said, Clinton put the kibosh on any perceived support of his for the government spending our way out of the current mess, which is the only “solution” offered by Obama.

Interestingly, Bill Clinton also suggested that adding regulations for businesses at this time would hurt them and job-creation — yet another significant departure from the Obama agenda.

It’s become apparent that Obama doesn’t actually expect or even want his plan to pass Congress. He knows his “savings” aren’t real and won’t stand up to scrutiny by economists and experts, just like they didn’t stand up to former President Clinton’s scrutiny. All candidate Obama needs to extract from his plan and angry rhetoric is to win back his far-left base and trick “regular” people (non-experts) into believing he is fighting for the “little guy,” but those mean, old Republicans are standing in his way and trying to protect rich folks. And of course, to him “rich folks” are the enemy (until they write a check to his reelection campaign).

That, in case anybody is wondering, is the very definition of class warfare. Pitting the haves against the have-somewhat-lesses as if it’s an either/or, us-or-them proposition is class warfare. Failing (miserably) to be enough of a leader to articulate that we are all in this together and to acknowledge the very basics of how the economy works with its many gears operating simultaneously, Obama resorted to the cheap divisive language for which he is becoming renowned. It’s as though he has already given up on fixing the economy and now is focusing his energies solely on blaming and bullying Republicans. But Bill Clinton might be giving up on Obama, despite his pronouncements to the contrary.

Obama’s pandering to the far-left base he fears losing means losing others he needs, such as centrist Democrats like Bill Clinton, as well as independents. Congressional Democrats have begun distancing themselves from Obama. 

At some point, these Democrats, including Bill Clinton, will graduate from running from Obama, to running to someone else. Hillary, perhaps? Don’t count her out. My money is on her being ready and willing to be drafted. The Clintons want Obama to get his deserved blame for his failures and to LBJ his way out of running for reelection. It’s already too late for some new, untested candidate to run. Therefore, the spoils will be awarded to the last man — or woman — standing. It may not a sure bet. But it’s a damn good gamble.”

Jacobus, president of Capitol Strategies PR, has managed congressional campaigns, worked on Capitol Hill and is an adjunct professor at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management. She appears on CNN, MSNBC and FOX News as a GOP strategist.

Universities Bloated More Than By Marxism, the religion, but By Marxism, the bureaucracy

Bureaucratic Bloat in Universities

from the National Center of Policy Analysis

“It’s time for a tuition revolt, and higher taxes aren’t the answer.  Students and the rest of the public are now paying for decades of mission creep and bureaucratic bloat.  The regents of the University of California met this past week to revisit an old issue they’ve never really dealt with well — how to cope with erratic (and usually dwindling) state aid.  They will probably raise tuition again, as they have in the past, says Investor’s Business Daily (IBD).

In the meantime, they have offered a plan to raise students’ costs by at least 8 percent, and up to 16 percent, annually for the next four years.  Unfortunately, they will probably come up short in efforts to raise money from private donors and foundations, and they will not sufficiently trim their budgets to make a difference.  Then they’ll have to face the inevitable question: What went wrong?

Consider the swelling at the UC system over the past two decades, says IBD.

• There now are nearly as many senior managers (8,144) as tenured and tenure-track faculty (8,521).
• As recently as 1993, the ratio between these groups was much different — 2,429 to 6,846.
• Put another way, 18 years ago the student-to-upper management ratio was 62-to-1; now it’s all the way down to 2-to-1.
• The ratio of students to regular faculty, meanwhile, has risen from 22-to-1 in 1993 to 26-to-1.

The trend in the UC system reflects a broader shift in the staffing of American academia.

• Nationally, the percentage of what the U.S. Department of Education calls “other professionals” at colleges and universities grew from 9.6 percent in 1976 to 20.7 percent in 2009.
• This category is a catch-all for nonteaching employees in positions requiring a bachelor’s degree or better (and being paid accordingly).

Yet tuition continues to rise faster than inflation, as it has for several decades.  Real change means taking an axe to operations that do nothing to promote what should be its core mission — transmitting and creating knowledge for the public good, says IBD.”

Source: “By the Way, We Teach a Little Too,” Investor’s Business Daily, September 19, 2011.

For text:

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/585302/201109191844/By-The-Way-We-Teach-A-Little-Too.htm

For more on Education Issues:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=27