The Parse

Parsing the stupidity

Archive for November 2008

It’s not a flip-flop as long as it’s for “the economy”

with one comment

Barack Obama, Aug. 9, 2008:  “We learned that the federal budget deficit could reach nearly half a trillion dollars next year. Eight years after we had a record surplus, we’re now faced with record deficits. This mortgaging of our children’s future is a direct result of the Bush Administration’s dangerously failed fiscal policies.”

Barack Obama, Nov. 16, 2008:  “We shouldn’t worry about the deficit next year or even the year after… the most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession.”

The reason Obama has so quickly changed his mind on budget deficits is that now that he’s been elected president, he wants to be able to spend whatever he wants on his programs.  When other presidents spend too much, it’s “exactly what’s wrong with Washington” and “the mortgaging of our children’s future.”  When he spends, it’s to “avoid a deepening recession.”  He’ll cover for his own spending deficits by claiming it’s all for saving “the economy.”


Written by The Parse

November 16, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Obama wants to read your diary

leave a comment »

It doesn’t look like Hillary Clinton or John Kerry will be working in the Obama administration after all.  Why?  Because both have an “affiliation” – that is, have received campaign donations from – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and that runs afoul of question 18 on the Obama administration’s questionnaire for high level jobs.

The question reads:

“Please describe any affiliation you…have or have had with any financial, banking, mortgage or insurance institution that is currently the subject of federal government intervention as part of the ongoing economic crisis.  This question includes…Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac…”

This is just one of many hypocritical and downright unbelievable pieces of information the Obama administration wants its high-level applicants to provide.  Clearly they don’t want any bad press if someone should turn up in their administration who has been involved with Fannie or Freddie…despite the fact that Obama himself ranks second among recipients of campaign donations from both failed organizations.

So, it seems Obama himself doesn’t qualify for a job in the Obama administration.  Obama also wouldn’t pass the question that asks applicants if they have ever had any friends convicted of crimes worse than a minor traffic violation (Tony Rezko?)

Other creepy things Obama wants to know is what you’ve written in your diary and everything you’ve ever written online, including any potentially damaging emails.  Obama also wants to know if applicants have had associations with any person or group who could be used to attack the applicant’s character.  I guess as long as they aren’t any worse than Bill Ayers or ACORN, it’ll be OK.

Anti-semite Farrakhan praises Obamessiah

leave a comment »

Now that the election is over, all of Obamessiah’s slimy friends have decided to break silence and come out of hiding.  First, William Ayers broke his gag order the day after the vote.  Then, Obama’s racist ‘former’ pastor Jeremiah Wright made the rounds on news programs late last week in new video.

Now, anti-Semite Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has appeared to praise The One and admitted that he’d been hiding since February so as to not endanger Obama’s chances at the polls.

It’s also worth mentioning that many in the Obamedia waited until right before the election or after it was over to begin voicing concerns about the mysterious messiah they worked so hard to elect.  Tom Brokaw talked to Charlie Rose the week before the election and the two scratched their empty heads about how they didn’t know anything about Obama (see below).  Then the day after the election, Newsweek’s Evan Thomas and Jon Meacham appeared on Rose, and, among other things, said there is a “creepy cult of personality” around Obamessiah and that he’s “deeply manipulative.”  Oh, now they tell us.  And what’s with all this soul-bearing on Charlie Rose’s show?  Maybe it’s because they know it is there nobody will be watching.

Why Obama won

with one comment

A not-so-brief hiatus, but The Parse is back and back a day after Americans executed their willingness to be duped by a far-left, quasi-socialist, racist, completely unqualified and anti-American Senator and now soon-to-be president.

For months before the election I read numerous news stories and op-eds arguing from nearly every angle possible why Barack Obama was dangerous and ill-prepared to lead the U.S.  Whether due to his radical associations, far-left voting record, disdain for the Constitution as written, paper-thin resume or left-wing litmus test for judicial nominees, everything I read made it abundantly clear to me that an Obama presidency would be disastrous for the United States and an affront to the values upon which it was founded.

Part of the reason Obama won is that these truths about him were not sufficiently revealed to the American people.  Obama effectively obfuscated his own ideology to the point where many people, including reporters covering him, could not and still cannot explain who he is or what he stands for.  The few things we know about Obama – those things mentioned above – were ignored by media partisans who openly campaigned for Obama to win.

Therefore, most Americans – including Obama supporters – do not know who he is or his guiding principles.  At the very least, they have only a partial view.  The day after Obama’s election, we have very little idea how Obama is going to govern, although those of us, like myself, who took the time to dig beyond the surface coverage of the liberal media have a clearer idea.  But most Americans who voted for him don’t really know who he is or what he’s going to do with any specificity.

So, why would so many people vote to elect someone to the most important job in the world, the most powerful office in the world, when they actually know very little of the truth about him?  The simple answer is that people want to feel good, and Barack Obama’s vapid inanities of “change,” “hope” and “yes we can” make people feel good.  Good about what, who knows?   (Maybe salving liberal white guilt.) But the bottom line is that Obama won on style.  He has little to no substance, and a (rather small) majority of voters yesterday decided they want to submit to emotion, get swept up in repetitive, meaningless catchphrases, and throw rationality and substance to the wind.  Eventually, though, the political slogans, Hollywood-produced rallies and teleprompted speeches will give way to his actions.  Then, we’ll start to know who he really is.

Written by The Parse

November 5, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , , ,