Proverbs 29:9

Pure supposition about Obama's dismal debate performance

On the first Thursday of September Obama turned in a lackluster speech at the DNC in Charlotte accepting the nomination for the Democrat Presidential candidate.

It was quietly posited that his subdued demeanor could have been due to his having been briefed on the jobs numbers that were due to be released the next morning. Rumors that took on a life of their own when the job numbers, as weak as Obama's speech, were released.

Last night, the first Wednesday of October, Obama performed miserably in the first Presidential debate. The September jobs report has been prepared, but will not be released until this Friday morning. Could his horrible debate performance be linked to the jobs numbers?

Cry baby Chris Matthews accidentally tells the truth

While crying about Obama's lackluster performance in the debate last night Chris Matthews accidentally told the thruth about MSNBC.

"Tonight wasn't an MSNBC debate tonight, was it?" Chris Matthews said after the first Obama-Romney presidential debate concluded on Wednesday night.

"I don't know what he was doing out there. He had his head down, he was enduring the debate rather than fighting it. Romney, on the other hand, came in with a campaign. He had a plan, he was going to dominate the time, he was going to be aggressive, he was going to push the moderator around, which he did effectively, he was going to relish the evening, enjoying it," Matthews said.

"Here's my question for Obama: I know he likes saying he doesn't watch cable television but maybe he should start. Maybe he should start. I don't know how he let Romney get away with the crap he throughout tonight about Social Security," Matthews complained.

Matthews then demanded that President Obama start watching cable news, specifically his program.

"Where was Obama tonight? He should watch -- well, not just Hardball, Rachel, he should watch you, he should watch the Reverend Al [Sharpton], he should watch Lawrence. He would learn something about this debate. There's a hot debate going on in this country. You know where it's been held? Here on this network is where we're having the debate," Matthews said.

"We have our knives out," Matthews said, admitting his network is trying their best to defend Obama and his policies. "We go after the people and the facts. What was he doing tonight? He went in there disarmed."

(continued)

Matthews admits that at MSNBC they attack the people, and the facts, that don't agree with their narrative. He also admits, with encouragement from Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz, that MSNBC is in the tank for Obama. He also indicates that the MSNBC moderators woud be less than impartial, taking a more active role int he debate... perhaps he should learn about debates and the role of the moderator.

However, his accidental truth is hidden in the litany of lies about Romney and the way he dominated the time and bullied the moderator, when in fact he was respectful. If you can stomach Chris Matthews in his whiny meltdown the video shows shows it live on air... a far cry from "I've got tingles running down my leg".

I'm a libertarian, and I'm voting for Romney

Despite the chnting hordes extolling the fantasy that there is another choice, there is not. My three reasons I am not voting for the Libertarian candidate but rather the Republican.

1. SCOTUS: if Obama is reelected he will likely have the opportunity to replace Ginsberg. And the Reagan appointees will be 80 in 2016.
   
2. Economy: It sucks. It will get worse if Obama is reelected.
   
3. Libertarian Party: isn't a party. It has a national platform but each state organization is so frakked up there is no cohesion or common vision. Plus at the state level they are more concerned about legalizing drugs than fiscal. constitutional conservatism.

Hey, I get it about the two choices sucking. But the TEA Parties have made great strides at wresting away control of the GOP from the establishment. Unllike Ronald Reagan and the way he envisioned a strong party, meaning good congresssional whips to keep RINOs in line, the TEA Party is just taking over. Just as the Socialist Party took over the Democrats... of course they also took over the media so it made the changes easier and appear much more subtle than they were.

Voting for Gary Johnson would be great, if he were running under the GOP ticket, but he is Libertarian. He will not win. Even if he gets 5%, 10%, or even 15% of the vote... heck, make it 25%... he loses. And Obama wins a second term.

"But," I can hear people saying, "we'll be sending a statement." Good for you. That statement is that you want Obama to continue destroying our economy, to allow Obama to appoint another radical to replace Ginsberg and perhaps replace two conservative Justices with judicial activists ensuring a 6-3 liberal majority on the SCOTUS for another 30 years.

As bad as the economy is it can servive another Obama term, but the country we all profess to love will cease to exists as we know it if the economy continues to grind to a halt AND Obama can appoint a judicial activist majority.

If you don't want to vote for Romney because who he is or because of your principles I can understand... don't vote for Romney, vote against Obama. But a vote for Johnson, or not voting at all is the same for a half vote for Obama.

Because your choice is simple, vote for Romney or risk losing America. I do not like Romney as the candidate, he would not have been in my list of top three candiates, but make no mistake, we had this discussion four years ago about not wasting votes for Barr/Root, but now more people are clamoring for the Libertarian party more than ever.

I used to be one of the token Libertarians and now more consitutional conservatives are stepping forward. But this is not the time, this is not the year.

Release the blind sheik

from 37,000 feet.

And the want Guantanamo closed too? There is enough room to get them all on the one plane.

Lets engage in a fun post hoc ergo propter hoc exercise

This started as a reply to one of Debbie's posts, but I added a few links to "make" the case...

September 4th: Egyptian military alerts it's security forces of possible planned attacks on the US and Israeli embassies.

September 5th: Obama begins a week long hiatus from his daily security briefing.

September 11th: prior to the scheduled briefing the Egyptian embassy was overrun.

Therefore, Obama could have prevented the attacks had he attended the security briefings.

August employment number in... and they suck

No doubt people who just read headlines will notice the unemployment rate dipping to 8.1% from 8.3% and believe it as a sign of economic progress. They may even pick up on the creation of 96,000 jobs.

However, the drop in unemployment is not due to the creation of 96,000 jobs it is due to approximately 364,000 people dropping out of the workforce.

How does one "drop out" of the workforce? Two methods; the most common is people report that they did not look for any jobs that week, the other is they run out of unemployment benefits.

So where are the jobs?

• Foodservice and drink establishments: 28,000
• Professional and technical servies: 27,000
• Healthcare: 17,000
• Financial Services: 11,000
• Manufacturing: -15,000

And average salaries? They dropped also.

Added to the mix is the bad news that the previous job creation figures were adjusted -19,000 for June and -22,000 for a total of 41,000 less than anticipated this summer.

Job growth failed to hit the rather modest estimate of 125,000 despite the average monthly job growth YTD being 139,000.

[edited to add link to BLS data]