My Washington DC field trip

Nattering Naybob: My lovely wife and I had the privilege of spending about a day and a half in Washington DC this past Friday afternoon and Saturday. Friday afternoon our visit was short and on the way back to our hotel in Linthicum Heights, MD (a suburb of greater Baltimore), we ran into a torrential rain on Route 295 that I thought was going to wash our car all the way backwards to Washington. Saturday the weather cleared and we were able to spend most of the day in our nation’s capital. Before visiting the American Indian Museum and the National Botanical Garden (both highly recommended), we walked the length of the mall from 15th street all the way to the steps of the Capitol. Yours truly took the below picture of the Capitol dome, in all its mid-Autumnal glory.

In walking the streets and mini-parks of Washington DC, my wife and I both marveled and how much enjoyment both we and our fellow tourists derived just from wandering around and discovering the various landmarks, governmental office, and monuments that are referenced so often in our popular culture. What a shame it is that Washington DC as an institution (and by extension, the city itself) has been ravaged so much by Congressional incompetence, bull-headedness, and cynicism. I was reminded specifically about the popular habit of dismissing Washington DC as a place to avoid, a place that members of Congress “can’t wait to get away from”. I don’t understand why people run for Congress if they are then going to spend the bulk of their time in Washington DC, metaphorically tearing it down. If only the members of Congress who seem to revile Washington DC so much, would only take the time to walk on the Mall, or on the avenues adjacent to it with the great museums of the Smithsonian, and hear the joy that visitors (from a variety of cultures and languages) receive just by spotting a famous landmark that they come across unexpectedly, or by seeing members of a family or small group of friends hovering around a map, excitedly plotting out their afternoon.

Ordinarily I dismiss this kind of idealism but I admit freely that when it comes to Washington DC, I am an unabashed romantic.

The Red Ranger: Did you happen to see any of Elizabeth Warren’s (aka Lieawatha) relatives at the American Indian Museum?

Washington DC is great place.  Haven’t been there in many years.  Was planning to go with the family at some point but that doesn’t look likely in the near term.  I believe the boy’s middle school takes an annual field trip there.  They will probably have more fun with their friends than with Mom and Dad anyway.

Nattering Naybob: Funny you should mention that, there was more than one reference in the exhibits in the museum to how people of light skin or blonde hair can also be fully-accepted members of the Native-American or Indian culture. Scott Brown should put on his corduroy hunting jacket and drive his pickup truck down to Washington DC and visit the museum for himself, maybe he will learn something. He may have plenty of time to do some sightseeing, as I notice that the latest polls in Massachusetts have Warren opening up some serious daylight between herself and General Custer.

“Stop the Romney Economy‏”

The Red Ranger:  Just got back from grabbing a quick lunch (Original Buffalo Bowl– chicken, rice, celery, blue cheese dressing and buffalo sauce) from Boloco (a MA eatery – highly recommended). Anyway as I was walking back I had to traverse a gauntlet of sign waving, orange T-shirt glad anti-Romney protesters. Lucky for me I work in a building with a large contingent of Bain employees. Turns out they were part of the BainworkerBus tour.

I honestly have to question whether these people were actually employed by the companies that Bain owns. They were a motley crew at best. My guess is that they are hired hit people making minimum wage. I am sure that they have no idea why they are protesting or what they are protesting about. I believe that the only job requirement is to be able to shout “Stop the Romney Economy” for hours at a time.

Even now as I sit in my office, 31 stories high, I can hear their faint chanting.

Nattering Naybob: Your hearing the Bain Workers’ “faint chanting” is appropriate, as soon these poor souls who lost their job because of Romney’s company, will be but a whisper in the passage of history. Being a Republican, of course you think they must be making minimum wage since they looked “motley”.

I hope they weren’t asked to build a stage for a big announcement, and then the big announcement is that the people who built the stage, and most of their colleagues, are getting fired by Bain Capital. This is one of Bain’s favorite tactics, sort of like making someone dig their own grave. Since the protests are taking place below your office, maybe you can save some crumbs from lunch and then open your office window and drop them down to the workers, sort of like John D. Rockefeller tossed dimes from his own office, to the out-of-work people below on the street during the Depression.

I wonder if the Buffalo Bowl was something that Josh Beckett ever snacked on in the Red Sox clubhouse along with his beer last season, while there was a game going on. Beckett has since been traded to the Los Angelese Dodgers, so maybe his food of choice is now avacado wraps with alfalfa sprouts, and beet juice.

The Red Ranger:  Unfortunately, the windows in my office do not open so I could not feed the starving masses. However, I am sure that they are now somewhere using their SNAP benefits feasting on Doritos and Twinkies.

I think Beckett was more of a KFC guy. Now he is probably a fan of IN-and-OUT Burgers.

French President bans homework? Viva La France!‏

Nattering Naybob: Did you see that the new President of France (the appropriately first-named Francois Hollande) has proposed that schools discontinue the practice of assigning homework to students? His reasoning is that students should be educated in school, not during the evening or weekends at home, especially since students who come from higher-class homes will wind up having an advantage over less fortunate students, who may not enjoy the same advantages at home.

I am all for a no-homework policy. In fact I condemn homework. I denounce it.  I hated every minute of school. When I got home from a hard day at school, I wanted my time to be my own. I did not want to have to worry about the Civil War (or was it the Silver War?) I applaud the French President, who just happens to be a Socialist, by the way. A real Socialist, not the Trumped-up Socialist that some on the Fanatical Fringe Right would label our President.

Red Ranger, I know first-hand that you were such an efficient student, that you did not even have to bring homework home, and in fact had time left over to throw rocks at the windows of abandoned buildings on the way home from school, with some of our more unsavory classmates, despite my admonishments to cease and desist from this anti-social behavior (you never listened to me, though.) This might have been the very first hints that you were headed to an irresolute adulthood of Republicanism.

The Red Ranger:  Being the proud parent of a seventh grader, I too believe that homework should be banned. Okay, maybe not banned but at least toned down. My seventh grader usually has several hours of homework a night. I believe that homework should be limited to one hour a night which I think is reasonable (just like his sports practices which are usually one hour in length). Also, I think that homework should be organized so that each night is dedicated to one subject. Monday: Math, Tuesday: English, etc. At a young age most kids do not have the organizational skills necessary to keep track of all the various assignments that are due. This leads to frustration on the part of the students. Also, by assigning so much homework I believe that it is a way for teacher’s to bypass some of their responsibilities.

While my sage-like abilities allowed me to escape the tedium of homework I do not think that just because one does not complete their four hours of homework they should be labeled a dotard.

My rock throwing was a protest of the failed liberal policies of the sixties that led to the explosion of abandoned buildings marring the landscape.

Nattering Naybob: So you further degraded the urban blight left over from the 60’s, by breaking what few windows were left in those abandoned buildings. Sounds totally logical to me. No wonder I scored 10 points higher on the SAT’s in High School than you did.

One of the few criticisms I have about my upbringing is that my parents ignored my daily pleas to be home-schooled, instead they made me actually go to a public school and interact with other people in the outside world. That reckless disregard for my well-being has scarred me for life.

The Red Ranger:  I always felt that society would be better served by keeping you out of the mix.

Wastebook 2012

The Red Ranger: Here is something for all of our readers to enjoy. I wonder how much it cost to produce this. Also, the report is one-third footnotes. To put things in perspective everything identified here comes to less than 2% of the annual deficit. Just goes to show how difficult it is going to be to reduce the deficit.

I hope to have the time to read through this.

Nattering Naybob: I actually am in favor of rooting out this kind of waste, as long as it does not cost more to root it out than the cost of the waste itself. I think the public needs to be confident that there is as little waste and inefficient spending of tax dollars as possible. This would be a small but important step in restoring the credibility of the Federal government. Probably a more practical method would be to implement a strict, enforceable freeze on all this kind of spending on a going-forward basis, and let the programs already in place just die a slow death or expire. Either that or we need to at least accept as inevitable the fact there will always be a segment of Federal expenditures that is spent on discretionary and sometimes downright silly stuff like this.

But I do agree that a US Senator’s time could probably be better spent than overseeing something like this study. He should have devoted this time to helping forge some common ground among Republicans and Democrats on larger issues. Thank God that Tom Coburn is a Republican at least, good for The Red Ranger for calling out a member of own his gang, albeit mildly.

The Red Ranger: My feeling is that this is just the tip of the iceberg. There are probably thousands of programs, grants, etc. that have become so ingrained in the budget (at least when there was a budget; has Romney pointed out in any of the debates that Obama has never had a budget?) and Federal spending that people just look at them as normal spending when if they looked at them from an external point of view they would probably see how foolish they are. The old “you can’t see the forest for the trees” saying.

I would love to have free reign to pick thru Federal spending and weed out all of the waste, at least what I perceive to be waste.

Obama wins Round 2

Nattering Naybob: I think even you, Red Ranger, have to admit that President Obama won the debate last night, by most objective benchmarks by which we evaluate modern Presidential debates. Whether it changed many minds either way at this late stage, who knows. Romney acquitted himself fairly well, but his demeanor was a little more surly and skittish than the first debate, and he came out with some head-scratching comments and verbiage. Two key moments from my perspective:

When Romney was describing how he sought to include more women in the interview process for his Cabinet in Massachusetts, he characterized the collection of resumes from qualified female candidates as having compiled “whole binders full of women”. This surely had to be one of the most unusual bits of imagery ever put forth in a Presidential debate. Romney also described one of the chief ways that he tried to be more inclusive of women in his administration by allowing them to leave early so they could get home and prepare dinner for the family. A noble gesture to be sure, but not exactly one that will help undecided women determine who better understands women’s struggles to be taken as seriously as men, in the workplace. An article in today’s online edition of The New Yorker summarizes Romney’s entire struggle with the original question posed to him of equal pay for equal work.

The second key moment was near the end of the debate when Romney foolishly insisted that President Obama never specifically called the Benghazi attack, and act of terrorism. Obama coolly let Romney tie a knot sufficient to hang himself and then allowed moderator Candy Crowley to point out, if somewhat sheepishly, that President did explicitly condemn the attacks in the opening remarks in his Rose Garden speech the day after the incident. I am not sure why Romney focused so much on this relatively semantical point when he might have benefited more by bringing the conversation more to overall question of how this was allowed to happen.

These two moments seemed to represent the demarcation of three distinct “sections” of the debate. From its opening thru the “binders full of women” comment, Romney seemed assured and confident. Between the “binders” remark, and the “did he call it terrorism” remark, Romney’s tone sounded a little more defensive and nervous. After the “terrorism” remark, Romney seemed like he couldn’t wait for the debate to end, which for his sake, did soon after. Your thoughts, Red Ranger?

PS: After the debate, most major news outlets featured at least one interview with an undecided voter who still said they needed more information and to learn more about each candidate, to make up their mind. Incredible.

The Red Ranger: I would rate the debate a draw. Both sides were able to get their points across. I think some fisticuffs when they got in each other’s face would have livened things up significantly. Candy Crowley could have then stepped in and smacked down both of them. The only reason that people are saying Obama won is because he looked so much better than he did in the first debate. I think people are getting confused as they are comparing Obama to himself in the first debate as opposed to Romney.

In regard to the terrorist attacks in Benghazi Obama did not specifically call the Benghazi attacks a terrorist attack immediately. He said something condemning acts of terror in general. Even many days after the attacks he was still blaming them on the video and not terrorist. If he did call them terrorist attacks in the Rose Garden then why did he not continue to do so. I believe that this is just a clever way for Obama’s team to try to wordsmith their way into convincing people that Obama called them terrorist attacks from the beginning. Why wasn’t this argument pointed out immediately when questions arose about what the president had called the attacks. After several weeks his team has had enough time to review all of his comments and then twist them around to make it sound like he said something that he didn’t actually say. I believe that the moderator was out of line here (as was also pointed out by media outlets).

I believe that Romney’s high point was when he laid out the litany of facts (higher prices, slowing GDP, etc.) about the economy during Obama’s term and how his policies are impacting the economy.

What is up with Michelle Obama leading applause during the debate? This is clearly a rules violation. She should be banned from the next debate and hit with a $25,000 fine.

Nattering Naybob: The Red Ranger rating the debate a “draw” is akin to your saying that Romney got creamed.

Why would Obama have opened his remarks on Benghazi with a reference to terrorist attacks, if he did not think it was a terrorist attack? And theoretically speaking, an attack on a consulate or anything else, could be BOTH a reaction to a YouTube video AND an act of terrorism. I really don’t know why everyone is so hung up on the semantics of the issue, but since Romney insisted Obama did not do something he did, then Obama might as well go ahead and reinforce the fact that Romney doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Obama’s uttering the phrase “terrorism” or “terrorist” in the opening remarks of his speech the day after the attack, should have precluded the Romney campaign from even suggesting that Obama did NOT say it was a terrorist attack. Whoever is doing the research for his campaign is asleep at the switch. But then again, Romney himself has said that his campaign is not concerned with fact checkers. His entire campaign has been one big continuous series of lies and flip-flops. Romney lies almost as much as Curtis Granderson strikes out in the playoffs.

And what are you talking about regarding Michelle Obama “leading” applause? There were only two very brief, fragmented bursts of applause that I can remember during the actual debate. What kind of evidence do you have that she was “leading” applause? Please forward it to the Committee for Presidential Debates, I’m sure they will be very eager and fine the First Lady your prescribed amount of $25,000.

The next and final debate on this coming Monday is about foreign policy. Given Mitt the Binder’s utter cluelessness about how diplomacy works, he should be very frightened by that prospect.

The Red Ranger: Here is the official list of debate violations currently under review by the Committee for Presidential Debates and video proof of Michelle’s clapping.

Nattering Naybob: Thank you for the links. Below is a quote from a well-known evening anchor on a cable news network that speaks to the charge that Michelle Obama applauded during the debate:

“Have you seen the articles? The First Lady got caught clapping? Oh my… is that REALLY an issue with some? Whether the First Lady broke a debate rule by spontaneously clapping one time?… If the nation is arguing about whether the First Lady spontaneously clapped, we have now gone off the deep end.”

Rachel Maddow, you guess? No. The above was from Greta van Susteren, of Fox News. However I must say that I am encouraged that you are looking at Slate.com these days.

Baseball incompetence in the Bronx

Nattering Naybob: I have been a fan of the New York Yankees for about 40 years now, Red Ranger (roughly the same time as you have been, I’m sure). In all these 40 odd years, including the dark days of the early 90s / Oscar Azocar Era,  I do not think I have ever seen anything quite like the sickly offensive output that the Yankees have been putting on this post-season, in particular during the first two games of their current series with the Detroit Tigers. The four biggest culprits are, in order of least work to most worst, in my opinion: Nick Swisher, Alex Rodriguez, Curtis Granderson, and starring Robinson Cano as the biggest perpetrator of hitting malfeasance. Cano set a major league record that is sure to stand for a long time, as longest hitless streak (26 at bats) without a base hit, in a single same-year post-season.

But at least Cano is making contact, albeit resulting in weak ground balls directly at infielders. Granderson, A-Rod, and to a lesser degree Swisher, seems to have literally lost the ability to make contact with a pitched baseball by means of swinging a bat. All throughout this season we were told by Joe Girardi and others that there was no need to worry about the Yankees’ season-long ineptitude at situational hitting, since they were able to pummel their opponents with home runs (they set a team record for home runs in fact). Now during the playoffs, when they run into better, smarter teams, and their hitters’ weaknesses are pre-scouted more thoroughly by their opponents, some observer’s fears are being realized. The ability to hit home runs to remedy a multitude of sins does not come into play as much during the playoffs.

Maybe the Yankees will shock me and the rest of their fans by somehow, some way beating Justin Verlander Tuesday night, in Detroit no less. But the way things are looking, I sense yet another whimpering Yankees exit in the playoffs at the hand of a younger, more resourceful and nimble team than themselves.

At least your Giants beat the 49ers on Sunday.

The Red Ranger:  Live by the sword, die by the sword.  It takes heart and not just the highest payroll to win the World Series.  Lately, I do not believe the Yankees have the heart needed to drive for the championship.  Look who won it for them in the first round.  Raul Ibanez, someone who has not been with the Yankees that long and who is still hungry for the championship and for whom it probably matters whether they win or lose.  Not having Rivera and Jeter on the field will certainly diminish the experience factor but may lead to some more hungry play on the field.  Although Derek Jeter has time and time again come up with some incredible plays in the playoffs.

Nattering Naybob: Now yesterday comes a story from the New York Post (whose credibility in some issues over the years has, admittedly, proven to be “fluid”) saying that during Game 1 of the Tiger series, A-Rod was sending mash notes via a transcribed baseball to two ladies in the field box seats behind the Yankees dugout. Historically I have been an A-Rod supporter, some might say “apologist”, but if this story is true, I have to say it should represent the point of no return for A-Rod’s tenure with the Yankees. Unless he redeems himself for whatever is left of the Yankees’ playoff run, I think they need to engage in some sort of buyout of the remainder of his contract, or if all else fails, simply release him, swallow the rest of his contract (thanks, Hank Steinbrenner), and find a new third baseman for next year and beyond. I said last season that they should have tried out Jesus Montero at third base. If Miguel Cabrera can play third base serviceably, Montero could have as well. Too late though, as Montero was traded to Seattle this past winter for pitcher Michael Pineda, who has missed all season with a potentially career-threatening injury.

UPDATE: The Yankees lost Game 3 last night, 2-1 in a typically pathetic display of offensive malpractice. On a night where Justin Verlander actually did not have his 100% “A” game, the Yankees still managed only 2 hits until the 9th inning (by Ichiro Suzuki,who I think must be retained by the Yankees next year). Now the Yankees have to win four straight games with their offense in a shambles, to proceed in the American League playoffs. Pretty sad.

Teddy Roosevelt and Minaj v. Carey

Nattering Naybob: Two “trending” topics this past week on opposite ends of the spectrum demonstrate the schizophrenic nature of our popular culture. First, is the sickening spectacle of Nicki Minaj (who the NY Daily News referred to as ” a wig-wearing wacko rap superstar”) and Mariah Carey insulting each other on the set of American Idol, a show which I never liked or watched to begin with and is now sinking in the ratings. Here is part of Minaj’s part of the exchange:

“Don’t lose your head. Don’t tell me I’m a gangster! So every time you patronize me, I’m-a take it back, and you’ve got a f***ing problem, handle it!”

Equally revolting is the spin put forth by American Idol host and Executive Producer Ryan Seacrest. Referring to the feud, he said: “We want that! We want them to be on this panel together. This is a good team, a great team… the feedback that they give is very good.” Pathetic. This is obviously American Idol’s “jump the shark” moment and it couldn’t come too soon for yours truly (I might add that in the same edition of the Daily News is the headline, “Chris Brown and Rihanna caught ‘kissing’, disappearing into bathroom at NYC club”. Brown, you may recall, viciously beat up Rihanna about two years ago, and ever since has been “wooing” her back via various social media venues, apparently successfully. Brown also has been noted for his pickup line to women he meets in clubs and wants to “hook up” with: “Don’t worry, I won’t beat you”. To quote Peter Cushing in Star Wars, “Charming to the last”.)

Then on the other side of the spectrum is a story that redeems my faith in the human spirit and helps me forget the ridiculous self-indulgent diva-like behavior of the trailer trash glitterati that seems to dominate our popular culture. This is uplifting report of the Washington Nationals’ mascot of Teddy Roosevelt finally winning a race around the Washington Nationals playing field. For those unfamiliar with the back story, here is a Washington Post story that explains it all.

The TR mascot’s previous long reign of futility had inspired Facebook pages and even a Twitter feed. Before his win on Tuesday, he had been growing extremely desperate, to the point that he was disqualified in one race for commandeering a golf cart from the Nationals ground crew and racing that to the finish line, Rosie Ruiz-style. As absurd as this story may seem, I think it has been a refreshing, good-clean-fun respite from the garbage that forms so much of our “entertainment” these days. Not to mention that it may have even inspired a couple young (and older) fans to learn a little more about the real Theodore Roosevelt. Great stuff.

The Red Ranger: I have never really been a fan of American Idol and have only watched it on occasion when my boys watched it.  I think the only year that we actually watched a fair amount of the season was the season with Adam Lambert.  That being said I have to wonder how much of all of this is just staged to drum up the aforementioned sagging ratings.  I wonder what criteria they used to pick the judges.  Nicki Minaj certainly seems only minimally qualified to be a judge.  However, I think every other celebrity is a judge on some sort of talent show so I guess she was the last one available.

As far as Teddy Roosevelt they never should have let him suffer the indignity of losing for so long.  I think that he was being bullied by the other contestants.  This type of behavior should not have never been tolerated in today’s PC world  However, coming from the “do as I say and not as I do” environment of Washington, DC it is not surprising.

 

Round 1

The Red Ranger:  Romney romps in Round 1.  Pretty much a unanimous decision.  Even your comrades on MSNBC  so say except for Rev. Al of course

Next week Ryan will annihilate Biden.

I hope you can get some sleep tonight.  You may be waking up with nightmares given Obama’s dreadful performane.

Nattering Naybob: How about those Yankees, huh? Despite all their injuries and runners left on base all year, they still wound up with the AL East, best record in the American League, and home field in the AL playoffs.

Romney did OK too I guess. Don’t get cocky, my Republican friend..

The Red Ranger: Yes, it was great to see both the Yankees and Romney win last night

Did you see Chris Matthew’s meltdown on MSNBC last night?  I hope he does not consider himself a journalist.

Nattering Naybob: I am surprised that you are questioning the journalistic viability of Chris Matthews because he actually was very complimentary of Mitt Romney last night. He said that Mittens was the more organized and cogent candidate and that he tried to “win” the debate, as he should have. If the scenario were reversed, and it was Obama who had the unexpectedly strong performance, Fox News would be saying that it was because the moderator (JIm “no, no, your time is up, ah, OK, go ahead) Lehrer, was to blame. That is the key difference between MSNBC and Fox News

I too thought that Romney was the more “organized” candidate. Obama looked tired and distracted. I believe he will do much better in the next two debates. The recent history of the modern debate (since 1976), tells us that an incumbent president seeking a second term, often turns in a lackluster debate performance in the first debate (Reagan 1984, Bush Sr. 1992, and Bush Jr. in 2004).

I first thought it might be a long night for Obama as early as the end of the first segment when both candidates were talking over each, and when Jim Lehrer said they were already going past their allotted time, Romney said “It’s fun, isn’t it?” That typified Romney’s level of comfort last night; he seemed to exude a much more positive energy. However. I expect that this will be the “high water” mark for the Romney campaign, especially since the “substance” of Romney’s performance is now being vetted by the fact checkers, and much of what Romney said, is being proven to be almost comically incorrect, especially in terms of what Romney said he believes is and does not believe in. What I want to know is what in the world was going on during Obama’s debate prep, it seemed like he had no plan and not prepared for some of the charges directed towards him by Romney. Hopefully this will be a wake-up call for Obama.

What can Scott Brown do for you? Nothing.

Nattering Naybob:  Pardon the appropriation of the UPS catchphrase, but I thought it was fitting, since Massachusetts is the Red Ranger’s adopted State. Here I was, all along, thinking that Scott Brown was a semi-sane Republican who at least could be counted on to reject some of the more extremist tendencies of the Modern Republican Party. How mistaken I was.

The question of whether Elizabeth Warren can credibly claim that she should be considered “Native American” may be open for debate. Warren says she was told by both of her parents for years that she her family genealogy included members of the Cherokee and Delaware Indian tribes, thus she was justified in considering herself part Native-American on a questionnaire in the mid-Nineties. Warren says that she never “checked” whether her parents’ claims were correct, that she just accepted them as fact… and that this same practice is followed by most people whose parents tell their children that their ancestors shared a specific ethnicity.

Some assert that Warren’s political opponents are justified in questioning her motivation for “checking the box” when asked if she were a minority. But here’s what I think Scott Brown’s reply should have been to Warren’s claim:

“To be totally honest, I cannot cite the accepted protocol for determining the validity of someone’s stating that they are, or are not, a member of a certain ethnic group. Regardless, if Elizabeth Warren says that she is a Native American, I should and will accept this at face value. But whether she is Native American or not, is totally irrelevant to the campaign at hand to choose the next Senator of Massachusetts. Voters of Massachusetts should make their choice on November 6th not on the ethnicity of either candidate, but on our positions on the issues and our respective visions for the future.”

Instead, Scott Brown chose a different road. Last week at a campaign rally, members of Brown’s own staff– including his deputy Senate Chief of Staff– gleefully performed the “tomahawk chop” and mimicked the clichéd “war whoops” featured in Grade B Hollywood Westerns of the first half of the 20th century (and later). Brown issued the standard “I don’t condone the actions of my supporters”, but his disavowal of these acts strains credibility and credulity, both. Are we really to believe that these people took it upon themselves to put on such a sickening display, without at least the tacit approval of their boss? I think I can predict your answer, but tell me anyway.

The Red Ranger: I know that you Libs always want people to ignore the prior actions of your comrades and shrug them off as just some small inconvenience or minor misstep. However, what people have done in the past is a good reflection of what they will do in the future. I believe that Obama’s association with Bill Ayers and Eric Holder’s participation in an armed takeover at Columbia University in 1970 presented a clear insight into what their mindsets are and how they are governing today.

As far as Elizabeth Warren, I believe her statement in one of Scott Brown’s TV ads sums her up best, she was asked by a reporter if there is anything else that will come out about her and instead of definitively stating no, she says, “I don’t know, we will have to wait and see”. Basically, admitting that there is probably more but someone will have to dig it up rather than being honest about her past. In fact, it is highly likely that she has practiced law in MA without a law license in MA.

How come you are so ready to burn Scott Brown at the stake for the actions of his campaign staff which you admit he did not condone but you are loathe to hold Obama accountable for anything that has happened since he became President.

Nattering Naybob: First, I am not ready to “burn Scott Brown at the stake”. I offered him free advice, did I not? Since you reside in Massachusetts, I think you are probably too familiar with the Salem Witch Trials. But more importantly, what on Earth does Eric Holder or Bill Ayers have to do with the fact that the Senate staff of Scott Brown led a campaign event (if it can be called that), that demeaned Native-Americans with offensive ethnic stereotypes, for no reason other than Elizabeth Warren (his opponent) claims Native American ancestry? Stop trying to deflect the issue.

May I remind you that Eric Holder was appointed in 1988 as a Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia by Ronald Reagan, who last time I checked, is the man that all your Republicans want to install as the fifth face on Mount Rushmore. So apparently any events from Holder’s past “participation in an armed takeover” (of an abandoned ROTC office) did not dissuade Ronald Reagan from appointing him to the Federal Bench.

When someone from the Tea Party shows up with the rest of his or her yahoo anarchist lunatic friends who chant about overthrowing the government, and that person carries a firearm to express their so-called “solidarity” with the Second Amendment, is that person guilty of taking part in “a protest whose purpose is an armed takeover of the United States government”?

Obama supporters

The Red Ranger: I know that you like to portray Romney supporters as idiots but here is one of Obama’s supporters.

The funny thing is that the program that paved the way for these phones was actually enacted during Ronald Reagan’s time in office.  However, Obama has used this program as sort of a bribe to addict his supporters to government handouts.

Natterring Naybob: First, I do not consider Romney’s supporters to be idiots, generally speaking. I consider them elitists who hate anyone with an annual income of less than $100,000. The people I consider idiots, are the ones who actively supported the campiagns of Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain. The supporters of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry, were a step or two above idiots, but still they were deeply disturbed.

As you mention in your typical “oh by the way” Red Ranger style, this so-called “free phone” program was started in the Reagan Administration (should I bother to remind you that there were no cellphones available to the general public in the Reagan administration, so the “free phones” must have referred to regular home phones…just a bit of factual tidying up). How do you claim that “Obama has used this program as a sort of bribe to addict his supporters to government handouts”? That is such an absurd, irresponsible, unfounded charge that I really don’t know what to say. My only hope is that you mean it “tongue in cheek” as a somewhat comic representation of your party’s default charge that all Obama does is get people (usually minorities) hooked on everything that is bad, and at the taxpayer’s expense, no less. Here is a blog that seems credible (I admit I did not know of its existence until today), that lays out the true story of the “free phone” program. Note that the blogger claims that a program that gives out free phones to people below the poverty line at taxpayer expense, is possibly unconstitutional, so the blogger is obviously NOT a “Lib” to use your snippy shorthand.

Red Ranger, I advise that when you go home tonight, you have a nice dinner, spend time with your lovely wife and two boys, then lay down in a cool, quiet place and watch the Yankees-Red Sox game on your local Boston TV station (go Yanks), and try to forget whatever life trauma has compelled you to endorse such outlandish claims.

The Red Ranger: I find your ability to label Republicans as either elitist or hillbillies depending upon the half-baked position that you are trying to support laughable.  It is widely accepted that the Democratic leadership consider themselves to be the true elites and that anyone who disagrees with them is of marginal intelligence.  The Republican Party is not the party of hate, that belongs to the Dems and their supporters who continuously spew their venom upon anyone who should happen to disagree with their immoral, socialist point of view.  Please refer to my prior Chik-Fil-A blog as support of this.

The facts speak for themselves in regard to the enrollment of people in the “free phone” program under Obama.  Enrollment has grown exponentially in this long-standing program under Obama so his administration must have triggered this growth.  To say otherwise would just be another example of your typical inability to face the facts as they are presented.

Here is a description of the person who you are using to research the “free phone” program:

Robert Scott Bell is a homeopathic practitioner with a passion for health and healing unmatched by anybody on radio.

Sounds like a truly reliable source on “free phones” to me.  I must say that I had a good laugh when I read this about your data source.

Nattering Naybob: Yes, being a homeopathic practitioner who has a passion for health and healing (two issues that you Republicans no doubt consider “elitist”) definitely disqualifies one from speaking with accuracy on any current event or public policy issues. I see what you mean. Damn those homeopathic practitioners! If he were a homophobic practitioner instead, he would have more credentials, from the Republican perspective, I imagine.
Go Yanks.

The Red Ranger: Everyone has the right to speak on any topic.  Whether I choice to believe them or not is up to me. That’s all for today, I am off to see my car mechanic as I am having real bad chest pains….