Posted on 08/26/2013 10:08:55 AM PDT by jazusamo
Many years ago, I was a member of a committee that was recommending to whom grant money should be awarded. Since I knew one of the applicants, I asked if this meant that I should recuse myself from voting on his application.
"No," the chairman said. "I know him too — and he is one of the truly great phonies of our time."
The man was indeed a very talented phony. He could convince almost anybody of almost anything — provided that they were not already knowledgeable about the subject.
He had once spoken to me very authoritatively about Marxian economics, apparently unaware that I was one of the few people who had read all three volumes of Marx's "Capital," and had published articles on Marxian economics in scholarly journals.
What our glib talker was saying might have seemed impressive to someone who had never read "Capital," as most people have not. But it was complete nonsense to me.
Incidentally, he did not get the grant he applied for.
This episode came back to me recently, as I read an incisive column by Charles Krauthammer, citing some of the many gaffes in public statements by the President of the United States.
One presidential gaffe in particular gives the flavor, and suggests the reason, for many others. It involved the Falkland Islands.
Argentina has recently been demanding that Britain return the Falkland Islands, which have been occupied by Britons for nearly two centuries. In 1982, Argentina seized these islands by force, only to have British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher take the islands back by force.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
You bet, TOL.
You’re dead on the mark about the manufactured manikin. I think it was designed for one term and surprised all when it was reelected, maybe they weren’t prepared to write another four years of script.
No, “our journalists” supposedly are objective because we sucker for the claim that they are objective. There is absolutely no philosophical reason why anyone would realistically expect that journalism would be objective. Certainly not the First Amendment, which if anything inhibits the government from attempting to enforce any such requirement.The reason journalism is of a single ideological slant is simple:People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (Book I, Ch 10)People of the trade of journalism “meet together,” not for merriment of diversion but to decide what is news, via the Associated Press newswire and by the medium of the AP style guide. The inevitable result is journalism which claims to be objective - but in actuality is heavily biased in favor of the virtue of journalism. In favor, that is, of journalists and politicians who go along to get along with journalists. And journalists are critics, not people in the arena who risk failure.
Indeed, they probably thought their voter fraud machine would be beaten by an overwhelming negative response by the Conservatives in the country. Then “we” nominated Romney, and the fraud and Conservatives staying home did the trick.
I voted holding my nose (for Romney).
Ah, of course.
The Destroy America machine will continue under someone even more vile than O’Bambi, and I know that is possible under Hitlery, who is a supremely evil person.
“One wonders how he will laugh when all his golden promises about ObamaCare turn out to be false and a medical disaster. Or when his foreign policy fiascoes in the Middle East are climaxed by a nuclear Iran.”
One hopes that such laughs as there are FRom Ophonybama, emanate FRom a Federal Prision cell, and that his administration suckups are his sole audience!
I agree. He also finds a way to use the term 'folks' each and every time he speaks.
Well, there's one thing we can know for sure, he's not coming from Honolulu or any other US city or state. IOW we're currently saddled with a phony-baloney Constitutionally unqualified prevaricating"president" who has lied his way into our White House where as a foreign born person he has no Constitutional right to be.
If I live long enough (I'm 76 now) to see him and his tribe depart the White House, probably all the while verbally protesting their forced removal from the WH premises by judicially authorized authorities, I will joyfully celebrate that glad day by cracking open a chilled bottle of 5-star domestic Diet Coke accompanied by a short stack of prime grade Ritz Crackers slathered with heaping spoonfuls of Georgia-made peanut butter. If my defective heart fails me before that glad day arrives I sincerely hope that any and all Americans who may be reading this drivel will be as glad and happy on that occasion as I will be if I make it that far.
You really shouldn’t compare Obama to Chauncey Gardner, who at least would have known the term “seed corn.”
I always compare learning in the way the cheating student did to eating food that someone ELSE chewed up and spat out for you. Who would do THAT? What kind of disease did that person have? (sarc) Doing that .. you always have to trust in the person or persons who have digested the thing FOR you. What did they leave out? What was unnecessarily emphasized? What political or other spin was arbitrarily or gratuitously put on the material? ETC
Personally, pre-masticated ANYTHING is unappealing to me.
I know this for a fact because only ONCE did I read the ‘notes’ on material I was supposed to ‘get’.
The notes were excessively arid, bloodless, abbreviated and in no way fully conveyed what the author said and were not expressed as well as the author had done. Much was lost. The original text was very RICH and had a depth and perspective (not to mention masses of additional information) that did not appear in the 'notes'. When I DID read the original text, I thanked myself heartily!! ALL authors are much more interesting in their OWN words. I am certain that fully HALF of what I call my 'education' was gained and positively enhanced because I read the original text of authors when I could have (but wouldn't) read the 'notes'.
Typical twisted liberal: “blame everybody else for your troubles”.
In Obummerland, the prosperous got that way only because “they made 10 people poor.”
Has no idea how capitalism works. The opportunities are there—you make responsible decisions, you work hard, you sacrifice, and you prosper.
Now as president, Obomba’s making sure the rest of us pay through the nose for every ne’er do well on the planet.
I’m saving this column!
Amen.
I cannardly wait for that to happen!
metwo.
Me too, it’s one of his best in my view, I save them all but this will be on the special list.
” In Obummerland, the prosperous got that way only because “they made 10 people poor.””
“You didn’t steal that money......I did! “
Obama
It's endogamous in the nature of notes. Brevity perforce excludes a lot of nuance and detail.
But remember, Obamacare isn't about health care. It's about destroying private insurance and employer-paid plans, and throwing voters on the alms (subornation) of the Democrat Party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.