The Stepford Staff

The Stepford Wives (1975 film)

In case you missed it, President Obama referred to himself 199 times in a 40 minute speech in Austin this past Thursday … see: CNS News Story. And this was with the requisite backdrop of nodding, laughing, applauding toadies. (How can these people allow themselves to be abased and used as human wallpaper?)

And, of course, this speech was delivered in Obama’s increasingly malicious, acerbic, mean, immature, snide, condescending, sarcastic, puerile, mocking, cynical, sophomoric, and derisive manner. (I could go on, but it certainly was not what we know as presidential.) It almost makes no difference what the subject of this talking-down was … for it was stomach turning. Even liberals such as Bob Beckel and James Carville found it offensive.

The TV show, "The Five,” posited last Friday why no one in Obama’s inner circle will disabuse him of such inflammatory (and egotistical) rhetoric. The Five group coined a new term which I liked a lot … cleverly referring to those surrounding Obama in the White House … as "the Stepford staff.”

This is an entry for the next Urban Dictionary.

(If this movie reference does not connect with you ... please see: Wikipedia Explanation).

A Test

I am herein offering a test to measure the bias of national media outlets .. that is, if and whereof they mention what happened in Congress yesterday that was meant to ameliorate the effect of the government shutdown. The House of Representatives proposed a piece of Ted Cruz's strategy ... a measure that funded the District of Columbia, veterans' services, and the national park service.  But the House Democrats kept this from reaching a required 2/3rds majority ... even after passing a similar measure to fund the Defense Department ... which was later passed by the Senate and signed in to law by President Obama ... see: The Blaze Story.

However, this morning's printed version of the New York Times indicates that somehow this bill made its way to the Senate and Democrat Majority Leader, Harry Reid, refused even to bring this proposal up for a vote in the Senate.  I'm sure that this was meant to punish the Republicans by punishing segments of the American people ... with the cooperation of national media outlets.  How cynical can one political party get?

Although the New York Times did reveal this information on page one this morning, it was in paragraph 8 and referred this measure as a "narrow bill."  I grade the Times with a B- ... it should have been in the headline and the first paragraph ... it's real news!  An exercise that you, dear readers, can use to test our media outlets' biases is to follow how much of this really important development the national media are willing to convey to you.  This should be fun.

Hair on Fire

I know that I have gotten cynical in my dotage ... possibly too cynical ... but there is something manically weird about the United States's closing of 19 embassies in the Middle East and Africa ... see: CBS Story. Apparently our government has received credible and specific threats that there are massive Islamist attacks planned against one or more of our diplomatic facilities throughout the Muslim world.  And so all these embassies will be shuttered until at least the end of this week.  Numerous congress-persons have asserted that this terrorist chatter is even higher than it was before 9/11/2001 ... this time centered in Yemen.

The reasons I am somewhat cynical center around the following thoughts:

- This over-the-top drama certainly takes the media spotlight off of the many scandals that are plaguing the Obama administration. The embarrassing admission that al-Qaeda is capable of such a large-scale effort clearly refutes Obama's campaign assertion that al-Qaeda is on the run.  Therefore, the downside of this policy reversal must, to them, be smaller than the risks emanating out of these numerous scandals.

- Will these supposed locked-and-loaded terrorists conclude that, since these embassies have be briefly closed, they will pack up and slink back to their hideouts ... foregoing any planned attacks?  I sincerely doubt that timing is of the essence in any such planned assaults.

- If these supposed threats are "specific," why would we close all these embassies pell mell?  Would we not have some reasonable idea about exactly where and when these attacks might take place?

- Since, thanks to Fast-Eddie Snowden, the terrorists know a lot more about the process that the United States uses in tracking terrorist communications, perhaps al-Qaeda is pulling our chain with this recent staged chatter ... and using it to verify what they have learned.

- The Obama administration seldom does anything that is not driven by political considerations.  Why should this hair-on-fire stage performance be any different.

But, then again, I don't want to be proven wrong as a result of more spilled American blood.

Afterward: For some comments along this same line of thought see: The Powerline Blog.