Ann Coulter has some fun with Husseinís recent gaffe:
I suggest that from now to election day Husseinís gaffes will be well-planed and formulated to accomplish exactly what he wants; i.e., keep the publicís attention focused on the gaffer instead of on Congress where it belongs. Joseph Farahís 38 reasons supports my interpretation:Last week, President Obama said "the private sector is doing fine."
He did not help matters by becoming lachrymose over the suffering of public sector employees: "Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government. ... And so, if Republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is, how do we help state and local governments ..."
38 reasons why Obama should not be re-elected
Exclusive: Joseph Farah shares collaborative effort to explain what BHO has wrought
Published: 12 hours ago
by Joseph Farah
Combine Husseinís past & future gaffes with Bidenís and they will have zero effect on the outcome of Novemberís election. Gaffes galore simply do not damage the gaffer enough to alter the result of an election. Gaffes serve the purpose of dividing air time among product commercials, scandals, and blunders. Hell, scandals hardly register and are soon forgotten.
In truth, Hussein signed everything Congress stuck under his nose. None of it originated with him. The real mess was made by Congress, and yes óó that includes Congress before Hussein came to office. ďBlame BushĒ should have been ďBlame Congress.Ē Note that Democrats took control of both Houses by blaming Bush for the mess Congress made. Thatís how the system works.
Itís easier to blame one man than it is to punish 535 members of Congress. When they run for reelection they claim they are only one vote. They are never punished individually for their partyís votes. The president gets blamed for everything Congress does. Itís weird when you see that a president never gets blamed for destructive EOs, or misusing federal bureaucracies, or giving his cabinet and his czars carte blanche to bypass Congress. Worse still, neither party stands up to the president when he does things he has no business doing.
The country just went through two years of campaigning. In those two years the media made it look like the countryís fate rested solely with the president. If Hussein is not on TV itís Romney, or talking heads taking about them. You ainít seen nothing yet. Just wait until after the nominating conventions are over. The media will have the American believing there is no Congress at all.
Frankly, I think Hussein knows he is a gone goose. Saving Democrat seats in Congress is the goal. The best way he can do it is to take all of blame and ask for more.
Tea Partiers are the best alternative to what is happening. Neither Democrat nor Republican want congressional races to outshine the presidential race, but itís not too late for Tea Party conservatives to focus on grabbing off a bunch of seats in both Houses.
Question: Did Romney give any sign he would veto ďbipartisanĒ economic crap legislation like the stuff Hussein and Bush signed? If he did I missed it. Tea Party conservatives with enough seats in Congress can make the president irrelevant so that he does NOT get legislation to sign or veto.
Finally, I want to take a crack at answering Ann Coulterís question:
And this:Take away the ability to fire people, and you have airport security, public schools, Veterans Administration hospitals, the Postal Service, General Motors and Pinch Sulzberger, New York Times family scion.
June 14, 2012Ironically, Romney is proposing that all Americans have the same ability he has to hire and fire insurance companies and doctors. The rich already can do this. Why can't the rest of us? We hire -- and fire -- our own appliance stores, pet groomers, restaurants, hairdressers and computer companies. Why not health providers?
And why are the media so desperate to avoid that conversation?
Obama's Public Sector Full Employment Plan
By Ann Coulter
Hereís my answer to the question:
Conversations about firing workers is the last thing media decision makers want because they know that labor unions took away an employerís Right to fire lazy, incompetent, drunks, perverts, drug addicts, and outright criminals. All of the other union demands combined do not compare to the destructive power that comes from employees who canít be fired. Itís not too late to change it.
If this country allows labor unions they should be restricted to bargaining for wages and protecting against PROVEN, WELL-DOCUMENTED, unsafe working conditions óó not vacation time, sick time, coffee time, pensions, work rules, and the rest of the garbage labor unions imposed on the country.