This week's comments cover Obama's re-election strategy, the faux outrage police, faux conservatives, and Dolts of the Chevy or Clash line.
Gerald wrote: Mr. Ransom is overstating the significance of the recent "slights" of Obama. Make no mistake, Obama will be a difficult person to defeat in 2102 and any effort to make him seem "irrelevant" to the voters is unwise. –in response to my column Obama Goes Doh!-for-97, 98, 99, 100!
I think you are confusing getting elected with governing.
I certainly think that Obama should be the odds on favorite to be re-elected. Any president has a significant advantage campaigning.
But I’m not talking about making him “seem” irrelevant. I’m talking about pointing out that in the national debate he is irrelevant.
He couldn’t get a single vote for his budget; he could only muster about 25 percent of the
House to vote for his “clean” bill on the debt ceiling.
All you need to hear is the growing criticism from Hispanics to let you know how badly Obama has lost control of his own destiny.
Darby O'Gill wrote: Stillborn??? Crib-death??? What a lousy choice of words....I'll skip this column. –in response to my column Obama Goes Doh!-for-97, 98, 99, 100!
I knew someone would be offended when I used the words stillborn and crib-death.
Congratulations. You’ve fulfilled my lowest expectations.
I wasn’t going allow the faux outrage police stop me from using words that best describe my point.
Too often we allow the debate about issues get hijacked by people who want to talk about how something was expressed. They do this to distract from the emptiness of their own ideas.
The Right needs to stop feeding the trolls who encourage outrage about style at the expense of substance, even those from our own side.
Clash wrote: Hey, Ransom, here's a suggestion for a column: The Evolving Structure of the American Economy and the Employment Challenge. Spence and Hlatshwayo focus on trends in value added per employee in the tradable and nontradable sectors over the past twenty years. –in response to my column Dems: Greed is Good as a Tax Credit
Not a chance.
This is why you’re a reader and I’m an editor; I’m a conservative and you’re a liberal.
You think because you find The Evolving Structure of the American Economy and the Employment Challenge interesting that everyone should be made to read this boring white paper about an obscure topic.
But as editor my job is to provide content that our readers want to read.
Judging by our traffic, the numbers of post and comments- and by the fact that you show up everyday and read our content - I’d say you should continue to be a reader and I should continue to be editor.
I doubt very much you have a future in online content management at least if it involves a for-profit enterprise.
If it were up to you and the liberals everyone would be driving Chevy Dolts and reading white papers that you picked out for them under the blue-green glow of a non-incandescent.
On the other hand, I think decisions on what one drives and what one reads should be made by individuals expressed in the free market.
Ray wrote: Let's all dress up (Whites only) in those snappy looking 18th Century uniforms so we can all march around and shout patriotic slogans while pursuing endless wars against the "ragheads" or whoever happens to be our enemy today. - in response to my column The New America Movement
I’m guessing you don’t personally know anyone from the Tea Party movement, unless perhaps it’s your father and you’ve had a chilly relationship with him.
Judy wrote: I'm one of those independents you reference in your article. I'm also a moderate. I voted for Ralph Nader. The Tea Party just doesn't fill the bill, because it is uber extreme. The real coups-de-grace was the Wash., DC rally, where Tea Partiers were standing near the Capitol spitting on black legislators. -in response to my column Tea Partiers Unite! Nothing to Lose
A moderate who voted for Ralph Nader?
I’m not sure you understand the meaning of the word moderate.
Look, I have no problem with people coming here and expressing their opinions, even when I disagree with them.
But why pretend to be “moderate,” if not to deceive people?
A moderate who was really a part of the Tea Party movement wouldn’t call the Tea Party “uber” anything. They wouldn’t even use the word “uber.” They wouldn’t claim that Tea Party activists spit on legislators of any color.
If George Soros is going to pay people to come on conservative sites and pretend to be disaffected Tea Party members, moderates, independents and conservatives, in order to sow discord, you should all learn better cover.
Your comments are kind of like the Osama BinLeaded character who claims to be a Republican, who then bad mouths Reagan and calls on the country to tax the rich “hard.”
He may be hiding behind a curtain, but his feet are sticking out for us all to see.
And so are yours.
The problem socialism has right now isn’t so much that they are running out of other people’s money, it’s that they are running out of dumb people.
That’s it for this week.
See Also these Top Columns
John Ransom: Email, Hate Mail and Comments from Readers
Mark Baisley: NASA Innovation is Gov Exception that Proves Rule
Mike Shedlock: The Repossession of BofA
Larry Kudlow: Obama's Job Recession
Gil Morales and Chris Kacher: Socialism Comes Home to Roost in Markets
Jack Bouroudjian: Eric Cantor: Singing to Small Business