Email, Hate Mail and Comments from Readers

Posted: Sep 11, 2011 12:01 AM

It's amazing how quiet liberals have become recently in defense of Obama. This was another "big speech" week, but we had no liberals out there defending the president.  

I don't know. Maybe as his own chief of staff, Bill Daley said, sometimes there is no defending the indefensible.

Kind of a weird admission for your own chief of staff to make, but it tells you exactly why Obama's in trouble.   

Dahni wrote: I'm beginning to think that Obama really isn't very smart, as proclaimed by many, and as indicated might be the case with his degree from Harvard. Cunning, immoral and self-loving might be much more accurate in describing him. He does so many things that I consider pretty stupid.- in response to Obama Proclaims: Stimulus Forever.

Dear Dahni,

I think even liberals are catching on to the fact that Obama isn’t what has been advertised.

I don’t know how smart you have to be to be president, but I think that maybe we could try someone who doesn’t have an Ivy League degree next time. More common sense, less education would be a great relief to the country. My understanding is that getting into Harvard is the hard part, but once in, they do what they can to grease you through.

Kind of like being an elite in America. 

That’s why I think your second point is the more salient.

Obama, his whole adult life, has been getting away with mediocrity disguised as brilliance by a practiced and nuanced cadence that he reads from a script. He’s gotten away with it because liberals are in love with the color of his skin, his romantic and mysterious background, his diversity. Now that he’s being graded like the rest of us are, he’s shown that he can’t adapt. He’s doing the same things he’s always done and those things just aren’t working.   

He has a lot of company though. The ruling class on both the left and the right are having trouble adapting to the age of the internet where communication has been democratized.

In the old days it used to be a handful of people in each city decided what made the news in the paper, on the radio and on TV. And another handful decided what you saw in the national news. But that’s not true anymore. Now thanks to the internet, there are so many outlets for news that we don’t have a small elite spoon feeding us “truth.” There is a real marketplace of ideas out there. And elites have not been able to adjust to the new circumstances.

That’s why they seemed so stunned when the rest of us caught on to the fact that our elected representatives weren’t even reading bills before voting on them. They’ve been doing that forever. What’s different now is that someone let the cat out of the bag. Out it is and out it will remain.   

To some extent the history of the last 15 years will be the history of how the internet revolutionized communications and how the ruling elite had trouble adapting to the new circumstances and became victimized by the revolution.

2012 will be the first presidential election where conservatives are fully engaged on the internet.

Obama, I expect, will be one of those victims.           

Jamesbloom wrote: Love you on the Jack B show!!!- in response to Obama Proclaims: Stimulus Forever.

Dear James,

God bless you and your descendents for the shameless plug for my weekly radio spots on the Jack B show, called “What’s Right with Ransom.”

I bet you didn’t know that you can hear me every Friday at :20 after the hour on the following stations:

Or alternately you can listen on line at or download the podcasts.

For a complete listing of all my radio appearances, join me on Facebook.

John Ransom | Create Your Badge

Loyal Democrat wrote: So, the cement industry should be allowed to fill up everyone's lungs with lethal dust just so the greedy owners can buy up yet another yacht? ­- in response to Obama Proclaims: Stimulus Forever.

Dear Democrat,

Don’t forget the private jets greedy Republican cement plant owners buy paying only 80 percent of the tax bill of the country. Jerks.

But to answer the question in one word: Yes. ;-)

Robert wrote: I side with John Ransom in most everything he says. But in this case, he leads us down a path that is moot. There are myriad examples of ridiculous, threatening and treasonous rhetoric that can be used for example on both sides. –in response to Debbie DNC and the Coalition of the Whacky

Dear Robert,

The article wasn’t about the “ridiculous, threatening and treasonous rhetoric that can be used for example on both sides.” It was about the fact that the Dems are in a precarious position because in order to keep their base happy they have to embrace such language and ridiculous policies behind it.

Plus, we’re not the ones that gave the country that stupid “civility” lecture after the Gabby Giffords shooting. That was aimed directly at the Tea Party, trying to weaken them.  

It’s one thing to be incompetent as the Democrats have shown themselves to be. It’s a whole other thing to be hypocrites, which they have also shown themselves to be. They can’t even live up to the precepts they claim to represent.

Civility for me, but not for thee.        

Jim wrote: Americans hate unions at least as much as they hate the press, Congress, used car salesmen and telemarketers. Unlike unions, telemarketers don't beat people up. And Illinois Roy wrote in reply: I think I'd rather take the beating. –in response to Debbie DNC and the Coalition of the Whacky

Dear Illinois,

Spoken like a true union delegate.

It reminds me of a line from Henry Hill in the movie Goodfellas.

Hill, who in real life grew up to be a mob soldier and a construction union delegate, is being beat up by his father for hanging around the wise guys at the pizza joint across the street.

“Every once in a while I'd have to take a beating,” said Hill. “But by then, I didn't care. The way I saw it...everybody takes a beating sometime.”

Gungy wrote: Of course, it'll go away, John. Where do we ever read about any of this stuff outside of Townhall and maybe Fox; except maybe buried in the back pages of the paper and then it's dropped? Did CBS cover it? NBC? –in response to Obama's Solyndra-Gate Won't Go Away

Dear Gungy,

In fairness, ABC News and The Center for Public Integrity started investigating Solyndra right after the loans were made. They have done an excellent job of reporting on it.

From ABC News:

Other flags have been raised about how the Energy Department pushed the deal forward. The Center for Public Integrity’s iWatch News and ABC disclosed that Energy Department officials announced the support for Solyndra even before final marketing and legal reviews were in. To government auditors, that move raised questions about just how fully the department vetted the deal — and assessed its risk to taxpayers — before signing off.

From the Washington Post:

Frank Rusco, a Government Accountability Office director who helped lead a review of the Solyndra loan and the Energy Department’s loan guarantee program, said the GAO remains “greatly concerned” by its 2010 finding that the agency agreed to back five companies with loans without properly assessing their risk of failure. The companies were not identified in the report, but the GAO has since acknowledged that Solyndra was one of them.

This goes right to the White House. It’s not going away.

Flaming Liberal Multiculturalist wrote: How quickly you folks abandon the Gods of Capitalism and the Entrepreneurial (instead of Holy Spirit) when you see a chance to bash the Obama Administration! The MAJORITY of start-ups fail, right!?!? That's that "creative destruction" process that I always hear all the supply-siders raving about, ain't it? –in response to Obama's Solyndra-Gate Won't Go Away

Dear FLM,

Government guaranteed loans aren’t capitalism. If the “creative destruction” had been allowed to go forward, Solyndra would have been bankrupt in March.

Solyndra makes a product for $6 and sells it for $3.

This reminds me of the great Keynesian political leader of the 20th Century, Adolf Hitler, who once told his economic czar, Dr. Hjalmar Horace Greeley Schacht, that the only thing that mattered was production. “I tell you,” said Herman Goering in defense of Hitler’s Keynesian nonsense, “that if the Fuhrer wishes it then two times two is five.”

Apparently Obama wants $3 to be more than $6.  

Any questions?     

M wrote: Matt Damon was born in Massachusetts to American parents. He was raised in America, attended American schools and went to Harvard. He's as American, if not more so, than you are. – in response to Taxing Matt Damon.

But Matt says that you only get to be an American by paying more in taxes not being born here.

“This is the greatest country in the world; is it really that much worse if you pay 6% more in taxes? Give me a break. Look at what you get for it: you get to be American.”

Maybe this is why liberals seem confused about where Obama was born. 

Conservatives Are Insane wrote:  I think we should tax the writers' of asinine blogs which promote nothing but the status quo 100%...we can start w/Ransom! – in response to Taxing Matt Damon.

Dear Insane,

I know you are but what am I?

OK, I’ve said too much already.

That’s it for this week.



John Ransom | Create Your Badge

See more top stories from Townhall Finance. New Homepage, more content. Be the best informed fiscal conservative:

John Ransom Email, Hate Mail and Comments from Readers
Mike Shedlock Will Markets Buy Government Lies?
Stewart Scott Why al Qaeda Is Unlikely To Execute Another 9/11
Bob Beauprez Obama's Pet Billionaire at Solyndra Make Take White House Down
Mark Baisley 9/11
Peter Schiff The Emperor is Naked and Broke
Marita Noon Extortion Funds Enviro Left Through Taxpayer Settlements
Email Ransom
Trending Townhall Video