Jug Ears Whiffs..

His mission last night was to basically re-inject himself back into the public ken after Boehner ejected him last Friday night and proceeded to deal with less capricious and more serious-minded Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.

(Boy howdy, you know you are wading into the deep end of the kim chee pool when you resort to characterizing Reid like that!)

Anyway, in an attempt to capture lightening in a bottle, a firefly, or perhaps just a urine sample, Obama sought to channel his Inner Reagan by speaking to the people hoping his duclet tones will soothe them into yet another beatific frenzy like what got him elected in 2008.

Reagan -- The Gipper -- could do it. Obama -- The Gaper -- failed miserably.

In any event, Mr Irrelevant-for-the-Weekend got the urge to take his case to the people in a speech that took only one minute to invoke his favorite get-out-of-jail-free card: It's Bush's Fault. It's clear that he actually intends to be dragging this hoary shibboleth with him into the campaign season as well. Coincidental with his prime disclaimer, the NY Times produced a chart that purported to show how The Light Bringer is also a victim of the vicious, insidious BushHitler and his evil puppet master, the shape shifting Dick Cheney-Condy Rice-Donald Rumsfeld.

Crayon depiction of The World According to The Gaper

Of course, this straw, being grasped at by the lefty blogosphere, has been thoroughly debunked as an amalgam of flawed static analysis, invalid assumptions, and misrepresentation. Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air analyzes (emphasis added):

There are plenty of issues with this chart, but let’s start with the notion that the “Bush tax cuts” cost the static-analysis price listed here. Absent those tax cuts, we would not have had the recovery from 2003-7, which generated a rather hefty increase in federal revenues; we’ll return to that in a moment. The actual revenue listed in this chart was what static analysis of the recovery would have brought into federal coffers, which is one of the main problems with static analysis. It also conflates tax cuts with federal spending, which only makes sense if one starts from the premise that the people owe their government all of their income less any that the government arbitrarily allows them to keep.

The chart then tries to claim that Obama’s spending increases over the next 8 years (projected) will amount to just $1.44 trillion — less than the annual deficit these days. Oddly, it doesn’t mention that the last Republican annual budget passed in Congress (FY2007) only had a $160 billion deficit, which tends to interfere with the narrative Fallows and the Times wants to build here.

(If you are ever braced in some steamy, waterfront dive by a coterie of Obama libtards murmuring the "BOOOOOOOSSSSSHHHHHH'S FAULT" mantra, visit Ed's dissection, print it, and laminate it for ready reference.)

But, try as they will, they cannot magic away reality. Doing the math is easy: Pelosi and Reid took the helm in January 2007; The Gaper got his grimy mitts on the controls in January 2009. We were launched into the abyss a fortnight later when Mr Wee-Wee Pants hustled the $800 billion stimullatio bill into law (after a three-day vacation in Chicago, remember?) and we were kicked further down the yawning crevasse by his incessant efforts to eventually pass Obamacare -- a millstone around the economy's neck with such untold dire consequences in the out years, that it has dried up business and investment for the moment.

But I am not here to argue stats. I just want to make the observation that his latest effort to play at chief executive is on par with the gold standard effort for the past 30 months. Basically, the speech was a vapid, perfidious airy persiflage devoid of any content whatsoever.

This was no major divergence from his past ability to turn gold into dross; he was no more than a petulant, blather-spewing juvenile incapable of accepting responsibility but more than ready to assign blame to others for his failures.

How many times do we need to listen to this incompetent or one of his clown troupe mumble this "dog ate my homework" excuse? Apparently it's wearing thin as Gallup has him plumbing the depths at 43% for the past week.

I wonder when we are finally subjected to All-Obama -All-the-Time campaigning next year if he will hit the 30% out of sheer, teeth-grating disgust over him belching out lies and slander in an attempt to paper over his pathetic previous three years. What do you think? I think I hear the nails ion the blackboard now!

Anyway, reminiscing, think back to The Oil Spill -- his dithering while the oil spewed into Gulf of Mexico. Several months wasn't it?

Remember how he also took months to finally meet with and discuss the troop surge required in Afghanistan.

How about is 30-month "laser-like focus" on the economy and jobs? How's that working out for ya?

Oh yes, the numerous gaffes and missteps in our foreign policy -- fawning to foreign leaders, kissing the rings of sheiks and asses of despots, bowing and scraping to emperors -- all culminating in a lessened opinion (if not outright contempt) for this country.

With each page turned in the saga of The Chicago Jesus, it is becoming more apparent all he is capable of doing is some light lifting, fluffy speeches, and schedule incessant golf games and expensive, exotic, tone-deaf vacations for him and his family and friends.

As to the "speech", I must candidly admit that I did not watch all of Obama's remarks last night; been there, done that, got the T-shirt. But, as I was fast forwarding the box to catch Speaker Boehner's remarks, I did observe this comical fool in fast motion: a spastic, contorted bobble-head, gesticulating wildly communicating nothing.

Perhaps a preview of how he will be presented in the upcoming campaign?

credo quia absurdum est
(I believe it because it is absurd.)

-30-