Matthew Richardson: Closet Democrat??

So …

What’s with the heading, “… Closet Democrat??”?

Well, before a week or so ago, I had never heard of Matthew Richardson.

Then, I see this ad on FOX NEWS, of all places, for this man running for the office of Attorney General of South Carolina.

Okay …

But …

Something seemed to be missing.

There was no mention of PARTY AFFILIATION. I’ve seen the ad several times now. I was right … no mention of party affiliation. Interesting. Suspicious …

So … I did a little checking.

Mr. Richardson IS the Democratic candidate for the office of Attorney General. Interesting. So, why doesn’t he say so in his ads?

Mr. Richardson is not just the Democratic candidate for the office of Attorney General. He isn’t just a run of the mill Democrat. He is the South Carolina Democratic Party’s elected representative to the Democratic National Committee, that illustrious group that sets the progressive platform for all supposedly good Democrats to run on.

Yet, Mr. Richardson doesn’t even advertise the fact that he’s a Democrat. Mr. Richardson isn’t just distancing himself from the president, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. He’s distancing himself from the entire Democratic Party in his campaign ads. Even his official campaign page doesn’t indicate he’s a Democrat without a little scratching.

I had heard that this was going to be the strategy for Democrats trying to get elected, but this is the first case where I’ve actually noticed it in such a blatantly obvious strategy of omission of party affiliation.

This alone doesn’t necessarily disqualify a person from being the state’s attorney general, in my opinion, yet it does make me wonder how he, as the state’s lead prosecutor and defender, might be inclined to handle “inconvenient truths”.

In an article on his website, Richardson touts experience, qualifications in his bid for state attorney general, Mr. Richardson makes the following statement:

“… the attorney general’s focus must be the law and not politics.

Yet, in an article published in “The State” in answer to the question, “Do you separate your professional work from your political work?“, Mr. Richardson replied,

I try not to avoid politics in my professional career. I want my professional career to be consistent and integrated with the rest of my life.”

So … which is it? Does Mr. Richardson separate his politics from his professional life or not? Can he? In one place he says the attorney general’s role shouldn’t be encumbered and influenced by politics yet, he also states that politics are an integral part of his professional career … inseparable.

So, we have here a man who conveniently doesn’t mention in his campaign ads that he’s the Democratic candidate although I readily admit that one doesn’t have to scratch very deep to discover that fact.

Then he states that the position of attorney general isn’t the place for politics but also states that he doesn’t separate his politics from his professional activities.

Well …

I appreciate his candor when his comments are gathered together and put into context. Has he just disqualified himself for the office of attorney general based on his own standards? And the “no Party” ads for the Democratic candidate …

“Tough and Fair” …

Really??

I agree with Mr. Richardson on one point. The office of attorney general should be about the law and not politics.

Advertisements

Tom Coburn Refers to Nancy Pelosi as “Nice”???

Dr. Coburn, I think you’ve let your inherent propensity, as a physician, to be forgiving cloud your choice of words, at least, if not your judgment.

Nancy Pelosi is “nice”? Nice???

Senator Tom Coburn, a physician from Oklahoma, is right about one thing as reported in Tom Coburn Knocks Fox News, Says Nancy Pelosi is a “Nice Person” – Political Hotsheet – CBS News. A lot of the people listening to him didn’t agree with him and don’t think Nancy Pelosi is nice. And, it’s apparent from watching the cable news channel that a lot of people at Fox News don’t think she’s nice either. And, he’s also right that many of the people who don’t like Nancy Pelosi, people who don’t think she’s nice, haven’t met her. I haven’t met her … and have no desire to do so.

For a number of years now, I have watched Nancy Pelosi spew her political rhetoric which is frequently grossly inaccurate as well as vindictive and vitriolic, that is, when she can get a few words out of her mouth in a consistent and non-bungling manner. These include her comments about former President Bush, the war in Iraq and her criticism and attacks on those who oppose her and her views.

I do imagine that during a one on one encounter, Nancy Pelosi could be “charming”, even disarming … but “nice” … no. It’s easy to be mesmerized or “charmed” by snakes, … but they’re still snakes. Nancy Pelosi may be charming … but she’s still Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi may even be likable … but she’s still Nancy Pelosi … and represents nearly everything I’m opposed to. And, trying to force what she believes on me is not something that I consider nice.

Throughout the years, I’ve met a lot of  “shuck and jive” street hustlers who were both likable and even charming. Regardless, I wouldn’t trust any of them any further than I could spit. Nice, as an adjective to describe them, never came to mind.

Nancy Pelosi may be charming. She may even be likable …, but “nice” … no.

I’d suggest Senator Coburn reconsider his choice of adjectives in describing Ms. Pelosi.

Nice refers to, not only how a person is, but “what they do”. I don’t consider a lot of what Ms. Pelosi is doing as “nice” … far from it.

Maybe Senator Coburn is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, has been in Washington too long and loosing some of his objectivity. He, at least should consider reviewing a dictionary before choosing his adjectives. I will admit he’s a lot more of a gentleman than Nancy Pelosi is a lady. I wouldn’t even demean female dogs by comparing them with Nancy Pelosi. I had a female dog for many years and wouldn’t degrade the memory of her in such a lowly manner.  He should also keep in mind that, in his future encounters with the “nice lady”, the sharp sting in his back could be the knife the nice lady was hiding … figuratively or literally.

Obama, Obama … Wherefore art thou, Obama???

Or subtitle: “Is This Dud(e) Totally Whacked … or still snorting or smoking something?”

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Third planet on the left or totally out of the solar system?

Well, he certainly isn’t functioning like he’s in the United States much less Washington, D.C. … well, maybe Washington, D.C. It seems to be disconnected from the rest of the country also … maybe another galaxy.

Egocentric, narcissistic, referring to himself in the third person …

Are these the characteristics of a person functioning on all cylinders? Is he, was he or has he ever functioned on all cylinders?

Maybe the president is watching too much MSNBC. They seemed to be the only “major” cable news network that didn’t comprehend the ramifications of the Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts. After the Democratic candidate, Martha Coakley, conceded the race, CNN and Fox News understood what had happened, but those loons on MSNBC … Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews … totally out in left field … figuratively and literally. I turned to MSNBC after the election was over just to see their response. It was like watching Saturday Night Live, hilarious … except the joke was on them. They were clueless.

It does appear that a majority of Democrats in Congress got the message and understand it. That, at least, is somewhat comforting since they control both houses of Congress although, thankfully, not as much as before the Massachusetts senatorial special election. It’s amazing how the sensation of being dunked in an ice cold lake can clear the mind to near sobriety … even those like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who have acted in the past year like Roman dictators inebriated with the sense of absolute power.

But not Barack Obama …

He goes on national television and has a temper tantrum … a “hissy” fit … like an over-indulged three year old who’s had his pacifier removed … which he was dreamily nursing on in his personal (induced?) alternate universe. Unfortunately, even after rudely and abruptly being denied his comforter and presumably awakened, he still couldn’t separate his dream state from reality.

I used to think that the President, Mr. Obama, was simply an inherent liar.  Now I’m beginning to have some doubts. I’m beginning to think that this poor man may simply be confabulating his own version of reality … much as he did in his two literary works.

Yesterday, in Ohio, he angrily complained about being falsely accused of cutting Medicare. But, aren’t there over $450 billion in Medicare cuts in his baby, the pending healthcare bill? Isn’t Medicare Advantage going to be eliminated in all states except Florida if the Healthcare bill were to pass?

He angrily defended his government transparency policy? Maybe he missed all of those sweetheart deals that were cut behind closed doors out of the public view, only to be the latest in the lack of transparency that has been prevalent since he ascended to the presidency.

Just a few examples …

The list seems to be endless. His angrily proclaimed perception … versus reality.

Could we be witnessing the first president with Munchousen Syndrome,  a person disguising himself as lucid and brilliant … while actually being delusional and disturbingly mediocre … promoted out of absolute obscurity to a position totally out of his capacity by a population hungry beyond rational thinking for simply … something different?

I think it’s entirely possible that Barack Obama may have another first to his credit in addition to being the first black president.

He may be the first president who is completely delusional … totally out of touch with reality.

Quite possibly, out of this country’s inherent kindness and generosity (which he seems to repeatedly fail to recognize), he should be, simply and quietly, sent back to South Chicago, that comforting womb which nurtured his kindred delusions and Marxist rantings in absolute … and impenetrable … obscurity) where he can also find undeniable comfort in again attending the church of Jeremiah Wright, his self proclaimed father figure and consort in delusional Marxist proclamations and rantings; and, not in the least, where he can do no further harm … hopefully. Pax vobiscum.

Now, there’s some food for thought.

Nancy Pelosi, Brain Dead … but her mouth doesn’t know it yet …

First of all, public speaker … she ain’t. Maybe her mouth is getting a hint that there isn’t anything upstairs. Fumbling, bungling, marginally coherent … pathetic. If she were not so vile, I might feel sorry for her.I sense that what few brains cells are still functioning within her cranium perceive that the environment might not be exactly friendly. The “deer in the headlights” analogy ? Hardly. Deer have a lot more sense even when revealed by headlights. Deer in the dark … well … in the dark, obviously … as in you’re clueless, Nancy.This woman is so full of dogma, there isn’t any room for intelligent assessment. I recently read a comment about San Franciscans, by someone who lives there … that half the population hears voices … causing confusion regarding the other half that’s talking into their bluetooth headsets. So, to which half does Nancy belong?

Question #1 regarding her CIA comments … she refuses to answer, other that saying she stands by her statement. Which one?  What were those three guys with her doing there other than running interference and killing time?

Well, she only took three questions. What a sleazy, fumbling, bungling wuss!! This woman REALLY irritates me!

So much for the weekly Speaker of the House briefing.

Confidence in Nancy Pelosi … Why????

Robert Gibbs says today the White House, i.e. President Obama, still has confidence in Nancy Pelosi. Jim Webb, Democratic senator from Virginia, says he has confidence in Nancy Pelosi. So say a few other Democratic politicians like Tim Kaine, governor of Virginia and Democratic national chairman. Also, according to current polls, the population is about evenly split on whether they think Nancy Pelosi or the CIA is lying.

I think that’s amazing. Exactly which of the four or five versions of Nancy Pelosi’s story are they confident in?

And does that mean that they have no confidence in Leon Paneta, the Obama appointed head of the CIA who has basically said Nancy Pelosi is lying?

It sounds like a classic case of wanting to have the cake whole while eating it, too.

I’ll put my money on Leon Paneta not being the snake oil salesman. At least he hasn’t waffled all over the place like Pelosi with a lot of stammering and stuttering.

As far as the rest are concerned, Nancy Pelosi is the snake oil in four or five flavors, and a lot of Democrats, including all of those who voted her Speaker of the House, are trying to give the nation a large dose.

What’s amazing is that 50% of the nation are simply holding their nose and opening their mouths to take the dose. I wonder what else can be shoved into the open orifice.

Mooooooooooooo ….!!!! What a bunch of cows. There’s some more of that yellow liquid in your ear, people , and you’re still fixated on how warm and soothing it is.

Nancy Pelosi and the CIA

What the hell is this woman doing being third in line for the U.S. Presidency?

When the assessment of her boils down to either being a liar or one stupid … person … or both, what sort of DA’s would want to keep her as speaker of the House of Representatives? I mean … how dumb are they?

This is enough to give even the most ardent atheist or agnostic a little bit of religion, to pray every night that nothing happens to Barack Obama or Joe Biden.

Let’s see … the chain of succession, Barack Obama (I’ll leave off my description of him now but it has something to do with Brown Shirt Goons from Chicago) … to … Joe Biden (I think a movie was made about him … “Dumb and Dumber”) … then Nancy Pelosi ( Ha-ha -ha -ha -ha -ha …).

Geez … what a joke!!!!

Let’s see …

What do you get when you have a snake oil salesman, a moron, and a lying airhead in the same room?
Answer:
The top three Democrats in Washington.


5/16/2009 Update:

There’s nothing in this article about the CIA, is there? Well, anyone who doesn’t know anything about the controversy regarding Nancy Pelosi and the CIA, her accusing the CIA of lying to her … and only to her … according to her four or five different versions of HER own lie …, well, you deserve Nancy Pelosi to be third in line for the U.S. presidency. The rest of us don’t.

H.R. 1: Did the American Public Get the Reader’s Digest Version?

As I heard one member of Congress gleefully retort, “You won’t find it in this bill!!”, during the closing arguments in the House before the final House vote on the amended version of the bill, there’s a lot not to be found in H.R.1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, as published on the Internet.

What’s not to be found are about 1000 plus pages of a Democratic wish list which were originally put before Congress and originally passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. That doesn’t mean it isn’t still there, but carefully concealed in vague words like “science”, “infrastructure”, and “wetlands”. The latter might apply to Ms. Pelosi’s Marsh Rat.

I have a sneaking suspicion that we’ve finally gotten a full blown version of Barack Obama’s “openness” and “transparency” … and the bill is really an abridged Reader’s Digest version of what the Democrats are up to.

So …

Who besides me would like to see the original 1000 or 1500 pages of the original Democratic “wish list” to compare with how the $787 billion actually gets spent?

Addendum:

To read or download the original House version of H.R.1dated 1/28/2009, go to House Version (H.R. 1) .

This is provided by http://readthestimulus.org/index.php?