Long but accurate. From Newsweek, their last cover story before - TopicsExpress



          

Long but accurate. From Newsweek, their last cover story before they go out of business. And they are liberal... Thanks, Major Walker. His thoughts on the President as a Speaker are arresting. As speakers, perhaps the Presidents since the 1930s rank as follows: 1. FDR and Reagan, though FDRs tones were usually condescending while Reagan was a man of the people and spoke shoulder to shoulder, otherwise the compositional styles had similarities. 2. Nixon (the best speech writer of the bunch, regardless of any media applied tarnishes) whose speaking pulled the GOP out of the 64 Debacle and laid the foundation for the next 40 years of Republican successes. While Nixon had Safire and Buchanan, etc. as speech-writers, they were assistants to a busy president, not his superiors. 3. Kennedy, whose physical presence was matched only by Reagan and Clinton, was heavily/totally dependent on speechwriters -- who at least were pretty good ones, and they wrote well for his Harvard reading style. 4. Clinton and Truman, whose ambitions connected from the underside of society. 5. Eisenhower, whose experienced and weighty perspective was unmatched, projected a gravitas steadying a nervous nuclear world on the brink of losing its grip -- so he was not a great orator but was a highly effective speaker at vital moments. 6. The current White House Occupant, known primarily as a teleprompter reader, golfer and basket ball buddy to the NBA and Hollywood. 7. Carter, Bush I, and Bush II: a world-class phony; perhaps our best rounded Vice President; and the President with the best grasp of how the 21st Century should proceed, but lacking a James Baker or a Howard Baker to ride herd on the Staff. ------ Before FDR, the best 20th Century popular speaker was probably Warren G. Harding. The shameless Speaker of Blooming Grove drew crowds. The content of Wilson and TR elevated their work. [Incidentally, TR was very concerned about what you think of him. He wanted you to like his speeches so much that when he finished delivering one, he then knew where the weaknesses were, corrected them and only filed the corrected manuscripts for you to read.] Of the others, Coolidge probably joined John Adams as our two best men in the Presidency, though an impassioned John Adams seems by far the better speaker. Recent biographies of both men are causing some Presidential Historians to reconsider their status. Why Coolidge Matters is trying to do for Cal what David McCullough did for John. Well, thanks again Major! Son of Clovis ------------------------------------------ On 8/26/2014 9:49 PM, Prosper Walker wrote: Well said, Bethel – thanks! Prop In God we trust Take a minute to read how great it is to see that the liberal press finally sees the truth! NEWSWEEK GONE FOREVER The liberal Newsweek Magazine is going out of business, but not before it attacks the President. A wonderful story. This is quite an article, even more so when you consider that NEWSWEEK finally had the guts to admit it. WOW ! Newsweeks : LAST COVER STORY !!! It is their last cover before they fold. Also read the article at the end. AMAZING!!! Finally, Matt Patterson and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely and tough. As many of you know, Newsweek has a reputation for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama and the one that appears in the latest Newsweek, makes this a truly amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to trickle through the protective wall built around him by the liberal media... By Matt Patterson (Newsweek Columnist - Opinion Writer) Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the worlds largest economy, direct the worlds most powerful military,execute the worlds most consequential job? Imagine a future historian examining Obamas pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite his unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a community organizer; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he vote present); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obamas spiritual mentor; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obamas colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no documentation for any of his claims. He may well be the greatest hoax in history. Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in:Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) non-threatening, all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals dont care if these minority students fail; liberals arent around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem, resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - thats affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isnt racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obamas oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people, conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and thats when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - its all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches. And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everybody else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly? In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office.
Posted on: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:37:25 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015