Disneyfying Bigotry & Bias

Disneyfying Bigotry & BiasDisneyfying Bigotry & Bias

Disney’s cancelling of Roseanne Barr’s wildly popular second iteration of Roseanne is a perfect example of the “Disneyfication” of the rampant anti-Conservative, anti-White bigotry and bias in the media and among Liberals and Progressives.

That does not mean that Ms. Barrs tweet wasn’t what would generally be considered in very poor taste. True, Valerie Jarrett does rather look like the Muslim Brotherhood and The Planet Of The Apes had a child, but it’s thought of as exceedingly rude to say so. Disney’s anti-Conservative, anti-White bigotry and bias is not shown by their cancelling Roseanne over her tweet; it is shown by their blithely ignoring equally or more egregiously vile or improper comments about Conservatives and Whites by other ABC personalities as part of their shows.

This is just Disney mainstreaming, Disneyfying if you will, the Left-Wing dogma that any of those bearing “protected traits” – for whatever “inclusive” list of those traits they’re using at this day, date, and time – are deserving of every protection while the short list of those without such traits are not only deserving of no protections but deserving of any attack that can be launched against them due to their “privilege” of not being a protected class.

~*~

NOTE: To me, Valerie Jarret does look like the Muslim Brotherhood and the Planet of the Apes had a child.  But, as much as I find Jarret to be vile, I find the comment to be ignorant and lazy. While Jarret was born in Shiraz, Iran, it was to a White American woman and a very light-skinned American Black man, neither of which were Muslim. Nor is there any credible evidence that Jarret herself ever adopted Islam.

Tags: | | | | | | |

It’s The O vs. The O

I know that it’s hard to believe but it seems that we’re witnessing a battle royale. It’s the Imperial President, Obama I vs. the Queen of Talk, Oprah Winfrey and the battleground is ObamaCare.

Obama vs. OprahObama vs. Oprah – A Battle Royale

It did seem strange that Oprah wasn’t shilling for the First Black President’s signature health care law. She was, after all, instrumental in getting him the Democrat nomination in the 2008 primaries and in later getting him into the White House.

At least the New York Post provides an explanation for this.

As the White House was gearing up to sell ObamaCare to the American people last summer, Valerie Jarrett, the president’s pointwoman on a host of issues, phoned Oprah Winfrey.

She invited the Queen of All Media to join celebrities, including Amy Poehler, Jennifer Hudson and Alicia Keys, to meet with President Obama and discuss how they could generate publicity for his health-care law.

“All of Oprah’s top people thought she would go, because when the president invites you to the White House, most people automatically say yes,” said one of Oprah’s closest advisers. “But Oprah said she didn’t have the time or inclination to go. It wasn’t like she had to think it over. It was an immediate, flat-out, unequivocal no.”

Instead, Oprah sent a low-level rep from one of her talent agencies, which was regarded as a insult. Obama had been counting on Oprah’s immense persuasive powers to help enroll millions in ObamaCare. But as the rollout turned into a disaster, Oprah didn’t lift a finger to help.

This is not to say that Oprah has come out against ObamaCare. Obama’s pseudo-quasi-semi-nationalization of America’s health insurance industry is the current battleground, not what is being fought over.

The reasons why the Queen of Talk refused to shill for the Obama Regime seem to be far more venal than that, which is frankly the only reason why I’m willing to cite the New York Post – They’re so very good at the venal and/or prurient.

Everyone remembers that Oprah went all out for Obama during the 2008 presidential election. What was not reported was that, in return, Oprah was promised unique access to the White House if Obama won. She’d get regular briefings on initiatives and a heads-up on programs to give her material for her fledgling cable network, OWN.

“Oprah intended to make her unique White House access a part of her new network,” a source close to Oprah told me. “There were big plans, and a team was put together to come up with proposals that would have been mutually beneficial.

“But none of that ever happened. Oprah sent notes and a rep to talk to Valerie Jarrett, but nothing came of it. It slowly dawned on Oprah that the Obamas had absolutely no intention of keeping their word and bringing her into their confidence.”

That’s the Obamas for you. They have never learned the lesson that loyalty is a two-way street. It’s likely that, given their entitlement mentality, that they actually incapable of learning that lesson.

The interesting part is that further points out an internal schism in the Obama Regime, with the FLOTUS and Valerie Jarrett holding a separate court within the White House and often working against others in the inner circle in order to maintain or further their power.

“Oprah was hoping there would be a genuine change in the atmospherics,” one of her friends told me. “But there hasn’t been. Clearly, she is being rebuffed at the level of Michelle and Valerie. And, just as obviously, President Obama hasn’t interfered on Oprah’s behalf.”

Of course, it doesn’t have to be even that complicated. There are simpler and baser reasons that might explain the schism between the White House and Oprah Winfrey who, in other times, would be the logical celebrity spokeswoman for the regime.

Ugly Moochelle
Fat-Assed, Nigga Bitch Needs To Stay Away From My Man!

Of course the reasons don’t really matter all that much in the long run. What matters is that the Obama Regime has burned the bridge between themselves and Oprah Winfrey, who a great number of people – people in key demographics for any perceived success by Obama – treat as a fount of wisom and who treat her words as Gospel.

That, of course, can only be a good thing for the American people.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

Lost In Translation

On an ongoing, issue-by-issue basis President Obama seems to fail to heed the will of the American people. Worse and more maddening than that, every time he speaks he claims that we, the People support his agenda.

It’s easy, in the face of Obama’s behavior, to think of him as a would-be tyrant who refuses to listen to the people. What if it’s something else though?

Lost In Translation
Much Effort Must Be Spent To Keep The Dreamer From Waking

Obama, close to utterly inexperienced in governing, is surrounded and sheltered by his advisers. Who really knows how they’re translating Americans’ outrage when they advise their charge?

Not that this is unusual. It has, in point of sad fact, been a problem for ages – in both the politics of business and the business of politics.

The Plan

In the beginning, there was the Plan. And then came the Assumptions. And the Assumptions were without form, And the Plan was without substance. And darkness was upon the face of the Workers. And they spoke among themselves, saying, “It is a crock of shit and it stinketh.”

And the Workers went into their Supervisors and said, “It is a pail of dung and none may abide the odor thereof.” And the Supervisors went unto their Managers, saying, “It is a container of excrement and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it.”

And the Managers went unto their Directors, saying, “It is a vessel of fertilizer and none may abide it’s strength.” And the Directors spoke amongst themselves, saying one to another, “It contains that which aids plant growth and it is very strong.”

And the Directors went unto the Vice President, saying, “It promotes growth and it is very powerful.” And the Vice Presidents went unto the President, saying, “This new Plan will actively promote the growth and vigor of the company with powerful effects.”

And the President looked upon the Plan and saw that it was good. And the Plan became Policy. This is how Shit Happens.

It seems to be ever the way; truth is lost in translation as it passes up the chain of command. Why should this be different when dealing with Obama? It is, after all, in his advisers’ best interests to keep in safely tucked in his dreaming. 😉

Tags: | | | | |

Why Obama Will Fail

To me it seems inevitable that Obama’s tenure as President will be seen as a failure. There’s still some chance that he’ll be reelected in 2012, but, should that come to pass, it will be more due to a possible lack of viable GOP candidate than any great support for President Obama.

Frankly I think that just about anyone who got elected as POTUS in 2008 was going to end up being seen as a failure. America has troubles for which there are no perfect or pain-free solutions.

What’s both somewhat odd and also very scary for America’s future is that it is not the Right, the Conservatives, who will ensure that President Obama is considered a failure; it’s the Left, the Liberals and the “Progressives” that will ensure such fate comes to pass.

I’ve noticed this trend, but this one singular post by a random blogger, july7nyc, in response to this screed at HuffPo summed up the situation perfectly and eloquently.

I admit, I got caught up in the hype. I believed, hoped. And I voted. Hes a great speaker- Ill give him that. I expected Obama to come in blazing- even Bush didnt seem to have a problem getting his agenda passed.

I never anticipated the resistance from other Democrats! His lack of leadership on health care has infuriated me. Why he didnt meet with all the Dems and pointedly say, Look, here is what were going to do with health care. You are going to back it up and vote for it and we are going to pass it and if you have a problem, you suck it up because you were elected to represent the people and the people want health care reform. If you give me a problem, I will make your life very difficult, but if we do this, you will reap the benefits.

There should not have been this lengthy, drawn-out time for debate and town halls and letting the Republicans lie and mislead and sour positive reform. The fact that even if this pathetic excuse for a health care bill passes, it is so watered down and worthless, it can only make things worse, further demonstrates what can happen when you allow the very industry youre trying to reform, have center stage.

I am changing to Independent and I dont even know what that fully means, but I do know I cannot align myself with a party of failures any longer.

It seems that many – july7nyc was just the one whose post resonated the most - on the Left feel the same way as President Obama’s Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Relations and Public Liaison, Valerie Jarrett, made it clear how she felt when Obama was first elected President.

However, given the daunting challenges that we face, it’s important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one.

— Valerie Jarrett
November 9th Meet The Press Interview

“Take power and rule” seems to be what many Liberals wanted Obama to do. Despite their very vocal and strident hatred of President Bush’s supposedly autocratic manner and his “Imperial Presidency,” the Liberals sound like they both wanted and expected President Obama to behave in exactly the same manner – only with an agenda that the Left favored.

The Left wanted and expected President Obama to truly lead his Liberals in Congress to enact a punitive regime and ram the Liberal agenda down America’s throats, irrespective of the fact that it is not the POTUS’ place to lead Congress. Bipartisanship, except possibly President Obama’s “interestingly” realpolitik definition of it, was not to be tolerated.

But President Obama is failing them. For good or ill his preference for rhetoric over action and the softer forms of coercion over direct exercise of power is as prevalent in his domestic policy as it is in his foreign policy. Obama is just unwilling to be the leader that the Liberals wanted and thought that they were getting.

More and more I’m sure that they will make him pay heavily and painfully for his great sin of disappointing them. That, more than anything from the Right, is why Obama will fail.

Tags: | | | | | | | |

Take Power And Rule

Valerie Jarrett, co-chair of Barack Obama’s Transition Team was interviewed by Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press this weekend (November 9th, 2008) and she discussed her views on the transition from the Bush presidency to the Obama presidency.

Let me politely say that some of her words on the topic of Obama’s presidency were unfortunate.

YouTube excerpt from Valerie Jarrett’s interview on Meet the Press on November 9, 2008:

I must say that I’m not particularly pleased with the attitude displayed by Jarrett in regards to how Obama should proceed with his administration. I’m not alone either. Various Conservatives and Constitutionalists are already jumping on Jarrett’s gaffe as being a harbinger of the dictatorial excesses to come from President Obama. Much like Rahm Emanuel’s appointment as Chief of Staff, Valerie Jarrett’s gaffe – already being called a Freudian slip by some – does not bode well.

However, given the daunting challenges that we face, it’s important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one.

— Valerie Jarrett
November 9th Meet The Press Interview

In the United States our leaders “take office;” they do not “take power.” In the United States our leaders “govern” or “serve;” they do not “rule.” To rule is the province of kings, and America is staunchly opposed to such beings – at least within the US.

To be fair, there is no evidence so far that President-Elect Barack Obama harbors any delusions of being either able or allowed to rule as opposed to govern, serve, and administrate. Jarrett’s words and possible views should not be granted more weight than they deserve.

I believe that what should be of primary concern is that such views as “take power and rule” intimate show a certain type and level of expectations that are being placed upon Obama by his advisers, backers, and supporters. Many people crave “Change” as was proved by the recent elections. Obama may have trouble meeting their expectations while operating within the constitutionally bound powers of the Presidency.

Some secondary concern should be given to the idea of Obama at least maintaining a semblance of humility and bipartisanship in the wake of such a bitterly contested election. Neither Emanuel’s appointment or Jarrett’s comments show any such semblance and serve only to entrench the Right and further fuel the Left’s expectations of “payback.”

Tags: | | | | | |