-
Anyone Still Believe Me?
May 21, 2013 | 30 comments
-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
The Obama Watch
A Fitting Monument to President Obama
A second Mt. Rushmore alongside Rutherford B. Hayes?
There have always been folks like that. There always have been folks who are the naysayers and don’t believe in the future, and don’t believe in trying to do things differently. One of my predecessors, Rutherford B. Hayes, reportedly said about the telephone, “It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one” That’s why he’s not on Mt. Rushmore because he’s looking backwards. He’s not looking forwards. He’s explaining why we can’t do something, instead of why we can do something.
— President Obama
Excerpt from a Speech on Energy
Prince George’s Community College in Largo, Maryland
March 15, 2012
Well, President Obama’s characterization of the 19th President of the United States as a Luddite couldn’t have been further from the truth. According to Nancy Kleinhenz of the Rutherford B. Hayes Presidential Center in Fremont, Ohio, Hayes “was very technologically savvy.” Kleinhenz went on to say, “He was a person that was very avant-garde, not only in his acceptance of technology but in every aspect of his life. His attitudes were opposite to many respects of what was standard for a man of his time.” Not only was Hayes the first President to use a telephone in the White House, he was also the first Commander-in-Chief to use a typewriter, a phonograph and even recorded his voice on Thomas Edison’s gramophone. While there were certainly people in the 1870s who looked backwards with regard to these innovations, President Hayes wasn’t amongst them.
When I first read that President Obama had made this gaffe, my first thought was that he don’t know much about history. Obama certainly don’t know much about geography as evidenced by his claim during the 2008 campaign that he had visited “57 states with one to go.” More recently, during the APEC summit in Hawaii last November, President Obama spoke about meeting world leaders “here in Asia” despite standing in the state in which he was born. President Obama might not claim to be an A student, although it would be nice to see those academic transcripts from Occidental College.
My second thought was that President Obama has his agenda to advance and neither knew nor cared if President Hayes had actually made those remarks. The same could be said for Obama’s speechwriters. If besmirching a predecessor is what it takes for the Obama Administration to impose its policies, then so be it. After all, why let the facts get in the way of an applause line? It is de rigueur for the Obama Administration to take cheap shots at Republican Presidents regardless of the century in which they served.
My third thought concerns President Obama’s lofty opinion of himself. President Obama claimed President Hayes isn’t on Mount Rushmore because he looked backwards instead of forwards. I think it is fairly safe to say that President Obama fancies himself a forward-thinking person. I also think it is fairly safe to say that President Obama also thinks his face should be added to Mount Rushmore regardless of whether he is re-elected in November. His supporters no doubt believe billions in federal funds should be allocated to carve out a spot to the left of George Washington, be it Newsweek editor Evan Thomas, who in June 2009 likened him to the Almighty. Surely filmmaker Davis Guggenheim would second Thomas’s motion. After all, Guggenheim struggles to find any fault with The Anointed One save for having “too many accomplishments.” Is it any wonder that Team Obama tapped Guggenheim to make a campaign film?
Yet come to think of it, President Obama might not want a spot on Rushmore. That would mean sharing the spotlight with Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. It would mean someone would have to dress up as Obama to race during the fourth inning of every Washington Nationals home game, all but guaranteeing Teddy Roosevelt never wins a race after being knee capped by union thugs. Of course, Obama would have to lose a race now and again, even if Eric Holder threatened to launch a federal investigation. Nah, President Obama would prefer a monument all to himself. But it would have to be really big, because not even the Grand Canyon could contain his ego.
So how do we best pay tribute to the 44th President? It would have to be something both manmade and interactive like an elaborate piece of conceptual art. The entrance is surrounded by Greek columns that are about to go under at any moment. It is a guarded by a mechanical white elephant that bows and apologizes. The white elephant overlooks a moat full of algae and alligators. The roof is covered with half a billion dollars worth of unsold solar panels. The solar panels cover a garage full of Chevy Volts that won’t start.
At the very rear of the garage there is a flight of stairs that you are mandated to run up. You arrive at a podium and in front of you there is a streaming video of adoring fans, many of whom begin to faint. Teleprompters can be found on either side of the video screen. A set of buttons on the podium instructs you to choose amongst Obama speeches, including his address to the 2004 DNC, his 2009 inauguration address, and even his speech that ridiculed President Hayes.
You then pick a speech and recite it as if you were playing Guitar Hero. However, be very careful to speak with the correct cadence. Because if you don’t drop your g’s when addressing the Congressional Black Caucus, you fall through a trap door and land hard in an uncomfortable chair. When you turn around, you come face to face with a death panel ready to render a pre-determined judgment. I cannot think of a more fitting monument to President Obama.
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (104) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/20/a-fitting-monument-to-presiden
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 3.20.12 @ 6:56AM
The man sounds more and more audioanamatronic every day.
Doubtless he picked President Hayes because he figured his Base had never heard of him, and it didn't make any difference what he said; most of his base, like he himself, believes that history began the day he was born.
Aces and Eights| 3.20.12 @ 8:48AM
The audioanimatronic Abraham Lincoln in Disneyland has more substance AND style than our exteeeeemed President Bozo.
Alan Brooks| 3.20.12 @ 1:26PM
"More recently, during the APEC summit in Hawaii last November, President Obama spoke about meeting world leaders "here in Asia" despite standing in the state in which he was born. "
Like there is any doubt.
Aces and Eights| 3.20.12 @ 3:50PM
I'm quite sure "Alan," that you have no doubt that Hawai'i is in Asia.
Alan Brooks| 3.20.12 @ 7:49PM
is it Pennell who is doing ID theft via "Alan"?
and the "I know crap".
ID theft is SHITTY.
Skippy| 3.20.12 @ 1:50PM
That robo-Abe was at the NY Worlds Fair in 1964-65.
It was kinda creepy then, like O'Bama is now.
Denise| 3.20.12 @ 3:12PM
Truth is, Barack Hussein Obama has been hinting that he expects his face on the money and Rushmore.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 3:23PM
How about we just change Detroit to Obamaville?
Marco2| 3.20.12 @ 4:48PM
I live very near that dangerous dungheap. Can we make Obama king and seal it off as an American bantustan?
Bill Husssein O'Stalin| 3.22.12 @ 8:21AM
A fitting monument to Obama would be a hole in the ground.
Jack in Wi.| 3.20.12 @ 7:01AM
Obama knows nothing about Rutherford B. Hayes. That line was just a throwaway joke put in by his speechwriters. Everyday Obama gets up and his handlers give him his schedule and speechs he is supposed to deliver. I don't know who exactly is running the country, but it isn't Obama.
As for Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln being on Mount Rushmore, they have al lot in common with Obama. Lincoln was a vitual dictator who supressed civil rights and freedom of the press. He leveled one third of the country wih his war of aggression. Roosevelt was a big governemnt liberal who loved foreign wars and regulation. They are both among the worst presidents, in my opinion.
Dick Nome| 3.20.12 @ 8:16AM
Said in true Murray Rothbard radical fringe Libertarian speak. Rube Paul would be proud of you.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 8:51AM
Dick, I have read "End the Fed" by Ron Paul, and both "Conceived in Liberty" and "What has Government Done to our Money" by Rothbard.
I have "Man, Economy and State" on my bookshelf. These are classics of the Austrian School of Economics found at www.mises.org.
Which of these have you read, and what is your precise criticism?
If you knew what you were talking about, you would know that our Founder's ideas came from Old Whigs like Burke and Classical Liberals such as Locke and Montesquieu. I have read "Reflections" and "The Portable Edmund Burke," as well as Locke's "Two Treatise of Government. I have "Spirit of The Laws" on my bookshelf. Do you not know that libertarians today resemble Old Whigs and Classsical Liberals more than any other philosophy?
What did Rothbard or Paul say in his writings that differed from Burke and Montesquieu?
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 11:20AM
Did you enjoy reading Atlas Shrugged? I find it interesting that you keep aping Levin's complaints about utopianism while still being a libertarian.
I think Murray Rothbard would have been much more of a non-interventionist than Montesquieu or Burke, for one.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 1:39PM
"Utopianism" is tyranny. Libertarianism means minimal, limited government.
That is why we have a Constitution of 18 Enumerated Powers and a Bill of Rights. Motesquieu was one of the inspirations for our Constitution in his separateion of Executive, Legislative and Judical. To have any two combined invites tyranny. Burke tried to prevent King George and the Tories from inciting the American Revolution. Rothbard was simply an economist that followed this political agenda to the social science study of economics.
I think all three are the antitesis of Utopianism where Rousseau summed it up nicely: "If one fails to bend to the general will, then one will need to be forced to be free."
You see, socialist propagandist perverted the word "free." To a libertarian or Old Whig, it meant freedom to do as one pleases without government intrusion as long as one does not infringe upon others liberty. To the socialist, "free" means someone else will provide your food, clothing and roof as long as you comply.
Pascal warned in Port Royal Logic that a word must have an agreed upon unambiguous and unequivocal meaning and be used consistently in any argument. So if you understand that you are judging Utopia by a different measure, then you should be able to understand that I see little difference in these three histoic figures.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 1:58PM
Actually, Von, you're the one creating a new meaning for utopianism. A utopia is an ideal society. It can have almost any form of government. Galt's Gulch in Atlas Shrugged, for example, is a utopia.
One if by land...| 3.20.12 @ 2:22PM
Its also FICTION dummy!
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 2:38PM
Yes, I am aware. I think you're missing my point.
Quartermaster| 3.20.12 @ 4:07PM
DRed, you're being obtuse. I'd say you have no knowledge of the works von Mises has cited and you are simply throwing down chairs in an effort to escape the consequences of your own ignorance and the stupidity of picking a fight with your betters.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 3:19PM
Galt's Gulch appears to be a spoof on socialism. Everything Midas touches turns to gold, and this is what pays the bills. Ayn Rand is making fun of you. Try reading her theory of "objectivism." She is making fools of those that think money grows on trees, or the rich people stole it from "society." If she were alive, she would probably scorn you on your lack of cognition and volition.
The producers abandon the tyranny and escape to anarchy. It is what Marxist think is going to happen after the dictator phase of communism morphs into pure socialism where everybody cooperates because they finally get it. Marxism is one of Levin's four examples of Utopia. Galt's Gulch is a mock on pure soicialism toying with them that they finally have money growing on trees or at the Midas touch.
You must study your Communist Manifesto, my friend.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 4:09PM
I'm not saying there's no such thing as utopian socialism. I'm saying that the existence of utopian socialism doesn't preclude the existence of utopian libertarianism. A lot of libertarians today seem to think that if we dismantle most of the state all of society's problems will be solved. That's a utopian dream. You can be a utopian of almost any political persuasion. All it means is that you imagine your particular political system of choice will lead to a perfect (or near perfect) socio-economic system.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 5:10PM
DRed, libertarianism is not anarchy. Marxism proclaims it will achieve anarchy but in a serene way. It is always tyranny.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 5:27PM
What does anarchy have to do with anything? You don't need anarchy to have a utopia.
Denise| 3.20.12 @ 3:11PM
This sounds familiar, like it comes right out of a book written by Mark Levin.
Aces and Eights| 3.20.12 @ 3:51PM
Freedom is Slavery, and Slavery is Freedom!
Marco2| 3.20.12 @ 4:51PM
Hooray, Hooray!!! That sums it up nicely, Jack in Wi. Some of our Republican heroes well, weren't.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 8:58AM
BTW Jack, FDR had his internment of the Japanese, Court packing and alphabet soup dictatorial "New Deal" policies that scared business almost as much as Obama.
And TR was a lunatic Progressive in the Wilson style. When Taft proved not radical enough for TR, he ran as the Bull (something) party candidate splitting the vote and giving us Woodrow Wilson and his "Intelligent Few."
We are still trying to save the country from Wilson and FDR policies.
Jack in Wi.| 3.20.12 @ 10:45AM
The Neocons favorite Presidents are Lincoln, Teddy Rooosevelt, Wilson and FDR. That is a good reason to dislike them all. My favorite is William Henry Harrson. All presidents do some damage to the country. He did the least.
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 11:12AM
Jack:
He didn't do much damage in the month he was in office.
The problem is of course the same old Leftist/Progressive schtick that demands every good idea be funded by the taxpayers. This constant demand for government "vision" for government to "do something" is where the fault lies. Ours is a government of limited, clearly defined powers, not one which should constantly be dreaming up new ideas, new programs and projects, to implement.
Frankly this is where Gingrinch is vulnerable. He is a grand idea man, but sometimes forgets that government should be small, unintrusive and limited. About the best we can do is try to cut off the blood flow of tax dollars to the tumor which is metasticizing in the body politic.
Alan Brooks| 3.20.12 @ 1:28PM
Don't forget Truman.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.20.12 @ 6:41PM
Don't forget the Alamo! Never Forget! What the hell are you talking about, Brooksie?
Occam's Tool| 3.20.12 @ 7:54PM
OK, Jack hates Israel and Abraham Lincoln equally. And he hates me, a lot.
I am glad to be among Jack's bete noires.
Vox populi| 3.20.12 @ 7:26AM
Jack, it was always obvious from your obsessive sribblings that you were an idiotic anti-semitic scumbag. Your comments about Lincoln evidently suggest you are also in favour of slavery. Just go away.
chuck| 3.20.12 @ 8:04AM
You're absolutely right about Jack being an idiotic anti-semitic scumbag. But he is right about Lincoln and the War of Northern Aggression. Lincoln's original aim was to save the Union, not eliminate slavery. Slavery would have died out on its own with the industrial revolution. 660,000 American lives were needlessly lost, and much of the South was destroyed.
FastJohnny| 3.20.12 @ 8:56AM
Saving the Union meant eliminating slavery. That issue was the crux of the problem and divided the country. It was obvious for many years before the ACW began that although there were other issues, the slavery problem was central. I am not convinced that slavery would have died out because of the industrial revolution as evidenced by industry putting vast numbers of immigrants to work in pretty poor conditions. Like it or not and whether the common soldier for the South fought for that or for states rights to determine their own direction, slavery was central to the cause of the war. Really, the states rights arguement at that time meant the ability of the individual state to proceed along a course of slave ownership, which is pretty darn hard to reconcile with a moral highground whether you are a screaming liberal or a staunch conservative. Think about it and take a look back at history and not the 'new' liberal revisionist history. I am a solid conservative and for the life of me can not see how a state could insist on the right to determine whether or not slavery was acceptable. It certainly does not fit into the Locke theory of individual freedoms and human self determinance, does it now?
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 11:17AM
The great irony of your American history is that the South was right (about the limited government) in the wrong cause while the Union was wrong (about government power) in the right cause.
Following that war the nation lost its vision of a small, uninvolved national government, a federation of States and began the movement toward a ever more centralized national power. When the Progressive movement finally arrived under Bryan, T. Roosevelt and Wilson, the centrralizing trends became all important. That is the battle we still fight today.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 11:51AM
The founders had experience with a small, ineffective national government controlling a loose federation of states under the articles of confederation and found it wanting.
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 12:02PM
Yes indeed DRed, which is why they created a stronger albeit well defined and limited national government, one with a taxing authority which many feared, to conduct business, proper for a self-governing people, but unintrusive in daily life.
The proper monument for this president would be a gigantic cared inscription of the text of the Constitution. Underneath it could read either:
Abandoned Nov. 2012 or
Reborn Nov. 2012
The choice of inscription is ours to make.
W| 3.20.12 @ 4:04PM
The founders did not provide for an income tax that would expand the powers of the federal government. Wilson gave us the federal income tax, federal reserve, and WW1. Without the federal income tax the federal govenrment would be the limited form drafted by the founders.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 4:14PM
Woodrow Wilson didn't give us the 16th Amendment. The founders provided us with a system that the people of this country used to provide for an income tax. In any event, the amendment was proposed during the Taft administration. I guess that means income tax is the Republicans fault?
W| 3.20.12 @ 4:22PM
Trying to revise history again? Wilson was president in 1913 and pushed for the amendment as part of his "progressive" agenda. As a lefty, you should be proud of Wilson.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 4:31PM
The 16th Amendment was passed by Congress in 1909. Almost every member of Congress voted in favor of it. Alabama, the first state to ratify the Amendment, did so in 1909. Those are historical facts. You think that was all Woodrow Wilson's doing?
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 4:32PM
W:
Exactly so which is why the Constitution prohibited such taxation. Once again look to the progressive era to find the source of our many problems.
W| 3.20.12 @ 6:02PM
Al Adab
Unfortunately the so called progressives included Republicans and Democrats both hungry for the power of a strong federal government fincanced by the income tax. Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were both progressives. The states could and would have dealt with the issues but the federal government stepped in and has not let go of the power.
DRed| 3.20.12 @ 6:19PM
Tell that to the people who were actually alive in the 1920s, because they disagreed with you by fairly large margins. The progressive were trying to cure a number of severe social problems, not trying to increase the power of the central government as an end unto itself. And they were largely successful. That's not to say there weren't unintended negative consequences, but you're completely ignoring the serious injustices that gave rise to the progressive movement.
W| 3.20.12 @ 9:10PM
What social problems were "largely" cured? What were the unintended consequences? You speak in generalities like most lefties.
RJ| 3.21.12 @ 12:11AM
Quite true, Al. The demise of Constitutional limited government began with the Progressive era, which both parties participated in. I believe it was Forrest McDonald who said that our political parties usually take different paths in the same direction. Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson provide evidence of that belief.
gearjammer| 3.20.12 @ 8:22AM
If the South voluntarily gave up slavery, maybe they could have voluntarily and peacefully left the union. We'd be two countries and that would be it. It may happen yet.
Appleby| 3.20.12 @ 11:35AM
I suggest you read an alternative-history book by Harry Turtledove called "The Guns of the South." My Daddy heard someone reading it aloud on NPR one afternoon and he bought copeis for himself and for me. Its premise is that some historically ignorant South Africans invent a time machine that can take them back to the Civil War so they can help Robert E. Lee win the War of Northern Aggression by supplying modern weapons and by convincing a couple of Them to join Us and do things to the Yankees that were in reality done to the Rebs...the history other than that is scrupulously accurate and documented in the Afterword, and pretty much agrees with the theory that slavery was already on the way out in the South. It also paints an unflattering picture of Lincoln as a socialist that surprised me, but research has proved it to be true. I recommend the book highly and wish it could be taught in schools where kids can still read.
Teaghan| 3.20.12 @ 2:26PM
"....unflattering picture of Lincoln as a socialist that surprised me"
Perhaps this is why obama more often than not, likes to liken himself to Lincoln.
Quartermaster| 3.20.12 @ 4:20PM
Lincoln certainly was nothing like the picture painted in your grade school history. The man was a cunning political animal and the willing tool of the northeastern money interests, the same bunch we have problems with now. Lincoln destroyed the Republic the founders gave us. he saved nothing.
Without Lincoln there would be no TR, Wilson, FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, Carter, Bush I, Clinton, Dubya, and Obama. The mess we have was begun by Lincoln and will not be overturned until we realize how it started.
Dixie Pixie| 3.20.12 @ 8:08PM
Appleby.....It was farm mechanization that killed slavery.
A tractor and farm equipment are far easier to maintain and are far more profitable than the best field hands.
Now, slavery only exists where mechanization is impossible or cost ineffective.
The “Guns of the South” was a good book, but the use of South Africans as a plot device did not make a lot of sense.
Renegade high-tech Neo-Confederates would have made a better fit, but high-tech and Confederates are a contradiction in terms in the liberal mind.
Mickey_moussaoui| 3.20.12 @ 7:44AM
Obama thinks he is tech savvy because he uses a teleprompter daily. Now if we could only teach him history, science, ethics and math we might have a leader.
chuck| 3.20.12 @ 7:58AM
No, we'll finally have a leader when he loses by a landslide in November.
Intelligent Design| 3.20.12 @ 7:47AM
A fitting monument to Obama would be a pile of manure.
Mike Rogers | 3.20.12 @ 8:37AM
Which would be shovel ready!
http://hotair.com/archives/200.....vel-ready/
RCA| 3.20.12 @ 2:22PM
BO's monument shall be known as Mount Obamanure!
oldfart| 3.20.12 @ 7:55AM
Every time Obama opens his mouth he shows that is not a very well educated or intelligent person. There is a significant difference between education and intelligence and the previous poster, Abbleby, is correct: The Pretender in Chief is a sound bite and not much else.
Alan Brooks| 3.20.12 @ 1:29PM
Hey, it take intelligence to talk down to your audience.
oldfart| 3.20.12 @ 3:12PM
Not if your target audience is dumber than the speaker. :)
Aces and Eights| 3.20.12 @ 3:52PM
No it don't. It only takes arrogance.
Quartermaster| 3.20.12 @ 4:21PM
With which the Obamunist is richly endowed.
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 5:06PM
QM:
Obamunist. May we have your permission to plagarize that very apropriate word?
WickedDickie--Virginia| 3.20.12 @ 8:14AM
I propose a simpler (and cheaper) monument to His Self Importantness and Vacationer-in-Chief to (warning, cliche' coming) raise the consciousness of the peeple. A picture poster in all post offices throughout the land. WANTED for constant lies, deceit, racism and giving aid and comfort to enemies of the U.S. (Call FBI, etc.)
Mike Rogers | 3.20.12 @ 8:39AM
How about we put BarryO through the memorial first, but the trapdoor is programmed to drop him to the death panel on the first lie?
albert constantine jr.| 3.20.12 @ 8:42AM
You guys work on the monument, I'll be at Michelle's Snack Bar concession working through the menu of Tofurkey and Veggie Burgers, along with the White House garden salad bar, while the USDA inspector goes through my picnic basket confiscating my poor food choices, because I'm obviously not smarter than the average bear (who would be dining on river salmon, and honey dipped tree bark).
Quartermaster| 3.20.12 @ 4:23PM
The roughage in the honey dipped tree bark will in your quest for regularity. So eat up! She knows what is bet for you.
martin j smith| 3.20.12 @ 9:05AM
The greatest monument to Obama would be a monumental defeat in 2012 along with his fellow Communists as well. We need a landslide . Whoever the "Republican" nominee happens to be must show they really are in touch with the average voter and follow thru in their policies after ( if they are ) elected. We do not need liars.
And we do not need double talkers. If it is Romney his words and deeds must show that he gets it and he does not go along with the got along to get along crowd. Am I optimistic about this? NO . But if he wants a mandate--he better.
john| 3.20.12 @ 9:52AM
OHhh hell! Don't you folks get it? He is just wanting someone suggest that a likeness of him be placed on Mt. Rushmore. Everyone has to know he belives he deserves that. The trouble is there isn't enough room. Oh yes there is room, but not for him and his ears, to say nothing for his overblown ego. I'm just counting time untill some left wing moron does suggest such a stupid thing.
Aces and Eights| 3.20.12 @ 3:54PM
OBozo wants his face on one side of Mt. Rushmore and his backside on the back side of Mt. Rushmore, so Bill Maher can have a domestic alternative to his regular pilgrimmages to Ireland's Blarney Stone.
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 4:34PM
He would probably prefer his likeness carved into Stone Mt. GA alongside the Confederate Memorial.
Petronius| 3.20.12 @ 10:19AM
Obama's monument will be His Occupiers burning our cities when the trash re-elect him and they are loosed upon us to plunder at will. The parasites now outnumber the producers.
Russel| 3.20.12 @ 10:48AM
I have an e-mail photo to prove he's headed there . A flatbed hauling the biggest chunk of coal you've ever seen .
Valerie | 3.20.12 @ 11:18AM
Well I think you are all about as intelligent as the person who wrote the garbage your commenting on...
"When I first read that President Obama had made this gaffe, my first thought was that he don't(it should be doesn't) know much about history. Obama certainly don't(should be doesn't again) know much about geography as evidenced by his claim during the 2008 campaign that he had visited "57 states with one to go."
SO I guess the writer DOESN'T know proper English and if I was this website I'd be damned embarrassed to even allow this article on your site!
Aaron Goldstein| 3.20.12 @ 11:30AM
You might not wish to be so quick about denigrating the intelligence of others without having all your ducks in a row.
I used the phrases "don't know much about history" and "don't know much about geography" as well as "President Obama might not claim to be an A student" in reference to the Sam Cooke song "Wonderful World" to which I provided a link. Here it is once more for your benefit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE6UrZMb71o
Cpm| 3.20.12 @ 1:40PM
Not to mention the bestselling books of the "Don't Know Much About...."series of the same names. Valerie, you can find them at your library or on amazon.com, and you might just learn something to go along with your self-righteous,condescending attitude.
Teaghan| 3.20.12 @ 2:31PM
Typical liberal/regressive~
marshcope| 3.20.12 @ 11:18AM
And the Ogalallas are still unhappy that Rushmore (one of their sacred mountains) was hacked up to put white presidents on it. I'm surprised O has not become sensitive about that. And who would want to be immortalized on a mountain called Rush?
Anthony| 3.20.12 @ 11:20AM
The Muslim Marxist simply makes things up as he goes along, and who in the LSM will call him on it?
Funny how a president who worships as a 7th century fanatic, pretending to be a "Christian" disciple of Rev. Wright's Black Liberation Theology Church, can call out a predecessor of his as leaning backwards.
Yep, only Obozo and MSLSD are leaning forward, you betcha!!
But of course, as far as Obozo is concerned, Hayes was just another "typical white guy" as Obozo's grandmother was just another "typical white woman", so what do you expect?
Obozo 's visage will not do on Mt. Rushmore, it's filled with too many "typical white guys". No, Obozo needs his own special memorial. I think a giant pyramid replete with stone lions with Obozo's head on their bodies will do, and in the center of D.C.
Hey, isn't it time for Obozo to receive a second Nobel Prize, you know, for his great "Summer of Recovery" program?
Appleby| 3.20.12 @ 11:40AM
I don't have much use for Shelly, but I think he got this one right on the button:
"I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away".
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 4:36PM
A great Greek statesman (forgive me my memory I can't recall which without looking) once said he would prefer people to ask why there was no statue of him rather than why there was.
Anthony| 3.20.12 @ 12:16PM
When Obozo looks forward, it's usually on a prayer rug facing Mecca.
Did you all catch Obozo's comment on Hayes; "He's explaining why we can't do something, instead of why we can do something".
Ah, there's Obozo's obsession with the negative rights concept in the Consitution, which restricts the power of what the government can do, as opposed to Obozo's desire for a Constitution that says "what the government can do".
Ya gotta give Obozo credit, the man is indeed committed to his co- religions, Islam and Marxism.
RJ| 3.20.12 @ 12:35PM
Mr. Obama doesn't know President Hayes. However, President Hayes knew well about men like Obama. Here is what he had to say:
"The executive power is large because it is not defined in the Constitution. The real test has never come, because the Presidents have down to the present been conservative, or what might be called conscientious men, and have kept within limited range. And there is an unwritten law of usage that has come to regulate an average administration. But if a Napoleon ever became President, he could make the executive power almost what he wished to make it. The war power of President Lincoln went to lengths which could scarcely be surpassed in despotic principle.” President Rutherford B. Hayes quoted in David Watson’s 1910 book "The Constitution of the United States", page 930
Of course Lincoln faced a domestic fight for American survival unlike any other President. Obama has no justification for his executive actions.
Anthony| 3.20.12 @ 3:07PM
Wow, The man was a giant forward thinking man after all, unlike the present delusional "forward thinking" occupant of the White House.
How frightening that it has come to this; Obozo, who is neither a man of conscience nor a president who respects the unwritten limitations of the office by men of principle now stands as our president.
Dare I say, President Hayes's understanding of self imposed limitations by men of conscience was and is a by product of classic Western Culture?
President Hayes's worse prediction has indeed come true, a messianic despot, anithetical to Western Civilization, hellbent on destruction, now occupies the Oval Office.
RJ| 3.20.12 @ 7:15PM
I think many of the earlier Presidents, viewed today as "undistinguished" simply because their term(s) of office occurred during relatively quiet times, would be far superior to our recent Presidents (JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, GWB & BHO). As you say, they were products of Classic Western Culture and probably had better morals. Garfield, Hayes, Cleveland, Arthur. While he has been much criticized as being out of his element in politics, Grant was a better man than most of our recent Presidents. If he had a better understanding of the duplicity in politics, I am sure he would do better than today's group.
Layne S| 3.20.12 @ 12:51PM
"So how do we best pay tribute to the 44th President?"
I say we hand him a crushing defeat in November 2012.
Alan Brooks| 3.20.12 @ 1:31PM
We should rename Earth to Obama. We are all part of Obama Nation now!
rpg| 3.20.12 @ 12:57PM
it wasnt a "gaffe" from Obama it was just another in the long string of politically expediant lies hes forced to produce to complete a sentence.
davelnaf| 3.20.12 @ 1:05PM
Please, can’t we be more respectful of our Dear Leader, President Obama? He’s trying with all his might to spend as much money as he can for as long as he can. He’s doing it to help us; it has been His signature achievement. What about Obamacare, you ask? Well, that was just a little thing he did to get elected in the first place. Once He is reelected He will agree that it will be too expensive and will almost certainly wreck the economy and then He will graciously relent—all praise to the Dear leader! Sorry about that burst of enthusiasm.
Now, about that Rushmore thing: He isn’t bothered that He might have to wait on that. He wants to completely transform the US first before having his image carved next to one of those ‘other’ presidents. He is, after all, the new presidential paradigm: the president that works so very hard to persuade us of the filthy capitalist error of our ways. He wants us to see, as He does, that all the wealth we created for over two centuries was really stolen from someone else. Of course, this might leave the question hanging of how anyone creates wealth in the first place and, well, our Dear Leader is working on that. So, cut Him some slack. We’re privileged to have Him as our Dear Leader; “possibly” the greatest President ever.
albert constantine jr.| 3.20.12 @ 6:28PM
There’s a scene in the film “The Boys in Company C” where Stan Shaw and James Whitmore Jr. (as a youthful Marine NCO and young officer, disillusioned with their leadership and their experiences up to that point in Viet Nam) decide to engage in some petty vandalism as a way to cope with their frustration. As they gave at an empty hillside, Whitmore asks Shaw something to the effect of “Did you ever spend a million dollars?”, and then proceeds to call in all manner of artillery, air strikes and other firepower on the imaginary enemy for their own expensive and amusing fireworks show, as a way to “stick it to ‘the man’”.
As I read your post (and others like it), it suddenly occurred to me that in the manner of the aforementioned scene, perhaps his presidency can be viewed as a tantrum or act of vandalism designed to waste a lot of money and resources as his way to “stick it to ‘the man’”, only, in this case, ‘the man’ turns out to be the American people.
Bob| 3.20.12 @ 11:49PM
Did you ever spend a trillion dollars?
Skippy| 3.20.12 @ 2:24PM
How could I have been so wrong about this giant of a man?
Dagny Taggert| 3.20.12 @ 4:02PM
Yeah Obama looks "forwards." That's why he wants to subsidize trains and windmills.
Al Adab| 3.20.12 @ 4:37PM
Trains Dagny? LOL :>)
Mark MacInnis| 3.20.12 @ 4:48PM
"So how do we best pay tribute to the 44th President?"
How about a posthumous "Medal of Freedom"?
MTB| 3.20.12 @ 6:19PM
President Obama spoke about meeting world leaders "here in Asia" despite standing in the state in which he was [allegedly] born.
Dixie Pixie| 3.20.12 @ 8:24PM
Gentlemen....Consider that Obama killing NASA's moon project might be a blessing.
The only monument equal to Obama's opinion of himself, would be his face painted on the Moon for uncounted generations to admire.
Anthony| 3.20.12 @ 8:53PM
Hmmm, good point. Besides, the Russians,who now have the only viable space program,would have to agree to add ears to the moon to complete Obozo's vissage.
I doubt Putin wants to spend Russian rupples on Obozo's ears.
Russel| 3.20.12 @ 9:06PM
Crazy Horse , under stone masonry carving by family and supporters for as long as I can remember . Someone who had more soul and integrity in his toenail than the *** who inhabits the oval office now . A hoodwinker who belongs in Ripleys Believe it or Not is more appropriate .
Dipesto| 3.20.12 @ 10:06PM
Re putting up monuments to O; Solzhenitsyn said of the glorification of Stalin; the only things in the ussr not named for him were the Volga River and the Moon- and there were rumors that that was coming up sooner or later.
Bob| 3.20.12 @ 11:47PM
Your second thought is spot on. These people don't care about history. They will rewrite history just to push their agenda and make their opponents seem backwards and evil, when the opposite is true.
Kingofthenet| 3.21.12 @ 12:40AM
What is the Rethug's Pitch...2008 is better than 2012?
sikiş | 3.22.12 @ 5:37AM
Talking about real estate loving it Here’s some mildly amuzing stuff I found: Thought for the day? : Crime doesn’t pay… does that mean my job is a crime?
Rick| 3.22.12 @ 12:35PM
Obamas' polices do to work its just headwins. He will NOT loose! Your a bigget and your poles are rasist!