Huh?

I am worried now. I cannot figure out if President Obama is ignorant, an idiot, a robot or just stupid. Maybe his teleprompter doesn't like him anymore. It could be his speech writers are out of work comedy writers from Conan O'brien's run with NBC.

There has been a lot of buzz about the commencement speech the Prez gave yesterday. I have heard quite a few commencement speeches and often they are poor at best. To me this one fits that category.

The smartest man in Washington DC said he doesn't know how to use an iPod, Xbox or PlayStation. I suppose that was meant to be a "laughter" line in a mediocre speech. Did the writers not realize the speech would be published and put out on video?

See, this it the thing that bothers me. He is the President of the "lone super power in the world", and yet he doesn't realize that people actually pay attention to what he says. I would think he learned a thing or two from watching what the press did to previous presidents, BUT maybe he doesn't know how to work a VCR or DVD player either. [Laugh line... come on, laugh!]

Maybe he thinks he is above the jabs of the press. They wouldn't do that to him... would they? Well, if it sells papers and ups hits on web sites they will! Duh!!!

Okay, here is another part of what is unsettling. I have made a few speeches in my life. I have written out my speeches, see I don't have a teleprompter. I have changed those speeches during the speech when something I wrote just didn't sit right when said in front of a crowd. It appears our Prez cannot do that.

It has me wondering, "What else does he say (read) that is untrue."

See the President said the following in his speech:

And meanwhile, you're coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it's putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.

Now, I don't know which to believe. In a way it sounds accurate that the President of the USA doesn't know how to work an Xbox or a PlayStation because they do not "...bombard us with all kinds or content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don't always rank that high on the truth meter."

See, I am older than the President and I do know a little about Xbox and PlayStation and they don't bring in content that is measured on a "truth meter". Maybe the Prez was speaking the truth when he said he doesn't know how to work them.

OR

Maybe he is getting his truth from video games! That is scary. That is real scary!

On the other hand, the Prez said that he doesn't know how to work an iPod. I find that interesting because you can listen to him on your iPod through iTunes. Also, did he think we forgot this embarrassing gift to the queen just a year and 40 days ago?

Barack Obama's gift for the Queen: an iPod, your Majesty

By Toby Harnden World Last updated: April 1st, 2009

Barack Obama met the Queen at Buckingham Palace today and gave her a gift of an iPod loaded with video footage and photographs of her 2007 United States visit to Richmond, Jamestown and Williamsburg in Virginia. In return, the Queen gave the President a silver framed signed photograph of herself and the Duke of Edinburgh – apparently a standard present for visiting dignitaries.

It is believed the Queen already has an iPod, a 6GB silver Mini version she is said to have bought in 2005 at the suggestion of Prince Andrew
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyharnden/9355453/Barack_Obamas_gift_for_the_Queen_an_iPod_your_Majesty/

I understand that he is a busy man. I would think though that he could send a text message from his Blackberry to his speech writers saying knock off the stupid comedy attempts, they make me look stoopid. But maybe I am assuming too much. Maybe Berry's Blackberry is just for show and he doesn't know how to work it either.

Maybe he just wanted to sound "hip" with the technology generation. Maybe he is a robot and does not think for himself at all. (Actually that might explain a lot of things.)

I have a two words for the President. Grow UP!

I also want to know how the free flow of information stops the "emancipation". Emancipation from what? Emancipation to what?

Words actually have meanings there Berry, if you knew how to use an iPad, you could use the dictionary app and find out such things on your own.

Sheesh!

Oh, and, our REPUBLIC needs some pressure, a lot of pressure...

They don't get it!

So it has been a while since I commented on anything. Not that there has been nothing to comment about, just too much to spend time doing so.

The article below brought me back.

"They" just don't get it. That is right, they don't get it. With all of the 527 groups throwing millions and millions into elections every time there is one, just WHO do they think funds the 527 groups?

George Soros who bets real money against government currency and was convicted of insider trading in France is a HUGE contributor to 527 groups.

"Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, $5 million to MoveOn, and $10 million to America Coming Together. These groups worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election." The Wikipedia article further states this: "Soros was not a large donor to US political causes until the 2004 presidential election, but according to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2003-2004 election cycle, Soros donated $23,581,000 to various 527 groups dedicated to defeating President Bush. A 527 group is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after a section of the United States tax code, 26 U.S.C. § 527. Despite Soros' efforts, Bush was reelected to a second term as president.

After Bush's re-election, Soros and other donors backed a new political fundraising group called Democracy Alliance which supported the goals of the U.S. Democratic Party. Soros supported the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which many hoped would end "soft money" contributions to federal election campaigns. Soros has made soft money donations to 527 organizations that he says do not raise the same corruption issues as donations directly to the candidates or political parties." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

So tell me that Corporations have not been influencing and trying to influence elections in "legal" ways. The ruling the Demigod er, I mean Democrat Party doesn't like is going to make it so that information is up front instead of hidden behind a 527 organization.

Gotta love the spin though.

Left and right united in opposition to controversial SCOTUS decision
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1137
Wed Feb 17, 2:46 pm ET

Much has been made of late about the hyper-partisan political environment in America. On Tuesday, Sen. Evan Bayh explained his surprising recent decision to leave the senate by lamenting a "dysfunctional" political system riddled with "brain-dead partisanship." It seems you'd be hard-pressed to get Republicans and Democrats inside and outside of Washington to agree on anything these days, that if one party publicly stated its intention to add a "puppies are adorable" declaration to its platform, that the other party would immediately launch a series of anti-puppy advertisements.

But it appears that one issue does unite Americans across the political spectrum.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that the vast majority of Americans are vehemently opposed to a recent Supreme Court ruling that opens the door for foreign and domestic corporations, labor unions, and other organizations to spend money directly from their general funds to influence campaigns.

As noted by the Post's Dan Eggen, the poll's findings show "remarkably strong agreement" across the board, with roughly 80% of Americans saying that they're against the Court's 5-4 decision. Even more remarkable may be that opposition by Republicans, Democrats, and Independents were all near the same 80% opposition range. Specifically, 85% of Democrats, 81% of Independents, and 76% of Republicans opposed it. In short, "everyone hates" the ruling.

The poll's findings could enhance the possibility of getting a broad range of support behind a movement in Congress to pass legislation that would offset the Court's decision. Of those polled, 72% said they supported congressional action to reverse its effects. Sen. Charles Schumer, who's leading the reform effort in the Senate, told the Post that he hoped to get "strong and quick bi-partisan support" behind a bill that "passes constitutional muster but will still effectively limit the influence of special interests."

The findings of the poll are a bit surprising considering the fact that the case split the Supreme Court, with the five conservative justices in favor and the four more liberal justices against it. The decision was almost universally hailed by Republicans in Washington, who saw it as a victory for the free speech provided for under the Constitution, while President Obama and prominent Democrats in Washington almost universally derided it as a dark day for American democracy.

However, Sen. John McCain, one of the original sponsors of the campaign finance law struck down by Court's decision and one of its few prominent Republican opponents, may have been prophetic when he predicted Americans would turn against the Court. McCain told CBS's "Face the Nation" that there would be a "backlash" once awareness grew about "the amounts of union and corporate money that's going to go into political campaigns."

Perhaps the new poll numbers show that McCain might have been onto something.

-- Brett Michael Dykes is a contributor to the Yahoo! News blog