Contributed by: filbert Saturday, May 08 2010 @ 03:37 AM CST
Given this language an historian from the future, seeking to reconstruct the great upheavals of the 21st century might reasonably conclude that the evil “they” the President refers to are the heartless managers who foreclosed the mortgage on this ordinary American, and that somehow this Faisal Shahzad was driven to an irrational deed by an intense pang of loneliness or perhaps alienation. A minority interpretation among future historians would probably argue that “they” refers to some other entity because the whole narrative is written in code. But the proposition that newspapers were written in code is so preposterous that only a few crackbrains will believe it. The entire saga of the catastrophe of the early 21st century will probably remain an unsolved mystery to those who pick over the ruins of a mysteriously vanished civilization.
The Series Bible [*12] — Writing . . .
NPA, which is organizing angry mobs to protest against capitalism, is very tight with the Prez, and the Prez is very tight with them.
The fix is in.
Change is coming.
The Real Reason Obama Revealed Nuke Numbers [*19] — “President Obama appears fixated on the idea that U.S. unilateralism in arms control will lead to improved security based increased personal popularity around the world. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clear that President Obama is on a unilateral treadmill that he cannot get off and U.S. security will be undermined as a result. He is finding that each unilateral concession he makes to meet foreign expectations that the U.S. lead by example in nuclear disarmament only results in more demands for U.S. unilateralism. It is only a matter of time before President Obama and the American people discover that his personal popularity is not as great a national security asset as he expects.”
NYT discovers record number of black Republicans running for Congress [*20] — “There was more violence at May Day rallies this past weekend than there have been in over a year of Tea Party rallies. Did the New York Times cover those and assign them to the entire liberal politisphere in the manner they do here with conservatives? Did they link that violence to the immigration-reform movement in the same way they have with no violence at all at Tea Parties with its attendees?”