Skip to content

Cunning like Coyote…

January 26, 2011

The article was titled “Snore or Snare” – I think it’s more along the lines of “Snore or Snort” because the article is entirely snort worthy

The ideas and policy proposals in Barack Obama’s 2011 State of the Union Address were anything but fresh and original…By staking his claim to decades of well-worn political detritus, I think Obama has set a cunning political trap for his enemies.

Where DO I start? To quote Bugs Bunny: “oh dear, my poor little woodland creature brain can’t possibly outwit a genius like you….whatever WILL I do?”

So, the genius the press advertised wasn’t….genius. The material was a retread, like Wylie Coyote continuing to order from Acme despite being blown up by their inventions in the last 25 or so pictures.

My personal favorite? “…a cunning trap”. Cunning as in Elmer Fudd or Wylie Coyote?  It’s as subtle as Wylie introducing himself to Bugs Bunny – the new neighbor – by saying “Hello, lunch”. Yeah, that’s cunning alright. Doesn’t “cunning” mean that you can’t see a head fake coming from a mile away?

It’s so cunning, the author admits that the president was wrong and had no interest in the economy in the SOTU 2010 despite saying the word “jobs” three times like a first year Hogwarts student holding their first wand. And we won’t even notice! We’re just “lunch”, and the other elected officials sitting in the audience last night who happen to have opposing opinions on the best way to govern are “enemies.”

Either way, in a reversal of positions from the last two years, Obama looks like he is focused on doing practical things to boost the economy,

Aren’t we so lucky to have such cunning thanklessly and tirelessly working on our behalf?

Advertisements
10 Comments leave one →
  1. January 27, 2011 10:15 am

    So who are the enemies in this author’s mind?

    • January 27, 2011 12:35 pm

      The “enemies” comment was in reference to Obama’s political enemies. Which I presume means anyone who doesn’t think he’s brilliant and acknowledge that fact with grateful acquiecesence to his wisdom and kindness

      • January 27, 2011 7:21 pm

        So . . . throwing out some well-worn platitudes sets out a cunning trap for the nonbelievers. Cuz, we’re just so gullible? Or cuz saying that he’ll do free markety things will cover (or help the media cover) his bumbum when we complain because he has not actually done them?

        sheesh to these people believe a single word they type?

    • January 27, 2011 7:45 pm

      The “enemies” are apparently those who would impede the growth of government.

      In 2009, Obama talked about economic recovery — but enacted a stimulus and other measures to slow it down.

      In 2010, his speech was about jobs — but his actions attacked job creators.

      Now he talks once again about growth — as he has been doing for two years — and this writer assumes that this is a “reversal of position” because he will do what he says this time.

      Perhaps the writer is in the habit of believing seven miracles before breakfast. But even the manner in which he has laid out his case makes it untenable — and I don’t think even he believes it.

      ===|==============/ Level Head

  2. January 27, 2011 8:39 am

    I wonder if maybe the author is just desperately trying to convince himself that Obama didn’t really mean it, he’s just spinning to make it look that way (isn’t that called “deceiving”) to make it LOOK like he means it.

    Did he just admit that Obama never REALLY meant jobs, jobs jobs, and is “throwing into relief” that the era of transparency & bipartisanship was a sham (er, intentional deception)?

  3. January 27, 2011 1:20 am

    It appears that the writer got his words tangled:

    He’s thrown into relief the fact that Republicans no longer seem interested in any government efforts to boost the economy, except where they offer an excuse to reduce the size and power of government.

    should have been

    He’s thrown into relief the fact that Republicans no longer seem interested in any efforts to boost the size and power of government, except where they offer to reduce the government’s effect on this poor excuse of an economy.

    A little better, perhaps. I hope it’s true.

    ===|==============/ Level Head

  4. January 27, 2011 12:41 am

    The article does seem to be putting lipstick on a pig.

    But your title reminded me of a jibe, delivered in the American Indian accents of that side of my family: “Smart like rock. Quick like tree. Swift like cantaloupe.”

    The latter part doesn’t really work as that melon was brought over by Europeans. And called it a rockmelon doesn’t sound like “antelope.”

    But in either event, the idea is to suggest a person whose speech resembles that of Barack Obama when campaigning after he’d “been up 48 hours.”

    It feels strange to have a president younger than I am. Obama wasn’t even alive when Sputnik or the Explorer satellites were launched. This was the fellow who demonstrated a few months ago that he was uncertain of the pronunciation of “Orion.” Man had been in space before he was born — that great transition he missed. And right about the time of the Apollo missions, he was coming back from Indonesia to be mentored by the communist/Black Panther activist. He wasn’t looking up, he was learning to look back before his own lifetime — and to hate.

    Knowing his background, I find the civility platitudes fairly hollow — and not convincingly delivered when he reads them.

    ===|==============/ Level Head

    • January 27, 2011 8:40 am

      I love it. Swift like cantalope…yeah, that’d be this bunch. We’d never EVER catch on that Obama didn’t really mean what he said with articles like that.
      “be more civil” is very similar to “tolerance” these days. Both mean “shut up and agree with me”

    • January 27, 2011 9:27 am

      I still get a little green when a long-time NFL player retires, and he’s younger than I am. it’s the price of wisdom.

      But your point is valid in that people with a different personal history have a very different view of what’s important. Since I was barely paying attention during the Carter administration (I was more worried about fractions), it took my own interest in re-looking at it before I could make an informed decision. Seen through this lens, the president and his speechwriters looked at history for examples, rather than their own personal experience. History is dictated by what you read about it, and how you interpret it, and it bothers people who lived through it. Just an observation.

      • January 27, 2011 9:53 am

        One frustrating aspect is when people are ignorant of history (that is crucial to a point they are trying to make) from just a few years ago. One person was telling me recently that there was NO evidence that Saddam Hussein was anything but peaceful. “What about the missiles that Hans Blix stumbled into when he went to the wrong building?”

        The person proceeded to argue that there were no missiles — and yet they were in the news, in Blix’s reports, and people were generally chatting about Hussein’s pretension to destroy one missile a day (of more than 100 known) but not allowing inspectors. Hussein sent Blix a souvenir video only — and when Blix wasn’t impressed, the pretend missile destruction stopped.

        My friend not only remembered none of this (though he considered himself well-versed on WMD issues), he insisted that I was making it up. More and more details — broadly featured in the news — were lost to him; he only remembered what he had read very recently and transplanted backward, replacing his actual experience of history.

        Permanently, it seems. And I’ve encountered this a lot: some people remember from their own earlier experiences of news only what recent pundits tell them to.

        Much of political speech — like that of our President — relies on the audience being willing to supplant what they know with what they would prefer to think. The author you quote above is pretty straightforward about the process, and assumes that the people who accepted his speeches (and disastrous results) from the last two years will be perfectly happy to get excited again.

        ===|==============/ Level Head

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: