Oh, he does make some compelling arguments — at least for some people.
But Frum counts on the fact that We the People just won’t take the time, nor do we have the sophistication, to figure out what’s really being communicated. He thinks he can hide it (as do others, including the media) through the foggy logic of modern political argumentation that he employs.
Here’s the gist.
The crux of Frum’s argument is this: Cain hasn’t been in politics, so Cain can’t effectively run government.
Politics presents a very risky game of chance, but a game nonetheless. Trust me. Just like with counting cards you can practically always win.
Consider this. Barack Obama received record amounts of money during his 2008 campaign. But did you know that just four years earlier, the Bush campaign had set its own records in contributions during a presidential campaign?
By all accounts, Obama received most of his 2008 campaign cash through small donations. But PolitiFact checked that claim and found it to be false. Rather, it seems he accepted money from all comers.
With this in mind, it becomes genuinely amusing to witness the proposal for taxing the million-dollar-plus making members of our upper class. Why? Because many of those who will be taxed are those who put the President into office in the first place!
I didn’t necessarily have it in mind to post today, but I ran across this OpEd piece in the Washington Post by Ruth Marcus.
Now let me just say at the outset that Marcus describes feeling “thoroughly depressed” after reviewing Obama’s debt reduction plan. But it seems to me this stands to reason at some level.
You see, Ms. Marcus appears to have bought into the “Change you can believe in” chant from a few years back. And now she apparently believes that Obama somehow reneged (just like I described in a piece yesterday).
The only difference? Marcus believes that, essentially, the devil made him do it—the devil being personified by those nasty members of the opposing party. [Continue reading]
I don’t know how many of you are following the emerging Solyndra scandal (and I do mean scandal).
National Review Online is reporting the story—complete with links to several previous reports—but for some reason, I haven’t yet heard it break on the major networks. Now that may be because I use CNN as my main source of news. But in any event, much of it appears lost on the world.
My main gripe has to do with how quickly this shows the President began breaking campaign promises after taking office. [Continue reading]
A recent article unveils the results of a “new CNN investigation” into the birther claims against Obama. But CNN, just like the rest of the media, doesn’t seem to understand that they no longer have the credibility to persuade.
The crux of the story deals with how ridiculous the birthers are for insisting that more persuasive evidence should be provided that Obama is indeed a U.S. citizen. But in attempting to make the birther movement look stupid, CNN ultimately falls flat on its collective face.
Well, because it’s intrinsically absurd. Those who believe in the theory that Obama wasn’t born in the U.S. (obviously) don’t trust the media—not one whit! Then a representative of that very media comes along and writes a story that tries to call adherents of the movement into question and make them look fringe and goofy?
Now. for my part I don’t see the writer (or those who did the “research”) really addressing the issue as the so-called “birthers” see it. What are their positions on the issue? [Continue reading…]