The Irritable Elephant

It’s time to retire the Irritable Elephant and take his hide out to pasture.

Nearly 200 posts and 45, 166 visits from wonderful readers like you later, it’s time for the Irritable Elephant to fade away. This will be my final post. It’s not that I don’t like doing this; I have loved every single comment and even the back-and-forth with frothing at the mouth liberals. You see, several months ago, I changed jobs and have a fairly high-level government job (some of my friends would argue that I am bringing the system down from the inside). Wink-wink.

We government hacks are subject some dumb-ass rule called “the Hatch Act,” which is even worse than Orrin Hatch’s music. It stifles political speech if you draw a government paycheck, period. So with a presidential election coming up (and oh, by the way, me having hammered all three remaining candidates, one of which HAS to win), it’s best that I fade away.

So thank you. Thank you for reading, for commenting, even those who flamed me. It’s been an amazing ride and I am now focusing my efforts on another blog (which my name is on - it deals with public relations) and under which I do not need to write using a pseudonym.

Old elephants don’t die, they just fade away.

The Never-Really-Was Irritable Elephant

I began this Saturday morning like most others, with a cup of coffee and grateful that I do not have to ensure the Monday through Friday pressures. I can start a little more slowly.

Then, my “blame Google News” thing happens.

I was perusing the headlines that some seriously flawed computer algorithm has conjured up for me and I see a headline that I cannot resist clicking on: The Fat Bush Theory.” Turns out that it is an op-ed, in Pravda the “New York Times.

I suppose that this op-ed columnist, Gail Collins, is yet another victim of the Bush Derangement Syndrome, but I am sure that there are elitists all over the country clicking their tongues in agreement over what barely passes for responsible journalism.

Here is her premise: President Bush made a statement this week about progress toward his announced goals to curb the growth of greenhouse gases. Good thing, right? Something that would require at a least a bit of responsible journalism, right?

Oh, wait. This is the Pravda the New York Times.

Ms. Collins writes:

• “Bush held a press conference in the Rose Garden this week to give us a warming progress report or, in his words, “share some views on this important issue.” He almost always refers to global warming as an environmental “issue.” As The Times’s Andrew Revkin noted on his blog, Dot Earth, most people talk about environmental problems. But perhaps the White House regards that as overly alarmist.
  
  Irritable Elephant note: comparing a Presidential speech to an environmental BLOG?!?! And one that is authored by a New York Times colleague?!?! Now that’s responsible writing.
  
• “I’m pleased to say that we remain on track to meet this goal,” the president said, in a tone that sounded rather belligerent considering this was supposed to be good news.”Irritable Elephant note: if you are an op-ed writer and not a White House beat reporter, meaning, it was likely that you were not physically present, how do you know the tone of the President’s remarks?
• “Suppose that two years after taking office, George W. Bush discovered that because of the stress of his job, he had gained 40 pounds and was tipping the scales at 220. The real-world Bush would immediately barricade himself in the White House gym, refusing all human contact or nourishment until the issue was resolved. But imagine that he regarded getting fat as seriously as he regards melting glaciers, rising oceans and drought and starvation around the planet. In that case, he would set a serious, management-type goal — of, say, an 18 percent reduction in the rate at which he was gaining weight, to be reached within the next decade.Irritable Elephant note: Jesus Christ, Gail. You need some therapy for this really awful case of Bush Derangement Syndrome. “Refuse all human contact?” You are not content only to criticize the President’s goal of curbing greenhouse has emissions, you can’t resist conjuring up some sort of fantasy bullshit of a 300-pound President watching “…melting glaciers, rising oceans and drought and starvation around the planet.”
• “If the Bush strategy seems a little … little, go back to our metaphor. Imagine it’s 2025, and you’ve got a 486-pound ex-president being wheeled in to accept the congratulations of the world on his excellent physical fitness program. Really, that’s big.” BONUS Irritable Elephant note: Gail. Do you have any mirrors in your upper, West Side loft? By the looks of your picture, you could mix in a salad every once in a while yourself. I would get that our President is is better physical condition than you.

Another Saturday morning ruined by Pravda the New York Times’ pandering to their elitist readership, channeled by Bush Derangement Syndrome.

The Especially Irritable Elephant

There has been way too much hot air in Washington, DC this week. Hillary, Obama and even long-quiet John Edwards has chimed in. I decided to revisit the topic of General Petraus, since a few months have passed since the Fenton Communications-sponsored “General Betray-Us ad.” I’m still not over that one. That’s one was low, even for Fenton.

But I found an op-ed in the San Antonio Express News by Colonel Ken Allard that points out what I have long been saying:

• The American public has a short attention span, especially when it comes to unpleasant topics;
• Americans paid attention to the war in Iraq when it was going poorly; and
• Now that things are going much better in Iraq (including decimating Al-Qaida), almost no one is talking about it.

Well, thank goodness that the San Antonio Express News is. This op-ed, authored by military expert Ken Allard, points out the following:

• An earlier and more attentive generation might have idolized Petraeus. This one barely grasps his victory and has no idea who he is. The Pew Research Center reports that 55 percent of the public cannot even recognize his name — roughly the same percentage as those who wish the war would just fade away. For most Americans, Iraq is distant thunder, an unpleasant interruption troubling the nightly news. Even if war coverage finishes above the producer’s cut-line, the dots are rarely well connected for an audience in which military illiteracy is always a working assumption.

• Similarly, the authors of the new counterinsurgency strategy also seemed to have learned something from the Untouchables: When the enemy sends three of yours to the hospital, send five of his to the morgue. But al-Qaida clearly understood what the media and their notoriously fickle audiences did not: Americans had finally become serious about winning.

• Victory has its own logic, eventually prompting the long overdue fight against the Shiite militias. However clumsy and ill-timed by the Maliki government, however uneven the skills of the adolescent Iraqi military, the assault against Shiite strongholds was exactly what was so loudly demanded on Capitol Hill this week: An unmistakable harbinger of Iraqi political progress. But not surprisingly, the language and logic were quintessentially Middle Eastern: Win the street-fight first and political reconciliation follows.

There’s a lot more in the op-ed that I could quote that is brilliant, but I love the points that Colonel Allard makes.

I just hope that there is someone left paying attention.

The Irritable Elephant

I am really struggling today after a friend sent me a link to a ceremony that took place at the White House today involving the President giving a Medal of Honor — posthumously. The solider honored was Michael Mansoor. Mr. Mansoor was 25 years old when he died in Iraq, saving the lives of his fellow Navy SEALS.

AP reported

Navy SEAL Michael A. Monsoor had fast thinking to do when a live grenade came out of nowhere to bounce off his chest: Take the clear path to safety that he had but his comrades didn’t, try to toss it safely away, or throw himself on top of it.

With barely an instant’s hesitation on that Iraqi rooftop, Monsoor took the last course, sacrificing his life to save the men around him. For that, President Bush on Tuesday awarded him the Medal of Honor.

This post will be brief because I have precious little to add to this story.

My first point is that many of us think that we are “brave” as we yell at other drivers on the highway, or many athletes talk about sports being “a war.” Nothing, and I mean nothing comes close to what our troops face on a daily basis and there is no higher sacrifice than that given by Mr. Mansoor. They deserve better than the partisan rhetoric that is blowing off of Capitol Hill this week.

The second point that I want to make for you Bush-haters out there is to look in the President’s face. He feels the burden of the office, the pressure of a starting a war that would produce childless parents like Mr. and Mrs. Monsoor and the anguish of the duties of being the Commander in Chief.

The Irritable Elepahnt

‘Nuff said.  I’m not always all piss and vinegar.

The Irritable Elephant

If there were voting in the land of Bush Derangement Syndrome, the unquestioned Dictator for Life would be Sean Penn. The man has visited (and defended) Iraq, Iran and Venezuela, defending all of current or past dictators.

I think that we all should nominate Sean Penn for Iranian citizenship.

Oh - and by the way, here is the opinion of a Venezuelan citizen speaking about Sean Penn’s comments.

The research continues.

The Irritable Elephant, Ph.D.

P.S.- and is it just me, or did Jeff Spicoli and his most stoned make more sense than Sean Penn at his most sober?

As part of my continuing research, I have uncovered video of Filthy Hippies (in the rain clearly to get some much-needed cleansing) in the throes of Bush Derangement Syndrome. In their natural state, they appear to be defending the rights of terrorists who want to kill innocent citizens: and suggesting that we “arrest George Bush.”

Let the research continue.

The Irritable Elephant, Ph.D.

Much like Dr. Jane Goodall crawling through the jungle to observe feces-encrusted apes, I was trolling through a parking lot yesterday and FOUND IT! THE MISSING POLITICAL LINK! To capture my findings, I quickly grabbed by cell phone camera and captured evidence of what I have been saying for some time.

Three out of four filthy hippies suffer from Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS).

As defined by Wikipedia, BDS includes “…a perceived tendency by some American liberals to blame President George W. Bush for virtually every ill in the world.” I humbly add to this tidbits from my own scientific studies: BDS also includes:

1. A stunning lack of ability to back up a bumper sticker political argument with any facts or substance;
2. When confronted with any data that refute their primitive cognitive abilities, Filthy Hippies begin to emit immediate, wild-eyed and shrill screaming — like a chimpanzee, and occasionally have been known to throw their own feces;
3. An aversion to bathing (am still researching the theory that soap and deodorant, like sound thinking, are actually repelled by said filthy hippies). I am halfway to this research, however, having already examined the link between the French lack of deodorant, stunning lack of gratitude for anything American, including saving their cowering asses twice last century and EBDS - European Bush Degrangement Syndrome.

I will be publishing my findings soon in scientific and political journals the world over, but for the time being, I submit to you, humble reader, proof positive of the link between Filthy Hippies and Bush Derangement Syndrome. Below are two subjects who have been known the world over to have been the original link between FH and BDS.

Humbly Yours,

Irritable Elephant, Ph.D.

Yesterday was interesting. I posted a You Tube video containing some of Jeremiah Wright’s (recently resigned “spiritual adviser” to Obama) hateful comments. Within two hours, two different people had sent me different You Tube videos with a crawl to a Web site “The Truth About Trinity.” Seemed a little fishy to me, but I watched them. Whomever sent them to me is doing themselves no favors.

Jesus Christ..literally.

I suffered through both of them just to listen for some sign that they were doctored, misquoted or misrepresented. There was nothing — and I mean nothing –in them to change my mind. There are two things that I want to point out:

• #1 - You either say hateful comments or you do not. It doesn’t matter what else you add. In the You Tube videos I was sent yesterday, Wright says:
  • The [2000] election was “stolen.” I guess that whole Supreme Court is just a myth.
  • That President Bush a “dumb Dixiecrat, a rich Republican who has never held a job in his life.” That’s certainly respectful for a man of the cloth. As Mr. Wright, you might want to do a little fact-checking, rather than spewing your rhetoric. President Bush worked in the oil business, owned the Texas Rangers and oh, by the way, was the Governor of Texas.
  • The government gives [blacks] pills and…then sends them to prison.
  • “God damn America.” It’s there.

  #2 - You either condemn hateful speech, or you do not. Obama has said:

  • “I’ll be honest with you, I didn’t have that many conversations with him over the last year just because I’ve been so busy. I haven’t been going to church. I wasn’t hearing a lot of these comments. In fact, the ones that are most offensive are ones that I just never knew about until they were reported on.” No repudiation.
  • “I had conversations with him in the past — in fact from the day that I first met him — about some of his views. But understand this, something else that I think has not gotten reported on enough, is despite these very offensive views, this guy has built one of the finest churches in Chicago. It’s not some crackpot church. I mean, witness the fact that Bill Clinton invited him to the White House when he was having his personal crises.” No repudiation. And just for the record, Bill Clinton, while he was trying to save his own ass, invited a lot of “spiritual advisers” to the White House, including Jesse Jackson, who was busy impregnating a woman to whom he was not married. Nice.
  • “I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork,” Obama said, seeming to want credit for his political bravery. “We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue. … But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” No repudiation.

I could go on and on, but the point that I want to make is simple. We are never — ever — going to get past racial intolerance in this country until we tell the truth — on both sides. There are many truths yet to be told, but hate-mongers like Jeremiah Wright spewing lies to the “amen chorus” doesn’t help a damn thing.

And Obama - if you want to have a “discussion about race” with America, let’s begin by telling the truth. Jeremiah Wright is a idiot. Racism still exists in America on all sides. But refusing to denounce the comments of an ignorant bigot like Jeremiah Wright doesn’t win you any point on my part, no matter how eloquent your speech.

Jonah Goldberg summed it up best, I think, when he said of Obama’s “Race Speech”:

For all the wonderful rhetoric and tantalizing promise of Obama and his speech, there’s not much that is actually new here. This was largely a restatement of Jeremiah Wright’s indictment of America, delivered in University of Chicago parlance instead of South Side Chicago diatribe.

The old baggage has been replaced with shinier suitcases, but the contents are the same as ever. Black America’s problems can be solved by spending more money on the same old Great Society programs. Any talk about black America’s problems that takes the eyes off that prize is a “distraction.” And, yet again, white Americans can prove their commitment to racial justice by going along with more big government. My hope for something better proved too audacious in the end. “

Oh — and in al fairness, I have posted below BOTH videos that I was sent to demonstrate that Wright was misquoted. I have put them both here. You be the judge.

The Irritable Elephant

I am disturbed with the whole Jeremiah Wright/Obama controversy, so much that it has taken me some time to compose this post.

On one hand, Obama preaches racial unity and healing. He is, after all, the son of a biracial couple. He should “get it” more than anyone.

On the other hand, his recent verbal tap-dancing “..I don’t think that my church is particularly controversial,” lead me to think that he is doing a Clinton-esque “it depends upon what the definition of “is” is,” when addressing the “religious” teachings of the recently dismissed “spiritual adviser” to his campaign. There is telling video below (for SALE at the church), but here are some of the of the views of Obama’s “spiritual adviser, which, if you read the statements carefully, he has yet to condemn.

• The American government is “under the influence of the Klu Klux Klan.”
• He repeatedly mocks black Republicans in the Bush administration.
• And here’s the doozy - Wright states point-blank that the U.S. brought on the attacks with our own terrorism and– and “we cannot be indignant.”

The video is below. I encourage you to watch it and make up your own mind. Does this do anything to promote racial healing in this country?