Obama is out Update

It’s the classical case of the unqualified person who got to the level of his own incompetence too soon.

There will be a deal of some sort because the Democrats won’t go down with him but he will be out of the Chair by November.  Time has come for Obama; in case you wonder, I mean November 2010 and not 2012.  He will be a forgotten man by then.

 Barack Obama has always been the “here today gone tomorrow” political opportunist.

Updated Thursday, September 30, 2010



 Obama has now lost all touch with voters and the Time Ragazine will surely withdraw their support for 2012 to save the Rag from the fallout.

17 Responses to “Obama is out Update”

  1. Ike Jakson Says:

    This is just one aspect to watch:


  2. Cheechdog Says:

    Ike, I’m afraid he will not be out by November, however, if a majority of republicans are elected, I expect they will try to impeach him in 2011.

    • Ike Jakson Says:


      I wanted to be the first one raising the point.

      But this thing with the DOJ has the Time Ragazine worried and when they worry you must know. It is so clear that they are taking precautions to dump Obama any day from now.

      I subscribe to Rasmussen since just recently and that shows an entire new spirit in the country. Strange moves can be expected.

  3. Cheechdog Says:

    “they are taking precautions to dump Obama any day from now”.

    Ike, that can’t be done over here, we would like to but it’s impossible. He wouod have to be impeached and that’s a long process that can’t be done until there is a majority of republicans in the house.

    • Ike Jakson Says:


      I thought of wording it differently but I was referring to the Time Ragazine dumping support for Obama to protect their own pockets from a backlash.

      Their very own Joe Klein likes the word “iffy” and you can see the Time articles turning iffy in recent months. It must have occurred to them that they had been to heavily in with him [for money of course] when it was going well and that they need a little iffy now.

      I know about the legal procedures that Government will have to follow.

      Keep well.

  4. Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont Says:

    Ike, sorry to go off topic but here you are at long last. 🙂 http://anatheimp.blogspot.com

  5. Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont Says:

    Did you get that?

  6. Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont Says:

    In case you didn’t here you are again. http://anatheimp.blogspot.com My sincere thanks for drawing my attention to this book.

    • Ike Jakson Says:


      Thank you so much.

      I have “fast-read” your Post on Intruder in the Dust by William Faulkner and you acquitted yourself admirably and with style. Faulkner was actually a complex man living in complex times and dealing with complex issues; he acquired a name only late in his life but then also a great following after that.

      Add “The unvanquished” to your list of Faulkner must reads. I shall try to leave a comment in your Post as soon as I can.

      PS: no problem or offense on my side, but the Dutch in Jakson comes without the C of the English Jackson.

  7. Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont Says:

    My apologies, Ike; I’ll change it straight away.

    • Ike Jakson Says:

      Thanks Anastasia

      I forgot to mention it but you will note that I received all three of your previous comments/enquiries. I followed the advice of someone else to apply moderation to all comments because I had a severe trolling problem for a while.

      And I shall try to get into your Post ASAP to leave a comment. In case I am still unable to do so; let us agree that if you have not heard from me in your Post in three days won’t you please look for a message to that effect in my Post?


      I will leave a message for you there [or you may leave one for me] to ask you to “guide me in step by step” into comments in your Posts. My IT knowledge is virtually non-existent; and I want you to read that Post and tell me what you think of my effort. Please.

  8. Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont Says:

    You managed it very well before! Google accounts is probably the simplest; I have a feeling that’s what you used. But, yes, I will.

  9. Nolanimrod Says:

    I’m a bit at sea, here, trying to follow the thread of the Ike-Ana conversation. I didn’t know what “IT” had to do with a blog post or comment. I hit her link to her story that started with Graham Greene and progressed to the Anti Slavery Society. I did hit a bit of a speed bump for awhile until I realized that when she said “ancestors of slaves” she meant “descendants of slaves.”

    She had a little chart which put her far to the “Right” and on the “Libertarian” side of the Cartesian graph. And that, to coin a phrase, “got me started.”

    Her nomenclature is skewed and singularly unhelpful. Luckily she disabused me of her own self-characterization when she presented her notion that the Liberia deal was masterminded by the ANCESTORS of Bush and Cheney in order to get uppity free blacks (or Negroes, as they were then known) out of the country before they could “contaminate” enslaved blacks. This is textbook leftist-progressivism: blacks are never actors, but clueless dupes pushed around the chess board by omnipotent, malevolent whites. This belies her placing herself far away from the “Authoritarian” side of her graph because the left is first, foremost, and always all about authority. People are always being “re-educated,” etc. They have to get their minds right. Whatever that takes.

    So I didn’t read all of her post. I stopped because I read it all the time in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and elsewhere. Even today conservative blacks are dupes. DUPES I tell ya! Victims of omnipotent whites who are using them for their own evil ends. They may think they have got to positions of prominence thanks to moral courage and strength of character but just deluded souls who are doing the work of The Man.

    If this doesn’t get me bounced off your blog I promise to try harder next time.

    • Ike Jakson Says:

      Naw Nolanimrod

      I don’t bounce people except for bad manners and/or profanity but even then I prefer just editing it out if I can.

      Ana and I have been discussing a book [intruder in the Dust] by William Faulkner. Do refer, if you wish, to her Post in her Blog


      You may find it of interest and she didn’t know where to drop a comment for me thus she simply left it in my most recent Post which was the one on Obama. She is actually very knowledgeable and does a great deal of research.

      Do read my last comment in reply to her Post as above.

  10. Nolanimrod Says:

    One thing which interested me in the Time article was the phrase <fighting the terrorists.

    The people they’re talking about over there aren’t terrorists. They’re soldiers, even if they don’t wear fancy uniforms and have a commander who thinks that diversity is more important than protecting his troops.

    That’s not to say that there aren’t terrorists over in Afghanistan. There are. They are lawyers and other busybodies that are just itchin’ to catch some soldier shooting somebody.

    • Ike Jakson Says:


      Time supported Obama for the money. They don’t report News; they still have to create the News because they can’t drop him just like that; we call it to save face, but it is really still the money.

      They will change when the money dries up or when the other side becomes more profitable.

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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: