Actual Thugs

It is not too soon to begin referring to the Obama regime as scandal-ridden. But what does this mean?

I was amazed at Obama’s first election, amazed that more people didn’t see through him. His gauzy promises, his tip-tilted nose, his serene arrogance, were all a sight for the prescient gobsmacked to behold. And then I was amazed again at his re-election — but this time I was amazed that the electorate hadn’t seen him. Now it was not a matter of seeing through him, it was simply a matter of seeing him. He had a record now; he had actually done stuff. Lots of people could see it, and they kept saying to the others, “Can you see it now?” And the answer came back . . . no . . . no . . . no . . . call it a continent-wide Huxtable presidency wish fulfillment syndrome.

But the American people, bless their hearts, are now starting to see the big E on the eye chart. Of course, our collective nose is almost touching the big E on that eye chart, but we can at least see it now. The doctor has been most encouraging.

We have the AP scandal. We have the James Rosen scandal. We have the IRS scandal. We have the Benghazi scandal. We have reports waiting in the wings that these scandals are going to go much deeper, and that a couple more volcanoes may erupt any time now. And the reason we now have these scandals functioning as real scandals is that the mainstream media — fully complicit in helping maintain a purblind populace the last four years — has by some act of God awakened. This doesn’t make them virtuous, but it does make them interesting.

One of the central things this means is that we should be glad that Obama won re-election — this may well in retrospect be a profoundly merciful kindness from God. God draws straight with crooked lines. Obama is a Chicago thug and Romney appears to be a nice man, but they are both of them statists. Statism is always death, whether or not there are smiley faces at the top, and it needs to be discredited in real time, by those running it. And who better to discredit something than the discreditable?

Statism is thuggery, and I prefer my thuggery be run by actual thugs. It helps to concentrate the mind.

Leave a Reply

5 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
screwliberalismL ButlerValerie (Kyriosity)Andrew RoggowJonathan Recent comment authors

newest oldest
Notify of

Huxtable presidency….actual thug…

You’ve learned a lot since teaming with the League of the South and writing “Southern Slavery as it was”. The dog whistles come with plausible deniability now.

Andrew Roggow
Andrew Roggow

My father had some interesting insight into the recent glut of scandals. He compared it to the Nixon Watergate scandal and noted that Nixon was a control freak. He was directly involved in the scandal. That is why the scandal actually reached up and got him impeached. Obama appears not to be a control freak but a stand-offish, nice looking, campaigner. These scandals then are most likely not the result of Obama’s direct involvement, but the lack thereof. Other people are really running the show without oversight. The scandals are in some measure a reflection of incompetence at administration. Still… Read more »


I almost kinda sorta (but not very much, really) wish I were back at my old job to see if the hard-core Obamolators are really beginning to see their false god for what he is…whether anything he does could be bad enough to put a dent in their devotion.

L Butler
L Butler

The scales, lifted from their collective journalistic eyes, by an act of God: namely, that the justice department they’ve worked so hard to shield has now revved up its spy network against the Associated Press et al. Suddenly, the Obama Administration is “borderline tyrannical,” as that amiable genius Piers Morgan so aptly put it.


I do not think you know what this word means…”scandal”… The appropriate word is FELONY.