You vet your life


Imagine if every disgruntled ex-lover, ex-spouse, ex-friend and/or ex-employee in your life had the chance to dish dirt on you – to expose your deepest, darkest secrets. Affairs, flings, drug use, shoplifting, drunk driving, cheating on tests – every closet has a few skeletons. How many skeletons do you have?

I’m talking about stuff you really did – but spun in the least flattering light. Add in made-up lies and anything is possible. They don’t have to prove any of it – it’s up to you to disprove it.

How many people could survive that?

Not everyone has to. If you are approved by the establishment your secrets are safe. The media will help you to cover them up and will attack anyone who tries to expose them. Even when your secrets are revealed the media will dismiss them as irrelevant.

The basic rule is there are no rules. Bill Clinton got hammered for admitting he tried smoking pot but “didn’t inhale.” George Bush and Barack Obama got away with admitting to using cocaine.

The sex lives of Bill Clinton, Sarah Palin and Herman Cain are open season, but Barack Obama’s is off limits. John Edwards’ sex life was off limits until his candidacy was over. Ted Kennedy got kicked out of college for cheating, then later drove his car off a bridge while drunk and left a woman he wasn’t married to behind to drown and it didn’t end his career.

If the media dislikes you they will fixate on every thing you say, pointing to every slip of the tongue, mispronounciation and verbal gaffe as proof you are a moron. If they like you then you can be a moron and they will say your mistakes are proof that you are smarter than everyone else.

Which brings us to this:

Furthermore, Mr. Romney, still unable to reach beyond 25 percent in GOP polls, may have hit his high-water mark. Consider how the selectively quiet mainstream media waged war on the conservative challengers, one by one, just as they began to pose threats to Mr. Romney, yet they have found little time for exposes on Romneycare or Bain Capital or – brace yourself – racism in the Mormon Church. Don’t worry, they will. Meanwhile, conservatives should ask themselves why they’re holding back now.

Even Mr. Romney’s supporters admit this. Washington icon Ann Coulter has curiously joined league with ultraliberal Obamaphiles Bill Maher and Warren Buffett, as well as the one-woman brain trust, Meghan McCain, to support Mr. Romney in the primaries. Miss Coulter claims the mainstream media are “terrified” of a Romney GOP nomination. Destroying her own argument, she predicts there will be an “explosion” of anti-Romney news stories that “have already been written, but they’re not scheduled for release until the day Romney wraps up the nomination.”

Miss Coulter doesn’t explain what motivates the media to shield the Romney campaign during the primaries. The answer is obvious: Mitt Romney is the media’s rope-a-dope re-election strategy for Barack Obama. They hope we’ll bite.

The media will turn on Mr. Romney faster and with greater vengeance than they did Mr. McCain in 2008, and when they do, his poll numbers – unlike those of his GOP rivals who already have faced their firestorms – will crater like Mr. McCain’s did. I would guess they’re already hunting down every family with a grievance against Bain Capital for breathless “How Mitt Romney destroyed our family” news stories. Unfair? Absolutely. Damaging? You decide.

If you still don’t believe the Obama-friendly media are hoping Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination, Google “Mitt Romney money picture” and ask yourself why the media are – for now – holding back this unseemly photo. It shows the former Massachusetts governor beside his former business partners with cash pouring out of their pockets, lapels, shirt collars and even a few body orifices. Even unapologetic champions of the free market cringe with anticipation of the bonanza that photo provides for Team Obama, which already loves to blame the weak economy on “fat-cat” bankers. This photo will be Exhibit A.


If I had to pick the single, most important lesson from 2008, it’s that we should beware the media darlings.

I don’t know whether Mitt Romney is being set up as a sacrificial lamb or not. A more likely explanation is a fixed race with two ringers. Obama is a Wall Street puppet. Romney is a Wall Street alumni. Either way, Wall Street wins.


Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2012 Elections, Bill Clinton, Herman Cain, Media Zombies, Mitt Romney, Nookie Jar, Politics and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to You vet your life

  1. elliesmom says:

    I know that you would rather be shot than have Newt Gingrich become president, but you have to admit that out of all of the choices that we have out there now, he’s the one who will be the most entertaining. The next 4 years are going to be a disaster no matter which one of them is elected. Romney is boring. We’ll still get all of the Republican policies Boehner and the new majority leader in the senate can pass, but none of the fun of watching Gingrich try to be the smartest guy in the room. If we’re going to hell in a hand basket, there should at least be some laughs along the way.

    • SYD says:

      I would welcome a Newt candidacy as well. For entirely different reasons. But… still….

      • elliesmom says:

        I’m not totally against a Newt presidency for reasons other than the entertainment factor, either. He has had experience working with a gridlocked congress and even if he was the guy causing most of it, he knows the dangers and the pitfalls, and when all was said and done, he and Clinton managed to do some good things. As far as carrying on an affair in secret while publicly denouncing Clinton’s follies goes, I couldn’t possibly care less what either of them was doing as long as the women they were doing it with were willing participants. I’m not married to them. I would have chosen Mrs. Gingrich’s solution to my private problem, but I don’t judge Hillary for sticking with Bill. None of my business.

  2. 1539days says:

    There’s a strange undercurrent especially with Morning Joe to make Jon Huntsman the new it candidate. There’s nothing wrong with the guy, but he just doesn’t have it. Herman Cain and Sarah Palin could get thousands of enthusiastic people behind them at any event. Huntsman seems to have the opposite effect. Plus, I’ve now heard that his family is keeping his campaign afloat.

    As for the media, the candidates need to start fighting fire with nukes. Andrew Breitbart isn’t a beloved figure, but the one thing he does is go after the media personalities directly. If these guys want to limit our choices for president by hitting the same story over and over, then I want to know what kind of dirty reprobate they are.

    • myiq2xu says:

      It took $99 million PLUS the media to turn Barack Obama into a contender.

      It took $400 million PLUS the media AND the DNC to make him the Democratic nominee.

      It’s took $750 million PLUS the media to make him POTUS

      All the money in the world can’t make him competent.

  3. DeniseVB says:

    The nominee’s going to need the tea party votes too and I doubt Romney has those. This last month’s going to be a wild ride to who puts more feet on the ground in Iowa.

    I’ve heard rumbles Cain’s people are jumping over to Perry in IA, who is the last anti-Mitt-Newt man standing.

    Then again, to beat the media and Obama’s war chest, we may need heavier artillery, and that would be Newt?

    • 1539days says:

      I heard now that Rick Santorum has gotten some favorable mention by Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Now, Palin is usually pretty diplomatic, but Beck called Santorum the closest thing to George Washington running for president.

      My sinking feeling has to do with the kind of people supporting Romney. The Tea Party has indicated they will vote ABO, but don’t want to keep saying it as an endorsement of Romney. Recent history has actually shown that Romney supporters are the ones who will stay home and scorch the earth with a second Obama term if their pony doesn’t win.

      • elliesmom says:

        Whenever you’re dealing with people who will take their ball and go home if they don’t get their own way, there’s always a trade-off. If you keep giving them their way, then you might as well roll up your tent and go home because it’s not your game anymore. You’re just a useful idiot in their game. Kind of like the PUMAs who voted for Obama in 2008. If you don’t give in, then you risk not having any game to play anymore. Like those of us who refused to jump on the Obama wagon and now are faced with choosing a Republican when what we want is a better Democrat. I don’t know if the Republicans can bridge the gap. Is there a Republican running who isn’t Romney who can get the Romney votes and still keep the more conservative part of the base? I think the latter group is trying to find that person, which is one reason why they keep jumping around.

        • lorac says:

          By definition, a PUMA was a Hillary supporter who refused to vote for Obama. If they were a Hillary supporter who voted for Obama, they weren’t a PUMA

  4. 1539days says:

    Case in point. Arianna Huffington is talking about Newt Gingrich being a flip-flopper. Considering she was kissing conservative ass around the time Newt was Speaker, it’s ridiculous to talk about consistency.

    • DeniseVB says:

      When a pundit uses “flip-flopper” against a conservative, I think what is our Peace Prize winner Obama then? It boggles my mind.

      • 1539days says:

        If you’re not a flip flopper, you probably never had legislative experience or a tiny resume. Basically, you’re Obama. Since he’s been president, Jackass has proved his flip flop bona fides as well.

    • yttik says:

      So many of the media figures are complete hypocrites. Dkos was a Bush voter who suddenly became an expert on the Dem party and an Obama supporter and a Clinton hater.

      I’m an ABO more then I’m a Republican, but people wonder why the Dem party turns me off so much. Besides the crap from 2008, it’s because so many of the characters roaming around in the party are the exact same people who kept me away from the Republican party for so many years.

  5. yttik says:

    Speaking about vetting your life, our local cops have been removed from doing background checks. Several years ago I applied for a job and did not pass the background check. By the time I was able to point out their error it was too late. My name was correct, my SS number wasn’t even close.Apparently I was one of many because background checks are now no longer available locally.

    Last year I spent months trying to remove some things from my credit report that were completely bogus. I swear the three credit reporting agencies are crooked. They make a mistake and for three easy payments of 19.95 they will correct it for you. I should have just paid the extortion fee because it took a few hundred hours of my time to fix it.

    Kind of funny, the job I’m currently applying for now wants to give priority to both former welfare clients and felons because they will get a tax break if they do. I swear, I am always on the wrong side of the fence.

    • gxm17 says:

      I spent years trying to get them to stop merging my info and another woman with the same first and last name, same middle initial (but different middle name), different SSN (not even close), different birthday (not even close) and she lived in another state (in which I’ve never lived). There was NO reason for them to confuse us even once, much less keep making the same error again and again. At one point the woman, unknowingly, got a credit card with my SSN (one of those direct mail offers sent to her address in another state because the credit reporting companies had changed the address associated with my SSN to her’s). Finally, after three years of this nonsense, I contacted my congressman and, after several months, he was able to resolve the issue.

      The credit card companies were almost always sympathetic and accommodating. The credit reporting companies were a different story. They don’t allow you talk to a person and they answer all correspondence with a form letter from a computer (no actual contact person is ever provided).

      The crap the credit reporting companies are allowed to get away with is beyond unbelievable and just plain wrong. If the other woman had knowingly used my SSN, she could have been charged with identity theft. But since it was a credit reporting company “mistake” then there is, legally, no one to blame for mishandling my personal information. No matter how many times they continue to make the same mistake.

      It’s a nightmare. There really needs to be some stringent regulation to get them in line and keep them in line. Instead, I pay their extortion fee every month to make sure they don’t hand out my identity to complete strangers. I do not have a common name, and I’ve often wondered how people with common names manage to keep their identity secure.

  6. glennmcgahee says:

    Funny you said that yttik, I recently applied for a job and the first thing they did was run a credit report. No interview, no references, just the credit report. I saw it in their file when I was hired with annotation to run it the day I submitted my resume.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Nobody ran a credit report on Obama. If they did they were racist and it was thrown out as “credible journalism”. Google: Michelle Obama Magic Beans. And, Zillow’s Obama Chicago Home.

  7. Dario says:

    Romney is only the darling of the Republican insiders. Unless Republican and Democratic candidates come to the scene, it’s Newt and Obama in 2012.

    • DeniseVB says:

      When I read today McCain came in fourth in the 08 Iowa primary, I wondered if the gig was up for Romney? As in, don’t worry, you’ll still be the nom and lose? Creepy.

Comments are closed.