Nitpicking The Nitwit

I’m not real big on gotcha journalism and since that is pretty much the only arrow in the quiver of the LSM when it comes to GOP reporting, I’m not much of a fan. Goofs, gaffes, misspeaks, even inaccuracies are all part and parcel of any political speech, so when someone mentions 57 states, 10,000 people dead in a Kansas tornado, making fun of the Special Olympics, mixing up his words like ,”The time has changed for come”, even losing track of where he is on his teleprompter, I don’t get too worked up, we are all human. But some F-ck ups are so egregious, so careless, and so reflective of an apathetic view of the military, that attention must be paid.

This is just so god awful. Stepping on your dick while giving a speech at a GM plant or a college campus, nobody much cares or will notice, but every single one of those soldiers in the background knows who in their ranks got the MOH and know the circumstances behind it. Bullshitting the military or not prepping properly to speak in front of the military is beyond the pale in my book. Presenting the MOH is such a solemn occasion, it is an honor for any president to be in the company of such heroes, something that should be remembered.

Obama confused Jared Monti with SSG Sal Giunta

As we all know, SSG Sal Giunta, of the 173rd Airborne, was the first living recipient (2011) of the MOH who fought in Iraq/Afganistan. SFC Jared Monti, 10th Mountain Division, was KIA in Afghanistan in 2006. He was posthumously awarded the MOH by Obama in 2009.

How does the Commander-in-Chief mix these heroes up? He put that medal around Giunta’s neck and he stood with Monti’s parents as they grieved. These fallen heroes leave such a great legacy, and we should know all their names. The ironic part of the speech, and this comes after the announcement of the politically pressured drawdown of troops in Afghanistan, was Obama’s closing remark, “Know that your Commander-in-Chief has your back.”

Compared to Bush, who was always portrayed as a dolt and a numbskull, Obama gets the special treatment because he is just so effing brilliant, but can anyone imagine in their wildest dreams that Bush would ever make a mistake like this?

The funny thing is that when some flunky staffer makes it known to Obama what he did, it will get the attention appropriate for a commercial break on ESPN while he is watching the NBA draft.

Comments are closed.

  1. Kimpost

    That was a really bad gaffe. I would imagine that he will offer an apology (if he hasn’t already). In any case, he should.

    Thumb up 0

  2. CM

    Yeah that’s a grand fuck-up indeed. No question about it.

    You don’t get away with anything these days The big local story here in the last 24 hours is a public gaffe (yeah aside from penguins and horse semen). The head of the Employers Association linked menstruation with workplace productivity during a discussion on the gender pay gap. And then doubled down by agreeing to interviews about it but not using the time to figure a way out, or to consider an explanation or apology. And then in a tv interview he stood over a female reporter like your steretypical bully boss. Brilliant. My facebook status today has been – ‘called in sick, period pain’

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10734243

    Anyway, will be interesting to see how Obama deals with this. What a dick.

    Thumb up 0

  3. CM

    Do they? Not something I’ve noticed in my experience.
    If you’re going to public with that sort of thing (even ignoring linking it to menstration) then you need to have the stats to back it up. Later in the day he was asked if he could support that with any evidence and he looked down for about 10 seconds and then looked up and put up his hand and said ‘CUT!’.

    Thumb up 0

  4. richtaylor365 *

    Do they?

    Yeah, they do. When I worked for the state the guys always had a large bank of sick leave saved up while the women were always tapped out, we just accepted it.

    And it only makes sense those using more sick leave will be less productive, but even broaching this subject would be a minefield, he should have just kept his big mouth shut.

    Thumb up 0

  5. InsipiD

    In my office, a guy might call in sick for one day every once in a while (there are only two of us, and I’ve called in twice in 3 years). There’s one woman in my office, however, who never calls in for any less than 2 in a row. She’s called in for 4 days in a row twice that I can think of. It was the case at the last job I had, too. Frankly I’d be shocked if any study was ever able to show otherwise.

    Thumb up 0

  6. AlexInCT

    I was discussing this on a military web site and frankly I am going to give Obama a pass. The guyy hs never had a real job, and I am sure like most leftists he could give a rats ass about the idiots that join the military, if he doesn’t outright look down upon them, and that is why I didn’t bother to write about it. Most people serving know this guy has got their back like a serial killer/rapist does.

    Thumb up 0

  7. CM

    It’s “you’re” not “your”. How long would that have taken to learn? A 2 second search? Maybe when you reach 6th grade they’ll cover it.

    What I said is that it wasn’t obvious to me (“in my experience”). I never said it wasn’t true (otherwise I wouldn’t have said “If you’re going to public with that sort of thing (even ignoring linking it to menstration) then you need to have the stats to back it up”).

    Anyway, even if they do:
    (1) can it be linked directly to menstruation?
    (2) does it mean that women are less productive (say over a year)?
    (3) does this justify lower rates of pay?

    The answer to those would all have to be inarguably ‘YES’ before you go public. And you better be able to show how the answers are ‘YES’. Otherwise it seems you’re just interested in starting a different career.

    Thumb up 0

  8. CM

    Personally I find that when I have one day off in a week (either a stat or annual leave or sick leave) I’m usually almost as productive (chargeable time) for the week. It’s not something I do consciously. I assume it’s because I’m more motivated or relaxed. But that obviously might not be the same for everyone.

    Here we also have domestic leave, which is what you use when something else is sick (and you need to take care of them). E.g. kids. And women are usually the ones to do that.

    Thumb up 0

  9. CM

    Some say that the people taking single days are more likely not to be sick. If you’re not sick enough to go into work, are you really ok the next day?

    Thumb up 0

  10. CM

    The guyy hs never had a real job,

    Wasn’t he a community organiser? Isn’t that a job? Or does it not count because it’s not “real”? What defines a ‘real job’? Being a civil rights lawyer isn’t a real job either? Law school teacher isn’t a real job?
    I thought only lefties demeaned and devalued jobs?

    Thumb up 0

  11. richtaylor365 *

    (3) does this justify lower rates of pay?

    Did he say that, women should be paid less, anywhere in the article?

    Here is a couple of dirty little secrets the feminists groups do not want going public:

    1) Of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30, women earned an average of 8% more than their male counterparts.

    2) Full-time working women spend an average of 8.01 hours per day on the job, compared to 8.75 hours for full-time working men.

    3) Men have been hit harder by this recession because they tend to work in fields like construction, manufacturing and trucking, which are disproportionately affected by bad economic conditions. Women cluster in more insulated occupations, such as teaching, health care and service industries.

    4) Women gravitate toward jobs with fewer risks, more comfortable conditions, regular hours, more personal fulfillment and greater flexibility. Men, by contrast, often take on jobs that involve physical labor, outdoor work, overnight shifts and dangerous conditions, all for a better paycheck.

    The nonsense that a woman is paid less then a man, for the same job is just that, nonsense.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html?KEYWORDS=pay+gap+sexes

    Thumb up 0

  12. Miguelito

    You know, I used to be the type that would go into work unless I was really sick. Now that I’ve busted my ass at this job for 13+ years and can do 99% of my job from home anyway, I stay home and work from there when I’m feeling bad. It’s only a handful of days a year max anyway (far less then the average here I’d say) but if I know I’m gonna feel crappy, might as well do it where I can be comfortable vs stuck at a desk.

    I think one reason women tend to take more sick days (basing this on my own experiences with what they stay home for) is if kids are sick, the mom is far more likely to stay home with the sick kid then the dad is as well.

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    Did he say that, women should be paid less, anywhere in the article?

    Maybe it didn’t say it in that particular article, but yeah, he suggested women’s monthly periods were among reasons they were less productive and therefore paid less.

    Interesting findings. It’s a topic I’ve never research before.

    How about this:

    Women earned less than men in all 20 industries and 25 occupation groups surveyed by the Census Bureau in 2007 — even in fields in which their numbers are overwhelming. Female secretaries, for instance, earn just 83.4% as much as male ones. And those who pick male-dominated fields earn less than men too: female truck drivers, for instance, earn just 76.5% of the weekly pay of their male counterparts. Perhaps the most compelling — and potentially damning — data of all to suggest that gender has an influence comes from a 2008 study in which University of Chicago sociologist Kristen Schilt and NYU economist Matthew Wiswall examined the wage trajectories of people who underwent a sex change. Their results: even when controlling for factors like education, men who transitioned to women earned, on average, 32% less after the surgery. Women who became men, on the other hand, earned 1.5% more.

    ….matter how you interpret the numbers, there are a few stubborn percentage points that can’t be explained away. Economists and advocates alike speculate that these are the products of slippery factors like discrimination — conscious or not. A 2000 study, for instance, famously found that after symphony orchestras introduced blind auditions, requiring musicians to perform behind a screen, women became more likely to get the gig. “I think discrimination has declined,” says Cornell’s Blau. “But I’m not yet seeing or believing that it’s been completely eliminated.”

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html

    Thumb up 0

  14. richtaylor365 *

    We have domestic leave here as well but a lot of it depends on other factors, do you get a certain amount of sick days each year where if you do not use them, you lose them? Another factor, Where I worked at the end of a career you could cash in any unused sick days. Each year unused sick days would accrue so that at the end you could conceivable have 600, 700 hours or more that you could cash in. Guys would get a nice check for this, where most of the women would get nothing because they used all their sick days.

    Thumb up 0

  15. CM

    Yep, makes sense. More and more people can work at home. And as long as they get the job done, the employee only gains (no chance of others catching what you’ve got).

    Our kids will be at school soon so my wife will be back in work. Will be interesting to see what happens in terms of who takes the day off to look after sick kids. I imagine we’ll share it. But will it be evenly shared?

    Thumb up 0

  16. CM

    Here it’s law that 5 days sick leave is provided each year (no, they don’t roll over but employers are probably ok with taking more one year if you’ve taken less in others). Domestic leave is a perk, not mandatory. No less than 4 weeks annual leave is mandatory. And then we have about 10 statutory holidays.

    I’m a bit torn on that system of paying out for sick days. I’ve seen plenty of people coming to work sick because they’re being macho about it, and others ended up getting sick as a result. I also think people should be judging whether they’re too sick to come to work on the basis of their sickness, not whether they’ll lose money.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Kimpost

    We don’t really have a fixed number of sick days. Well, there’s an upper limit, but that’s 550 days. The first day pays nothing. Being sick for more than a week requires a doctors note. The first 365 days pays 80% of your pay, the rest (up to 550) pays 75%.

    The state pays for that, not the business. On top of that we have temporary parental leave for caring for sick children, and regular parental leave. Also state paid.

    Thumb up 0

  18. richtaylor365 *

    I think it’s sensible. It is not going to encourage those sick to suck it up and come to work, very few people factor in the payoff 20 years away to how they are feeling now, but it’s fair in that some people don’t get sick very often, and some do. I rarely took more then one or two sick days a year, some other guys (gals) would take 10-12 sick days a year. Once retirement comes around you look at your accrued sick leave and realize you have a couple months banked, it is human nature (such as it is) to not want to lose those days, if you could not cash them in then you are real tempted to catch something real nasty and be out of work for a long time.

    Thumb up 0

  19. InsipiD

    2 out of my 3 times were for food poisoning or the like. The other was a Friday where I’d been getting sick for a couple of days and I spent that day and the weekend down with a bad cold. At my office, sick days are use ‘em or lose ‘em, so I guess some people feel compelled to use every one they can. Most employees earn one per month, though a long-termer can get 1.5. That means that a veteran employee could, between sick and vacation days, be gone 36 work days per year-7 weeks of work without losing pay. That puts a crushing amount of extra work on the others sometimes. It’s really hard, too, when your department’s budget is tight and you’re trying to get all the work done with what you have and some of what you have is trying so hard not to be there. I didn’t even use all of my vacation days last year.

    Thumb up 0

  20. AlexInCT

    Wasn’t he a community organiser?

    That was meant as a joke right? Because that’s not a job. If anything it is a joke and why he has no clue what he is doing.

    Thumb up 0

  21. JimK

    “Oh please say more things and go down some side path so I can spend the next fourteen days nitpicking the living fuck out of every syllable, because quite frankly I think you’re all too stupid to see through my ‘Who, me, I don’t understand’ bullshit, so dance, monkey, dance.”

    FIFY.

    Thumb up 3

  22. AlexInCT

    No Harley, I meant what I said. If community organizing is a job, then on campus protesting instead of going to class is a job too. Seriously, there isn’t anything of value that comes from community organizing, no matter how noble those that say it is a big deal, make it out to be. Obama has ZERO real world experience. Period.

    Thumb up 0

  23. CM

    Alex gets to say anything he likes and if I ask basic questions (politely) about why, I’m automatically a dick?
    Huh? How does that work? Is Alex a personal friend?

    Thumb up 0

  24. CM

    Among other things Obama set up a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants’ rights organization. There’s nothing of value in that?

    Organising begins with the premise that (1) the problems facing inner-city communities do not result from a lack of effective solutions, but from a lack of power to implement these solutions; (2) that the only way for communities to build long-term power is by organising people and money around a common vision; and (3) that a viable organisation can only be achieved if a broadly based indigenous leadership – and not one or two charismatic leaders – can knit together the diverse interests of their local institutions.

    This means bringing together churches, block clubs, parent groups and any other institutions in a given community to pay dues, hire organizers, conduct research, develop leadership, hold rallies and education cam­paigns, and begin drawing up plans on a whole range of issues – jobs, education, crime, etc. Once such a vehicle is formed, it holds the power to make politicians, agencies and corporations more responsive to commu­nity needs. Equally important, it enables people to break their crippling isolation from each other, to reshape their mutual values and expectations and rediscover the possibilities of acting collaboratively – the prerequi­sites of any successful self-help initiative.

    By using this approach, the Developing Communities Project and other organizations in Chicago’s inner city have achieved some impressive results. Schools have been made more accountable; job training programs have been established; housing has been renovated and built; city services have been provided; parks have been refurbished; and crime and drug problems have been curtailed. Additionally, plain folk have been able to access the levers of power, and a sophisticated pool of local civic leadership has been developed.

    http://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/20081103_1.htm

    I would say working in that role for 3 years would provide someone with a very ‘real world experience’. I don’t know how an argument would be constructed to suggest the opposite.

    Thumb up 0

  25. InsipiD

    Not really. The president is my employee and it’s completely my prerogative to look at his resume critically. As far as I’m concerned, his only meaningful experience is in the Illinois and US senates, where he had unremarkable records. The rest of his work history is full of murky and ambiguous stuff that looks like he’s explicitly covering something. I’ve never been impressed, but then I didn’t vote to hire him.

    Thumb up 2

  26. InsipiD

    That’s absolutely hilarious. That sounds like the kind of resume pads that someone would do as a college summer intern and only list when trying to get their first real job.

    Thumb up 2

  27. CM

    Wow. And yet liberals are the ones who supposedly look down at what people do for a living.

    After short stints as a business journalist and as an advocate for a Harlem-based public interest research group, he conducted what he refers to as a “nationwide search” for community-based social action work with a liveable salary.

    He found it in Chicago. He became the director and sole paid employee of the Developing Communities Project, a church-based advocacy organization for low- and middle-income blacks. His annual salary was $13,000. By the time he left, the organization had 13 employees and a solid record of accomplishments, from the removal of asbestos in public housing units to education counseling for disadvantaged youths.

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/1990/02/15/a_law_review_breakthrough/?page=2

    Thumb up 0

  28. CM

    Of course it’s your right to assess his resume according to your own standards. I’m not saying that you’re not entitled to your opinion. Of course you are.

    But it IS absolutely elitism to say that someone doing that sort of work isn’t doing anything “meaningful” or that it doesn’t constitute a “real job”. Total elitism. I imagine it had significant meaning to many people, particularly as it sounds like he did it very successfully.

    Thumb up 0

  29. AlexInCT

    But it IS absolutely elitism to say that someone doing that sort of work isn’t doing anything “meaningful” or that it doesn’t constitute a “real job”.

    Sorry CM, but that is bullshit. The left is why we have to pretend that people that do nothing of value don’t do just that, for fear of exactly what you just did: infer we are elitists for expecting people that to actually do work to produce something of value. A garbage collector does work that produces value to me. Community organizing is a useless thing, and doubly so when you are organizing those people for is to embrace the belief they are owed other people’s wealth. See the difference?

    And I stand by my comment that Obama’s first real job has been the presidency, and we can all see how well he has been doing at that. These last 3 years have been amatuer hour on steroids. BTW, I think a garbage collector could do a better job at running the country than the community organizer is doing right now.

    Thumb up 1

  30. CM

    Ah I see, the test is whether it’s of value to YOU personally. Well I guess that clarifies things (even if you still haven’t managed to define what ‘produce’ actually means).

    No, I’m afraid I see significant value in the removal of asbestos in public housing units, education counseling for disadvantaged youths, job training programs, housing being renovated and built, and provision of city services, refurbished parks, and specific action to curtail crime and drug problems in a specific area. I think any reasonable person would see value in a job which involved those things.

    It’s a fantasy to say that this is his first ‘real’ job (even if you want to dismiss his role as director and sole paid employee of the church-based advocacy organization). A fantasy born of elitism.

    Thumb up 0