Longoria’s Obama Endorsement
Hopes to Capture Doofus Vote

By Jim Berlin

In a presidential election, celebrity endorsements – specifically TV and movie stars — are solicited by both candidates for a simple reason: the vote of a doofus counts exactly the same as that of a genius.

If you’ve always wondered if you are a doofus but were afraid to ask, here’s a test: (l) I am going to vote for Mitt Romney because Clint Eastwood recommends him, or (2) I am voting for Barack Obama because that foxy Eva Longoria says it’s the right thing to do.

If you answered yes to either question you are a doofus. Or, if you prefer, a dimwit.

Now, Clint Eastwood is a terrific actor and director and Eva Longoria is a terrific fox, but their opinions on subjects outside their profession are no more informed than yours or mine. They are not privy to special insider information available only to the entertainment industry. They do not know anything that we do not know.

They are simply famous. Which, as the ancient Romans used to say, doesn’t mean squatus.

Oddly enough many celebrities would disagree. Because they are accustomed to being idolized and rarely criticized by the doofus masses, they begin to view their

google images

opinions on virtually everything as suitable for bronzing. I suspect Eva Longoria pictures herself as one smart cookie. In her defense, she is a terrific fox.

But most movie and television stars become stars by acting, i.e., reading words written by other people. Smart other people.

The doofus is incapable of drawing a distinction; if Eva is speaking, the words must be her own. Therefore she is smart. Therefore I will vote as she suggests.

Don’t be a doofus. But then, if you are a doofus, you won’t know it until it’s too late.

What If Obama Has a Fire
Bigger Than Romney’s Pants?

By Jim Berlin

The desperate spin concocted by Democrats to explain Obama’s debate debacle is that Romney lied. Repeatedly. About everything.

That devious Mitt, they say, unleashed such an overwhelming tsunami of dishonesty that Barack was shaken to his moral and intellectual core…thus reducing the poor devil to the equivalent of a nervous little girl in a tutu at her first dance recital.

Mitt Romney – Mormon bishop turned school yard bully. Barack Obama – U.S. President robbed of his lunch money. What’s wrong with this picture besides everything?

Whether or not the challenger’s pants were on fire, or even warm to the touch, should be less disturbing to Americans than this agreed-upon explanation for Obama’s meltdown: If our President can be thrown so easily off his game, if he is incapable of responding rationally when an opponent forcefully goes off script, the nation is in more trouble than we imagined.

Why so? What happens in Colorado doesn’t stay in Colorado. Be assured that our enemies around the world – and our friends, too – took note of Obama’s inability to stand strong and successfully counterattack when confronted by the unexpected.

If that’s disturbing let me drop the other shoe.

getty images

When the Mitt’s-a-liar spin was put together after the debate, he’s Barack Obama and he approved this message. Obviously he saw no downside in adopting the excuse that he was rendered helpless by a surprise turn of events. Here’s the problem with that:

During presidential campaigns the question always arises about how, if elected, the man would react if he got that dreaded phone call at three in the morning…the one where the world has hit the fan and the right decision is demanded right now.

The Colorado debate was in wide-awake prime time.

GM Alive–Bin Laden Dead:
Catchy But Not Convincing

By Jim Berlin

Democrats are countering “Are you better off now than four years ago?” with the line, “GM is alive and bin Laden is dead.”

This is the Dems’ last line of defense and it might resonate with young Americans who get bored reading anything longer than text messages or bumper stickers. It could even score points with addled Baby Boomers who thought the Dick and Jane books of their childhood were too confusing: “See Spot run! See Puff play!”…My God, what does it all mean?

Assuming you are smarter than that and have no wish to be manipulated by catchy campaign slogans, here’s what’s wrong with the GM-bin Laden slogan:

GM almost died because for decades it grossly overpaid its workers for producing a pretty but undependable line of cars and trucks that began rusting away two years after rolling off the assembly line. The formula worked because Detroit was the only game in town.

And suddenly it wasn’t. The Japanese and later the South Koreans began offering better vehicles for less money – vehicles that kept on trucking, roaring right past all those GM products broken down at the side of the road. Millions of Americans not living in Michigan did the only logical thing: They chose value over blind loyalty to GM.

GM almost died because it made itself sick. It recovered more quickly because its sins were washed away by billions of dollars from taxpayers without their consent.

But it would be alive today even if it had declared bankruptcy – as millions of still-

google images

surviving individuals and corporations have done – long before it did. It would still be leaner and meaner today and doing things right.

Osama bin Laden dead? All Obama did was allow the intelligence community to continue its pursuit of him over the years. What President would not?

And when it knew with high certainty where he was, Obama allowed the SEALs to go in and kill him. Again, what President would not? There was zero political risk: Failure would have been forgiven.

What would not have been forgiven by Americans was if word had gotten out – and it would have – that Obama had a chance to kill bin Laden but refused to try.

GM is alive and bin Laden is dead. They’re going to need another slogan.