I have to admit something to you all: Michael has been kind enough to play along with a little set up of mine.

Few libs would be dumb enough to come here and repeatedly draw attention to the fact that Reagan was such a better speaker, from the heart, than the teleprompter president. I didn’t even hint at a comparison in this post but Michael was kind enough to come here and play along by bringing up the subject…. REPEATEDLY.

Thanks Michael. I couldn’t have done it without you!

Instead we have this:

Hell, look at any Bush press conference in which he is answering the questions from the press and you can see Bush is better at thinking on his feet then the robot known as Obama.

Find something else to whine and nit pick about. You’re starting to bore me.

I guess the lying lefty loon has never seen my ever so popular video:

It would seem that the lying lefty loon has already granted that you have complained about the fact that Obama reads his speeches. The lying lefty loon believes that, if you think that this video is an anwer to the questions of “Why is it bad when one person does it and good when another one does, and what is the essential difference behind the distinction you make?” you are an idiot. He also believes that your unwillingness to address these questions, saying only “Go back and review them if you want my opinion,” makes you an intellectual coward.

As mentioned above, the lying lefty loon sees your video as yet another attack on Obama’s speech-readin’ ways without saying what distinguishes them from Reagan’s speech-readin’ ways.

I’ve read the entirety of your blog output for the past couple of years

Michael,

It’s not Obama’s use of the TelePromTer that we worthy of criticism.

It’s his complete and total inability to string together three sentences without it.

He cannot even introduce Cabinet or Court appointees without it.

He cannot conduct press conferences without it.

Obama, without his TelePromTer is like a child without its’ binky.

He’s lost.

That’s what we find worthy of ridicule.

It’s good to know that we’ve gotten into your kitchen.

And you want to call ME a liar?

Idiot!

I have already posted on this subject multiple times.

I’ve read the entirety of your blog output for the past couple of years, and you have never once explained why Obama’s reading his speeches is an indicator of his badness, while Reagan’s reading of his speeches is an indicator of his goodness.

You have, indeed, frequently attacked Obama for the fact that he reads his speeches, but you have never gone beyond that. I’ve challenged you to explain why it’s bad when one person does it and good when another one does. What is the essential difference behind the distinction you make? That you have never done, and to assert that you have is a simple lie.

Frankly, it’s pretty clear you don’t want my opinion and are just looking for another opportunity to spill your bile.

Your comment is absurd.

Really? Then please explain the essential difference between delivering a prewritten speech, as President Obama does, and, on the other hand, delivering a prewritten speech, as President Reagan did.

First of all Michael, I *am* one of those people who detest listening to liberal progressives portray our troops as “children” and “victims” that were somehow forced into military servitude. They make their own decision as young adults, and their training advances their maturity far more than civilian lifestyles. To demean them as kids too stupid to make a choice for their own future is nothing less than insulting degradation.

Secondly, Reagan did not “infantilized” our troops. Obviously you suffer from a reading disorder. Parse words s-l-o-w-l-y and figure it out. “…hardy *hardly* more than….” means they are no longer boys, but not by much. As I pointed out above, the maturity of those in the military is superior to their civilian peers because of the discipline and responsibility attached to the gig.

But then, it’s obvious you’ve never served, nor are likely to volunteer. No problem. Those “infants” you feel are immature victims will protect your sorry butt, too.

You are unable to back up anything you say. Your comments typically show more bile than brains and as such, your remarks don’t deserve my full consideration.

I have attacked Obama for being addicted to a teleprompter, NOT for speaking from prepared remarks.

A distinction without any difference at all.

Also: please point to where I have trashed the troops.