President Obama, during Thursday’s (May 27, 2010) press conference, said that every morning when he’s shaving, his daughter comes in and asks, “Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?” It is reported that Glenn Beck hit a new low by mocking this asserted inquiry of Malia, President Obama’s daughter. I disagree. Here are my thoughts as to why I do not think Glenn Beck was mocking Malia Obama:

1. I do not believe the question was asked by Malia Obama. In order for her to ask the question, President Obama would have to be posing the problem of the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico as his responsibility. He would have to have been telling his daughter, literally and only, “I have to plug a hole.” It is inconsistent with President Obama to ever leave any doubt laying around that something might be his fault. He would have tagged his mission to “plug the hole” with some blame gaming.

2. It is inconsistent with President Obama to take responsibility for anything without first blaming somebody else. If you have to bet on the “somebody else,” put your money on George Bush. So, if acting in character, and if actually consulting with his daughter Malia, he would have said, something akin to “I have to plug the hole George Bush caused,” or “I have to plug the hole the Oil industry caused.” Thus, his daughter would have asked, “Did you plug the hole George Bush caused, Daddy?” Or maybe, “Did you plug the hole the oil industry caused, Daddy?” Or “Did you plug the hole Republicans caused, Daddy?” Or even, “Did you plug the hole that unregulated free enterprise caused, Daddy?” Now if these were the question his daughter asked, I’d believe the story.

3. Consistent with President Obama’s inability to accept responsibility on steps one and two of crisis management (Step one: What happened and who is at fault? Step two: What is the solution and who’s going to be responsible for the solution?) and President Obama’s narcissistic inability not to take credit for the third step, the actual solution, there is no way he would allow his daughter to surmise that if he didn’t “plug the hole,” it would be his fault. Nothing is his fault according to him. I’ve wracked my brain and I can’t come up with a single example of him taking the blame for anything. On the other hand, and in the opposite, he does have an inclination to take credit for most everything, regardless of two important points of consideration. POINT 1. Did he actually do anything allowing him to take credit? POINT 2. Is there anything for which he can take credit? As an example, see the economy. Notwithstanding the Stimulus Package’s failure to keep unemployment at 8%, President Obama is taking credit for an improved economy that is not improved.

4. Even if his daughter did ask such a question, and if President Obama told the entire story of the routine morning dialogue with Malia, he would have told us of his response, which if the story is to be believed, would have been, “What hole are you referring to Malia?”

Because, and this is a transitional paragraph, President Obama has a lot of holes to plug. He has the economy hole which is going down the drain due primarily to the tangible fear of business of Obama’s policies. He has the national debt hole. It is almost literally off the charts. He has the foreign policy hole. His apology tour didn’t work. North and South Korea are no longer hugging. Iran is going nuclear. Israel is miffed at us. He has the war hole. No end in sight. He has the immigration hole. Huge numbers of illegals are leaking in. And he has the Joe Sestak hole, the primary point of my commentary today. Here goes:

Here’s the news: Former President Bill Clinton was tasked by White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to make an approach to Rep. Joe Sestak — allegedly offering him an unpaid advisory role on an intelligence board in exchange for getting him to drop his primary bid against Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.). Rep. Joe Sestak says he declined the offer. This stinks of tripe in so many ways. No way. Here’s why it is nothing more than a cheap charade.

QUESTION NUMBER ONE: Who would go to a candidate in a senatorial race and offer him an unpaid job in exchange for pulling out of a race?

ANSWER NUMBER ONE: Nobody.

QUESTION NUMBER TWO: Why would Joe Sestak state that he was offered a “job” when, if you believe the White House, it was an unpaid position?

ANSWER NUMBER TWO: He wouldn’t.

QUESTION NUMBER THREE: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why wouldn’t Joe Sestak reveal its details?

ANSWER NUMBER THREE: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?

QUESTION NUMBER FOUR: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why wouldn’t the White House reveal the details?

ANSWER NUMBER FOUR: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?

QUESTION NUMBER FIVE: If it was so innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why did the White House employ Bill Clinton as a go between to make the offer?

ANSWER NUMBER FIVE: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?

QUESTION NUMBER SIX: Given the merits of the alleged proposal, give up your costly senate race and the White House will give you an unpaid position, would Bill Clinton actually go to Joe Sestak and make such a proposal?

ANSWER NUMBER SIX: No way. He would have laughed in their face and said, (think Bill Clinton’s voice after he laughs) “No way in hell he’s going to take that deal! What if we offered him women?” (The second sentence in Bill Clinton’s predicted response is a joke.)

QUESTION NUMBER SEVEN: If it was so legal, innocent (and worthless) a proposal, why did the White House and Joe Sestak employ so much delay in their response to repeated inquiries of the media?

ANSWER NUMBER SEVEN: Because it wasn’t so legal, innocent and worthless a proposal?

Come on folks. These guys are lying. If a five year old answered a poignant and imperative question with so much delay, distraction, ambiguity, and illogical response, you would never believe the child. You would know that something was amiss. And there is something amiss. The White House and President Obama are lying to us. This truth is right there in their false, taunting, demeaning, insulting, arrogant and audacious words and actions. They are betting on Americans being stupid. A bad bet Mr. President, a real bad bet.

Here’s a recap. President Obama is lying about his morning father-daughter dialogue, just like he is lying about “nothing improper occurring” with Joe Sestak and just like he is lying about not knowing the circumstances of the director of the U.S. Minerals Management Service, Elizabeth Birnhaum’s departure, (he had to know or he has to be inept, pick).

It was not Malia Obama that Glenn Beck mocked, it was President Obama. I believe he brought this on himself when he exploited his daughter for political gain and to massage his disturbing and troublesome ego. I also believe it was low brow to use his daughter in the way he did.

That’s my Reetzality for the Day.

Thanks for the read.

Brett Reetz

Note One: It has been learned that the “Top Kill” attempt to “plug the hole” was stopped and was in a holding strategy well prior to the press conference. Thus, and equally nefarious, President Obama could have been aware of this and, metaphorically, bet on a horse that had already won the race when he held his press conference. Another way put, he could have been demonstrating faux bravado and faux responsibility for the task of “plugging the hole” that had already been plugged by somebody else.

Note Two: I once used reference to my daughter in a closing argument. I was remanded by the District Attorney and the Judge. They were right and my reference to my daughter to make a point was improper in all respects.

Note Three: I looked up the definition of the word “mock.” By definition, if Glenn Beck was imitating Malia, regardless of whether the morning father-daughter conversation occurred, then he was “literally” mocking her. However, his obvious intent was to mock her father. I’m sure Mr. Beck feels bad about this. President Obama should feel worse.