BLOOM (screaming): “Have you lost your mind? What are you talking about? Kill the actors. You can’t kill the actors — they’re not animals, they’re human beings!”
BIALYSTOCK: “They are? Have you ever eaten with one?”
– The Producers
The most common question — or remark — that I get from readers is to say that I’m wrong to talk about how Western policymakers (and especially the Obama administration) are ignorant, ideologically deluded, and unable to learn from experience. They claim that these problems arise from a deliberate malevolent effort to destroy America.
It tells something about how bad a lot of the administration’s policies are that such a conclusion is possible. Nevertheless, it’s not correct.
With academia, mass media, most of the publishing industry, and Hollywood on their side, how would these policymakers know any better? Their professors told them they were brilliant; the books they read all tell them they’re right. Nobody corrects or criticizes them except those who they can rationalize are opponents — and evil people, too! — and thus these are partisan carpings to be disregarded.
If the critics can be described as conservatives, their views are discounted. If you are proven to be correct, that seems to have no effect on the powerful institutions and elite opinions.
In fact, the very fact of being a critic is used to disqualify criticism. When I wrote a detailed critique of Obama’s policies in a prestigious policy journal, the prestigious authors responded that what I said should be discounted — and my specific arguments need not be persuasively countered — because…I was critical of Obama’s policies!
I cannot imagine any other time in modern Western intellectual history when this kind of thing has happened.
So the usual corrective institutions aren’t functioning. If no one tells the emperor and his courtiers that they are under-dressed, such people are going to keep peeling off clothes confident of the fact that nobody (or at least anyone who counts) will tell them that they are naked. With so much insulation, they don’t feel the chill.
Those certain that Obama and his government — and I only speak of foreign policy here — must be acting deliberately out of malice generally have one thing in common: they have never actually dealt with high-level politicians and decisionmakers.
Believe me, ignorance, arrogance, stupidity, a smug arrogance that closes one off to learning from advice or experience, and ideological blinders are not so unique in those circles. I’ve seen this pattern over and over again, both as a historian and from direct observation.
And those readers who have had such first-hand experience are no doubt nodding their heads at this point and thinking of their funniest anecdotes that demonstrate this point.
What’s unique is the almost totality with which various enablers keep up this pretense, making the situation far more extreme than usual. Presidents like Bill Clinton and George W. Bush no doubt believed in their positions. But having to confront daily a firestorm of ridicule and criticism forced them to question themselves constantly, to make adjustments, and even to change policies that clearly were either not working or were too unpopular.
That’s the way the system is supposed to function.
What is different now are the following points:
The points about no criticism are all true enough. They live in a bubble world. Yet you miss what I think is the key.
Granting your argument that it’s about ideology, you are missing that their ideology is specifically anti-American. It is an ideology that by design wants to weaken if not destroy America. So when they are acting in line with it, they are not just being well-meaning dupes.
You could further parse this that some of them are too ignorant to realize they are being used (useful idiots), but many know quite well what they are about. The late great James Burnham put it best:
The difference between a Liberal and a Communist is that the Communist knows what he’s doing.
The question about Mr. Obama is then simple: Liberal or Communist?
I would put it slightly different. Obama is trying to set up a dictatorship of the bureaucrat, like they have in Europe. This allows the a self-anointed elite have to a type of near absolute control while maintaining the fiction of liberty.
I will write that again, the goal of the American leftist is to set up a DICTATORSHIP OF THE BUREAUCRAT.
Bob From Virginia you have hit the nail on the head. The left views people as problems that need to be administered just as livestock need to be administered. People as problems is precisely the theme of the Green religion that has swept through the major institutions of the left, including public education, universities, the MSM, and the bureaucracy. They would like to minimize the costs of these problems by stacking them in small high-density apartments, eliminating independent mobility via automobiles, while providing them with minimal levels of healthcare, caloric intake, and heat. There is of course a group that protests the confined and stultifying life envisoned by bureaucrats, but the group is PETA and the individuals concerned are chickens.
This is quite an insight.
Communists talked about the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ but esatblished the ‘dictatorship of the bureaucrat.’ In the end both Communists and the modern left view public opinion as inconsequential, something to wire around, not as an expression of sovereignty. But there is something that sets the modern left apart from the Communists: Whereas Communism held that at the end of the day, a planned economy was a better route to a wider prosperity than capitalism, the modern left discards the idea of prosperity itself. Prosperity, as created by economic growth, is planet-killing and unfair in and of itself.
“How would they know any better?” Let me tell you how.
Their consciences would tell them that butchering baies by the millions is wrong. No sane person believes to the contrary. Therie perusal of scripture would tell them that homosexual conduct is abominable; vicious and nasty and destructive to the soul. Common sense would tell them that weakening our defenses and strengthening our enemies is selfdestructive. Adam Smith et sim would convince them that keynesian economics is silly; as would reflection on their own economic experiences.
NO! These moslem monsters are ruining the USA deliberately; to take us over and enslave or kill us.
Why should any action by holders of any appointed office be judged as voluntarily induced, invoked, or commanded when the results are historically detrimental to the nation’s survival and contributory to its collapse? Did they not all swear the same oath of office? What more would you deem necessary for more conspiratorial success than that good men do nothing? .
Successful conspiracies consist of many concentric circles of policy encouragement using only minimal management overlap with only the identities of tentacles from the outermost loop revealed in media coverage while ignoring more circles only a skip away.
Does media omission reveal journalistic negligence or is it merely another subtle circle subverted to influence public opinion and security of a conspiracy? Party affiliations and names reported on biased TV news is scarcely evidence for either acquittal or conviction when designed for maximum audience attraction to captive victims for ad parasites but repeating action patterns of either can only be ignored at risk of missing the boat.
Don’t kid yourself; they ALL know what they’re doing. Socialism is just a slow-motion slide toward totalitarianism. Those who promote it do so because THEY think they’ll be in a position to take over the reins of power. Generally, they are wrong, because the revolution always devours its children – though never soon enough.
When are you going to publish collections of your essays? Your insights should be required reading for every American. It’s frustrating to think that you are not a national security adviser or at the very least a widely recognized commentator.
I guess you scare too many people, you could cost a lot of pundits their jobs.
Wher shall we mail your sponge and knee pads?
Totally agree with Bob from Virginia. Your insights are quite apt to our situation. It does seem that we are dealing with the emperor and courtiers. Obama’s smugness, his lack of humility and arrogance in the face of such critical issues is mind blowing. But the inability to criticize his failures is discouraging and frightening. When he just wheels out Whoopi or Oprah and call everyone a racist makes me angry. But what makes me angrier are these brain dead people who keep swallowing this hogwash.
Is a bear Catholic?…does the Pope $h!t in the woods?…naw,wait a minute…that doesn’t sound exactly right somehow
Academia is in deep trouble. They have insisted for many years that you must be educated in their institutions with a degree and transcript to be proven smart with above average intelligence. (Our president has neither according to public records) Now comes the big commercial diploma mills and academia’s situation is getting worse.
As you write America is politically at the confluence of ideology and ignorance.
I guess the saying now that “Common sense is very valuable because there is so little of it” is making more sense than ever. I believe in the common sense of the average American.
The scary part, I think, is that didn’t the “average American” elect our most dangerous current president? It’s scary to me that if the average American can be duped and snookered like this, what’s in store for us in future elections?
Now,I guess that I want to be told that no, the average American did not elect this Obama…….then…good grief….who did?
And whats more Charlie. Obama’s Vault BC was released April 2011 Obama’s fake COLB was released 2008. So ask yourself or rather ask the Moonbats this question what BC did Obama present to the Democratic Party vetting committee prior to his nomination as candidate. What BC did he use to obtain his Driving License, Illinois Bar registration, College Registrations and all those other things that a bureaucracy demands you provide your ORIGINAL copy of your BC for. For example I have just applied for my UK pension and have had to send my original BC to do so.
So who was responsible for vetting Obambi and what documents did they physically see because it can’t have been his Vault BC or his phony baloney COLB can it.
INVESTIGATE THE DEMOCRATIC SELECTION COMMITTEE NOW.
Barry, your analysis of the Middle East is always on target, but when it comes to this issue I beg to differ.
While it is patently true that leftist group-think is driving their policies-foreign AND domestic-their main focus is much more sinister than ideological blindness gone amok. It is also impossible to separate the PURPOSEFUL de-construction of the US capitalist economy, with their foreign policy initiatives and the attendant negative outcomes.It is NO accident.
A purposeful weakening of the economy directly impacts US muscle on the world stage.As a matter of fact, without such weakening it makes it impossible for foreign powers to ignore US ‘recommendations’.
Moreover, those who crave socialist/Marxist outcomes to transform the US economic system, are precisely those who crave (for example)Islamist Muslim Brotherhood outcomes in Egypt and elsewhere.This is the case despite the fact that Islamists ultimately will destroy their socialist/Marxist collaborators.
Further, what are the chances that simply ideological blinders/ignorance/group think is responsible for Obama deposing Mubarak(GO NOW!!),while boldly stating(via their media surrogates/think tanks) that the Brothers are not dangerous Islamists, insisting that the MB have NO interest in taking over Egypt?Such a conclusion would mean that EVERY Obama mouthpiece is seriously deluded, incapable of reading what is in front of their nose, while many average citizens are able to connect the dots?Please…..
While it is flattering to believe that folks such as myself are more perceptive than the ‘smarties’, it is hardly true.What IS true is that US patriots look at events through the prism of American interests and have a basic understanding of history.On the other hand, Obama and his cadre view events through an anti-American prism, hence, both domestically and foreign policy-wise they ALWAYS place US interests in peril.
Adina
excellent post.
I think the essay is great. Thank you Barry. …what you write is for the most part a largely correct from a limited point of view. I agree that the mind set is as you state and the the president gets a pass from the cheer leading media.
AND THAT THEY ARE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN …sorry Barry this is where I too differ
I agree with Adina that the obama administration is destroying the economic system on purpose …willful treason.
I don’t think anyone can name a beneficial program that has come out of the obama administration. NOT ONE. even the deadbeat freeloaders socialist redistribution folks will see diminishing returns.
Right on the button, Adina.
The ideology defense, like the abuse excuse, is all wet. In a free country (I can hear snickering already) free will and choice, personality, and temperament determine the acceptance of an ideology. Certain conditioned reflexes do come into play on thought and action the deeper and further one gets into it, but in the long run, ideology doesn’t possess a person, it’s the other way around all the way.
Barry O, Hillary, etc., are not ignorant, or stupid, or brain dead, They’re very well informed, and very clever, they know what they’re thinking, saying, and doing, are consummate liars, experts in gobbledygook and double-talk, and indeed they are doing the best they can, with great success so far, to ruin our country.
It’s time to face the sad and sordid fact that Jeremiah Wright’s hate-filled “God Damn America” is a mindset and sentiment far more widely shared and deeply felt than we could ever have imagined.
P.S. Obama & Co.’s foreign policy has Israel fixed in its sights also. In response to Roger’s post in Friday’s Tatler , I pointed out that Israel’s security concerns were not “irresponsibly” disregarded by Obama and Hillary Clinton, they were deliberately and maliciously disregarded. They know very well that the U.S.-armed and U.S.-trained PA forces in the so-called West Bank will turn their guns on Israel. I can imagine Barry and Hillary, along with Samantha Power, Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, and Rashid Khalidi dancing with joy, as Pete Singer sings, and William Ayers tramples upon both the American and Israeli flags, in a celebration party, once the shooting starts.
The only thing I disagree with in this excellent article is the conclusion. It’s illogical. Just because there is an explation x for a phenomenon, that doesn’t preclude explanation y.
Mr. Rubin may fervently believe the cabal is just an unchecked version of mainstream liberalism, but that does not preclude the explanation that they are a far more virulent strain than has yet appeared, even if that strain has existed in academia for decades. The more virulent strain explanation is more compelling, and better supported by little lenin’s history, which is marinatied in marxism and other forms of extremism.
If obama was a run of the mill liberal politician, than Mr Rubin’s thesis would make more sense. But obama isn’t a run of the mill politician, by a long shot. If Mr Rubin is unfamiliar with his roots, then he should investigate them beyond the lies the man told in the biographies that he had written. And even if you accept Dreams at face value, it is clear that obama is an extreme outlier for national politicians. In addition, we now have the abundant evidence of his appointments, which no mainstream American can deny are extreme. And then there is the obvious refusal to ackownledge the rule of law and his policy positions, which are a combination of socialism, marxism and one-worldism.
Unchecked liberalism and / or incompetance does not explain this crew. In their minds, they might not be deliberately trying to “destroy” America but they are certainly trying to change it in a way that is vastly different from the history and traditions of the country.
Fair enough, but a notable gentlemen from Ockham put it this way: if x is less elaborate than y, then (all other things being equal) x should be PREFERRED over y, whether or not the former actually precludes the latter.
There is nothing about the current President’s life or policies that doesn’t jibe perfectly well with a certain sort of hothouse leftist environment, and with a certain mixture of ordinary (if lamentable) human personality traits. We can achieve perfectly coherent accounts of the man’s motivations and mental processes without waxing conspiratorial, and without stretching the facts. Ergo, it’s more reasonable to do so. Q.E.D.
The point of discussion isn’t hothouse conspiracy theories, it’s whether or not they are deliberately attempting to “destroy” the US. The word “destroy”. of course, is loaded (and I happen to believe it) but if you replace “destroy” with “transform” or another less loaded word, than the issue is more clear.
There really is no question whatsoever that they are trying to make fundamental changes to the country. Little lenin said it himself. He didn’t describe what he meant, but now we know. “FundamentaL” means “in ways I can’t openly describe because you wouldn’t vote for me if I made them crystal clear”.
His fundamental change is, to an already large and rapidly growing number of people, “destroying” the country.
But I don’t expect politicians to say so openly. This isn’t the only thing they can’t say out loud either.
Mr. Rubin doesn’t have to limit himself since he isn’t an elected official. I doubt if even he believes exactly what he wrote. I would bet money that he also thinks the “fundamental change” we are experiencing isn’t some minor tinkering at the edges of liberalism and conservatism.
its funny, he has told us before exactly what his plans are and nobody believes him.
fundamentally transform America.
you don’t do that by accident, but the “thinkers” among us are so wrapped up in themselves they cannot see the bare truth laid out to them.
fundamentally transform America.
energy costs must rise.
we must stop using oil.
what the hell, seems simple to me.
LaCracquere wrote, “a certain mixture of ordinary (if lamentable) human personality traits”
There is nothing ordinary about Mr. Obama’s personality traits. If they were ordinary, then the world would be far more like hell than it already is. Mr. Obama is a clinical psychopath. Such a diagnosis scares people to death, so they avoid the word. It also makes Americans look like idiots to have elected someone who has no interest in the entire concept of truth. People have called him narcissistic, but that is again off the mark. He fits the category of “psychopath” far better. Kindly see Cleckley’s “The Mask of Sanity” or the work of Robert Hare, “Without Conscience.”
Barry Rubin is wrong, not because his observations are incorrect, but because he has not considered the research on psychopathy, since it is not his field of interest. However, I will just mention that ‘politics’ is a field that draws psychopaths to it. Therefore, politicians are more likely to commit acts without reference to how they affect other people than a random sample of the general population. Moreover, like every other personality trait, one is more or less a psychopath depending upon behavior and ideation patterns. There reaches a point where most clinicians become comfortable with such designations. In this case, psychiatrists of repute have avoided making the obvious diagnosis because of the earthshaking implications of having someone so afflicted holding the highest office in the land.
I think you mean sociopath rather than psychopath, Jerry. Sociopathy and psychopathy are two sides of the same coin but are distinct disorders from a clinical perspective. Cleckley wrote “The Mask of Sanity” back in 1941 when the term ‘psychopath’ was the only one in use and no distinctions had yet been made. In a nutshell psychopathy is tied to genetics, while sociopathy is environmentally caused (with potential genetic predisposition) with elements such as chaotic childhoods and so forth as factors. A true psychopath is incapable of forming any emotional ties to others at all, whereas a sociopath does form select emotional attachments. A sociopath also has a more “normal temperament,” is less organized in his or her demeanor –he or she might be nervous, show agitation, or be quick to display anger whereas a psychopath has amazingly good emotional and physical control, displaying little to no emotional or autonomic arousal, even under situations that most would find threatening or horrifying.
Yaeli,
You made my point for me. Mr. Obama is well controlled, but so easily expresses thoughts that reveal his lack of conscience. I recall vividly his comment after being confronted in an TV interview with the stealing of the Nevada State primary from Hilary Clinton by barring her followers from the voting floor. “It was a difficult primary!” was his response. Furthermore, his ability to change his stated position without needing to justify the change is another clear psychopathic feature. For example, people laugh at his stern defense of “transparent” government and then his closed door deals on TARP and the medical bill. No need to explain the change!
Robert Hare is of the opinion that ‘psychopathy’ deserves its own place in the psychiatric nosology. He has demonstrated its presence as a separate factor in the criminal population. From your statement, it would seem that you disagree in the beginning and finally agree in the end with that position.
One Simple Queston.
Let us suppose, for just a moment, that the Obama Administration does want to destroy America, he does want to bring all of the traditional institutions down, and he does want to remove America as a Leading Power in the world.
What Actions would he do differently?
Precisely, and if you hadn’t already asked the question, I would’ve.
Drive up oil prices? Check.
Government takeover of health care? Check.
Take over major corporations? Check.
Funnel massive amounts of money to cronies and allies? Check.
Piss off our allies and suck up to our enemies (and do a bad job of that)? Check.
So, what exactly would Obama be doing differently if he WERE trying to damage America than what he’s doning already?
you can add one of the main tools
…spend so much money that it will become an un-surmountable yoke on the citizens.
the debt will prevent the USA from maintaining a viable military ..progressive hate the military. it makes people strong and disciplined. it provides good training in trades and allows poor to escape the poverty cycle ..there are many more aspects of the military that are very positive ..unless you are a progressive.
Add one more:
Allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military.
“The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.”
Lenin
As usual, John David is right on!
And the answer to this rhetorical question is, “Nothing.”
Most do not see this evil intention because, if they saw it, they would be constrained to do something about it. And they lack the courage to act, so they pretend they cannot see. This is the Ostrich Principle, implemented. Question: What does one expose when one buries his head in the sand ?
“…if, to one who governs himself with caution and patience, times and affairs converge in such a way that his administration is successful, his fortune is made; but if times and affairs change, he is ruined if he does not change his course of action. But a man is not often found sufficiently circumspect to know how to accommodate himself to the change, both because he cannot deviate from what nature inclines him to do, and also because, having always prospered by acting in one way, he cannot be persuaded that it is well to leave it; and, therefore, the cautious man, when it is time to turn adventurous, does not know how to do it, hence he is ruined; but had he changed his conduct with the times fortune would not have changed.”
- The Prince
Let me concede at the outset, Barry…at how preposterous it must sound to suggest that one’s own President and his closest inner circle are trying to work against the best interests of the country intentionally, rather than believing that their idiotic and destructive policies actually are in the best interests of this land of ours.
I’m also quite sure that every malevolent idiot king, emperor, despot, dictator in history had people making the same argument on their behalf.
I would like to ask this question. If Bill Ayers was somehow elected President or George Soros, would we say the same thing? How about Jeremiah Wright? Louis Farrakhan?
What is the tipping point that allows us to begin to believe that the antipathy…and sometimes outright hostility that has been shown for Middle America, our free market system, our Constitution, our allies, …supercedes the mens rea defense that tearing apart this land of ours is “not intentional”?
The far, fringe left call themselves “do-gooders”, so WE must bow to their notion of what is “good” and what is “bad”?
And, we must allow for every hoax, every fraud, every deceit, every sham, every distortion…as merely innocent suspension of belief in truth and reality?
Or can leftism cross the line and actually become an intentional destruction of a system that WE believe in…through means which cannot allow for “apologism” and cover…under an umbrella of innocence that is not deserved?
Are David Horowitz’ “Shadow Party” or Stanley Kurtz’ “Radical-in-Chief” merely the ramblings of bumbling fools, jesters with no experience and tin-foil-hat wearing extremists?
I have no doubt that the Hippie Doofus contingent “believe” in all their ridiculous notions. What I cannot dismiss, is the notion of the horrific manner in which they are willing to lie, deceive, scam, distort and tear down this country…to achieve them.
obama is on the same path stalin was on …and we know how that went.
Let’s theorize a bit. He has no skin in the game, period! Records show the title to his “home” in Chicago is in the name of others and others pay the tax bills (as was the case of his other “home”). It’s all a sham as he makes his millions off phony book sales and raises billions through corrupt fund-raising activities. Should be easy for him to escape to some remote island or Kenya and leave few tracks, much as in his past life, he leaves few tracks. Remember, it’s Bush’s fault.
So, destroying the US economy and wrecking foreign relations is inconsequential to him and he displays it proudly every time he opens his mouth. And, now, to smooth things over a bit, he names Crocker as ambassador to Afghanistan, promotes Petraeus to CIA, and moves another schlub (Panetta) to head Defense. Want to see our defense strategy crumble along with the economy and foreign policy? Just wait until Panetta is done with his wrecking crew.
Adina is correct,
Mr Rubin; you are being a gentleman in the way you wrote this stuff. I’m not a gentleman. I see this administration much the same way as I do King Saul. We (the American people) wanted a King and we got one. However, it goes far beyond ideology. Barry and Soros are determined to create an Open Society. POWER is the end game; the policies are a means to an end and it is pure evil at work. America and Israel are tied together in that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob also set America aside for a purpose. Watch and learn as Israel’s defender shows the world that Israel is indeed loved. Watch and learn as America’s founder sweeps across America and prepares the fruited plains to receive His grace.
Your article is good, but it falls short of reality.
“We are 5 days away from fundamentally transforming America” Obama.
What is this BS?
Obama’s foriegn policy is mostly a continuation of Bush’s, well everywhere except Libya and that situation is not a mystery.
I can see that right wings go as nuts seeing a man like Obama in office as lefties went hearing a republican who couldn’t make a clear sentence, but get over it.
Democrats aren’t all trying to destroy America, for God’s sake.
Black men aren’t all stupid and they’re not all trying to destroy America ok?
Having Hussein in your name doesn’t eman you’re trying to destroy America.
Breath into a paper bag till you calm down.
What does 20 years with a pastor who actually preached “God damn America” argue?
Does it argue that Obama is intelligent and wants to build on America’s traditions and story?
I believe Bush’s foreign policy had slightly different imperatives that included avoiding America being damned by God rather than being inspired by that quiet little Hitler, Jim Cone.
Yes I know that Reverend Wright was horrible (though I think more of a paranoid than actually an enemy of his country), and it was worrying to me at first that Obama had been in his church however:
1.) In office he has shown no sign whatsoever of thinking like the Reverend, quite the opposite.
2.) He refused to let Reverend Wright into the white house – note that the Reverend responded to this insult by making a horrible anti-Semitic statement that the President is under the control of “powerful Jews”…
So yes, I agree that it was a horrible sign that the President was willing to sit though Wright’s horrible rants. In my mind the only thing that saved Obama from this is that it turns out that Sarah Palin’s pastor was – and who thought this was possible – worse. He was in Africa lynching witches. Let me repeat that. He was in Africa lynching witches. He was quoted as saying that this was “spiritual warfare.”
But Obama has been resident for 3 years now. It’s time to judge him by what he has said and done IN office not by paranoid fears based on what pews he sat in.
OK, lets list a few of his “accomplishments:
1. He has murdered over 4 million innocent, unborn babies.
2. He has promoted and endorsed the sin of homosexuality and forced in on our military.
3. He has armed our enemies.
4. He has not even attempted to secure our borders.
5. He has bankrupted our economy.
6. He has nationalized(communized) the auto, health and insurance industries.
7. He has weakened our nuclear deterrent.
Now, what more could he do to convince YOu that he hates America? Burn the flag? Oh, but he has already done that, several times!
…
I believe Bush’s foreign policy had slightly different imperatives that included avoiding America being damned by God rather than being inspired by that quiet little Hitler, Jim Cone.
…
“Not being damned by God” isn’t really a specific foreign policy. You are uhm, reading too much into people’s motivations and not enough of their actual actions… And.. you sound mad as a hatter.
And maybe you can explain to me what your paranoid rant about James Cone has to do with Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya etc etc
he went to that church because he had relations with a couple of the choir boys (actually men) …but they are dead now.
Just the Obamist cabal in control of the White House.
Obama isn’t “black” he’s allegedly half-African. “Black” is a cultural confection concocted by the left to avoid having to recognize the psychological pathologies of the underclass; blackism is redneckism for people whose skin is too dark to show the red.
Having “scholar” in your handle doesn’t make you one.
Actually I doubt if Barry (Obama, not Rubin) intends or is capable of doing more than eating waffles in his shirtsleeves whilst on the golf course; he strikes me as too uneducated, too narcissistic, and too lethargic. The problem is that Mr. Rubin, together with many other people, assumes that Obama is actually in control of, or at least responsible for, the excesses of the current regime. He should be seen as a figurehead, a cardboard cutout draped with an expensive suit, whose arms wave and whose voice squeaks when an Ayers, an Emanuel, or a Wright sticks his hand in that part of Obama’s anatomy usually associated with puppeteering.
Really? Just a continuation of Bush’s policies?
Obama showed Netanyahu exactly how he felt about him by leaving him to dine alone when he was here on a State visit.
His gifts to the Queen of England and to her Prime Minister were deliberately insulting. They could not have been more insulting. videos to a blind man? Really? And returning the bust of Winston Churchill, which Bush had in a place of honor?
His treatment of our acknowledged enemies, however, has been far more warm and embracing.
This is continuing Bush’s policies? Are you mad… or just that ignorant?
I don’t know anything about Obama’s gifts or dinners but those aren’t the most important elements to foreign policy.
Willful ignorance at that. How can you miss that Mr. “Scholar”?
Or should that be schoolboy?
How about deep sixing the Columbia trade agreements? How about his demanding that the Israelis stop all settlements as a precondition on talks? How about walking out on the Czechs and the Poles’ missile defense agreements? How about trading British nuke secrets to the Russians?
This administration keeps screwing our allies over, in more ways than just symbolics.
Possibly you might want to learn about these very important issues (that every one else knows about by the way) before you make any more comments that really highlight your bias and ignorance.
Obama’s foreign policy a continuation of Bush’s?
Do you think Bush would have tried to destroy democracy in Honduras, denigrate the need to bring democracy to the middle east, apologize all over for America, fabricate a bunch o nonsense and shew it out in a speech in Cairo, humiliate friends in Israel, the Czech Republic, Poland, and the UK, join anti-Israel hate groups like the UN Human Rights Council and ICJ, appear weak when world stability and the cause of democracy depends on American resolve?
I would rethink that sentence if i were you. Or just find someplace to lie down and rest.
I agree that his Cairo speech was horrible, I’ve talked to Eyptians about it… It was in what, his first month? I think he’s allowed to make early mistakes.
And the other ones (of those I’ve heard of) aren’t good, but none of this are sweeping policy mistakes, they’re minor he-made-a-poor-choice-of-word stuff.
Once again, maybe he ISN’T as good as Bush in some ways, and not only does he have compensating strengths in international arena (and I don’t have time to go into detail right now).. but
But my main point stands. There is NOTHING he’s done that rises to the level of wrongness to warrant the hysteria in this article and comment section.
Obams is fighting harder in Pakistan than Bush ever did, he didn’t do anything stupid like keep his promise to just shut Guantanimo and let the terrorists free. We have continuing work in Iraq and Afganistan. He’s made some good speeches in Israel about supporting the Israelis and made some good statements here..
He hasn’t changed things much. He really hasn’t
A lack of change of direction in foreign policy is not the way someone acts who is trying to knock over the card castle. He’s a fucking normal president.
Come on kids.. Imagine what horrors would have happened if Kerry had been elected, or God forbid, Dennis Kusenich.
When you’re done shuddering, don’t you have a minute of shame for how you’re slandering the President?
Don’t you have a moment of shame when the only reason that you can concoct to support the Once is, “Hey, the other Demonrats would have screwed up even worse“?
Ah, but I forget: you’re a progressive. Ipso facto, you have no shame.
The premises I’m reading over and over here are not that Obama makes some mistakes but is more or less continuing our old policies [and ask yourself is Obama worse - he hasn't hired any Rumsfields has he?]
The premise is
1) He either is deliberately attempting to destroy America or / he’s so stupid [what can you expect from a black man right] that he APPEARS to be trying to destroy America
2) everyone agrees that he is bringing the final end to America. That he’s the worst president in history. That it’s all over, all American ideals destroyed all institutions destroyed a complete break with the past etc…
No reason is given, one assumes that it’s because he’s black, or as Glen Beck’s guest suggested, the antichrist, or as paranoids say, Osama’s secret conspirator or something. The fact that his POLICIES are totally normal must be a cover for the evil control of satan or something…
Look if you want to say “we would do better” that’s totally legitimate, but what you ARE saying is that if anyone says that Obama isn’t the most destructive man in history then you’re an evil “progressive” lacky of the communist/muslim/niggers or something…
There seems to be a requirement here that no one is allowed to have any integrity. ONE MUST DEMONIZE OR ELSE!!!
Telling the truth is not “slander” One only slanders when he does not tell the truth. Now, heres the truth. You foolishly voted the monster into office, are deeply ashamed of your irresponsibility and not man enough to admit it.
Yes, Obama IS a Bozo! Yes, its true that he “ain’t all that bright”. Yes, he should be at a shoe shine stand in Peoris. Or the federal prison at Leavenworth.But, he ain’t. He is where you and lots of other fools put him- in the White House. And that fact makes YOU responsible for his deliberate crusade to destroy these United States.Sleep well!
Everyone pay attention that it was the libwit that brought race into this.
This administration is the outcome of a candidate with a particular hypnotic power over a particular majority of the electorate who was collectively praying for the thrills of a hypnotic trance in the form of a special government benefit. It’s all working rather well, as far as that goes. The only fly in the ointment is a bunch of strange people who insist on the consideration of some empiric version of reality. Their ardor is intense enough to have driven the last election into the first quadrant of what may prove to be a dramatic U-turn. If these raging fanatics cannot be stopped, God help us, the fundamental transformation of America is in Jeopardy!
You would not want to wake up from a hypnotic trance just to discover that you are broke, would you?
I was writing something in comments earlier on the subject, but my internet went inexplicably dead.
The issue here is not just what Obama is or isn’t, but what people who elected him believed they were doing.
First, leadership. I think it is repetitive to say, but people mistook his lofty speeches as a sign of leadership. When, as Rubin points out, he had no leadership skills or experience. His past experience was as about the art of compromise. Every leader must be able to listen to people, bring their ideas together, find a way for people to work together. However, a leader is also the person that makes the final decision and takes responsibility for it. He is the person that is out front, taking the biggest risks. The buck stops here. He is also the person that sets the goals and says “follow me”.
Obama’s experience as an arbitrator was only re-enforced by his political career in Chicago. When you swim in the company of like minded people, the types of compromise you have to make are actually not very extensive and do not challenge your ideas.
However, we can’t forget why people selected him. It wasn’t just about his lofty speeches or the ideas of hope and change, etc. It was because people had determined that government and the general electorate was becoming too divisive. they felt that Bush had been too “divisive” with his insistence on following specific principles. They were looking for that one leader that could pull everybody together. They were looking for Reagan, but Reagan was dead.
They were looking for somebody who pulled people together at home and abroad. The problem is that it is real leadership that pulls the most people together, not just the art of compromise. What Bush discovered and people simply ignored was that you simply cannot get everyone to follow where you lead, you must get as many people as that will go.
Real leadership does listen to the best people you can surround yourself with, but a real leader also says “here is the point we need to reach”, determines the best plan and then says “follow me”. Not “we’ll follow this person” until that doesn’t work out and then “let’s follow this plan” until that doesn’t work, going from what direction to another. a real leader is goal oriented. A real leader knows that they have to get out in front and “put some skin in the game”. Take the risk of being the person blamed instead of desperately trying to protect their own position.
A real leader sees their own trajectory of success as the success of the people around them and the business at hand, not just the success of instituting their own programs based on ideology.
that is where Obama fails miserably. the people he needed to make successful were not the people he took to Washington nor his ideas about what America ought to be. Those people are the people of the United States. The ideas that must always be made successful are simply freedom and our way of life. When he is bent on instituting his own programs regardless of how unsuccessful it makes us, he is not a good leader of our nation.
The American people did elect him so what does that say about us? People not only mistook his speeches, but obviously put the art of compromise at the top of their leadership check list. I believe that this was a hope in leaving behind the troubled period after 9/11 and the long wars to get back to the “good life” they may have imagined existed in the 90′s. We even have a name for it amongst ourselves, but few actually examine it’s true meaning – 9/10, the day before 9/11.
That isn’t only about fighting the war or the advent of terrorism and the spread of Islamist ideology which is quite as potentially dangerous, oppressive and destructive as Communism. It is the desire to exist in the post Cold War period when there was no more “great enemy” to confront. When there seemed to be nothing but the clear blue sky between where we were and our own dreams of the spread of freedom and the ever widening spread of prosperity.
Another area where Obama is failing and seems more and more like Carter, (Which if you look at Carter’s election, was based on similar feeling of just truing to get back to “normal” after Vietnam), is that, while a good leader recognizes the reality of the situation, he doesn’t go around saying “just deal with it”. Which is essentially what Obama has been saying.
All those lofty speeches about “tomorrow” are gone. Met, I suspect, by the reality of his situation which is far beyond his scope of experience. There was a sense in the elections that people were looking for a leader who gave them a vision of tomorrow and was working towards that. A good leader knows that, even while people need to be aware of their situation when it is dire, he knows that he has to continue to inspire them to go forward.
People who are able to do that are people who actually believe in that vision. A vision, not of decay and decline, but a vision of greatness and success. They have a set of guiding principles and the vision is reached by setting small achievable goals that stack up one on top of the other until the pinnacle is reached. Not just grand sweeping gestures that rarely if ever achieve the state goal in one great leap.
Those that try to achieve that leap usually end up falling on their faces and often leaves them despairing, unable to get up and lead effectively again. Especially when their plans are entirely unrealistic. Sadly, it often leaves a trail of devastation behind them.
Should we be less dependent on foreign oil? Sure, the world is changing and nations are growing, but how do we actually get there? Is renewable energy a better deal? Sure, if it is actually “renewable” and can really sustain the energy needs of a nation, but what are the right tools, how fast can we really get there and is causing unnecessary pain in the market and economy actually necessary?
I don’t think that those questions are being asked. Neither are there any questions about what constitutes our “real and present danger”.
Obama said he wasn’t interested in “blanket policies”, but he did not comprehend that policies are based on principles and that certain “blanket policies” are the result of very large and real problems. It’s meant to guide responses so that we don’t run from one direction to another. That is how we maintain “stability”, not just some bizarre “status quo” that can never be sustained when we are talking about a world of billions of people with their own demands and desires.
In the next election, people are going to want real leadership. I don’t know if we are going to get it anytime soon. People are going to look for someone with skills and a plan to get us out of this mess. they want to be inspired to go forward, not by lofty, meaningless speeches, but by someone who is going to point to the first hill and say “we’re going to take that one” then move on to the next until we get to the goal.
I think that is why Paul Ryan seems to have so much success. He has at least the outlines of a plan and is asking people to follow him to take the first hill. Whether he is the next best candidate, I don’t know, but someone with a similar approach. Trump and Palin simply aren’t going to make it. They are too much about their own image, the same thing that brought Obama in. Trump is a demagogue and Palin is more about her brand and ideas.
We are in want of a leader with principles and a plan. Pray God that one appears soon. It may be heretical to say it, but I don’t much care what political party they are from though I suspect that that the only ones that can present a challenge at this stage are the Republicans.
(If you want my true assessment of Obama based on an historical figure, it isn’t Chamberlain or Carter or even JFK. It’s Custer who was himself a product of self-promotion and deluded press. whose ego led him to once again lead a “brave but stupid charge” against an overwhelming force and get him and his command massacred. The press lamented his demise for months, but the military used his actions as a learning moment. What I fear is that Obama’s conglomeration of the “Sioux and Cheyenne nation” are the Shia and Sunni Islamists in the middle east. I just don’t know how terrible the massacre is going to be).
I disagree completely that Obama’s past experience was about compromise or indeed, that Obama is even capable of compromise. I consider that his total life experience is about Control Over Others. Obama has a pathological psychological need to control others. That is the only interaction that he has with people: control over them.
If he feels that he cannot control them, then for Obama, these other people cease to exist. He has shown this in his indifference to the Iranian demonstrators, in his indifference to terrorism, in his indifference to the damage of the oil spill..etc.
Obama has also shown a deep incapacity for compromise, whether it is with the GOP or others. Obama Must control. If he feels he is not able to control you, then, he will lie, manipulate..and then turn to insults and derision. He has shown this behavior constantly – from his insults to foreign leaders to his insults to the Supreme Court to Paul Ryan…and so on.
Is Obama seeking to destroy America? As others have pointed out, the term ‘destroy’ has to be defined. It is more correctly understood as ‘transform’ from a nation focused around individual freedoms, rights and responsibilities, which include a free market and private enterprise…to one that focuses on group identities, the disappearance of the individual, the rise of state domination. Obama certainly, with his need for authoritarian control…prefers and wants the latter system for the US. And, the cabal that he has surrounded himself with are deeply invested in statism.
Is Obama anti-American? Yes – it’s embedded in him from his upbringing via his mother and grandmother..and his wife and the 20 years with the Rev. Wright.
You give Obama WAY too much credit.
He’s an appliance for the Progressive Movement. He’s “in charge” because he’s attained the Office. He’s shown no ability to “control” anything that was not being controlled by his handlers.
He has no vision, or ideals that would advance anything but disorganization and chaos.
He has an “agenda”, but, that is being handled by HIS administrators, the Democrat Socilaists of America, and reiterated by the Socialist Media in America.
If he is ever pressed about details, he becomes defensive, and disintegrates before your eyes into a sniveling juvenile, unable to protect himself, and is rescued by his media and administrators.
Just plain pathetic.
I think that it is absolutely true that Obama is a big believer in compromise.
The only problem is that the word means something else to Leftists that it does to most people. We think that compromise means to incorporate and make allowances for the opposition. For them, “compromise” just means dividing up the spoils.
Democrats are big on compromise these days. A lot of Republicans are too.
Thank you for your splendid exemplar of “drivel”!
Here’s another interesting take, provided by former Ambassador Bolton, on what President Obama is up to. Mr. Bolton suggests that President Obama knows very well what he is doing and is playing a waiting game; he probably has to if he has any hope of being reelected. Mr. Bolton was addressing the National Rifle Association, so his focus was on gun control. However, his comments probably have broader applicability.
If Mr. Bolton is correct and President Obama manages to fool as many voters as in 2008, Katie bar the door. And not only as to firearms.
I don’t think obama is going to fool the people. he is going to cheat.
voter fraud is the main plank in his re-election campaign.
Keep your ammo dry.
Anyone notice the angry Syrian mobs protesting against the dictatorship?
How many opposition guns did you notice?
This disaster was installed by the liberal/leftist/whatever media in a complete and total failure of their sacred trust which I do not believe was accidental.
If he was vetted 1/100th as much as Plain and Joe The Plumber were he would never have been elected.
I’m sure Pravda is chewing their shorts in envy.
Whether a country is ruined due to neglience / naivete or by deisgn, it really doesn’t matter. It is still ruined.
Exactly
I can’t believe there this whole article and comment section is in perfect agreement … all hysteria with no actual reasons given whatsoever…
Of course Obama’s foreign policy isn’t different from Bush’s so you CAN’T have any content to your claim that he is ruining America.
This is why people think all this hysteria and ranting must be based in racism, because when there is no visible criticism, only demonization, we assume that must be because you can’t bring yourself to say your actual reasons out loud…
So why don’t you say it out loud? You say Obama’s foreign policy is the worst in history, meant to destroy America… tall claims. Now what is you reasoning. What exactly in the foreign policy is so horrible?
So far the only responses I got in this comment section was that Obama showed some personal rudeness to a few heads of state… that isn’t even policy. Is that all you’ve got? Obama is rude – end of America? Is that it?
Actually, sir, I wonder if you understand foreign policy by your question.
As the president is the head of a nation and the one responsible for setting foreign policy, his or her actions bear more weight and small actions, whether intentional or accidental, can and does imply much without having to state it out loud.
For instance, for years Mubarek’s government would not meet with Hamas at the Egyptian Foreign Ministry or any other official government building. Hamas was forced to wait at a hotel at the government’s leisure. The intent was to indicate that Hamas did not enjoy Egypt’s full support or recognition as any position of recognized authority in the Palestinian territories. Now they have been to the Foreign Ministry for a full meeting, a delegation was received and Egypt went forward with providing a reconciliation tool with Abbas in the West Bank.
Now, if you understand foreign policy and diplomacy, when Hamas was being made to meet at a hotel outside of any official govt office, it not only meant that they did not enjoy official recognition, but Egypt did not have to say it out loud and risk alienating the entirety of the occupants of Palestine. Yet, at the same time they were maintaining relations.
That was also the way they could maintain relations without completely irritating Israel and the peace treaty. Also, Abbas could not complain that Egypt was undermining his position and authority.
Now that they are receiving Hamas officially, they are recognizing them as a joint power in the territories and signaling to Israel that things are going to change. Without actually saying what that change is and jeopardizing the treaty.
Obama, a man who claims to understand nuanced relations and policies, is either an idiot or he has purposefully acted rudely towards Israel’s Prime Minister. I believe we can lean towards intentional since we know that Obama and his staff have at least privately or even more publicly announced their desire for settlements to be halted. They were not. Obama sent a clear message to Israel that the office of the greatest nation on earth was peeved.
If the recent Egypt issue is not to your liking, you should read history and how the likes of John Adams was left twiddling his thumbs for several hours in the ante-room of the French King’s palace. Because the French were not sure if, during their continuous agitation with the British, whether they wanted to thumb their noses at the King of England so completely and set off a major war.
Later, or envoy was again kept waiting in France as the Napoleon was agitated over US trading with Britain AND France during their war. They believed that, after France had helped the US in it’s revolution, they should have at least assisted France by improving trade with them and, hopefully, reducing supplies to England.
Foreign policy isn’t just about what we write down in a treaty or whether we exchange ambassadors. Everything in between has meaning.
Personal rudeness by the president and leader of foreign policy for the US has meaning.
Mr. Rubin’s argument is only valid if:
1. The Obama administration is, to a man, ignorant of history; AND:
2. If everyone in the administration is utterly blind to the evidence available; AND:
3. Those who are not blind to the evidence are being ignored without malice.
What are the odds? Especially given that one who is consciously trying to destroy America would do exactly what the Obamunists are doing?
The whole premise of this article is flawed. You assume that these Leftists love America and do not seek its destruction. Peter’s comment was excellent, as you noted. Communists are the knaves and Liberals are the fools.
One of the reasons McCain lost was that he was playing by gentlemen’s rules which were from another time. Queen’s Rules are for gentlemen, not thugs. The Pubs keep losing because they insist on being gentlemen, while fighting thugs. The notion that we are all gentlemen here and we all seek the best for America is nonsense. The evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary.
Let us proceed logically:
Are there people in America who hate America? Of course.
Are there Communists in the country. Absolute fact. They even have a Party and openly state their goals.
Would some of them decide to disguise themselves as other than Communists? Of course.
If enough of them were to do so, could they take over another Party, by changing it from within? Of course.
Does the Democratic Party now look just like the Communist Party? Well, yes, pretty much.
Could the Communists or the America-haters get one of their own into the Whitehouse? Yes, they could succeed at such a task, via manipulation and subterfuge.
So, is it really so hard to believe that Obama could be one of them? After all, he actively sought out such associations throughout his life. His Daddy was one. “Uncle Frank” was one. Black Liberation Theology is Communism dressed as Christianity. There are all the other America-haters, too. Rashid Khalidi. Khalid al-Mansur. Louis Farrakhan. Rev. Wright. Father Fleger. Tony Rezko. Van Jones. The list goes on and on and on.
Finally, Obama IS articulate. I do not think he is stupid at all. He stutters because he is trying to concoct the best lie he can on the fly. He is ignorant of many things, true, but he is NOT stupid. He knows exactly what he is doing.
You think he is just innocently doing this terrible destruction, because he does not realize it? “Gosh, if he only realized it, if these external forces would only provide the perspective to him, he would just change his ways.” Really? Just how foolish, how ignorant of the facts, can you possibly be? This destruction is a feature to him, not a bug. The Constitution is a bug to him, not a feature.
Do you honestly believe that he is so stupid he cannot see it? You think he is a bumbling Carter? Or rather, does he engage in brutish tactics that Carter would never embrace? How is he different from Carter? Sheer malevolence. The man is malevolent. He is not just a puppet. He knows exactly what he is doing. He is an active partner.
So, Mr. Rubin, here is your external input. Will you remain ignorant?
You are being remarkably fair to the Obama administration, Dr. Rubin, perhaps a little too fair.
Obama does appear to have a very confused foreign policy which I believe is based on his and his advisors antagonism towards the West in general and is expressed by treachery to America’s allies and harmlessness to America’s enemies.
I believe that Mr. Obama has a visceral animus towards Israel in particular and Jews in general, notwithstanding that he is willing to employ a certain kind of Jew who shares his own animus.
You believe that if Mr. Obama had to confront a hostile press and had a few “no” men in his administration, he would have a more realistic understanding of his humanity and that he too could make errors.
This assumes a certain self awareness and willingness to introspect, that is, to step outside oneself and see yourself as others do.
Obama once was quoted as saying he would rather be President of China so he would not have to put up with all the criticism he has to face.
This tells me all I need to know about Obama’s arrogance, his “I know everything there is to know”, and how “I am the smartest person I know and the most intelligent President America should be proud to have.”
Obama will never admit he might be wrong nor will he change course in his foreign policy.
To transform a nation first it has to be destroyed. This fraud for President is doing just that !!!!!!!!! He is a puppet being juggled by Marxist’s and Liberal’s such as George Soros for one,who are destroying our great country !! Ignorance is letting it happen !!
If the outcome of their policies results in evil then we have no need to parse their motives. A tree that consistently produces rotten fruit is bad and needs to be chopped down.
I don’t think Obama is intentionally trying to destroy the United States, but his view of the world is, and fast. He doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism and he is a European-style socialist. He thinks America should be no different than France or England and that we should have all of the social-welfare benefits and big, bloated bureaucracies that drove all of the European countries into bankruptcy. That is the economic model he is following and that is what is destroying this country. Unfortunately, you have a lot of socialists in Congress like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who think the same way and that’s very dangerous when passing legislation that will destroy us all. So you’re left with a socialist ideologue running this country into the ground and the main stream media, also made up of far-left liberals and socialists, not saying a word about it. And people wonder why we’re going broke.
The only way to stop this is by throwing Obama out of office in 2012. It must be done, or else there won’t be much for anybody to save in the next few years.
agreed…
…but I doubt that he will be legally voted out. he will do a harry reid and end up with more votes then voters.
he has his minions out there now setting things up. the supreme court case in Wisconsin is an example. it would have been a no contest runaway for the republican if it wasn’t for election fraud.
acorn or what ever they are called now are out ..the unions are on side and the DoJ is meddling in the redistricting.
The question for me has to do with construction. How do we deal with civilizational destruction? At what point is an institution ruined, so that it can’t be repaired? Destruction is a lot easier to carry out than construction. It seems that we should be setting about creating new institutions to replace the educational, religious, governmental, & social institutions that are being torn down. Such construction takes decades, if not centuries. But, we can start to creatively construct a civilization right now.
That conclusion only really works if you believe Obama wants to take America down a notch or two and the rest of the Dems are in conscious agreement with him.
But that reality seems to be that Obama is conning THEM as much as anyone else. I even doubt that Obama’s nefarious intentions have ever been revealed to hi8s own wife.
Classic Leftist policies and diverity multiculturalism minority identity political balkanization promotion destroy the country. Obama is just a proponent of those policies. He isnt the only one, in that regard.
Many dont wish to destroy the country, they actually think that their policies will lead to a utopian society.
Those policies will only lead to poverty and misery for everyone.
“Many don’t wish to destroy the country, they actually think that their policies will lead to a utopian society.
Those policies will only lead to poverty and misery for everyone.”
Don’t overlook the fact that to many of the more “complex thinkers” in this administration, those last two factors applied to the “common herd” DEFINE a “Utopian society”.
They only want the nobility (i.e., themselves) to have a good life. Everybody else must be inferior to their superior selves in all ways; otherwise, they feel diminished. The One isn’t the only egotistical narcissist in this bunch, he’s just the one with the most developed case of the disorder.
And don’t bother trying to explain to this lot that they won’t be able to have their tech toys, their wagyu beef, and that cute barista at Starbuck’s making them their latte’ in the civilization they dream of creating. Not having any familiarity with how an economy, or a technological culture, actually works, they’ll never believe you. It’s all magic to them, and they think that “wishing makes it so.”
Maybe at Hogwarts. Not anywhere else. But by the time the “enlightened ones’ figure it out, it will be far too late. Especially for the rest of us.
clear ether
eon
The author is right on the money when he infers that the Left’s deafness, dumbness, and blindness has largely been an evolutionary development. Perhaps communism’s abject failure did something to these people, made their brains ingrown, feeding on their own delusional drivel.
One can also argue that the Clinton administration’s patina of criminality played a part in evolving the Democratic Party to what it is today, a ninety percent ultra-liberal party with the rest only moderately so. Anyone that has taken account this evolution, and why they have gone so far left, has probably regarded as quite plausible the possibility that someone far worse than Clinton would one day become president.
There was a time when liberals were largely well meaning and would try as best they could to make cogent arguments in support of their positions. The difference between the then and the now of liberal thought is the difference between trying to persuade with unconvincing arguments and outright propaganda. And it will get much worse before it gets better.
this obummer character is in full stage makeup. the N.R.A. guy is right. he has been told to just sit and wait, until either reelected, or defeated. the people he represent probably figure it is now or never, and are probably right.
look realistically at what it will take to seize complete control of this country.
1. win the next election – cheat and do whatever else is required to win as necessary
2. silence the media/internet critics – legislation constantly pending, and reintroduced, and changed. silently working to control the net. some say he already has a switch to shut it off. Fox is constantly under all sorts of attack from all sides as well. he could probably shut them down if the assault were unexpected.
3. he said last time he required an army just as large and well equipped/trained as the military. his words, not mine. of course if most of the fighting military is not here …
4. get the guns – he tried this. didn’t work. put a steep tax on ammo. some say hitlery is trying to work some u.n. gun control strategy behind the scenes. he has already quietly allowed foreign agencies police powers in this country.
he even had a dress rehearsal:
it is said obummer went balistic when his plans to shut down Honduran’s domocracy and place his marxist friend back into power, went south. this guy only needed a second term to finalize his socialist/marxist plans. it was amazing to watch, and realise the entire U.S. media refused to honestly cover it, or cover it at all. many said it was a mini-rehearsal for things to come. after watching it unfold, who could argue? and the rumors that the whole election was set up to be rigged, if they could just get the x-president reseated before the election happened.
fyi – smart Hondurans finally tricked obummer & co. under immense and constant pressure from the U.S. (state dept. got almost the entire world to not recognize Honduras), and told him they would relent and allow the x-prez back into the country. they did, but not until after the election and swearing in of a new president. that is when they say obozo lost his cool. one of the other marxist SA countries had let the x stay at their embassy, which was promptly surrounded by the Honduran Army. talk about scary times for Hondurans, via obummer.
he has a base that will vote for him if he were to murder someone in public. he has a senate, s.c and fbi/cia/etc. that would probably not even arrest him for mass murder in the streets.
thanks to this guy, i have, for the first time in my lifetime began to worry about the safety and security of my country, and will remain diligent in watching his every move, as should every American.
Pharaoh Hussein is an evil bastard (literally) a closet Mohammedan, of Arab and Luo descent, who hates God and good.
The Clintons hate God too, that is why they love to promote ripping apart millions of little infants while still in the womb.
Actually half of America is evil, and America will soon be judged…
Here are the differences between the three presidents mentioned in this essay, and listed along a continuum:
George W Bush was frequently wrong, but probably had something more than a 50% track record of success. I can confidently state that his motives, if nothing else, were honorable.
Bill Clinton had a roughly 50-50 success rate, but eventually his own motives and future actions were impossible to pin down, since they were calculated on the basis of his own political hide.
Obama has been wrong better than 90% of the time. The one decision with which I agreed that I can think of off the top of my head was the order issued to shoot the Somali pirates two years ago to save hostages. Everything else has been wrong and hideously destructive. Only malice can account for a singular and unblemished record of catastrophic failure. I give no benefit of the doubt.
Does anyone with a brain cell need to even ask this question. The Weather Underground has been trying to infiltrate the Government for years to destroy the country from within. He is their front man, along with the Muslim Brotherhood and Soros. That phony birth certificate that was released yesterday was a way of giving Americans the finger. Even FOX News is lying for him now. Here is an article about Valerie Jarrett and her parents ties to Bill Ayers.
VALERIE JARRETT’S MOTHER AND BILL AYERS’ FATHER
http://barracknow.blogspot.com/2009/09/frank-marshall-davis-jarretts-and-ayers.html
Is this what is really hidden on Obama’s true birth certificate?
http://octaman.com/comments/MalcolmO.html
“Destroying the village in order to save it.” I lean toward this Vietnam-era nugget to explain Obama’s governance.
G.W. Bush was also criticised for not listening to his critics.
Maybe as the office grows more powerful, the problem described here becomes the new normal?
Bush listened. He rarely responded directly. And he never retaliated. Obama likes to mock his critics. And in some cases, when he could get away with it, he tried to muzzles his critics – Fox News, for instance. The left is good at that. First they assign derogatory names, then they mock.
Obama is a disaster for all decent people in the world. Barry Rubin, for all of his insights and excellent writing, just refuses to say this out loud. It needs to be said.
Who’s the Idiot? Obama or Us?
You can hold our “feets” to the fire and not even the Marine “Corpse” would be able to interfere. I know this as well as I know every one of the “57 states” I visited in 2008 and as well as I understand the Middle East, an issue that has “plagued the Middle East for centuries.” Furthermore, I want to make the case for government-run health care since the government-run post office is rife with “inefficiencies” but privately-owned UPS and FedEx are thriving. Now, I don’t speak “Austrian” and I bowl like a “Special Olympics” kid but I can tell when a Cambridge cop acts “stupidly.” “My Muslim faith” teaches us to understand things like that. I may not know the difference between Kansas City and “St. Louis” but I do know “Israel will always be a strong friend of Israel’s.” I’m not like those “bitter people who cling to guns and religion” and hate foreigners even if I do confuse dead people with “ten thousand.” I’m always open to “advise” but not criticism for bowing to a foreign potentate or giving cheap, useless dvd’s to a prime minister or for spending $40,000 on a date with my bride. And, as far as picking tax cheats for my Cabinet, they’re all good people.
All except one of the above idiotic statements, actions, and political appointments have been documented as attributable to America’s scholarly President Barack Hussein Obama. “Feets” is a newbie, cited with audio tape substantiation by Monica Crowley on her Saturday afternoon radio broadcast on WABC-AM, aptly titled “The Monica Crowley Show.”
Described in a 77WABC blurb as, “An intelligent, articulate woman, Crowley is a rare find in the talk radio world,” and that she is. She led off on April 30th with a presidential quotation from Obama’s speech in which he actually said he would expect Americans to “hold our feets to the fire” on the economy . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4256
The author seems to think that it is just incompetence, combined with liberal/progressive ideology, rather than an attempt to destroy the country.
The author is wrong, but only because the author did not include the part where the president and all of his radical appointees and czars are ALSO determined to take the country down, in order to remake it as they see fit.
America will not go down easily, but with a determined President (The Demorat Congress, prior to January did its job of sowing the seeds of destruction) and an incredibly dangerous world financial situation, a Fed that seems hellbent on creating the world’s biggest monetary crisis ever, we have the kindling for the fire.
Next, it must be continually stoked, with deliberate and/or incompetent and/or dangerous foreign policy decisions. Throw in a little more debt problem, sprinkle with world riots and government overthrows like never witnessed before, add an oil crisis (Obama pushes that hard) and pretty soon we have trouble with a capital T.
Now, union thugs wiil destabilize this country, as they have started to do, a lying, dishonest, corrupt media will keep most in the dark, and then add some more money printing by the Fed to finally collapse the dollar.
Voila. No more America– but a new, transformed America takes its place.
It is willful and deliberate, but greatly aided by the most incompetent President and administration in our history.
Never underestimate the danger of a large group of supremely confident morons. A crusade of arrogant fools can be as destructive as an earthquake or tidal wave.
The only thing that keeps me going is the dream of a Palin presidency. The howls and shrieks will be as sweet as honey. I don’t know if she would be any better than the One, but she makes the people I hate foam at the mouth and that’s good enough.
Poul Robson sang ” so wide is my native country…” in Russian! Can a black man sing these words in America? Did Hitler or Stalin whished to destroy their countries? Yes! they believed that their countries must win or die!
This is why I do less politics. Yes Barry, they live in a insulated world, so insulated and self supporting that they can’t even see the results of what they are doing, they can’t even recognize failure, because they read the NY Times and certain books they are actually blind to their own actions, month after month, year after year. And naturally Barry, the people who write the books, run the newspapers, and blather on TV, are in the same bind. Maybe it’s the politicians who reinforce the people who reinforce them, a dogmatic circle you might say. Is it just possible Barry that they do know, at least some of them[ forget about an ape like Katie Couric] and this is what they want. Possible that there is no innocent reason or excuse, but what we are looking at is just old fashioned aggression, or hate, or the will to destroy, or, are you ready, Power. Barry, Obama didn’t spend 20 years in a black racist church for nothing, he didn’t befriend Bill Ayers for laughs. His dogmatic pursuit of his policies is in fact the result of a particular bitterness and animosity. He and plenty more like him know damn well what they’re about. Wake up Barry !!
Palin/West 2012. Let’s do it.
Help me out here and explain why Obama is somehow more of a threat to the destruction of America, than let’s say, LBJ, who fought a disastrous war and initiated (talk about fundamental transformations) the “Great Society?” And then there was FDR. I know that headlines have to be about today’s news, but so much of this bluster seems devoid of historical perspective. If this is not the worst ever, and if we are not on the eve of destruction, then will enough people care?
We have cycles of liberal politicians and conservative ones, doves and hawks, each calling forth end of the world rhetoric from the opposition during their tenure.
Obama was chilly to Netanyahu and the Queen? Clearly the end is at hand.
Yes, the economy is in the tank, gas prices are abominable, and Afghanistan smoulders on; none of which are good, but making a case that we are seeing anything unprecedentedly bad, except maybe the size of the deficit, takes a fair effort to simply ignore our history. Think 1776, 1812, 1861, the Great Depression, 1968, gas line and stagflation…but that’s all ancient history now. Clearly THIS is the worst ever, Obama is the worst ever, and the sky is falling. Alas, this seems to be the only tone and volume in which many of you can speak.
You left out Libya, and how Obama abrogated the leadership of our military to the UN, without consulting Congress.
… come off it…
Imagine what foreign policy would be like if Kerry had been elected or God forbid, Dennis Kucinich or the blunders of a Palin Presidency or God forbid Michelle Bauchman.
When you’re done shuddering don’t you feel a little ashamed of how you’re slandering the President?
He’s continuing Bush’s policies a lot better than those above would. Is that really what destroying America looks like, mostly staying the course?
You all should be extremely ashamed.
I wasn’t aware that Bush;
1. Wanted to throw Israel under the bus;
2. Was four-square against domestic energy development, wanted to bankrupt the coal and oil industries, and abolish nuclear power;
3. Was committed to not actually fighting Islamic radicalism, except when it was acceptable to radical Islamists to do so;
4. Was committed to either nationalizing industries (“Government Motors”) or telling private companies that they were now owned by their labor unions (Chrysler);
5. Wanted to create a “national health-care system” so impractical that all his supporters would demand, and get, waivers so they wouldn’t be forced to buy into it;
6. Was determined to spend more money than we ever might have on “stimulating the economy” in ways that don’t actually do it;
7. Was determined to bring us down to the European Union’s level in any way he could, no matter who suffered as a result, as long as it wasn’t him; and
7. After the above litany of idiocy, was constantly running off to spend all his time on the links.
Saying that Obama is “continuing Bush’s policies” is the sort of idiotic statement I’d expect from somebody who spent eight years either calling Bush “H****r”, saying “a village in Texas is missing its idiot”, or claiming that Al Gore was “robbed” in Florida.
The sort of person who will say anything, no matter how disconnected from reality, to avoid admitting that the guy they voted for when he promised “Hope & Change” has turned out to be a farking idiot with nihilistic pretensions and zero actual ability to run anything but his mouth.
I do agree with you on one count though; Kerry as President would also have been a disaster. And so far, he has agreed with Obama on just about everything- or didn’t you notice?
clear ether
eon
First of all this article is explicitly about foreign policy only, so widening the topic to economics, fiscal policy, health care etc is just changing the subject.
So the only two points that are relevant to this topic are 1 and 3.
1. Wanted to throw Israel under the bus;
I don’t see any sign of Obama throwing Israel under the bus. He made some good speeches unequivocally supporting Israel, I was expecting worse and I was surprised.. So back it up..
3. Was committed to not actually fighting Islamic radicalism, except when it was acceptable to radical Islamists to do so;
…
The Islamists getting blown up in Pakistan might think otherwise.
Admit it, you just made this up.
First of all, economic policy is inextricably linked with foreign policy. We live in an “interdependent” world, remember?
Secondly, energy policy is also part of the package. When we send money overseas for oil, instead of using our own energy resources, it affects our foreign relations. It also tends to put money in the hands of people whose intentions toward us may not be honorable. This, too, affects our policies toward other nations, and theirs toward us. In point of fact, it tends to encourage people who don’t like us to continue to act against us, on the grounds that we are either too weak, or too stupid, to see that we are facilitating their hostile actions.
As to Israel, Obama has snubbed them every chance he has had, has repeatedly taken the Palestinian side in the “peace process”, and is busy trying to prop up the two most dangerous enemies Israel has; Assad in Syria and the mullahs in Iran. And oh yes, there was this bit about forcing Mubarak to get out of Egypt- so the new Muslim Brotherhood-backed government could call for abrogating the peace treaty (negotiated by that other sterling example of Democratic brilliance, Jimmy Carter), and get ready to go after Israel again. Except this time, they’ll be using American-made Abrams tanks, F-16 and F-15 fighters, and other assorted highly effective systems that we sold them in the (mistaken) belief that Egypt would remain our ally. So much for Obama’s “being on Israel’s side”. If this is evidence of good wishes toward Israel on his part, then by the same logic, FDR should have embargoed military and raw material sales to England, instead of Germany, prior to 7 December 1941, to “prove” how much he liked the Brits.
As for drones dropping bombs on Pakistani terrorists, I’ll believe it’s more than just window dressing for domestic consumption when they actually do enough damage to affect their attacks in Afghanistan. Obama only attacks targets that will not inconvenience the Islamists, and only with enough force to look good in the Gallup Poll. What amazes me is that people still fall for it; Clinton pulled the same act over and over again. You’d think even the most clinically thick individuals would have figured it out by now. (Or at least have seen the movie “Wag the Dog”.)
As for “making things up”, I leave that to the MSM. As Will Rogers once said, “I don’t make jokes- I just read the newspaper and report the facts.”
You should try it sometime.
clear ether
eon
Why does everyone neglect that Obama put our military at the disposal of the UN, without consulting Congress, in their support for Libyan oil for Europe? Does that count as foreign policy?
Clear Mind: Did you hear the Pres of the Black Chamber of Commerce say that he voted for obama, even though he knew he had no back ground, no business experience, etc., because he was black and he was sure he would surround himself with wise, experienced advisors. Now he knows the truth and calls him a communist. Great eh!
What drones do is repeat the same things over and over, even when shown to be wrong. This “Scholar” appears to be a good example of an absent-minded type, incapable of acknowledging posted fact, schooled, it seems, in flinging poo like a maddened baboon. Why?
In order to “fundamentally transform” America, certain aspects of our civil society must be stripped away. Statism cannot survive when Americans are free and informed; when we decide to follow our Constitution and return to the limited federal government it describes, the statist is necessarily identified as the enemy. When we confront the enemy, he resorts to bluster and lies; his ideologically bankrupt positions are indefensible, and will not stand when debated properly.
Foreign policy is only one aspect of governing, and the founders had many thoughtful ideas on how to conduct same, most of which are no longer followed, regardless of the Administration. IMHO, Michele Bachmann would conduct foreign policy more closely in line with our national ideals than any other possible presidential candidate in the field. Rubin is correct: ignorant and stupid. Others are also correct: intentional deconstruction.
Replacing “by the people” with massive, centralized, top-down thugocracy will not be tolerated by patriots. Stop grousing and fight with us!
This brilliant comment stayed “awaiting moderation” for a long time: I’ll try again:
Help me out here and explain why Obama is somehow more of a threat to the destruction of America, than let’s say, LBJ, who fought a disastrous war and initiated (talk about fundamental transformations) the “Great Society?” And then there was FDR. I know that headlines have to be about today’s news, but so much of this bluster seems devoid of historical perspective. If this is not the worst ever, and if we are not on the eve of destruction, then will enough people care?
We have cycles of liberal politicians and conservative ones, doves and hawks, each calling forth end of the world rhetoric from the opposition during their tenure.
Obama was chilly to Netanyahu and the Queen? Clearly the end is at hand.
Yes, the economy is in the tank, gas prices are abominable, and Afghanistan smoulders on; none of which are good, but making a case that we are seeing anything unprecedentedly bad, except maybe the size of the deficit, takes a fair effort to simply ignore our history. Think 1776, 1812, 1861, the Great Depression, 1968, gas line and stagflation…but that’s all ancient history now. Clearly THIS is the worst ever, Obama is the worst ever, and the sky is falling. Alas, this seems to be the only tone and volume in which many of you can speak.
Obama snd his backer’s ARE DESTROYING America !!!!
Aren`t you being a little hard on someone as inexperienced as obama. Obama`s only claim to fame is helping with organizing ACORN. We all know how honest ACORN was and is, but they can spend taxpayers money. Obama has never really has done an honest days work in his life. He was pushed and given a free ride through college!
Mr. Rubin makes a lot of observations but writes nothing to counter the argument that Obama and his regime are not trying to destroy America purposefully. Look, they’re Marxists! Admittedly, some are society socialists and others Fascists, but they all agree that America needs to be transformed into a socialist state. Personally, I simply cannot believe that anyone is so dumb as to do the things Obama has done unless he has not intended to do it in order to realize his socialist ambitions.
Why within the world would you would like to acquire genuine Ugg boots when you will find numerous reduce-fee copies for the market place? You’ve heard the maxim: You only get everything you pay back for!Real Ugg boots are manufactured that has a tanned outer surface and double confronted sheepskin with fleece about the inside of from the boot; the best of the boot has fleece around the outdoors.
Peter, you make a good point. I would say that the ideology is objectively anti-American. You will also note that I did NOT discuss domestic policy which is a totally different matter. But using your very cogent quote–and I think that is a very good distinction–how many people within the administration does this fit? However, as a result of your suggestion I will modify the text. Thanks.
This admin does seem amateurish when it comes to foreign affairs, almost like its a trial and error exercise (or he won’t try because he doesn’t want to err), but as you note, the domestic agenda appears pretty clear to me and others here…it ain’t good. I honestly don’t think the O can think more than two or three moves ahead, so he lies and cheats. And the media gives the man a pass.
I don’t think it’s not being able to think-ahead as it is that he’s not surrounded by those who can do critical thinking. He’s surrounded by totally inexperienced people who have never had to strategize to succeed. None have ever had to plan in a “war room” environment where concepts are vetted, conclusions are tested, and choices made. He admits he dislikes national security issues, denies the economic crisis and regularly identifies a fall-guy – today, it’s the oil companies. Those are not leadership qualities, and at every opportunity to demonstrate leadership, he gets-out-of-Dodge.
A truly smart person surrounds themselves with smarter people than themselves. A stupid person is one that has to be liked and the center of attention all the time