Humor vs. Contempt: Obama and the Question of Character
Much has been made of Barack Obama’s claim to have been “amused” by the nationwide tea party demonstrations on Tax Day last week. Really, he told acolytes at a Democratic fundraiser (expected haul: $2.5 million), “they should be saying thank you.”
Applause. Cries of “Thank you.” Laugh track?
I believe that the editorialist for Investor’s Business Daily got it exactly right about the second part of Obama’s response to the rallies: “Thanks for What?” he asked.
Why should they [the tea partiers] be thankful? As the president himself said on his weekly radio address a week ago, “one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000; that’s another promise we kept.”
In fact, that wasn’t his promise at all.
Here’s what candidate Obama really said in September of 2008: “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
Got that? “Not any of your taxes.” The claim of no tax hikes on those below $250,000 as a result of the current administration’s policies is completely and utterly false.
A report from the House Ways & Means Committee’s GOP members notes that, since January 2009, Congress and the president have enacted $670 billion in tax increases. That’s $2,100 for each person in America. At least 14 of those tax hikes, the report says, break Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. Roughly $316 billion of the tax hikes — 14 increases in all — hit middle-class families, the report says.
This comes in addition to recent data from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office showing U.S. spending and indebtedness growing at an alarming rate. Government spending now totals 25% of GDP, a quarter above its long-term average. By 2035, it will hit 34% of GDP at current trends — a 70% increase in the real size of government in just 25 years.
Ha, ha, ha. Very amusing, what?
What should we make of Obama’s merriment? What does it tell us about his sense of humor? What does it tell us about what an earlier age would have called his “humor,” his character?
The first thing to notice about this moment of hilarity is how consonant it is with other Obama rhetorical eructations. For example, how similar in spirit it is to his challenge to Republicans after Nancy Pelosi managed to ram the presidential health care legislation through Congress. Instantly, there were calls to repeal the law. “My attitude is,” Obama told a crowd in Iowa, “go for it” — as if it would get them anywhere!
Obama’s amusement at the spectacle of dissent was also consonant with the remarks of candidate Obama disparaging all those “bitter” folks who “cling to guns or religion” instead of getting with the big government, progressive leftism espoused by Barack Obama.
Indeed, in one sense Obama’s comments are simply natural coefficients of a basic presumption of that progressive attitude, namely, the conviction that the left-liberal view of reality is not a political view but merely the view that any enlightened, reasonable person would have. It is only dissent from that view that is political, warped by self-interest, etc. If only everyone were sufficiently enlightened, everyone would (so this fairytale goes) have essentially the same ideas about all contentious issues. Which is to say, there would in the end be no contentious issues, for to dissent from the progressive narrative would be evidence of (depending on the nature of the regime) heresy, treason, or stupidity. Ultimately, contention would not only be stigmatized as counterproductive, it would be proscribed as criminal or insane.
The popularity of this view, as I’ve noted elsewhere, owes a great deal to John Stuart Mill. It was Mill who assembled the seductive arguments and inveigling rhetoric that convinced susceptible souls to look forward to a future in which, for the first time, “general unanimity of sentiment,” “firmly grounded in reason and in the true exigencies of life,” would make dispute about any important matter otiose. What if you dispute Mill’s notion of what counts as rational? What if you think he erred in defining “the true exigencies of life”? What if you think the whole utilitarian calculus is deeply flawed and in fact elides essential dimensions of human endeavor? Then you are a candidate for re-education, restraint, or ostracization.
If you care to test the traction of this dimension of the left-liberal consensus, you need only contemplate the way in which its spokesmen in the media and political establishment treat the tea party demonstrations. It wasn’t so long ago that Robert Gibbs, the president’s press secretary, dismissed the tea partiers as members of “the Brooks Brothers’ Brigade,” i.e., mostly middle class folks who, alarmed at the statist initiatives undertaken by the Obama administration, organized to proffer a competing point of view but who did so peaceably and with respect for the rule of law.
That was back when Obama, Gibbs, et al. could regard the tea parties as an impotent nuisance. In recent months, it is clear that the tea party has become a nuisance that, far from being impotent, might well be an electoral game-changer. Hence the establishment’s rhetoric has shifted drastically. You no longer find Barbara Boxer sneering about tea partiers being “well dressed.” Nowadays you find tea partiers accused of racism, violence, and disloyalty, never mind that the left-liberal establishment can point to no examples of these torts. The thing to grasp is that those making the accusations do not feel called upon to offer examples. The guilt of the tea-partiers transcends anything so pedestrian as actual behavior. Tea partiers are like “class enemies” under Stalin: guilty by definition.
Which brings me back to Obama’s merriment. Why did he find it “amusing” to contemplate the anti-tax rallies undertaken by (let us remember) the people he serves? Where was the humor? Let me add that I like a leader with a sense of humor. It was something that Winston Churchill, for example, possessed in spades. Clement Attlee, he said, was a modest man who had much to be modest about. Ronald Reagan had the same gift. Having been shot by John Hinckley, he said to the doctor: “I hope you are a Republican.”
But it’s one thing to have a sense of humor. It’s quite another to regard one’s opponents with amused disdain. One key difference is the presence of contempt. Obama’s modus operandi excels in the deployment of contempt. Is it part of his instinctive embrace of Saul Alinsky’s “rules for radicals“? I do not know. But in some ways Obama’s habitual expression of contempt is the most alarming component of his style of governing. Together with his evident self-infatuation and notorious sensitivity to criticism, it bespeaks a character that is volatile, heedless, and disengaged from the palpable realities faced by the people he represents. Hence his suggestion — meant, I feel sure, in all earnestness — that the people who rallied against bigger government and higher taxes should thank him for . . . for what? For not taxing them into penury?
Obama doesn’t see this, of course. He really cannot twig why everyone is not lining up to thank him for being their leader. Such imperviousness is worrisome, for it betokens a disconnection from reality. But it looks now as if the dissatisfaction represented by the tea partiers is growing by leaps and bounds. It is not dissipating, as many predicted; it is gaining definition and ever-more broad-based support. There will come a time when Obama will find it impossible to avoid acknowledging this. That is the moment when we really have to fear the reaction of this supremely disengaged connoisseur of contempt.
“If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” — Issac Newton
“If I have seen a little further it is by standing far, far above contemptible little Lilliputians who should be thanking me.” — Barack Obama
‘Instantly, there were calls to repeal the law. “My attitude is,” Obama told a crowd in Iowa, “go for it” — as if it would get them anywhere!’
As the insurgent problem arose in Iraq, Bush said, “Bring it on! – as if it would get them anywhere!
“But it’s one thing to have a sense of humor. It’s quite another to regard one’s opponents with amused disdain.”
“How’s that Hopey-Changey thing going?” asked Sarah P. with amused disdain. (She must be reading Alinsky.)
There is a very important distinction here; Barak Obama’s contempt [and I really do believe it to be contempt] is aimed directly at the electorate. As you may recall, these are the people by whom he was elected, and FOR whom he serves.
Quite right. Further to this point, it must be noted that all politicians and activists have enemies…. all of them. That is natural.
What is telling here is that the (American) Left’s enemies and those they hold in disdain are always their fellow countrymen…. and none other. Always always always. Only us, never any outsider. Never.
Always and Never.
Don’t forget Israel.
“There is a very important distinction here; Barak Obama’s contempt [and I really do believe it to be contempt] is aimed directly at the electorate. As you may recall, these are the people by whom he was elected, and FOR whom he serves.”
Right. Sarah Palin’s goshdarn comments about how rural Virginia and all these other places were “real America” surely wasn’t supposed to be contempt for the half of the electorate that lives in these crowded, unAmerican cities.
She was talking about the attitudes, not the location.
It’s possible to find people with such attitudes in big cities, but it is rare.
Why don’t you quite trying to find reasons to be offended.
#39 Morton Doodslag:
loathesome brittle freak
Love it! It’s right up there with another apt description of “The Won:” Effete Academic Weakling.
Jerry: Whay do you bother? Go away.
President O often sounds like a highly paid “public Intellectual” in a faculty lounge at a prestigious university speaking of the great unwashed, i.e., undergraduates.
Regarding President O’s manner of speaking: George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” (1946) is well worth reading again.
Yes, I agree. Once he becomes aware that he is going to lose, or actually loses the next election, there isn’t a doubt in my mind that he will really do whatever he wants from that point on, and it’s going to be ugly.
His contempt isn’t just for the opposition — it’s for our entire country, culture and history — that is clear as a bell.
Who says “They should thank me”?!? I mean … Who says a sentence like that?!? Has any president EVER said that before? Did Eisenhower say that when he returned from WWII? Most leaders — even the most foolish — will at the very least give lip service to saying that they are the ones who are “privileged” to serve.
Don’t you hear an echo of Michelle telling the crowd how “Obama won’t LET you … [this or that]?
He must sit in front of the mirror every night with Michelle behind him leading him to say his Stewart Smalley “affirmations.” “I give them their health, I give them my tax cuts, I’m King of the World, They worship me and everyone is thankful to have me and what I do for them.”
He’s a jerk!
and that’s all he’ll ever be
Obama wasn’t to the manor born, but everything he has was pretty much given to him. So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone if he lacks empathy for the working slob taxpayer class. He’s the community orgaanizer in chief now, and if the communities he organized in Chicago are any portent of the communities he’ll organize as POTUS, then America is in big trouble.
One day, when he gets his ass thrown out of office, I think he should be thanking us…
Thank you, Barack Ol’ Buddy, for presenting the true face of American “liberalism” to the public—a perfect image.
Square on the head! I am grateful indeed that he has torn the mask off the Dems, and VERY grateful that the vote on ‘Healthcare Reform’ was party line. For once the GOP stood square against petite-fascism! I’m anxious to see the next fight, and if they can do it again. By the time 2012 runs around, it may have become a habit. Imagine that, a GOP that has voted for liberty unanimously several times in a row.
I’ve got chills. Thank you Obama!
As for everything else he’s done…not so much.
I think Obama’s sense of humor is a big asset. He can laugh off the stupidity and cupidity of opponents, without rubbing it in too much. McCain’s “bomb, bomb, Iran” attitude is much more frightening than a President with the good sense to be amused by the absurdity of the teabag movement.
There is nothing wrong with being amused by people who choose to behave as clowns.
Peace.
DS
I am sure that the 50 million federal retirees who got no COLA in 2010, and have already been told there will be no
COLA for 2011 are laughing their heads off…especially w/the $700 + Billion bailouts for Obama’s Wall Street friends and campaign contributors. I started laughing really hard when I had to pay 16.75% of my income in Federal and State taxes. BOY!!! Did I find that super amusing….. NO!
I am, at the very least, highly amused by your comments.
David demonstrates the arrogance that defines modern liberals. He assumes that anyone who disagrees with Obama is stupid and childish. Does he point to any examples? Of course not. Does he try to prove his point? Of course not.
He just knows that anyone who disagrees with him must be stupid, to him it is self evident, and if you can’t see that, it’s just proof how stupid you are as well.
Just keep telling yourself how superior you are to the rest of us. I’m sure it will comfort you somehow.
And Mark, don’t forgot to point out that David signs off with the ubiquitous progressive valedictory…. “Peace.” Lest we mistake him for a pusillanimous conservative
Heh – notice how David S. stops any and all who might object to his comments? He ends that comment by the Stop Sign of ‘Peace’, which semantically functions to STOP any criticism of him. Heh.
Doesn’t work that way, David. Your comments are open not closed. That means that YOU don’t control how others react to them. Therefore….
Your comments are totally unsubstantiated. You have to provide some evidence that people who criticize Obama’s policies are acting out of ‘stupidity and cupidity’. Kindly explain. Remember, what you say is not gospel; that Stop Sign at the end of your post doesn’t close the door to a Request-for-Substantiation.
And your denigration of the Tea Party Movement by name-calling is not a rational argument but an irrational act. Could you explain why it is ‘absurd’?
Again, remember, you can put up a Stop Sign all you want but you and you alone are responsible for what you say. Trying to get out of responsibility by attacking without allowing retaliation is ..gosh..it’s rather totalitarian, isn’t it?
David – try this little experiment. Stand in the middle of a crowd of Tea Party people and spout off about how wonderful your Messiah is and see what happens to you. Lots of derision to be sure – but I’d be willing to bet you won’t be harmed. But stand in the middle of a bunch of Obama supporters like a group of SEIU members and spout off about the harm he is doing to this country and see what happens.
Good luck getting out of there without getting seriously injured.
Now who’s the clown?
Hey – I think I hear your momma calling you to lunch.
You mean like people who insist on referring to the Tea Party movement as “teabaggers”?
I find it amazing that you all jump on the occasional liberal commenter in such predictable ways, ways that do not generally address the substance of their points. As someone who myself sympathizes with Obama a heck of a lot more than most of you, I still recognize that there are genuine points of disagreement about economic policy that deserve to be aired. Instead of engaging in substantive argument, you claim (a) that liberals regard Obama as a messiah (say what? and can you please provide evidence that the particular liberal you are responding to does?); (b) that Obama is dangerous (planning violence, planning to take off his mask and exercise dictatorial authority, is a psychopath–this is all crazy talk, people); (c) that Obama is some sort of extremist (it’s very clear, and this is one thing I admire him for, that he is quite moderate not only in most of his positions but in his temperament–folks, if you’re scared of BHO, then you should be terrified of a good chunk of the American population); (d) that he hates America (I don’t even know where to begin). You are all living in an echo chamber that I find frightening for its lack of connection to reality. I’m quite serious when I ask you to think about this. I found similar anti-Bush rhetoric to be over the top in the previous administration. It’s dangerous, and anti-democratic (honestly, it’s quite hostile to the half of the country that tends to agree with Obama). It’s ultimately un-American. Go ahead and flame me. But if one or two of you can stop for a second and think rationally about this, this post may have been worthwhile. By all means, support smaller taxes than I do. By all means, support a smaller government. But be rational, people. (And while you’re at it, do recognize that many in the tea party represent the less rational elements of your side of the debate.)
“But be rational, people. (And while you’re at it, do recognize that many in the tea party represent the less rational elements of your side of the debate.)”
Everytime I see something rational in an Obama position, he immediately does something to make me believe it was for show (eg. Health Care summit).
Obama is clearly not well advised nor knowledgeable in most everything he dabbles in (and it is dabbling). Cash for Clunkers/Appliances was a waste of money. There needs to be a net gain when you do a marketing program, and when businesses do these things, it’s usually to make a bad quarter look good.
Science, don’t make me laugh. There are lots of “scientists” in name only.
I could go on but don’t want to waste my time.
The tea party is primarily about irresponsible taxation and spending. There is no debate from the liberal side…the jury is in as Obama repeatedly reminds us with his depracating humor. Unfortunately, it was not by a majority opinion.
The system was gamed.
Rational,
Here is the bottom line:
Every person that BHO is and has been close to; that has served as his mentor; is or was a doctrinaire Marxist or fellow-traveller (his mom, dad, grandparents, his spiritual advisor, his boyhood father-figure/mentor, a chunk of his appointed czars). These are facts. It his hard to logically conclude that that kind of background would issue forth one who is moderate.
His economic policy is punitive to production.
His foreign policy encourages our enemies.
His energy policy will impoverish us (there IS a reason that humanity left windmills behind three centuries ago).
I suppose if a rational person were to casually dismiss what BHO says, does, and who he associates with, yeah, I guess he is an alright guy.
Why not point out the substance of the points David S made in his response to Mr Kimball’s post that we should address? Perhaps it’s the the elitist’s disdain he shares with Obama in his claim that stupidity and cupidity is the rationale for the Tea Party movement. Perhaps the point you want us to address is the vulgar, puerile self-mockery David makes of himself with the ‘teabag’ characterization? Perhaps the ‘clown’ characterization?
These are not addressable points. David S’ comment was nothing more than an immature and malicious outburst and was treated as such. .
@Rational – You really missed the boat on this one. I’m all for pointing toward a more reasoned discussion, but this was the wrong thread. If you want to ask people to address the substance of a comment, you should have chosen a thread where the initial comment had substance. The initial comment had three statements:
1. people who oppose Obama are dumb and greedy (stupidity and cupidity).
2. Some politician he ran against is worse (not relevant to this discussion).
3. People who oppose Obama act like clowns.
What substance is there to address? Why did you assume there was substance to that? Think about it.
OK then, I am amused by obama the clown. In fact I am mused at the democrats too.
Obama is a devoted follower of Saul Alinsky and his actions simply mirror what is written in Alinsky’s book. But did you notice one thing? Obama never, ever, quotes past presidents, let alone the founding fathers, in any of his speaches. It’s as if the world began with Obama and Obama’s words. Think about that. He never seems to feel the need to quote anybody, even past DEMOCRATIC presidents. With an ego like that, you have to wonder what’s going to happen if his party gets crushed in the fall.
Even just yesterday, he was heckled during a speach in California and you could see how angry he was. Imagine if he had to face an entire crowd of angry Tea Party members that way? No, all this bum has left is to diminish the Tea Party members by trying to ridicule them. But it’s having the opposite effect and I think he’s beginning to know it. But as the public turns against him, when his “charm” has faded and the public realizes that “Hope and Change” just ment “Much more of the same” in Washington, watch out. I think you’re going to see a frustrated little child in the White House who will blame everybody but himself for the situation we’re in. Hopefully, in the fall we can vote in some grown ups who will be able to clean up the mess he made.
LIberty, I agree with your sentiments, but do not agree “that he is beginning to know it”. He is not capable of believing that he could be wrong. This is the character flaw that will hopefully end his presidency before we become EUtopians or worse.
America can’t exist in any recognizable form if we have three more years of this guy. Sorry, folks, we can’t wait until 2012. Impeach the communist NOW! He’s committed plenty of documentable impeachable offenses far worse than any of the things previous presidents have been impeached for.
Kathy, the problem with your suggestion of impeachment is that we’d be stuck with replacements as bad or worse than Obama! Would you want Joe Biden as president? How ’bout Nancy Pelosi? The best way to attack this arrogant imbecile is to beat him at his own game — take out his support system and force him to deal with a new majority come November. Besides, that’s the only way an impeachment would get its legs as the left would block any efforts at all.
Biden’s a fool, but he isn’t as bad as Obama.
Whoever Biden picks as his VP will have to be approved by the Senate, which will either be in Republican hands or only narrowly Democratic.
LIberty, I agree with your sentiments, but do not agree “that he is beginning to know it”. He is not capable of being introspective or believing that he could be wrong. This is the character flaw that will hopefully end his presidency before we become EUtopians or worse.
The only way Obama will be out of office…is the 2012 election, and that is “iffie”..due to black block vote and deeming the Republicans as racists.
When you get something for nothing,something someone else works hard for, and it’s literally handed to you by one political party in particular…you want your freebies and will defend him ’til the end.
He does not appear to realize how unpopular he is becoming.
\
The disconnect from reality that is most dangerous of all belongs to the voters that elected Obama.
A quick barometric reading across the country reveals a massive combination of people that think exactly like Obama does hyper-infused with a staggering heap of emotionally driven flesh most of whom have no idea what planet they are on. Any person that finds humor in this mess is sick.
Yup. Unfortunately, we do get the leaders we deserve.
Best thing you can do: Kill your television. It is the colonialist occupier of our MINDS.
Hitchens once had a marvelous pieve about the humor of our dear, beloved leader:
“President Bush used to tell jokes about his weaknesses, the most salient of these being his tragic struggle with grammar, itself quite possibly rooted in dyslexia. Many of President Obama’s jokes, his speechwriters should take note, were at the expense of his strengths—”I might lose my cool”—and were thus bordering on the narcissistic. (If I have a fault, and I’m the first to admit it, it’s probably this: I am too sweet and too patient and too tolerant of the mistakes of others.)”
So I concur with Credit Man here: He’s a jerk!
Libertyship46′s line, “Obama never, ever, quotes past presidents, let alone the founding fathers, in any of his speaches. It’s as if the world began with Obama and Obama’s words.”, misses the point.
Don’t you know? In the Beginning there was The Messiah. Just ask him. I’m sure Michelle and the rest of the syncophants tell him that all the time.
David S says, “There is nothing wrong with being amused by people who choose to behave as clowns.” This attitude only works if they’re not costing you money. The clowns in this administration and Congress are doing all they can to ruin this country. DS talks about, “the stupidity and cupidity of opponents”, projection if it ever existed. That doesn’t describe the Tea Partiers, ordinary people all, but does describe the crowd in DC. Which only proves Lenin was right about useful (or useless) idiots.
Obama is indifferent towards our national debt. He doesn’t spend ten minutes a week worrying about it. Obama is a narcissist who is convinced that he is wonderfully brilliant and self-sacrificing. Any bumps on the road to utopia can easily be taken care of at a later date. The main thing is to gain more power by “nudging” the common folk into doing what’s best for them.
#10. “Even just yesterday, he was heckled during a speach in California and you could see how angry he was.”
You are correct: the heckler wanted President O to get rid of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” O said that he agreed and is trying to do just that.
California is going down the tubes economically (12.6 % unemployment and a colossal debt), and those dudes are worrying about “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and President O feels their pain.
Add to Obama’s humor about his own dishonesty at the expense of taxpayers a penchant for scapegoating and and clandestine assassinations.
Rapacious insurance companies and money grubbing physicians were the scapegoats for for the enactment of Obamacare. Israel is the scapegoat in formulating an Obama administration policy in the the Middle East. Wall street is the scapegoat for financial reform.
Obama dithers for months on the highly publicized dispatch of more troops to Afghanistan but enthusiastically endorses targeted assassinations by drones run by the intelligence services far from public scrutiny.
Character? This is the sleaziest creature ever to occupy the White House.
It is not Obama’s connoisseurship of contempt that alarms me the most. It is the media who still refuses to recognize it for what it is. And American people who seem to enjoy being held in contempt.
The American people don’t enjoy being held in contempt. Those who seem to, are simply on the side of Obama, and also hold everyone else in contempt. It comes very easy to them.
In fact, I think they gain intellectual self-esteem by imagining themselves to be Obama’s peers, whereas the rest of us (who don’t adore Obama), are obviously inferior.
Obama is a pathological narcissist, a state that I consider he moved into as a young boy.
He interacts with the world by only three strategies, all of which are geared to control others. He is unable to interact in an equal relationship; he cannot accept someone else being ‘right’ which means in his unconscious, that he’d lose control over you.
His tactics are: misinformation; he’s a pathological liar, his words are meant to control not to inform you. He’ll say whatever is needed to maintain this control; if it differs from what he said yesterday – that’s irrelevant.
Another tactic is emotional manipulation; he sets up situations that are on an apocalpytic cusp, where he’ll insist that Congress pass the stimulus or ‘the economy will collapse’. Pass his Health Bill to save dying children and prevent rapacious greedy doctors from cutting out your tonsils. Stop nuclear arms because terrorists will steal them…yet he has forbidden, yes, forbidden, us to use the terms ‘Islamic terrorism’.
And his third tactic is, is you dissent and resist him, he’ll accuse you of bias. That is, your rejection of Him is not due to Him and His policies, which are beyond debate, but are due to your own failings. You are biased; Obama uses the theme of racism as a basic plank in his approach to the world. Now, he’s after the people of the Tea Parties and his theme is – they must be racist because only biased, bigoted people reject him.
He’s pathological. He’s dangerous because someone who, as I suggest he did, moved out of the real world and into a virtual world of his own construction so many years ago…is psychologically fragile. He can’t handle ‘attacks’ on his virtual world. Try to tell him that his views are not the Ultimate Truth but require dissent and debate – and that’s an attack on the sanctity and safety of his virtual world. Confront him, and that’s an attack. Resist – and that’s an attack.
If you are someone whom Obama can’t control..you may be outside his reach or you may not want something from him, then for Obama, you simply do not exist. Literally, you do not exist. The demonstrators in Iran did not exist for Obama; he ignored them. Why? First, they wanted freedom, not Obama. Second, he couldn’t access them to charm them and make them want Him. Therefore, they did not exist and he turned his back on them instead of publicly supporting their desire for democracy.
Put someone that fragile in power, and as has happened, he expands his Need-To-Control. He must control more and more of what is going on. The BackRoom Gang who run Obama politically, are busy using him to insert statism into the US. This agenda isn’t simply Obama’s Need-To-Control, it’s also the socialist agenda of the Democrat gang. Obama, I claim, isn’t an idealogue and does things not for their ideas but only to gain him control over others.
Yet, in a strange way, since he doesn’t live in the real world ..i.e., he plays golf while Poland buries its leader instead of going to the Washington Polish Embassy..but since he doesn’t live in the real world, he’s going to be satisfied with moving more and more into a virtual world.
His nuclear reduction treaty was a virtual treaty; it’s operationally useless.
His talk about Iran is virtual; he’ll do nothing..which means that Iran WILL obtain nuclear weapons.
I think we’ll see more of Obama’s thin-skinned rage and contempt against anyone who dissents, and also, as he is exposed to more criticism, we’ll see more of his retreat into the virtual world of his imagination where he controls everyone and everything.
My fear, since he became a candidate has been that you are spot on in your analysis
Great new cartoon on what Obama is doing to Liberty in this country at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/category/obama/
Another great cartoon at this site showing Obama’s lack of truthfulness at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/ilied-ipod/
#2,
Sarah Palin isn’t serving this country in any official capacity. Therefore she is not making policy-nor is she passing legislation we cannot live with. One can take or leave whatever she says with no impact on one’s future.
GWB was not addressing his countrymen-the people he was serving.
How many other presidents can you name who have shown so much disdain for those they serve ?
Obama is president of all the people and is accountable to every one-not just those people who will vote Democrats in.
#9,
That isn’t real humour. That is anger for those who cross him.It is mere vindictiveness.
Honest and truthful progressive-left’s are now seeing the light on the danger of the self-proclaimed #1 Fuhrer Obama. More and more of them are turning away from him and his radical policies and massive taxes. His idealogical cadre and he have trouble with the truth and fairness, so they will fossilize on the vine. Keep the faith.
More and more of them are turning away from him and his radical policies and massive taxes.
What’s the source for this, please?
Link?
Thanks.
Try any polling agency.
look at legitimate polling and you will see the facts …
I have found that the way to most effectively deal with the condescending moralizing of progressives is two fold; you must rearrange the deck chairs in their dialectic.
First, explain to them the concept of “fighting words.” If they use fighting words, they will get a fight that they will lose. You, as a patriotic american, are NOT a second class citizen to be insulted in any way. Remember that and act accordingly. The idea that they are tolerating you and not the other way around has got to be inverted.
Second, they have no idea how to handle casual disrespect, blasphemy even, against their religion. Yes, this is using Alinskyite tactics against them…
Remind them, up front, that their Messiah in the long term employ of a slumlord by the name of Tony Rezko. But of course, phrase it a little more colorfully than that.
Are my ideas fair? No, but they are definitely more fun than arguing against someone looking down their nose at you.
David S., throwing the term “Teabagger” around is homophobic, and disparaging to gays.
Peace, Unicorns and a great big bowl of snuggly-wugglies for breakfast!
The man is arrogant, narcissistic, and behaves as a ruler, not a servant of the people. Has he forgotten that he got his job from the taxpayers of this country? And to have the sheer, unmitigated gall to treat the overtaxed citizens with contempt? Disgusting, and very, very frightening.
He does not “serve”; We serve HIM. And, by the way, We are PAYING HOMAGE TO HIM, in cash.
Roger:
I forgot to thank you for another insightful article.
We are not worthy to find fault with Lord Obama. Everyone has seen halos magically appear on his photos. That’s heavy and you know it. No one else is so dedicated to creating a world where we can sit around the campfire and sing happy songs with those who wanted to kill us before he opened their hearts. Like, WOW. Those who stubbornly cling to their Constitution will have to understand that He knows best. Should it be necessary to suspend national elections at some point, we must trust it is for the good of the country, and thank Him for his courage and wisdom. We are not worthy to find fault with Lord Obama.
60 Minutes interview with The Won (we have been waiting for) by Steve Kroft over the tanking American economy:
“You’re sitting here. And you’re— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, “I mean, he’s sitting there just making jokes about money—” How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asks at one point.
“Are you punch drunk?” Kroft says.
“No, no. There’s gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama says, with a laugh.
This guy is simply too awful to be for real. Somebody(s) powerful and rich just behind the scenes, pulling the levers is my guess. It also appears that some on his staff are making their post Wagu-steak career plans…so much like the Greek cruise ship crew who whispered “abandon ship” and piled into the lifeboats themselves…
What passes for humor on the left and gets the biggest laughs amongst that crowd, we would view as sarcasm and disdain, usually said with a sneer, a shake of the head, and a roll of the eyes. They will always have the conceit that they are somehow smarter and more enlightened. This is why they insist on using put-down terms like “teabagger” to describe us which I am sure they think is funny. Yet over the whole range of issues, most leftists rarely deviate from the party line. They do not form independent opinions where they might agree on one issue, but disagree with the leftist party line on another. This is not allowed among those wishing to remain part the collective. So in this way, they are like brain-dead automatons.
You’re so wrong! Many on The Left were very angry that ObamaCare didn’t provide a “public option” RIGHT NOW. The Dems have worked hard to let them know it will take a little time to get there, but there we . WILL . get.
A little bit of dissent about the slowness of Obama’s takeover is acceptable.
Many on the left are blissfully ignorant of what the public option means. You need to know how the current government run operations work, to realize how inefficient they are…why gov’ment programs have pushed toward managed care contracts (private) for cost control reasons.
Reality hurts when it sets in. Unfortunately with liberals it’s usually after the damage has been done and they’ve covered their tracks.
After the ‘damage is done’ it will naturally be the conservatives fault -probably Bush.
The trick to the party of “tax and spend” is that it became the party of “spend and then tax.” In order to maintain that illusion that big tax increases are not coming, the president demands that “thank you.” There are people out there that would predict that cap-n-trade, green jobs, health care costs, unionization of the entire work force, deficit spending, and $3.50 gasoline will not increase the economy.
Any slick politician or con-man knows that if caught between the big lie and the lynch mob, that it is better to re-inforce the big lie.
Thank you Roger. Excellent article encapsulating the many egregious Obama flaws – his arrogance and dishonesty being two of many, many weaknesses.
And I want to thank David S. for providing us the caricature of the type of “highly educated” lackey who voted for Obama – superficially sophisticated and venal.
One caution, though. When Obama begins to lose his grip and begins to lose his magic, and some of his former supporters begin to turn as is happening now, and Obama feels politically threatened, expect things to turn from ugly to dangerous. Right now, Obama is narcissistic enough to still believe his charisma alone will win the day.
We’ve already witnessed the insidious charges of linking tea party folks to Timothy McVeigh. When these charges fail, I fully expect to be hit with more charges of racism, this time with tacit accusation by Obama himself.
Yep, some of ‘em are already starting to talk about putting us on trial for “sedition.” The punishment for that is no joke. This is getting very un-funny very quickly. (Not that they’re gonna shut ME up, though. Strength in numbers, folks. They’ll have a hell of a time trying to jail ALL of us)
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/joe-klein-beck-palin-may-be-committing-sedition-for-speaking-out-against-obama-video/
Heck I hope we are commiting sedition. Im sick of this president. I did not vote for him, but when he won i was the guy saying lets give him a chance. even tho i listened to him during the campaign and the stuff he was saying scared me as i recognised exactly whare it was comming from. The more he said the worse i felt. He and his admin have ZERO respect for us. He views us as children. I have NEVER seen someone divide this country so much, in such a short period of time. We need to keep up. We need to commit sedition, break the law if neccesary! Most of all…we can never let up. the ‘party dosent end in nov, or 2012. in fact it dosent end…ever. we cant let this happen again.
With those ears you would think he would be a better listener.
The problem with Obama is really simple… He honestly believe he’s God.
Think about it.
Mr. Obama’s personality seems increasingly shaped by the adulation he receives from the mainstream media. As we know, nearly all of the “elite” news and entertainment media has been both his cheering section and pet poodle since he appeared on the scene in 2000. It would take someone with a lot more character than Mr. Obama not to be affected by the day-in and -day-out hosannas from this group. Whatever his other qualities are, humility and self-deprecation are not among them.
Always remember what Cecil B. DeMille said about Norma Desomond in “Sunset Boulevard” – “Twenty studio publicity men working overtime can do terrible things to the human spirit.”
A flashing smile, a cloud of smoke,
and a hearty ‘Hide your silver !’
The Lone President derides again !
We are surrounded by Tea Partiers !
What you mean ‘We’, Whiteface man ?
Is Lese Majesty a crime, yet ?
There is something tragic about the coming collision between Obama and America, but it may be the inevitable result of 50+ years of provocation by the left. The push back is late, but it’s potent, and maybe the cultural war is coming to its climax. It better be resolved one way or the other.
What I find alarming in all this talk of taxes and spending is that the greatest tax increase of all, one that will hit everyone, is ignored. That tax is inflation and politicians love it because they think they can’t be blamed for it. Regardless of how much Obama raises taxes we are not going to come close to paying for his reckless spending to date, not to mention the huge mandates we already had such as Social Security and Medicare. The situation will be compounded as interest rates go up, especially if Moody’s drops our credit rating. This bill will come due as soon as the economy picks up enough steam to effect unemployment and wages.
Rancher, I must beg to differ. Among the many things I cannot fathom about this administration is what they are thinking vis a vis inflation. If they agree with you — “politicians love it because they think they can’t be blamed for it”, I think they are out of their minds.
Inflation can be presidency killers. And ponder that virtually everyone born after 1970 has no awareness of what it is or means whatsoever!. None. Courtesy of Ronaldus Magnus.
If inflation does hit, say next year, I would relish the specter of Obama trying to blame a two-years gone Bush for that one. Bring that one on, big boy! It’d crash in flames, and he’d look twice the fool.
No, if inflation hits hard, and I fear it will, it will do Obama no favors, and I do not see any way he or his minions could spin their way out of it. And a lot of young people who have yet to turn on their Tiger Beat Messiah will then get the long-awaited wake-up call that we all got some time ago.
Indeed, Bush’s only connection to that would be the TARP et. al. in 2008, for which Obama himself voted in favor.
I guess I should have said politicians love it because they think they can’t be directly blamed for it. They didn’t vote for inflation after all. I don’t see Obama getting caught in the coming tsunami, the economy won’t begin to pick up until businesses see some sort of stability and an easing of hostility from both the White House and Congress. What also will be necessary will be an easing of job killing legislation like Obamacare and Cap and Tax. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid will by definition be out of the picture. The ones who will pay will be those in power when a real recovery occurs, probably Republicans.
Rancher:
I don’t want to appear to be defending the current President, but I have to challenge your statement, “Regardless of how much Obama raises taxes we are not going to come close to paying for his reckless spending to date….”
In point of fact, the President cannot raise taxes; that power is the exclusive province of the Congress, specifically the House of Representatives (United States Constitution, Article I, Section 7). Likewise, under the same Article, the President — regardless of party — cannot spend a nickel unless the Congress votes to let him.
Back during the Reagan Administration, Ronald Reagan was blamed for ballooning the deficit, mostly as a result of the military build-up that ended up bankrupting the Soviet Union. The accusation was as inaccurate and unfair then as it is now. During the Reagan years, the across-the-board tax cuts he pushed through Congress resulted in Federal revenues more than doubling over the subsequent six years. Congress saw all that lovely lucre rolling into the Treasury and preceeded to spend every dime of it, and then some. At the same time, every annual budget proposal Reagan sent to Capitol Hill was declared ‘dead on arrival’ by the Congressional leadership — every one.
The problem is not a President with a radical agenda (that’s actually a whole ‘nother issue); the problem is with a Congress with so little fiscal discipline, so little judgement, so little — dare I say it, sanity — that they’re willing to go along with it, indeed to double down on it. Slap some sense into the Congress, and a lot of our current problems would not seem so intractable.
November cannot come soon enough for me.
It’s true that only congress can raise taxes, or in the case of Bush’s tax cuts, let them expire. But this President can veto such taxes like the VAT, and has promised to do so, but won’t. Obama takes credit for what little tax cuts congress has passed, I’ll credit him for tax increases. He owns it just like he owns the coming inflation nightmare, although Bush also owns at least part of that.
The President has forgotten (if he ever knew) that though only a little more than 50% of the electorate voted for him, he must govern the entire country. He seems to have spent the last 15 months jeering at those who did not vote for him, and his jeers are getting louder and nastier. The greatest challenge of a leader is to lead those who do not wish to be led. This is most certainly true in the business world. Not only has the President never actually been a leader, he is uninterested in being a leader. He does not engage in the art of gentle persuasion. He just uses the bully pulpit. I have never seen any hint that he understands what it takes to lead.
I don’t think he’s forgotten, it’s more that he never cared.
Those who weren’t smart enough to vote for him are beneath his contempt.
In his mind, not supporting him is proof positive that you are racist, stupid, childish, etc.
The same goes for those who used to support him, but have fallen away.
Actually, those who voted for Obama comprised 30% of the electorate. Some 58% of the electorate turned out for the election and 52% of those voted for Obama.
0.58*0.52 = 0.30
Roger concludes that when Obama realizes that the Tea Party sentiment “is gaining definition and ever-more broad-based support … is the moment when we really have to fear the reaction of this supremely disengaged connoisseur of contempt.”
Perhaps — but I’d suggest that the moment to fear this loathesome brittle freak is already long past. He is wreaking havoc, and will continue to wreak havoc until he is deposed. Right now his disinformation Czars and media apparatchiks are spreading ominous warnings of the seditious nature of opposing him. The Rachel Maddows and Bill Clintons are waiting — hoping — praying fervently for the trap to spring — on that day when a lone lunatic doing god-knows-what allows them to act against their political enemies by painting the millions in opposition to Obama and his “progressive cause” with the broad brush of “traitor!”, “insurrectionist!”, “Vast Right-wing Conspiracy(c)!”, et al.
Obama and HIS cabal are bankrupting our nation.
They are embracing our enemies and slapping our friends.
They are trampling on the Constitution and waging war against our treasured American Rights.
In the sickest manner those on the Left are fomenting the very conditions which are bound to precipitate the violent actions they seek and need in order to lower the boom and install their tyranny. Doubt my words? See their methods on the day the “Healthcare Reform Act” was signed — Watch as those odious black race-baiting stooges waded through the Tea Party demonstration in Washington — their only motive was to harvest those shouts of “nigger” and the image of whites spitting on blacks — Not finding those slurs, not seeing that spit — they then set about, aided by theirmegaphone abettors in the media, to invent those scurrilous accusations out of whole cloth.
America is being set up by this criminal filth. We should fear what was sown by the Left through the election of this heinous man. The Hurricane is only beginning to blow, and devastation will be left in its wake.
George Soros may be the evil genius and financier behind the whole thing, but the real dynamic of what’s going on is best seen in the smug, sneering smirks of the loathsome Bill Ayers. Ayers is the one who got Obama the only “executive” job he ever had, running that Leftist instrument the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Ayers is the one Obama shared an office with for THREE YEARS when they were serving as co-directors of CAC. Ayers is the one whose rich daddy pulled strings at University of Chicago to get Obama that part-time senior lecturer job (N.B., NOT “professor”) at the law school, teaching gullible students all about “power dynamics” and how the Constitution gives too much power to evil productive citizens. Ayers is the one who not only launched Obama’s run for the Illinois Senate in his living room, but beforehand got Obama introduced to all “the right people.” Ayers is the one who saved Obama’s ass with “Dreams from My Father,” when Obama was two years overdue and the publisher was getting ready to ask for a refund of the advance money, which Barack and Michelle had already spent most of. Ayers is the one who, with his wife, fellow commie terrorist and Charles Manson-admirer Bernardine Dohrn, babysat Obama’s kids.
Ayers is the one who, so many years ago, getting out of jail time on a legal technicality thanks to the ace lawyer hired by Ayers’ rich daddy, came out of the courthouse smirking and swaggering, admitting he was “guilty as hell, free as a bird, what a country!” As in, “NYAH-NYAH-NYAH-NYAH!”
Ayers was the one Obama was channelling when he shot the finger for the cameras at Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Paul Ryan and others… and Ayers is the one Obama is channeling as he gives one great royal “F*CK YOU!” to the American people every day from the moment he wakes up and gets out of bed.
Obama didn’t run the Annenburg Challenge. He was a member of the board that oversaw it.
I think you’re thinking of the Woods Fund, of which both Obama and Ayers were board members, and in which capacity they sat together on various public panels.
But the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was indeed co-chaired by Obama and Ayers. Stanley Kurtz researched this thoroughly back in 2008. From his September 23, 2008, article at National Review Online (http://article.nationalreview.com/372023/obamas-challenge/stanley-kurtz):
Let’s first review CAC’s initial setup. In the first year, 1995, Obama headed the board, which made fiscal decisions, and Ayers co-chaired the Collaborative, which set education policy. During that first year, Obama’s formal responsibilities mandated close cooperation and coordination with the Collaborative. As board chair and president of the CAC corporation, Obama was authorized to “delegate to the Collaborative the development of collaborative projects and programs . . . to obtain assistance of the Collaborative in the development of requests for proposals . . . and to seek advice from the Collaborative regarding the programmatic aspects of grant proposals.” All this clearly involves significant consultation between the board, headed by Obama, and the Collaborative, co-chaired by Ayers….
As CAC board chair, Obama was essentially authorizing the funding of Ayers’s own educational projects, and the projects of Ayers’s radical allies….”
You should read the whole article.
As for Ayers and Obama sharing an office, please read “Crossing Paths Daily: Obama and Ayers Shared an Office (for three years) ” at: http://www.verumserum.com/?p=2907
#4 Aqua: “His contempt isn’t just for the opposition — it’s for our entire country, culture and history — that is clear as a bell.”
Oh you are soooooooooo right!!!
“David S., throwing the term “Teabagger” around is homophobic, and disparaging to gays.”
Isn’t it amusing that leftists use their daily practices, which they believe to be good and taught to all schoolboys, as insults? Even in their invective they know the truth! It’s an insult because it’s ugly.
Aqua (#4): To the best of my recollection LBJ said that. He was apparently particularly bitter over the “hey hey LBJ” chant, believing that he deserved to be treated better by the youth after everything he did for them.
I realize comparing Obama to LBJ doesn’t exactly aquit Obama in any meaningful way, I just thought it was an interesting parallel.
I knew from the moment he promised that people earning under $250K a year wouldn’t be taxed that Obama would be unable to keep that promise. Because, if you tax the people who own the means of production (to use Marxist terminology the president would be familiar with) they will simply pass the costs of said tax on to all consumers of their products, which IS a tax upon all consumers, including those who make less than $250K a year. The fact of the matter is generally, with the tax system as complicated as it is, only the rich (top 5%) can afford tax advice which will provide them significant savings and keep their rates almost as low as the rest of the actual tax payers. This is why a simpler solution is needed, such as a Flat Tax or the Fair Tax. Without all the loopholes and confusion, people will not waste as much time looking after the money they don’t get to keep anyways, and government will spend less on enforcement with less laws. Generally, less laws and harsher enforcement of those laws is a good thing, because we don’t overburden people with regulations, and at the same time, we punish those who break the laws while not expecting everyone to be an attorney or need one.
#38 Drew, spot on. Instead of being the President to all citizens, he acts like he’s still in campaign mode, demonizing those who dare to disagree with what he narcissisticly believes to be a Messiah-like message & plan. His disinterest in being a leader was demonstrated when he voted “present” so many times when he was Senator. It’s so ingrained in him that he wouldn’t be able to make a decision about pulling the ripcord after jumping out of a plane.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: “Hmmm . . . should I pull this ripcord since I’m not a Latino woman who makes wise decisions? Should I pull it before I consult Robert, Rahm & David? Since those far-right religious conservatives would have me pull this ripcord, maybe I’d better think twice about it. What would Alinsky do?”
PRESIDENTIAL SYCOPHANT: “Mr. President, excuse me, but you’re running out of time to pull your ripcord.”
PRESIDENT OBAMA: “Nonsense, you silly fool. I have plenty of time. Plus, I have used my oratorical gifts to state my message to this ripcord, and if it doesn’t get it, then it’s just clinging to guns & religion.”
#41 Tehag, I know!
And yet they complain conservatives are the ones filled with hate, and contempt.
The people in and of this forum are just too stupid to understand how great a man Obama really is. You just wait and see. He is the greatest president we have ever had. Ever.
Peace. It’s all good.
Truly, a Legend In His Own Mind.
Are you for real????
This remark reminds me of the Kerry staffer quoted after the presidential election “They voted against their own self interest!” Somebody should ask BO if he thinks most people are incapable of calculating their taxes. Actually, somebody should ask him when he last did his own taxes.
Barry is the shallow, narcissistic, rarely sane, ideal democrat. He is the perfect demorat as created by the ruling radical democrats who built and tended the affirmative action machinery to produce him. In another sixty days or so it will be impossible for his inner circle to hide the fact that Barry is stark, raving, mad. To no avail, the democrat crowd will unite in blaming those horrible little Tea Party folks for driving our first black president insane. Unfortunately for them, no one will believe that little Barry Sortero hasn’t been insane all along, and only those who are the same sort of ideal democrats as Barry himself will want to vote for those who followed an insane Pied Piper off of a cliff.
Regards
Not Nero, but new age Caligula…watch him dictate a new format for NCAA playoffs.
Have you noticed that they have already moved beyond “Tea[partiers] are violent racists?”
Starting this past weekend, many of the lefty propagandists shifted their message to: Tea party people are just silly. They all wear dumb, amateurish costumes. And they all carry dumb, amateurish signs. What the signs say is ridiculous and makes no sense, so don’t even pay attention to it.
Not that smart a move. True, it became obvious that the “violent racists” thing wouldn’t stick. But it doesn’t mean the “silly, absurd” thing is any more believable. It only works (for the time being) because the real tea party attenders and their actual signs are starting to fade from view. But they will be back!
I think most politicians on the campaign trail offer promises and high expectations. O’Bama certainly raised the hopes of our nation by saying he was going to bring a change to Washington and have transparency. All I see are non transparencies, lies, and mysteries concerning our relationships to Iran, terrorists, Israel etc. Very few people in our country want to depend on government for their lively hood. It is sad that our independence is being eaten up by our government especially by taxes to get rid of our deficit by one party making the decisions. Both parties have a role in this but OBama has to own his own high expenditures by expanding the welfare state and expanding our government against the will of the people.
Mr. Obama is a psychopathic liar! He has indeed raised taxes on everyone, particularly the middle classes – from lower to higher middle class and he has done so with the passion of a true Marxist and the iron will of a fascist.
My “safe” savings account receives .15 percent interest. Modest interest used to be utilized to sustain those who had saved a bit during their lifetimes. But to Marxists “interest” is a form of unearned income, producing unfair inequality between the “haves and have nots.”
By keeping interest rates at essentially zero for those who cannot chance losing their capital, Obama is reducing the middle classes to penury. It is the Federal government that is preventing the earning of the smallest reasonable return on the money people have lent to their banks. It is more than a tax. It is theft from the people who can least afford it and who worked the hardest to make their lives comfortable.
It appears to be an example of BLT Marxist view.
How many people can you name who have written two (that is 2) autobiographies about themselves before they have ever accomplished anything? Who does that??? How can David S and they rest of the boy toys defend something so narcissistic
Besides Obama, the only person I can think of is Adolf Hitler (or did he only write one autobiography)?
From the Mayo Clinic site at:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/narcissistic-personality-disorder/ds00652/dsection=symptoms
Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by dramatic, emotional behavior, in the same category as antisocial and borderline personality disorders.
Narcissistic personality disorder symptoms may include:
Believing that you’re better than others
Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
Exaggerating your achievements or talents
Expecting constant praise and admiration
Believing that you’re special and acting accordingly
Failing to recognize other people’s emotions and feelings
Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
Taking advantage of others
Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
Being jealous of others
Believing that others are jealous of you
Trouble keeping healthy relationships
Setting unrealistic goals
Being easily hurt and rejected
Having a fragile self-esteem
Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional
Although some features of narcissistic personality disorder may seem like having confidence or strong self-esteem, it’s not the same. Narcissistic personality disorder crosses the border of healthy confidence and self-esteem into thinking so highly of yourself that you put yourself on a pedestal. In contrast, people who have healthy confidence and self-esteem don’t value themselves more than they value others.
When you have narcissistic personality disorder, you may come across as conceited, boastful or pretentious. You often monopolize conversations. You may belittle or look down on people you perceive as inferior. You may have a sense of entitlement. And when you don’t receive the special treatment to which you feel entitled, you may become very impatient or angry. You may insist on having “the best” of everything — the best car, athletic club, medical care or social circles, for instance.
But underneath all this behavior often lies a fragile self-esteem. You have trouble handling anything that may be perceived as criticism. You may have a sense of secret shame and humiliation. And in order to make yourself feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and efforts to belittle the other person to make yourself appear better.
——————————
God save our Republic from our Twit-in-Chief!
Wow! I think you hit the nail on the head.
Re ETAB #18: “His tactics are: misinformation; he’s a pathological liar, his words are meant to control not to inform you. He’ll say whatever is needed to maintain this control; if it differs from what he said yesterday – that’s irrelevant.”
What you have described is one of the main characteristics of a psychopath. People continue to call Mr. Obama “narcissistic.” However, the psychiatric diagnosis of “Psychopath” fits better. The idea that a human being can say different things about the same subject without have to justify the differences is not an easily learned tactic, but psychopaths do it quite naturally.
We would be doing much better if Mr. Obama were a narcissist. He would need to look good under all conditions or he would withdraw to depression. Not so with psychopaths who actually become calmer in emotionally arousing situations. See Dr. Robert Hare who wrote “Without Conscience.”
I think that’s right. Clinton was a narcissist, big time. Bush had some delusions of grandeur, I’d say, like declaring victory in Iraq. Or maybe just upper-class ignorance borne of privilege. Obama is more like a psychopath. The 60 Minutes interview with Kroft was the turning point for me. I mean, I opposed what he stood for before that. When I saw how he laughed at the CBS questions, which seemed to come out of the fact that Kroft was genuinely disturbed by Obama’s behavior, I realized that this is a nasty human being.
What the hell did people expect from a guy who voted FOUR TIMES to NOT outlaw the killing of born-alive, out-of-the-womb, living, breathing babies? This is one cold, cruel S.O.B.:
http://www.bornalivetruth.org
http://www.onetruemedia.com/otm_site/view_shared?p=7030bd098cca768e72d111&skin_id=701&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url
When did Bush declare victory in Iraq?
Psychopath or sociopath or aggressive narcissist or whatever. I’m certain that the President would be rating high on Hare’s PCL. That weird 60 minutes interview last year, where the interviewer had to ask if the President was “punch drunk” because of his inappropriate giggling and laughter . . . that was just kinda creepy. It unsettled me to think we now had a mentally unstable person in the highest elected office in the land.
Another really scary event will occur when (and if) Mr. Obama loses the next election. He will give a victory speech and then continue on as though nothing has happened. Only then will Americans realize how lucky they were to have dodged a bullet. Remember, Mr. Obama brings a gun to a knife fight.
And all goes well until January 20 at noon, at which time the President-elect shows up at the White House with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and orders them to, “Get that man out of my office.”
Baal, #23 above, has it right. Get in their faces. They’re nearly all cowards, and the slightest provocation sends them screaming that they’ve been assaulted or threatened. This is the same reaction the Dems and their minions have when a few hundred of mostly gramps and grannies get together at a tea party. The hysteria appears to come from the startling realization on the left that average Americans are starting to hate them as much as they hate the average American. As for SEIU thugs, most are fat slobs who couldn’t defend themselves from a bunch of teenagers. We’ll see how tough the left is.
I think Obama has the most dangerous type of personality disorder.
he is not above using violence to achieve his goals. the worst is yet to come.
True..
Obama is a blight on our country and it seems to make him happy.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7103252.ece
The players change, but the tune remains the same: a one note orchestra comprised of deformed souls, scoundrels, scalawags and similar ilk conducted by the Chief Deformed Soul in the Oval Office.
He’s antagonistic, childish, and dangerous.
“That is the moment when we really have to fear the reaction of this supremely disengaged connoisseur of contempt.”
Wow! This one sentence says it all!
It is Obama’s contempt that reveals the immature punk that he is.
What exactly is the tax cut he has given to all of us? Wouldn’t any tax benefit just have gone to deficit borrowing with the stimulus , cash for clunkers, home buyer credit, health care law, etc.? Does he really deserve rationale attempts at dialog anymore? There has just been too much dishonesty.I consider it a waste of breath at this point since I do not consider Obamanites anything but malevolent.
Quoted from and Linked to at:
The Supremely Disengaged Man-Child
Obama’s financial “reforms” just got shot down. And the GOP will continue to slam his ass.
Barrack Hussein Obama is NOT the lawful president of the United States:
http://politickamerica.com/
Simple. Let’s hope Lt. Col. Lakin makes his point to America.
Terry Lakin Letter to (illegitimate) POTUS:
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/news/terry-lakins-letter-to-potus.html