Obama proves conclusively that the position he is best suited for is UN Ambassador
Aren’t they the ones who are supposed to be good at listening to hateful diatribes against the US and all its evils, sitting there looking bored while taking notes, and then pretending the whole thing never happened?
Presidents, on the other hand, are not supposed to do that. They are supposed to respond, to point out the good things about their own country and its history. They are supposed to…but hey, wait a minute, isn’t this the man who not only silently listened to ferocious America-bashing for twenty long and admiring years spent in the pews of his Chicago church, but who indulges quite regularly in the practice himself?
So I suppose it was hardly a stretch for Obama to listen to the fire-breathing Ortega dump on the US for fifty minutes at the Summit of the Americas, and to not make a peep in return about it, even when asked later at a press photo-op.
Actually, my bad—Obama did utter a peep. This was his response when queried as to what he thought about Ortega’s speech:
It was 50 minutes long. That’s what I thought.
During his own summit address, Obama added the following telling words [emphasis mine]:
To move forward, we cannot let ourselves be prisoners of past disagreements. I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old. Too often, an opportunity to build a fresh partnership of the Americas has been undermined by stale debates. We’ve all heard these arguments before.
No doubt Obama thinks this is an example of turning the other cheek, of opening up a dialogue in a helpful and receptive way. And I might even have agreed with him—that is, if summits such as this were family therapy sessions among people who love each other and just want to get along, but have been squabbling recently.
But nations do not follow that model. Power and influence, strength and weakness, are the only coin of their realm.
And once again Obama is sending a message of weakness. The fact that he will not stand up for his country verbally suggests he will fail to do so in action as well. Whether the leaders of other nations are correct or not in that assumption about him remains to be seen; I suppose he could surprise them by acting stronger than he sounds. But his words signal dangerously that he—and this country, despite our vast strength—will be easy to take advantage of for at least the next four years.
The narcissistic sentence I highlighted was probably Obama’s idea of a sarcastic joke (I believe so, anyway; since I haven’t seen a video, I can’t be sure of his tone of voice). But even as a quip it was juvenile, inane, and self-referential. However, as Ann Althouse points out, that’s what we’ve come to expect of Obama—after all, he was only eight when terrorist Bill Ayers was setting his bombs.
It has become clear to me that Obama does not identify with this country and its interests on a gut level. It has also become clear that, although most presidents and politicians are somewhat narcissistic, there has never been such a pure and unabashed narcissist in the White House before in my lifetime—perhaps ever. This does not bode well for this country. Or the world.
[ADDENDUM: Speaking of Obama’s self-referential narcissism, here’s another example from the same summit. After his new good buddy Hugo Chavez gave him a book that was a Leftist analysis of European and US exploitation of Latin America, Obama responded to a press query this way:
I thought it was one of Chavez’s books. I was going to give him one of mine.
If I were doing the gifting, I’d give Obama a copy of Machiavelli’s The Prince. No need to give one to Chavez—I’d wager he’s already read and digested it.]
Faced with stories like this, I recall the words of a philosopher from another age, Casey Stengel:
I think that this Administration’s record in foreign policy will make us remember the ’62 Mets.
I think you are spot on about his not identifying with the US. He doesn’t speak for us because he hasn’t a clue about who we are. For him, we are categories in “How To Identify Uncouth American Rubes.”
Political, social, and psycho analyzing Obama should result in one hefty tome by the time he’s finished. I suggest all future candidates for the Presidency who did not have a father to raise them be eliminated from consideration, de facto, if not de jure. After Clinton, and now Obama, I’m convinced this is the way to go — too much baggage otherwise — neuroses, guilt complexes, projecting superiority complexes, moral relativism vying with moral superiority, multiple personalities, and on and on and on.
“It was 50 minutes long. That’s what I thought.”
This was almost a good line… since it really was 30 minutes, something like 2 hours or more would have done it better…
I still think one of the main questions is does he believe this or not? Same thing with Wright.
If he *does* believe it then at some point it will come crashing down and I suspect that we will see a wish of vengeance that has not been since the days of a monarchy.
If he doesn’t then we are in even bigger trouble as that would generally mean his goal is weakening of the US for something. Do not know what that something is.
Personally I think he does believe and can suppress it when needed. When he is caught off guard (say Joe the Plumber) then he falls back into leftist philosophy.
Neo, I have to add, that aside from the ‘when I was three’ crack it all reminds me of the progressive tendency to offload everything they dislike about America onto conservatives… everything bad from the past (even if progressives caused it) and ‘bad’ (re: non PC) about the present = conservatives and not them….
“Power and influence, strength and weakness, are the only coin of their realm.”
I think this may not be so. Consider the special relationship between the US and Great Britain, and the opposite kind of relationship between the US and Iran. Beliefs and emotion and trust count for a lot.
“It has become clear to me that Obama does not identify with this country and its interests on a gut level”
This is terrifying, if true. Of utmost seriousness. I suspect Obama will discover his values about 3 years into his Presidency.
Fred2: Our relationship with Great Britain is an exception to the general rule, because of our shared history and cultural as well as philosophical heritage. Even so, if the interests of each country were to somehow radically diverge from the other, I believe you would see a cooling and/or rupture even in that close relationship.
Folks – face reality.
HBO is dumb and incompetent. His talent is distance reading from a teleprompter, turning to the other one every twenty words or so.
This is obvious…an accomplished speaker never looks at the same spot in an audience every other time. Usually the order is front – back – left – right – center – front, etc. Try to engage ALL the audience…
Alas, he’s The Triumph of Affirmative Action Over Talent.
It shows…
You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet, Neo. Check out this response from Obama about what was going on in 2004 (when he was, what, 42?) and not when he was 8 years old or 3 months old. From thehill.com (as in Capitol Hill) website:
What an arrogant d***. He really is the supreme narcissist if he thinks that is an even remotely appropriate answer for a president of the United States to give when asked about a period when he was already a nationally known political figure. If Reagan was the “Teflon President”, Obama is trying real hard to be the greased pig president. And it’s not very becoming.
Whether he realizes it or not, and he sure doesn’t seem to, he’s not president of himself. And he’s not even president of some kind of fantasy United States that just popped into existence this year that he can treat as his personal plaything. He’s president of a country with over 200 years of traditions, history, mores, and significant accomplishments filled with a wide variety of people. He was elected to be president of all of them. As Neo says, and I’ve thought that even before she said it, I don’t think in his gut that he gets it and has that connection. I don’t think he really understands what his job is, which, in world forums, is to represent the United States and be its advocate not its apologist. He can hold whatever personal views he wants, but its job to be president and represent us to the best of his ability. Why a majority of the people chose him, after his track record in that area was established, I have no idea. But acting like a weasel, and pretending he’s not even responsible for what he said in 2004, just adds icing to the cake of his unsuitability.
—
Here’s my comment in much shorter form: It’s not all about you Obama. You’ve got a bigger job now. Grow up.
I agree with your every word in the paragraph about Obama’s not identifying with this country.
And Fred2, I believe Obama discovered his values long ago, and they all revolve around himself. He values only that which enhances and glorifies himself, probably even including his family. In an ordinary citizen that would be lamentable; as President, he trivializes and endangers our country.
No doubt Obama thinks this is an example of turning the other cheek, of opening up a dialogue in a helpful and receptive way
A friend of mine who is a serious Christian, yet conservative, reads Christ’s teachings in the gospels as applying to personal relationships, not state conduct.
I think my friend is right.
The Obama administration is going to provide a terrible warning to the future about this confusion.
First let me say that I really enjoy reading this blog and all the posts in the comments section. The folks (the majority anyway) who comment here are very smart, articulate and are a pleasure to read.
The following may be a little off topic but is very relevent to the big picture. All the things that I read on a few websites all have the same theme, that this president is the most dangerous person this country has seen in a very long time. But what I read is what amounts to preaching to the choir. Either way, here goes: I just don’t see anything changing for the better in the next 4 years and b.o. (sorry, just can’t show enough respect to even capitalize for this idiot) will most certainly be re-elected as a show of appreciation for all his hard work at trying to destroy this once fine nation. I just don’t see how anything will be better as the msm continues to cover for this buffoon and all his cronies. The vast majority of people who voted this joke into office will do it again as they are not concerned with where this country is going. They only care about the color of skin and have a “we won you lost” mentality. Besides, most rational people who voted this dolt in are not even hearing or reading about what is really going on (thanks msm) and don’t see all his attempts at ruining this country. Therefore, these rational voters will never see the error of there ways and make the appropriate alterations to there vote come 2010 and 2012.
Please, if anyone sees where I am wrong about our future then give me some info that will help ease my stress about this nightmare we call president.
Well at least our “Dear Leader” believes in something, specifically in the unproven and increasingly unbelievable theory of “Anthropogenic Global Warning” or pretends to, to appease his base (or perhaps to further weaken and eventually destroy the capitalist system and “frog march” us all towards full-blown Socialism); the Democrat controlled Congress is about to debate legislation putting in place Obama’s “cap and trade” policy to reduce “greenhouse” and carbon emissions from “polluters” i.e. coal burning power plants.
Having made progress toward nationalizing and/or controlling the Banking, Insurance and Auto industries, this is, in fact, an attempt by Obama & Co. to now seize control of the Energy sector, while at the same time imposing a huge tax on every individual and business in America every time they flick on a light switch, heat or cool their homes or businesses, turn on their computer or TV, or cook a meal.
Our glorious MSM did not widely report, call attention to, or analyze–as they should have–Obama’s statements during a videotaped January 17, 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle and available on YouTube, in which he stated that his “aggressive” cap and trade policy would deliberately cap emission standards at such a low level (and ratchet them down lower each year), that it would “bankrupt the coal industry,” (see the video of Obama stating this here http://tinyurl.com/cgg5wc plus commentary here http://tinyurl.com/cucpqj). Peter Orszag, head of Obama’s Budget Office, testified to Congress that such companies would likely pass their increased costs on to consumers, which to quote Obama, “would cause electricity prices to skyrocket” (see video of Obama saying this here http://tinyurl.com/dym2sx).
Various estimates of the yearly cost of Obama’s cap and trade policy for the average family run from a low estimates in the hundreds, to an estimate of a $1,100 yearly increase per family (http://tinyurl.com/cpolfs), to an estimate that Obama’s cap and trade policy would cost the average American family $3,100 dollars a year more for energy costs (http://tinyurl.com/crxfgn), to an MIT calculation that it would be a bankrupting $4,560 per year. These estimates, of course, do not take into account the toll such a “bankrupting of the coal industry” and “skyrocketing electricity prices” would have on various coal states, on employment–both direct and indirect–tied to coal production, transportation, generation and use, or on our economy in general.
.
Ken — I wouldn’t give in despair so quickly.
Even with the MSM giving Obama cover, I think the effects of Obama’s policies and the defects of his approach (as in this topic) will become clear enough for Obama to be defeated in 2012.
Although it’s still Obama’s honeymoon he’s lost ten approval points in the polls since the inauguration.
Pingback:Obama gets his butt handed to him, by some douche nozzled named Ortega « Political Byline
P.S.–A few pertinent coal statistics to show where the direct blows will fall:
The majority of coal fired electrical generating plants are concentrated in two diagonal belts, one along the East coast and a parallel belt further inland, all generally within a line drawn diagonally northeast to southwest from the Great Lakes to Texas (see a map at http://tinyurl.com/cz2p6u).
Three states are responsible for production of more than 50 % of our coal, in order of total production they are: Wyoming, West Virginia, and Kentucky, followed by the relatively smaller producing states of Pennsylvania, Montana, Texas Colorado, Indiana, Illinois, North Dakota, Virginia, New Mexico, Utah, Ohio, Alabama and, finally a few states bringing up the rear with small amounts of production–Arizona, Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Maryland, Oklahoma, Alaska, Kansas, Missouri and Arkansas (see a chart at http://tinyurl.com/cmqzrk).
But, Wolla Dalbo, those enormous energy taxes will in time offset the enormous deficits Obonga & Dems have incurred on our behalf and for our own good. They’re just good ol’ budget balancers at heart, just like us, see?
They will not go gently into that Good Night, either. We must somehow help them.
“Besides, most rational people who voted this dolt in are not even hearing or reading about what is really going on ( thanks msm )…”
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/
Sums it up.
I think most, if not all, of the regular visitors to Neo’s place at one time found themselves to the left of the political spectrum. Yes? I did, and thats why I have gravitated to others who have had a shift in their politics.
That said, I would be the first to admit that the U.S. foreign policies of Republican and Democrat administrations alike have alienated parts of the world, notably, in this case Latin America. I’ve always preferred a Latin American foreign policy which supported the indigenous populations instead of supporting brutal dictators. But alas, with the spread of global communism the U.S. supported the status quo. This policy actually gave rise to leftist dictators from Castro and Che, to Ortega, and on to Chavez-all devoted marxists.
What Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and the rest of the Latin world needs is a healthy dose of capitalism. But with buds and associates such as Wright, Ayers and the rest of the statists in his administration, Obama seems hell-bent on destroying capitalism here in his own country.
If it were all just about fixing our “disastrous” economic situation–in which trillions of dollars of accumulated wealth has been lost, the government has taken steps to, in effect, “nationalize” many companies and many other major companies have gone bankrupt, the stock market has lost more than a third or more of it’s value and is in turmoil, production has slowed, credit is tight, family budgets are strained, and hundreds of thousands of people are newly out of work–you would think that the last thing any President in his right mind would do was propose the imposition of energy policies that would deliberately “bankrupt” our coal industry, and have the immediate effect of causing electricity prices to “skyrocket”–with the immediate short term effects of putting more people out of work, decreasing our electrical generating capacity, and levying a heavy tax on every American who is a consumer of electricity, thus exacerbating all of our existing problems and, moreover, delivering a devastating blow to all those states–a large portion of the U.S.–where coals is mined or coal-fired plants produce electricity, especially the already chronically depressed Appalachian coal region, and the Ohio basin.
It is either gross stupidity, a very deliberate, calculated policy based on ideology–and, given all the other incongruous and seemingly illogical actions of Obama & Co., another step toward establishing tight control and a tyranny over a much weakened and, thus, more vulnerable U.S.–or malice and, so far, I tend to think it is a mix of all three.
despite our vast strength–will be easy to take advantage of for at least the next four years.
I’m still giving him the benefit of the doubt, the U.S. hasn’t been challenged in a major way since his term started, if the minor scuffle we had with Pirates off the shores of Somalia is an example of actions overriding rhetoric, then I think my benefit of the doubt is justified. He still hasn’t pissed me off in a major a yet, so far so good Mr. President.
“It has become clear to me that Obama does not identify with this country and it’s interests on a gut level.”
An obviously true statement.
He has yet to really get it, at the gut and heart levels, the remarkable exceptionalism, and yes, goodness of the U.S. I pray that he may have an “eye opening, Saul on the road to Damascus” moment, but I’m not holding my breath.
The scary thing is that like Obama, our youths in the educational system have had their heads filled by the likes of Ayres and Ward Churchill, etc. etc.
Socialists/Liberals are the new cool and sheik. Conservatives are presented as moronic neanderthals.
I think we of once liberal leanings can and should be a pivotal counterpoint.
Bullseye. If I attended a conference were somebody slagged off Canada or Mexico, I would be unperturbed too. Mildly annoyed, but that’s about it.
Put it another way. Suppose Ortega said blacks are genetically inferior intellectually and therefore naturally suited to a servility. Would Obama have connected just a little bit more then? I’m thinking, yes.
Most people on the Internet Right seem completely defeated by Obama already. There is so much outrage over every last issue and non-issue that you are simply getting yourselves into a stupifying and self-massaging lather.
As someone who is a liberal, thank you for being so ineffective.
Please, please, please: keep up the outrage and criticism. The Internet Left did the same thing with George W. Bush, and I can tell you it works. The left limited President Bush to two terms where he did he did everything he wanted to do.
Obama will do the same, largely thanks to you, the deranged opposition.
Maybe Move On and the Internet Right can merge so you can raise money together? It is a thought worth considering.
>It has become clear to me that Obama does not >identify with this country and its interests on a gut >level.
He was the quasi-abandoned son of an anthropologist. Hence his famous detachment as an outsider studying the natives.
Absent Kenyan father, early childhood in Indonesia. Doted on by grandparents — of course he belongs everywhere and nowhere and thinks the world revolves around him.
A citizen of the world. Ignorant of history, and poorly educated to boot, despite the credentials.
Frightening.
Obama says hes not going to raise taxes on ordinary Americans. Who needs to raise taxes on them when you simply raise it on all businesses ordinary Americans buy goods and services from?
Americans who don’t get this simple scam scare me more than Obama does.
tjproundamerican: As someone who is a liberal…
I’m confused. Are you a proud American (capitalized, btw) or are you a liberal? Which?
Oh my gosh Occam!
What wit! Ho ho ho! You are a rascally rascal of a wittily wittel! No wonder Conservatives are so vital in all our arts and crafts, you craft, arty sly son of a gun!
SteveH, I’m with you 100%. I’m shocked at the number of liberals who don’t get this. (Although I don’t believe Obama’s assertion either.) It’s simply a matter of outsourcing tax collection to businesses.
My personal favorite: 95% of all Americans will have a tax cut. No one of normal (or above) intelligence can possibly believe this, but apparently liberals do. It’s akin to saying that Obama’s policies will make everyone above average.
Enjoy your term, Barack. Maybe Habitat for Humanity will be hiring in 2012.
It’s a serious point. Liberals typically are ashamed of this country, its history, and culture, and apparently feel the need to apologize to all and sundry for it. (See, e.g., the sermons of Barack Obama’s pastor.)
So why are you proud of America? What specifically are you proud of? Spare no details!
Seriously, I’d like to know.
tjproud,
While there are similarities in the state of the internet right now and the state of the internet left after Bush was elected, (“oh what to do, what to do?”), that’s where it ends.
You’all were scared shitless that the U.S. would turn into one big “Jesus country”. We on the other hand see Obama turning the U.S. into another secularized Europe.
And we all know the gifts that the modern secular Europe has given the world: socialism, communism, fascism, and a couple of world wars.
ABC network radio news actually played two extended soundbites of The One as he recapped his weekend.
Tripe. Soundbites. Stilted, memorized, agonizingly, painfully, artificially regurgitated pap provided for the compliant media at the moment the pap was scheduled to be delivered.
This man has no soul.
We aren’t a socialist country, yet. The presidency is a market choice distilled into one man at one moment. We really, really screwed up. Markets are about the smart finding the profit.
But that happens after the dumb blow their capital.
We really, really screwed up.
And we’ll pay for it.
Adagny: you’re right about the gifts that Europe has given the world. But you left out another important one: an inability or an unwillingness to confront the spread of Muslim extremism, either abroad or, more what is more troubling, at home. Most European countries are doing what they can to accommodate Muslim extremists in the name of multi-culturalism.
It’s hard to say if Obama would be a good UN ambassador. I remember the ones during difficult times: Adlai Stevenson and Jean Kirkpatrick. Obama certainly wasn’t like them.
But, then, they were given a different task. Both Stevenson and Kirkpatrick were sparring with people who were running America down and wished its demise.
I believe Obama likes running America down, and wishes its demise, so he would be in a dicey spot were he to try to emulate Stevenson and Kirkpatrick.
UN ambassador? Nope, a bit above his pay grade.
News anchor? Perfect. Here, Barack, read this. Attaboy. That I could see.
tjproudamerican, it is true the Left did Bush a favor by acting as if they preferred defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan. This was an extremely stupid position to take with the American electorate.
We run across a lot of self-styled liberals, but very few of them show much pride in America as it is, and we are aware that opposition to “Americanism” is an article of faith among the Left.
The electorate’s patience ran out in 2006 when Republicans started acting as though Iraq were a hopeless cause, while Bush’s populist supporters were alienated in particular by failed Immigration reform following the failure of Social Security Reform.
President Bush had his merits. Chief among those was a determination to make the right decisions for the nation as a whole. He was a statesman in that sense, whether one agrees with all of his positions or not. He was, however, a terrible political leader for the Republican Party, and his political strategy after 2004 lacked realism and ruthlessness. Perhaps he just got tired of swimming against the media tide, as G.H.W. Bush and even Reagan before him had tired.
So against yet another lackluster geriatric Senator, in the context of a global financial panic, and with the support of 24/7 media carpet bombing, Mr. Obama managed to win the Presidency. More importantly, the Democrats won strong majorities.
So is Obama winning? That is not so clear. It is clear that the Democrats are getting their Christmas wish list of regulatory changes, with consequences which have not yet been felt.
President Obama has high personal approval in the poll ratings, but his negatives are up dramatically. Luckily for him, his strongest supporters hate Republicans like poison, and there are exogenous reasons why a lot of people are unwilling to hold President Obama up to criticism.
More challenges are ahead, and President Obama will have the opportunity to do himself some good or some mischief with the broader electorate in how he handles them. Personally, I think that re-regulating the economy, strengthening the hands of the unions, taxing carbon, limiting free trade, and failing to defend the case of the United States against the Putins and Chavezes of the world will make Americans poorer and the world more dangerous. Bowing to foreign kings and yucking it up with caudillos will not make America loved. This will not work as well with the electorate as the Left expects.
I am a little tired of psychological speculation about President Obama. There is no leverage in it.
The man may be an empty, if extremely elegant, suit, but he is now in a position where what he does matters. Undoubtedly, he will try to take the credit for anything that goes right (and some things will, as long as we have people like the Navy Seals), he will try to avoid responsibilities for mistakes, and he will try to spin episode of indecisiveness, impotence, and fecklessness in foreign affairs as evidence of a intelligent, nuanced realism. In this, he will be assisted at every step by the media.
But he will make mistakes, and a lot of them if I am any judge. He also has a glass jaw that makes him hyper-sensitive to criticism. We should be anticipating those mistakes and preparing the ground to put the case across. We should not spend time in a reactive stance or waste time and goodwill on name-calling.
neo said:
“…there has never been such a pure and unabashed narcissist in the White House before in my lifetime–perhaps ever. This does not bode well for this country. Or the world.”
I thought I had directed you to this in the past? Ali Sina had it spot on quite some time ago.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html
Obama is such a pathological personality that he is extremely dangerous. But a person actually in the field would have a better feel for that than this simple person does. neo?
Adagny said:
“…with the spread of global communism the U.S. supported the status quo. This policy actually gave rise to leftist dictators from Castro and Che, to Ortega, and on to Chavez-all devoted marxists.”
And the locals that actually live in the countries bear no responsibility for their own misdeeds? Huh? Wha? Why cannot they take responsibility for their own choices? Are they perpetual adolescents? Nope, sorry, that theory does not fly. They get to own their own messing of their nests.
kcom said:
“It’s not all about you Obama. You’ve got a bigger job now. Grow up.”
BANG ON!!!! Nice post kcom, I like it! But he will not ‘Grow Up’. He is as Diana West posits the eternal adolescent as are most Liberal Progressives. They have a world vision of what they wish to see and cannot reconcile the real world to what it actually is therefore they act out in strange and startling ways.
The Won, 0bummer, is a cypher. We know very little true about the man.
His books are obviously ghost written constructs. The voice is wrong.
We have not seen his real birth certificate. We do not know where he really was born. That may come to matter, I think.
He has not released his grades from any institution. Lackluster performance is okay but why not let us see that he is truly just like the rest of us? What is the harm?
He was President of the Harvard Law Review without the correct prerequisites – a really good and in depth law article being published. The one he did publish seems to be very lightweight.
We are asked to believe he sat in the pew at a poisonously racist “church” and never, ever heard the unhinged diatribes of it’s main pastor? The man who he claims is a mentor?
He is allied with a former domestic terrorist trust baby who is now a prof at a major college but never heard of the man’s communistic politics?
There are just so many holes.
I fear for the nation and the world.
tjproudamerican has a point. We need to get our positive vision out and not get bogged down on what we don’t like about O and the left.
test
“”We need to get our positive vision out and not get bogged down on what we don’t like about O and the left.
Thomass””
Our positive is to hope for enough misery occuring domestically and abroad to wake Americans up?
This slow frog boil strategy working, with over 50% of voters dependant on and influenced by govt handouts is the worst possible scenario.
Excellent! Your suggestion would provide a match made in heaven.
You can argue whether Obama is too friendly with South American dictators, or if his Middle East strategy is wrongheaded and naive, or that he shouldn’t have used bailouts, but these are abstractions for most people.
Where Obama will be at his most vulnerable is on his cap and trade policy because, if the result is a spike in electricity prices and every household energy bill in America doubles or triples–as most estimates say they will or more–that will, as they say, “hit home” and doom him to one term just as the long lines for gas doomed Jimmy Carter–Obama being the return of Jimmy Carter without the peanut’s graciousness, humility, backbone, strategic vision or savvy.
Now that Obama has surpassed Jimmy Carter as the most naive and manipulated President, it will not be long before he is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to make it official.
Robohobo said- “What, are they perpetual adolescents? They get to own their own messing of their nests.”
So much of Latin America had been ruled by powerful, elite, white, European families with control of vicious militaries. The indigenous were held back and down as they struggled for basic rights. U.S. interests were with United Fruit Co., Brown and Co. etc. and so support went to the status quo, and neglect to the oppressed. The U.S. finally started paying attention when the poor turned to the subversion offered to them by the Soviets.
So the U.S. has a history of messing the nests in Latin America.
As with Cuba, I believe our neighbors to the south would choose what we offer over marxism in a heartbeat. The people love the U.S.
I just don’t like the way Obama is trying to go about it, denegrating the U.S. everywhere, all the time.
Pingback:Amused Cynic » Blog Archive » What would W have done with Chavez’s militant leftist book?
Actually, the position for which Obama is ideally suited is ex-President.
I modestly repeat what I’ve posted here intermittently since Hussein O was nominated: Obama=Chavez. He’s Chavez in diapers right now, but growing.
To quote William S. Borroughs-admittedly not a saint, or the most stable guy in the world–“A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what’s going on.”
How is this for a scenario?
Obama’s policies–particularly his tax and energy policies–deliberately make our economic “disaster” get worse, energy prices spike, and there is increased unemployment, more foreclosures and bankruptcies, housing prices stay low or even drop again, the stock market is a disaster and trending lower, more and more businesses are pushed over the edge by increased energy costs, are going under, consumers are reluctant to spend and, indeed, pull back from any but essential spending, and there is increased and general turmoil and distress in the land.
As a result, Tea Parties and other protests against government policies get bigger and louder and angrier and, there are a few incidents of violence around the country that the MSM and the Obama administration hype and try to tie to the protesters, and thanks to MSM commentators and Nepolitano’s DHS–which has laid the groundwork with its recent Report–the people who participate in Tea Parties or any other protest against the government and it’s policies are now labeled as dangerous “right wing extremists” and “racists” and, as such, such protests are seen as an “unhealthy” breeding ground for further violence, and, one way or the other, they are “discouraged,” and any push back by demonstrators is taken as proof of the demonstrators violent and extremist nature.
The economic distress and instability, and the threat of increased “extremism” and violence obviously calls for a tighter control over the availability of guns and ammunition, so some form of gun registration (proposed by Speaker Pilosi just last week) or control is enacted in this “Emergency.” The Democratic controlled Congress also authorizes a further large increase in the size and funding of all the “public service” organizations–chocked full of ACORN people and welfare beneficiaries doing their “mandatory” public service–and mostly Obama supporters–that make up Obama’s proposed “Civilian National Security Force,” whose members are now going to not only minister to the distressed, but also to be used as police auxiliaries.
You do see where this is going into some variant of Hitler, Mussolini, Mao and Castro land, right?
Barry is the President of Id,not the USA.He’s an alienated slacker who thinks irony is a fine substitute for wisdom and life experience.
Obama could still do some mischief at the UN — like join in the denunciations of the US or the votes against Israel.
No, I’ve been saying for a while that Obama is most suited to be a motivational speaker with a slick line of infomercials advertised on late-night TV.
Let me add another layer or two to the scenario I have laid out above.
Add to the picture I have drawn above the further increased taxes and costs, the hardships and economic dislocations caused by the imposition of Obama’s government takeover of health care, an industry that, one way or the other, is said to encompass one sixth of our entire economy.
Finally, add a Muslim terrorist attack invited by Obama’s obvious weakness, his blindness to the existential threat imposed by Islam, and his policy of decreasing our military forces and capabilities; an attack equal to or perhaps much greater than 9/11 in casualties, damage and financial and psychological impact.
Give the situation posited; can you see Obama & Co. asking a Democratic controlled Congress for and receiving the tools to impose even tighter control over America, under the guise of “protecting” and “saving” it? I sure can and voila, a Tyranny, a police state, in which any protest against the state is now a criminal act, is defined as extremism that is outlawed.
Unfortunately, I think that there is a good chance that bringing about such a Tyranny is what almost all of Obama’s actions and choices–which seem so illogical and misaimed if they really are intended to fix our economic “disaster”–are aimed at creating, and although he says that healing our nation is his aim, he is not concerned in any way with solving our problems in a way that preserves and protects our democracy, our rights or our capitalist system but–quite the contrary–is taking active steps as fast as he can to destroy them, before we can realize what he is doing, and react effectively to stop him.
I voiced the same thought today, Wolla: We will have another 9/11, giving Hussein O the excuse for martial law to yield a totalitarian state. And he’s working to make that happen by cozying up to the Iranians et al. They’ll do the (needed) deed for him.
Voting in 2010 is not the answer.
SteveH Says:
“Our positive is to hope for enough misery occuring domestically and abroad to wake Americans up?”
If no one has the basic tools to understand what is happening, how can they assign blame? Obama and the dems will just blame the misery on market excess, Bush, et cetera.
So far, it’s been working for them. We can only HOPE that it stops working… we don’t know that it will… Example, in the UK, the left blamed the failures of the NHS on Thatcher for over 20 years after she was out of office (most of which were really related to socialism not working, of course…)… The ploy kept sorta working so they just kept doing it…
We’re going to have to start from the ground up teaching people about economics, what these evil free markets really are, and then calmly explain who did what to get us here.
Needless to say, I hope that doesn’t happen (either aspect). If we do have another 9/11, which I have to agree became a lot more likely as of 1/20/09, I expect/hope it would work strongly to Obama’s detriment.
Hard-core lefties and the truly soft-headed might defend him, but independents probably won’t buy it. After all, how long can the left continue blaming Bush for everything? At some point, they’re on their own account.
Right.
I doubt that Obama can leverage a 9-11 event much. He’s too vulnerable to charges of weakening security while cozying up to our enemies and denouncing Bush and his policies.
Such an event would be a repudiation of his “talk loudly and carry a tiny stick” diplomacy.
The more pronounced danger IMO is that Obama will turn the US into a Chicago-style one-party state, while allowing our enemies to retrench, then expand their influence.
Wolla Dalbo:
Yes, that’s pretty much the scenario I foresee.
Which is why, as I’ve said elsewhere, Obama needs to be stopped before he becomes too entrenched in power.
Even a cursory glance at 20th Century history shows that the collectivization of America will lead to massive suffering and horror.