Competitor in Chief
I was astounded to read this portrait of Obama that appeared in last Sunday’s NY Times magazine section. There’s plenty about how smart he is, and what a hard-driving perfectionist, but does the Times really think this sort of thing is complimentary?:
…[Obama] joked at a recent New York fund-raiser with several famous basketball players in attendance, “it is very rare that I come to an event where I’m like the fifth or sixth most interesting person.”…
But even those loyal to Mr. Obama say that his quest for excellence can bleed into cockiness and that he tends to overestimate his capabilities. The cloistered nature of the White House amplifies those tendencies…
For someone dealing with the world’s weightiest matters, Mr. Obama spends surprising energy perfecting even less consequential pursuits. He has played golf 104 times since becoming president, according to Mark Knoller of CBS News, who monitors his outings, and he asks superior players for tips that have helped lower his scores…
Even some Democrats in Washington say they have been irritated by his tips on topics ranging from the best way to shake hands on the trail (really look voters in the eye, he has instructed) to writing well…
For another, he may not always be as good at everything as he thinks, including politics. While Mr. Obama has given himself high grades for his tenure in the White House ”” including a “solid B-plus” for his first year ”” many voters don’t agree, citing everything from his handling of the economy to his unfulfilled pledge that he would be able to unite Washington to his claim that he would achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Those were not the only times Mr. Obama may have overestimated himself: he has also had a habit of warning new hires that he would be able to do their jobs better than they could.
“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,” Mr. Obama told Patrick Gaspard, his political director, at the start of the 2008 campaign, according to The New Yorker. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”
Though he never ran a large organization before becoming president, he initially dismissed internal concerns about management and ended up with a factionalized White House and a fuzzier decision-making process than many top aides wanted.
It goes on, but I think that’s enough to give you the flavor and demonstrate that this is not a puff piece, and that the passages I just quoted have the ring of truth.
All in all, I think it’s one of the most unpleasant portraits of a president I’ve ever read. How strange is this, to be published in the Times? Do liberals see the same things in it that I do, or do they just see a brilliant, hard-driving, hard-working, guy?
Hedging their bets and trying to position themselves to get an interview with Romney/Ryan before the election or after if they triumph.
Never, ever, forget that liberals like leopards do not ever change their spots. Never. NEVER.
Many of the liberals I know say that something is just too complicated when they can’t deny the problems, but can turn around and suggest something else is as simple as falling rain. I think they do see this simply, or the papers and such are trying to suggest it.
But I do think. If you see liberal thought and can’t even touch it sometimes, and I am the same way with you and others here, imagine for just a moment what I see of liberals, perhaps understand my frustration even at sites like yours (and without saying right or wrong, you or them or me, just… a notion unto itself). Just a thought to soothe some of the ruffled feathers from of late. I think, hope.
vanderleun: never fear; that particular possibility (that the Times had changed its spots) never even occurred to me.
I just wonder if (a) they still see what they wrote as being in Obama’s favor; or (b) they are hedging their bets, as you write; or (c) they have some inside info on how the polling is going
In the meantime, though, readers will be reading this really unpleasant-sounding portrait of the wonderful Obama.
Obama has pissed them off professionally. They remain die hard lefties, but the WH has basically cut reporters out of the loop. He’s going to get these kind of leaks until that changes (which it will not if these reports are true).
The journalist job market is precarious most times and a downright disaster today. It is important to have a portfolio that might appeal to a centrist employer.
DirtyJobsGuy: good points.
“. . . his quest for excellence can bleed into cockiness and that he tends to overestimate his capabilities.”
Is it possibly not a quest for excellence but an attempt to justify (to himself as well as others) the “veracity” of his own inflated sense of self-worth?
As for the media, are we watching two competing egos? One (the media group) vested in the sanctimony of its liberal theories v. Obama’s own sense of self-worth?
There has been discussion at this blog in the past that liberals will never recognize the failure of their utopian dreams. When those dreams fail, it’s always due to faulty execution, when Obama causes those utopian dreams to fail, look out bus axle!
As Vanderleun points out above, it’s not that the Times is changing its spots, but perhaps it’s beginning to look for liberal messiah 2.0!
There’s plenty about how smart he is
The man is a dolt. He has at most the intelligence of an average college student at a so-so university.
The author either does not recognize that fact, in which case he himself is a dolt, or he does, in which case he is prevaricating, possibly to continue to be accepted in liberal circles.
and what a hard-driving perfectionist
If Obama really is a perfectionist, the Secret Service needs to put him on suicide watch.
, and what a hard-driving perfectionist,
Likewise, see Ed Morrissey on Politico’s sudden realization of the obvious. Looking for messiah 2.0?
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/06/politico-this-hope-and-change-guy-is-really-into-mudslinging-huh/
I think Vanderleun is correct. The bums are getting ready for the landslide. The following article is not Republican:
http://greengopost.com/2012-presidential-election-mitt-romney-landslide/
Excerpt:
Watch for the Democrats’ firewall on the Pacific coast, upper Midwest and Northeast to crumble. The South will go solidly Republican once again. Oregon will go to Romney in a squeaker; Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Iowa will go red; and Obama can say goodbye to Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Maine. The electoral map will look a lot more like 1988 than 2000 or 2004. And as goes the Romney landslide, so will the Senate, with pickups in Hawaii, Virginia, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Connecticut, Nebraska and Florida. I predict Romney will win with 370 votes in the Electoral College and Obama winning 168, with some states including Minnesota and Washington only going for Obama in a squeaker.
A further thought on “. . . “. . . his quest for excellence . . . .”
Isn’t one who strives for excellence imperfect by definition? One strives for what one doesn’t possess. That should make them humble in some way as well.
This seems to be completely at odds with Obama’s opinion of himself.
Looks like they’re establishing an explanation in the event that Obama loses. Its not that he was a bad president, it’s just that his “drive for excellence” drove him to set his goals to high, and he inadvertently offended some with his overconfidence.
It’s damage control and, now that he has undeniably lost favor with a diverse sample of Americans, it is also a bit of retributive change. Obama’s faction divided the Democrat party and his policies (and their outcome) have become increasingly unpopular. There are limits on the power of JournoLists to manipulate perception to sustain mass delusion.
History, if it can be relied upon, will note some day the things said by Obama and others, about Obama, and will wonder at how pandemic the crack habit was in the early Twenty-first Century.
Leslie Gelb’s NYTs book review of the James Mann’s, The Obamians:
“The creator and commander of this diverse team is, of course, Obama himself. And I would go further than Mann and argue that he oversees one of the most centralized foreign policy operations in history– based principally on his brain power and intellectual self-confidence, not on knowledge or experience.”
Contra that:
“You can’t just march in and make that argument and then have him [Obama] make a decision,” [Lawrence] Summers told [Peter] Orszag, “because he [Obama] doesn’t know what he’s deciding.”
Not only does Jodi Kantor have Obama as a fierce competitor, but also, a confident perfectionist “obsessed with virtuosity,”
The only thing that’ll make that go down is a double Wild Turkey.
Yeah, ol’ King Putt’s offended every greenskeeper of every course on which he’s ever played.
based principally on his brain power
We’re doomed.
This unattractive character trait seems to be fairly common on the far left. I had an acquaintance once tell me (in perfect seriousness) that she – a white girl from Berkeley – knew more about being black and raising black children than Bill Cosby. She also told me that she knew more than I about how military families feel when their loved one goes off to war. I’m a former Navy wife whose entire family has served in the military, while she freely admits that she’s never even met anyone in the military. I’m sure those liberal speechwriters, policy advisors, and political advisors of Obama’s feel much the same way I did.
Anecdotal evidence that The Won is faded: yesterday eight of us sat in a waiting room when someone intimated that he hoped Obama was gone in November – to universal agreement in the room.
And this in California, no less. (OK, SoCal, which is not so heavily Red-infested as SF. But even so, it’s noteworthy that conservatives are beginning to feel their oats enough to speak up in public, something that would not have happened four years ago for fear of receiving a finger-wagging lecture.)
OB,
There is much anecdotal evidence to note. I’ve already noted that in union-blue Pittsburgh, Obama earlier this year couldn’t fill a 500 person room by more than half, that local Dem politicians were conspicuously absent (by conspicuously, I mean not that they were simply awol, but they made sure the voters knew they were awol), Obama welcomed to Sioux City airport with it’s code (OBAMA welcome to SUX), giving away tickets to Obama’s acceptance speech in bars, an undervote in the April PA primary equal to 8.9% of all votes cast in PA in Nov 2008. . . the list goes on.
We can only hope that this is Instapundit’s preference cascade.
T – I’m also near Pittsburgh, in a small city filled with union steel workers. I’ve seen quite a few Romney signs and bumper stickers, but none for Obama. Democrat friends of mine have volunteered comments that he simply has to go. I’m cautiously optimistic.
And speaking of his ego and “perfectionism”, if and when he loses, it is going to be Ugly. In fact, I’m buying a gun before the election.
Someone who actually believes he can do everything–EVERYTHING–better than anyone else is delusional. And insufferably arrogant.
What’s truly sad is that people still find this narcissistic empty chair admirable.
About the waiting room eight, I wonder if what was said, was said in the duck and cover mode, the mode of saying it softly and slowly at first, gauging the reactions as you go, but only after having a first intuition the statement might have a positive reception. Point of which is the level of tyranny that already reigns.
From the Woodward book:
“John, I’ve got great confidence in my ability to sway the American people,” Boehner quotes the president as having told him.
Pride, ahhhh, feels good to the one being prideful but actually? Not so attractive. That, I believe, is perhaps even a greater reason for Obama’s collapsing likeability than the economy.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bob-woodward-book-debt-deal-collapse-led-pure/story?id=17104635#.UEkTo7KPVGY
“Do liberals see the same things in it that I do, or do they just see a brilliant, hard-driving, hard-working, guy?”
Well, some have drunk the kool aid.
But really what are liberals and leftists to do? Admit that he’s an insecure, empty narcissist? Admit that he was not only completely unqualified but had no interest in growing into the position? Admit that he’s even worse than Carter, while acknowledging that he tells himself that he’s the greatest, bar none, President ever? (the B+ was false modesty)
To do so would expose their utter lack of judgement.
It would also open them to the charge of racism, certain to be leveled by die hard Obama supporters.
All they can do is cling to the fantasy that their motivation is to save the country from big business’ evil capitalist monsters. The Illuminati…
No, barring a disastrous showing by Romney in the debate, this election is going to be a landslide for Romney and many democrats sense it. That’s why turnout is so low.
Get set for excuses, evasion and charges of “BushHitler” all over again. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s (the Baghdad Bob of the democrats) disconnection from reality and congenital lying is a preview of the refrain shortly to come from the left.
All they have left is lies. The biggest lie being their own self-delusion.
.
==================================
Stop It Already — He’s Not So Smart
==================================
.
I’ve often wondered if Obama’s arrogance and obnoxious behavior isn’t really evidence of a very, very poor self-image. Think of it: Abandoned by his natural father; then his mother; and then his step-father. Neither fully white or fully black and probably not feeling truly comfortable with either group. At some level he must know that in some part his academic success and career moves have been the result of affirmative action and not merit.
And so, over the years, he has adopted this nasty little self-defense mechanism. “I am better than you at everything.” And even if I’m not better now I will practice and become better.
And that is why we see his unwillingness to tolerate dissent or criticism. It threatens him because at some level he realizes that it is true.
Hey, look!
More “Republican Obstructionism”
Translation: “The GOP didn’t roll over and play dead.”
About the waiting room eight, I wonder if what was said, was said in the duck and cover mode, the mode of saying it softly and slowly at first, gauging the reactions as you go, but only after having a first intuition the statement might have a positive reception.
Very much so. The first statement was approached rather obliquely and thoroughly hedged (“You know, there are times I wonder if we might possibly be a little better off with a change…”), the political equivalent of Punxsutawney Phil. Only once it became clear that others were of like mind did everyone in the room drop shields (to mix my metaphors) and speak freely: “O must go.”
kaba, I’ve thought the same thing. Objectively most of his own family – apparently including his mother – treated his presence as approximately as desirable as that of herpes. That’s got to hurt.
In this view, titling his book “Dreams From My Father” is especially poignant and/or pathetic. Dear old Dad obviously didn’t want anything to do with him, and in fact only shared a domicile with Stan and Barry for a grand total of two weeks in his entire life. More likely than not, Barry Jr. owes his existence to poor quality control at a condom factory, and knows it. That makes his support for abortion particularly ironic, because if it had been legal in 1960, he doubtless would not be here now.
His publicly espoused obeisance to his father must arise either from an attempt to assuage some convoluted psychological quirk, or profound cynicism. (“Dreams From My Honky Bank VP Grandmother Who Took Me In When No One Else Could Be Bothered” doesn’t make it as an electoral vehicle.)
every quirky leaves its mark…
if your morally imbecilic, you don’t know where the boundaries are till you cross them. you have no shame, no guilt, and what disgusts normal people is not a problem (as this is a feature of the abnormality).
there are two ways to write, and one type always writes one way, and so leaves fingerprints if you know what to look for. Or realize how they hide it.
you can write to inform…
and you can write to manipulate…
[and you can combine them]
how does a functionally illiterate person get around the problem? they pretend they cant see, and ask a stranger to read something for them…
how does a socially inept person learn to appear more normal, and why would they have to? they use scripting of sorts and they have to because neuro-typicals only have one category for not normal… (at least till they learn a reason otherwise).
What are the fingerprints of sub-clinical sociopathy?
What policies and structures would such create?
well, one clue is that people with no guilt, no shame, and no real disgust, will have boundary issues. if they are on script, they are fine. off script, they can seriously make social errors by stepping over boundaries… (political correctness hides this as its a script that we all know that sets the boundaries and if you follow it, no one can accuse you of being abnormal or crossing a boundary that would exist without it)
when you write to manipulate and you have boundary issues from not having any… your moral imbecility can only construct a ‘front’, a surface construct.
You cant construct a whole if your not whole.
doing so is about coloring within the lines… the whole has boundaries that normal people have, and so to make the whole, you have to get the boundaries.
so what happens is they laugh late… why? because they dont know whats funny, and there is a lag between them reading others and copying them to appear normal.
when they write, the front focus of the missive seems great, but the implications that imply some boundary crossed that a normal flags, will not be caught as its invisable to them…
The US woman, known only as SM…
SM is a woman with no fear… the area of her brain that would provide it, is not there… and she lives in a very violent neighborhood.
such a person would not be able to write a horror script for people. would they? how would they know what people are afraid of, except by guessing or learning and scripting?
[by the way, the movies like saw and hostel are sociopathic focused – they cross boundaries to shock and disgust, and get you acclimated to sexual sadism… but they dont do real horror. horror is not about shock, or disgust, or sadism… is it?]
a regimented (scripted) world where the class that compels (a type of power that can be felt), is free to act without being oppressed due to their lack of boundaries is what this is about (and their entertainments).
the piece is intended to manipulate… so its front is well constructed, but look a bit deeper and the boundaries it crosses otherwise is what neo is seeing.
depends. are we talking producers or consumers and if consumers are we talking about those that take their cue and copy and so pretend to be smart and have the right answers (like the sociopath who laughs late because they dont know whats funny), because they dont know how to live any more (being disconnected from the information passed on by family).
those that dont know how to live, who didnt learn the stuff that one learns in a healthy family that is connected that you dont get in school. (conflict resolution, negotiation, sacrifice, the worth of something, what is moral, what is not moral, etc).
the consumers have a sense of it, but they tend to deny that sense in favor of being safe in numbers (ergo free thinkers refer to them as the herd, the collective, the hive).
She was selected to write because she is going to write a narrative that resonates with the young who have the same disconnect and moral waywardness, and lack of connection.
like book publishers selecting schizophrenic writers to write horror books (bad mental forms can be induced by walking int heir footsteps. ergo, docs who work in wards are closely monitored)
her front will be great for them, and they wont look deeper. she didnt write it to convince thinkers to convert, she wrote it to appeal to non thinkers who copy so they dont copy the wrong thing when they see other numbers go to romney.
remember… they copy the volume position as there is safety in numbers. ergo fake Facebook things, the fakery on how liked people are. the ogilvy mather advised using rooms too small to create standing rooms for effect… (and other manipulative things that if you knew the art would ‘get’)
the copiers of the volume position are the populists… they are communist because its popular not because its a reasoned position. if its popular to like Romney, guess which way the avalanche will flow? like voting for Nixon, you’ll wonder if anyone voted for the prior winner..
busing people, numbers in immigrants, fake crowds to make larger populous groups, and so on… is how you get the disconnected to sway… (and you make disconnected by destroying the family, and you destroy the family with free love, no fault divorce, abortion on demand, and state favoritism through a movement that has said it was destroying family for over 100 years, and openly so).
the kids who became the full time flower children were the ones most disaffected… the kids that turned out most conservative and principled were in traditional family and so learned those things i listed above
wealthy kids disaffected by distant (and sometimes sociopathic) parents… kids edumacated that they know more than their parents then off to school and their only moral compass is what everyone else is doing and if it seems good on the surface.
the author is a product of all that.. while most of us were made before that, and dont realize that those are our defenders, our future caretakers, and so on.
they actually have the numbers and if it wasn’t for their induced moral imbecility and erased cultural history, they wouldn’t vote en masses so uniformly.
want the masses to turn communist? disconnect them from their history and past (thanks feminism), capture the cool, make goodness uncool and badness cool (and add communism to the pile), and let populism sway them en masse (as that is their moral compass)
and peoples confusion as to process prevents them from doing the not so nice but necessary thing and remove the problems, even if they will be seen as evil for a while.
as someone recently said… the right, in truth, lets everyone at the table, because that is honorable and moral. but the left, once inside, let in by honor and fareness, does not tolerate the other, and ejects them.
this is what your seeing in society.. the dominant group that was moral, let the arguments that were immoral take hold because that is fair and moral. once they were allowed in and to talk and such, they have been dividing and pushing out the moral group that let them in!
its all a process… and a familiar one to experience
but hey.. when we redefined how you tell merit, we also deconstructed the norm of self organizing around ability and being functional… now everyone is a general… and there is no lesser… 100 captains on the titanic, will they steer away in time?
By the way..
i suggest next ows or similar thing, hand these out..
DON’T BARGAIN WITH LIFE FOR A PENNY
I bargained with Life for a penny,
And Life would pay no more,
However I begged at evening
When I counted my scanty store.
For Life is a just employer,
He gives you what you ask,
But once you have set the wages,
Why, you must bear the task.
I worked for a menial’s hire,
Only to learn, dismayed,
That any wage I had asked of Life,
Life would have willingly paid.
OB,
I actually feel a degree of sympathy for Obama. My family was as poor as white trash can be but we were surrounded by love and acceptance.
That doesn’t make me more inclined to vote for him though. Such a fragile personality shouldn’t be anywhere near the reins of power.
I prefer the discipline of knowledge to the chaos of ignorance.
I don’t know the rules of grammar. If you’re trying to persuade people to do something, or buy something, it seems to me you should use their language. David Ogilvy
on obama moving venues:
Always hold your sales meetings in rooms too small for the audience, even if it means holding them in the WC. ‘Standing room only’ creates an atmosphere of success, as in theatres and restaurants, while a half-empty auditorium smells of failure. Ogilvy
As far as using smaller venues goes, Hitler used the same tactic; I’m sure others have also.
Best way to counter Clint’s speech. Say you really like him.
http://www.tmz.com/2012/09/02/clint-eastwood-barack-obama-chair/
You know, if Obama had really reached out to the Clintons and obtained the considerable political experience and advice of Rapist Clinton, he could have had everything he wanted, for sure, in his second term. But nooooooo, he had to have it all from the start.
I also like TMZ’s description of Clint’s routine as “bizzare.” Has TMZ no respect for art? No matter how bizzare?
kaba, I do too. If this perspective has merit, his life is a Kafkaesque nightmare: always seeking validation to mitigate the feelings of inadequacy and rejection gnawing at his soul, but no validation ever extirpating them. /shudder
Some high-flying academics evince the same psychology, which is the source of their drive. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, if one excludes the personal cost), they’re scratching where it doesn’t itch. It’s not pleasant to watch.
If BHO was not the president I too could find a degree of sympathy for what I have considered for the last 5 years to be a rather sad figure of a man who must harbor many internal doubts. However, he has created havoc, sown bitterness, and projected a deep loathing for the traditional concept of what it means to be an American. He foments envy and senseless hatred. He willfully pits Americans against Americans. That can not be excused by a troubled childhood and evokes no sympathy from me.
As far as the NYT and others are concerned, I think they sense the ship is sinking and now it is necessary to craft an explanation for BHO’s failures and his defeat in November.
The Liberals I know don’t read anything, and see a man who is everything he says he is, and nothing he proves to be. The irony of it all is the way they view themselves- thoughtful, informed, and on the right side of every issue. A lot like the man they worship.
Kaba and OB,
I tink you are absolutely right about his screwed up life. Another element is that all who rejected him emotionally were also lefties (mom, dad, and grandparents) who indoctrinated him. Perhaps he is now competing with them to show how good he is and how wrong they were to reject him.
If he were in therapy instead of in the WH, I would feel sorry for him, but I simply can’t stand his condescension. I come from a pretty poor family from clinger territory. He has insulted my family.
FYI, a NY Times article complimentary of Bush’s leadership deciding on the COIN ‘surge’ in Iraq:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/washington/31military.html?_r=1&ref=world
“OBAMA welcome to SUX”
Hasn’t he lived there all his life?
Obama welcomes you to suck you.
Jason deserves more sympathy.
I can’t believe the bullshit of “sympathy for Obama.” His bullshit has caused more real harm than any mass/serial killer.
f’shiza.
I realize most comments consider “as if no pain had been caused” which, obviously, was not the case. So, let sympathy, not judgment, rest with God, the only One who has Power to forgive.
The worst employees I’ve ever had were those that thought they could do everyone’s job, including mine, better than the people who were currently doing them. It often came as a shock when I told them to not worry about what Bob or Jen or Joe was doing, and to focus their own work, which invariably needed improvement. Apparently, they’d never been told before that they were anything but perfect. A few got the message. Most didn’t, and moved on, voluntarily or otherwise. Arrogance born of unearned self-esteem dies hard, apparently.
“I can’t believe the bullshit of “sympathy for Obama.” His bullshit has caused more real harm than any mass/serial killer.”
I hear you, Curtis. I know the posters didn’t mean it that way but after having this crap as POTUS for the last 3 1/2 years I’m in no sentimental mood.
After everything else, not that there aren’t a million other reasons to dislike BO, it still really steams me that he was elected even though the had NEVER accomplished ANYTHING substantive in his adult life. The emptiest suit (and chair) ever.
I have zero sympathy for communists. Full stop. End of discussion.