Mona Charen on Obama’s narcissism
Or is it megalomania?
Mona Charen has Obama’s number. She notes in particular the odd combination of fake humility and real self-aggrandizement present towards the beginning of his speech to the UN General Assembly:
Beware of politicians who claim to be “humbled by the responsibility the American people have placed upon me.” It’s a neon sign flashing the opposite. And sure enough, in almost the next sentence, the president allowed that “I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world.” Really? The whole world pulses with hope and expectation because Obama is president? People in Amsterdam, Sao Paulo and Taipei have a spring in their step because an Illinois Democrat won the White House?
Well, yes, he says, but it’s not “about me,” rather it’s a reflection of dissatisfaction with the “status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences and outpaced by our problems.” Oh, yes, and everyone around the world was electrified by Obama’s campaign slogan because these expectations “are also rooted in hope.
Shorter Obama: t’s not about me, and I’m so humble—but the entire world waits on my magical solutions.
Charen goes on to skewer the hypocrisy of the member nations and their representatives, when Obama proudly announced:
On my first day in office, I prohibited without exception or equivocation the use of torture by the United States of America. I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed.” The audience, composed in part of regimes that pluck out the eyeballs of political enemies and hack off the hands of suspected thieves, applauded vigorously.
I have long joked that, with his propensity to stay at jobs only a short while before going on to ever bigger and grander positions, Obama had nowhere to go after the presidency except UN Secretary-General. It’s an office uniquely suited for his skill set, one in which he can do a lot less harm than he can as POTUS. Perhaps it’s time for a promotion?
So anyone up for a wager? Obama steps down after his first term, as his poll numbers tank? The media line will be: He was just too good for this country.
Wow, Secretary General of the UN is the perfect job for Obama – it’s a place where it’s a-okay to be all talk and no action. Kinda the opposite of being POTUS. I’m at the point with this wanker where everytime I see him on TV I want to shout “shut up and do something USEFUL!”
E: Oh, he’s doing things that are very useful.
The question is: useful to whom?
I’ll take 1:2 odds that Obama steps down before his term is over.
I believe Obama is on his way to the worst presidency since Warren Harding. Obama will be reviled even by the media when they realize how badly they were had.
I don’t think Obama has the character to withstand this level of rejection. It’s also possible his ineptitude will result in a clear disaster which he will own.
Hubris, thy name is Obama.
“Really? The whole world pulses with hope and expectation because Obama is president? People in Amsterdam, Sao Paulo and Taipei have a spring in their step because an Illinois Democrat won the White House?”
I kinda got the idea a lot of people DID… now, that is not a good thing IMO… I actually think it’s sad and pathetic… and shows that people really bought into the global Bush bashing (he sorta reminds me of Goldstein out of 84) but, ummmm, yes.
Obama’s Speeches– Obama Mentions Self Nearly 1,200 Times!
Obama loves to hear himself talk — about himself. In just 41 speeches so this year, not including this week’s big speech at the United Nations, Obama has talked about himself nearly 1,200 times — 1,198 to be exact. (That breaks down to 1,121 “I”s and just 77 “me”s.)
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/09/23/dan-gainor-obama-speeches-ego/
The interviews went off as expected. Obama kept his “I” on the nation’s problems. He mustered 387 personal mentions in just 82 minutes of air time. Forget the economy, health care, racism or whatever. Every 13 seconds, Obama was talking about … Obama.
takes a long long tmie for reasonable people to come around and accept reality… by then its usually too late.
or to quote pink floyd
no one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun.
I don’t think Obama has the character to withstand this level of rejection. It’s also possible his ineptitude will result in a clear disaster which he will own.
so through an evolutionary process he is stuck going down the road to a despotism.
as i said, its a process, and they dont start out that way, but turn that way once things dont work right.
however, everyone assumed, even after i say otherwise, that these guys come out like vampires in teh movies.
no… what happens is that they have a ego problem. they have some defining thing that makes them fenatical. they have bad homelives and chips on their shoulder. they tend to like socialism since that gives them the excuse to revenge and be rewarded by it. and when things donw work out, they and their cronies cant resist the totalitarian temptation.
so as i said, the hitler YOU know is a cartoon.
the Stalin YOU know, is a cartoon
you have to get to know them better to understand how they came about and were created.
and then understand that their methods warp them. that even if they are as good as gold starting out, their acceptance of bad as a means to good, damns the whole thing.
its self fulfilling given the attiudes and the willingness not to do the right thing, even if that right thing is to step down and walk away. (like washington).
this is very much like a bad marraige
and in a bad marraige the woman you marry and the woman you divorce are not the same person.
well, in a despotic thing the person you elect is not the person you want out later on.
reasonable people control their expectations, and since they expect this jack booted instant thing as if they were occupied in 24 hours… nothing is happening.
like glen beck said last night.
he hopes this is just a wicked left experiement and things will NOT resul tin what it appears like.
but there is no way to tell.
however, my attitude is that we shuold never be in a position that we owuld have to tell. that means that our checks and balances are gone and the reasaonable ones have soothed the crowd into a lets wait and see.
like it was a movie and you can walk out if its not good.
in fact, in a way thats exactly how we are treating our lives on one level. like the outcomes are bac plots we can walk away from.
however the truth about last century was that it wasnt a movie, and that the horror of it was not the horror of it.
the horror was the little things…
bourgeoisie = middle class = silent majority
The Perestroika Deception
By John Griffing
The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record…The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends.
– Dimitri Manuilski, Prof. at the Lenin School of Political Warfare in Moscow, 1930[1]
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/the_perestroika_deception.html
i have read through a lot of documents frmo those places. its why i have a completely different turn than huxley. the fact that my family was a part of in in several ways and areas gave me reason to study what reasonable people do not.
right now, no one wants to know this information. if they factor it in, they would have to abandon their social status.
we complain, but we dont like the answers, so we make up our own.
that helps them…
President Obama’s aggressive drive toward Socialism fitting neatly into decades of Communist strategy.[2]
That long and patient strategy of deception was developed in the halls of the KGB, and dutifully carried out by Communist subversives in the United States. Prominent KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn has called it the “perestroika deception.”[3]
According to KGB documents published by Golitsyn, “perestroika” and “glasnost” were always intended from the beginning to serve as a media ploy to deceive the West into lowering its defenses to the point where Soviet goals could proceed unchallenged. Of Golitsyn’s 194 predictions, 139 had been fulfilled as of 1993.[4]
more of them have been confirmed since then
Even former Soviet Premier Gorbachev, the eventual face of these policies, later acknowledged their true nature: “The decision to launch a new economic policy, which substantially widened the notions of socialism and the ways of building it, was imbued with profound revolutionary dialectics.”[5] Translation: world conquest will proceed as planned. The “revolutionary dialectic” is a tactic that has been employed throughout Soviet history. The word “glasnost” appears in Lenin’s writings 46 times.[6]
how many of us here have read those works. I have. which is why i can quote such obscurities.
but to huxely and others i am the one with the wrong answers, even though what i have been showing fits, and they have been doing nothing but musing over mostly made up stuff (which they use like spackle to fill in the holes).
Gorbachev has even been as blunt as calling perestroika a “continuation of the October Revolution.”
and how may quotes from gorby and the green signals have i posted? oh yeah… why read about a reality that youo want to excise from your personal one?
The second facet of the “perestroika deception” has been to engineer a “peaceful transition to socialism” in the US by way of a manufactured economic crisis. Soviet manuals from the seventies outline this dimension in some detail. In 1974, Alexander Sobolev of the Moscow Institute of Marxism-Leninism developed the means by which a “peaceful revolutionary process” could take place. To do this, Sobolev stressed the need for a “nationwide political crisis” to be followed by “effective measures to neutralize wavering social strata.” It was Lenin himself that said, “A revolution is simply impossible without an overall national crisis.”
The aim was to co-opt well-meaning Democrats in Congress into advancing a “peaceful transition to socialism” in the wake of US economic collapse.
i have read those things… they were always avaliable to true believers. but they are hard to read, and so they self select.
most have no idea what kind of literature that is, or even believe that the people that wrote it are as serious about it as a heart attack to the person having one.
If the idea that the Communists could use an economic crisis to turn the United States into a Communist country sounds far-fetched, perhaps Gorbachev’s recent remarks will serve to enlighten:
The model that emerged during the final decades of the 20th century has turned out to be unsustainable…It was based on a drive for super-profits and hyper-consumption for a few…I have no ready-made prescriptions. But I am convinced that a new model will emerge, one that will emphasize public needs and public goods….
Will this new model be called Communism? Almost certainly not. But whatever it’s called, the outcome for the US will be the same.
even after its done, they will name it something different… that way we can believe its still not what it is.
the horror was the little things…
I actually learned something from NPR Sunday night.
The hosts were discussing H. P. Lovecraft and according to one host, HPL had decreed a proper pronunciation of Cthullhu: khloo-hloo.
That had always bothered me. Like many I settled for kh-thul-loo, but it never seemed right.
Which reminds me of my favorite 2008 bumper sticker/t-shirt:
Cthullhu for President 2008
[Red-white-blue tentacled horror image]
Why settle for the lesser evil?
http://www.zazzle.com/cthulhu4prez_tshirt-235084444389651883
THE KREMLIN SINCE STALIN
http://www.archive.org/stream/kremlinsincestal006155mbp/kremlinsincestal006155mbp_djvu.txt
How far the rulers of the USSR intend to go in an ideological
reorientation of this kind can usually be gathered from the extent
to which quotations from the classics, Marx, Engels, and Lenin,
are used in justification. In this case it was easy to find suitable
quotations, because Marx and Engels, as well as Lenin,
repeatedly stated that the road to socialism differs from
country to country, and that In certain conditions the trans-
formation could be achieved by taking the parliamentary road.
At the Twentieth Party Congress Mikoyan was the only one
who quoted a remark from a speech by Karl Marx, at a workers’
meeting in Amsterdam in September 1872, which had been
taboo in the Stalin era: We did not say that the paths to this
goal (a socialist society) are the same everywhere. We know
that different institutions, customs, and origins must be taken
into account and we do not deny that there may be various
countries, such as America and England, and if I knew your
institutions better I might perhaps add Holland, where the
workers can reach their goal by peaceful means.’ 1
There are, however, more far-reaching statements by Marx
and Engels on this subject. Marx, for example, in his Analysis
of the debates on the anti-socialist law at the end of September 1878
said: ‘If the working class in England or the United States
were to win a majority in Parliament or Congress it could
remove constitutionally the laws and institutions which stand
in the way of its development.’ In his preface to the English
edition of Das Kapital of 1886 Engels said that in England ‘the
inevitable social revolution could be carried out completely
by peaceful and legal means’. In the eighties of the last century
Engels also included France among those countries in which a
peaceful transition to socialism appeared possible to him. In his
pamphlet Criticism of the social-democratic draft programme of 1891
he says: ‘One can imagine that the old society could grow into
the new one peacefully in countries in which the people’s
representatives hold all power, in which one can, constitutionally,
do what one wants, as soon as one has a majority of the people
behind one. This might be possible in such democratic republics
as France and America or in such monarchies as Great
Britain where the dynasty is powerless against the will of the
people.’
bet ya no one else reads this stuff…
but if ya did… and you stood up and looked around, you wouldnt think what has happend in only one lifetime after WW, was even possible.
Maybe Obama should run for Supreme Cthullhu.
It would be a step up from POTUS or UN Secretary General. It would give him dominion not just over Earth, but also outer space and nameless dimensions.
It would prove that he is evil and that we truly are helpless in his many-tentacled grip.
It would explain that odd birthmark that NO ONE will talk about.
If for one would welcome our new tentacled overlord.
you get a clearer picture if you cna sit through a couple of hundred 400 plus page books.
but given that most have attention spans and require cicero as a writer, such tracts are seldom read.
another interesting book from the universal library is.
Hitler A Study In Tyranny (1962)http://www.archive.org/details/hitlerastudyinty002762mbp
but its too long for most of you at 848 pages.
as i said… all this stuff is not available to the americans today who dont have an average 8th grade reading level any more.
which is why most are no longer used to reading long things and they dont like it.
and so that puts most of the most lucid works prior to the latter half of the last century out of reach and too boring.
and huxley,
what your doing is sliming me by association to something i have nothing to do with.
that is, you have gone completely off topic to pull in a very bad sci fi fantasy writer with a pagen bent.
and then start going on about voting for a god.
why?
because i bring in a defector whose writings have been confirmed over time?
because i bring in writings from the people who actually do things here?
who promotes the elders of zion crap? (the russians)
who promoted american labs created hiv to cover their antrhax labs? (russia).
what language was obamas mother and father learning in class when they met (russian)
what kind of socialist is ayers (stalinist – russian).
of course, your ONLY retort is to do what?
lower yourself to copying leftist troll tactics?
way to go huxley…
when the chips are down, your true colors come out.
Obama’s links to Russian ideololgy
this is just off the cuff.
please give me the list of associations to cthulu…
1. parents met learning russian
2. uncle was key to overthrow kenya free state and created a communist one with assistance from russia
3. daughter has a russian name, sascha. its alexander, after alexander pushkin. the man whom russians say embodies them.
4. other daughter is named malia, after an american author who biographied pushkin
5. likes to redistribute wealth
6. loves unions
7. hates our allies
8. loves our communist enemies
9. has run up the budget to more than all other budgets before them combined.
10. has printed money to more than 3 times the money in print before he came to office. that is our monetary supply has increased more than 400 percent in 2 years. wait till that hits
11. has favored russia by unilateral disarmament
12. has favored russia by trying to reset relations as if they have never had a pass
13. His biography (now admitted) was written by ayers a stalinist whose organization wanted the extermination of 25 million americans, planted bombs, killed people and commited bank robbery to fund the black socialists
so huxley, waht are obamas associations to cthulu?
i guess its a shutout.
Huxley:
I believe Obama is on his way to the worst presidency since Warren Harding.
Before the election, I constructed an experience metric of US Senators who became President. Here was Obama’s experience applied to the metric: US Senate experience, no House of Representative experience, no Vice President experience, no Cabinet experience, no military experience, no experience as Governor.
There was only one other President who fit Obama’s experience metric. That would be President Warren Harding.
oh. and to put in other terms what you did.
you used collectivst tactics to ridicule me to bring me back in line with how you want the group to be. you want them to follow your reasoning, and you dont want them to listen to me at all. that way, your status remains.
however, if they do read the stuff i put up from the past… they will learn facts you dont like. facts that make your points not so clear any more. facts that makes the one PRETENDING to be reasonable, someone not to listen to as they dont have all the facts, and they trhow them out, and they do so to control the message others get.
if you werent doing this, and you didnt internalize these methods, then you would rationally talk about these prior texts.
but you havent read them. and thats a problem to maintaining your status as a man whose reasonableness comes from logic and reason.
but logic and reason with holes in it like swiss cheese, that does not address all of whats there. is not logic and reason, its just another form of propaganda where you control the message and what people think.
i want them tocome to their own concljusions based on ALL of the facts.
you have remarkably internalixed the methodology where the ignorant can appear smarter than the smart and knowlegeable, as long as they have an ignorant audience.
once that is the situiation, the last thing anyone in a good place needs there is real facts!!!
no differnt than the 50 or so years missing from the DNC history covering the hayes elections.
I’ve also been wondering if Obama shouldn’t have been running for UN Secretary General. His campaign speech in Germany last year strongly reinforces that consideration.
I have to admit serious trepidation, though, were he ever to attain that seemingly feckless post. With his buddy-buddy overtures to the likes of Ahmedinajad, Chavez, Castro, and Zelaya–tempered with his obvious anti-Americanism–what coalitions could he build for his “New World Order” that would put teeth (or should I say fangs) back into the UN?
I would be afraid.
Gringo: I give Harding the nod over Obama because Harding served as Lt Gov of Ohio for two years and completed six years in the US Senate.
IMO one has to go back to the William Jennings Bryan, the populist, progressive nitwit, who received the Democratic presidential nomination in 1896 with only four years experience in the US House of Representatives.
But sure, Obama, Harding, and Bryan — all fine dangerously inexperienced hacks
Huxley: Bryan won his first nomination largely on his oratorical skills, as shown in his “Cross of Gold” speech. Bryan did not operate with a teleprompter.
One other comparison: Harding was rumored to be of mixed blood.
Neo wrote:
“E: Oh, he’s doing things that are very useful.
The question is: useful to whom?”
Oh, I know, I know. Maybe Victor Davis Hanson was right when he wrote that Obama is acting more like a university president than anything else. It explains the worthless speechifying, which is noteable only for the inverse ratio between its high ideals and its practical content.
I have never been a conspiracy theorist. I’m completely unmoved by the birth certificate kerfuffle. But I will say this: if Barack Obama had been a Marxist mole, deeply planted by some nefarious outfit to be activated at the perfect, opportune moment to enact a program designed to bring about the end of our way of life, how would he behave any differently?
When I heard an audio clip of the school children singing the songs about Obama, it dawned on me that what some people who were so disgusted with Bush were anxious for was a fuhrer. (BTW, WTF was the “mmm mmm mmm” chorus? Was the song about a person or food?)
Artfldgr:
Relax, man. Keep your eye on the Obonga ball. We are with you! You are among friends here. United we stand, and all that. I get your posts, though the typos generated by your hurry do put some rocks on my path.
Artfldgr:
I’m with Tom, here. Don’t be discouraged. I get a lot of value from reading your posts. Although I don’t find much in the way of comfort, still I tend to share your views. I hope we’re wrong, but no one has persuaded me of that so far.