Obama's Sense of Life

Something bothers me about President Obama besides his political and economic views. I'm not sure how to describe it, other than by referring to his sense of life, his soul or his core values. His approach to vitally important issues seems muted, lacking in passion.

To give you a sense of what I mean, consider the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope," which also served as his campaign motto. To begin with, that phrase is an oxymoron. "Audacity" refers to bravery in action. "Hope" is entirely passive. The two don't belong in the same phrase. Besides that, the phrase itself is weak and non-assertive. It is especially inappropriate for a commander-in-chief, whom we want to be strong and decisive.

Obama's indecisiveness in foreign policy is a transparent reflection of his core personality. Just today, I was listening to his press conference following the Republican takeover of the Senate in last night's election. In answering questions, he happened to refer to 9/11, and in doing so characterized it as "a heart-breaking tragedy." 9/11 was not a heart-breaking tragedy. A heart-breaking tragedy is when your dog gets hit by a car. 9/11 was a monstrous injustice perpetrated by a hideous band of Islamic terrorists. But notice again the president's reluctance to respond in a strong, assertive and appropriately passionate and self-righteous tone.

Or consider the President's reference to Islam as "a religion of peace." After all the violence and bloodshed committed in the name of that religion, characterizing it as inherently peaceful is similar to calling 9/11 "a heart-breaking tragedy." It's yet another retreat from moral judgment.

In his address to the nation on ISIS, Obama stated, "ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents." This statement is so obviously false, it's difficult to believe that anyone could take it seriously. The Koran explicitly and repeatedly commands Muslims to “kill the unbelievers wherever you find them” (e.g., 2:191, 9:5), “strike off their heads” (e.g., 8:12, 47:4), make sex slaves of their wives and daughters (e.g., 4:24, 33:50), and continue this jihad “until all opposition ends and all submit to ‘Allah’” (e.g., 8:39, 9:29). (quran.com)

Our president does not want to confront evil. It's much easier to whitewash it. That way, one can avoid appearing self-righteous and morally superior. Islam is just another religion of peace, don't you know? We're no better than they, and we dare not suggest otherwise.

Ugh!

Bringing Nixon(and/or LBJ, the tag team Duo of Demolition)back would be the perfect analog to a serpent eating its tail.

This is me, with wildly happy, optimistic  thoughts:  Obama as the tail of the serpent.  As in, the end of the serpent.

I loved those pictures on OL of Obama at 23.  "Leader of the Choom Gang."    Chillin' at the dorm, having vague visions of his Hopey Changey Dopey Days to come. Not quite Che, except in the dopamine blunt-blunted corners of his own mind.  Says it all.  Feel free, but ... no evidence it helped out the Vision Thing.

regards,

Fred

Bill,

Those are sharp observations... the sense of contradiction that leaves Obama being passive - not just in certain areas, but also in style and in a sense of who he is.

He has a strong inner drive or he wouldn't be where he is today.  And he is very disciplined or he couldn't have gotten where he is.  We also know that he is terribly dishonest, and we know that Progressivism is a political philosophy that is dishonest at its very root.  They were made for each other.

I see this man as driven by an inner rage and defended by narcissim.  He has picked up and woven together his Progressive/Anti-colonial/Globalist/Black-Liberation philosopies as a net of intellectual structures to hold together his direction, to identify those who he hates (projected self-hate if you want to get all psychological about it), and to make "moral" the living of a lie.  Lies that are accepted and that symbolize a subconscious antidote to the child's fears of being inferior, being rejected, being hated, and being in danger.  A lifetime of lying to himself, while always disembling to others leaves an exterior that shows coldness, detachment, and some inner motivation that is hidden and can only be deduced.

I can see an affinity for the imagined "Arab Spring" coming from his distant childhood experience of Islam (maybe the young child's first feeling of safety from an ideology?), combined with the anti-colonial feelings he seems to have acquired from his deep identification with his father, and dressed up in the academic idiocy prevalent regarding Arabs that we see in Harvard and Columbia universities.  But it doesn't seem like enough in my mind to account for the things you've point out, or how consistently and deeply wrong he is this clash between civilization and barbarism.  I feel like we don't have the whole picture at this point. That he may have deep ideological views that are even crazier than those we know of.  Or we, as logical thinkers, have a harder time grasping the way a highly educated person can use ideas in ways that are totally unconnected to reality.  He has made his writings and speeches and actions too much of a false cover for what he really thinks and believes.

I think that at his core is anger. I surmise that it is redirected from self-hatred that started in early childhood, and a from child's most intense fears of rejection or being harmed... all converted into a hatred of others.  Wrapping himself in far-left academic theories is like putting on armor so that he can do battle.  The constant use of lies and hiding himself is the heart of defense system and has left him emotionally stunted - leaving room only for hidden anger.  Narcisism is another defense that melds very well with the other defenses, and would have started at a very early age.  His greatest enemies will always be those who see lies or he fears might expose those lies or stand in the way of him getting his way.  His failure to grasp the real horror of ISIS may come out of his repressed desires to wreak terror on those who see through his defenses and therefore threaten him (just a thought).

This of course is all blatant psychologizing, but at this point in history, with what he and the other Progressives have lead the country into, I'll make no apologies for trying to unravel their bizarre inner workings to complete a picture we already have of how wrong they are politically, ethically, and philosophically.

William:

I think you sense the phony in him, which is what makes us all so uneasy.

Not just about him.   He is the culmination in this political trend.

Nixon really did sweat profusely in those TV debates with Kennedy.    And, it really was a tell.   But what did America political machinery learn from that debacle?   It learned how to put lipstick on pigs.   Any pig.  And it's been doing so with ever more refined artistry ever since.   It's all about the Remote Optics now.   It is complete veneer, to the point where, in spite of Postel's hypothesis, it is possible to effect charisma, to manufacture it as if by design.  To wear it like cardboard armor.    In the Age of Remote Optics, real armor is no longer a necessity.

Truman wouldn't have a prayer today.   I doubt even JFK; he'd have been Romneyed in the primaries.

But a Reagan?  A Clinton?  A Bush 43?   An Obama?    

We've been trained to put that list into two groups, and we do.   But, look at the following list:

Truman, Eisenhower, JFK

Their appeal was to Americans, not just their half of a polarized America.   Any of us would be hard pressed to distinguish the policies of Eisenhower and JFK, they were centrist American presidents in a much more unified America, only artificially divided into 'parties.' 

Eisenhower, the Kansas doughboy, and JFK, the charasimatic NE patrician, but both forged by their individual experiences in WWII in defense of this nation and its peculiar ideas of freedom.

And after JFK... it was as if the clowns moved in and took over American politics.    Bush 41 stands out as a blip, a brief throwback, among a parade of folks wearing cardboard armor.

LBJ?   Nixon?   Carter?

As much as I enjoyed the charisma of Reagan and the noises that came out of his mouth, I can't help but believe that the nation would have been better off 'just saying no' to the sugar rush.   He paid lip service to the idea of limited government, and we settled for the words and the delightful delivery.    And our reward was the encouragement of a parade of charasimative cardboard cutouts.

The post election analysts expressed the following well; the charismatic tidal wave that was Obama was about Obama; the Democrats mistook that wave of personal charisma for the nation swinging Far Left towards the extreme left side of the Democrats.    Now that the cardboard armor of Obama has been totally exposed by his ineptitude and the tidal wave has crested, none of that had carried over to the Democrats.   This election was a reaction.   The Hopey Changey Brigade that swept him into office did not show up to sing his praises and save him from two years on the rack on the way out the door.

And yet, the Christies and Roves have interpreted this as a 'massive mandate' -- they managed to get over 50% of the 37% of those who voted -- are taking their 19% to the bank and claiming this is a resounding endorsement of Circus As Usual.  

 I seriously doubt that.     

A national reset.  A biannual ritualistic bloodletting.   The Right's version of Hopey Changey.    Now things are going to be different in DC.  

And the beat goes on.

More like, the beating.

How many times can we watch the exact same movie credits role by, and actually expect a different result?

regards,

Fred 

医者？私が仕事から家に滞在しています4時間の勃起を持っている場合ので、私の妻は看護師を再生することができます！

Hahaha!

That would be, a day ending in 'y'.

Bwuahahaha!  Hi Di!

Bill, 

To the subject of your posts, you can add Obama's participation in the progressive's recent attacks on local law enforcement (Travon Martin, Ferguson, Baltimore, etc.) and his seeking to make things better for criminals (eliminate bail for lessor offenses, early release from prison, etc.)  

We know there are areas of criminal justice could use some reform.  And we all know that there are a small number of bad apples on some police forces, but the president's focus has no such balance.  Instead it is anti-police, racially slanted, and sees criminals as the victims.  If you parse things as we do here, where those who respect rights and defend rights are respected and those who violate rights are the enemy, then, yes, Obama's sense of life seems to be backwards.  Flat out backwards!

Bill,

Thursday morning a home-grown Islamic terrorist kills some of our military personnel in a Chattanooga recruiting office.  But in a country where every citizen is guaranteed the right to bear arms, no one will let military personnel in recruiting offices even carry a side-arm.  That shooting happened in the morning, but it didn't deter Obama from going ahead with his sit-down meeting with a group of convicts in a federal prison.  And if the optics of that don't seem bad enough, this in the same week that a young woman was killed by a criminal alien in a sanctuary city, and amidst the signing of the deal with the terrorist-nation Iran.

The Justice department recently filed and won a suit against the Sheriff of Maricopa county, here in Phoenix, and he is now required to provide Spanish speaking services in the jails.  

This administration is anti-law enforcement, anti-military, unhappy with the restrictions of the constitution, but happy to sit and chat with locked up criminals, and negotiate unenforceable nuclear deals with a terrorist nation-state whose leader chants "Death to America".

Like the technique of the BIG LIE, which seems too large to be a lie, these behaviors seem too crazy to seen as crazy.  Like 'too big to fail,' these practices all knit together as too impossible to believe.  The pathological in politics now seems to be the norm.  I suspect that it is partially because their politics are incomprehensible that the progressives get away with as much as they do.

Add this to Donald Trump being number one in the polls among GOP primary voters, and the race on the Democratic side being split between an avowed socialist and Hillary Clinton (who has zero accomplishments unless you are willing to count scandals, cover-ups and lies).

Has someone been putting hallucinogens in my morning coffee?