Over the last few years Barack Obama has frequently been described as “detached.”
Charles Krauthammer in 2009- Obama is “cool and detached and unconcerned” :
Why Obama Is Emotionally Detached
On the situation in Detroit
Yet Obama’s approach to the cities has been a detached one, favoring a broadly palatable “metropolitan policy,” which encourages cooperation between cities and suburbs.
How Obama’s cool, detached temperament is hurting him and his party.
Obama detached from reality of his regulation
In a previous post I asked “Where’s Waldobama”? Events were flying about and Obama was nowhere to be seen.
Now the world stares at a genuine nuclear crisis in Japan, a civil war rages in Libya, the dollar is on the edge of losing its tenure as being the world’s reserve currency. And Obama? He’s filling out his NCAA bracket for ESPN. While the world reels, Barack Obama plays his 61st round of golf.
It’s mind boggling. Obama is not just detached. It’s far worse than that. He doesn’t give a freaking damn and I don’t think he is even capable of caring.
Barack Obama is a sociopath.
Here is a list of potential sociopathic behaviors from Profile of a Sociopath See if any sound familiar.
* Glibness/Superficial Charm
* Manipulative and Conning
* Grandiose Sense of Self
* Pathological Lying
* Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
* Shallow Emotions
* Incapacity for Love
* Need for Stimulation
* Callousness/Lack of Empathy
* Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
* Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
* Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
* Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
* Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
* Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
* Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
* Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
* Conventional appearance
* Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
* Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life
* Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim’s affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
* Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
* Incapable of real human attachment to another
* Unable to feel remorse or guilt
* Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
* May state readily that their goal is to rule the world
Everyone knows that Social Security is in trouble, but Obama’s overriding concern is his re-election:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling and Sperling’s deputy, Jason Furman — leading figures in the president’s economic team — are pressing Obama to cut Social Security benefits if necessary, say sources familiar with their positions.
But Obama’s political team, led by David Axelrod, David Plouffe and Jim Messina, are urging the president to understand that backing benefit cuts could prove disastrous to his 2012 reelection hopes, sources say.
While the Surgeon General of the US advises those on the West coast to purchase iodide tablets Barack Obama is furiously occupied with………fundraising.
President Obama makes his first major fund-raising pitch for his 2012 re-election on Monday night when he meets with about 50 backers—some involved in his 2008 campaign and others who are considered potential major supporters.
Obama meets with the group at the St. Regis Hotel at 7:30 p.m. est at an event organized by the Democratic National Committee, which is the political arm of the Obama operation for now since “official” Obama re-election papers have yet to be filed with the Federal Election Commission. No money for the 2012 re-elect can be collected until Obama files with the FEC. Any pledges obtained at the DNC reception Monday night–it is a DNC event–goes to the DNC. But since the main purpose of the DNC at this stage is to support Obama’s programs and re-election–it is a difference without a major distinction.
Obama is focused like a laser on bullying and “Women’s History Month.”
Why the focus on bullying? Because poor Obama was bullied as a child
“If there’s one goal of this conference,” Obama said, “it’s to dispel the myth that bullying is just a harmless rite of passage or an inevitable part of growing up. It’s not.” He spoke to more than 100 parents, students, teachers and others gathered to discuss the problem and share ideas for solutions.
“Bullying can have destructive consequences for our young people. And it’s not something we have to accept,” he said.
In other words, it’s all about him. And if it’s not about him, he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about it. He is a sociopath. The United States has a President, but this what the US looks like without a leader.
Libya, spending, Japan- Obama is sitting them all out and waiting to see what’s best for him.
He is a disgrace to the office of the President.
Twice in recent months Obama has let toadys float the trial balloon of the President needing a person to do the job of Chief Executive.
A person in that position would free the elected person (Obama) so he could fund raise, campaign, give speeches, go golfing, to basketball games, parties, vacations …. and so on.
Depending on who Obama picked……
It just doesn’t work that way.
This is a ridiculous article–barely worth reading, let alone commenting 0n.
The media created apparition that was Obama has gone poof.
Boy do those Styrofoam temples look stupid.
I wonder if he really will be re-elected. I mean perhaps he knows this whole ball of wax, the economy, is going to melt down like Fukushima #4 and there will be no point in running for re-election?
Decisive When It Really Matters!
Obama’s 2011 March Madness Picks on ESPN
As Leader of the Nation and the Free World, NOT so much…
But, but.. he said, “I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president,”
So much for that. No hard decisions.
Oh, please, does any of this surprise anyone who was really paying attention in 2008? I mean, what exactly did “Hope and Change” mean? Hope for what? Change to what? He could have just as well campaigned on the slogan “I’m Not Bush” and it would have had just as much meaning.
And what were Obama’s glaring attributes? The ability to read lofty speeches written by a 25 year old speech writer and read from a teleprompter? His ability to make promises that have not come to pass (close Gitmo, no more renditions, bringing all our soldiers home from Iraq, job creation, stronger economy, lower gas prices)?
No, Obama was simple a clean slate that the media was unwilling to vet and David Axelrod could train to give lofty speeches read from a telepromter. Axelrod was the real genius, with Valerie Jarrett (now, there’s someone with a scary background) pulling the Pinochiobama strings. He is a figure head, a lead man, a facade for the real power behind the scenes.
But some of us knew that. We took the time to research the bills written by Obama as a state senator. We took the time to look at his votes (he was voted farther to the left than Teddy Kennedy) as a federal senator. We researched his background, wondering who paid for his tuition to not one, but THREE tony, expensive universities when his grandparents were simply “middle class” supported by only his grandmother. We understood that the “Frank” Obama talks about in his book was the Communist, and pedophile, Frank Marshall Davis. We understood that his dreams were dreams FROM his father, not dreams OF his father, a drunken, womanizing Marxist. We knew there was a shallowness to a man whose grandmother, that had raised him and did without to send him to an exclusive prep school, was dying but he posponed his trip to visit her until he had appeared with the Grecian columns like Caesar returning to Rome.
Obama has no respect for the nation that gave him the highest honor we can bestow on anyone, and after recently seeing all the photos of Obama with his feet on the Resolution Desk and other historic furniture in the Oval Office, we can safely assume that he has no respect for much of anything but his own ego.
Obama is not a leader, he is simple the face projected by a group of people who are really in power. He is a party animal (averaging a party every three days his first year in office, according to the NY Slimes) and who is more comfortable with other name brands than he is with his own generals.
Funny, I can picture in my head George Bush talking about being bullied in school and, after having kicked the bully’s ass, got a proper reprimand from his mom, not admitting that someone probably took his lunch money away from him and got by with it.
Obama, Obama (Video)
I may be a little behind the curve on this, but Neil Cavuto may be one of the most talented interviewers to ever grace the screen. He’s able to come back intelligently in an interview without being condescending, not let the interviewee skate, plus he’s humorous as hell.
OH, Yah, . . . what I’m getting at is . . . he should run for the Presidency and raise the level of the dialogue.
I’m with you, James Raider. Cavuto has been one of my favorites in the biz world, and for a news host, for quite some time. The “big head” guy is one of the only reasons I keep cable news around…
Alas, such a wonderful man has MS, and is quite unlikely to do the POTUS thing, tho he jokes about it quite often when selecting a fake VEEP.
It is unfortunate that Neil Cavuto is so ill.
I forget what he’s got but it is chronic, progressively getting worse and, often times, exhausts him.
His ”big head” humor used to slay me.
Opinions vary. The country is split, with each half thinking the other half has more loose screws than a Studebaker. One-half of all outside observers may think we’re all a little crazy. I haven’t seen any polls on that.
@ chipset, Thus far He has succeeded in being a Mediocre to Incompetent One Term President and His arrogance is only surpassed by His Constitutional and Economic Illiteracy. as His Transcripts are “Not Available”, I can only rate Him on a Pass/Fail Performance rating and give Him a Fail on Foreign and Domestic Policies and rate His Leadership as Missing in Action. The Affirmative Action Governance by Czar and Agency Regime gets a Huge Fail from Me across the board.
On Dithering, Indecisiveness and Divisive action, He gets a pass. On Rock Star Partying, living lavish in the trappings of office and failing to come through on Campaign promises He gets a Pass. On alienating Traditional Allies and bringing American prestige to an all time low on the International Stage he has succeeded beyond My worst expectations. Career Politicians, Activists and Community Organizers are too short sighted to be National Leaders or Statesmen. Their Judgment is compromised by their lack of Values and negotiable Integrity.
I’ll never forget how he schooled O’reilly on oil prices. He proved him wrong when he claimed the oil companies were gouging and O’Reilly lost it.
That is a true statement. On the other hand, true facts don’t, and Obama is a nightmare of a president.
Each half also seems to have its own set of true facts.
RETIRE05: Why are you spreading the nasty rumour that Frank Marshall Davis was a “pedophile”? Are you trying to railroad Davis with just the trumped-up evidence that his porn novel included sex with an underage teenager, or is there any empirical evidence, such as court records or confirmatory statements from Davis himself? A novel is fiction, and is fraudulent evidence for such accusations! Do you also consider the author of “Lolita” to be a pedophile, or just Davis? Perhaps it’s time for MythBusters to take a closer look at this unsubstantiated claim.
“Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.”
– Abraham Lincoln
That’s weird, Kaleokualoha.
I had never heven heard the Frank Marshall Davis wrote porno.
What I have seen is a part of a poem written by Obama, himself.
In that poem Obama writes of his youth and mentions a nasty stain that comes from Frank’s crotch and gets (somehow) onto Obama’s crotch!
I’ll see if I can find a link.
The whole poem is there.
Full of double entendre.
(That’s a ”gay” thing, btw.)
Thanks for your reply, Nan G. There is no evidence that “Pop” concerns Davis. Further, if you read the poem, the writer pulls out a mirror that he had been saving under his chair. Unless you believe the writer saved mirrors anywhere other than his home, the setting is evidently Obama’s home.
“Have patience awhile; slanders are not long-lived. Truth is the child of time; erelong she shall appear to vindicate thee.” – Immanuel Kant
Number 1, it is impossible to railroad Davis as the commie bastard is dead. Good ridance. But if you really knew anything about Davis, you would know that he admitted to having a little threesome with his wife and an underage girl.
Ummmm, I once posted (on another blog) some history on Davis. Someone, with a Hawaiian moniker, raked me over the coals for it, saying he was Davis’ son.
President Hannibal Lecter will see you now.
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
It is ambiguous, that’s for sure.
And I found this about Obama’s grandfather drinking and doing drugs:
“He knew Stan [Stanley Armour Dunham] real well,” said Dawna Weatherly-Williams, a close friend of Mr Davis “They’d play Scrabble and drink and crack jokes and crack jokes and argue. Frank always won and he was always very braggadocio about it too. It was all jocular. They didn’t get polluted drunk. And Frank [Frank Marshall Davis] never really did drugs, though he and Stan would smoke pot together.”
The line about his eyes going off in two different directions also seems to fit gramps over Frank, btw.
So, it could be gramps.
@retire05: Davis never admitted to anything of the sort. Fictional character Bob Greene admitted to the threesome, just as fictional character Humbert Humbert admitted to sex with Lolita, and just as fictional character Mark Twain wrote of his adventures. It helps to distinguish between the lives of authors, and fictional lives of their characters.
BTW: Perhaps it is better to only post verifiable fact rather than slander from disinformation sources.
Why, yes, Keleokualoha would be one and the same with Mark Davis. It seems Mr. Davis is quite busy, having a blog at Organizing For America, posting over at HuffPo, and commenting at numerous right wing websites like Redstate.
It would also seem that Mr. MARK Davis does regular Google searches, looking for any mention of the man he claims to be his father, and then trying to defend Frank Marshall Davis, claiming the man who had a healthy FBI file was not a Communist, inspite of others who say Davis WAS a Communist and they were in the Communist Party with Davis.
For you, Mark, I cannot prove your claims of being FMD’s child, not can I prove any of your other claims that he was not really as involved in Obama’s life as much as Obama leads one to believe. But I would suggest you get a life. If you intend to spend the rest of your life denying what your father was, you are going to be a very, very busy man. Perhaps sometime on a psychiatrists couch is in order for you.
Ignore this person. He is everywhere, on every blog, that ever mentions Frank Marshall Davis. Obviously a person with no life, and some serious psychological problems, he thinks that what he has to say, in spite of the contradictions by those who knew FMD really well, holds some import.
There is no way he can prove to be Davis’ child. But his bio at OAF is interesting, although it may be fictional.
@retire05: I am not denying that he was a communist. Professor Tidwell, whom I know personally, revealed that he had a private letter in which Davis admitted that he joined the CPUSA during WWII. I am denying, however, the falsehoods regarding my father, as outlined in my newsvine column (above). Professor Tidwell, who edited my father’s books, has confirmed my identity at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGx9n3. You can email him at the University of Kansas for additional confirmation.
The major falsehoods concerning Frank Marshall Davis are refuted at http://kaleokualoha2878577.newsvine.com/_news/2011/01/22/5896467-disinformation-against-the-obama-davis-relationship
An earlier analysis is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at
Please note that his membership in the CPUSA is NOT a point of contention.
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” – Galileo Galilei (1564 – 1642)
@James Raider: He’s also a really nice guy. Met him once in NY.
If you can, catch Neil’s interview of Trump which ran today.
Neil’s brilliance is subtle, and hilarious. It was also evident that Neil could eat Trump’s lunch. He’s a joy to listen to in an interview.
I admit I’m not a fan of anyone on any screen in this hemisphere, but I think I’m becoming a fan of Neil Patrick Cavuto.
Unfortunately, it appears that Neil has MS.
You seem to cherish going to other websites and pimping your own. Why? Is readership down and you are trying to generate a little traffic?
Fictional writer “Bob Greene”? Bob Greene was Frank Marshall Davis, a man who apparently was pretty twisted, sexually.
Tell me, if you can disprove all these claims made by your father, have you sued anyone? I would warrant the answer is “No” since you cannot disprove your own father’s words.
Now, toddle on off and see if you can find some other blog that may have, in passing, mentioned sick, twisted Frank Marshall Davis, a traitor to his own nation and a racist, to boot.
You remind me of Che’ Guevara’s daughter who denies that her father was a murderous thug who killed hundreds, if not thousands, of Cubans because like Davis, he was another sick bastard.
Obama Heads to Rio Sunday
Washington (CNN) – President Barack Obama headlines a Democratic party event Wednesday night, the second time this week and fourth time this month he’s been the main attraction at a party gathering.
President Obama is headed to Harlem at the end of the month for a $30,800-per-head political cash bash.
It’s all about him. It’s only about him.
I guess we’ve got some visual evidence. He’s so detached in the photo up above that the shadow of his coat is in the wrong place. It floats in the air. He’s apparently about to levitate.
Hello Mark, I see you are back. It’s been a few years.
Yes, retire05 and others. If you’ve been around FA for a few years, you would recognize Mark’s handle and appearance. Rather than have him have to repeat himself endlessly, you may want to read one of the lengthy comment threads back then with Mark about his father in summer of 2008. Also here in fall of 2009. And no, I’ve never seen him appear here to boost his website ratings. Fact is, I’ve only seen him here and other places when he finds someone is discussing his father in a manner he deems as incorrect or outright lies.
Regardless of your own opinions about Frank Marshall Davis, it is admirable that a son does a constant cyber search to keep his father’s name clear when the man is not here to defend himself. Personally, I have found that Mark has been more civil than Billy Bob and others who have appeared here, and I do respect that.
As for myself, I have no idea why anyone chooses to dig up Frank’s name, as if it’s the kiss of death to Obama… or perhaps supposed to be the smoking gun of guilt for his socialist agenda. I don’t know the man (Davis). I’ve read mixed history about his past. And I damned sure am not going to say I know more about the man than his son.
But I will say that absolutely none of it has to do with the POTUS residing in the WH today, IMHO. We’ve all been exposed to all factions of politics and religions in our lives. What path one chooses for his own cannot be blamed on those that surround you during your youth…
…. unless, of course, you’d like me to confuse you with lib/progs who do not believe in self responsibility and blame everything on your parents, your relatives, teachers or others.
In which case, please don’t attempt to convince me you are conservative, and believe in responsibility for self.
So here’s my suggestion. If you want to go toe to toe with Mark about his father…. a guy who really knew him and didn’t form opinions from our uneducated, hyperbolic news media… then I suggest you first reread some threads and get some intimate knowledge under your belt from the past on with whom you are dealing.
Then remember that Frank Davis has nothing to do with our political power today. That onus is on Obama and the Dems for their irresponsible, socialist thrust for decades. Other than that, you all carry on with your Obama “gripe of the day” without me.
“Tell me, if you can disprove all these claims made by your father, have you sued anyone?”
Exactly WHAT claims made by my father? Are you speaking of the claims of fictional character Bob Greene? My father made none of those claims, just as John Cleland made none of the claims of Fanny Hill, Daniel Defoe made none of the claims of Moll Flanders, and Nabokov made none of the claims of Humbert Humbert. You apparently have problems distinguishing fiction from reality. Whan a fictional character makes a claim, this is different from the author making the same claim.
In this regard, Davis’s book is like Samuel Clemens “Roughing It,” in that they were both written under pseudonyms that were also fictional characters in their stories:
“Samuel Clemens wrote autobiographical novels under the pseudonym “Mark Twain,” including “Roughing It,” which “follows the travels of young Mark Twain through the Wild West during the years 1861–1867. After a brief stint as a Confederate cavalry militiaman, he joined his brother Orion Clemens, who had been appointed Secretary of the Nevada Territory, on a stagecoach journey west. Twain consulted his brother’s diary to refresh his memory and borrowed heavily from his active imagination for many stories in the novel.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roughing_It)
In both cases authors used pseudonyms to publish autobiographical novels that were “fictionalized but still based upon actual occurrences.” In both cases these novels presented fictionalized adventures of their pseudonymous characters. Does anyone claim that the adventures of “Mark Twain” literally occurred in the life of Samuel Clemens, because “Mark Twain” said they happened? If not, then why should anyone claim that the adventures of Bob Greene literally occurred in the life of Frank Marshall Davis, because “Bob Greene” said they happened? Fair weather principles indicate bias.
The issue is rather simple: Either you literally attribute fictional characters’ stories to their authors’ real lives, or you accept that fictional characters’ stories are fiction. By definition, even semi-autobiographical novels are fictionalized accounts of their authors’ own lives. Research should reveal that ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim the events are true, although their actual authors make no such claims!
BTW: It’s virtually impossible for the estates of slander victims to sue for defamation in the United States.
“Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.” – Abraham Lincoln
@ Dr. John,
I have a sneaking suspicion that the actual President presiding is Jarrett. She’s scarier than the marionette she controls.
Obama is simply not engaged in the job, other than enjoying the TRAPPINGS of the office to the fullest extent possible damn the costs to taxpayers. Policy? What Me Worry?
Retire05 in #7 has it about right in paragraph 3. Good one Retire05
Calling this man President is an insult to the office in my opinion! This clown is nothing more than a puppet whose strings are tied to his Marxist handlers. Every action he doesn’t take leads me to believe this even more. The disrespect this man has for the office he occupies is an insult to every American!
Mataharley, I have been reading Mark’s comments all over the web since 2008 when he seemed to have first appeared on the scene. So please, don’t insult my intelligence by assuming that I am not familiar with him and should peruse this site for his previous comments.
All of us want to believe in the goodness of our parents. But there are those who are better left to the past and defending is a waste of time and a futile endeavor. Alieda Guevara continues to defend her father, claiming he was a benovelent rebel, when the truth is far from that. On the other hand, Fidel Castro’s daughter has put distance between herself and her father, understanding that he is nothing more than a brutal dictator.
Now, I am not comparing FMD to either Guevara or Castro, and we are not responsible for the actions of our parents, but Mark’s obsession with the rehabilitation of his father’s legacy is a tad out of the norm. Psychotic comes to mind.
Davis was an important part of Obama’s life (his grandfather using Davis as a “black” connetion for a young Barry), and like teachers who you trusted had an impact on you, Davis seemed to have an impact on the mind of a young adult who was just starting for form social opinions. Obama makes that quite clear in his book. And you cannot dismiss (well, I guess you can if you choose) the influence that Saul Alinsky had on that same impressionable mind that was forming the political/social philosphies he holds today. To accept that Alinsky had an influence but claim that Davis did not, is cherry picking.
Mark Davis has a website, which he linked here, and if anyone wants his take on FMD, they are free to read what he posts. But he admits that FMD was a Communist, which would make FMD a person who held beliefs that are an antithesis to our very republic.
Cajole Mark if you wish. And if he truely believes what he says, that is his business. But his invasion of every website that even mentions FMD’s name is an obsession that he needs to deal with.
And for you to threaten to equate me with libs/progs who do not believe in personal responsibility shows that you have a) not read my multiple posts on this site or b) choose to disallow them. And was nothing more than a cheap shot. Something I could equate with liberal/progs should I choose to do so.
I have no real interest in Mark, or the man he claims is his father. They are moot points in the whole picture. But I also think there is a time to move on, live your life by your own acheivements, and stop defending the indefensible on blog sites that most people have never heard of (not counting this one, of course).
James, Obama has NEVER exhibited leadership qualities. He sits in the Oval Office because the media fell in love with a person that fit their list of qualifications: he is far left, he had a fairly clean slate (never digging into his bill writing or voting record), he was young with a young family, and he was BLACK. Shelby Steele said during the primaries that Obama would garner votes from those who suffered white guilt, thinking that a vote for Obama would absolve them of that guilt (for what their ancestors, not they, were guilty of). He was right.
Obama’s childhood was messed up. An absent father, an athiest mother who had been raised by far left wingers that wanted to globe hop, and who was willing to let her first born be raised by his grandparents, a grandfather who seemed to care more about drinking, who showed disrepect for his own wife (as written by Obama in his book), a young man torn by his own bi-racial heritage looking for his place in the world with no one in his life acting as a responsible adult other than his grandmother, who he eventually threw under the axels of the bus.
Obama admits to seeking out the far left (the black power players, the fundalmentalist feminists, the Marxist professors) when he went Occidental. I would warrent that did not change when he went to Columbia, as he talks about Cooper Union (a frequent hang out of William Ayers who mutually shared Obama’s friend, Edward Said). Can anyone say that the opinions they formed in their 20’s do not play a part in the decisions they make in their 40’s?
A number of Obama’s formative years were spent in a Muslim nation. He was never a product of the American black community he so likes to tout. Returning from Indonesia, he did not attend public school, instead was sent to a prep school where dark skinned natives were the norm (check out Kill Hoale Day) so he never suffered from racism, instead it was the other way around (as outlined in his book). And when he married, he married someone with an obvious chip on her shoulder toward white people (read Michelle’s thesis). Don’t we ususally tend to marry those we have much in common with?
Obama is a fiction. A creation of David Axelrod. Whole cloth built from fairy wings. A myth. The emporer with no clothes.
@ retire05, #37
It’s difficult to understand why the MSM doesn’t see any of this, and each day defends Obama’s incompetence on all fronts. It gets comical. Yesterday, one airhead on CNN adamantly defended his inaction on Libya as decisive decision making. No matter how pathetic and ignorant Obama’s responses might be to events across the Nation, or around the world, the MSM seems to find justifications to support his incompetence, and the MSM remains in denial about this man.
Between Axelrod and Jarrett, the White House is controlled by people bent on changing the landscape beyond return.
I also think that the lowlife opportunist Emanuel jumped ship because, as much of a nutjob as he is, he couldn’t stand the extreme nature of the ideological climate that has invaded the Oval Office.
James Raider, the media doesn’t go where it doesn’t WANT to go, and it has so much invested in Obama that it now has to continue the charade. The MFM sold Americans a bill of goods, a fantasy, and will never admit it was wrong (when have you ever heard any of the left-leaning media say they were wrong?)
Alexrod left D.C., based on his claim that his ADULT daughter needed him (I guess she didn’t need him the last two years), Emanuel left for one reason, he wanted to make damn sure he had a job in two years, and that leaves Scary Jarrett pulling the strings on a daily basis. Not a good senario.
But the media can hide total imcompetence for just so long. As the unemployment rate stays high (in spite of the numbers fixing by this administration), job creation doesn’t come close to the need, gas and groceries continue to climb in price, and with gas prices affecting everything we purchase, the dollar becoming weaker by the day (think Weimar) a hard job in January, 2009 become insurmountable in 2012.
Unfortunately, if the Republican held Congress manages to bring spending under control (which I doubt with a Harry Reid controlled Senate) that will not reflect on the Congress, but the poseur in the Oval Office as he will take credit for it. But make no mistake, Obama will never move to the center. It is not in his DNA. We MUST take the Senate in 2012. There is no other option. If Obama has anything to his credit, it is his ability to surround himself with people who are experts in astroturfing (that’s how Axelrod made his fortune) and the ability to rouse the lemmings.
Yet, you were compelled to comment …
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
more ‘out of the norm’ than your obsession with trying to slander his father, someone you have no connection with? You’ve already written, what, close to a thousand words on this thread alone, but you find it strange that he would dare want to stand up and defend his own blood, while you carelessly throw a bunch of crap against the wall hoping some will stick? You have an interesting definition of psychotic. I think it’s so sad to see people like you sitting around and impotently whining away the hours with ridiculous conspiracy theories that add nothing to the public discourse. “Oh, Obama talked to some guy who was communist when he was 11, and that’s why the economy’s in the tank!” “Oh, Obama’s face looks detached and now there’s a nuclear crisis in the Japan!” Come back to planet earth, buddy. And when you get here, I suggest the first thing you do is apologize to Mark.
Tom, did you enjoy your little rant? Good, glad you could vent. Pent up frustration is not good for anyone.
Now, since you chose to run your mouth, I will give you the history and actual facts: it is not the first time I have encounted Mark. I was on a forum at another site (the History Channel, to be exact) where he challenged anyone, and everyone, who dared mention that his father was not Ward Cleaver.
As to the “Obama talked to some guy when he was 11” crap, perhaps you should take the time to read Obama’s book. He was NOT 11 when FMD was giving him advise about “whitey” as Obama prepared to leave Hawaii for Occidental.
I have no intention of apologizing to anyone for my distaste for FMD. The fact alone that Davis was a Communist is enough to garner my disgust, much less that Davis was also a racist.
Perhaps you should examine your own stance. Would you hold such contempt for the daughter of Fidel Castro, as you seem to hold for me, because she admits that her father is a murdering dictator? We don’t get to chose our parents, as Mark Davis had no choice in that matter, but we don’t have to defend the indefensible.
Now, read this:
Yes, he has ‘no choice’, but I think you’re off-base to term him ‘psychotic’ for wanting to defend his own father from what he perceives of as false attacks and character assassination. Are you saying you wouldn’t do the same thing in his shoes?
As for “contempt” for you, that is going a little far. I am merely puzzled, as always, by why people feel compelled to invent malevolent reasons for Obama’s alleged incompetence. What is it driving that need? You tell me, I’m all ears. It isn’t enough that you’re in disagreement with the man (an intellectual, political or philosophical disagreement is indeed fertile enough grounds for heated discussion): no there has to be some evil smoking gun, brimstone and all, whether it be where Obama was really born (“but he’s so foreign seeming!”); his family’s moral standing (“like father like son!”); the people he’s known in life (“Don’t take an elevator with a Marxist – it’s contagious!”); his being a puppet in an international conspiracy worthy of a James Bond flick (“How dare George Soros be rich AND liberal!”); his being a secret Muslim (“and don’t forget, he’s best buds with Gadaffi too!”), etc… It’s all silly nonsense! Even within the conservative wing of the Republican party, stuff like this is considered passe (not that they’d ever actually go on record saying so, of course). If his faults are so apparent, why the need for all the window dressing? Makes me wonder, that’s for sure. Talking about Obama’s performance with someone who feels it necessary to conjure a fantastically evil back story feels like discussing the solar system with someone who thinks the sun revolves around the earth. There isn’t even enough common ground to start.
retire05, I know you aren’t a lib/prog. Therefore I wasn’t “threatening” you with anything. Altho that choice of language seems to be a bit harsh for something you take as personal which was meant as more generic. I assure you, you are not the only one on this forum, or others, that dearly loves to bring up Davis at every opportunity.
And if you had read Mark’s 2008 comments, he does not dispute Frank was a Communist. As he said,
Hey… I’d be out there doing the same if someone was using my father as the sword, and exaggerating what I felt was their relationship to boot. I wasn’t there. I don’t know. Neither do you. But of what importance is it, really?
As I said, it’s an enigma to me why anyone wants to hang their hat on Davis’ legacy… whatever anyone believes that is… as a “gotcha” type of judgment call on Obama, or as an explanation of that’s why he’s a socialist in belief today.
Because a child is raised by alcoholics doesn’t mean he becomes an alcoholic. Jack Mormons reject their parents’ Mormon upbringing. Liberal Democrats can raise children who become conservative. Conservatives can raise liberals, progressives, or even communists and those who end up in radical Islam.
My point is we all have influences in our lives that are positive and negative. Obama is not who he is because of Frank Marshall Davis. He is who he is because of his own choices. I agree with Mark. His influence on Obama is not only exaggerated, it’s characterizing Obama as a “victim” of Davis’ association. (therein lies the lib/prog reference I meant)
Sorry… Obama’s no victim. He got to where he is all by his lonesome. Davis or no Davis. I make note of who he surrounds himself with today. As a child, he had less choice of the same.
Therefore I still scratch my head in wonder why the heck anyone wants to bring up Davis. He is irrelevant to the inept and dangerous man occupying the Oval Office.
As far as Mark goes, he has always been polite, eloquent and well versed in his appearances here. So I do believe he deserves the same in responses. If my belief he deserves that, whether or not you agree with his father’s legacy, gets you all a’twitter with me, I can’t help that.
Tom, you’re so far off base about me, I don’t know where to start.
I make no excuses for Obama’s incompetence. He simply is. I also make no apologies for noting that Obama’s opinions were seemingly formed early in his adult life, and those opinions have not changed to any noticable level. I have never said “like father, like son” or “he’s so foreign seeming” or ever mentioned anything about his birth. So bringing up all those things, that I did not say, have no bearing on the discussion. They simply allow you to try to present an straw man argument.
You see, FMD is not the “smoking gun”, but rather one person, out of many, that contributed to Obama’s social/world view. And whether you like it or not, FMD had a greater influence on Obama than did his biological father, or even his own mother, for that matter. The people that influenced a growing, maturing Barry Obama would have been those closest to him, his grandmother, his grandfather and yes, FMD.
I did not “conjure a fantastically evil back story.” The things I have said about FMD have been said for years, only resurfacing when Obama threw his hat in the ring and people started examing the things he wrote his his books.
So ask yourself this: if all the things said about FMD all these years were untrue, why did Mark surface only in 2008? Mark is obviously an Obama supporter, so what better way to distance the man he supported for POTUS from a radical influence than to dispute the radicalism of his father, who had a connection (you could even say bond) with the curret occupant of the Oval Office? Would that not have been a battle that Mark had been fighting for over a decade, not just the last three years?
Or did that never occur to you?
And no, had the situation been the same for me, and my father was a radical, drug using, racial supremicist womanizer I would not spend my days supporting him and trying to change history. But hey, that’s just me.
Mata, what about my comment that I think FMD is a moot item eluded you?
Yes, liberals can raise conservatives. And vise versa. But the chances are slim. And to say that someone who a person referred to as “mentor” has no influence on their viewpoints is just flat out wrong. Do you think that Jeremiah Wright, Jr. had no influence on Obama? Or Edward Said, Saul Alinsky, Rhasid Khalili, or William Ayers had no influence on a young adult forming his viewpoints?
Obama is a composit of everyone he ever placed trust in their views. Just as you are a composit of the influence of your parents, favorite teachers, special professors, peers. No one person formed your philosophy, but they all contributed to it.
Why does anyone still bring up Huey Newton, or Martin Luther King, Jr., or Abraham Lincoln? Because the words of those people influence all of us. Some good, some bad.
Well, retire05… your “moot” item comment was #36 in this thread. That was after my first comment #32. Which then begs the question, if you consider it “moot”, why bring it up at all in your comment #7?
My goodness… no clue where you come up with that vague statistical theory. I can look at my own family, and see that our mixture of politics indicate “slim” is not applicable. And I see no dearth of that around me as well. Yes, we are all influenced by others to an extent. However Obama chose his own path, and Davis has little to do with it. Those same influences are prevalent in our public school curriculum and on college campuses all over the nation. Some follow that creed. Others reject it. Slim? If you are correct, there will be “slim” number of, or no conservatives that come out of our education system. So I shall agree to disagree.
This debate on Davis is very useful because it points to critical corner of the ego’s frailty, . . . the too common tendency to fear denouncing hateful or evidently deviant actions, for what they are.
IMHO, it matters Not what philanthropic or brilliant action or stellar book anyone participates in, if that person has also participated in deviant or harmful behaviour to others.
We see this every day in a parade of characters which the media parades in front of us who are presented because they are stars, newly minted icons, or billionaires, . . . . and the hypocrisy is that somehow such behaviour is in effect condoned, even applauded. Confusing much?
Today, for example, the MSM is enjoying replays of Tiger Woods’ late night interview with Kimmel – it was all one big joke, good for you Tiger, nice to see you back. This doesn’t provide our children and grandchildren with much exemplary moral fibre.
Soooo, . . . while Davis’ actions may have nothing to do with the “son,” Obama should never have made mention or even acknowledged such a despicable individual. Davis may have had no impact on Obama, young or old, but that’s not the point. There’s no way Obama didn’t know what everyone else evidently knew. This is further example of someone too weak and insecure at his core, to know what he stands for, . . . or against.
Mata, if you think that liberal parents raising conservative children are an odds on even, you are delusional. How many times have you thought to yourself “My God, I’m turning into my mother”? Yes, we all choose our own path, but to say that path is not influenced by those we have been exposed to is also delusional.
As to our educational system, especially the higher learning institutions, yes, our children are saturated with liberal thought as they are beyond our watchful eyes. One of the most prominent questions my friends with college-aged kids ask them was “where do you come up with that crap?” The response is always ” Well, professor So-In-So said this or that.
Someone influenced Obama’s thinking. He did not grow up in a vacumn. He was not a test tube baby that lived in a environmentally controlled bubble who formed his political philosphy once he was allowed out into the real world. His philosophy is quite clear when you read his books. And he reacts accordingly. Or shall I not mention the Cambridge Police officer who was on the brunt end of that philosophy? Obama immediately assumed the officer “acted stupidly”. Why was that? Because he values the word of a professor over a police officer or a black over the word of a white? Obama’s immediate reaction was based on his social philosophy, one that was gleened from those who influenced him.
Again, I have no problem with Mark wanting to defend his father. That is his right. And he has a forum to do that for anyone who wants to visit his blog. But he has hit tons of websites, all saying the same thing. And why? Does he know any of the people he is disputing with? He was on the Current Events board at the History Channel forum doing exactly what he is doing here. And Huffpo, RedState, etc. Basically, as I said before, he seems to be trying to make the man he supported in the last presidental election seem less radical by making those that influenced that candidate less radical.
I knew Obama was like this, but it still hurts to see the stupidity.
After the Libyan rebels had pushed Kaddafi into a one city/suburb corner, Obama dithered.
Now Kaddafi has not only pushed the rebels back to one city by bombing and strafing and gassing them, but Kaddafi has also threatened anyone who might consider helping them by counterattacks AND attacking any non Libyan ships in the Med. Sea, too!
So Now Obama wants to go after Kaddafi?!
See the way Obama works is to WAIT on the international community.
We call that dithering.
American Spectator’s Ross Kaminsky puts it this way:
A news agency reports this:
Libya’s defense minister warns that any military action against it will result in retaliatory strikes against air and Mediterranean sea traffic.
Obama is all of a sudden scared that, if Gaddafi gets his power back he will return to doing acts of terrorism and violence in the area.
Gaddafi killed AMERICANS with his Lockerbie bomber.
Gaddafi had a nuclear program that he gave up out of fear of GWBush’s war on terror.
Doing little acts of terror and violence IN THE Middle East is the least of his plans.
And after saying all that, I have no idea if the rebels will be worse.
Wow. So many ingredients in the Obama stew.
You say Obama’s opinions were “formed”. In another comment, you opine that one has a “slim” chance of escaping one’s parental influences. At the risk of being offbase about you again, you seem to have a very deterministic approach to character and philosophical development. This I find strange for a conservative.
Does it work both ways for you? To use the obvious example, are GWB’s successes and failures not victories and defeats for him personally, but merely the logical by-products of his enviable upbringing? If personal choice and responsibility are of such little consequence in the equation, why wouldn’t government assistance and (gasp) affirmative action be both logical and moral imperatives in our society? After all, people have a perfectly good excuse for not making it on their own in your worldview – it’s their parent’s fault. Or, as I suspect, is Obama the exception to the rule in your personal philosophy, and your read on him flies in the face of everything you believe only because you loath the idea of assigning him the credit for his remarkable and rapid rise from obscurity, an obscurity the provenance of which most definitely does not reside within the borders of the heartland America as you define it?
Tom, yes, many times our opinions and viewpoints as adults have been formed by parental influence. And the influence of teachers, coaches, peers, etc. We do not live in a bubble, far removed from the opinions of those we care about.
Your attempt at spinning what I actually said is, well, pathetic. I never said that everything that happens to us, like making bad choices, are our parent’s fault. Nice try, but no cigar. As adults we are free willed individuals. We need to learn to separate the chaff from the wheat. Some do, some don’t. It is a proven statistic that a female child of an unwed mother will probably find herself in the same boat. Men, who have grown up with abuse from a parent are often abusers themselves. Environment plays a large part in our lives. The decision as an adult comes when we either continue, or break, the cycle.
And you really think Obama “rose” from obscurity to be POTUS? Do you really know so little about him? He lost his first election, and only won after he hired Davis Axelrod. Alexrod had been a player in Chicago politics long before he met a former community organizer that he could train to read from a teleprompter really well. Valerie Jarrett, another power player in Chicago, was also implemental in his “rise” to fame. It was Axelrod who lobbied to have Obama give the keynote speech at the 2004 DNC convention. Most people had never heard of a Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. before that.
Is GWB a product of his parents? You bet. He gets his tenacity from Barbara and his compassion from George, Sr. His love for his home state was instilled in him by his parents.
But when the rubber meets the road, and Obama goes off script, he shows his true mettle; with the Cambridge police affair, to his decisions on Honduras, now to Quaddafi (who must go but can stay but must go to doing nothing to support the rebels).
Oh, and when did I even mention “the heartland of America?” Or is that just more of your filling in the blanks?