While I initially found candidate Barack Obama a compelling figure, as least year’s campaign wore on, I found the Democrat was more like Gertrude Stein’s description of Oakland, “There is no there there.”
His briefly celebrated speech on race followed the revelations of the racism and conspiracy theories of his pastor (for twenty years) has long since been forgotten save by the most zealous of his acolytes. His platform was little more than warmed over liberalism (as one of his most fervent admirers described his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention). He hadn’t really accomplished anything before his election as President. His rhetoric about being a “new kind” of politician who transcended partisan divisions stood in stark contrast to his record.
So, to those who so love the man, please tell me what is it about him which so inspires you? Why do you have such confidence in his ability to lead? Too often though when I ask this question of his supporters, they’re recite campaign boilerplate to contrast him to his predecessor.
So, make the case for Obama without attacking George W. Bush or any Republican for that matter. I’m curious to hear why so many are so enthusiastic about a man with so little in the way of substantial accomplishments.
I did have a classmate last year say he liked Obama’s tax plan. Someone in Bible study one Sunday morning compared him to Jesus, saying he is here to spread a new understanding, or some such. I’m honestly not sure which appalls me more, which probably makes me a bad Episcopalian.
Obama believes in rational analysis, and conceptual competence. He puts these into practice.
He believes in diversity and difference, he believes in himself, and he believes there is some other alternative to either/or between the two, and works to manifest ithen through some evolving form of inclusion.
He gives people, the world over hope. He believe in success through honey over vinegar. Because of the hope he inspires, the world seem willing to engage with him, as early evidence of the value of this approach.
Snerd
Snerd, that’s what he believes, but what has he accomplished?
Obama believes in rational analysis, and conceptual competence. He puts these into practice.
By hiring tax cheats to run his Cabinet and by violating a law he himself wrote to fire an Inspector General who dared to go after one of his contributors.
And that’s just two examples.
GayPat: “… Snerd, that’s what he believes, but what has he accomplished?”
SG: Actually it is what I believe about him.
The request, or rules if you remember were “Explain your enthusiasm for Obama without attacking Republicns”. That’s what I did. Your comments seem to miss that.
Nevertheless, you ask what Obama has accomplished … He’s accomplished to NOT being “W” … 😉
Snerd
Actually, what Obama has accomplished is showing the fallacy of assuming competence based on skin color, which is what the racist left like Snerd supports.
Evidence there Scare-Crow-Maker …. !?
Snerd
Is that honey like telling the Iranians to piss off or honey like repeating how much he thinks America sucks?
And just how is that Hopey-changey thing working out for ya?
Good for Snerd for answering SPW’s request. Now, Ive got to say I think your answer is as empty, trite and platitudinous as it gets.
Where on Earth is there evidence for this? Was he analyzing things rationally when he backed the Honduran president who is trying to become dictator for life in violation of that nations constitution and Supreme Court? Was he in favor of “conceptual competence” when he suppressed an EPA report that called his Cap and Trade policy into serious question? Or when he fired his inspector general in violation of congressional statute and blamed it on the widely respected inspector for being senile?
When you say he has an “evolving form of inclusion” is that what is means when he has an infomercial on ABC for his health care reform bill without any alternative views being represented? Or when he and Democrats exclude Republicans from major policy meetings? Perhaps what you mean is the way he has stacked his health care town meetings with his supporters and operatives? Or maybe you mean that he is showing an evolving inclusion when he threatens the bond holders at Chrysler, or Israel? Or the way he threatened TV and radio stations that played campaign ads that criticized him?
Where was the honey in his threats to the bond holders at Chrysler? Israel? His threats to TV and radio stations? Where was the honey in firing people who blew the whistle on the rampant corruption already taking place within his administration? Where was the honey in his threats to anyone who would give money to Republican PACs?
You mean like the Germans who say he is screwing up the worlds economy? Or the Chicoms, Russians, Venezuelans, and Cubans who have all said his economic policies are too far left! Or the Brits who call him a “pantywaist”? Or the Israelis who utterly reject him? Or the Iranian and Honduran people who, rightly, think he will not support them in their efforts to secure liberty for themselves? Or the Russians who think he is a joke? Perhaps you mean the Canadians who have retaliated against his protectionist policies? Maybe you mean the Chinese students who laughed out loud when his treasury sec said their investments in the dollar were safe? Or perhaps you mean China, Russia, and now India among others who are calling for divestment from the Dollar as the worlds currency as a result of Obama’s catastrophic policies?
No he definitely is no “W”. And that is NOT a compliment. Bush was a FAR, FAR better president than Obama in every way. Obama’s foreign policy is dangerously incompetent, his domestic policy is dangerously totalitarian. He is easily the most corrupt president in my lifetime, and that includes Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon. He could well turn out to be the most corrupt president in American history. He is a thug, a Stalinist, anti-Democratic, and it will take America decades to recover from the damage he and his fascist policies have already done to our country and the world, let alone the future destruction of liberty he intends to wreak. Obama has already matched Jimmy Carter for one of the worst presidents in history, and is well on his way to out-doing him. George Bush looks mighty good right now, and with what Obama’s policies are doing, President Bush is going to keep looking better and better.
Obama’s track record shows that he believes the following.
One should not meddle in other nations (fraudulent) elections (Iran); Just in the affairs of allied democracies (Israel), and to support executive coups (Honduras)
Executive power is to be used to override congress (Missile talks) but not to help his constituants (DADT).
Human Rights don’t matter (China)
Speaking with allies require preconditions (Israel) enemies, they don’t (Iran, Venezulea).
Nationalized Health care is good… for everyone else. (ABC informertial)
I’d love to help all you gay folks repeal DOMA (words) just as soon as I get done defending it calling y’all incestous pedophiles (actions)
Terrorists are bad, unless they’re terrorists I associate with.
And finally No one should be denied a right to vote (ACORN) unless it’s by the Black Panthers.
Speaking on behalf of friends at church who expressed their support for Obama, I think it was largely based on the idea that he would be anti-war, bringing the troops home from Iraq and not getting into a similar war, that he would be anti-torture (and these friends of mine are generally of the mind that waterboarding is torture), that he would be less divisive and arrogant in his dealings with foreign nations, and that he would care more about the poor. To be sure, I don’t agree with them that Obama is better than Bush was or that McCain would have been on either domestic or foreign affairs, but that’s how my Obama supporting friends saw it. FWIW, I don’t hear them talking much about Obama now. Considering how excited they were to make him president, they say very little about him now.
Obama is the Kris Allen of presidents.
The first rule of psychobabble is to create a mystique and then defend the mystique. I haven’t a clue what irrational analysis is, so I probably can not understand “rational” analysis. So far as “conceptual competence” is concerned, are we talking about competence that is conceptual or having concepts that are competent or being able to conceptualize and chew gum at the same time?
Stand back, this is really a mess. When you believe in “diversity” do you favor it over continuity? If so, how do you explain gravity? And difference includes swine flu, does it not? It is good to believe in yourself. Shall we stretch that to the limits of egoism and egotism?
This yin and yang of the dynamic tension between diversity, difference and believing in yourself in order to reach manifest inclusion is quite the masterpiece of psychobabble salmagundi. As Obama once famously said: “(This) is above my pay grade.”
Unfortunately, like wisdom, hope can not be doled out. A wise man hopes for the possible and plans the means for achieving the goal. A foolish man expects someone to satiate his sense of satisfaction. A wise man studies the details of hope and change and judges them on whether they meet Snerd’s high flung “rational analysis” and “conceptual competence” tests!!!!! Putting a man on the moon was not based on hope. It was firmly grounded in physics and technology.
I try not to clean my bathroom tiles with honey, nor do I put vinegar in my tea. Each has its proper place and use. As to catching flies, I am not clear why one would take the honey and vinegar route when DDT is so darned effective.
Good luck on the world engaging with Obama through his mission of hope. Christ did not nail himself to the cross. Messiah’s, whether sent or self proclaimed, have a relatively short shelf life. Charismatics, on the other hand gain power and then consolidate power and then live behind the iron doors of food tasters, body guards and constant paranoia.
He gives people, the world over hope.
Hope in one hand, crap in the other. See which one fills up first.
Yes, look at the hope he’s given the people of Iran (we won’t get involved) Honduras (You should take your impeached president back) Poland, Ukraine and Georgia (that memo about tossing them to the wind after they said they have our back on missile defense) South Korea and Japan (we’re saddened that the Norks keep chucking weapons over your heads).
Goodness, you get one (apparently) sincere, if psychobablically incoherent, answer and you attack it!
Can’t you just let Snerd’s dreamily hope&changy answer stand unchallenged?
I know there were a couple of other acceptable responses, but they’re second-hand. My only second-hand info, post-election, would be our “usually vote Republican” friend who said, “He’s only doing what any president would have had to do.” I’m trying to picture McCain giving $4 BILLION to ACORN…nope, can’t picture it. Throwing secured bondholders under the bus in favor of Big Union? Nope, can’t see it. Signing a couple of trillion dollars in pork bills? Probably not. Oh well, if it helps him sleep at night….
Polly, I will try to avoid being over sensitive to the idea that Snerd’s foolishness should be politely be snickered at and not subject to overkill.
Unfortunately, modern American liberalism is almost entirely based on the feelings of the elite and subject endless psychobabble. Poor Snerd came piously calling with the worst case of hopey-change drivel yet seen.
As a rule, when you make yourself the poster child of inanity or you keep returning with the same old talking points spin, you are asking for a complete dress down, tarring, feathering and invitation to the free lobotomy clinic.
A small anecdote. I spent the weekend with my sister. She and her husband were big Obama supporters. They live in a pretentious-hippie area which was very pro-Obama. My sister’s husband has turned on Obama. He came with me to a local Tea Party event, where he opened up and spontaneously described Obama as arrogant, “out of control” and destructive. He said, roughly from memory, “Putting up a black guy… brilliant marketing! People [ed: possibly meaning himself] got caught up in doing something ‘historic’ forgot to ask questions. I didn’t like the other guy [McCain-Palin], but I can’t help thinking that if we had the other guy, things would be different. We wouldn’t put up with North Korea firing missiles and we wouldn’t be spending ourselves into the ground.” With great effort, I successfully restrained myself from saying ‘I told you so’.
Bottom line: Obama is toast. It will take a few years to play out and it will be a rough few years; but – barring Obama magically converting to good policies – he is toast.
#18 : With great effort, I successfully restrained myself from saying ‘I told you so’.
I applaud the restraint. That showed true compassion, a conservative trait for sure.
Thanks TnnsNE1.
Obama believes in rational analysis> Of what?
and conceptual competence.> What is ‘conceptual competence’?
He puts these into practice.> How?
He believes in diversity> Of what?
and difference> In what?
he believes in himself> What about himself?
and he believes there is some other alternative to either/or between the two> So he believes in ‘not either/or’ rather than ‘either/or’–i.e., he believes in either ‘not either/or’ or ‘either/or’–i.e., he believes in either/or?
Because of the hope he inspires> In what?
the world seem willing to engage with him> Who in ‘the world’?
I can shed a bit of light as well. A friend of my sister-in-law is a clinical psychologist and adamant Obama supporter. She just received a fat government grant to study the effects of cannabis on teenage male brain development (or some such thing). In her words, “It’s a good thing Obama is president, because he’s not anti-science.” I suppose the last half of that remark was a subtle attack on Republicans, but for this person, Obama is doing exactly the right thing; spending taxpayer money on research projects that ought to be funded privately…if at all. And she benefits.
As Miriam Ahrens said in “The Women” “Any ladle’s sweet that dishes out the gravy.”
Bush got under my skin in myriad ways but I don’t think he acted with the intent of destroying our nation as we know it.
I avoid politics at work but I’ve noticed that a few people who made snarky comments about my conservative views and opposition to Obama have been saying less and less as the weeks go by. And I, like ILC, have remained classy enough to not say “I told you so”.
I initially thought that Snerd’s first comment was brilliantly satirical. How sad to find out that he wasn’t joking.
#18, that restraint is honorable but not a trait we share. Instead I am looking for a Demacrat whose career I can ruin by launching frivolous ethics lawsuits 😉
or even a DemOcrat would do…
Has Obama fixed all those problems America was having with the Russians? If so could he come home and visit with the families of the latest 467,000 souls who have lost their jobs just in the last 30 days of the Obama depression.
David Brooke’s answer to your request there GayPat
[…]
Americans still admire dignity. But the word has become unmoored from any larger set of rules or ethical system.
But it’s not right to end on a note of cultural pessimism because there is the fact of President Obama. Whatever policy differences people may have with him, we can all agree that he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity. The cultural effects of his presidency are not yet clear, but they may surpass his policy impact. He may revitalize the concept of dignity for a new generation and embody a new set of rules for self-mastery.
Funny, awhile back I asked y’all to tell me what was so great about Sarah Palin without attacking Obama. I think maybe one person tried, the rest did their usual sandbox mentality drooling. GPW, I know you weren’t one of those. Seems like it wasn’t a fair question and by asking it that way I didn’t want to hear what was wrong with Obama. Twisted logic but considering who it came from… and some of you are so predictable I know exactly what you will say next.
Obama exibits dignity? Last time I looked he was whinning because one of 21 tv networks was critical of him. Dignity. Obama has whinned about his predecessor more than any President in 50 years. He loves to appoligize for things his country supposedly did 100 or 20 years ago, but never appologizes for his own errors. Dignity. I think not. A teleprompter can’t fake dignity.
…we can all agree that he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity.
He’s snarky and specifically names people who he perceives as being negative toward him (Rush, Hannity, Fox News) and complains about them. He has a general mein and rhetoric of dignity but constantly undermines it with condescending remarks about them (Hillary Clinton) and the famous fifth-grader “I’m flipping you off by holding my middle finger over my chin so the teacher doesn’t know what I’m doing” of Clinton on national television was NOT dignified.
*yawn* Source please adDave?
Livewire, ADD Dave never cites sources. He just makes sh-t up. It’s why I don’t even find his comments worth reading or responding to.
Amy K, yes, the Obama middle finger thing is very childish. Obama is a guy who never has had to face adult responsibility in his entire life.
This is a little off-topic but, A Democrat plant showed up at the St. Louis Tea-Party with a phony hate sign. The Democrats are so desperate to discredit the movement, their operatives are showing up with offensive signs in hopes of discrediting the actual participants.
“It’s why I don’t even find his comments worth reading or responding to”
Wow, you even lie about yourself. Truly bizarre.