Obama Self-Portrait

Chicago Eliminated in the First Round

Brian Deese: "Boldly Ignorant and Unskilled Apparatchik"

Further to my earlier post on the very strange happenings at GM, come thoughts from others:

John Batchelor:

• Brian Deese is a Gen X version of a commissar - a political officer in charge of maintaining the aura and discipline of a Leninist cult at any particular enterprise.
• ... he dropped out of Yale Law, worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign, then switched to the winning Obama campaign after it won? Or that he lives with his dog? This may be a new kind of passive punishment for GM. Bought by POTUS to be handed over to a boldly ignorant and unskilled apparatchik who thinks of himself as dog-lover.

Uppity Woman:

• I guess the world has changed since last week or something. Most people who are put in charge of important things generally know something. Usually they are picked for experience and knowledge. Oh wait. How stupid of me.
• Don’t you just love the way the New York Times describes an arrogant, horrendous, self-impressed horse’s ass when it’s one of Barack Obama’s horrendous, arrogant, self-impressed horse’s asses?
  

Michael Bryant: Ontario's Chief Pickpocket!

If you want to see how arrogant (and incompetent) the Ontario government has become then look no further than this and this.

Narcissist in Chief

A stunning new article investigates the strange psychological forces that drive Barack Obama.

---

Here's a comment on the same from SDA's "ET":

Yes, Obama is a narcissist. But not a 'mild' type, such that everyone who hears about his narcissism will sigh and say 'oh well, all politicians are narcissistic'. He's a pathological narcissist.

This means that his need to be in control of how YOU interact with him supercedes everything. It means not only that he has, long ago, moved himself into a fictional world of which he alone is the author, but he must control all that happens and exists in this world. He cannot interact directly with reality; he interacts only through this 'text' that he created, long ago, where he is esteemed, valued, adored - and above all, in control.

If he feels that he is losing this control over you, and by control, I mean his freezing you into ONE mindset about him (adoration), then, he has two options. One - he will act as if you don't exist. And quite frankly, since he can't control you, you don't exist. He's quite capable of walking by you, lying shot on the ground. The other option is rage; he'll be insanely angry and try to control you that way.

We can see his constant pressure on the American public for adulation. His constant photo-ops, even to his eating a hamburger! His control of the Press, where his press meetings are pre-set, controlled and no critical questions are allowed. That is, he ignores FOX news and anyone who will question or criticize him. Obama uses these constant press meetings to pontificate and preach to us, the unenlightened and unwashed.

Criticize Obama - and he'll get his aides after you, as they did with the Tea Parties.

The problem with a pathological narcissism, is that once put in a role of great power, it can explode in breadth and scope. He'll become obsessed with his need to control and to receive adulation. He'll become obsessed with anyone who criticizes him.
So, we'll see more anger, more control, more repression, more photo-ops of 'the casual Obama' and more misinformation and manipulation on his part.

Plus, since he himself has no capacity for historical, economic or legal analysis, and thus, can't understand the results of his controlling policies - we'll see a chaotic mess as he cannot explain policies and programs - and yet, cannot handle criticism of them.

Posted by: ET at May 6, 2009 12:38 PM

Canadian Liberal Arrogance

With this video, move the time slider to 1:20:


There you will hear Michael Ignatieff say: "Mr. Harper, you don't understand Canada!" This coming from a man who has spent most of his adult life in the U.S. and who married a woman from Hungary. I don't hold either of these things against him but what INCREDIBLE ARROGANCE to make such a statement!!!

Incidentally, the reason it got such a thundering applause is because it's emblematic of the attitude of Liberal elites, which in essence is this: "We are Liberals, we are the chosen ones, we know more than the rest of you about everything! And if you DARE to hold other political views then we will ridicule you and crush you. For this country is ours to shape as we think best, for we are the enlightened ones!"

Charles Adler shares his thoughts. So does Kelly McParland.

A Little Insight About Criminals

Dennis Prager said something today that I thought was rather profound:

"The commonalities I've seen amongst people involved in evil is that they always possess a combination of self-pity and arrogance."

If you know anyone who is involved in crime then I believe you'll find this to be very true.

Incidentally, he was discussing this this recent tragedy.

The Arrogant Rahm Emanuel & Nancy Pelosi

Canada's recent budget process showed a good example of bi-partisanship to help out the country. In the United States the Democrat leadership is taking a very different approach:

The Never-Ending Vitriol of Liberals

This evening I heard an interesting interview with the author of this article, Chris Hedges. He explained how messages from politicians are not much different than marketing for consumer products and that all are designed for the intellect of 10 - 12 year olds. He focused mostly on the rather mindless marketing message of the Obama campaign, with the never-ending "Hope & Change". He then predicted that next year, as the recession sets in, and people realize that Obama isn't the Messiah and can't possibly deliver everything he implied he could, there's going to be a strong backlash.

To this point I agreed with everything he said, as had the interviewer, Charles Adler.

But then he took a huge swerve to the left and stated that the ones who would be the most disappointed would be the Religious Right in America. <insert screeching car brakes here>

After I got my head on straight again, for it had clearly spun entirely around after hearing this, I listened further. Thankfully Adler didn't let such B.S. go without being challenged. "Why would the religious right be disappointed? They never voted for him!", he said [paraphrasing].

Hedges seemed somewhat shocked that an Olympic Stadium sized hole had just been shot through his conclusion. Yet he couldn't get himself to state publicly that fellow liberals like himself were the ones completely taken in by Obamamania.

And I had such hope in the days after the U.S. Election, how liberals were going to open their hearts & minds and really try to understand the viewpoints of conservatives. Unfortunately arrogance, smugness, and downright hate always gets in their way.

Will Obama's Arrogance Destroy Obama?

Here's a detailed, fascinating article published in the UK's Telegraph newspaper. Here are some key quotes from it:

A senior Democratic strategist, who has played a prominent role in two presidential campaigns, told The Sunday Telegraph: "These guys are on the verge of blowing the greatest gimme in the history of American politics. They're the most arrogant bunch Ive ever seen. They won't accept that they are losing and they won't listen." A Democratic National Committee official told The Sunday Telegraph: "I really find it offensive when Democrats ask the Republicans not to be nasty to us, which is effectively what Obama keeps doing. They know thats how the game is played."

The Democratic strategist told The Sunday Telegraph: "[Obama's inner circle] thinks they know best. They don't return calls. There are governors and senators calling them up with ideas. They don't get back to them. "These are senior people from the border states and the South who know how to beat Republicans, and they're being ignored. They ignored everyone during the primaries and they came through it, so they think they can do the same again."

Mark Cunningham of the New York Post summed up the private views of many: "If it suddenly seems like the Obama campaign doesn't have any idea what it's doing, maybe that's because it doesn't."

Doug Schoen, a former pollster for Bill Clinton, last week declared it insanity not to concentrate resources on the swing states. The Democratic strategist said: "My Republican friends think its mad. Before Sarah Palin came along we were investing money in Alaska, for Christ's sake, that could have been spent in Ohio and Pennsylvania. It assumes Republicans are stupid and, when it comes to winning elections, they're not."

Peggy Noonan, the former Reagan speechwriter, blamed the defection of women voters from Mr Obama on the atom bomb of ritual abuse by left-wing bloggers and Democratic officials, painting Mrs Palin as a bad mother and religious weirdo. Ms Noonan wrote: "The snobbery of it, the meanness of it, reminded the entire country, for the first time in a decade, what it is they don't like about the Left." The Republican strategist Dan Schnur said that the effect was to repel blue collar, family-oriented voters. "They didn't like Obama in the primaries and voted for Hillary. And they still don't like him now so they're voting for Palin."

Extreme Arrogance or Ignorance?

I don't usually republish comments made on this blog but there's a portion of one that is too priceless to be kept hidden in just the comments section.

A fellow who goes under the anonymous moniker of "Floating Abstraction" has been challenging me on my general support of the U.S. and condemnation of Russia's actions in Georgia. Fine, great, super, challenge away. That's what an open discussion/debate is all about.

But included in his recent rant was this gem:

"One needs to view macro-geopolitics with complete impartial objectivity that is free of bias in order to see the whole picture accurately. In doing so, it makes it easier to try to view events from multiple points of view so that one can try to understand the motivations behind the actions taking place."

He then goes on to assert that because he, the righteous, all knowing one, is free of bias, his opinions trump all others.

I meet people like this all the time. You start having a discussion with them, often about politics, and when they realize that they're losing and/or realize you're never going to agree with them, they pull out their "credentials card". It's usually their academic credentials but is sometimes a magazine article they've read or a Michael Moore documentary they've watched. One time a British guy I met in Europe pointed out that he had 3 sets of letters after his name. He insisted that whenever I wrote him a letter that I include those letters when I addressed him. Needless to say, I chose otherwise.

In this particular case, Mr. Abstraction had been making some good points. He's clearly well read and well informed on the subject of Georgia. But the moment a person crosses that tipping point and convinces themselves that they, and they alone, know THE TRUTH is the moment the discussion must end because any further debate is pointless.

Traditionally such knowers of THE TRUTH have been religious zealots. In North America, they're often Fundamentalist Christians. In other parts of the world they're Fundamentalist Muslims. But in recent years there are new strains of this same narrow-minded mindset:

• Liberal Extremists
  
• Environmental Extremists

Examples include Al Gore and David Suzuki, who both declared the debate on global warming to be over and then labeled anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers". Not only are both of them wrong about the debate being over (science doesn't work that way) but they both owe 6 Million Jews and other Nazi Concentration Camp victims a HUGE apology.

Another example is something locally here in Vancouver, where I live. There's an ongoing debate about the pros and cons about the Insite supervised drug injection clinic. Most of the powers at be keep telling us it's a great thing. I disagree. Why? Because I've carefully listened to David Berner, a man with an accomplished track record on drug addiction treatment. I've also listened carefully to what recovered drug addicts have told me. They all think that Insite is a horrific initiative that is only propagating the misery these poor drug addicts are experiencing. But rather than actually debate anyone, the supporters of Insite have taken the same arrogant approach as Mr. Abstraction: "We know THE TRUTH and anyone who disagrees with us is therefore ignorant of THE TRUTH." It's an effective trick to silence all debate. But it's a sadly pathetic trick.

One of the few truths that all mature adults realize is that everyone views the world in a different way. A wise old saying that more people should pay attention to is "not to judge another person until you've walked a mile in their moccasins." Feel free to convince others of your views but the moment you espouse that you are free of bias and thus know THE TRUTH is the moment that you need to go into the corner and take a serious time-out.

The Ugly Truth of the Modern Yuppie

Today, a friend and I went out for lunch to a popular sushi restaurant on Broadway near Cambie. It was very crowded, which kept the two servers extremely busy. I'm quite sure they were also the owners. We were sat down at a table for two, with an identical empty table right beside us. A few minutes later several groups of others came into eat: one couple, one threesome, and another couple. There were precisely three empty tables at the time: the one for two people beside us, another two-person table elsewhere, and a table for four.

The first couple were the perfect looking aging yuppies: late 40's / early 50's, perfectly coiffed hair - the woman blonde, the man slightly grey, sunglasses covering both sets of eyes. There was clearly an area to line-up but with their righteous noses in the air, they plunked themselves down at the table for four, even though they absolutely knew that there were others behind them.

The male owner, who was running his feet off at the time, quickly surveyed all the waiting patrons and politely gestured for the two yuppies to instead sit down at one of the tables for two. They refused and marched out in a huff. The threesome were seated at this larger table and the other couple quietly sat down at the other table for two.

But the little drama wasn't yet over! A minute or so later, Mr. Yuppie came marching back in, thrust his face toward the owner and exclaimed, "I hope you know that you've now lost two permanent customers!!!" I looked toward the door and saw his female companion waving her finger in scolding disappointment at the poor bewildered owner. They then both marched out a second time.

Whoah! All of this in supposedly laid back, polite Vancouver. I've long sought a comprehensive definition for the term "Yuppie". On the surface it's supposed to just mean "Young Urban Professional". But today I saw a first hand example of what it really stands for: Arrogant, stuck-up, multiple illusions of grandeur, selfish, a completely phoney facade, and just downright RUDE!

Sadly, I see this sort of behaviour all the time in Vancouver. These same sort of people are precisely the ones who won't hold open a door for anyone, be they elderly or handicapped, because doing so would mean actually having to acknowledge that a lesser being was in their midst. If you fit the archetype of a yuppie, please consider spending 1 minute of time injecting yourself with some compassion for every 10 minutes you spend perfecting your outward appearance.