Obama: 2012, naivety and the all-saying 'I'

The return of President Obama's repetitious "I" usage when speaking to us (his subjects) suggests he is fully back into campaign mode.

I am not exactly sure when he stopped campaigning, but I do recall a break in the last eight months or so. Somewhere. Maybe it was only spotty moments across months.

Obama's first 18 months or so in office proved that he is not quite a chief executive but, as I've been calling him since 2008 (in anticipation, originally), the "campaigner-in-chief". Having not done much in the private sector and otherwise being a professional politician, it was clear to me, in 2008, how he got where he was: slick campaigning.

In 2008, I felt he was campaigning on pie in the sky, and gloating rhetoric. "Change We Can Believe In." "Hope" under a graphic of Obama's face! We learned that lots of people liked that airborne pie. That, and lots of people didn't like giving the Republicans the White House again, under a more experienced career politician (it seems shockingly few thought it mattered he was also a war vet and POW).

A fairly small majority of actual voters seemed to have made their choice without much homework at all. It was as if they had never, ever read fine print on anything. They didn't appreciate the nuance of ad campaigns versus real-life functioning. And they did not know of the vast evidence of gross disappointments of those believing in fairy tales in a world that lacks much like fairy tale, in reality.

We saw, through the notable mishaps and back-seat driving of his administration from 2009 to 2011, that he sold that pie in the sky because he believed in it, too. He was as out of touch with many burdens of reality as his fan base. Remember "Obama Girl"? How about "Obama is my Homeboy" and other goofy t-shirts?

It was telling that, during Seth Myers' comments at the 2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner, that Obama nodded and grinned, KNOWINGLY, when Myers said that "2008 Barack Obama" had entered the Oval Office in 2009 with naivety.

Naivety is great in a college grad entering the workforce, or a well-meaning activist against child abuse or such tragedies. Not great in the Leader of the Free World. Not SO MUCH naivety, of the kind seen since 2009!

I wish that the same dolts who were at the Correspondents' Dinner in April 2011 would trap that one brief moment in their memories. But they apparently are too naive themselves to appreciate that they, and other dumdums in the media, assured this amateur leader and full-time campaign personality would become the most naive POTUS in history. With the exception of Warren G. Harding, perhaps. A passable job of being personable beats serious and effective change. That's the low bar we've set.

So what's those contrary to Obama's cult of personality, and government-centered economics, need to do to? Well, taking the White House in 2012 would be nice. But we can make fun of him as the narcissist that he's proven to be from now until 2016, if we must. I really hope not, but I also know that the USA, as it now stands, can survive him, as despite wannabe socialists and nanny state do-nothings, this country still enjoys much rampant individualism.

With that in mind, here's some pithy phrases I plan to utilize referring to Obama:

- The all-saying I.
- The I has it.
- Taking the I train.
- When Obama glares at a reporter who asks a challenging question, it is called his I beam.
- I is married to Me-chele.

- Isn't it a shame that his family name isn't Ibama?


When not handled in low fashion, wisecracks and well-placed nicknames get a valid point across. And for a change, in 2012 Obama will be running on a very obvious record, not on sales of pie in the sky. That pie's been burned for enough Americans that a genuinely charismatic, or just streetsmart, GOP alternative can win in 2012. Who will that be?

Whoever it is, they will be running against the admittedly naive, narcissistic All-saying "I".

The return of I

When Barrack Obama won then entered the White House, there were many unable to ignore the way in which he talked. He used references to himself more than was comfortable. It seemed the country had chosen a ego-filled narcissist as POTUS. The "I" counts were high in each of his speeches.

With the recent death of Usama bin Laden, in his statement to the world it seemed Obama returned to the many, many self-references that had put off many people in his first year or so in office. Perhaps it is because he is a narcissist, not unheard of among politicians. But perhaps it is out of a larger arrogance, a self-absorbtion that is found in the worst leaders of history.

Likely, whatever else it is, it is evidence, after only a short respite if any at all, of the president's return to campaign mode. The campaigner-in-chief is back.

Brace yourselves. And if you know anything good about relevant jobs creation and economic revival, hope for a very strong, principled, and equally driven GOP candidate for 2012.


- jR

Bin Laden raid noises described on Twitter - UPI.com

Bin Laden raid noises described on Twitter

 
"Go away helicopter - before I take out my giant swatter :-/," he messaged before the attack began.

Within minutes, he posted, "A huge window-shaking bang here in Abbottabad Cantt. I hope its not the start of something nasty :-S."

Eventually, Athar resent a post from Munzir Naqvi: "I think the helicopter crash in Abbottabad, Pakistan and the President Obama breaking news address are connected."

Shortly thereafter, another Twitter user confirmed the news, the Journal reported.
 
On Monday, the IT consultant wrote, "Uh oh, now I'm the guy who liveblogged the Osama raid without knowing it."
 
---
 
The mass media pooped all over the facts on this one, early on. Too bad they weren't watching activity on Twitter, the reports all would not have claimed that: 1. The death happened the week prior to the actual event; 2., happened due to a drone -- or other -- bombing. Again, a week prior.
 
They might have reserved their knee-jerk speculation for more important things, like Trump's shots at Obama's secret college records, Trump's views and character defects, or the next time he takes a shot at the Most Transparent Presidency Ever.
 
 

Morally corrupted? Yeah, that fits. "Choose labels carefully," say Mexico's US ambassabor

Mexico's ambassabor to the US realizes what they are, knows that they are violent and criminal, these drug cartels of his country, but it seems he cannot grasp it in rational terms. He starts by disagreeing with the term "terrorists". What's wrong with his response is where he goes from there.

Choose labels carefully
Re: "Let's call México's Cartels what they are: terrorists," Friday Editorials.
The editorial should be better headed "Let's Call Mexico's cartels what they are: very violent, well-financed transnational criminal organizations."

These transnational criminal organizations, which operate in both our countries, are not terrorist organizations. They are very violent criminal groups that are well-structured and well-financed. They pursue a single goal. They want to maximize their profits and do what most business do: hostile takeovers and pursue mergers and acquisitions. They use violence to protect their business from other competitors as well as from our two governments' efforts to roll them back. There is no political motivation or agenda whatsoever beyond their attempt to defend their illegal business.

Misunderstanding the challenge we face leads to wrong policies and bad policy making. If you label these organizations as terrorist, you will have to start calling drug consumers in the U.S. "financiers of terrorist organizations" and gun dealers "providers of material support to terrorists." Otherwise, you really sound as if you want to have your cake and eat it too. That's why I would underscore that the editorial page should be careful what it advocates for.

Arturo Sarukhan, Ambassador of Mexico to the U.S., Washington, D.C.
(via Dallasnews.com)

And a response at the same paper's site:
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/04/mexico-ambassad.html

---


The Economic Asteroid Plan

The federal government failed to sort out a budget again, many months after the supposed due date, which was OCTOBER 2010. Just a little late now that it is April.

To budget or not to budget, that is the problem, it seems. It is way beyond WHEN.

I am already good and tired of the scare tactics by the leftists. They gave the same emotion-based proclamations over ObamaCare. Not surprisingly, these are the same "leaders" who in recents decades have always insisted on adding more and more government, Now they are insisting it will all be paid for with magic pixie dust or something. To the very brink, these folks had also insisted there was nothing wrong with certain federal financial programs, such as the CRA that allowed loans to the unemployed, and Fannie and Freddie, which were the nonsensical housing debt twins by the time 2008's economic fall happened. 

I'd like to see a real reason, not some emotion-charged twaddle that explains why a tightened budget shouldn't happen. Not just some 5% haircut that hurts education and the poor, but broad pay cuts (to put public employees on par with private!), nonessential program slimmings, defense project trimmings, etc. Barring that, how about a good reason -- emotion and threat-free -- why a shutdown should not happen, from leftists. 

Maybe I have it wrong, perhaps it is better to continue pretending that government is not too large and it is paid for, that the majority of citizens and our futures aren't getting a raw deal by the feds, that poor habits and waste are virtually gone from government, that loopy politicians and interest groups are not bent on further betraying the basic concepts of the republic. 

Yeah, it will aaaaall be OK so long as we keep putting off the tough trim-down. The US seems to be no longer the Eagle, instead the 500-lb man who refuses to see his doctor for a checkup. (You gonna eat that?) How very American and exceptional it is to pretend necessary decisions away! 

We can always hope an asteroid hits the planet and that solves the economic problems for us. Party till the planets bursts! 

jR

Enhanced by Zemanta