Home » Our kick-ass president

Comments

Our kick-ass president — 53 Comments

  1. I can imagine the jeering commentary from the liberal peanut gallery if Bush had tried to talk this way.

  2. Jennifer Rubin at Commentary mag notes the uneasy decision-making style of the Obama administration. The strange shifts between Obama’s cold, calculating persona, and his recently exhibited faux-rage are the superficial manifestation of something deeper. Maybe, as some would have it, an inability to lead or to be in touch with reality as it actually is. Or, as others would have it, a covert plan to lead the U.S. into policies the majority of its population wouldnt support.

    In either case, as Rubin notes in her title the effect is a feeling that you wouldn’t want Obama in foxhole with you. Or as Juan Williams, the African-American commentator at Fox has stated “you may not want to have answer the 3:00 a.m. call.”

    A quote from that article:

    “Obama was comfortable when running for office, when he could get by on rhetoric and as a legislator – where no one is really responsible for anything. What he’s ill-equipped to do is govern and lead. Plenty of people are hired for jobs beyond their abilities and outside their areas of competence. Unfortunately, the damage done by placing someone of that ilk in the White House is grievous and in some cases irreversible.”

  3. Haha – if this had been a week or two afterward and was in defense of an aggressive (if late) start then I would have figured OK – fine.

    But in defense of doing nothing almost 50 days later is that he is so aggressive that he knew it was a disaster and kicked ass before any one else knew is … strange to say the least.

    He is advocating what he didn’t actually do at all. At what point is he “slow” if around 50 days later asses still not kicked, those smart fisherman’s ideas not used, and the thing going on and on and on.

    I do not know what is saddest, if he believes it, thinks others believe it because he says it, or that for some people the latter is true irrespective of if he himself believes what he says.

  4. Ah yes, I guess I didn’t say which I believe the case to be – I think he truly believes what he says and the anger is real. I think it is an outgrowth of frustration that these bold initiatives that took someone of his caliber to come up with have not been successful or popular and us lower people are to blame.

  5. This would appear to fall in the category of “not presidential.” It would be a little more believable if he actually had a record of accomplishments other than being a student. He’s a lawyer who never won any big cases. He’s a professor who never published anything. He was a legislator who never wrote major legislation and abstained from votes whenever possible. What we are seeing is watered down street bravado.

  6. “”The whole thing reminds me somehow of John Kerry and the hunting license””

    Reminded me of President Camacho in the movie Ideocracy while speaking to “Ths House of Representin”. Lol

  7. Not only is this awkward behavior, but all I can think is: after 50+ days and you don’t know whose a** to kick? Where have you been, buddy? Maybe you should get around to talking to the CEO of BP instead of sitting down for yet another TV interview. Maybe set up a meeting with Salazar (for when you’ve expended all avenues for coastline cleanup) to discuss where things went wrong within MMS. Classless and clueless.

  8. Did anyone notice the bottom-screen graphic from the Today Show / Matt Lauer interview where Obama notes his intent to “kick ass” — “President Obama Fired Up Over Oil Spill.”

    So what happens? Obama & Co. gather that the consensus is that he lacks emotion and needs to get angry. Do they just dictate what they need the graphic to read? Is it that easy? Lauer did a decent job, he was as aggressive as he gets with democrats. The graphic must have been pre-negotiated.

  9. Barracks communism (also referred to as Nechayevshchina) is the term coined by Karl Marx to refer to a ‘crude’, authoritarian forced collectivism and communism, where all aspects of life are bureaucratically regimented and communal. … Later, political theorists of the Soviet Union applied this term to the People’s Republic of China under Mao Zedong (1950s-1970s).

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_communism

    I dont know if the link has the info correct.. (and i dont expect moonbattery to correct it)

    but the term comes up in
    The origins of totalitarianism/ By Hannah Arendt

    its in reference to the “catechism of the revolutionist” in which they do not know if the work was written by Bakunin or Nechayev..

    It refers to (according to arendt)

    The “system of complete disregard for any tenets of simple decency and fairness in [the revolutionists] attitude towards other beings… wend down in Russian revolutionary history as Nechayevschina (from the origins of totalitarianism)

    its a set of rules for the revolution and other details.
    i forgot about it until they referred to it.

    The revolutionist is a person doomed He has no personal interests, no business affairs, no emotions, no attachments, no property, and no name. Everything in him is wholly absorbed in the single thought and the single passion for revolution.

    The revolutionist knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the bonds which tie him to the civil order and the civilized world with all its laws, moralities, and customs, and with all its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy, and if he continues to live with them it is only in order to destroy them more speedily.

    The revolutionist despises all doctrines and refuses to accept the mundane sciences, leaving them for future generations. He knows only one science: the science of destruction. For this reason, but only for this reason, he will study mechanics, physics, chemistry, and perhaps medicine. But all day and all night he studies the vital science of human beings, their characteristics and circumstances, at every possible level of social existence. The object is perpetually the same: the surest and quickest way of destroying the whole filthy order.

    4. The revolutionist despises public opinion. He despises and hates the existing social morality in all its manifestations. For him, morality is everything which contributes to the triumph of the revolution.

    Anything that stands in its way is immoral and criminal.

    tons more to it… but hey… why go read all this stuff to read what they read and so forth?

    it cant be very different than what we all discuss and imagine, no?

    you can read the whole thing here..
    http://www.uoregon.edu/~kimball/Nqv.catechism.thm.htm

    Back in the days when we were against socialism/communism, these writings [like this] were the basis of our cold war attitudes…

    after all, you forget that this is their idea of acting in the world, you tend to consider their actions in nicer light than otherwise…

  10. The continuing oil disaster is just a distraction for Obama.
    He does not think in terms of trying to fix the problem, he looks at it from the point of furthering his goal of cap and tax and the green energy fairy tale.

    He sees BP as just another corporation to rape – not for repairing the environmental damage, but to fill the government coffers.

    Obama could care less if the oil kept pumping into the ocean for years, he knows that soon the media will stop covering the disaster and soon be back to running interference for him.

  11. by the way, under the catechism for revolutionaries…

    NOT doing something about the spill helps the goal of destruction, and so, he is not in a position to actually want to stop it, help it, abrogate it, or anything he says publicly as that is all for consumption to an end.

    read the bakunin work, and you will start to understand why what they do makes no sense to your way of thinking.

    the reason is that you keep thinking the goals are otehr than what they are, and so you cant resolve your ideas in terms of any kinds of ends that are acceptable, but not the real end.

    that is, everyone wants to connect two dots..

    but when i analyze, i go from one dot, to where it leads me.

    where i end up is the other dot, even if i had not thought of it, or conceived of it. which is the failure of the anticipate the end and connect the middle way of analysis.

    this is why the debate doesnt go anywhere, since the person wants you to always tell the end dot, then connect between things.

    and if they dont agree the end dot is possible, they reject any and all lines that would lead to it.

    when they are right, this is great.
    when they are wrong, they are constantly off foot, and cant get on the track…

    if you read more of what they read, you experience more of what they experienced, and get an idea of what they think based on what they copy (they are not original at all).

    and anything new, is always in terms of these past works… if you dont know these past works, then you have no direction they go in.

    ghost got it, but not why…

  12. in terms of under the bus:

    The revolutionist can have no friendship or attachment, except for those who have proved by their actions that they, like him, are dedicated to revolution. The degree of friendship, devotion and obligation toward such a comrade is determined solely by the degree of his usefulness to the cause of total revolutionary destruction.

    and

    When a comrade is in danger and the question arises whether he should be saved or not saved, the decision must not be arrived at on the basis of sentiment, but solely in the interests of the revolutionist cause. Therefore, it is necessary to weigh carefully the usefulness of the comrade against the expenditure of revolutionary forces necessary to save him, and the decision must be made accordingly.

    The revolutionist enters the world of the state, of the privileged classes [soslovnyi…mir], of the so-called civilization, and he lives in this world only for the purpose of bringing about its speedy and total destruction. He is not a revolutionist if he has any sympathy for this world. He should not hesitate to destroy any position, any place, or any man in this world. He must hate everyone and everything in it with an equal hatred.

    The first category comprises those who must be condemned to death without delay. [ie. people who could reverse or will change when they see things]

    The second group comprises those who will be spared for the time being in order that, by a series of monstrous acts, they may drive the people into inevitable revolt. [the liberals who think they will have a place at the table]

    The third category consists of a great many brutes in high positions, distinguished neither by their cleverness nor their energy, while enjoying riches, influence, power, and high positions by virtue of their rank. These must be exploited in every possible way; they must be implicated and embroiled in our affairs, their dirty secrets must be ferreted out, and they must be transformed into slaves. Their power, influence, and connections, their wealth and their energy, will form an inexhaustible treasure and a precious help in all our undertakings. [these are the other politicians and wealthy and such who will or have been put in a position to HAVE to despite our thinking of them otherwise]

    The fourth category comprises ambitious office-holders and liberals of various shades of opinion. The revolutionist must pretend to collaborate with them, blindly following them, while at the same time, prying out their secrets until they are completely in his power. They must be so compromised that there is no way out for them, and then they can be used to create disorder in the State. [these are those we see most at protests, and schools, and so on – useful idiots]

    The fifth category consists of those doctrinaires, conspirators, and revolutionists who cut a great figure on paper or in their circles [kruzhki].
    [these are teh communists who they celebrate, like dunn with her admiration of mother Theresa and mao]

    They must be constantly driven on to make compromising declarations: as a result, the majority of them will be destroyed, while a minority will become genuine revolutionists

    and to pay attention as i said about feminism
    The sixth category is especially important: women. They can be divided into three main groups.

    First, those frivolous, thoughtless, and vapid women, whom we shall use as we use the third and fourth category of men.

    Second, women who are ardent, capable, and devoted, but whom do not belong to us because they have not yet achieved a passionless and austere revolutionary understanding; these must be used like the men of the fifth category.

    Finally, there are the women who are completely on our side — i.e., those who are wholly dedicated and who have accepted our program in its entirety.

    We should regard these women as the most valuable or our treasures; without their help, we would never succeed.

    that last group are those who i quote all the time, and yet cant get the other two groups of women to believe and stop supporting that third group.

    the last statement
    To weld this world into one single unconquerable and all-destructive force — this is our organization [organizatsiia], our conspiracy, our task.

    in having useful idiots and varios levels of followers.
    something i TRIED to explain with feminism, but this is such a heinious thing, that its not believed

    All comrades should have under them second- or third-degree revolutionists — i.e., comrades who are not completely initiated. these should be regarded as part of the common revolutionary capital placed at his disposal. This capital should, of course, be spent as economically as possible in order to derive from it the greatest possible profit. The real revolutionist should regard himself as capital consecrated to the triumph of the revolution; however, he may not personally and alone dispose of that capital without the unanimous consent of the fully initiated comrades.

    and in terms of saving someone

  13. Artfldgr, I know exactly why.

    I know why Obama spends more time complaining about Rush Limbaugh and the Tea Party protests than actual terrorists.
    Obama’s only real enemies are conservatives.

    The end game is single party rule – liberal fascism – with Obama playing the part of Mussolini.

  14. Europe may actually be helping us out more than I thought they ever could by their financial implosion.

    Obama didn’t count on socialism failing in a major way during his time as emperor.

    And I just got laid off again – (the second time in 2 years).

    Obama is doing everything possible to ruin the economy, and it is working…for now.

  15. I don’t mind the absence of decorum. I mind the palpable phoniness of Obama’s demeanor. Anyone who has whined about the price of arugula at Whole Foods is well-advised not to attempt his impression of Mr. T.

    I can picture Soros ordering Obama to emote to try to connect with the rubes, and this was the response he got.

  16. Perhaps a more appropriate song for Obama would be Macho, Macho Macho Man.

    ghost707, something will turn up, until then be prepared to change locations, I mean like to another state, and change fields, also be prepared to do work less than your skill level.

    remember what Thomas Sowell wrote…”if the only thing wrong Obama does is wreck the economy we can count ourselves lucky.”

  17. “”I mind the palpable phoniness of Obama’s demeanor.””
    Occam

    Amen. Its like listening to a punk kid car mechanic telling you your car needs a new flux capacitor while keeping a straight face.

  18. Thanks Bob and Occam for the words.
    I have electrical and mechanical skills – and live in Texas – all good.

    I noticed there are quite a few openings for folks with HVAC experience. I could learn that pretty quickly.

    Also have some old clients that I can do work for on the side. I expect alot of people are doing that as well.

    Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

  19. I am suprised that Obama bit the bait. It seemed more in his narcissistic character to disdain emotion. His unconvincing performance does reinforce a narcissistic disorder diagnosis in that when the anger projected is manufactured, it is apparent that it is not genuine because anything that is not first and foremost about him, he doesn’t know how it should be related. He’s got no experience with that.

  20. I want to see it. I’ll pay a month’s salary to see him stand up to any man he chooses (and some women).

  21. Surprising that nobody has mentioned any possibility that BHO was responding to Bill Maher’s recent racist monolog. Maher wished that our president would act like a thuggish black gangster to those responsible for the oil spill to force some action. The timing of BHO’s “get rough and tough” act is very coincidental.

  22. Just to throw this in here, Gateway Pundit has a piece on a Maine warehouse with huge amounts of oil containment booms, and the capacity to make more.
    They can’t get anybody to take them.

  23. Curtis, I think Obama’s tentativeness arises from his not being culturally, viscerally, an American. He has to reflect consciously on how an American might react to a situation, and then mimic that.

    Given that he’s not good at thinking on his feet – not even his most ardent supporters credit him with that – he shies away from situations where he has to do that (e.g., townhall meetings with McCain – no way).

    The confluence of these two considerations means that his show of “anger” was probably scripted in detail, and possibly rehearsed, which is why it rings hollow.

    Stark, probably no one mentioned Maher because no one watched (or watches) him.

  24. Curtis, I agree, certainly on Obama. He isn’t really an American, despite being one de jure. Paradoxically, I think many of the Mexicans who serve in our armed forces (to earn citizenship) are actually more American than Obama.

    I don’t have a problem with Clinton in this respect. He’s a lowlife, but that’s a well-represented demographic in America (and everywhere else).

  25. Rosie has a solution for BP:

    O’DONNELL: “Someone has to do it….Call it Socialism, call it Communism, call it whatever you want…. Seize their assets. Take over BP!”

  26. I have a better solution for plugging the hole: have Rosie sit on it.

  27. Obama’s pretending to have normal emotions. But having no idea how to be a real person, he tries on reactions like clothing. If one isn’t received as appropriate, he takes it off and tries another.

  28. To paraphrase Groucho (the Marx who made the most sense, ahead of Harpo, Chico, and Karl): “These are my personae, and if you don’t like them, I have others.”

  29. Occam’s Beard Says:

    “I have a better solution for plugging the hole: have Rosie sit on it.”

    I like the idea.

    But then how do we plug that other big hole in the middle of Rosie’s face? LOL

  30. In response to another of Neo’s posts, I forget which, I wrote that I am increasingly persuaded that Obama is psychotic, with paranoid features. Not full-blown, of course, but more goofy than fool/knave/narcissist.
    I hope that Neo may in time give us her thoughts on this; though this is psychiatric, beyond therapist.

  31. Via Powerline, here is Palin’s advice to Obama:

    http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/less-talkin-more-kickin/397148258434

    She seems to think he is a normal incompetent, but she does tell ways in which he screwed up. I guess she couldn’t get into his psychopathology, but like others here, I think that is the major problem.

    Here’s a challenge to all you builder/ engineer types out there. Create for The Won his own personal Kick Myself in the Ass machine. He could keep it next to his treadmill. Anytime there is a problem, he could go to his workout room, use the machine, and then turn his attention to actually solving the problem. It might spare us these phoney see-how-tough-I-am interview comments.

  32. God this is awful, another MTV reality show. The world’s in a mess and this guy is taking advice from Spike Lee.

    I’m running out of adjectives.

  33. The man is thinking like a community organizer: not “How can we fix this problem?” but “Who can we sue?”

  34. This trying on of personas is something adolescents do. One day they try to be this, the next day that, the next day what they think other people would like…while at the same time thinking they know everything. Hey I remember it well. And looking back, with a lot of amusement.

    Our President is unfortunately doing it right now on the public stage, because he doesn’t seem to really know who he is. Now he’s trying to be Teddy Roosevelt. I’ve never felt that guy (Obama) knew who he was, because he’s never really had to do anything that’s really hard, which is when you learn who you are, for better or for worse.

    Although running for President and winning is most certainly hard, I will grant him that, but his whole campaign was so Manchurian that it was hard to get a grasp on who he was, and then it hit me, he Doesn’t Know! And neither does anyone else. And he doesn’t know he doesn’t know! And neither do his Followers! Well, expect the Teddy Roosevelt persona to be discarded ASAP.

    Also, sueing at this point is such a ridiculous waste of energy (no pun intended). And looks pretty bad. I mean hey fix it fellas! Fix IT!! I don’t think the oil covered penguins are gonna be all that excited about their settlement, ya know? Even if it’s for LOTS and LOTS of money!

  35. I love your image of the “trying on of personas.” This would explain a lot about Obama’s silliness.

    He lies whenever it’s convenient in a way that most people–except the media–would find shameful. But maybe he believes his lies.

    What a crackpot president we have. A sort of Captain Queeq.

  36. I love your image of the “trying on of personas.” This would explain a lot about Obama’s silliness.

    He lies whenever it’s convenient in a way that most people–except the media–would find shameful. But maybe he believes his lies.

    What a crackpot president we have. A sort of Captain Queeq.

  37. I think deep down the Dope knows that he is a dope. He doesn’t do meetings well so he sort of, well, doesn’t have them. My memory of his few reported meetings was that he left the participants stunned with his lack of background and inability to comprehend the subject matter at hand. His accumulated wisdom is wrapped up in the “nuanced” statement that he doesn’t talk to experts if he has to learn whose ass to kick. Surprisingly, his poll numbers went up after this very unpresidentiai statement was reported so I guess we are going to be inundated with the Dope’s new toughness. It also reflects the sophistication and sensitivity of the Dope’s supporters.

    And, since you can be pinned down if you don’t make a decision he sort of doesn’t make decisions either, unless of the easy kind from his college years such as to stop some profitable activity consistent with his ever more evident marxism. Palin reminded us that he did not meet with McChrystal before making his decision to send more troops to Afghanistan. Now, he refuses to meet with the president of BP. It’s not that he might learn something from these meetings. It’s that he is incapable of learning anything from them and that that failing would expose him for what he is. The Dope.

    Atlas calls him a dolt. I thing Dope is more descriptive and all-encompassing but I can live with dolt, such as the Dolt. It’s not that we should have reasonable expectations that the Dolt can do the job of president. It is that he is totally incapable of doing it. Anything is possible with this guy and none of it good!!!!

  38. The $64,000 question: what happens when he deals himself the queen of diamonds?

  39. I love your image of the “trying on of personas.” This would explain a lot about Obama’s silliness.

    You may never understand
    How the stranger is inspired
    But he isn’t always evil
    And he is not always wrong
    Though you drown in good intentions
    You will never quench the fire
    You’ll give in to your desire
    When the stranger comes along.

    Billy Joel: The Stranger

    He lies whenever it’s convenient in a way that most people—except the media—would find shameful. But maybe he believes his lies.

    read the catechism of a revolutionary which i posted above

    we dont find it so strange that a man who is interested in cars, knows the history of cars in more detail than us.

    we dont find it so strange that a man who is interested in boats, knows the history of boats in more detail than us, and would endeavor to learn things that only boatmen know…

    so why, oh why, is it so hard to understand that a man who is interested from before he is born, in revolutionary politics, would start by reading about his heroes and the people who made things happen in a way that gave them the power to attempt to “make the world”?

    you want to know about Christianity? the tenets, beliefs, attitudes and such of the christian and Jewish mentality, what the goals and ends are. but you don’t want to touch anything that they read, consider, discuss, play with, cogitate and fantasize about.

    whats worse is that we try to figure out waht they are up to sans all that, and instead use our goals and our ideas of safety, security, ability to move after our tasks are done etc.

    so people willing to die for their cause, ignore their relationships for their cause, use and lie to people for the cause, give up their lives in total towards a cause, and not care if they are sacrificed for the cause…

    are completely removed from our ability to cogitate precisely because we do not ignore our relationships to achieve a goal, we do not literally do anything disregarding every limit to reach a goal, and we generally want to get out of whatever it is we get into to play another day.

    its not that we cant do this, we just refuse to

    so the more extreme the revolutionary is in following the catechism the more likely they will succeed since we would rather imagine otherwise, than realize and have to act in a way they compel action once known.

    the inability to conclude and study and understand is akin to leaving your back door open to theives because you dont think they are audacious enough to go roud back… or you saunter without a care during the day, believing that the criminal would not do something in broad daylight (despite knowing otherwise).

    any lesser actions would be believed and opposed

    who would believe a 150 year conspiracy to world power? who would believe a 40 year cultural revolution in place of war given nuclear weapons?

  40. The $64,000 question: what happens when he deals himself the queen of diamonds?

    he cant win, so he will double down to stay at the table longer despite the end

  41. We have $234 millions to give to Americorps (fifth column) but nothing to NASA? We tell the world how many nukes we have and that we won’t use them?

    This president already has been dealt the queen of diamonds and is fully activated.

  42. “Curtis Says:
    June 9th, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    We have $234 millions to give to Americorps (fifth column) but nothing to NASA? ”

    ===================

    Not to mention, he’s just promised $400 million to Abbas for the West Bank and Gaza.

    The NY Times says “The exact details of how such aid would be used in Gaza remained unclear. Nor was it immediately clear how Mr. Abbas, who has authority in the West Bank but no authority in Gaza, would be able to administer it.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world/middleeast/10prexy.html?ref=global-home

  43. There are several pauses that show deliberate self-restraint from swearing far more emphatically. The entire commentary from Mr. Obama is that of “you’re f’ing wrong, I’ve been busy, but you’re all too ignorant to know” with a final dose of “retribution is all you peasants want”.

  44. What amazes me about this “kick ass” hullabaloo is that nobody has brought up Obama’s penchant for giving the finger — literally — to those who cross him. Has everybody forgotten his ever so subtly rubbing his jaw with his middle finger during a debate with Hillary (to the audience’s delight), doing the same thing during a McCain debate, and again during the health care debate as Paul Ryan was speaking? I’d say the guy is a low life, but I’ve got to think that, in their heart of hearts, the low lifes also view him with contempt.

  45. Far from flailing in his response to the environmental disaster, Obama has been way ahead of the curve all along. As early as a month ago, he assures us, he was facing the elements down in the Gulf, gaining first-hand intelligence from local fishermen on “whose a** to kick.”

    The nation should rejoice in being led by such a diligent a**-kicker in chief in this time of crisis.

  46. Two things…he also mocked McCain’s inability to raise his arms in one of the rallies…it was quick but I saw it…shame.
    What other phony can we think of that tried on different personnas in televised presidential debates?
    How are things working out for you,Al?
    With the recent Helen debacle,I believe that liars,frauds and mean-spirited people(think Dan rather) eventually get theirs.It’s headed your way,O.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>