Obama the knave: the long view
When you blog you write an awful lot, day after day after day. That means that you forget some of what you wrote—perhaps not “forget” exactly, but it slips your mind and it’s only on looking at it again that it rings a bell of familiarity. Sheer volume of output can do that.
Recently I came across an article I wrote in October of 2009 about what I thought Obama’s plan for the US and the world might be. When I recently came across that essay again by chance (prompted by a commenter mentioning Reagan’s “city on a hill” remark) it had only a vague ring of familiarity. I was surprised, also, by how early in the game I’d written it, which shows how easy it was to see much of what Obama was up to even then. I will never understand why more people didn’t see it, sense it, feel it.
Here’s an excerpt:
Obama may not be speaking in openly religious terms as Reagan did, but he nevertheless looks on America in a way that could be seen as religious: he sees it as a nation conceived in original sin, one that has gone on to commit offenses against the world for which it must now atone. And Obama views himself as the special instrument through which America can finally purify herself, join the world of other nations as an equal rather than a leader, and go forth and sin no more.
You might say that Reagan believed in American exceptionalism, whereas Obama believes in Obama’s exceptionalism.
Please go back and read it.
[NOTE: The article only discussed part of Obama’s motivation, because even by that time I believed he was a committed leftist as well: see this and this.]
It Is always about Barack. If the Treasury had a million bucks for every time he said “I” or “me” we would be debt free today.
He have not seen the real results of his knavery. ISIS unleashed in America, 30 million illegals and $18T of debt with normalized interested rates. Depression.
Neo wrote:
Years ago, a child-genius was being interviewed. He was asked, “Do you ever wonder why you’re so smart?” to which the boy replied, “No, but I often wonder why everyone else is so stupid” (or words to that effect).
Face it Neo, you’re smart.
“I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot.”
All too typical ignorance.
Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Hamilton, Paine, Henry, Mason, Morris, Jay, Rush, Abigail Adams, Woolman, Samuel Adams, Livingston, Carroll, Dickinson, Lee, Martin Wilson, Witherspoon, Bassett, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, William Few, John Marshall, Richard Stockton, Zephaniah Swift, and many more… all spoke out against the ‘abominable practice’.
The Founders thoughts on Slavery:
George Washington:
“there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it. Were it not that I am principled against selling Negroes… I would not in twelve months from this date be possessed of one as a slave.” –Letter to Morris, April 12, 1786
John Adams:
“Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States…. I have, through my whole life, held the practice of slavery in …abhorrence.”
Thomas Jefferson:
“The rights of human nature [are] deeply wounded by this infamous practice [of slavery].” –Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774
“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever:” –Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782.
“As it is, we have the wolf by the ears, and we can neither hold him nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Holmes, 1820
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free.” Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, 1821
James Madison:
“We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.”
–Speech at Constitutional Convention, June 6, 1787
“[The Convention] thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.” Records of the Federal Convention of 1787
Benjamin Franklin:
the 1st President of America’s first Antislavery Society.
“Slavery is …an atrocious debasement of human nature.” –”An Address to the Public from the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery” (1789), Benjamin Franklin, Writings
Alexander Hamilton:
Hero of the Battle of White Plains, NY & Aide-de-Camp to General Washington – Principal Architect of the Federalist Papers, New York Constitutional Convention Delegate, First US Secretary of the Treasury, Inspector General of the Army under President John Adams and widely considered by American historians to be, “one of the greatest administrative genius’ of all time.”
“The laws of certain states …give an ownership in the service of Negroes as personal property…But being men, by the laws of God and nature, they were capable of acquiring liberty, and when the captor in war …thought fit to give them liberty, the gift was not only valid, but irrevocable.” Papers of Alexander Hamilton
Gouverneur Morris:
proclaimed slavery a “nefarious institution, the curse of heaven on the states where it prevailed” spreading poverty broadly through society.
George Mason —
VA delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787
“this infernal traffic” that produces “the most pernicious effect on manners.” “Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant; they bring the judgment of heaven on a country.”
John Jay:
First Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court
“It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”
–John Jay, letter to R. Lushington, March 15, 1786
Patrick Henry:
Governor of Virginia, Patriot
“I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be offered to abolish this lamentable evil.”
— Patrick Henry, letter to Robert Pleasants, January 18, 1773
Benjamin Rush:
Founder of America’s First Anti-slavery Society, Signer of the Declaration of Independence & Father of American Psychiatry
“Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity… It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical denial of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who has solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men.” “(slavery) is so foreign to the human mind, that the moral faculties, as well as those of the understanding are debased, and rendered torpid by it.”
Samuel Adams
Father of the American Revolution, Signer of the Declaration of Independence
“A slave cannot live in my house, if she comes, she must be free.”
Thomas Paine:
Founding Father & Influential Patriot:
“that many civilized, nay, Christianized people should approve, and be concerned in the savage practice (of slavery) is surprising; and still persist, though it has been so often proved contrary to the light of nature, to every principle of Justice and Humanity…Our Traders in MEN (an unnatural commodity!) must know the wickedness of the SLAVE-TRADE, if they attend to reasoning, or the dictates of their own hearts: and such as shun and stifle all these, willfully sacrifice Conscience, and the character of integrity to that golden idol.” – African Slavery in America” March 8, 1775
In fact, based in part on the efforts of these Founders, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts abolished slavery in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island did so in 1784; New Hampshire in 1792; Vermont in 1793; New York in 1799; and New Jersey in 1804.
The first federal racial civil rights law in America “An Ordinance of the Territory of the United States Northwest of the River Ohio,” was passed on August 7, 1789 with the endorsing signature of President George Washington. It prohibited slavery in any new State interested in seeking to enter the Union.
Consequently, slavery was thus prohibited in all the American territories held at the time; and it was because of this law, signed by President George Washington, that Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin all prohibited slavery.
It is not surprising that Washington would sign such a law, for it was he who had declared: “I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery].” -George Washington
Most Americans of today are unaware that during the years when Washington was alive, the laws in Virginia were designed to discourage and prevent the emancipation of slaves. A great financial burden was imposed upon any slave owner seeking to emancipate a slave. Thus, the only remaining means to dispose of one’s slaves was to sell them and, had Washington not been opposed to this practice, he could have used that means to end his ownership of all slaves. The excess number of slaves, which he held, was economically unprofitable for Mount Vernon and was a life-long burden upon his finances.
Despite the financial benefits he could have reaped and the years of financial burdens he endured, Washington adamantly refused to sell any slaves, saying “To sell the over-plus I cannot, because I am principled against this kind of traffic in the human species. To hire them out is almost as bad because they could not be disposed of in families to any advantage, and to disperse [break up] the families I have an aversion.”
This stand by Washington was absolutely remarkable for his day…and singular. No other founding father acted so nobly in accepting the circumstantial conflict between adverse societal laws and personal principles. The loophole that finally allowed Washington to circumvent Virginia law was by emancipating his slaves upon his death, a provision he placed within his will to ensure its success.
Finally, the canard that the ‘3/5ths’ compromise is proof that the Founders considered a black to be only three-fifths of a person. This charge is yet another mis-portrayal of the truth.
The records of the Constitutional Convention make clear that the three-fifths clause was actually an antislavery provision.
As Professor Walter Williams explains: “It was slavery’s opponents who succeeded in restricting the political power of the South by allowing them to count only three-fifths of their slave population in determining the number of congressional representatives. The three-fifths of a vote provision applied only to slaves, not to free blacks in either the North or South.”
Since the three-fifths clause did not apply to free blacks in the south it was not a measurement of human worth; it was an attempt to reduce the number of pro-slavery proponents in Congress. By including only three-fifths of the total numbers of slaves into the congressional calculations, Southern states were actually being denied additional pro-slavery representatives in Congress..
“Foreign policy is a major mechanism by which this country will be made level with other countries–just one nation among the rest, stripped of much of its power and its weaponry.” neo
And doesn’t that perfectly figure into Obama’s traitorous ‘deal’ with Iran.
[Obama] “believes such a downward direction is the morally proper one for America and Americans, the only way we can be forgiven our manifold sins and emerge purified through humility and sacrifice.” neo
I’ve reached the conclusion that it’s worse than that. Obama does not seek America’s ‘purification’ “through humility and sacrifice”. He’s a Racist at heart and thus his prejudice doesn’t allow for even the possibility that whites can be purified.
Obama wants ‘an eye for an eye’. He wants 400 years of white slavery and oppression. He wants a non-white majority in America so that as a group, whites will always be in the minority.
And Michelle, like Hillary a real hater, is insatiable in her thirst for revenge. No amount of penance, amends or recompense will suffice. We must suffer unending torment. It is a living hell that she wishes for whites because she’s an even more hateful Racist than her husband. Besides her words, I base this assessment upon the fact that I cannot recall ever seeing a picture of Michelle where she was smiling at a white person with the smile reaching her eyes.
“Obama also believes that he is the special instrument by which the nation can accomplish this transformation. That, more than any specific policy on any specific issue, is the goal of Obama’s presidency: the shriving and humbling of America.”
His boot on America’s neck, forever grinding her into the dirt.
I’m still waiting for Obama to stop the rise of the oceans and heal the earth. I suspect he will be as successful as King Canute who, according to the legend, ordered the tide to halt.
I could see that he was a Chicago scammer from day one. Scams are the political infrastructure, game plan, and economic system of government in Chicago and all of the business and any other organization that can be roped into it. Everyone with any knowledge of political structures in the US knew this as it has been in place for a very long time.
Amazing reads, including the comments. neo is perspicacity itself. And the commenters were wonderful, expressing many of the same thoughts which are still expressed years later.
Artful observes that another commentator has caught his verbosity, which made me laugh.
And this stunned me and also made me laugh:
I felt better about myself when I read that, like even-Zeus-nods better.
And the last funny part reminded me of this, which I find hilarious:
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=pat+condell+public+apology&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=BBD69D45C0C04CCC0B87BBD69D45C0C04CCC0B87
snopercod and GB – – great posts (funny and informative respectively).
” I will never understand why more people didn’t see it, sense it, feel it.”
_______________________________________
Many more did actually see it…
We were shutdown by the mainstream media and allegations of, “racism”.
Disquieting to say the least…
GB…
Hamilton was, de facto, America’s second president – -as George, during his second term, simply vectored everyone and every issue over to his ‘chief of staff.’
It reached a point where it was hard for even his old army buddies to chat up Washington on purely social matters.
He, Washington, had become used to all such chats turning into what US Grant would later term ‘lobbying’ for this or that political push.
[ One is reminded of the US Army colonel of Krefeld who vectored all German civilians over to Pvt. Kissenger’s office during the occupation. For Henry was the true ‘mayor of Krefeld.’ Naturally, Kissenger had the burg up and running in a week.]
&&&&
Jefferson was bankrupted by the Revolutionary War. He’d accepted fiat script terms when he sold all of his real assets very early on. They proved to be “not worth a Continental” and they WERE Continental dollars.
He was one of the leading lights pressing for a prohibition of fiat currency issuance from the new constitutional government, hence the provisions that debts be paid in silver… with gold as an option.
He didn’t quite get everything he wanted — and the result you see today.
From the outset, Hamilton and Jefferson were at odds over central banking — which implicitly involves the issuance of fiat debt instruments — fiat monies, second hand.
In one of the greatest ironies of American political history: the Democrat party was primarily founded (Andrew Jackson, “Old Hickory”) to take up this torch. To terminate the central bank, end fiat credit issuance by the same, and to up hold racialism/ segregation/ slavery — and to NOT spend large (anything, really) on infrastructure with the Federal purse. (Polk, “Young Hickory” especially)
That party has flipped 180 on EVERY single one of its founder’s core political planks.
Modern Democrats can not believe such a verity.
Heck, even Lincoln has become a “Democrat.”
And, the capper: even most Republicans don’t remember/ ever learn that the Liberal establishment was birthed entirely inside the Republican Party — and that Teddy was the first progressive president.
He was fulsomely against Big Business and the political corruption that such actors spewed — ironic since THEY are the ones who put him on McKinley’s ticket (1896) — to get him out of their hair.
617 days.
I want to know the network behind Obama. He did not originate this trade deal, Obamacare, open borders, etc. Yet he clings to his agenda like a religious zealot and bristles intensely and pettily when challenged. Who convinced him of the of the crucial importance of these policies? What goals do they serve? Certainly not greater access to health care or an increase in mutually beneficial exchange between nations.
Is his end game an American version of Sweden? France? Venezuela? Oceania? It is simply a fact that the Democrat Party–and the leftists who dominate it–are seeking to end two and a half centuries of self government by the people and return to aristocracy. They lie with populist or altruistic rationales to dissemble their agenda, but there has to be literature and correspondence discussing their goals and actions. In the case of the trade deal, for example, could we peruse issues of The Nation from the 1990s and see a nascent blueprint? Or is the nursery of tyranny something kept effectively out of the sunlight?
Look for George Soros’s motives behind this. He’s the one who lives to destroy nations and has always been actuated by bottomless malice, and a nearly endless bank account.
Cui bono?
I will never understand why more people didn’t see it, sense it, feel it.
If they did, they would join you in converting or reconfiguring your beliefs.
Since they do not, they fail the standard. Only a few people are capable of accepting the truth, at the cost of something valuable up front.
Think about *david axelroad* why is this son of a
registered Communist from NY, dispatched about
the world, ( UK, Israel) to *consult*, lucratively I might add, on the Political campaigns in these foreign countries, if not being funded by Soros & the
Progressives to usurp the *will of the people world
wide* & install elites as world governors.
LOL spelled axelrod wrong, he is on the Road
an awful lot…..
Who exactly is Obama?:
Family pictures of young Barack and Michelle Obama are fake.
“I want to know the network behind Obama.” Matthew M
There’s definitely a large, connected, moneyed network, that groomed and continues to support Obama.
As Beverly points out, Soros is part of that network.
My guess would be that Valerie Jarrett is Obama’s ‘point of contact’ with that network.
A
Neo says: I will never understand why more people didn’t see it, sense it, feel it.
really? its not that hard… people tend to want to think and pick the positive, even in a negative potential… so to be good glass is have full people rather than accept the reality they see, they ignore the negative.
i have this all the time in watching this kind of person try to plan or design something… they think good design ignores the bad, so that they can focus on the good… in doing such, their plans are all doomed to failure as they dont address the bad, the potential for it, and so on.
Dilbert has written about it for ages… its the mentality of the pointy haired boss and the VP character… their lives validate, to them, their world view, and so, they see nothing that may deny that validation and they blame anyone that may rock that world view.
this is why the big lie works and doing bad if you do a lot bad not a little bad, works… their desire for that bad thing they might see to not be real, makes them refuse to see it.
this is made worse by the idea that by refusing to see or believe you take on a positive position not a delusional dysfunctional position that negates your ability and agency in the world.
its one of many forms of such delusions that different people take up, and even more commically, when they take up the positivist pacifist delusoin they think normal and cautious views become abnormal and extreme to them!!!!!!!!!
our desire to apply premises and ideas goes beyond our desire to think ourselves… so when femnists promote dont blame the victim, a concept for the court, not the real world… their victims tend to want to exercise a court concept in the real world, and then believe that the real world is wrong, not that they did something stupid..
In court, you dont blame the person for being mugged because regardless of what they displayed or tempted the other with, the other should not have done what they did.
however, if your in the real world, then you know that acting like a victim and tempting mental defectives will find the people that would ignore law and morals and ethics and have them act upon you…
this is why a young very pretty girl will court rape and worse all the while believing the idea that the victim is never wrong…
so you have a positivist marxist socialist… they refuse to accept the world as it is, and so want to change it while at the same time defining that it isnt that way.
so a positivist deluded person will see someone warning about Obama as a person who is Catastrophizing and so, by believing such, resets their off kilter meter to normal!
this is why the left calls the people trying to warn them tin hatters… rather than see some of the catastrophizing as valid, they lump them together, and by doing so, recenter themselves in their minds and so to themselves are normal and refuse to budge from that position!
Catastrophizing
Minimization
Grandiosity
Personalization
Magical thinking
Leaps in (il)logic
“All or nothing” thinking.
Paranoia
Delusional thinking
putting aside people with real issues that have these problems and focusing on what is basically normal people skewed… one may be able to see that each issue has its cousin on the opposite end of the spectrum.
to the parnoiac, the person who sweats nothing and is relaxed regardless of things, seems abnormal
the woman buying makeup looks at the package and sees that she is rubbing herself with fruit she likes, and so employs magical thinking… and the world telling her that whitches are magical and women are that, and so on, feeds into that delusion.
you DO understand them, as these are all normal things but stretched… crazy people dont do abnormal things, they do normal things in abnormal extremes, times, etc.
want to see a GREAT example of this in a movie?
take out the movie, the longest day
there is a scene after the normandy invasion starts where they are forced to break in and fight from. an elderly french woman is there and a few others. at some point in the movie, while everything else is going on, she refuses to believe the war is there and is happening. ie. it must be a dream… so she gets dressed, puts on her coat… and before anyone can notice, dons her hat, and walks out into the street to hail a cab… she doesnt get 30 feet before she is cut down by a machine gun.
having been a volunteer EMT i have seen this more than once… though most want to say they are in shock, but in reality they are not… their blood pressure is normal, they wont die if it continues, what it is, is that their minds refuse to accept what their minds are telling them is outside their inner world.
i have posted before that what you see is not reality, what you see is perception. and because of that you live in a inner world which constantly aligns itself and models the details of the outer world. the more details you have the richer your inner world is. the more fact based your inputs are, the less skewed your inner world is… seeing people who are not there is the inner world model generator having a problem… after all, withotu this inner world model reality, such things as non existent people cant happen!!!!!!!! in fact, this stems from a model of mind i created from the literature that fits all the mental issues we have and express and can fit it all neatly in to one model… including how gedanken symbology can be used by people like einstein to work out the math of the univers he cant touch… or how nash could see people who were not real and thought they were and had to ask real people he trusted if the person he didnt know that was talking to him was real or not… why depression ‘colors’ your thoughts.
this is because you live in a universe unto your own, and you use this thing for all manner of things besides removing the delay between seeing processing and action. after all, how can you catch a ball if there is no mechanism to shift what you do by the delay of comprehension and decision to act? if you were not doing this, you would constantly miss the ball because your hand would be where the ball was not where it is…
so its real easy to understand what is goin on… and why less intelligent people do this kind of thing easier than more intelligent people… and why more intelligent people have much richer delusions that are harder to disprove or negate than simpler fare.
the model can only model what it understands
the model covers over what id doesnt understand or what is missing with other things so that you dont notice how much you are mssing (but can notice more if you practivce and are honest that you dont know, otherwise you train your brain to add spackle before your conciousness sees it)
this is no different than your brain covering the blind spot in your vision where the optic nerve enters the eye and there are no visual elements… note that law makes no allowance for this actual medical thing!!!!!!!
your conciousness is not the controller its the observer and influencer… if it was the controller lots of things would be different… delusion has its place in the model, like making it cohesive and functional… however, too much of this good thing that erases your blind spot, spakles over details that are not needed etc, can be very bad when it generates people that are not there, refuses to accept reality, etc.
they refuse to accept the world they live in..
so the world they live in, in their head, tweaks the inputs and so generates an internal reality that fits their refusal.. otherwise, it could drive them made and break their machine permanently… [this mechanism is also why we dont feel connected to our bodies, that our minds seem to exist apart from that… making us creatures of mind more than whole]
this is why the left picks the educational things they do… if you give everyone trophies, then people think they are greater than they are, they grow used to the positive feeling of that, and so when they grow up, their system is well trained in skewing the inputs to maintain this false positive situation established as kids.
same with other things… this is what marxism and social control through medical arts means.. its people whose models are more real, playing with the useful idiots minds which are less real… entertainment amplifies this if not balanced by reality and knowlege… your brain does not know to put the fake reality inputs that are not fact based into anothner container, it incorporates them into itself as if its real. after all, until the modern era, most input is real and ok to align with.
like the woman in the longest yard, their minds are too weak and too skewed to accept reality as it is and find it ok. they are like kung fu tse (confucious) and Siddhartha (bhudda) and laozi (lao tzu) in the famous paintings of the vinegar tasters.
both Siddhartha and Confucious refuse to accept reality and find it to be dirty and so on.. so each tried to come up with a way to make it acceptable… Siddhartha decided to ignore it… to transcend and wait till he returned to the great nothing… Confucious decided to be totalitarian and like lefties try to stagnate the world and come up with rituals and rules that would be the accepted action for the real world thing and so through ritual avoid the minefield that is reality. the stagnation is required because if you allow change you negate the rule book as it cant encompass all..
laozi was the brave not left person that said nothings wrong with the world. its how you look at it and deal with it… fight the universe and your gointg to lose and be unhappy… (to which liiberals are unhappy)… work with the universe, and things go well and so on… the funny thing is that as i said above, the deluded need to see the normal as in laozi as abnormal to regain their center. so realists like laozi and those who want to accept the facts of the world and work with it, are not the normals to them! they are the evil people who do not want a better world molded by force and fight agianst the universe for better… like the reality based crowd that disparages the real reality based people… they do not know they cant change it and will lose the fight, so they think the others who work with it are evil for they wont end the problems that they see with it.
so the reality based people see the real problems and people like obama for what they are, because they want to see real as real and so address real problems that they can change.
the other side sees changint their own view of the world as easier than changing obama and so they negate what they see and fix the world inside their heads by chanign it…
the problem is that this does not work in reality outside the internal one they live in cause their mental change does not align with the world… and the more they skew the internal the more they have to ignore the real world outside to avoid the unpleasant feeling of wrongness
this is where their hate comes from. their more realist opposition keeps wakign them up from their internal dreams and spoiling the internal reality with an alignment to the real that tracks the mud of reality across the carpet of their internal co-op
🙂
hope some read this before its deleted or cut down
Error dialogue:
Obama may not be speaking in openly religious terms as Reagan did, but he nevertheless looks on America in a way that could be seen as religious: he sees it as a nation conceived in original sin, one that has gone on to commit offenses against the world for which it must now atone.
lets rewrite this as real vs believed..
[see, you do it too neo!!!! we all do it to some degree]
Obama may not be speaking in openly religious terms as Reagan did, but he appears to onlookers to look on America in a way that could be perceived as religious: we assume by his portrayal that he sees it as a nation conceived in original sin, one that has gone on to commit offenses against the world for which it must now atone.
you have no idea what he sees, doesnt see, etc.. but your language is that you know… its not accurate.. as you dont know… it also does not allow for the idea that what is portrayed is not real… does it?
so we talk in a language that expresses what we dont know and may be faked or real, as always real and so find it hard to detect the act as everything is real and nothing is ever an act.
so if he says something religious, he must be religious, not that he saiud something and saying is not believing nor necessarily exposing what you are or believe yourself
its a normal inaccuracy that leads to failure to detect cons, lies, manipulations etc… its the normal delusion of the default position that you live in a world in which everyting is as it appears! and that makes it nicer to most people who cant accept the world as it is, or have not realized that that is what the model is doing for them.
want to know why youdont detect his game? its because we dont use language which insures we may be fooled or tricked… that concept is outsdie the language and discusions used until such a time that one has some irrefutable evidence of such trickery… however, once one gets real good at this, one cant see it even after it as one may want to correct the facts after the facts to reset their position to the prior warm fuzzy position.
if obama is sincere, then your paragraph may be true, but if he is an actor, and incincere, your paragraph does not allow for that thought within its concepts as the language asserts knowing when there is no knowing.
to do the same to the end of your comment:
You might say that Reagan believed in American exceptionalism, whereas Obama believes in Obama’s exceptionalism.
reality based correction:
You might say that we believed that Reagan believed in American exceptionalism, whereas we believe through inference of language and action, that Obama believes in Obama’s exceptionalism.
how you write is how you think
or to quote a popular pop tune
you can only whistle as well as you can hear…
it takes practice to think in terms that preserve the reality of things vs the perception of things and how otehrs want to be percieved or portray themselves.
we seldom want to accept that we live in a world of millions of others who are not as they appear and no where near as safe as we assume. and most of the time that is ok, but beware if your a handsome young man and this default is applied when a man named J Dahmer invites you to dinner.
if you want to get a great grasp of this thing by a famous science fiction author of wonderous ability, then i would suggest reading Heinlien, and the books in which some characters are like a notary public but called professional witnesses.. or fair witness.
a fair witness will look at a red barn and say, the side i see is red, i have no idea what color the other side i do not see is. when most people would emphatically testify that the barn was read, or a whole barn and not just a front they see from their perspective!!! the negating the not seeing the back is the spackling the brain does when one lets it…
A fair witness is a character type from the 1961 science fiction novel Stranger in a Strange Land
A fair witness is a fictional profession invented for the novel. A fair witness is an individual trained to observe events and report exactly what he or she sees and hears, making no extrapolations or assumptions.
your paragraphs are full of assumptive extrapolations that you really dont know as you dont know obama close enough to make a better guess… do you? i dont…
And given that people like Barsky had dual lives in which they were spies and wives and families did not know, you may be close to someone and still not know!!! this was definitely true of the ice man, whose wife just avoided the question… and especially true of Ted Bundy… whose wife had no idea of this side of his life…
if one first acts like a fair witness one can separate the facts from the inserted fictions and made up spackle that one uses to make a whole cloth out of a bedsheet with lots of holes in it!
and so there is your answer as to how the mechnisms inputs work… the person who does not see obama for what he is, is making assumptions and conclusions that are not supported… and does so automatically in a way that you cant even get them to see that they are doing it.
lord knows i have tried for years to try to get people who dont do that as much to stop doing the little bit they do when they ahve a situation that is defined by ideology and its outcome is defined as well, and not knowing that, fill in some extrapolation or assumption to explain what they see as “i dont know” and leaving it at that is so not pleasant as the other.
this is done because a good false explanation from wrong extrapolations from data they dont have, when agreed with by others without the same information, gives us the same feeling as getting it right, even though we have it so wrong its not even wrong.
have to go.
but i would welcome if anyone was interested in the ins and outs of a singular theory of mind that comes rom the singular fact that neural nets always answer (they never not answer) and they can only answer one question (though if they answer the right question they can answer tons of others!!! creating the illusion of many answers when there is only one. ie. many answers are derivatives of the one question its working on)
🙂
this is done because a good false explanation from wrong extrapolations from data they dont have, when agreed with by others without the same information, gives us the same feeling as getting it right, even though we have it so wrong its not even wrong.
i wanted to add one last thing upon reading this a second time
you can see the effect of the above in comment areas where the leftists will skip to the pleasure signal by just copying the other person and saying some tag line… its bushes fault, etc…
its like the joke about numbering all jokes which allowed commedians to tell more jokes and laugh more in a shorter time (or some other reason given)…
rather than go through the whole logical work to get to the conclusion, and then get the pat on the back and commiseration, they skip the logical work, and just say the conclusion, and feel good and pat each other on the back… that sure negates practice in logic and why they get so angry if you say or explain how they are wrong… you just negated their free good feeling without the work of the actual logic… now to feel good they have to work at it and earn it… and these are people who want things without earning it!!!
real debate is work… work for them negates the drug hit they want… unlike others who feel good that their work is not in vain… they also get a drug hit from commiseration over negatives… ie. putting others down to feel superior together… which feels like your in a better group which for primates would be a real good thing if real.
but in an inner false world in which reality is not tested and negated, real is just what you decide it to be.
their anger and action is akin to taking the drug away from an addict when they need a fix… ornery…
“I want to know the network behind Obama.” Matthew M
Obama is President because of Chicago Jews.
Some Chicago Jews say Obama is actually the ‘first Jewish president.’
The key role Chicago Jews played in getting him to where he is.
G6loq Says:
May 14th, 2015 at 4:59 pm
“I want to know the network behind Obama.” Matthew M
Morons.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Hanlon.
Hussein is the obvious surface, but it’s not the ocean itself. People who saw Hussein, may have seen through the illusion that others were blind and weak to.
But that does not mean Hussein is the only or even the most important problem humanity faces.
G6loq,
is that what you’re going to say the death squads are, morons, when they come to burn your home down?
What is the point of that though?
Ymarsakar Says:
May 14th, 2015 at 7:34 pm
¿Qué?
Methought I wuz sayin’ dat them in da Obama electing network are morons … twice over!
They will burn our home down and we’re stooopid enough to let them do it.
Ymarsakar
More seriously,
my May 14th, 2015 at 4:59 pm and May 14th, 2015 at 5:13 pm are together.
Neo should allow an edit function.
Obama couldn’t not have been elected if it were not for the Chicago crétins as documented.
G6loq, blame the Jews?
That’s original.
G6loq, blame the Jews?
Somebody gotta do it! And, they help!
Obama continues to humiliate us on the global stage:
And for all the expected talk of close ties and historical alliances, at the White House on Wednesday, Mr. Obama named the wrong Saudi king as he invoked the long tradition of friendship between Washington and Riyadh.
“The United States and Saudi Arabia have an extraordinary friendship and relationship that dates back to Franklin Roosevelt and King Faisal,” Mr. Obama said in the Oval Office meeting on Wednesday.
King Faisal bin Abdul Aziz ruled from 1964 to 1975, when he was assassinated. Roosevelt died in 1945. Mr. Obama almost certainly meant to refer to King Abdul Aziz bin Saud, Faisal’s father, who famously met with the American president after the Yalta conference in February 1945, just months before Roosevelt’s death.
Methought I wuz sayin’ dat them in da Obama electing network are morons … twice over!
I get your point. The goon squads, however, are in Hussein’s network.
They may not be the master minds, but the Nation of Islam needs manpower to intimidate voters and enforce the bus in.