They Said He is an Intellectual

by editor | March 5th, 2009

and I saw more than one story about how he was a quick study. He himself, told use experience wasn’t the key to being a president, it was the ability to have correct judgment.

So, once more, in the light of the aftermath of the election, and gauging his words against his own deeds, “we” got so much of him wrong.

Experience isn’t necessary, if you already know how you are going to judge. Even more so, if you think your understanding of all things is superior to all around you (that’s the “intellectual” part coming into play).

If he is a quick study, all I see is a quick study in how to implement a radical agenda in the face of determined political resistance. Note the word “political” and no others in the sentence. By looking at those who he seems to have initially held up as his associates (before he tossed them under the bus when they came to light), they were pretty much all about radical political change. Yes, the names Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright come to mind.

He his long term friends and close associates do not include people who have been or became ambassadors, economic wizards, business builders, nor even historians. The close associations seem to all be those who would corrupt the system, specifically for political change.

President Obama just is going to have it his way. History be damned, and any, yes, any political opponent, regardless of party affiliation, (soon some Blue Dog Democrats, I predict, will be getting the Rush/Joe the Plumber/Rick Santelli/Jim Cramer/Sara Palin treatment) be damned, too. It’s now the time to destroy America as a leader, and the ironic thing is, it is being done by our leader.

Now, a commenter on The Anchoress nailed some of my thoughts, that hadn’t completely formed. These words became the basis for this post, and extend my thoughts along these lines well.

# Bender B. Rodriguez Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:00 am

You know, we were all concerned that, as inexperienced as he is, Obama would need on-the-job training. But apparently, Obama does not believe he needs to learn how to do the job. He clearly believes that he knows everything he needs to know — and the things he doesn’t know are irrelevant to his objectives.

For example, how the economy works. He doesn’t care to know that because he is not interested in making it work. He is only interested in changing it. Don’t bother him with financial facts, don’t interrupt to tell him that his pants are on fire, he has an ideological agenda to enact and the facts and/or results be damned. It doesn’t work? Who cares? The agenda is going to be enacted anyway.

Or, foreign policy. That the Iranians and Russians and Syrians and Gazans and Taliban and Al Qaeda and everyone else is ready to roll Obama is irrelevant. He doesn’t care about the facts. He has an agenda of appeasement and apologizing for America and blaming America for everything, and that’s that.

Actually learning the facts, actually learning how to do the job of president is irrelevant. Obama is going to do whatever the hell he wants to do. He won. That’s all the learning and knowledge and facts he needs.

What else have we mis-interpreted about his “campaign rhetoric?

Note in this analysis regarding these types of behaviors:

[…]
An important distinction is between cerebral and somatic narcissists. The cerebrals derive their Narcissistic Supply from their intelligence or academic achievements and the somatics derive their Narcissistic Supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and romantic or physical “conquests”.

Another crucial division within the ranks of patients with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is between the classic variety (those who meet five of the nine diagnostic criteria included in the DSM), and the compensatory kind (their narcissism compensates for deep-set feelings of inferiority and lack of self-worth).
Obama displays the following behaviors, which are among the hallmarks of pathological narcissism:

* Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and “ideals” (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause him overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, reuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.

Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image. This has to do with magical thinking. Obama already sees himself as president because he is firmly convinced that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes affect reality. Additionally, he denies the gap between his fantasies and his modest or limited real-life achievements (for instance, in 12 years of academic career, he hasn’t published a single scholarly paper or book).

– Feels that he is above the law, incl. and especially his own laws.

– Talks about himself in the 3rd person singluar or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclsuive center of attention, even adulation

– Have a messianic-cosmic vision of himself and his life and his “mission”.

– Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)

– Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.

– Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).
[…]

To paraphrase a comedian, but put it in this context: That’s scary, no matter who you are.

Maybe we elected the “Punisher-in-Chief.”

Comments are closed.

Recent Posts

Categories

Switch to our mobile site