Narcissist nasty misogynist incompetent treacherous boob Barack Obama. We’ve been writing that considered analysis since 2007. As the Barack Obama occupation of the White House turns into the final days in the bunker even Big Media Obama protection squads are confirming what we have written.
Indeed some of our most dramatic indictments of Barack Obama are gaining traction in Big Media circles. It was not always thus. We recall with disgust that beginning in 2007 Barack Obama supporters said “Obama reminded them of Kennedy.” Recently we mocked a Dr. Nate Morris and other Obama voters who only realized the content of Barack Obama’s character once ObamaCare emerged as the threat to them it is.
Today, on the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, we take an opportunity to discuss the creature known as Barack Obama and several overlooked news stories that confirm what we have written about Barack Obama since 2007.
* * * * * *
What is Barack Obama? Consider this provocative excerpt we wrote years ago which is but a sample of the many times we have ventured to explain the twisted man-child that goes today by the name Barack Obama:
” Obama, the “boy raised by wolves” as Michelle Obama describes him, has been looking for a man in his life for a very long time. We’ve long tracked the Anatomy Of A Flim-Flam Man and how his sperm donor father saw him once and ran away. What we have seen is:
“…Obama’s history is more akin to a rejected and dislocated youth who turned to back-slapping and flim-flam confidence games to fill the hole in his life….”
After his sperm donor dad dumped him, Obama’s doorknob mother (“everyone gets a turn”) with a fetish for third world men hooked up with Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo. It didn’t take long for Lolo to dump the boy. First Obama was handed over to a nanny (a gay transvestite nanny at that – not that there’s anything wrong with that). Then Obama was shipped to Hawaii to live with the Grandma that Obama, when desperate and for political profit, called a “racist”.
When in Hawaii ten year old Obama was provided by the grandparents with a black family friend. The friend, Frank Marshall Davis, was probably a member of the Communist Party and wrote an autobiographical novel (“Sex Rebel“) that suggests Davis was a pedophile. Davis was a father type for Obama who sought him out for advice. Davis advised Obama regarding college: “You’re not going to college to get educated. You’re going there to get trained.”
The warped boy became a warped man. Obama continued to search for the elusive daddy. One big daddy opportunity came from the pulpit – Jeremiah Wright.”
Our allegations are well documented at the links. Our interpretations of this twisted creep have been our own. Last week however much of our view of Obama was echoed at Politico. Yup, Obama lovin’ Politico. This is what Dr. Berglas, a.k.a. The Politico Shrink, wrote:
“Why Does Barack Keep Making Weird Jokes About Michelle? [snip]
To me the important question is: What does it say about President Obama’s feelings for his wife that he made what certainly seems to be an oral sex joke about her in front of a room full of people? [snip]
The Vogue interview offers some clues. “Michelle grew up in a model nuclear family: mom, dad, brother,” the president said. “There’s just a warmth and a sense of belonging. And you know, that’s not how I grew up. I had this far-flung family, father left at a very young age, a stepfather who ended up passing away as well. My mother was this wonderful spirit, and she was adventurous but not always very well organized.”
The first lady, in other words, grew up in an Ozzie & Harriet-type family—the kind Obama has said he wishes he’d had, sometimes even distorting his history to convince himself that he did. In his autobiography, Dreams From My Father, the president idealizes the man who married and then dumped his mother. You can try to spin this all you want, but the fact is that a man who is abandoned in infancy by his father is psychologically scarred for life. [snip]
Most boys in that situation overcompensate for the anxiety, insecurity and self-doubt this causes by developing a defiant cool—a swaggering attitude of “nothing phases me, I’m a rock”—designed to disguise a hole in their self-concept. In psychological parlance, they engage in “compensatory adaptations” to pain, which, in time, become a compensatory personality style, a subtype of narcissism that converts every deficit into its obverse—as in, “I’m not inadequate. I’m The Man!”
The key to understanding the president’s less-than-charming jokes about Michelle is realizing that those who suffer compensatory narcissism dread emotional intimacy. To protect themselves against being hurt in adulthood as their abandoning fathers devastated them as children, they reverse their feelings. As in: “I don’t need or love that wonderful, talented, supportive woman; she’s a piece of crap.”
We don’t give a crap about Michelle Obama and her corrupt Chicago familiy. We also don’t buy into a lot of the shrink’s analysis nor think it matters. As to Obama as narcissist we were among the very first, if not the first, to write about it. To us, as we have constantly written, what matters is that Barack Obama’s abandonment by his desperate to be pollinated in the third world mom and sperm donor philandering drunk of a dad lead to a very unhealthy self-loathing (which we find entirely deserved) and a twisted way of dealing with the world. Barack Obama in his self-loathing narcissism (no these are not contradictory) realized that his path lay in flim-flams and back-slapping. This crippled social being achieved great success in self advancement but zero achievement or enduring accomplishments. We summed it all up in Raised By Wolves:
We believe the evidence suggests Obama learned to be a flim-flam back slapper type who did whatever helped him as a survival method when he was an boy. Now Obama has devolved into a cold, arrogant and aloof personality who does not care about anyone but himself.
In Raised By Wolves we compared Barack Obama to Bill Clinton who had a childhood of difficulties as well. Bill Clinton acknowledged his problems and dealt with them in a mature manner. Bill did not run away and become a flim-flam con man. When Bill Clinton said “I feel your pain” he really did because he empathized with people. Bill said about himself:
“You know, my mother was married five times to four men. Because she married my stepfather Roger Clinton twice, because they divorced once and then they remarried,” says Mr. Clinton, pointing out his mother’s grave. “My mother was widowed three times. She had a lot of sadness to her life. But she always carried on.”
So did Bill Clinton. While his mother was divorced from Roger Clinton, the former president decided to change his name legally to Clinton. Why did he keep the first and second names of his biological father, William Jefferson, but not the last name?
“I think the fact that I was born without a father, and that I spent a lifetime trying to put together a picture of one also had a lot to do with how I turned out,” says Mr. Clinton. “Good and not so good. But I think on balance, more good than bad. But it had a lot to do with it.”
All people have “issues” in their lives. But how those issues are dealt with and the adult product that emerges because of those “issues” is what matters. Bill Clinton learned to empathize with people. Barack Obama became a soulless shark. The danger to America from Barack Obama’s broken personality is real. Ace of Spades, discussing a book about Jon Peters and Peter Gruber called Hit And Run made some observations which fit Barack Obama exactly:
“Peters, some of his colleagues believed, thrived on chaos. He made nonsensical changes last-minute, throwing off scripts, shooting schedules, and budgets. He would suddenly be committed to an oddball idea that no one had even heard before, nevermind agreed to include in the movie.
They speculated that Peters wasn’t able to perform in a “normal” environment, where he would tend to feel marginalized by the more professional sorts of people.
He preferred chaos. And what some of his colleagues believed was this: When he created chaos, he was the Center of the Storm, and the only person who understood what the hell was going on, because he, after all, was causing all the problems. So creating chaos tended to put him in the central position of power on a set, because everyone would have to come to him to find out how to fix the problems.. that he himself had caused.
And by doing so, he created power for himself. On a “normal” sort of shoot, power flowed to the more centered, more predictable partner Guber, or the other more professionally-minded movie people; but on a chaotic set, power flowed to Peters, who worked well in a chaotic environment.
Or at least he wasn’t as bothered by chaos as most people, and thus would appear to be calm and cool by comparison — a rock in the storm. Again, the storm he created, but he would appear to be a fairly steady rock in that storm.*
I’m starting to wonder if No-Drama Obama shares this preference for chaos and upheaval with Jon Peters.”
Smells like Obama, doesn’t it? It’s all about lies and creating chaos so no one will notice Obama is a stumbling chucklehead boob with a briefcase full of crackpot ideas and snake oil. It’s all about chaos – the New delay: Deadline for ObamaCare enrollment moved back from December 15th to 23rd even though it is understood that the insurers needed the two weeks to fulfill the enrollment process and verify that the applications were in correct order. It is chaos creation for the many having to work extra during the Christmas holidays while Obama sleeps and golfs in Hawaii.
It’s about chaos. It’s all about avoiding accountability with the latest attempt to dodge the 2014 elections with another shifty scam as HHS delays 2015 enrollment to … just past the midterm elections. It’s about chaos and deception.
The chaos caused by yesterday’s vote in the senate profits no one but Barack Obama. Barack Obama will be able to get some appointees through in the chaos he’s created but it is generally agreed by most commentators from Journolister Ezra Klein to Charles Krauthammer that this Senate rules change will come back to help Republicans:
“Decades of negative and destructive policies can be reversed with a bare majority. Obamacare can be repealed with a bare majority. True Conservative Judges will not be banished due to a filibuster threat.
Yes, it’s true that the absence of a filibuster could accelerate the destructive policies. That fear is justified, particularly as to the judiciary. But face it, we were headed there anyway unless drastic action was taken.
That drastic action took place yesterday. By Democrats.
Now at least we have a chance to achieve previously unimaginable progress in a single presidential term if we also have bare majorities in Congress and a President with the willpower. It will take only one such term.”
The chaos will only help Barack Obama and then it will come back to destroy what the Democratic Party worked generations to accomplish.
* * * * * *
Which brings us back to JFK. In May of 2008 we compared John F. Kennedy to Barack Obama. Obama did not come off very well. But back then the Obama shills continued to swoon and declare Barack Obama reminded them of JFK.
We’ve learned much more of the real parentage of JFK’s books since then and we have learned much more about JFK. Much of what we have learned is not flattering but even that new knowledge keeps Barack Obama in the dung heap and Kennedy’s qualifications to be president on a pedestal.
In her latest attempt, contrary to our own advice, to protect Barack Obama by using Hillary Clinton as a shield Elinor Clift documents the lament:
“Obama was supposed to be our Kennedy, but that’s all gone. We don’t think of him that way anymore. What happened?”
What happened was that Obama’s chaos birthing boobery and lack of qualifications to be president have finally been exposed as we knew they would be. John Kennedy was qualified to be president. Barack Obama is not qualified to be president. This is a dangerous fact. It’s dangerous to the United States. It is dangerous to Israel.
John F. Kennedy’s great political achievement arguably is his actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. What Kennedy understood that politically he could not allow Soviet missiles in Cuba. It was not a military problem, it was a political problem.
During the Cold War the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had nuclear armed submarines aimed at the United States which were even closer to the continent than potential Cuban missiles. Soviet nuclear torpedoes easily could attack the United States east coast and the entire American Navy in one stroke.
President Kennedy understood that there was no way he could allow Soviet missiles installed in Cuba which would have a greater range that could hit deep into America. It would have been Finlandization and a neutered, nervous, America afraid to function. Kennedy understood the sophisticated interplay of the military and the political.
Barack Obama does not see or deliberately ignores that lesson from JFK. Obama weakens America. Obama’s chaos policies also hurt America’s allies, especially Israel.
These days Barack Obama is planning the ultimate treachery against Israel. Israel can never let Iran hold a nuclear sword over the Jewish state but Barack Obama either does not see this or prefers the Jewish state of Israel to be caged by Iran, if not obliterated by Iran in a second Holocaust.
Fortunately Israel has a leader who will never let Iran achieve it’s political aims with nuclear arms:
“Why Netanyahu won’t yield
The prime minister’s hard line on Iran reflects his deep sense of duty to defend the Jewish state against an existential threat. [snip]
Iranian leaders know — and Israel’s analysts agree — that lessening the economic pressure on Iran will send an incontrovertible message to foreign companies, many of which are already seeking contracts with Tehran, that the sanctions that took years to build are ending. Iran could drag out any confidence-building period indefinitely while producing fissile materiel for multiple bombs.
Top-flight intelligence helped Israel grapple with the challenges posed by the Arab Spring, but the stakes regarding Iran — the lives of 8 million Israelis — are vastly greater. Pundits may posit that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is a moderate, but Israelis cannot indulge in speculation. Our margin for error is nil.
Knowing that, Netanyahu is duty-bound to warn of Iranian subterfuge, to insist that Iran cede its centrifuges, cease enrichment, close its heavy-water plant and transfer its nuclear stockpiles abroad.
He has a responsibility to explain that although Israel has the most to gain from diplomacy, it also has the most to lose from its failure. He is obliged to stress that the choice is not between sanctions and war but between a bad deal and stronger sanctions. And as the prime minister of the Jewish state, Netanyahu must assert Israel’s right to defend itself against any existential threat.
Critics can call him militant or intransigent, but Netanyahu is merely doing his job. Any Israeli leader who did less would be strategically and morally negligent.”
Barack Obama pretends to not see that Israel cannot risk a hate filled close neighbor with nuclear missiles. Israel for generations has had unacknowledged nuclear weapons but never used them even in the most dire circumstances. An Iranian regime that hates Israel and Saudi Arabia would never exercise restraint. Kennedy could not allow nuclear missiles in Cuba just as Israel cannot allow nuclear missiles aimed from Iran. Barack Obama closes his eyes and pretends to all the world that he just doesn’t see.
Israel sees the danger. Saudi Arabia, which hates Israel and Jews, sees the danger. That’s why Saudi Arabia has decided to help Israel:
“Two old foes unite against Tehran
Convinced that Iran is tricking the world over nuclear weapons, Israel and Saudi Arabia may work together to curb its ambitions
ONCE they were sworn enemies. Now Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency is working with Saudi officials on contingency plans for a possible attack on Iran if its nuclear programme is not significantly curbed in a deal that could be signed in Geneva this week.
Both the Israeli and Saudi governments are convinced that the international talks to place limits on Tehran’s military nuclear development amount to appeasement and will do little to slow its development of a nuclear warhead.
As part of the growing co-operation, Riyadh is understood already to have given the go-ahead for Israeli planes to use its airspace in the event of an attack on Iran.“
Israel knows about the dangers of appeasement. Barack Obama only brings chaos. We’ve written about this before too in 2009’s Obama, Jew-baiter, And The Sudentenland.
Recently Ben Stein wrote that Obama is “Making ‘Annihilation’ of Jews Possible. We saw it all years ago but now it is getting Big Media play.
We’ll end today with Fouad Ajami discussing When the Obama Magic Died:
“The current troubles of the Obama presidency can be read back into its beginnings. [snip]
Forgive the personal reference, but from the very beginning of Mr. Obama’s astonishing rise, I felt that I was witnessing something old and familiar. My advantage owed nothing to any mastery of American political history. I was guided by my immersion in the political history of the Arab world and of a life studying Third World societies.
In 2008, seeing the Obama crowds in Portland, Denver and St. Louis spurred memories of the spectacles that had attended the rise and fall of Arab political pretenders. I had lived through the era of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdul Nasser. He had emerged from a military cabal to become a demigod, immune to judgment. His followers clung to him even as he led the Arabs to a catastrophic military defeat in the Six Day War of 1967. He issued a kind of apology for his performance. But his reign was never about policies and performance. It was about political magic.
A nemesis awaited the promise of this new presidency: Mr. Obama would turn out to be among the most polarizing of American leaders. No, it wasn’t his race, as Harry Reid would contend, that stirred up the opposition to him. It was his exalted views of himself, and his mission. The sharp lines were sharp between those who raised his banners and those who objected to his policies.
America holds presidential elections, we know. But Mr. Obama took his victory as a plebiscite on his reading of the American social contract. A president who constantly reminded his critics that he had won at the ballot box was bound to deepen the opposition of his critics.
A leader who set out to remake the health-care system in the country, a sixth of the national economy, on a razor-thin majority with no support whatsoever from the opposition party, misunderstood the nature of democratic politics. An election victory is the beginning of things, not the culmination. With Air Force One and the other prerogatives of office come the need for compromise, and for the disputations of democracy. A president who sought consensus would have never left his agenda on Capitol Hill in the hands of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
Mr. Obama has shown scant regard for precedent in American history. To him, and to the coterie around him, his presidency was a radical discontinuity in American politics. There is no evidence in the record that Mr. Obama read, with discernment and appreciation, of the ordeal and struggles of his predecessors. At best there was a willful reading of that history. Early on, he was Abraham Lincoln resurrected (the new president, who hailed from Illinois, took the oath of office on the Lincoln Bible). He had been sworn in during an economic crisis, and thus he was FDR restored to the White House. He was stylish with two young children, so the Kennedy precedent was on offer.
In the oddest of twists, Mr. Obama claimed that his foreign policy was in the mold of Dwight Eisenhower’s . But Eisenhower knew war and peace, and the foreign world held him in high regard.”
Those American Presidents, agree with them or not, loathe them or love them, that led America in the interests of America and for the people with respect for democratic process. Barack Obama’s narcissism is a chaos craze destructive to America:
“During his first campaign, Mr. Obama had paid tribute to Ronald Reagan as a “transformational” president and hinted that he aspired to a presidency of that kind. But the Reagan presidency was about America, and never about Ronald Reagan. Reagan was never a scold or a narcissist. [snip]
If Barack Obama seems like a man alone, with nervous Democrats up for re-election next year running for cover, and away from him, this was the world he made. No advisers of stature can question his policies; the price of access in the Obama court is quiescence before the leader’s will. The imperial presidency is in full bloom. [snip]
Valerie Jarrett, the president’s most trusted, probably most powerful, aide, once said in admiration that Mr. Obama has been bored his whole life. The implication was that he is above things, a man alone, and anointed. Perhaps this moment—a presidency coming apart, the incompetent social engineering of an entire health-care system—will now claim Mr. Obama’s attention.”
The old saw “If you are bored it’s because you are boring” is so true in Barack Obama’s case. Or as G.K. Chesterton put it “There are no uninteresting things, only uninterested people.” Barack Obama is bored because he is a narcissistic bore. Further, Barack Obama does not want to look in the mirror because what he sees proves that he is the piece of sh*t he knows himself to be. The self loathing narcissist looks in the pool of water and sees a turd.
Narcissist nasty misogynist incompetent treacherous boob – that’s Barack Obama. To borrow from Lloyd Bentsen: “I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Obama, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”