Looking into the crystal ball to determine how Obama will act after the midterms *UPDATED*

I’ve heard from various people that, once the midterm elections are over, with the only real questions being (1) whether the Republicans also take the Senate and (2) by how much they take the House, Obama will change his tune.  After all, Bill Clinton did, and he emerged from the debacle strong enough to retake the White House in 1996.

I am absolutely certain that Obama will not change his tune.  If there was a betting office for these things, I’d actually put money on my certainty.  (That tells you how certain I am, ’cause I never gamble.)

My conviction about Obama’s rigidity is rooted in the nature of Obama’s narcissism.  Clinton was also a narcissist, but of a very different stripe.

Here’s the deal:  narcissists are people who have black holes where their egos should be.  Whether because of nature or nurture, they do not have a healthy self-identity.  They are able to create a self-identity only by reference to those around them.

There are two pathways for a narcissist to choose.  The first is the Clinton pathway, which is to work hard to make everyone like you.  If you do that, you are constantly proving to yourself what a great guy you are, because everyone likes you.  This is why Clinton, despite his many, many, many personal issues is such a charming, likable human being.  (It also explains his obsessive womanizing, because each woman who falls in his arms helps reaffirm his sense of his own attraction.)  When this person is faced with a wall of dislike, such as the 1994 mid-term elections, he will immediately switch tactics so that he can feel the love again.

The second narcissistic pathway is to elevate yourself by denigrating others.  This is entirely distinct from the “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and gosh darn it, people like me,” approach, which is aimed at building oneself up.  (And yes, I know that Al Franken is also a malignant narcissist, but it’s still a great line.)  This second type of narcissist doesn’t praise himself, he demeans others.  It goes along these lines:  “I know I must be handsome, because he’s ugly.  I know I must be smart, because he’s stupid.  I know I must be competent, because he’s incompetent.”  This second narcissist also tries to surround himself with people who will reflect well on him.  “People will know I’m successful because my wife is beautiful.  People will know I’m smart because I hang out with college professors.”

This tactic, by which the narcissist tries to use the presence of superior people, and an obsessive focus on their real or imagined shortcomings, the yardstick for measuring happiness never works.  As the old saying goes, “wherever you go, there you are.”  Because the narcissist has a gaping hole where a healthy ego is, no matter how he surrounds himself with successful, attractive people, all the while being sure to denigrate him so that he retains some personal altitude, he’s always unhappy.  And all he knows how to do is more of the same:  He surrounds himself by smarter, more beautiful people, whom he must demean so that he can bob along above them.

That’s Obama.  That’s Mrs. Obama too, which is why these two, having reached the pinnacle of world success, look so miserable.

Assuming I’m correct about Obama’s borderline personality disorder, it’s fairly easy to predict that, after the devastation of the coming elections, he will double down on his policies, rather than accommodating the new, very powerful opposition.  He cannot acknowledge that change is necessary, because the fault isn’t his; it’s everyone else’s.

I warned in 2007 about the danger of electing a malignant narcissist of Obama’s cut to the highest office in the world.  When it comes to the ordinary “us versus them” of politics, Obama transcends even “progressive v. conservative,” and transforms it into “me v. everyone else.”

John Yoo, at the GroupaPalooza I attended, mentioned that Obama has his constitutional duties bass ackwards.  In the past 20 months, with his own party in charge, and with his manifest dislike for America, he’s been too strong at home, where he is supposed to act as a brake on Congress, and too weak abroad, where he should be a powerful commander in chief.  Beginning in 2011, I predict that Obama will suddenly see the light regarding his constitutional responsibilities at home.  Faced with a Republican Congress, rather than sensibly bending to the people’s will, he will use the veto like a cudgel, blocking conservative initiatives at every turn.

Obama’s probable intransigence means that the damage already in place won’t be stopped.  The best that can be done is to prevent further damage.  The good news, though, is that he won’t be setting himself up for a 2012 victory, leaving the field open for both Hillary (who will savage him in the primaries) and for a viable (do we have one?) conservative candidate.

UPDATESultan Knish has some fascinating insights from the crystal ball too.  (h/t Sadie)

UPDATE II:  Peter Wehner, dissecting Obama’s Rolling Stone interview, makes my point perfectly.  BTW, it’s fascinating that, despite the fact that Yawn Whiner was practically slobbering on Obama’s feet during the interview, Obama still managed to come off as a nasty, embittered, self-serving man.

UPDATE III:  Aside from the savagery of Jon Stewart’s attack on Obama, the clips he has of Obama’s unbelievable partisan speech, something more appropriate for a campaigner than the leader of a whole nation, you also see the viciousness of a narcissist scorned:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2010 – Democratic Campaign Woes
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Rally to Restore Sanity
Be Sociable, Share!
  • jj

    You’re absolutely correct about the personality issues that Obama (doesn’t know he) lives with.  (Genuine narcissists don’t notice the issue – beyond wondering what’s wrong with everybody else.)
    But the thing about them is, any sort of reinforcement they get, from pretty much anywhere, and no matter how minuscule it is in the larger scheme of things, will trump everything else.  The most revealing thing I’ve seen recently about Obama is the interview he just did in Rolling Stone.  It’s enlightening for several reasons, but the big one (to my way of thinking) is that he neither notices nor cares that his agenda has burned down his party.  The loss of the American people is not an issue for him, us peasants are all rather unimportant.  He thinks he’s done swell at implementing his agenda – and sadly, truth be told he has.  But the point is, even in the dire circumstances facing his party, the interview largely consists of him breaking his arm patting himself on the back.  He thinks he’s done great.  And as long as he gets reinforcement and approbation from Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Larry Summers, Ding-Dong Shabazz, Andy Stern, Bill Ayers and his foul wife; and the others he’s surrounded himself with who are philosophically aligned with him, he’ll be fine, and continue squarely on course.  He values them, because they think like him, and it’s only people who do so that he does value.
    BTW – I quite deliberately do not include Pelosi, Reid, etc. in the group whose approbation he values.  He doesn’t value them – they have no real idea of what goes on in that mind.  They are useful idiots for him, and  where his agenda meshes with theirs and the end result is that they empower him – well, fine.  But the deeper, essentially Marxist view of history, the genuine Progressive view of the world (not the Hillary Clinton kind of BS, but the real, George Bernard Shaw/Marx and Engels Progressive view), the dislike of this country and its history and traditions,and the complete disregard for the Constitution is a different matter.  I don’t believe most of those who empower his agenda in the halls of government share that.  In fact, Pelosi, Reid et al are neither smart enough nor educated enough (in the sense of broadly read) to understand with whom they’re dealing, or what the “remaking society” goal truly is.  Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Murray, and the gang are many things, but they are not philosophically inclined, nor are they broad thinkers.  They do things exactly like what they’re doing: refusing to pass a budget; adjourning without addressing or allowing a vote on the tax cut issue; deciding to postpone adjudicating Rangel’s mess until after the elections – and he sits in a corner and just laughs.  He’s a blood-in-the-streets person, and they are so hopelessly dumb they haven’t realized it yet.  he does not have the same values they do – and he doesn’t give a good goddam about theirs – but he’s happy to use them.
    So he’ll continue on his merry way.  No change.  There is no reason for him not to.  He has the same view of the American people and their silly elections that Stalin had about the Russian people.  Will he change his views to get a little affection or approbation from the American people?  No, of course not.  He doesn’t value the affection or approbation of the American people.  He has no use for them.  Expect no change.

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm


    Hear, hear!  You don’t know how I wish I had your way with words.


    Confirmed, he’s a narcissist, doesn’t give a damn and nasty. What can or does he do without his sidekicks and support.
    Rule by Executive Order.  Rule by appointing more czars.
    Hell hath no fury like a dictator scorned. He can do a considerable amount of  (more) damage in 2 years – the question is: How do we limit it?

  • Zhombre

    Bill Clinton was the type of politician who wanted people to like him and worked at it; Obama can’t understand why some recalcitrant people don’t like him, and resents it.  Clinton had centrist impulses; Obama does not; he’s the receptacle of every leftist shibboleth that has been in currency for the last 50 years.  Clinton grew up in Arkansas and immersed himself in good ol boy Southern politics at the state level, as AG & Gov. Obama grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, well away from the mainland US and I doubt he has any real comprehension of, and certainly no love for,  that vast interior of the US that exists between the coasts and outside the academic enclaves.

  • Danny Lemieux

    SADIE: “Hell hath no fury like a dictator narcissist scorned.”
    That’s what worries me. The only thing that makes me think he won’t try to take the country down with him in a fit of spite is that he, presumably, will want to protect his daughters.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    For background research on what makes a narcissist tick, I highly recommend this blog.
    I first wrote about it in around 2004, when John Kerry was the big “N” word around.
    See the enemy within, the friend destroyed by lies.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    People may remember a time when the Left and a bunch of busy body political voters kept saying “give Obama more time, he’ll do good”.
    Well, we gave him more time and that wasn’t what happened.
    Then there were the people of a more stable bent that said Obama is incompetent, not malicious. He’ll crash and burn because he doesn’t know how to play politics and get votes in a non-election year.
    Well, we tried it there way and treated Obama as just incompetent and a fool, but not evil or malicious. Guess what happened. More Americans lost their jobs, suffered, and some of em even suffered and died in Afghanistan.
    Think a Leftist is cute and harmless? Think again, if you can.


    Danny, I wonder if his daughters attended lip services before Rev. Wright. If so, his parental instincts would be as challenged as his mother’ were.
    p.s. Thanks for cleaning up my Hell hath …. (I forgot to add the ‘N’ word)

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: Soccer Dad()

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()

  • Mike Devx

    I just love this one.


    A short and sweet sequence of five pictures of “Obama On Vacation”.  I keep going back to it and looking at it.  For some reason I can’t tear my gaze away from it.

    By God, I do love it.  It captures the essence of the man, and the reason why, these days, every time I see him or hear him, I want to puke gallons of vomit.  It’s gotten that bad.  He hates everything I deeply love and cherish, especially about America.  He loves everything I hate, especially about much of the rest of the world.

    Go to that link, and glory in the depictions of the slick, disgusting worthlessness and CLUELESSNESS that is the Great Deceiver, Obama.

  • Mike Devx

    And oh yeah.  This Obama sleazeball has just said, that if the American People elect Republicans to a majority in the House this year, that:

    “…we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill.”

    This from the weak-kneed guy who can’t say a bad word about any of the REAL enemies of America, out there in other countries, who want to do Americans real harm.  Nope, Obama-baby can’t say one bad word about them.  But when it comes to Americans who don’t agree with him, the monstrous little pip-squeak squeaks as tough as they come.   “You don’t bring a knife to a gun-fight” (or something like that.  “Smash them in their faces”  “Punch back harder”  “Hand to hand combat”.  

    Hey, it’s gonna be blood in the streets…  but not against our real enemies.  Only against fellow Americans.  Obama-freak has been like this from Day One.  Weak against real enemies.  Totally tough against his fellow Americans.  Too bad he’s the wimpy nerd Urkel in a world of real toughs.  Loser freak.

  • Pingback: Soccer Dad()

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Lol. obama’s doing H2H. That’s hilarious mike.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    <B> Loser freak.</b>
    I take it that you don’t like him?


    “…we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill.”
    Does this mean he’ll finally put away his golf clubs?
    Mike, I so enjoy your rants. You manage to get them out there without using a single expletive. I, OTOH, must go to a “R” rated site  to vent once in a while.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Obama will change his tune
    These wouldn’t happen to be the same people who in January of 2009 said to give Obama more time to demonstrate his competence, now would they.
    These wouldn’t happen to be the same people who in April of 2009 said to give Obama even more time because he hadn’t had enough time to repair bush’s economic damage, now would they.

  • Pingback: Watchers Council – Multiculturalism Thriving In Europe, Though Not Really | Mere Rhetoric()