Obama’s nastiness comes to the fore

I’m sure you’ve all seen the interview Obama had with the Texas reporter.  Obama was asked mildly hard questions, got defensive and, when he thought he was off mike, chastised the reporting for daring to do anything but grovel before him.  Daniel Henninger, in today’s Wall Street Journal, looks as this episode and a few others and concludes that the charming pre-election Obama is gone, with a new Obama having taken his place.  I agree completely with Henninger that there is nothing charming about President Obama.  Where I differ is in my belief that there was nothing charming about Candidate Obama either.

Obama’s nasty side was always in full view but, as in The Emperor’s New Clothes, people consciously closed their eyes to it.  I don’t know that I’ve heard a nastier put-down in politics than the one Obama dealt Hillary when she was asked about her likeability factor.  After she gave a rather charming response to the effect that “I think I’m likeable,” Obama turned to her, and in a remarkable display of sneering condescension says “You’re likeable enough.”  Ouch.

These sneering putdowns continued throughout the election run up, with the memorable ones being his “lip stick on pigs” remark; his cheap pop-psychology about embittered, gun-loving Americans; and his one fingered head “scratches” when speaking of or to his opponents.  After the election, in his first meeting with Republicans, he refused to debate issues:  “I won.”

He is now and always has been a singularly cruel, dismissive, condescending man.  What’s happening now is that the cumulative weight of his nastiness, coupled with most people’s inability to maintain cognitive dissonance for too long, is highlighting the obvious:  that Obama is unclothed when it comes to human decency.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

The Bookworm Turns : A Secret Conservative in Liberal Land,
available in e-format for $4.99 at Amazon or Smashwords.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. says

    Though, interestingly, a business reporter who attended the meeting with Obama at Facebook yesterday, and who otherwise seems pretty non-political, described Obama as “charming” this morning.  I think you are right that he is by nature a crude person, but I also think he can turn on the charm when he wants to (although you have always seemed to be immune to it). 

  2. Charles Martel says

    I just saw on Drudge that Jerome Corsi’s book, “Where’s the Birth Certificate,” is number one on Amazon. In other news I see that the New York Times reported an earnings decline of 57.6 percent for the last reportable quarter. And speculation over the cost of gasoline by summer has gone from discussions of $5 per gallon gas to the possibility of $6-per-gallon gas in certain areas.

    My, my, the wheels are starting to wobble, aren’t they?

  3. suek says

    “What’s happening now is that the cumulative weight of his nastiness, coupled with most people’s inability to maintain cognitive dissonance for too long, is highlighting the obvious: …”

    What’s happening now is that he has _power_!! Con men are always charming to the mark as long as they need to ensnare them. Once the con has his prize, the charm is gone.

    As before, the birth question is still out there. Actually, it has changed slightly – where he was born has no relevance … the fact that his father was a British citizen, thereby conveying dual citizenship upon his son _is_. The question _needs_ to go to the SC – but my guess is that they’ll postpone until it becomes moot, then _not_ address it…because it’s moot.
    Then the problem will arise – _IF_ in fact he was not eligible because he was a dual citizen, what becomes of any and all legislature/executive orders he signed? At the very least, I wish the SC would make some determination of _who_ has standing in a court to challenge a candidate’s eligibility, and who has the responsibility to do so, given that the court is unlikely to vacate the position of president elect once the voting is done. Personally, I think that’s why the SC has been so hesitant to get involved. Nevertheless, there _were_ cases brought to the Federal courts before the election, and the court dismissed them saying that the person bring the suit had no standing. IMO, _any_ citizen _does_ have standing – and if not, then who does? Even Keyes apparently was considered to have no standing – and he was a candidate running for the same office. If not he, then who?

  4. Danny Lemieux says

    DonQ – I believe that Al Capone could be exceedingly charming when he wanted to be.

    I also believe that Clinton, noted for his mesmerizing charm, was exceedingly charming to Juanita Broderick before the famous event occurred. Even, concerned, as in “I’d put some ice on that”.

  5. Libby says

    Good point, Suek. I think he’s charming to whoever he needs to support him, and then he has no problem throwing the under the bus once they’ve outlived their usefulness.
     
    As for Corsi’s new book, I think the absence of a wide variety of basic life documents is what is driving the book to #1 on Amazon. While I could care less where he was born, he’s spent a whole lot of money keeping something hidden, possibly the fact the he never legally changed his surname from Soertero (?) back to to Obama. Why else hide not only the bc, but all of his schools admissions forms and transcripts? Did he apply as a foreign student – Barry Soertero? What would this mean for all of the bills he’s signed as “Obama”?
    OK – I’ll take off the tinfoil hat now!

  6. says

    “. . . there was nothing charming about Candidate Obama either.”

    And, yet, folks still voted for him?!  Why?! How can so many people have blinders on?

    Obama as a candidate turned my stomach everytime he opened his mouth and turns my stomach even more as President.  I’m really puzzled as to why more people aren’t turned off by him and his actions? It almost makes me think that *I* am the crazy one. (so, thanks for Bookworm Room and all the intelligent commenters I know that I am not that crazy)

  7. Libby says

    Charles – I also never found anything charming about candidate Obama.
    I think most non-political types were swayed by the intense media support (only glowing coverage, reporters obviously excited about him) in combination with Bush fatigue. And the Left, who had spent the last 8 yrs hating that idiot cowboy Bush, found in him the perfect candidate: black (so if you don’t like him, you’re a racist!), great credentials (Harvard, etc.), a “compelling life story”, no paper trail/skeletons in his closet, and a habit of speaking in such vague and hopeful terms that people were tricked into thinking he agreed with him. There was also a lot of Chicago-style shenanigans used to win the primaries, including having Black Panthers intimidate Hillary voters, bending the primary rules, etc.

  8. jj says

    Where exactly are Obama’s clothes hidden?  He’s not just nasty, he’s also inept, inexperienced, indecisive, ignorant, maladroit, a historical ignoramus – what the hell does he do well?  Can anybody come up with anything at all?  He’s not even a particularly good liar.
     
    “What’s happening now is the cumulative weight of his nastiness…” – that’s not America’s problem.  America’s problem is the accumulated weight of his inexperience, ineptitude, ignorance, etc.  If he was sufficiently competent to locate his generative organ with both hands, nobody would care about whether he was nasty or not.  We could at least regard him as “ept,” as opposed to manifestly – and hugely -  in-ept.  We could say: “yeah, he’s a miserable bastard, but at least he knows what he’s doing.”  As it is, we don’t even get that much satisfaction from the little SOB.
     
    The correct answer to any politician is the one I admit proudly I gave the Schumer reptile years ago when he was in congress and didn’t like a question I asked him at a gathering one evening.  The reporter should have looked at Obama and said: “Mr. President, it’s a big office, but you know what?  You work for me.  You’re my employee.  I pay you.  You’re on my payroll.  So I’ll ask you anything I damn well feel like asking you – and I’ll even expect an answer.  If the day ever comes when I’m on your payroll, then you can decide what’s a legitimate question – but until that day comes we’ll do it my way.”
     
    Schumer didn’t like it either.  I didn’t – and don’t – care.  It’s one of the warm moments I’ll cherish my entire life: that I once pissed off and upset that worthless bastard.  As memories go, it’s a warm fire on a chilly night.

  9. pst314 says

    “He is now and always has been a singularly cruel, dismissive, condescending man.
    For much of the left, that’s part of his charm. They didn’t vote for him in spite of his character flaws, or in ignorance of them. They like him better because he is a vicious, evil man.

  10. pst314 says

    Charles #7 “I’m really puzzled as to why more people aren’t turned off by him and his actions?”
    I take it you have not lived among liberals all your life as I have: Liberals tend to be vicious, nasty people. I think their loud opposition to various fashionable “phobias” is explained by the psychological term projection.

  11. says

    It’s not hard to charm a reporter that has come to meet with Obama. There’s little reason for the reporter to make Obama annoyed enough to cut off their “exclusive access”. 

    What Obama uses is not just political affirmation and mutual identity to get to people. It’s a lot more layered then that.

    A non-political business reporter in this context is equivalent to a political opportunist working for Obama. The former relies on buttering up Obama. The latter relies upon buttering up the boss.

    They like him better because he is a vicious, evil man.

    I would agree with that. Most of the Left aren’t evil because they are misguided. They are evil because it benefits them to be so. 

    Obama has a few psychological and propaganda tools under his belt.

    1. Power. Power by itself influences people around them to bend their will to the source of that power.

    2. Influence. Fear of being shunned or blacklisted makes people kiss up to those with influence, for they are afraid of being out in the dark with no influence.

    3. Politics. Political agreement and rah rah raw jingoistic Obamanationism allows people to treat Obama as a Great Man. Exactly the same way they glossed over Ted Kennedy’s indiscretions and crimes, because they said “he was a lion of a man in fighting for women’s rights”. That girl that died to pave the way for Ted Kennedy’s great political rise would be grateful that she helped put him on the road to Women’s Greatness, they think. Hell, not only do they think this, I’ve seen them WRITE IT on their blogs. Right out there. Can you believe it.

    4. Hypnotism. Hypnotism is not well understood by the majority of the public. There are basically two kinds. Re-programming of underlining assumptions without mental defenses blocking it and suggestions which steer the conscious mind’s will towards the path of least resistance (obeying the suggestion). The former is the closest to what people would consider mind control and it is often used in brainwashing and psychological torture. Put someone in a sensory deprivation tank for a week while I keep telling them that 4 equals 2, and eventually they will believe 4 equals 2, believe you me. Anyone ever been in a sensory deprivation tank for awhile, never let out? The mind starts to get rather detached from the body and if you add in malnutrition and being fed only fruit juice, a lot of good things can result with a minimum of fuss. Expensive in both time and resources, however, and torture is always cheaper physically.

    The other kind, suggestion is the weaker of the two and the most easily resisted. Those with strong wills who simply are stubborn or refuse to do what other people tell them to do just because, are easily able to resist hypnotic suggestions. All they have to do is to produce a counter-suggestion. If the suggestion is “sleep”, then the person just tells himself “if I sleep, I die”. The will not to die then becomes stronger than the desire to sleep and the body acts according to the strongest will.

    Obama uses both. He uses both. And that’s why so many are hypnotized, regardless of their political ideology. I’m talking about those Republicans that say they believe in anti-socialism then went gaga over Obama. You know they were there. Whether you wish to call them RINOs or not. But primarily, it was those with political aspirations that melded with Obama’s that came under his spell the most. And those were the ones that heard and saw his speeches. Because Obama’s version of re-programming hypnosis has to deal with body language, sound, and visual pickups. You cannot get it if you just read the words. That’s not how hypnosis works. You need to do more than just read words.

    5. Fear of the Left. Fear of Leftist punishment for disobeying Obama or the Left also plays a large part in creating fervor amongst those who say Obama is great. Because they see it as their way of keeping themselves safe and secure. The more they cry out that they love Obama, the more safe they can feel that they have avoided Leftist torture and pain. That’s not such a small thing all in all. When Obama orders the 1 minute hate on Rush or Breitbart or Fox News or Sarah Palin, You Had Better Get with the Program or else.

    For most people on the LEft, it’s just easier and safer to obey the suggestive command in their heads rather than resist it. 

    I think in the end, you need to know more than just living with the Left to understand them. You have to have been part of them and feel what they feel and use what they have used. Then you will start to understand. Living in a Democrat commune isn’t enough by itself to teach you the arts of psychological torture or propaganda manipulation. It just isn’t. No matter how many radicals you think you know, no matter how many Democrats are in your social circle, it is not enough. Most of them have NO IDEA what propaganda even is. They don’t know how to pick it out from sunlight. You have to be of the Left alliance to be given the information on the real weapons they have deployed.

    And make no mistake, psychological torture and propaganda manipulation are weapons.

  12. Danny Lemieux says

    “As usual, Obama got his history wrong; this time everything he said about Texas was wrong from the point spread of his lose to Texas being historically Republican.”


    You’re looking at it from the wrong perspective, IndigoRed…history only began when Obama took office!

  13. SADIE says

    What we heard off mic was only a sampling from the simpleton. CBS refused to release the entire off mic comments.
    http://bigjournalism.com/amarcus/2011/04/20/confirmed-cbs-editors-refuse-to-release-full-audio-of-obama-hot-mic-recording/
     
    Obama is unclothed when it comes to human decency…
     
    …which reminded me of the staged photo op with his feet on his desk and the bottom of his shoes facing the camera, while he spoke with Bibi Netanyahu. If I were feeling a bit more creative today, I’d take a stab at tweaking the Elizabeth Barrett Browning poem, How do I love thee to something more applicable. As to his unquestioning adoring fans – they’re in dire need of group therapy. As my dear ol’ Dad used to say, “not all the nuts are locked up.”
     
    Dad, where ever you are in Heaven – YOU WERE SO RIGHT!

  14. Charles Martel says

    Have you ever run into someone who cannot be embarrassed? Kind of like John Belushi’s Bluto Blutarsky character in “Animal House?” Well, both Obama and the people who voted for him are the Blutarskys here.

    The irony is that while folks on this site (Zach excepted) are embarrassed by and for NBOTUS, we’re not the ones it’s going to do any good for.

  15. SADIE says

    Speaking of Animal House – isn’t that a euphemism for the DNC.

    Dateline: SF Fundraiser (where else)$35,800 doesn’t buy what it used to.
    Menu included scrambled organic Petaluma farmed eggs, chicked apple sausages, organic fingerling potatoes; fruit and berries; miniature danishes and Matzo crackers.
     
    The song was gratis from a paid in full table.
     
    Dear Mr. President we honor you today sir Each of us brought you $5,000 It takes a lot of Benjamins to run a campaign I paid my dues, where’s our change? We’ll vote for you in 2012, yes that’s true Look at the Republicans – what else can we do Even though we don’t know if we’ll retain our liberties In what you seem content to call a free society Yes it’s true that Terry Jones is legally free To burn a people’s holy book in shameful effigy But at another location in this country Alone in a 6×12 cell sits Bradley 23 hours a day is night The 5th and 8th Amendments say this kind of thing ain’t right We paid our dues, where’s our change?
    http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm

  16. says

    My jaw about hit the floor when I read about the Texas historical gaffe … I write novels about the American frontier, I’ve researched and written about Texas and frontier American history to the point where my daughter claims that I am a slightly-nutty obsessive! But that off-the-cuff comment was just so … ignorant. Really, I do wonder about him… and I wonder about those people who voted for him, in 2008. I really do. I think for me, the ultimate moment of disillusion was whe I saw a picture of him, and his staff … and he was sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office… that desk made from the timbers of the Resolute, that so-historical desk … and he was lounging back in his office chair, with his feet up on the desk, and the standing officers of his staff/cabinet … standing. He had his feet … on the desk … that historic desk… and in Muslim culture – and I think also in Indonesia – that it is an insult to show the soles of your feet to people.
    I was talking to my daughter this morning, on our walk with the dog – that I wonder if he hasn’t become like one of those relatively useless european monarchs, of the 16th-19th centuries; one of those ornamental princlings, who looked fabulous, and had equally ornamental spouses and offspring, but who were propped up by their regents, their prime ministers, the whole governmental establishment and a well-tamed media, which disguised their essential incompetance.
    He’s a hollow man, a well-dressed puppet – and I do wonder, now and again – how well he knows this in his inner self.

  17. says

    Daniel Henninger has been living under a rock for the year of the 2008 elections, yes.

    Obama.2008 was engaging, patient, open, optimistic and a self-identified conciliator.

    No, Henninger, Obama in 2008 was mocking and crapping all over the country just as he is now. You were just paid to shut your mouth about it, and you did.

  18. Charles Martel says

    Sgt. Mom, what a nicely written take-down of America’s most declasse man. Too bad that he is so hollow at the core that he cannot see in what incredibly low esteem so many Americans hold him.

  19. Moose says

    Did anyone else see the Manchurian Candidate?

    This is feeling like deja vu. (Not the “gentlemen’s” club, either)

    Regarding the birth certificate thing: there probably is one, but there might be something on it that could be troubling. Does anyone know if “religion” is entered on a B.C. in Hawaii?

  20. Charles Martel says

    Moose, I’ve seen the original Manchurian Candidate from 1962. Chilling. Today it would be laughed of the screen by critics because everybody knows what nice people Communists are.

    Your question about religion being entered on a birth certificate in Hawaii is a good one. I never thought of that one. I’m just keeping my fingers crossed that Trump will, in the words of Lyndon Johnson to the troops in Vietnam, “bring the coonskin home and nail it to the wall.”

  21. SADIE says

    Jerome Corsi’s book goes to #1 on Amazon and the article at Front Page examines the internal and external factors affecting Americanism and concludes with the following:
     
    -snip- Jerome Corsi comes up with evidence of Obama’s foreign birth, however – it is clear that the problem of Obama-esque un-Americanism is now endemic to American culture herself.
     

    http://frontpagemag.com/2011/04/22/about-the-birth-certificate/
     
    The article, however, does not examine the list provided by a commenter.
    The list is a partial one. Madame Dunham’s passport records have magically disappeared prior to 1965 and why the forfeiture of his law license in Illinois. Sgt. Mom’s jaw almost hit the floor on a Texas gaffe and we’re still hitting our heads against a ‘wall of silence’.
     
    My question is:  Do we have a stranger among us or within us? He certainly has had a lot of helping hands and handlers.
     
    Certificate of Live Birth — Released? Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released Soetoro/Dunham marriage license — Not released Soetoro adoption records — Not released Fransiskus Assisi School School application — Released Punahou School records — Not released Selective Service Registration — Released – Proven Counterfeit Occidental College records — Not released Passport (Pakistan) — Not released Columbia College records — Not released Columbia thesis — Not released Harvard College records — Not released Harvard Law Review articles — None (maybe 1, Not Signed) Baptism certificate — None Medical records — Not released Illinois State Senate records — None (Locked up to prohibit public view) Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost (All other Illinois state senators’ records are intact) Law practice client list — Not released University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

  22. SADIE says

    Oh how  time wears away truth. The Manchurian Candidate in book form dared to mention the other ‘C’ word …Communists.
     
     
    Even back in 1959, the NYT remained clueless.
    “Mr. Condon has not written a successful novel but a wild, vigorous, curiously readable melange.” –

    New York Times Book Review

  23. says

    I was never an anti-birther nor took much sympathy with the whole concept that it was best avoided. Whatever ties up Obama’s resources is to the good. Even if it is not currently as effective as one might wish, that is no reason to throw away a potential weapon that can be used against one’s foes. It was a matter of priority to me. There were obviously groups of Americans that felt this was important to them and they were willing to put their time and energy into it. I saw that as only a plus. Anything to tear down Obama and his Leftist alliance of child killers and Islamic sympathizers, second by second.

    On the matter of priority, I did not believe it was effective enough in 2008-10 to warrant a high priority mark for resource allocation. But if people want to allocate their own resources, I wouldn’t go up against them. That was the critical difference between me and others. Others wanted the whole thing buried, acting like if they only recover from the “embarrassment” in front of the Left, that it would be good for conservatives. Since when has acting on the defense and playing by the rules ever rewarded conservatives when Leftists started the name calling and belittling campaign?

    How effective it is now, remains to be seen. Certainly it is one more feather on Obama’s brokeback camel hump excuse of a spine. Just one more. Just one more. And we may see it all come crashing down. Wouldn’t it be glorious.

Leave a Reply