Monday, April 30, 2012

President Obama: Mean Spirited Political Hack, Always Campaigning

I saw this today, and had trouble believing it. Presdient Obama actually suggested--as celarly, yet about as dishonestly, as I have ever seen a politician suggest such a thing, that Mitt Romney would not have authorized the operation that killed Osama bin Laden, if Romney had been Presdient.  This is almsot the most MEAN SPIRITED thing I have ever seen/heard a Presdient say, and I have heard Obama say some awfuly MEAN SPIRITED things about many people (yes, GOP politicians and Congress, but also people like doctors).  This all comes from a Democrat AD DISTORTING what Mitt Romney ad said, with Obama "doubling down" on the whole idea of directly POLITIXIZING the bin Laden operation (which Ropmney, me, and msot other have praised Obama for, even as this blgo sarcastically ridiculed the OVER-HPE of the Obama role--leading to this blog's SCOOP of how Obama had PERSONALLY, but SECRETLY, joined the SEAL team in the actual operation).

Is there anything wrong with Obama "tkaing credtit' for the bin Laden decisin he made?  Of course not.  When he overdoes it, he may come across as a thouroughly UNLIKABLE individual tryingt to appropriate to HIMSELF LL of the "credit"--the lion's share of which surely involves to the peoople lhow actually palnned the operation, and the inteligence lpeople who made it possible.  Still, Obama deserves credit for HIS decsion, and EVEROONE ss willng to give him that creddit (As John McCain deserved credidit for the SURGE --Petraeus--policy in Iraq wfor which OBAAMA refused to give hhim credit, as McCain PUSHED that olicy well before Petraeus was put in charge over the OBJECTINS of Democrats like Clinton and Obama). The point is that Obama has a perfect right to take credit for what he DID, but to specualate that an opponent would NOT ahve doene something like the same thing is MEAN SPIRITED (especaily when it is based on DISHONESTY). 

You should be able to see where this is going.  The MAIN media "storyline" on Obama is how LIKABLE he is.  Hogwash.  And I get tired of 'conservatives", and gOP politicians, sayhing this based on POLLS. If yu read this blog, you know that this blog has concluseively shwon that PLLS are one of the most UNHEALTHY aspects of modern society: that is, the OBSESSIN with polls.  Nope.  Presdient Obama is NOT LIKABLE.  He is the msot ARROGANT individual I have ever seen in politics (saying a whole lot). He says TERRIBLE things about other people.  He LIES constantly (see this blog for example after exampe). Sure, I have no problem with him as a "man", afther, and husband.  But I "like" Mitt Rolmney just as much on that score. No.  I don't see Obama as "warm".  I see him as a remote, ARROGANT man who likes to LECTURE people. The is THIN SKINNED to criticism, and generally is the very knod of person I DO NOT LIKE.  (Cyncs, by the way, may say that all I have to do to see a person just as arrogatnt as Obama every day is to LOOK INTO THE MIRROR, which my own 89 year old mother says, even as shke agrees with me on Obama, but that merely proves my point on Obama.)  Bill Clinton was what I call LIKABLE, if sleazy.  Obama is not "sleazy", at least in theway Bill Cltinon was/is, but Obama is NOT "likeable".

As stated, all Obama likes to do is CAMPAIGN, an dLECTURE as to why everyone should let HIM make all of the decisions.  He has even LECTUED the United Stattes Supreme Court.  What he truly likes to do is HEAR HIMSELF TALK.  Anyone can seem "cool' if they get the SOFTBALL press, and questoins, Obama has gottaen from the beginning. When challegend, President Obama is UNLIKABLE.  And there are a LO of people who agree with me on this one.  Take my word for it. Remember, this blog is NEVER WRONG (se parehthesis above as to me looking in the mirror).

Doubt me?  NEVER do that.  All I have to do is recall what Presdient Obama said about DOCTORS, in a LIE designed to "push" his health care bill.  He said that doctors would prefer to get "$26,000, $30,000 or even $40,000 for an amputatin, rahter than do "preventive" diabetes care.  What a TERRIBLE thinng to say about doctors!!!!!  How CAN any doctor out there support a President who would accuse your ENTRIE PROFESSION of being this CORRUPT?  But what makes it really bad is that what Obama said is an OBVIOUS LIE (not a matter of opinion) . First , the doctors doing preventative care are generally NOT the docttors doing amputations.  Second, a surgeon miaght get as little as $1000.000 for an amputation, and this tallk of $30,000 or $40,000 dolars was an obvious LIE.  Presdient Obama does this all of the time  He just does not cARE whether wht he says is even close to the truth, so long as it SOUNDS good.  That is why he said, on one occasion, that small businesses would save "3000%" on health insurance premiums under Obama's health care bill.  In case lyou did not knoown, it is IMPOSSIBLE to "save" more than 100%, and Obama's health care bill does not even accomplish anything close to that. 

My 89 year old mother is till the best I hve heard on succinctly describing Obama:  'He wanst so give people things 'free' (with other people's money), and he wats to tell people what to do."

Sorry.  This is NOT "likable"  I don't think Obama comes across nearly as likable" as the character Burt Lancaster played so well in "Elmer Gantry", or nearly as likable as the real life Bill Clinton.  Furterer, people no longer are PAYING ATTENTION to Obama's WORDS (usually on teleprompter).  We have heard it all too many times.  The "preacher" voiice.  The arrogant, dogmatic assertions.  The sheer hubris. "Likable"?  I don't thinks so. 

Then why do the "American people' like Obama so much?  I don't think they do.  To the extent the polls are even honest (and it is a media LIE to report the poll they WANT to cite as totally accurate, even if many other polls say somethign different), here is how people "hear" the questin on Barack Obama:  "Do you HATE Barack Obama--and , remember, you may be a closet racist if you say you do?"  No, I don't HATE Barack Obama.  I just objectivelyl know that he is destroying this country.  In fact,, this whole media "storyline" on Barack Obama is absurd, as this whole QUESTION is absud (the poll question).  What difference does it make whether I would "like" Barack Obama as a person?  Why wuld I, or any ThINKING person ( leaving the media out of it), even TH:INK about whether I "like' Barack Obama.  If I were "hanging out" with him (lol), I might consider this question (if he were not President of the United States, as anyone would ALWWAYS want to "hang out" with the President--like him or not).  It is IRRELEVANT to me whether I "like' Barack Obama.  What does that have to do with teh wya I VOTE?  No.  I don't think that Obama "connects" any better with people--once they have heard all of these speeches, as he has doene nothng bu campaign from day 1 of his Presdiency) any better than Mitt Romney (who, I agree, does NOT realy "connect" with people)l.  When people suggest that Obama is "connecting" wiht them, in this ridiculous poll questin, they are really regurgitating merely what so many peooople are TELLING THEM.  If even "conservative' commentators, and GOP politiciaans, keep SAYING that Obama is "likable", why would people not assume that is the CORRECT answer.  People KNOW that they can VOTE for whom they want, and against whom they want, whether they "like" teh person or not.  As Mitt Romney has said:  "People are nto that stupid.'.  It is not an IMPORTANT quesitn, despite the media AGENDA to make it so, and there is no reason to assume people regard it as importatn.  After all, if Mary Matalin can "love' James Carvelle, and still apparenty disagree with him on virtually every political question, why hsould a voter have any problem with voting against someone that voter may VAGUELY LIKE (mainly because almsot everyone is tellng the voterter he SHOULD).

But this blog is not ordinary.  I tell you when the emperor (which Obama would like to be) has no clothes.  Obama is realyl pretty MEAN SPIRITED, and not really "likable" at all. "Soraring rhetoric" does not a 'likable" person make.

"But=, Skip, do you  "like' Barack Obama as a person, or are you a HATER."  Cnat you READ (or are you effectively BLIND, like me, such that you can't even read well enough to proofread or effectivelly  "spell check" these articles)?  To me, this is an IRRELEVANT question.  I don't think about it, unnless ltlhe media forces me to do so with their ridiculous "storyline".  I don't consider Obama 'likable".  Idon't HATE him, or feven "dislike " him, ON A PERSONAL LEVEL (partly because I don't knon him on that level).  But Obama is NOT asking for my VOTE on a PERSONAL LEVEL (or ist hat exaclty what he and the media are doing, because hey ca't make a convincing case any other way)?  I don't think Romney "coonnects" with peple, but that does nto mean I 'dislike" him on a personal level.  But, again, Romney is not asknig for my vote ON A LPERSONAL LEVEL.  Both of hese men are asking for my vote as a person who can LEAD this coutnry in the right directin.  Frakly, I DISLIKE BOTH MEN, on that basis, and that is the ONLY basis any of us should be evaluating them.  Should you vote for a person you HATE on a lpersonal level (say you even know them on that level), if you think thahat person will LEAD this coutnry in the right directin?  The media seems to suggest that you would NOT.  But that is objectively WRONG.  It is OBVIUS that you SHOULD vote for a person you HATE, even over a person you LIKE, if the person you hate would be the best (or at least a better) Presdient than the person you like.  How can you even CONSIDER any other postion. 

Where this really goes wrong is the GOP "estalbishmment" idea that you should not "criticize" Prfesdient Obama because peole "llike him".  Hogwash.  Talk about DEFEATISM.  The main pront of this article is that Obama is doing exactly the OPPOSITE of this:  saying HATEFUL things abut his oopponents at every opporuniy, and even about people who may not exaclty be his "opponents' (like DOCTORS, or people on Wall Street). There is this "idea' ott there taht politicians should UNILATERALLY DISARM against Presdient Obama, because that will put thime in DANGER of their political lives.  That seems to especially MOTIVEATE the GOP politicians in CONGRESS.  Taht is why I tell yo (among other reaasons):  DEFEAT THEM ALL.  And when I say ALL, I mean ALL--EVERY incumbent member of Congress, whether GOP or Democrat. 

Do you "like" ME--from what I say in this blog?  Why should I worry about it?  Yes, I understand how politicians THINK they need to be like used car salesmen, or insurance salesmen.  However, that is one of the things WRONG with this country, and why I "like" Crhis Chiristie (on the level that matters), even while I don't think he is my type of philosophical conservative.  No, I don't think a politician should go out of his way to OFFEND people, as you may believe I sometiems do.  But tyring to be "all things to all peoople' is its own kind of DISASTER. The thing I liked best about Ronald REagan was that he was AMIABLE, while standing FIRM on principle.  People liked it that Regan was "likable", but they like even mroe that he STOOD FOR THINGS, and couuld expalin WHY.  Obama, in contrast (as shown by the way he keeps CITING REAAN and how his "idesas' are supposedly "endorese" by BOTH SIDES--knowing he is lYING), is NOT "amiable". He is MEAN SPIRITED an dDISHOENST.  He does "believe in things< but hardly tryies to HONESTLY explain what he blieves in to people.  With Obama, it is all ARRoGANCE and WORDS--words used to SELL rather than clarify.  This is the OPPOSITE of Regan, and another way of saying why I don't find Obama "likable"  in the areas that matter. Obama is Elmer Gantry Reagan was Jimmy Stewart, or the character that Stewart played in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington".

Contrast Jimmy Stewart with Barack Obama.  Stewart was a reserve air force officer, even in his later years. In that capacity, Stewart SECRETLY flew a COMBAT mission over North Vietnma, in the Vietnam War, as Stewart had done so many years before in World War II. That is the most UNBELIEVABLE thing about tthis blog's SCOOP that President Obama PERSONALLY went in with the SEAL team that tok out bin Laden.  You might think that the most "unbelievable" thing abut that is the idea that the Secret Service would let Obama do that.  I beg to differ.  The most unbelievable thing about hthis blog's (admittedly sarcastic" "coop" is the idea that Obhama would go in with the SEAL team, and later KEEP IT A SECRET (as Stewart did with regard to that mission over North Vietnam-even insisting upon it). To me, Mimmy Stewart was a "likable person,and so was Ronald Reagn.  Persdient Obama is not. 

No comments: