November 08, 2010

The Post-Responsibility President

Mr. Obama has diagnosed the problem, the malady that caused his electoral faux-Greek columns to collapse: It was all a failure of messaging. Well, at least he has taken some meaningless faux-responsibility. Yet, even in this, he is in the process or transformation. He is, as he is so fond of saying, moving America forward, making progress. Until his recent admission on 60 Minutes, it was George W. Bush’s fault. Everything. All of it. You name it, he did it. Then (actually, more or less simultaneously) it was the fault of the American people, the bastards. Too fearful and stupid, one and all, to understand the brilliance of the scientific, factual communists who rule them. Ingrates, every man, woman and child, unable to be properly grateful for the bounty bestowed upon them by The One.

But now, at long last, Mr. Obama has it. The problem is, finally, absolutely, wait for it...the messaging! It is true that this explanation has been periodically trotted out, only to be quickly flattened like a shooting gallery target, but this time Mr. Obama appears to have settled on it. It is at least a grudging, tacit admission that we, the people are possibly sane and smart enough to understand and accept the brilliance and majesty that is Barack Obama, his policies and all of those who worship him if only he would formulate and speak the correct message! Forget the endless speeches and press releases, forget that Barack Obama is the single most over-exposed President in history, nay, should America persist to a trillion generations, the most over exposed President in perpetuity, all Mr. Obama need do is trot out the proper message and the scales will fall from the eyes of the electorate. Is it not fitting that the subjects of The One should be healed if only he spake the word?

Herein lies, as plain as the peasant noses on our dull, collective, ungrateful faces, the answer to a question that seems to perpetually vex the chattering classes: Will Obama change course and tack toward the center? Of course not. There are two primary reasons, reasons that rely upon science and fact (of course), that explain what seems so difficult for the intelligentsia to understand.

It can, no doubt be proved by means of countless studies in the fields of sociology, biology, and particularly, psychology, that one can only change a lightbulb if the lightbulb really wants to change. In this case, Barack Obama, the embodiment of hope and change, cannot change, will not change, unless he recognizes that his policies have failed and that change is, therefore, required. Mr. Obama acknowledges only (without actually saying it, of course) that perhaps we are a little brighter than he thought and he will labor to craft the correct message that will trigger the proper receptors in our reptilian brains, forcing us to embrace him and his ideas, which is his destiny.

The second, and larger issue is that Mr. Obama is a committed socialist/communist. Even Mr. Obama’s two (?! Don’t get me started...) autobiographies clearly outline his lifelong communist mentoring, education, friendships and associations. As a true believer, he cannot admit error or failure, for the socialist path never ends, is inevitable and non-falsifiable. Anyone who believes that socialist policies are failing is mistaken. The problem, the only problem, is that insufficient socialism has been envisioned and/or applied. Thus the only possible solution to any mistakenly perceived problem is the application of more and more fervent socialism.

But wait--as an informercial would say--there’s more! Mr. Obama is a narcissist of epic, heretofore unseen, proportions. As such, the recognition of personal failure or error is a virtual impossibility. Hyperbole? Consider this quote by Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett from “The Bridge,” an Obama biography by David Remnick: “I think Barack knew that he had God-given talents that were extraordinary. He knows exactly how smart he is...and I think he has never really been challenged intellectually...somebody with such extraordinary talents that had to be really taxed in order for him to be happy...He’s been bored to death his whole life. He’s just too talented to do what ordinary people do.” No doubt Mr. Obama, upon hearing such fulsome praise, immediately blushed and bade Ms. Jarrett tone it down. Hey! I just saw a flying pig!

Imagine a man who has never held a real job, has never had to keep regular hours while working for his living, yet has enjoyed every benefit America has to offer: Exceptional educational opportunities, mentors and supporters willing to extend not only social connections but substantial cash to his upkeep and advancement, and slavering worshippers who cannot praise him enough. Imagine a man who has never had to endure the rigors of accepting or discharging responsibility. Recall, please how Mr. Obama and his advisors, shortly after his ascension to the minor office of the presidency, which is no doubt terribly boring, complained that they really hadn’t anticipated how, you know, like, hard it was. I mean, long hours, governing and people complaining and stuff, geez!

And so Mr. Obama has adopted socialist foreign policy as American domestic policy: If one talks to the enemy, that is, in and of itself, a transformative, real accomplishment. Mr. Obama has recently revealed that the American public is the enemy, and he is now contemplating how best to talk to it. He was the post-racial president, the post-American president, and he has nearly transcended all “posts” to become the post-responsibility president, a man who need no longer be bothered by doing, but merely by speaking.

A nation of enemies breathlessly awaits the messaging.

UPDATE ON 11-10-10: Several readers have taken me to task for suggesting that Mr. Obama is a socialist/communist. It is, as others have observed, remarkable that many of those who identify themselves as socialists and agree, in significant ways, with Mr. Obama's policies, bridle when Mr. Obama is identified as a socialist. In making such statements, bloggers must rely upon known evidence, and in Mr. Obama's case, it is considerable and of long standing. May I suggest reference to Stanley Kurtz's new book on Mr. Obama's long socialist pedigree, and for more handy and brief reference, a posting only today on the excellent Powerline blog on the same topic. No doubt there are various flavors of socialism/communism and true believers and gatekeepers may consider such matters of some importance. But among the unmistakable strategies of socialists are denying socialist intent, attacking anyone who identifies it, and keeping their long term agenda hidden as part and parcel of achieving their eventual socialist goals. Many American socialists, being rather unsophisticated and inexperienced and realizing that most Americans have little patience for socialism, have actually made the mistake of making explicit that strategy in discussing the eventual goals of Obamacare which include driving private insurance firms out of the market to pave the way for a socialist single payer system, which Mr. Obama himself has, on more than one occasion, expressed his explicit desire to achieve. In brief, when one is up to one's hips in a socialist snake pit, they need not wonder what all the hissing is about. Communists are merely a more generally murderous version of socialists.

Posted by MikeM at November 8, 2010 11:51 PM

Speaking as an actual Socialist, a Democratic Socialist,I have to tell you Obama (who I am not a big fan of) is pretty far from where we stand. The banks and auto industry remains un-nationalised, there is no tax on wealth, and a single payer health care system is nowhere in sight. Words have meanings and you should be more careful how you use them. As for Obama being a Communist, you should go to an actual Communist (Trotskyist)web site and see how fond they are of the president. is a good place to start. No disrespect intended, but people are way too careless about throwing out political labels. "Loser" might be a more appropriate term for our current president.

Posted by: James Connolly at November 9, 2010 09:38 PM

Finally, some common ground, something on which virtually all of us can agree. Thanks James.

Without stretching to any sort of "angels on the head of a pin" debate about exactly where Obama and his various policies lie on the scale of statism, state capitalism, socialism, communism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc -- or how far and how fast he is reaching his ultimate goal, we can all certainly agree that yes, Obama is a loser in all of our eyes, regardless of our individual ideological leanings.

To be fair from a purely semantic point of view, using a term like socialism or communism to describe one particular regime, is somewhat akin to asking somebody to go to the store and get a 12-pack of "cola." Sure, cola drinks all have some similarity in their taste, but if you ask any true Pepsi or Coke aficionado what makes their drink different, you're likely to hear partisanship that outstrips anything in the political realm.

While the loser handle certainly applies to Obama, it is likely too imprecise to apply broad terms such as socialism or communism to him.

True socialism and true communism, as opposed to their actual practice, don't require the Chicago mob style of intimidation/extortion tactics Obama has used infamously. Those tactics are closer to facism, but even that term isn't entirely accurate.

Just as most other statist/collectivist politicians who rose to power are each defined under their own ideological handle (Maoist, Trotskyist, Marxist, etc), the most semantically accurate path would be to use the term Obamist, and fill in the details within that definition to explain which statist/collectivist ideologies he has copied his various beliefs and goals from.

Posted by: Junk Science Skeptic at November 9, 2010 10:23 PM

I am not a fan of James connolly.

Posted by: Kevin at November 9, 2010 11:54 PM

@JSK. You know it does look like a hybrid made of
sociolism,communism and facism.

You are on to something there.

Posted by: Ron at November 10, 2010 04:17 PM