February 16, 2009
— Gabriel Malor In a continuing series of indecisions, the President is putting off making a decision about sending troops to Afghanistan. After he spent the campaign screaming his head off about the need for a surge in Afghanstan, Obama wants more time to study the issue.
Here he is at the first presidential debate, September 28, 2008:
We need more troops. The situation is getting worse. We had the highest fatalities among US troops this past year than at any time since 2002. I would send 2 to 3 additional brigades to Afghanistan. Keep in mind that we have 4 times the number of troops in Iraq, where nobody had anything to do with 9/11 before we went in, where, in fact, there was no al Qaeda before we went in. That is a strategic mistake, because every intelligence agency will acknowledge that al Qaeda is the greatest threat against the US, and that the place where we have to deal with these folks is in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Its not just more troops. We have to #1, press the Afghan government to make certain that they are actually working for their people; #2, weve got to deal with a poppy trade that has exploded; #3, weve got to deal with Pakistan, because al Qaeda and the Taliban have safe havens in Pakistan. Until we do, Americans at home are not safe.
Here he is on Meet the Press, May 4, 2008, answering "Would you, as president, be willing to have a military surge in Afghanistan in order to, once and for all, eliminate the Taliban?":
Yes. I think thats what we need. I think we need more troops there, I think we need to do a better job of reconstruction there.
And here he is today:
The latest sign of crossed signals occurred Friday, when White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters Obama "hasn't made a decision on augmenting our force structure in Afghanistan," three days after Pentagon officials said he would likely do so that week.
As I said, this is a continuing series where the President tells people he intends to do one thing and then goes off in a different direction.
Of course, this is spun by some Politico so-called reporter as a "methodical and independent decision-making style" which is a sharp break from the "usual style" of Bush 43. Despite his confident statements (lies?) on the campaign trail, Obama is now "questioning the timetable, the mission and even the composition of the new forces."
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
10:31 AM
| Comments (167)
Post contains 425 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: braininahat at February 16, 2009 10:35 AM (8M1gG)
Posted by: MSM at February 16, 2009 10:39 AM (uiKEv)
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 10:41 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: TC at February 16, 2009 10:41 AM (QXKjZ)
Posted by: RiteWingFascist at February 16, 2009 10:42 AM (1hSHv)
Posted by: Stu Pidd at February 16, 2009 10:42 AM (W0B71)
Posted by: UncleFacts at February 16, 2009 10:42 AM (M+Vfm)
If we'd never gone into Iraq, the same people would've been saying the very same things about Afghanistan. "Mistake", "imperalism", "we need to come home now", etc.
The next war these tools find that they can support will be the first one.
Posted by: tsj017 at February 16, 2009 10:45 AM (TBwnU)
Posted by: billygoat at February 16, 2009 10:47 AM (x0n2J)
Posted by: Ken at February 16, 2009 10:48 AM (2LCD6)
Posted by: Vic at February 16, 2009 10:48 AM (f6os6)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2009 10:48 AM (FcR7P)
He's micro-managing.
It's going to be worse than Carter.
He's got NO NO NO executive experience which means NO NO NO experience delegating.
He's not going to tell Petraeus that he wants to surge in Afghanistan, so do it, "make it so", and put the troops where they'll do the most good and "tell me what I can do to help that". NOOoooo... .he's going to try to micro-manage it. And in the mean time he's going to neglect the heavy lifting of keeping our access overland in Pakistan or get our air access back in K-stan.
Carter wasn't a disaster because of bad intentions. He was a disaster because his intentions were *good*, and he had to make sure, personally, that the right things were done.
Obama is going to be the same for the same reasons.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 10:48 AM (NxP4A)
Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at February 16, 2009 10:49 AM (SMD8k)
Why is this not surprising? Obama has never proven any ability to make hard decisions, and, notwithstanding the liberal philosophy of Skittle-shitting Unicorns, the presidency is all about hard decisions.
Posted by: Pavel at February 16, 2009 10:49 AM (UFpcQ)
Remember this little diddy:
Right now, we don't have enough troops, and NATO hasn't provided enough troops because they are still angry about us going into Iraq. So we just don't have enough capacity right now to deal with and it's not just troops, by the way. It's like Arab Arab Arabic interpreters, Arab language speakers, we only have a certain number of them, and if they're all in Iraq, then it's harder for us to use them
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 10:50 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Harry at February 16, 2009 10:50 AM (RxSlU)
Posted by: Techie at February 16, 2009 10:53 AM (906oR)
Watch over the next months. This will fit everything he does. Watch. Because I'm right.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 10:55 AM (NxP4A)
Can any of the military-connected types among you fellow morons tell me how re-enlistments have been going since the election? From what I'm hearing anecdotally, the armed forces, and the Army in particular, is having trouble retaining noncoms; but that may be based on biased information. Anyone have solid data?
Posted by: Brown Line at February 16, 2009 10:57 AM (VrNoa)
He's gotta start a-learnin' how to manage somewhere. For most of us it's when we were in our twenties and the position was likely as an assistant-manager or junior department head or somesuch with about five people to manage, a position that if screwed up didn't have much impact.
If he fully understands where he is, and I'm sure he does, he must be scared shitless about pretty much everything. And a leader like this will make a ton of bad decisions due to the pressure he faces every day.
Posted by: Ken at February 16, 2009 10:58 AM (2LCD6)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2009 11:00 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Four Hour Erections! at February 16, 2009 11:00 AM (n2eCn)
Posted by: Harry at February 16, 2009 03:50 PM (RxSlU)
I have a very long list to choose from to fill in the blank, but I too don't wan't the 'you know who's' asking me what I have in mind. Unless it's a one-on-one interview with all options on the table.
Posted by: was virgin Lebaneses goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 11:01 AM (bcK3v)
We're now experiencing the "Say anything" style of leadership. I'm sure everything will work out alright.
Posted by: Eleven at February 16, 2009 11:02 AM (7DB+a)
Posted by: Farmer_Joe at February 16, 2009 11:04 AM (z4es9)
Posted by: FireHorse at February 16, 2009 11:05 AM (5KNeJ)
I respectfully disagree with the people who say he is trying to micro manage. Obama is lazy. Look at the history of him writing the first book and the deadlines. Look at his punctuality regard to anything. Look at his voting present. Look at his indecisions. Look at his lack of any scholarship written papers. Lazy people do not micro manage. Maybe whoever is controlling him wants to micromanage but its not Obama.
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 11:05 AM (m2CN7)
#1~perfect. Stupid shit I say, then change my mind about? Just words.
This fucking guy is somethingelse.
Posted by: The Central Scrutinzer at February 16, 2009 11:05 AM (Cy5K8)
Bingo. Can't vote "present" anymore when you're President, Barry
Posted by: Ombudsman at February 16, 2009 11:06 AM (fWF4Q)
Posted by: Mikey G at February 16, 2009 11:06 AM (4eLhB)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:07 AM (NxP4A)
Think about his typical workday, say over the last 10 years - he probably never actually worked more than about 20 hours in a typical week, as he never had what any normal person would consider as a real job. Now, up at 5 or 6 am, first thing every morning a national security briefing on how various parts of the world want us all dead, more meetings throughout the day, no down time at all, and probably concluding it all around 8 or 9 at night. Pretty grueling for anyone, but especially for someone who has never done it before. He is going to age before our eyes.
Posted by: Ken at February 16, 2009 11:07 AM (2LCD6)
Posted by: Roy at February 16, 2009 11:07 AM (cB77O)
Skippy the Wonder Poodle as president - barks loudly, shits on lawn and accomplishes dick. For fun chases own tail and licks nuts - when tired of that licks his ass for dessert.
3 years, 11 months and 5 days to go - good luck America.
Posted by: Murph at February 16, 2009 11:07 AM (m7FCp)
Posted by: '80sBaby at February 16, 2009 11:08 AM (zmiSr)
Posted by: PJ at February 16, 2009 11:08 AM (fyFnu)
So isn't it still like 4 more fucking days until this druggie marxist has even logged his first month in office.
What a sad joke.
Posted by: Toad at February 16, 2009 11:10 AM (kOQDM)
Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at February 16, 2009 11:10 AM (SMD8k)
Sounds exactly like the complaint against Clinton back in the day. At least Clinton was doing something important, like getting nobbed in the Oval Office.
Posted by: Ombudsman at February 16, 2009 11:12 AM (fWF4Q)
Carter supposedly suffered from extreme overwork.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:12 AM (NxP4A)
And let's not forget this classic nugget either: ChimpyMcHitlerHalliburtonNoBloodForOil!
Posted by: billygoat at February 16, 2009 11:12 AM (x0n2J)
Can any of the military-connected types among you fellow morons tell me how re-enlistments have been going since the election? From what I'm hearing anecdotally, the armed forces, and the Army in particular, is having trouble retaining noncoms; but that may be based on biased information. Anyone have solid data?
Posted by: Brown Line at February 16, 2009 03:57 PM (VrNoa)
I don't know what the current figures are, but in the near future I don't believe they'll be as bad as I would have expected them to be. I think the horrible enconomy and the resulting lack of jobs will keep the re-enlistment rate high.
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 11:13 AM (bcK3v)
Posted by: toby928 at February 16, 2009 11:15 AM (PD1tk)
I think you have insulted Chinese food.
I'd say Obama is more like a pretty frosted donut with multi-colored sprinkles, that is filled with rancid, maggot infested cheese.
Now I've insulted pretty frosted donuts.
Posted by: shibumi at February 16, 2009 11:15 AM (tZB/c)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:15 AM (NxP4A)
Posted by: josh at February 16, 2009 11:16 AM (RZg/k)
So don't worry, either the shuck or the jive will do something.
Posted by: bill-tb at February 16, 2009 11:18 AM (7evkT)
It is my opinion that most people voted for Obama because he has a nice sounding voice, and sounds good when guided by a TelePrompter.
He is like Carter, though, in that Carter was an indecisive fuckbucket, too, and it cost the country dearly. Those who voted for him because he sounds so nice will rue the day, as will we all.
Posted by: OregonMuse at February 16, 2009 11:18 AM (FO+YO)
Posted by: josh at February 16, 2009 11:18 AM (RZg/k)
It means that his Chief of Staff, world-renowned tough guy, isn't doing his job.
Posted by: Ombudsman at February 16, 2009 11:18 AM (fWF4Q)
Posted by: jukin at February 16, 2009 11:19 AM (dCKOO)
Posted by: A.G. at February 16, 2009 11:20 AM (JoIvi)
Posted by: Obama's Minister of Truth at February 16, 2009 11:21 AM (wba6w)
Keep in mind that we have 4 times the number of troops in Iraq, where nobody had anything to do with 9/11 before we went in, where, in fact, there was no al Qaeda before we went in. That is a strategic mistake, because every intelligence agency will acknowledge that al Qaeda is the greatest threat against the US, and that the place where we have to deal with these folks is in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Actually Mr. (sorry, President) Obuttfuck that was strategically brilliant on our part.
We were already officially at war with Iraq. they signed a cease fire agreement back in '91 and they violated it. We didn't need anyone's permission. The only reason we didn't kick their asses earlier is because Clinton has no backbone.
Afghanistan is a land locked country. Supply lines are critical to winning a war. We can supply our troops in Iraq and we can get the bad guys to leave their caves to come fight on our terms.
The bad guys did in fact come puring into Iraq from Syria, Jordan, Iran and Saudi Arabia where they got their asses stomped.
It is not the war on Afghanistan. It is the war on Terror (i.e. terrorists). They are everywhere in that part of the world.
The icing on the cake is that we got to take out one of the top 3 assholes in the world (Saddam). All the while Bin Laden (the hero to all terrosists) has been hiding in a cave for eight long years; where is the prestige in that.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at February 16, 2009 11:22 AM (Nwbo8)
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 11:23 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Ken at February 16, 2009 04:07 PM (2LCD6) This comment might be from somewhere out in left field, but I believe one of the reasons he will be spending as little time as possible at the White House is it really cramps his style when it comes to having a smoke. When he's in ChicagHO, he probably just lights up right inside the house and looks that Amazonian monster straight in the eyes and says, "Now were in Mah House, Mah Rules! Wassup and shit!"
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 11:25 AM (bcK3v)
6 It is almost like Obama didn't have a plan when he was running last year, even though he talked like he did. Crazy, I know!
When Clinton was interviewed late in his presidency he said that all he thought about and planned for was winning. And when that actually happened, they all looked at each other as he said, "what do we do now?"
This man is Bill Clinton with purple lips.
Posted by: stimuluspackage at February 16, 2009 11:25 AM (J228s)
Posted by: XBradTC at February 16, 2009 11:25 AM (16ypJ)
He needs to tell the Military commanders to do what we do best, kill the enemy and break things, then he needs to get the fuck out of the way.
Posted by: Michael at February 16, 2009 11:26 AM (00mcl)
He's the president. If I were him, I'd say "I'm the Leader of the Free Fucking World. If I want to smoke in the Oval Office, I'm gonna light up when I want to, whenever I want to. Now STFU."
Posted by: Ombudsman at February 16, 2009 11:29 AM (fWF4Q)
Posted by: baldilocks at February 16, 2009 11:29 AM (SDAu2)
From what I'm hearing anecdotally, the armed forces, and the Army in particular, is having trouble retaining noncoms; but that may be based on biased information. Anyone have solid data?
If it does drop don't expect to find it in the news. That would just be bad press for Barry. It will be the opposite of when Bush was in office. When the military wasn't meeting it recruiting goals it was top news every month. Those reports being major news disappeared around 2005 or earlier.
Posted by: buzzion at February 16, 2009 11:30 AM (Lrsi6)
And micromanagers are famous for being indecisive, or at least spending their time deciding details rather than overarching concepts.
That's just it. Obama doesn't know the details of a lot of what he is advocating. A micromanager would know those things. Obama deals in generalities.
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 11:30 AM (m2CN7)
...which is why I vote "present." Whew, that was a close one.
Posted by: HasItBeen4YearsYet? at February 16, 2009 11:30 AM (HwAPE)
Posted by: katya at February 16, 2009 11:31 AM (oRJZj)
He sure didn't micromanage the stimulus bill. He let the Dem congress write the thing.
People said this would happen if Obama was elected. That he'd be such a neophyte that his underlings would battle to fill the power vacuum made from a weak presidency and chaos would rule.
Those people were oracles.
Posted by: Toad at February 16, 2009 11:32 AM (kOQDM)
polynikes, Arab interpreters are so useful in translating Pashto, don't you agree?
I'd rather O not send more troops in without a good plan.
Now, the 100 dollar question is: who is drafting the plan? Central Command or Jones in the White House?
Posted by: Bob from Ohio at February 16, 2009 11:34 AM (s6nMp)
Posted by: CB at February 16, 2009 11:34 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: IC at February 16, 2009 11:35 AM (jZNCU)
Any president can have a rough patch at the beginning- to be fair, I'll give him that. But have you seen anything that would lead you to believe he's going to pull out of this tailspin? I don't. It's going to be a long four years.
Posted by: Ombudsman at February 16, 2009 11:35 AM (fWF4Q)
I think I'll put my "X" in the "not a micro-manager" box.
Honestly I think the guy's gonna spend four years just saying basically anything about anything. I wouldn't really call it "waffling." It's more like "nothing at all."
Posted by: Eleven at February 16, 2009 11:35 AM (7DB+a)
On his "spiffy" new ride. Freakin' douchenozzle.
Posted by: CB at February 16, 2009 11:37 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:38 AM (NxP4A)
Honestly I think the guy's gonna spend four years just saying basically anything about anything. I wouldn't really call it "waffling." It's more like "nothing at all."
That's what bullshit artists do best.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at February 16, 2009 11:39 AM (Nwbo8)
No, because they don't understand the underlying concepts, they spend time on them that a competent manager wouldn't.
Posted by: XBradTC at February 16, 2009 11:39 AM (16ypJ)
Posted by: baldilocks at February 16, 2009 04:29 PM (SDAu2)
Spot on. However, "Told ya so" is just so 2008ish. In 2009, as a result of that Messianic pile of humility that the non-morons elected, we can now all feel free to say, "I won!"
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 11:39 AM (bcK3v)
Gitmo? Important... so we have to stop all trials and have a "study" so that Obama can decide what must be done.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:41 AM (NxP4A)
Posted by: RiteWingFascist at February 16, 2009 11:41 AM (1hSHv)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:42 AM (NxP4A)
But then he took off to Chicago and put it off for a day? (Or more? Did he sign it yet?) Because he's going to all of a sudden panic and think... I gotta know what's in there!
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:44 AM (NxP4A)
Synova,
I partially agree with you but it's not classic micromanagment. It's image control. Classic micromanagers do work themselves to death in the belief that if they want the job done right, they have to do it themselves, and they are willing to work themselves to death to prove it.
But Obama suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, among other things. And people with NPD devote their lives to construction and maintenance of what they see as a 'perfect' image. Since they labor to maintain the fantasy that they are perfect and everyone else is flawed, they don't really 'trust' anyone to do anything because, since the rest of us are not perfect we will only make him look bad. That's why he mocked Biden so quickly - he cannot bear the thought of his actions being perceived as less than perfect.
Obama is lazy and has never/will never work an honest job because he deludes himself that he is special . He thinks his very existance contributes to our society the same way that we lesser beings contribute our labor. At times his NPD shows through even more when he believes his half backed guess, hunch, impression etc. constitutes sound policy that an entire nation can and should rely on - without question. He doesn't feel the need to study, consult, research etc. and is proud of his ability to rattle of easy solutions that are not allowed to be proven false right at that moment. Hence, he responds to facts that threaten his god-like self image by saying "I won." That's not normal pyschology, it's not confidence, it's a delusional belief resulting from NPD. And having a fragile narcissist in control of the USA is very dangerous. Narcissists are capable of unspeakable, tireless rage - and he has US to vent his rage upon.
So I believe his is micromanaging (in that other people should be allowed to do their jobs but he won't let them) and lazy (no concept of a work ethic except when talking to his 'subjects') and dangerous (why do you think he kept saying he was ready to 'rule').
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 11:44 AM (SI17F)
Sort of like talking "tough" with Pakistan.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:45 AM (NxP4A)
Posted by: Jim King at February 16, 2009 11:46 AM (ZM2Vo)
LBJ tried to micro-manage Vietnam and we all know had that worked out.
Before we get too carried away with the comparisons here, even though LBJ microd the military they were still succesful despite his interference. The cong were defeated and the North had been beat back. The South had total control of their country when we left.
It wasnt until the lying treaty breaking assholes with a (D) after their name pulled the rug out from under them that the North was able to move down and take over. They were still getting massive amounts of aid from Russia and China.
Posted by: Vic at February 16, 2009 11:47 AM (f6os6)
Posted by: CB at February 16, 2009 11:48 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: SGT Dan at February 16, 2009 11:48 AM (y2s/z)
And the public mocking of Biden was disturbing. It really was.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 11:49 AM (NxP4A)
ransomnote is my sockpuppet.
Okay its not but he stole what I was going to say only less so without the big words and logical structure.
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 11:53 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Barry O at February 16, 2009 11:53 AM (knHvu)
What a bad time to be living by myself with guns in the house.
I don't know how to use the tiny url thingy, so I'll say I just read an article on news dot yahoo dot com that was titled "Newest US troops in dangerous region near Kabul." Between the Associated Press bullshit and the Obama mind control bullshit, my bullshit meter just redlined.
Here's a sample: "It is a common complaint from Afghan leaders. President Hamid Karzai has long pleaded with U.S. forces not to kill innocent Afghans during military operations and says he hopes to see night raids curtailed. "
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 11:54 AM (bcK3v)
Posted by: Scrapiron at February 16, 2009 11:59 AM (GkYyh)
Soon as I learned what 'arugula' was and saw him order 'waffles' for breakfast, figured he was a limped-wrister...and not in a good way (like blowing guys).
He's weak, and he's never dealt with real life issues. No one ever smacked him in the mouth for saying something stupid or for being an arrogant dick mitten. He's been coddled his whole life...how did that happen for a black man in a racist country?
Posted by: gator at February 16, 2009 12:01 PM (yUiO3)
And while I usually make a habit of trying to find the kindest explanation for behavior, ie. Obama cares about doing a good job and will try to keep direct control over the things he feels are most critical, I'm certainly open to the idea of a bit of image protection. Not taking a stand, the voting "present", the seeming to be open to all ideas when he was editor of the law review, those things tend to keep as many people as possible liking you. And the mockery... making a joke of Biden, the pig and lipstick jokes, the cuts to Hillary "you're likable enough", and all the various, small, *deniable*, things he's done... it's almost impossible to believe that he'd really actually flip someone off during a speech, but at the same time, as much as there is no way at all to show it was deliberate or even suggest that it was without coming accross as a bit deranged... a person has to wonder.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 12:05 PM (NxP4A)
The only reason he was so tough on Afghanistan during the campaign was to portray it as a negative contrast to our primary efforts and focus on Iraq. If our battle was only in Afghanistan during the campaign he would have framed that war as a strategic mistake too.
Exactly. Trying to rationalize his positions is a waste of time. They are matters of posture and convenience and nothing else. The MSM has managed to put a deeply flawed person in the White House at a time when we are in great peril, both economically and in terms of national security, and he is surrounded by many other people who are even worse.
If we cannot find a legal and ethical way to stop the uncontrolled influence of the MSM upon our national institutions, we will surely perish. The MSM is nothing but unaccountable power weilded by wealthy elites who have dangerously childish schemes for changing our society.
We are truly being dragged helplessly into danger by these infants... think of the old sci-fi flick, The Attack of the 50-foot Baby!
Posted by: sherlock at February 16, 2009 12:07 PM (ZrS0c)
I think Obama suffers from Class President syndrom. He is cute, popular, etc., but he has no sense of "thought". He has so many panels, commitees and advisors because he has always had people make decisions for him. He is so conditioned to this that he probably has problems following complex thoughts. He fails to see 6 steps down from his decisions because he can't. He has never had to see the consequences of a decision. His view on abortion and the stimulus proove that.
A popular man is popular because he has never been decisive.
Posted by: outraged at February 16, 2009 12:09 PM (penCf)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 12:12 PM (NxP4A)
Now, up at 5 or 6 am . . .
How do we know he's up at 5 or 6 am, he's the president and can do amything he pretty much damn well pleases. His first morning he got up at 8:30 am because of that crack binge he went on the night before.
I think the reason he doesn't want to hang around the White House is he found out after he moved in that the target of the fourth plane was the White House.
Posted by: RB at February 16, 2009 12:12 PM (ewXBY)
It certainly was! I wouldn't do that to anybody. And he does it to everybody, including - his own guy!
Goat, I agree with you about the smoking, come to think of it. I remember when I smoked, being somewhere I couldn't was like being in a jail.
And I don't think he is really committed to not smoking. I think he is committed to *mostly* not smoking, which can really put you between a rock and a hard place.
Posted by: Alana at February 16, 2009 12:15 PM (JE2zV)
Is Gates lying?
Posted by: andros at February 16, 2009 12:16 PM (k39jK)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 16, 2009 12:22 PM (PQY7w)
Is Gates lying?
You can't categorize opinion as a lie or truth. You can assume that your cabinet officer will always default to being politically correct when speaking about his boss.
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 12:24 PM (m2CN7)
February 16, 2009 - In a major foreign-policy decision taken over the weekend, President Obama has decided to legitimize the United Nationss anti-racism forum known as Durban II. State Department officials announced in a press release buried on Saturday, that starting today the United States will attend for the first time the preparatory meetings of this controversial U.N. conference.
Oops. Promises, expiration date, etc.
Posted by: toby928 at February 16, 2009 12:24 PM (PD1tk)
There is no Obama - the responsibility for him rests with the fucktards who elected the fucktard. Share your pain by finding one and yelling at it!
Posted by: Chas at February 16, 2009 12:25 PM (81ekr)
I wonder how soon it will be until we are (GOD FORBID) attacked again? Does he have a plan for the events after the attack? Sure seems he has a plan that will lead up TO the attack.
Since he was elected I find myself hugging my kids just a little longer, a little harder.
Posted by: outraged at February 16, 2009 12:25 PM (penCf)
If he believed his own hype, he now can't back down, even when confronted with a dire need for comprehensive understanding of multiple situations.
So he punts .. or evades ... but tries to sound presidential or omniscient.
Obambi is trying to take a calculus test, but barely made it through algebra. He can't admit he is lost, so he'll come up with a new math ... and spout nonsensical answers ...
Have we ever had a president have a mental break down in office?
Posted by: bill at February 16, 2009 12:27 PM (yXtKX)
Posted by: outraged at February 16, 2009 12:31 PM (penCf)
Not every Republican assumes Obama is going to fail, poly.
Posted by: andros at February 16, 2009 12:31 PM (k39jK)
Posted by: t-bird at February 16, 2009 12:33 PM (FcR7P)
Operation Pipewrench....
/dead horse + lead pipe
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at February 16, 2009 12:35 PM (niCBt)
Posted by: ronsfi at February 16, 2009 12:39 PM (h6sl7)
Posted by: liontooth at February 16, 2009 12:40 PM (n3pxb)
Posted by: Kolchak at February 16, 2009 12:40 PM (0eJbm)
Are we kidding ourselves?! If it weren't Iraq, the neo-communists would be screaming and whining about Afghanistan - we fail to acknowledge how many opposed actions in Afghanistan.
Lo and behold, those who oppose further presence in Afghanistan are coming out of the woodwork like crazy, and Obama will submit - they will sacrifice the lives and memories of those who sacrificed and died to give others the OPPORTUNITY to better themselves, their people, and their countries - and they will do it all to further their political power.
Posted by: Tyler at February 16, 2009 12:43 PM (4taA4)
Posted by: SalvucciFumbles at February 16, 2009 12:45 PM (jzK5I)
Sgt Dan,
I suspect delays, like his signing the porkulus, are based his need for worship - his impromptu holiday will give Denver the time it needs to erect greek columns or some other tribute to his greatness. I believe they are also due to his need to be in control of everything and he is finding omnipresence harder than it looks - so he will slow everything down in order to give each issue his midas touch.
The important details you describe will be carried to him by those he finds threatening because most military people are trained to be self reliant and carry themselves with pride (they are the opposite of someone like Reid or Biden). So some general shows up in Obama's office with more information in his head than Obama has in his own jug eared head and right away that's a problem. How does god take advice from 'mere' soldiers? Whomever wants to reach him with big boy issues has to be master at letting Obama act like he already knows all the battle field variables, is a more seasoned warrior, and is only allowing himself to be addressed by a 'lesser' as an indulgence. Maybe this isn't an unusual hurdle for the generals etc. but I think the stakes are higher now.
Synova,
A touch of narcissim or able confidence could help someone rise to presidential heights. But that would not be Narcissistic Personality Disorder. To be diagnosed with NPD is to be classified as a) a person without a conscience b) a person without a 'true' cohesive personality and c) a person who cannot be cured.
Lifes experiences can soften and temper the edges of a normal person with a narcissistic streak. But a person with NPD remains abusive even if they get better at hiding it. Obama's rudderless, ephemeral presence as the head of the law review or as the wonder candidate for the presidency is, I believe, a result of his pathological need for approval (therefore commit to nothing) and b) a person without a true cohesive personality. Obama can't state his positions if there is nothing inside him that holds convictions other than the defensive need to look like a man of principle - it's all an act.
I wondered, and still wonder, about that hand gesture. Some people said it was obvious but I wasn't sure because.....WHO would ACT that way? As a presidential candidate???On national television where we can all see him?? That is a toxic clue. When I first studied NPD I would read accounts of persons with NPD attempting to destroy their family members and spouses utterly, as humans. The whole time I kept sighing *but WHO could ACT that way*? Sometimes I have the same reactions to criminals who do preposterous things - WHO would think they could get away with that?? The answer? No one. There isn't an intact person with a conscience inside a human with NPD. There is an airfield with various ego and thought propelled aircraft all taking off and landing at different agles without any guiding direction from a tower - there is no one in the tower. There are fragments of a destoryed personality swirling around inside, the person with NPD feels horribly empty and knows something is wrong - and builds an external god-like image of himself to compensate. And then he takes his anger out on others. I appreciate your goodness of heart to think the kindest thing when in doubt; I believe that you are probably often correct for doing so. But there are people who are incapable and undeserving of your kindness and one of them, IMHO, is our POTUS.
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 12:46 PM (SI17F)
Translation: He's ordering white flags even as we speak.
Posted by: GarandFan at February 16, 2009 12:52 PM (237hA)
Posted by: polynikes at February 16, 2009 12:52 PM (m2CN7)
I don't know if NPD is more prevelant in people with abandonment issues but if so, Obama is a prime candidate. His father abandoned him. His mother sent him away to be raised by his grandparents while she kept his baby half sister with her. That's gotta hurt.
I read a really poorly designed website all about this before the election. The guy claimed Obama has NPD and Hitler had it etc.
Posted by: SalvucciFumbles at February 16, 2009 12:57 PM (jzK5I)
Posted by: rinseandspit at February 16, 2009 12:59 PM (oEAm5)
The guy's a little bitch. He's the guy who'll make fun of someone or shoot a surreptitious bird when safe and surrounded by friends. Call him out and he'll fold or rage ineffectively, then fawn all over you later.
Damn, rinseandspit, you just described so many dumbasses I had to call out (harshly after giving them twenty chances) and then felt guilty since they literally started crying.
Posted by: gator at February 16, 2009 01:05 PM (yUiO3)
Posted by: gator at February 16, 2009 01:07 PM (yUiO3)
Posted by: robtr at February 16, 2009 01:07 PM (uJzOr)
But regarding President Obama? Dead on analysis. That's exactly on target.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 16, 2009 01:08 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: MarieOsmond at February 16, 2009 01:09 PM (tb//D)
Polynikes,
NPD is more prevelant in people with abandonment issues. It's thought to start as a failure first to bond (to a parent or gaurdian) and then to learn to see oneself as a separate person (from the parent or gaurdian). This occurs in normal people from 2-4 years of age. This is when the personality, with it's conscience, forms. Formative years in a positive environment could heal early damage but it doesn't look like Obama ever had much of a chance throughout his childhood. The reason there's no cure for NPD once a person reaches late teens/early twenties is that therapy works by interaction with a person's true personality (including conscience)- and sufferers of NPD don't have one, and science does not have the power to create one. Once the damage is done you have a self seeking person without a conscience who naturally quite damaging to others.
Bill #106,
I wondered that too. Obama can't handle the errosion of his self delusion - then what?
Ombudsman,
Chronic lateness is also said to be a control issue - asserting that all must wait upon you emphasizes that the sun rises and sets on you. And no one at the meeting dare say "Where have you been! We have all been waiting...."
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 01:09 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: rinseandspit at February 16, 2009 01:09 PM (oEAm5)
Posted by: kelley in virginia at February 16, 2009 01:11 PM (g568/)
Posted by: MarieOsmond at February 16, 2009 01:12 PM (tb//D)
Posted by: MarieOsmond at February 16, 2009 01:14 PM (tb//D)
That's it...I mean it is so damn obvious when you run into one of these dick mittens. They pout and stomp, but will back down everytime. And, they're in all walks of life. I once had a big ex-Marine tenant that wouldn't pay his rent on time, and I finally got in his face about it, and I'll be damned, bitch started crying. I hope it was an act. I imagine almost all politicians are this sort.
Obama talks big and has such an arrogant prick demeanor about himself, but he's probably never had to be tough. He was a fat little kid, grew up in Hawaii in private school, went to Harvard, etc. Someone willing to cut someone's head off or live in a cave for years will take Obambi to the woodshed.
We're in trouble, and I don't think people realize to what extent. They're still glowing because we have an unqualified amateur as POTUS that just so happens to be half-black.
Posted by: gator at February 16, 2009 01:19 PM (yUiO3)
Posted by: outraged at February 16, 2009 05:31 PM (penCf)
As they say, the only way she could get uglier, is to get bigger!
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 01:19 PM (bcK3v)
Rinseandspit,
I like your analysis and agree with it and all the sadness it brings. I was suprised that some of my friends actually drank the koolaid. I couldn't figure out why they would never hire someone at work with no experience but said "Can't we just give him a chance?" when it came to POTUS??? Unbelievable.
I remember reading on a blog that the deepest reason that libs hated Bush with rare passion (BDS) was because, for a guy whom they framed as a witless simian, he ran circles around them, got elected twice etc. and there was nothing that they in their brilliance could do about it. Hmmmm...he won...and strangely he never felt Obama's need to say so.
I have a friend with an IQ of 175 who claims that Obama is a genius with an IQ of 148. Oh I argued with her on that (despite my average IQ) because Obama seems so profoundly witless. "Genius?" I shouted. But she perservered in saying so. She said that she was fortunate to never be the person with the highest IQ in the class growing up - it made her doubt her assertions and check her facts. It's her opinion that he was too often the person with the highest IQ and sees no need to check his facts etc. I dunno....the idea of his having an IQ above the double digits still irks me...but her theory might account for a portion of that smirk on his face. And may account for more of liberal dillusion - define Bush down and then point to Obama's IQ as proof of superiority....ok now I am dispondent again......
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 01:22 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 01:23 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: MarieOsmond at February 16, 2009 01:24 PM (tb//D)
Posted by: MarieOsmond at February 16, 2009 01:26 PM (tb//D)
I think Bulldog McAssenstein and Token-ya make a nice couple. The older daughter is very pretty and the little one is cute as a button.
They could look like John Merrick with third degree burns and Kaposi's sarcoma, I wouldn't care. But, their belief system will fundamentally change what America once stood for, namely self-determination and limited government.
Don't get me wrong...I'd say the same thing about the repubs today. Sadly, it feels as though we have no options short of disrupting the government.
Posted by: gator at February 16, 2009 01:27 PM (yUiO3)
If we cannot find a legal and ethical way to stop the uncontrolled influence of the MSM upon our national institutions, we will surely perish. The MSM is nothing but unaccountable power weilded by wealthy elites who have dangerously childish schemes for changing our society.
YES THERE IS A WAY! WE CAN BOYCOTT THE SPONSORS OF
THOSE NEWS ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE DISAGREE WITH!!!
Beginning with you-know-who we could hit them so hard their Mexican Pa'tron would want his money back!!! and all we have to do is simply not buy their Goddamn Products!!!
Posted by: Julian Bream plays J.S. Bach at February 16, 2009 01:31 PM (zSnEy)
We're in trouble, and I don't think people realize to what extent.
I agree, and we should start talking about what we can DO about it!
Posted by: Julian Bream plays J.S. Bach at February 16, 2009 01:35 PM (zSnEy)
And... for the rest: To be diagnosed with something means that the symptoms are bad enough that a person has trouble functioning. That doesn't mean, at all, that a person can't have a far milder version of the same thing and function.
Saying that Obama has NPD because so much of his behavior fits and that this means that it's full blown NPD is more than I'm willing to accept. I don't know of any psychological behavioral disorder that is all or nothing. The psych things that seem to be, are physical disorders.
For one thing, he doesn't seem controlling in his home. And wouldn't he be?
It may well color his process, to make image control a significant element of his decision making, to fuel the micro-managment, and lead to indecisiveness and all of these things.
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 01:35 PM (NxP4A)
Absolutely right!!!! I'm glad to see that someone else was deeply troubled by the assholish way in which he referred to someone who should (at least theoretically) he his strong right arm.
Now I have ZERO use for Biden who is an inside-the-beltway, bloviating imbecile. But to see the Odiot trashing him so arrogantly is painful. I guess Obama forgot that he personally selected Biden as his VEEP -- so doesn't Biden's gaffe-filled idiocy reflect back upon the O himself???
Posted by: deMontjoie at February 16, 2009 01:49 PM (QXgVC)
I have a friend with an IQ of 175 who claims that Obama is a genius with an IQ of 148.
Are you sure she wasn't using Kelvin scale instead of Fahrenheit? LOL
Posted by: bill at February 16, 2009 01:55 PM (yXtKX)
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 01:57 PM (SI17F)
Mama's gonna make all of your
Nightmares come true
Mama's gonna put all of her fears into you
Mama's gonna keep you right here
Under her wing
she won't let you fly but she might let you sing
Mama will keep baby cosy and warm
Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe
Of course Mama's gonna help build the wall
Mother do think she's good enough for me
Mother do think she's dangerous to me
Mother will she tear your little boy apart
Oooh aah, mother will she break my heart
Hush now baby, baby don't you cry
Mama's gonna check out all your girl friends for you
Mama won't let anyone dirty get through
Mama's gonna wait up till you come in
Mama will always find out where
You've been
Mamma's gonna keep baby healthy and clean
Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe
You'll always be a baby to me
Mother, did it need to be so high.
Posted by: Mama Michelle at February 16, 2009 02:00 PM (ad8lc)
I'm unwilling to concede him a respectable IQ without more documentation than we've seen so far. His performance to date certainly does not support such cognitive ability (a degree of glibness -- yes, I'll give him that).
Rather, I wonder if his early childhood history may have included skewed external perceptions of an otherwise average IQ to be significantly above the mean. As his grandparents' "Golden Child", he may have rarely encountered negative feedback on his performance. This would have then reinforced his over-inflated self-image.
PostScript: Several studies have shown an INVERSE correlation between capability and self-esteem in certain environments. The hypothesized mechanism being that barely-capable folks do not know that they're incapable without external feedback. Therefore, even when they do poorly on standardized tests, they arrogantly feel that they're doing great.
Posted by: deMontjoie at February 16, 2009 02:16 PM (QXgVC)
Posted by: CoolCzech at February 16, 2009 02:16 PM (iafWn)
Posted by: jukin at February 16, 2009 02:17 PM (dCKOO)
Synova,
I really hope you are right, about everything. At first I thought about how happy I'd be if you are and then I realized that he would still be destroying our economy and jeapardizing our national security and that did dampen my optimism a little.
I find myself wondering, if I had his resume (if I were he), why would I believe I would be the best person to be president of the United States? On what would I base all my sweeping promises? I'd be a junior senator with no accomplishment to my name proclaiming that my election will mark the day that the seas ceased to rise etc. Even without the economic meltdown, I'd have islamofacism, Russia, Iran, China etc. I'd have to be so sure of myself and my lack of experience that I'd cut other statesmen off by saying "I won."
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 02:17 PM (SI17F)
deMontjoie
You comment is the reason I will sleep better tonight! The cognitive dissonance was getting to me!
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 02:19 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: CoolCzech at February 16, 2009 02:20 PM (iafWn)
Well, I never made any claim that he wasn't going to destroy our economy and jeopardize our national security and generally eff up Afghanistan. ;-)
Posted by: Synova at February 16, 2009 02:33 PM (NxP4A)
Posted by: CoolCzech at February 16, 2009 07:20 PM (iafWn)
And to further that analogy, O-bomb-uh is about to get up out of the dining booth, walk-out without paying and see if anyone notices.
Posted by: virgin Lebanese goat until Ace visited at February 16, 2009 02:35 PM (bcK3v)
Obama was half black, but didn't evolve through the average Chicago black man experience ... perhaps he mistook the extra dose of admiration bestowed on him at Hahverd for his achievement as a black man ... as an extra dose of admiration for being really gifted ...
Does he know his "blackness" gives him a pass on things, or does he think it is all Him?
Late night hosts still praise him as superior, and none yet dare even make a joke about his missteps ... it is still sacrilege. Maybe after the honeymoon, his shit will stink, and farts won't be as cute.
Posted by: bill at February 16, 2009 02:44 PM (yXtKX)
Posted by: PJ at February 16, 2009 02:44 PM (fyFnu)
He's the founders' nightmare.
Posted by: toby928 at February 16, 2009 03:10 PM (PD1tk)
Wouldn't surprise me if they think they have a 175 IQ. The inflation of IQ scores lately is hilarious, anyone over 150 was a stunning prodigy, a freak of nature numbering one in ten thousands. Now every kid is 140 or higher and people are testing over 190s. Moral of the story: grade inflation doesn't just happen at the school level, folks.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 16, 2009 03:11 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: toby928 at February 16, 2009 03:37 PM (PD1tk)
Posted by: toby928 at February 16, 2009 03:38 PM (PD1tk)
Christopher Taylor,
For the longest time I ignored her statements about IQ for that reason. Whenever she mentioned her IQ I looked at her mildly as if she were mentioning the weather. Then as I began to work for her on various projects, I began to notice that she was capable of fixing theoretical problems (legacy statistics) by suddenly replacing the original theory with radically different and fully fleshed out, detailed theory that worked better. So at that point I thought to myself she was very smart but not necessarilty a genius. Then she began performing theory and paradigm replacement while integrating elaborate AI logic into simple programs like Excel because management wouldn't let her have 'real' software. Finally, when allowed to use programming software, she was producing products herself that would generally take the diverse expertise of an innovative company to create, in remarkably little time. I was finally convinced that it is likely true - she is a genius. I agree with your premise (the Lake Wobegon effect), I've seen it myself, but in her case I believe she is indeed a genius.
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 03:48 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 16, 2009 04:09 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: Harun at February 16, 2009 04:31 PM (xEAye)
Posted by: ransomnote at February 16, 2009 05:13 PM (SI17F)
Posted by: burnt toast at February 16, 2009 05:34 PM (GbFGJ)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 16, 2009 06:18 PM (Ygf78)
I've never seen a president become a miserable failure so quickly. Not yet Jimmy Carter or Richard Nixon. Obama is a loose cannon and the nation will pay dearly for its bad judgement.
The nation will suffer for allowing two candidates of such low attainment to run. I have no doubt that this will be repeated again and again.
Posted by: Thomas Jackson at February 16, 2009 06:53 PM (0Qynq)
Posted by: Anonymous at February 18, 2009 03:13 AM (aLnB3)
Do anything needed to support an idea, a good idea usually brings good results, doing
business is like that.http://www.dunksky.com/.This site has always been on
Posted by: nike dunk sb at October 30, 2009 03:44 AM (LACJ9)
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.









