You are here

President Pointless

Error message

  • Deprecated function: Optional parameter $decorators_applied declared before required parameter $app is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 3532 of /home/ethepmkq/public_html/drupal7core/includes/
  • Deprecated function: Optional parameter $relations declared before required parameter $app is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 3532 of /home/ethepmkq/public_html/drupal7core/includes/

NRR has reduced service to US political destinations due to the revealed nature of the current President. Words as he uses them do not have meaning in the sense necessary for a reasoned analysis. Whatever Barry says, as I see it, has no meaning. His orations may have feeling, and intent, and he does communicate something. Just not facts.

There’s nothing reliable and consistent about which one can construct criticism. He’s been on most sides of the important issues, which is surely reasonable for the swirling realm of emotion, but a lousy foundation for policy. There are too many contradictions. It is as if Obama lives in the world of dreams, where logic need not apply. When dreaming, the discontinuities do not exist. When awakened back into the world of physical laws and the community of contracts where words are so immutable that they seem foreign (estoppel seems a relevant example), those dream events appear silly.

From what I’ve learned about Barry’s biography, he’s extending the use of a coping mechanism developed in his teens. When he learned to see himself as black, and saw whites apparently regard him suspiciously, Obama learned that to get along, all he needed to do was tell the white folk what they wanted to hear. Be calm and polite, and the tension would ease, allowing Barry-Barack to continue doing whatever he pleased.

My keyboard psychoanalysis is not too relevant, though. What matters is that arguing over Obama’s words is like arguing with an 9-year-old. Made of jello. And without meaning behind words, it is tough to know what his policies or goals actually are. We have to wait for the Executive Orders to be signed, or the legislation to pass Congress. Because those words have meaning in the traditional legal sense, not in the squishy slippery “living Consitution” sense.

Victor Davis Hanson has compiled a highlight reel of Barry’s ju-jitsu with old-fashion truth.  After amassing evidence, VDH speculates:

Why has President Obama developed a general disregard for the truth, in a manner far beyond typical politicians who run one way and govern another, or hide failures and broadcast successes? 

First, he has confidence that the media will not be censorious and will simply accept his fiction as fact. A satirist, after all, could not make up anything to match the obsequious journalists who bow to their president, proclaim him a god, and receive sexual-like tingles up their appendages. 

Second, Obama is a postmodernist. He believes that all truth is relative, and that assertions gain or lose credibility depending on the race, class, and gender of the speaker. In Obama’s case, his misleading narrative is intended for higher purposes. Thus it is truthful in a way that accurate facts offered by someone of a different, more privileged class and race might not be. 

Third, Obama talks more than almost any prior president, weighing in on issues from Stephen Colbert’s haircut, to Sean Hannity’s hostility, to the need to wash our hands. In Obama’s way of thinking, his receptive youthful audiences are proof of his righteousness and wisdom — and empower him to pontificate on matters he knows nothing about.

Finally, our president is a product of a multicultural education: Facts either cannot be ascertained or do not matter, given that the overriding concern is to promote an equality of result among various contending groups. That is best done by inflating the aspirations of those without power, and deflating the “dominant narratives” of those with it.

Narratives are dreams. Even when used to explain collective grievances or class conditions, a narrative is experienced individually. In storytelling, the teller makes an invidual personal connection with each listener. Many connections many be simulateneous and parallel, but each is distinct. Those distinct connections are significantly emotional, and thus outside the realm of reasoned analysis.

It’s foolish to argue that Chris Matthews did not feel an Obama-inspired tingle. Barry struck resonance in Matthews’ dreams. Translating that feeling into policy probably makes perfect sense within their shared narrative. But I’m not dreaming. I can’t follow the narrative. With my tradition-bound vocabulary and ancient logic tools, I’m lost.

The President is not talking to me. I’m not included in the conversation—even though he uses language of inclusion, he isn’t inclusive by my understanding of the concept. That leaves me with nothing to discuss beyond what I overhear from Barry’s dream conversations. Talking about overheard feelings is just gossip. And I have better things to do.