>This Is How I Saw It

>I wrote the following in November 2008, just a few days after the election. It was a post in another blog I have and don’t use too much anymore. I thought it would be interesting to re-visit the points I made in it, and see how many have proved themselves, or maybe disproved themselves, now that we’ve had a chance to more fully assess BO.

Here it is:

November 14
We Don’t Know Who Obama Is
You probably heard shortly after the election that some media figures are admitting that we really don’t know who Obama is, what he stands for; he’s sort of like a puzzle. But I think we have all sorts of examples of his character, pieces of the puzzle, before us in the way he has conducted his life and this campaign.

We know he is charismatic, because of his quick rise to power on the basis of his personality with virtually no other qualifications.

We know he is arrogant, because he is ignoring the many requests for him to prove he is eligible to hold the office of president; and he will not answer questions he doesn’t “like.”

We know he does not keep his word, as evidenced by his “changing his mind” about accepting public campaign financing. That is dishonorable and renders him untrustworthy.

We know he is unscrupulous and will do anything to “win,” because he changes the rules in the middle of the game, he changed positions many times during the campaign, he set up his online donation system to accept contributions without safeguards to ensure his contributions were all legal and above board, and he will not release a list of contributors to prove they were all legal and that he did not cheat to win.

We know he has overstated his past experience, making “community organizer” sound like some sort of big executive position, and in his case the community organizing had no real beneficial effect on the neighborhoods it was supposed to help, according to an interview with National Review. One associate of his, Mike Kruglik, said during the interview that during his community organizing days, Obama “was constantly thinking about his path to significance and power,” and that Obama went to Harvard Law School to [paraphrasing] find out more about power, how powerful people think, what kind of networks they have, and how they connect to each other. From this we can assume he is power-hungry.

We know, because of his denial of his many questionable associations, that he is a liar. We also know, because he requires those wishing appointments to fill out a questionnaire listing THEIR past associations and past actions that might be “embarrassing” to him or demonstrate conflicts of interest, that he is a hypocrite.

We know he is a bully, because he punishes those who ask him legitimate questions about his policies and stances, calling these questions “personal attacks” and then denying “access.” His campaign blacklisted WFTV after Barbara West asked Joe Biden some tough questions, and he did not call on any Fox News reporters during the press conference he held shortly after the election.

We know he is domineering, and extremely insecure (which can quickly turn to paranoia – it wouldn’t be the first time), because he cannot handle being challenged and he wants to silence those who speak out against him, as evidenced by his appointment of Henry Rivera as FCC commissioner, and his appointment of Rahm Emanuel as WH chief of staff. (Rivera is a strong supporter of the “Fairness” Doctrine, and Emanuel condemned Clinton “betrayers” to death in the 90’s as he stabbed a table with a knife, crying “Dead!” after speaking each “betrayer’s” name.) He also wants to form some sort of citizen security force, separate from and independent of the military, which some fear would be similar to this organization.

We know he does not have a clue about protocol and is very immature, because of the leaks about his confidential meeting with President Bush (no one else was in the room…); and, according to Hillary Clinton, his “naive and dangerous” positions on matters of national security.

And we know, by his own words in his own books, that he feels a close kindredness with Marxists.

It turns out there is a lot we know about him after all, if we put all the pieces together. Based on his own actions and statements, and reports from some who know him, the man is a charismatic, arrogant, dishonorable, untrustworthy, unscrupulous, self aggrandizing, power hungry, lying, hypocritical, domineering, insecure, unversed, immature, naive and dangerous Marxist-leaning bully.

Not that there haven’t been bad politicians before, but……..

%d bloggers like this: