Do You Love Obama?

If you do, then Stephen Marche has written the article for you – from Esquire:

Before the fall brings us down, before the election season begins in earnest with all its nastiness and vulgarity, before the next batch of stupid scandals and gaffes, before Sarah Palin tries to convert her movie into reality and Joe Biden resumes his imitation of an embarrassing uncle and Newt and Callista Gingrich creep us all out, can we just enjoy Obama for a moment? Before the policy choices have to be weighed and the hard decisions have to be made, can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a painting by Vermeer or a guitar lick by the early-seventies Rolling Stones or a Peyton Manning pass or any other astounding, ecstatic human achievement? Because twenty years from now, we’re going to look back on this time as a glorious idyll in American politics, with a confident, intelligent, fascinating president riding the surge of his prodigious talents from triumph to triumph. Whatever happens this fall or next, the summer of 2011 is the summer of Obama…

It is also the summer of unemployment, bankruptcy and increasing risk of war…but no matter.

We’ve seen this sort of thing before:

The celebration of the 70th anniversary of the birth of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin has become a social and political event of great historical significance.

The love of the people for the great leader, the admiration for the titanic activity of Comrade Stalin as a great revolutionary, statesman, general and theoretical genius, has turned this celebration into a powerful show of unity of the Soviet people, the peoples of the countries of peoples democracy, the progressive people of the whole world…

Hate to break it to Marche, but the prodigious talents of Obama led to a crushing GOP victory in 2010 – and may well lead to Obama being booted out of office in 2012.  And here’s the real kicker – our super genius President could easily have avoided all that.  Think back to January of 2009 – all us GOPers were shaking in our boots, worried that we were entering in to 20 years of liberal governance.  One thing we knew for certain was that nationalized health care was a sure thing…the Democrats had the House, the Senate and the White House and could easily put together a plan which would have put the overwhelming majority of the population permanently on the government teat, thus making the task of getting a conservative majority vastly more difficult.  All Obama had to do was use a little finesse – no chance he’d blunderbuss it through like Clinton tried in 1993, right?

Well, turns out Obama’s actions made Clinton’s in ’93 look masterful.  The bonehead turned it over to Pelosi (when he should have turned it over to a bi-partisan panel headed up by McCain) who then crafted something certain to provoke opposition, thus allowing the GOP to regain its footing.  We were cooked on January 20th, 2009…now we’ve got an even money chance of starting a conservative,  Second American Revolution on January 20th, 2013.

But Obama is still the man our liberals claim to love – mostly because they have a weak idea of what “love” means.  In actually, what they have is a servile devotion to their Great Leader and Teacher.  They are on their knees because they want a master, and have found him.  Just disgusting to think that so many people who are my fellow Americans are like that – the fruit of a century of enervating liberalism, and we’ll be more than a century in purging our nation of it.  Fortunately, Obama in actuality have given us our chance to do just that.

41 thoughts on “Do You Love Obama?

  1. Cluster's avatar Cluster July 13, 2011 / 9:50 am

    Interesting how they mention “progressive people of the world” in the glowing article on Stalin. Coincidence?

    Progressives must be proud.

  2. Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 10:29 am

    I don’t think we ever expected reality to affect the swooners whose emotional passion for Obama has provided such a creepy freakshow.

    Our resident trolls here appear to post their support for Obama not so much from love of him personally but from blind irrational loathing of a fantasized Right and its carefully demonized members. But we see, particularly in the Complicit Agenda Media, this need to express such a giddy level of absolute adoration that words like “insanity” have to come to mind.

    The Left gets quite upset when we point out that they appear to be driven by emotion rather than intellect, yet they tell us in their own words the level of blind emotional passion that defines their loyalty to Obama.

    Schoolgirl and schoolboy crushes are OK, if you are a schoolgirl or schoolboy. And if the object of this intense emotion is a TV star or a hunky athlete. Seeing the same level of breathless ecstasy generated in adults, by a politician, is downright freaky. Seeing them panting to tell the world about their love is freaky cubed. Thrills running up legs. Yecchhh.

  3. MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 10:57 am

    “They are on their knees because they want a master, and have found him. Just disgusting to think that so many people who are my fellow Americans are like that ”

    Hey, it’s just like you were with Bush and now Palin!

    The Stalin clip was great, though–you’re devolving into self-parody at quite a rapid rate.

    • Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 11:13 am

      Yes, we know that the hyper-emotional Left, being totally driven by whatever emotional spasm is going on at the time, has viewed the Right through their own filters and assumed that everyone is as blindly, foolishly motivated by equally shallow criteria.

      We have had plenty of opportunity to watch the RRL spew nonstop emotional sludge and then assume that we, too, are as lacking in anything more substantial. I guess I can understand why they need to invent and then cling to this fantasy——it might be hard on them to admit that they are just swept along, willy-nilly, on whatever emotional currents come along, while others utilize reason and rationale and facts to build objective opinions.

      It would be way too hard for the RRL to change, to turn away from that oh-so-gratifying emotional rush they get from both worshiping and loathing, and change to calm, objective analysis and unemotional decision-making.

      So none of the Leftist hysterics can possibly grasp the very real fact that while they are screaming outside the windows of their heroes, fainting away from the ecstasy of simply being IN THE SAME ROOM, BREATHING THE SAME AIR !!!!!!!! as their idols, waxing poetic over the glories of their faces, their speech, their clothes, their brilliance, their very BEINGS, others simply see their elected officials and candidates as people.

      How could we expect those who crave the emotional high of adoration and the emotional thrill of hateful attack to even begin to understand that most of us do not function on that hysterical, irrational level.

      While many of the leaders and aspiring leaders of the Right do spark enthusiasm, do generate a sense of excitement over what we think they might be able to accomplish in positions of leadership, we merely admire them and respect them. We do not swoon over them. We do not have tingles running up the leg in their presence. We do not LOOOOVVVVE them.

      And we do not base our other political decisions on emotion, either. That is why we are not on the Left.

      • tiredoflibbs's avatar tiredoflibbs July 13, 2011 / 11:50 am

        According to Monty(jeffy) those are all talking points because he said so!

        Get with the program(ming)!!!

      • mitch's avatar mitch July 13, 2011 / 12:15 pm

        I guess you have never visited C4P.

      • Thomas's avatar Thomas July 13, 2011 / 1:10 pm

        Amy

        your posts are becoming deranged and dangerous.

        Talk about high horse.

        I can recommend a good shrink if you’re interested up in Wyoming. I have a friend who lives in Jackson Hole.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 1:21 pm

        “the hyper-emotional Left, being totally driven by whatever emotional spasm is going on at the time, has viewed the Right through their own filters and assumed that everyone is as blindly, foolishly motivated by equally shallow criteria”

        You’ve got that precisely backward, as your own emotional spasm and shallowness illustrates. But projection is just SOP for you, isn’t it?

    • tiredoflibbs's avatar tiredoflibbs July 13, 2011 / 11:48 am

      Nice talking points there Monty (jeffy)! Care to regurgitate any more? This blog is critical of Bush and anyone including Palin when required unlike you drones.

      What were you saying about a favorable obamateur media – being fiction? Well, here is some more proof. Of course, you don’t like the truth that bitch-slaps you in the face.

      Try again, drone.

    • libsRJerks's avatar libsRJerks July 13, 2011 / 4:16 pm

      Monty RugBurns, we’ve seen your crap before. It’s very basic drivel, not a thought involved in creating it. You moron, get outta here!!!

  4. GreenMountainBoy's avatar GreenMountainBoy July 13, 2011 / 12:49 pm

    Please oh great monty, please tell us. Are you not scared that bams will just declare himself potus for life. Remember how afraid you were Dubya would. Look at the lawlessness that is coming out of this so called administration. Silly statement. You are ready to accept whatever bams throws our way. No thought for you required heh.

    • Thomas's avatar Thomas July 13, 2011 / 1:09 pm

      Green,

      what’s your point? That Obama will be a President for life? Are you deranged?

      It’s amazing how you conservative wingnuts will make up stories, engage in fear mongering, and try your best to start a race war.

      Neo does it all the time with his incessant posting of “Obama’s army” in inner cities.

      Pathetic.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 1:23 pm

        “what’s your point? That Obama will be a President for life? Are you deranged?”

        Yeah, that is a pretty weird one, isn’t it? I’m actually rather curious as to where that particular conspiracy theory came from.

      • GreenMountainBoy's avatar GreenMountainBoy July 13, 2011 / 1:24 pm

        LOLzer Thomas. You libbies were driving yourself crazy at the thought that Dubya woluld do something extra-constitutuional. Bams has exceeded even this “wingnut” wildest dreams.
        You just prove my point. The libbies of this country are ripe for a dictatorship.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 1:32 pm

        That’s very nice, GMB, but it still doesn’t answer the question of where this “Obama will declare himself POTUS for life!” conspiracy theory comes from. The B4V crew is usually a day or two behind the conspiracy theory du jour, so I’m wondering if you’re on the forefront for once or if this is just random silliness.

    • franklymydear's avatar franklymydear July 13, 2011 / 1:46 pm

      GMB, do you still have your guns? Remember when everyone went into a panic that Obama was going to come and get your guns and ammo. All that blather about the Deranged Bush Syndrome – nothing compared to the rights Deranged Obama Syndrome. And no, I doubt that anyone is afraid that “bams” will just declare himself potus for life. Like Bill Clinton, I expect that Barak Obama will do a lot of positive things after leaving office, be that after one term or two terms as potus. He will not be riding a mountain bike all over the country.

  5. potomac's avatar potomac July 13, 2011 / 1:31 pm

    Noemie Emery, writing in the Weekly Standard in November, 2003:

    I love George W. Bush. I worship the man. I wake up every morning glad he is president. When annoyed by small things – traffic, the weather, an overcharge – I say to myself, “President Bush,” and at once feel better. I like his worldview. I like his dogs and his wife and his mother. I think he looks cool in his shorts and his t-shirts. But it isn’t these things that make my heart flutter: It’s that he drives the people I hate the most nuts…

    Amazona: “we see, particularly in the Complicit Agenda Media, this need to express such a giddy level of absolute adoration that words like “insanity” have to come to mind…”

    • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 1:36 pm

      John Hinderaker writing on the Power Line blog in 2007:

      It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can’t get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

      We see this need to express such a giddy level of absolute adoration that words like “insanity” have to come to mind…

      • Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 1:40 pm

        Monty, you saw “adoration” in THAT?

        You are even goofier than I thought.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 1:42 pm

        Sucks to be hoisted on your own petard, doesn’t it, Amazona? But one would think you’d be used to it by now, considering how frequently it happens to you.

      • Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 3:13 pm

        In other words, Monty, you realize that this comment reflects respect but not adoration. So all you can do is try to divert to more insults.

        But then as we have noticed you do have to stick with the only thing you can do.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 6:53 pm

        Just for fun, Amazona, imagine that Hinderaker was writing that about Obama, not Bush. Boy, would you unleash a terrific rant, full of references to knee pads and blithering about “hard-core Marxism” and such!

        No need to get all snotty, though, just because your own words have come back to haunt you yet again. Just accept it and move on, OK?

      • Mark Noonan's avatar Mark Noonan July 13, 2011 / 8:51 pm

        Monty,

        The rest of the quote:

        …Hyperbolic? Well, maybe. But consider Bush’s latest master stroke: the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. The pact includes the U.S., Japan, Australia, China, India and South Korea; these six countries account for most of the world’s carbon emissions. The treaty is, in essence, a technology transfer agreement. The U.S., Japan and Australia will share advanced pollution control technology, and the pact’s members will contribute to a fund that will help implement the technologies. The details are still sketchy and more countries may be admitted to the group later on. The pact’s stated goal is to cut production of “greenhouse gases” in half by the end of the century.

        What distinguishes this plan from the Kyoto protocol is that it will actually lead to a major reduction in carbon emissions! This substitution of practical impact for well-crafted verbiage stunned and infuriated European observers…

        In other words, a bit of a joke to contrast Bush’s environmental policies with the foaming at the mouth, world-is-dying liberal ideas…Meanwhile, the linked article never admits to being a joke. It actually gets more sycophantic later on.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 13, 2011 / 9:32 pm

        How about when you declare Bush to be on par with Lincoln, Mark? Joke, or fluffing?

        And that’s not even getting into the idolatry of Sarah Palin.

      • Mark Noonan's avatar Mark Noonan July 13, 2011 / 11:29 pm

        Monty,

        Time will only tell – but in the central fact of identifying the Islamist enemy and trying to fight it, Bush ranks very high in Presidential ability. That he was torn down by much smaller men who hated him doesn’t detract from his achievements…and, eventually, we will have to fight and win the war Bush tried to have fought and won during his 8 years in office.

        Meanwhile, the proof of Bush’s ability is in the fact that Obama has thrown over nothing of what Bush developed to protect the United States.

      • MontyBurns's avatar MontyBurns July 14, 2011 / 3:10 pm

        Fluffing, then. Noted.

    • Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 3:28 pm

      pot, thanks so much for pointing out the total humor deficiency of the RRL troll contingent, as well as your limited reading capacity.

      First, the comment is a joke. It starts off as, possibly, a love letter to President Bush, but when you get to “…When annoyed by small things – traffic, the weather, an overcharge – I say to myself, “President Bush,” and at once feel better. …” you realize it is a put-on.

      Well, people who possess a sense of humor realize this. You, not so much.

      But where you really lose it, in your rabid single-minded need to find something to support your conviction that all are as emotion-driven as you, is where the author says “But it isn’t these things that make my heart flutter: It’s that he drives the people I hate the most nuts…

      Sorry—people did not vote for Bush because they were swept away by a fan-club hysteria. Sure, we liked Bush, even had affection for him. He was, and is, a likable guy. You guys just cannot comprehend the reality of a belief in a system motivating people instead of blind irrational passion.

      Trying to explain this to you is like trying to explain how an orange tastes. You either know, or you don’t.

      The fact is, you are taking the stand you are taking because of the emotional way you view the world, and that in and of itself means you are incapable of understanding any other way. You have to assume everyone is like you, but—fortunately for the nation—-they are not.

    • Mark Noonan's avatar Mark Noonan July 13, 2011 / 8:52 pm

      potomac,

      Look up “joke” in the dictionary and get back to us.

  6. goldjake's avatar goldjake July 13, 2011 / 1:32 pm

    i am very curious where obama has destroyed the constitution besides maybe the health insurance bill which is questionable. Amy can you please stop calling people names and acting so self-righteous. i am not even technically a hard core liberal and i bet you cannot predict what i am going to say.

    • Amazona's avatar Amazona July 13, 2011 / 3:11 pm

      jake, I am very curious about where you saw a claim that Obama has destroyed the Constitution.

      There are certainly many observations on his determination to just IGNORE the Constitution, even to subvert it. But as it is not yet destroyed I can’t imagine where you found a comment that it has been, much less that Obama did it.

      The erosion of the Constitution got a good start with FDR. Since then there have been some big incursions, some small attacks, but a general weakening of allegiance to the rule of law which it established.

      If you are not “technically a hard core liberal” then what are you? You must have some idea of what “a hard core liberal” IS or you could say you don’t qualify as one. So what is a “hard core liberal”? And how do you differ?

  7. Cluster's avatar Cluster July 13, 2011 / 2:36 pm

    Because twenty years from now, we’re going to look back on this time as a glorious idyll in American politics, with a confident, intelligent, fascinating president riding the surge of his prodigious talents from triumph to triumph.

    I am curious what triumph to triumph the author is referring to? Is it the union bail out triumph? The increasing unemployment triumph? The no budget in over 2 years triumph? The numerous golf outing triumph? Maybe Monty or Thomas can help me out. Afterall they are the smartest posters here, right?

  8. js's avatar js July 13, 2011 / 3:21 pm

    its hit nebraska…

    The book that OPS bought, “The Cultural Proficiency Journey: Moving Beyond Ethical Barriers Toward Profound School Change,” includes a worksheet for teachers to score themselves on a continuum of cultural sensitivity. The continuum ranges from “cultural destructiveness,” as evidenced by genocide and ethnocide, to “cultural proficiency,” depicted as the highest level of awareness.

    Only those educators who acknowledge the existence of white privilege in America, that “white” is a culture in America and that race “is a definer for social and economic status” can reach proficiency, the authors contend. Those who score poorly on the worksheet are asked in the book what they will do “to align yourself with the values expressed.”

      • neocon1's avatar neocon1 July 14, 2011 / 8:41 am

        An attorney at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which annually receives big chunks of taxpayer dollars, claims “a pattern of racketeering activity” prevails at the renowned civil rights group.

        The allegations, outlined in a federal lawsuit this week, come a year after an NAACP executive in Georgia got criminally charged with embezzling more than $275,000. In that case, the branch director
        and her top assistant used the nonprofit organization as their personal piggy bank for at least six years, according to authorities.

        Hmmmm Saffire
        do da name pigford and charade ring a familiar note?
        thieves and looters all.

  9. libsRJerks's avatar libsRJerks July 13, 2011 / 4:38 pm

    New names, new libs? Or are they the same old pukes who pollute this blog?

    • neocon1's avatar neocon1 July 13, 2011 / 6:21 pm

      SSDD

      I LOATHE the muslem marxist POS, and all he stands for. OK??
      Do I wish him harm?
      not by man, or mans hand
      By nature, or God?
      four packs a day??
      Welllll puff away big boy! Im buying!

      NOTE:
      only following the democRAT lead…remember Clarence Thomas??
      DITTO!!!!!

    • casper's avatar casper July 13, 2011 / 6:24 pm

      Interesting comment coming from you keefer.

      • neocon1's avatar neocon1 July 14, 2011 / 8:06 am

        catspuke

        “the same old pukes who pollute this blog?”

        in YOUR case same name, same SHIITE,
        NEXT?

Comments are closed.