The Essential Obama

Gerard Vanderleun illuminates one facet of what I see in Obama:

Doing “something” in Afghanistan has no possible benefit for either anarchy or Obama. Anything that is “done” – be it sending in more troops or bringing troops out – only increases order and reduces entropy. Decisions, one way or another, direct management solutions. In Afghanistan as it is in America these days increased and directed management of problems decreases chaos and uncertainty. It is not an accident that all of Obama’s domestic agenda involves replacing private sector management with government czars and bureaucracies.

If your inner goal is the destruction of established systems of governance you will seek in increase chaos and uncertainty at every turn. This is exactly what we see in Obama’s personal style of what passes for “governance.” We do not have to intuit this. We need only observe and not deny the evidence of our senses.

Veterans of dysfunctional corporations will recognize the Obama style as the one in which upper management is fond of giving middle management “All the responsibility, none of the authority, and zero resources.” It’s a time-tested recipe for failure and demoralization while maintaining an aloof, “concerned,” and above the fray posture on the part of the CEO. It is what is being done to the US military, day in and day out, in Afghanistan and, as such, works to Obama’s favor as long as it can be done slowly and without alarm.

One of Vanderleun’s commenters who goes by the nom de web ahem offers a link to an American Standard article by Mark Hyman which explores another facet:

The central conviction of Obama’s ideology is that America is guilty of limitless moral failures and is the chief architect of the world’s ills. Obama has boundless enmity for America, its key institutions, and its longtime allies. Consider these facts.

The author then submits Obama’s relationships with Davis, Wright, Ayers, his assistance to Farrakhan, his disregard for key allies, his deference to anti-American leaders, his actions against the CIA, his repeated apologies for various American actions, his radical staff, and much, much more in support of his contention.  Despite roughly two pages of examples, he leaves off ties to ACORN, Holder’s dismissal of the Black Panther’s voter intimidation case, intimidation of critics, and more.

I’ve said it elsewhere and now I’ll say it here: The enemy of the Left is always domestic.  This is one of the key differences between the Left and the Right.  The Right is concerned about foreign enemies, some of whom are here in the US.  The Left sees the Right as the enemy in a very real way.

Go on!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: