He was happy to exploit his exotic Kenyan family as part of his remarkably canny self-promotion, yet in the end the composite characters with invented narratives are far more real to him than a non-composite brother with an actual sick kid. Because the composites know their place – bit-players in The Barack Obama Story.
This has been gaining some mention in my regular blog reads in these past days, not so much though, that link at the bottom of “The Corner” to Deborah Gyapong where she retells an un-bragged about story from Mitt Romney’s days at Bain Capital.
http://deborahgyapong.blogspot.ca/2012/08/story-that-reveals-something-of-mitt.html
B. Hussien sure has a lot of old stories that haven’t seen the light of day, perhaps the media will start to mention some of Mitt’s old stories, I suspect in the new administration the tone will be different.
I wonder if Obama is a full blown sociopath. It seems to me that he mimics empathy. Nothing is ever his fault but all glory is his.
I happen to have a disabled little brother and on my meager salary I have ‘loaned’ him (we both know I’m never getting the money back) several thousand dollars, bought or given him all his furniture etc. The average wage is Kenya is $79 per month so for less than the cost of a latte per day George Obama could be lifted out of poverty. The fact that a multimillionaire has not set up a monthly bank transfer of $100 for his brother speaks volumes about him.
I went here – vodahost.com/web-hosting-sociopath-test-sociopath-definition.html/ and scored Obama at 30points based on his behaviour as reported by the lame stream media.
The generosity of the left is always via proxy – the government using your money.
Al, my own view is that Obama is a pathological narcissist, which in effect is also a sociopath.
Obama is unable to live in reality; that is, in a world where other people exist as themselves with their own self-interests, will, power, agenda. Obama has a pathological need to control all of his external world; he has to feel that HE is in control and that Others cannot intrude on or affect His World.
He probably moved into this pathology as a young boy and by now, he is completely alienated from reality. He can only interact with people if he feels he controls them. He has learned to control them by misinformation (aka lies); and by constant emotional manipulation.
If he cannot control you, then you cease to exist for Obama.
He is, of course, unable to feel empathy because that acknowledges you as a real Other. He can only control. Or not control. That’s his only interaction with the world.
This pathology means that Obam alives entirely in a ‘virtual’ realm; that is, one that he himself authors and writes. Truth, or a direct relation between one’s words and the external reality, has no meaning for Obama. The external world doesn’t exist for him.
Therefore, Obama lives entirely in the Words that he speaks. These Words have no reference to the real world. So, he’ll say whatever he needs to win you over, to control you. And two hours later, will tell a different audience the exact opposite. To win THEM over.
Keep someone that pathological in a local community activity and he’s relatively harmless. Move him into a position where many, many diverse forces and people exist, and his ‘retreat’ activities will be to Divide and Conquer; to threaten apocalyptic scenarios unless you follow his Will; to ignore anything that questions him (ie, he ignores Congress); to set up sycophantic followers (his czars)….; to portray himself as a victim (of racism)..and so on.
It’s all there. He’s a very dangerous person.
Great post ET, you nailed it all about this fraud. His an invention of the extreme Marxists that have taken over Hollywood and all the other stations they needed to conquer to take down the US. America has one chance in Nov. if the lazy conservatives sit on the couch, wasting their lives watching the Kardashian sluts, and don’t get out to vote in this atmosphere then they will have their couch redistributed by Barry and no one to blame but themselves.
“Obama’s slumdog brother: Meet the hopeless drunk from a Nairobi shanty town who is the U.S. President’s BROTHER”
http://hemingwayreport.blogspot.ca/2012/08/the-romney-camp-should-be-salivating.html
ET: don’t you ever get tired on writing the same post over and over.
Obama will win the next election. Be prepared for that.
“The conventional wisdom runs like this: Liberals are charitable because they advocate government redistribution of money in the name of social justice; conservatives are uncharitable because they oppose these policies. But note the sleight of hand: Government spending, according to this logic, is a form of charity.
Let us be clear: Government spending is not charity. It is not a voluntary sacrifice by individuals. No matter how beneficial or humane it might be, no matter how necessary it is for providing public services, it is still the obligatory redistribution of tax revenues. Because government spending is not charity, sanctimonious yard signs do not prove that the bearers are charitable or that their opponents are selfish. (On the contrary, a public attack on the integrity of those who don’t share my beliefs might more legitimately constitute evidence that I am the uncharitable one.)
To evaluate accurately the charity difference between liberals and conservatives, we must consider private, voluntary charity. How do liberals and conservatives compare in their private giving and volunteering? Beyond strident slogans and sarcastic political caricatures, what, exactly, do the data tell us?
The data tell us that the conventional wisdom is dead wrong. In most ways, political conservatives are not personally less charitable than political liberals—they are more so.
First, we must define “liberals” and “conservatives.” Most surveys ask people not just about their political party affiliation but also about their ideology. In general, about 10 percent of the population classify themselves as “very conservative”; and another 10 percent call themselves “very liberal.” About 20 percent say they are simply “liberal,” and 30 percent or so say they are “conservative.” The remaining 30 percent call themselves “moderates” or “centrists.” In this discussion, by “liberals” I mean the approximately 30 percent in the two most liberal categories, and by conservatives I mean the 40 percent or so in the two most conservative categories.
So how do liberals and conservatives compare in their charity? When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike. Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money each year than liberal people, but a percentage point or so less likely to volunteer.
But this similarity fades away when we consider average dollar amounts donated. In 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more money to charity than households headed by a liberal ($1,600 to $1,227). This discrepancy is not simply an artifact of income differences; on the contrary, liberal families earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families, and conservative families gave more than liberal families within every income class, from poor to middle class to rich.
If we look at party affiliation instead of ideology, the story remains largely the same. For example, registered Republicans were seven points more likely to give at least once in 2002 than registered Democrats (90 to 83 percent).
The differences go beyond money and time. Take blood donations, for example. In 2002, conservative Americans were more likely to donate blood each year, and did so more often, than liberals. If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply in the United States would jump by about 45 percent.
The political stereotypes break down even further when we consider age: “Anyone who is not a socialist before age thirty has no heart, but anyone who is still a socialist after thirty has no head,” goes the old saying. And so we imagine crusty right-wing grandfathers socking their money away in trust funds while their liberal grandchildren work in soup kitchens and save the whales. But young liberals—perhaps the most vocally dissatisfied political constituency in America today—are one of the least generous demographic groups out there. In 2004, self-described liberals younger than thirty belonged to one-third fewer organizations in their communities than young conservatives. In 2002, they were 12 percent less likely to give money to charities, and one-third less likely to give blood. Liberal young Americans in 2004 were also significantly less likely than the young conservatives to express a willingness to sacrifice for their loved ones: A lower percentage said they would prefer to suffer than let a loved one suffer, that they are not happy unless the loved one is happy, or that they would sacrifice their own wishes for those they love.
The compassion of American conservatives becomes even clearer when we compare the results from the 2004 U.S. presidential election to data on how states address charity. Using Internal Revenue Service data on the percentage of household income given away in each state, we can see that the red states are more charitable than the blue states. For instance, of the twenty-five states that donated a portion of household income above the national average, twenty-four gave a majority of their popular votes to George W. Bush for president; only one gave the election to John F. Kerry. Of the twenty-five states below the national giving average, seventeen went for Kerry, but just seven for Bush. In other words, the electoral map and the charity map are remarkably similar.
These results are not an artifact of close elections in key states. The average percentage of household income donated to charity in each state tracked closely with the percentage of the popular vote it gave to Mr. Bush. Among the states in which 60 percent or more voted for Bush, the average portion of income donated to charity was 3.5 percent. For states giving Mr. Bush less than 40 percent of the vote, the average was 1.9 percent. The average amount given per household from the five states combined that gave Mr. Bush the highest vote percentages in 2003 was 25 percent more than that donated by the average household in the five northeastern states that gave Bush his lowest vote percentages; and the households in these liberal-leaning states earned, on average, 38 percent more than those in the five conservative states.
People living in conservative states volunteer more than people in liberal states. In 2003, the residents of the top five “Bush states” were 51 percent more likely to volunteer than those of the bottom five, and they volunteered an average of 12 percent more total hours each year. Residents of these Republican-leaning states volunteered more than twice as much for religious organizations, but also far more for secular causes. For example, they were more than twice as likely to volunteer to help the poor.
Surely Jimmy Carter would have been surprised to learn that the selfish Americans he criticized so vociferously were most likely the very people who elected him president.
Que leech wrote ” Obama will win the next election. Be prepared for that.”
Why do you think so many are stocking up on guns, ammo and non perishable staples? It is because he may with the help of the Obama water carrying MSM and ballot stuffing win, this will be worse then the great depression of the 1930’s for America and Canada.
quebecois, don’t you ever get tired of writing the same empty and subjective opinions over and over?
You write utter nonsense about physics, biology and cognition. You inform us you are just a morass of atoms and are unable to think. You prove this with your constant false data and specious opinions about the Quebec and Canadian economies and societal situations. You haven’t a clue about what goes on elsewhere in the world, or in the US. So?
It’s “Bleak (White) House” starring Barack Obama as “Mrs Jellyby.”
Now ending its four year run?
Yeah Quebecois and I am cheering for the PQ in September in your sordid province. My hope is that I can be of assistance in the next referendum.
They say a pathalogical liar sooner or later ends up believing his own lies and lives the fantasy he has created.
That seems to be the case here.
Oooh…I can hardly wait for his third autobiography, Shit I Made Up and How it Changed the World…
Don’t be too hard on Qwebecky…every village needs an idiot.
He really does seem sociopathic. If the brother is a drop-down alchoholic with no desire to change then there’s not much Obama can do for him, but the nephew? That’s obscene.
Romney needs to get pictures of this kid and make sure people hear about this.
What a great opportunity to illustrate unmistakably the difference between conservative and progressive values. Romney or one of his surrogates should very publicly set up some sort of employment opportunity for George so he can easily earn a good living. For $100/month it can’t be too hard. Solar cellphone charging service? Monthly column (he seems fairly articulate in the interview I saw)?
Good one Syncro. shit I made up
A week ago I thought it was a toss up between Romney and Obama. Though the election is far from decided now, my compass is pointing towards the GOP. Why? The Dems seemed to have jumped the shark:
– their divisive smearing is clearly wearing thin, including to a small extent the MSM
– They doth protest too much with Ryan pick as GOP VP. It seems evident he scares the s**t out of them, and a Palin-style attack on him will have little effect
– the Dems seem to have already, and prematurely, fired off all their smear ammunition and campaign advertising budget. What’s left, their policies?
– the bizarre behaviour of VP Biden lately shows desperation. Why would he make a ridiculous speech of GOP puting “y’all in chains?” He insults moderate voters, including blacks, to pander to a vote (hard left identify politics black lobby) whose vote he is already guaranteed?
The Dems are doing this to themselves; what will their behaviour be when the GOP, as they should, puts concrete policies forward when voters are more engaged months from now? Their Occupy Wall Street redux of “you didn’t build that” is tiresome and silly. They’ve been forced to defend silly comments constantly in the last month.
BTW the President’s press guy seems quite incompetent to me, not articulate at all and seems ill-prepared for obvious questions, not seeming to what the capital of Israel is or the context of Biden’s outburst.
Quebecois dufus: It is no surprise you’re sure Obama will get re-elected, you surely believe in the fantasy of Quebec separation with continued transfer payments and access to the ROC dairy market. The idea of Quebec separation jumped the shark years ago and I wonder, though I’m still not sure, if the Dems have done the same this election cycle.
Far better it is to repeat a post than to be a parasitic tic on the ass of a nation.
And you expected …? Something different?
I have held the opinion that Obama is a fraud since the first mention of him as a potential candidate for the DNCs run at the Whitehouse.
If anyone thinks that the Dems themselves believe Obama’s BS then think again. Obama is NOTHING but a TOOL. As a person … he is a fraud … his entire life story is a fabrication and he is surrounded by lowlifes who are dedicated to bringing America down.
The DNC and the power brokers in the party know all of this … and do not give a rats ass. Because? They know how to make use of it.
Obama will say and do anything his handlers tell him to. And he will not give a sh!t about the consequences. The bonus for the DNC and the guys pulling the strings is that even he slips up and says what he actually “thinks” … it plays to the leftards in the world and their “Damn America” politics. Obama himself is stupid and in plain terms an asshole. But this does not matter.
Obama is a con-game being played on the American people and the world … by people who really are the enemies of the American people.
George Obama , Baracks half brother from Nairobi Kenya is in an anti obama movie.
http://www.dineshdsouza.com
Sepraatist Froggie can legitimately use that name when he and his welfare province quit subsisting on western Canadian oil money, then Froggie you will truly be a sepratist , you loser panhandler.
ET: I’m all-in with you on Obama being a sociopath.
Quibble: I don’t like this psychopath/sociopath distinction. They’re both the same. A psycopath may or may not be violent (stab people to death in showers or weild a chainsaw). The word sociopath implies a kinder, gentler psycopath. It’s misleading.
Bartinsky: Yes, ET has a most excellent analysis of Obama’s poor character. He’s a narcisist certainly, and a sociopath. BUT, all political marxists (as distinct from Ivory Tower Armchair Marxists) are narcissistic sociopaths. ALL. No exceptions. It’s tautological! (am I using the word right?)
However, you’re not quite there in your understanding of the man when you refer to him as a “invention” by marxists. You (and ET with her “back-room gang” (TM)) need to get past this “Manchurian candidate” theory and GET in your GUT that Obama is a full-on Marxist. His mother and father were marxists and his mentor Frank Marshall, his father’s friend, was a marxist, a card-carrying member of the Communist Party.
The 2008 Election was a communist coup and McCain threw the election by being nice about nice Obama with his nice smile and his nice family.
Read David Horowitz (esp. his piece about Carl Bernstein’s failure to come to terms with his father’s treasonous communism). He himself was once a a communist having grown up under two communist parents. . He speaks about how communists pose as liberals. Which is what Obama did.
…granted Qwebecky is an expensive village idiot…so is Barry Sotero when you think of it..
You know Obama is shark bait because the Dem cartel is going to underbus Biden with him – also before they decided to write them both off they asked Hitlery if she would run as his VP and she refused – the Klintons know a zombie administration when they smell one, besides I think she will appear as the Dem 2016 zombie POTUS candidate.
All the scent on the wind is that BamBam could not BS his way out of the heap of BS he was covering up about himself, his alignments and his real actions. Beyond the stink he is putting off in the public nose, I think he will be indicted for complicity in fast and furious if he were t be reelected, and the Dem rainmakers can;t have that dogging them.
Maybe living in a make-believe world is Barry’s “safe” place. We all know that his father and step-father were Muslims and that Obama lived in Muslim countries when he was a boy. Having been to Afghanistan twice (outside the wire) and travelled to mid-Eastern Muslim countries, I know that boys between the ages of 6 to 12 are usually passed around as a plaything for the men of his family or close family friends…perhaps Obama went to his “safe” place while he was being “handled” by his uncles who fed him dog.
When I read the story. For some reason this scripture kept popping into my head. Joshua was talking about treating strangers with compassion.
Real Tolerance.
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And if you greet your brethren only, what do you more than others? do not even the tax collectors so?
Obama has no time for his family nor his friends. He doesn’t even rate Pagan stature. In other words the innate impulse to care for relatives by most of humanity is missing like color blindness. Most families look after each other. The good & the bad. If he cares so little for those of his flesh, you can guess what “Concerns him about humanity or you as a citizen. This man has no heart.
Shades of Soviet Union – the NDAA world of Obromoney:
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/aug/19/tdmet02-chesterfield-man-held-in-hospital-on-conce-ar-2140519/
The KGB put intellectuals in ‘mental hospitals’ if they wanted to ‘pick their brains’. There they (KGB) could ‘adjust’ the thinking of the ‘thinker’.
Me No Dhimmi, I think you have Obama’s father and grandfather mixed up. His grandfather, a friend of Frank Marshall Davis, was a member of the Communist Party and was investigated as an alleged communist spy. In 1997, the FBI destroyed the file they had on Obama’s grandfather.
Me No Dhimmi – “The word sociopath implies a kinder, gentler psycopath.”
Nah. Just means he’s a socialist psychopath 🙂
Whatever supporters are left are either too dyed-in-the-wool or too proud to go back on their schoolgirl crush for the Liar-in-Chief.
Narcissist? Sociopath? Possibly both? Bad for America is my conclusion and I just want to see the back of him.
No big theory, invented by the sages, is needed to explain the Zero. Greed and selfishness covers it.
chutzpahticular, thank you. You’re right: the commie was his grandfather’s friend.
And I see I included only only 2 of the commie-mentor’s 3 handles: Frank Marshall Davis.
Here’s that Horowitz piece on the great “investigative” journo Carl Bernstein who was unable to come clean on his commie-dad, who followed SOP and posed as a liberal.
This piece gave me added insight into Bernstien’s animus toward Nixon who, after all, was a unabased commie fighter in his early career.
You Have GOT to go to Drudge report! New stunning cover re Obama on next Newsweek…and just a stellar article by Niall Ferguson.
The Communist regimes may have collapsed, except in N.Kprea. However their propaganda has fuelled many Western intellectuals .. and they are ardent, to bring communist harmony on Earth.
sammy, thanks. Great article by Ferguson.
Me No Dhimmi: Thanks for the link to the Horowitz piece about Al and Carl Bernstein. Very interesting! Both Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward should be squirming now, as they observe the machinations being played out by Obama and his Marxist cabal.
Romney had a polygamous great-great grandfather but Obama’s daddy was a bigamist who illegally married his mommy while already married. That could have got him a nickel in the slammer. Instead he went to Harvard where his son from an illegal marriage later went.
After the “Thank you mam” and marriage Obama’s mother and father didn’t really ever see each other.
ET your analysis is good. What mystifies me is that so many people cannot see the man for what he is. I don’t mean that I expect everyone to be able to formulate an accurate psychological analysis of the man, but you would think some sort of human gut instinct would kick in and alarm bells would ring.
I have always assumed that most people have a sixth sense for a sociopath, even if they don’t know exactly what it is they are dealing with. Surely such a sense would have been developed through evolution.
Does society really have that many suckers?
All of the psycho-analysis being done on Obama is neglecting one thing, he has absolutely no say in how the US is governed. He was handpicked to be the ‘face’ of the Democrats because of his oratory skills and the passing resemblance he has to being black.
The man cannot think for himself as evidenced by the off-the-cuff blunders he makes (that dubya was crucified for but the MSM gives him a free pass). He’s only allowed to give unscripted interviews when the questions are ridiculously lame. Without a teleprompter he is completely lost.
His personal history is replete with fabrications to the point that anyone looking for the truth is purposely overwhelmed and only the die hards have the tenacity to keep going and they are easy to write off as tinfoil hat conspiracy nuts.
All of that leads to only one conclusion, he is nothing but a puppet.
Yes TJ, there are that many suckers in society. Ontario is the glowing example of that.
I don’t mean that I expect everyone to be able to formulate an accurate psychological analysis of the man…
Psychoanalysis means nothing. Just the soft science of guesswork. There’s no hard and fast scientific proof for any of it. Probably why their manual changes yearly. By vote (consensus).