I was thinking about what Ann Althouse said - she can only tell when Obama's pleased with himself, not when he's lying - and wondered, "Why is that?"
Sure, you could say Obama's a really good liar, but he hasn't seemed to get one over on me or Thomas Sowell. I know - I was being cute with that last line - because what I'm getting at isn't necessarily racial. But Ann's comment does indicate that she doesn't actually see Obama, the man. That he's some kind of "other" to her, who despite all this time - and her very best efforts - she still can't read.
If you ask me - "marriage" number three - Obama could "hit that."
Sure, you could say Obama's a really good liar, but he hasn't seemed to get one over on me or Thomas Sowell. I know - I was being cute with that last line - because what I'm getting at isn't necessarily racial. But Ann's comment does indicate that she doesn't actually see Obama, the man. That he's some kind of "other" to her, who despite all this time - and her very best efforts - she still can't read.
If you ask me - "marriage" number three - Obama could "hit that."
We saw the same thing with Bush. People morphing him into all kinds of strange shapes, that had little to do with the flesh and blood standing before them, or the situation he was handed. And the most remarkable thing about it - after all the damage they did under the weight of their delusions - is they don't grasp what they've done:
It's still we who are expected to say "Good for you!" once they discover Bush was a pretty good president, and a kind man, who they deliberately raked over the coals in wartime for nothing, and then kicked him to the curb unceremoniously, all to our detriment.
But they got a little "sizzle" in their lives, so whatthehell.
But they got a little "sizzle" in their lives, so whatthehell.
Now it's "Obama is like Bush" (a redundancy) because the reality is they can't admit they never saw more than silhouettes of either. They've always been too willing to be cut off.
The whole set-up strikes me as a political Self-Help cult:
The whole set-up strikes me as a political Self-Help cult:
If there isn't a Black Bush to be found, they'll invent one,...
There was an essay written years ago--that I've been unable to find again--by John Garvey, called "Thinking in Packages". In it, Garvey posits that in public discourse we reach a place where people stop thinking and instead trade opinions, informed or not, as tokens of membership in a group. You meet someone, so you hand them a token—“I’m a vegetarian”, say—and because that token puts you in the group, they can then safely assume that you are liberal, pro-choice, not racist, hate Monsanto, back alternative energy, and hate Rush Limbaugh. No thinking required. Or you could say, “2nd amendment makes sense to me.” And that makes you a tea party conservative who hates Obama, wants the government reduced to delivering mail, and weeps every night before a picture of Brietbart.
ReplyDeleteThe debates then get wired that way, and it is so uncool to actually look at Obama (or Bush) and to compare the words that come out of his mouth with what he actually does, because (in the mind of the masses) that violates the contract. Hey! You said you are for racial equality and civil liberties! How can you be critical of Obama? Or, “Hey! You said you think liberty is being eroded. How can you oppose Bush?”
It’s a sucker’s game, like three card monte. The only way to win is to refuse to play. Ignore the chattering. Lies are lies, big or small. Truth is truth.
Why I enjoy your blog. I don’t always agree with you, but you’re hauling water for nobody. And today, that is so fucking refreshing it takes the breath away.