This comment from Reader Bonus Gift was in response to the post earlier today regarding whether Obama quit or is just unable to deal with reality. It appears to come down on the side of reality deficient, coupled with not too bright. It is worthy of highlighting with the hope that it encourages additional commentary on this subject from other readers. The title above suggests three explanations for Obama’s recent campaign performance (they are not necessarily mutually exclusive nor all-inclusive). Perhaps you have other thoughts.
In any case, here are Bonus Gift’s thoughts followed by some additional thoughts by me:
Yes, certainly he is unable to deal with reality and its associated facts. He is essentially a narcissistic, spoiled, affirmative action psychopath.
More specifically, he is a study in oxymorons, with the emphasis on the moronic. For example, little Barry is not very bright, yet arrogant; in addition, he is clearly not able to think on his feet (i.e., especially without a teleprompter and speechwriter), yet thinks he can, etc., etcetera.
Actually, being anointed and pushed through every door, he has never had to deal with reality, even during these so called “debates”.
He is constantly protected by his fellow travelers in the cultural Marxist media, yet he imagines that it is his opposition that is unfair.
I could go on, but I wonder when he has ever had to really perform from either economic motivation or intrinsic motivation (e.g., pride of mastery). For example, he thinks that speaking another language is a must for American school children yet he has lived overseas (and indeed is likely an Indonesian citizen, or at least was), claims to be multicultural, multiracial, etc., yet he claims to not know a second language. Especially if they grow up in other countries, I’ve know people of average intelligence that have mastered several languages; in addition, many people who are merely curious show a higher level of knowledge in, for example, other cultures and languages than little Barry.
In fact, and possibly most bizarrely, he shows little knowledge or respect for the U.S. Constitution (i.e., other than cultural Marxist talking points), yet he was a professor of Constitutional law and went to law school. He was editor of the Harvard Law Review, yet has never written an article for it (or edited any as far as I know) or any other law journal.
Do you get the idea? What stands out isn’t reality or facts but the bubble he has cruised around in for essentially his entire life even though his mother and father (i.e., whoever it turns out to be) largely rejected him in favor of Marxist rhetoric. If you even mildly dispassionately analyze this thing that occupies the White House, it is really difficult not to come to the conclusion it should be committed to an asylum, yet there it is grinning like Biden and blithely saying, for example, that four or so avoidable deaths in Libya which were covered up by his administration were “non optimal”. Non optimal for whom?
Regarding the debates themselves, there is essentially not much to gather from them in that they are no measure of extemporaneous thinking or thoughts. As far as I know, the “debaters” know in advance what topics are covered, and even then they tend to ignore the specific question and digress toward the memorized answer. Thus, little Barry is fed lines and told to act in certain ways when certain topics come up. While it would truly be fascinating to watch Barry try to debate, I’m afraid it would only reinforce the know pathology of what is known, and nobody really wants to see a grown affirmative action president man-child narcissist cry.
I suspect that what Bonus Gift speculates about is valid. I have always likened Mr. Obama to a trained actor who can deliver lines provided to him. In that respect, he reminds me of Ted Baxter of the old Mary Tyler Moore show. Off-camera (and off teleprompter) Baxter was a likable, but bumbling fool (he was no different on camera when his teleprompter broke down).
In Obama’s case, he does not appear very bright but has adopted this air as part of his imagery. Speaking and thinking extemporaneously are difficult because of his lower level of intelligence (which he must hide) and also that what “knowledge” he possesses is Marxist in nature (which also must be hidden). Thus, most issues to him are processed first in terms of the Marxist answer and then must be re-packaged into what he thinks is acceptable to say. Re-processing this answer to what he thinks people are willing to accept produces all the stammering and “uhs” and “ahs” that characterize any non-scripted conversation with him.
Off-camera he is surrounded by like-minded individuals so there is no need to put lipstick on true feelings. Yet, I suspect even then he has trouble making decisions.
Others have suggested that he is merely a puppet with Valerie Jarrett as the intermediate puppet-handler. Who is manipulating Jarrett is the real and unanswered question.