Unfit For Power

BMS-ztKCIAAO2z5.jpg large

Peter Wehner:

My views on President Obama are such that very little would surprise me in terms of the ethical lines he would cross in order to gain and maintain political power.

That may seem like an overly harsh judgment, so let me take a moment to explain what I mean. I have become convinced, based on what I would argue is the increasing weight of the evidence, that Mr. Obama is a man whose sense of mission, his arrogance and self-righteousness, and his belief in the malevolence of his enemies might well lead him and his administration to act in ways that would seem to him to be justified at the time but, in fact, are wholly inappropriate.

I would include as evidence to support my assertion the president’s routine slander of his opponents, his serially misleading statements (including flat-out falsehoods about the lethal attacks on the Benghazi consulate), the IRS scandal and the public signals the president sent to that agency over the years, the unprecedented targeting of journalists by the Department of Justice and the attorney general’s nasty little habit of misleading Congress, Mr. Obama’s unusually dishonest campaign against Mitt Romney, and his overall contempt for the rule of law. He just doesn’t think that rules should apply to him, that he is above all that. Those who see themselves as world-historical figures tend to do that.

But wait! There’s more!

Victor Davis Hanson:

Presidential ethics are now situational. Obama is calling for a shield law to protect reporters from the sort of harassment that his attorney general, Eric Holder, and the FBI practiced against Fox News and the Associated Press. Through such rhetoric, he remains a staunch champion of the First Amendment — even though he now has the ability to peek into the private phone records of millions of Americans.

The president is outraged that the IRS went after those deemed politically suspicious. So he sacked the acting head of the IRS, Steven Miller, who was scheduled to step down soon anyway. The administration remains opposed to any partisanship of the sort that might deny tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, founded by the president’s half-brother Malik, but would indefinitely delay almost all the applications from those suspected of tea-party sympathies. Consequently, Lois Lerner granted the former’s request in 30 days, but took the Fifth Amendment when asked the reasons for obstructing the applications of the latter.

These ethical gymnastics were not entirely unforeseeable. Obama ran as a reform candidate for the Senate in 2004, while his campaign was most likely involved in the leaking of the sealed divorce records of both his primary- and general-election opponents. As a senator, he characterized recess appointments as tainted, only as president to make just such appointments — some of which later were declared unconstitutional in a unanimous decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

I knew that Barack Obama was unfit to be president when he played the race card on Bill and Hillary Clinton. (By “unfit” I mean “lacking in moral character”.) At that time I knew very little about the then-senator from Illinois.

I have learned a lot more about Obama in the last five years. Nothing I have learned has changed my opinion of him. In fact I am more convinced today that he is unfit to hold power than I ever was. The evidence continues to accumulate.

This may surprise you but I think that Obama really believes most of his own bullshit. He thinks he’s a great leader and that he is smarter than everyone else. He’s Norma Desmond, living in a fantasy world.

He sees himself as a transformative figure of historic proportions. At the same time he is narcissistic and selfish with a overblown sense of entitlement. He honestly can’t understand why people disagree with him – that’s why he blames racism and partisanship.

Worst of all he is a sociopath. He feels no guilt or shame.

Unfortunately, even though he is unfit to hold power he is the president.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Klown Musings and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to Unfit For Power

  1. still counting down the days til he’s done and gone……less than 4 years and counting. You should put up a countdown meter on the website myiq….

  2. driguana says:

    It all seems so obviously apparent, doesn’t it? Yet, as you say, he is the president! The parallel question is, why? Especially if he was and still is, unfit to be president. Two things strike me at this time: charisma and the media. After Bush, Americans wanted “charisma” thinking that was the same as “leadership” and so that’s what the media sold everyone. Most Americans fell for it. The evolving question will be equally interesting….”now what do Americans want”? And how will the media respond?

    • Constance says:

      Democrats also effectively defined Republicans in a negative manner. I work with young people and most of them sincerely believe Republicans want to make birth control illegal. Exempting birth control or womens health from Obama care might make the fat old men happy as hell but there aren’t enough of them to elect a President and as long as Republicans keep that line of crap up they aren’t electable to nation wide office.

  3. lildoggy4u says:

    You left out the fact that he is a LIAR!

  4. DeniseVB says:

    All these lies, and so much tin foil to wrap myself in. Just wondering if rolling out all these “scandals” is some kind of smokescreen for something much bigger ?

    Then there’s the First Lady’s faux pas not going with Obama to meet with the Chinese first couple because her kids were wrapping up the school year or something (yet she attended a fundraiser for Terry McAuliffe Thurs night, ok, it was local). As soon as Obama dumped those pesky communists, he flew his Chicago capos in for golf and a boys night party. As the country circles the drain…..

    I would love to see a vote of no confidence in the House to slow him down, otherwise the ploy may be working, I’m getting sick of Scandal-gate too.

    • driguana says:

      I get the same vibe. Question is, what could be next? We’ve now gone through natural disasters, spy vs spy, terrorist attacks etc. I’m beginning to wonder if Obama’s incredible lack of focus on urban issues may be leading to racial conflict in certain urban areas…all blaming whitey and/or Republican/conservzative fiscal constraint issues. Never let a good crisis go to waste, remember? Wondering if the whole Zimmerman/Martin case isn’t going to blow things open again, too. Simmer, boil, simmer, boil seems to be the approach and it is approaching summer which could be a very long, hot one…

      • DeniseVB says:

        BO’s policies aren’t helping the urban/gang infested inner cities that’s for sure. He seems to be creating more welfare than jobs.

        I have a bad feeling about the Zimmerman trial. The wrong verdict may well start the second coming of the Rodney King riots. Marshall Law anyone? We saw a taste of that in Boston….hmmm, hmmm, hmmm.

    • leslie says:

      Yes, it seems there is a veritable barrage of squirrels. What is happening while DC is teeming with those pesky squirrels? While we are grumbling and protesting and tweeting and blogging our dismay and distrust, what is going on behind the stench of squirrel poop?
      I, too, am feeling very uneasy.

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Judge Jeanine would make a great Attorney General 😀

  6. conner43 says:

    ‘Nothing is more difficult than trying to explain the obvious to those who don’t want to see it.’ paraphrasing shamelessly from Ayn Rand..

    We are now learning about O’s campaign ‘cave’ and how the cavemen used data to pinpoint votes.
    Am not convinced that the cave didn’t tap into existing gov’t data from Prism .Would that still be illegal ? Here in the rabbit hole it’s hard to tell anymore.

    • 1539days says:

      The best way way to describe what’s happened to this country is perception is reality. Barack Obama was a mediocre politician who was hard to pin down on issues. He was marketed as a community organizer, but lost an election against a candidate who rallied the community.

      Most of his political career in Illinois was marked by the elimination of candidates by anything but democratic means. The time he spent in the legislature was entirely unremarkable, attaching himself as co-sponsor to other people’s bills. When he ran for US Senate, he (in reality, his minions) eliminated one candidate with public humiliation rather than actual corruption. He leaked information about his general election challenger’s family, even though he was far Obama in votes (70% to 27%).

      2004 was a bad year for Democrats. Kerry lost because he was a weak candidate and ran a bad campaign, but was also perceived a certain way due to the Bush campaign. Obama was given a prominent speaking role because he was a winner among losers.

      In 2007 and early 2008, Obama was an also-ran who couldn’t even beat Hillary Clinton among African-American voters. The real contest was between Clinton and John Edwards, a senator whose wife was shoring up his numbers with women. Again, a candidate against Obama had secrets revealed and Edwards was out of the race.

      Obama was largely allowed to run a general election campaign in the primaries. When Clinton was clearly heading toward victory, the superdelegates did what they were created for, reversing the direction of the delegate count so the DNC’s choice would win instead of the party voters. The party then changed the rules so that the primary and caucus votes would be higher for Obama.

      Obama ran on changing Washington from a party system to the best interests of everyone. The voters ate it up because the media refused to write about anything in Obama’s history. There were myriad examples of the media tipping the scales (Charlie Gibson, for example) but the media rarely calls itself out. By the time 2012 rolled around, Obama had the power of government to win his election.

      • driguana says:

        Yes, quite interesting. My prog friends call this “being a brilliant politician” and, I guess, if viewed from that perception, as you suggest, then there is a kind of “brilliance”. When pressed about what makes him a good president, another frequent response is that “he ran a brilliant campaign”. In my humble opinion, politics is rarely a “positive” thing and a “campaign” does not make a presidency. Nonetheless, the media shills also tend to take this same specious course.

        • 1539days says:

          I remember when his stooges used to say Obama has the experience to be president because he was running a presidential campaign. I suppose they have a point, since Obama is in permanent campaign mode. Then again, Obama is a complete moron. He has a lot of people who tell him what to do and they are the real geniuses at amorality for the sake of power.

      • DeniseVB says:

        I do remember 2004 well, had Edwards been on top of the ticket, I think the Dems would have won that year. Bush was getting tiresome, JRE was the hopechangey candidate. Kerry was meh. Loved Theresa though, but all she could talk about on the campaign trail was her deceased husband. Sigh. MANY Dems threatened to stay home unless Kerry at least put Edwards on the ticket, it worked. Unfortunately, the campaign sucked, he hid the more charismatic Edwards out in the cornfields (like McCain did to Sarah) with a muzzle on. Kerry lost the election wearing a full body condom.

  7. votermom says:

    • DeniseVB says:

      Darn, link won’t let me past the “register to read” wall.

      • votermom says:

        The PRISM spin war has begun
        Posted By Elias Groll Friday, June 7, 2013 – 7:15 PM
        The war over how to spin revelations of the National Security Agency’s latest spying program has officially begun.

        On the heels of media reports that the NSA has gained access to the servers of nine leading tech companies — enabling the spy agency to examine emails, video, photographs, and other digital communications — Google has issued a strongly worded statement denying that the company granted the government “direct access” to its servers. That statement goes so far as to say that the company hasn’t even heard of “a program called PRISM until yesterday.”

        At first glance, Google’s statement is difficult to believe. Senior intelligence officials have confirmed the program’s existence, and Google’s logo is prominently listed on internal NSA documents describing participating companies. But Google may be engaging in a far more subtle public relations strategy than outright denial.

        Google’s statement hinges on three key points: that it did not provide the government with “direct access” to its servers, that it did not set up a “back door” for the NSA, and that it provides “user data to governments only in accordance with the law.”

        According to Chris Soghoian, a tech expert and privacy researcher at the American Civil Liberties Union, the phrase “direct access” connotes a very specific form of access in the IT-world: unrestricted, unfettered access to information stored on Google servers. In order to run a system such as PRISM, Soghoian explains, such access would not be required, and Google’s denial that it provided “direct access” does not necessarily imply that the company is denying having participated in the program. Typically, the only people having “direct access” to the servers of a company like Google would be its engineers. (Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg has issued a similarly worded denial in which he says his company has not granted the government “direct access” to its servers,” but his language mirrors Google’s denial about direct access.)

        A similar logic applies to Google’s denial that it set up a “back door.” According to Soghoian, the phrase “back door” is a term of art that describes a way to access a system that is neither known by the system’s owner nor documented. By denying that it set up a back door, Google is not denying that it worked with the NSA to set up a system through which the agency could access the company’s data.

        According to Soghoian, the NSA could have gained access to tech company servers by working with the companies to set up something similar to an API — a tool these firms use to give developers limited access to company data. Google has denied that an API was used, but that denial doesn’t exclude the possibility that a similar tool was used.

        To protect itself against allegations that it inappropriately compromised user data, Google further notes in its statement that the company provides “user data to governments only in accordance with the law.” Despite the outrage directed at the NSA and the Obama administration, PRISM — as currently described — is in all likelihood within the bounds of the law. In the aftermath of the 2005 disclosure that the Bush administration had carried out a warrantless wiretapping program, Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 and the Protect America Act of 2007. But those laws did not outlaw the kinds of actions carried out by PRISM.

        As for Google’s claim to have never heard of PRISM, would the intelligence officials who reportedly collaborated with Google have used the program’s actual codename?

        The tech companies alleged to have participated in PRISM aren’t the only ones who appear to be spinning PRISM to their advantage.

        On Friday, U.S. government sources told Reuters that PRISM was used to foil a 2009 plot to bomb the New York City subway. In all likelihood, such counter-leaks will continue in the days ahead as intelligence officials try to portray the program as essential to national security.

        Welcome to the PRISM spin war.

  8. votermom says:

  9. votermom says:

    • votermom says:

      Also a second shirtless guy – security hustled them off.

      • Jadzia says:

        There have been protests all over the country opposing gay marriage. (My husband got trapped in a parking garage in Bordeaux a couple of days ago during one such protest.) It’s a vocal and angry minority. I suspect that if Hollande would just TRY to pretend that he gives a crap about the economic situation (he and his gov’t, having learned nothing from what happened to Clinton in the early months of his first term, essentially decided to prioritize gay marriage over pretty much every other issue), these protests would be a lot smaller/fewer than they are.

  10. lyn says:

    I’ll never respect Obama. History is littered with sociopathic leaders, and Obama is one of them.

    • wmcb says:

      “This “leak” was totes made up and false!!!! But we are going to prosecute you for leaking it.”

  11. HELENK says:


    take a look at the picture in this article. I would not trust either of them as far as I could throw them

    • DandyTiger says:

      The sound of desperation. Perhaps he knows some of the stuff coming down the pike from the “thrown under the bus” IRS employees.

      • DeniseVB says:

        I keep thinking of Woody Allen’s quote “Keep telling the truth then you don’t have to remember anything”.

        Probably why Bush never got impeached, whenever there was a kerfluckup during his terms, he made everyone tell the truth. Frustrated the media to no end. Most of the lefty blogkings (du,dkos, etc) just made shit up to keep the sheep herded.

        • wmcb says:

          I disagreed with a lot of what Bush did. A LOT. But I’ll give him this: with very few exceptions he fucking owned it. He stood up like a man and said, “Yes, I did this, and here’s why, and I think it’s right.”

  12. wmcb says:

    A 2011 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruling found the U.S. government had unconstitutionally overreached in its use of a section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The National Security Agency uses the same section to justify its PRISM online data collection program. But that court opinion must remain secret, the Justice Department says, to avoid being “misleading to the public.”

    Note the admitted reason for secrecy. Not national security. Not “you’ve endangered agents in the field.” No, it has to be secret because the people couldn’t handle knowing. I.e. they would be really pissed off if they knew even a part of what we are doing.


  13. HELENK says:


    the founder’s folly—-The Supreme Court

    this article should get the lawyers awake

  14. foxyladi14 says:

    Look who is back. 🙂

  15. wmcb says:

  16. wmcb says:

    • wmcb says:

      I love multicultualism if you mean accepting/respecting other cultures.

      But what THEY mean by it is actively resisting the idea of anyone adapting to the evil, horrible American/Western culture, and accepting practices absolutely opposed to our way of life and jurisprudence as totally fine and beyond reproach or scrutiny. Even when those cultures and philosophies openly want to destroy us.

      What THEY mean by multiculturalism is the demand that Western culture commit suicide.

  17. wmcb says:

  18. wmcb says:

  19. wmcb says:

  20. HELENK says:

    can you imagine putting ricin in a letter and having it returned marked undeliverable ? does this fit in the dumb criminals of the day catagory?

    • HELENK says:

      Rep. Darrell Issa said Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings made a statement that was “extreme and reckless” when he said the IRS’ targeting of tea-party groups is a closed case.

  21. Constance says:

    I agree that Obama is “narcissistic and selfish with a overblown sense of entitlement” But I don’t think he even cares if the things he says are true or not and he does not care about our country or our true culture (not the fake culture media hypes). I also still think Obama is the puppet of some men who couldn’t win an election. And his goal is to transform the USA.

  22. HELENK says:


    In America we worry about what people are carrying

    In Israel they worry about who the people are

  23. HELENK says:


    Judge Jeanine America being transformed

    I love this lady. wouldn’t she be great as attorney general?

  24. SHV says:

    “Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance”


    hopefully someone will set up a defense fund for the guy

  25. wmcb says:

Comments are closed.