Michael Gerson Sums Up Obama’s Narcissism

Wow:

On several occasions, Obama attacked American conduct in simplistic caricatures a European diplomat might employ or applaud. He accused America of acing “unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others” — a slander against every American ally who has made sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. He argued that, “America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy” — which is hardly a challenge for the Obama administration, which has yet to make a priority of promoting democracy or human rights anywhere in the world.

The world, of course, has its problems, too. It has accepted “misperceptions and misinformation.” It can be guilty of a “reflexive anti-Americanism.” “Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world’s problems alone.” Translation: I know you adore me because I am better than America’s flawed past. But don’t just stand there loving me, do something.

And, wow again:

Twice in his United Nations speech, Obama dares to quote Franklin Roosevelt. I have read quite a bit of Roosevelt’s rhetoric. It is impossible to imagine him, under any circumstances, unfairly criticizing his own country in an international forum in order to make himself look better in comparison. He would have considered such a rhetorical strategy shameful — as indeed it is.

At the United Nations, Obama set out to denigrate American goodness so he can become our rescuer. The speech had nothing to do with the confident style of Democratic rhetoric found in Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy. It insulted that tradition. And no one is likely ever to quote the speech — except to deride it.

Here’s my take, though. President Obama is no different from candidate Obama. What did you moderates out there think he meant when he said that he would rise the tides and save the planet and BE the change you can believe in? Why do you think President Obama wanted to “remake America”?

I’ll answer it for you: Because he felt that America is fundamentally flawed. Because he believes HE is the fix. Pretty simple. And he’s no different today than he was a year ago. it’s just rather startling to hear the President of the United States apologize for his own country inherent badness and say that his inherent goodness is the cure.

Arrogant and narcissistic? Yep. But he had a lot of useful idiots help him get elected. His America-hating speechifying is nothing new. Some people are just hearing for the first time.

H/T @allahpundit

Posted in Political Animals | View Comments

Those Peaceful Pittsburgh Protester Libs

Well. They’re covering their faces, wearing black, running around and acting menacing–why, it’s just like the Tea Part folks!

This video is being treated as legit by HuffPo. I don’t know:

Okay, did some checking. Tommy Christopher says it’s real:

While convinced that the video is a fairly obvious hoax, we contacted the Pittsburgh police to see if anyone had reported the arrest. They referred us to the G20 Joint Information Center, which gave us this stunning statement:

The individuals involved in the 9/24/09 arrest, which has appeared online, are law enforcement officers from a multi-agency tactical response team… It is not unusual for tactical team members to wear camouflage fatigues. The type of fatigues the officers wear designates their unit affiliation.

Prior to the arrest, the officers observed the subject vandalizing a local business. Due to the hostile nature of the crowd, officer safety, and for the safety of the person under arrest, the subject was immediately removed from the area.

Another G20 spokesperson confirmed for me that the man is in police custody, and that the officers are not affiliated with the military in any way.

Well. A couple thoughts, in that case.

One, don’t be a vandal.

Two, don’t be a vandal during a riot on American soil.

Three, I thought it was fake because they didn’t immediately cuff him–not that the officers in question looked particularly vulnerable considering the dude was a pipsqueak, but still…he could be armed or take their arms.

Four, it is discomforting seeing an American citizen whisked away like that by guys not in police uniforms.

Five, don’t be a rioting jerk, you indulged, spoiled American “youth” punk. This ain’t England. Or France.

Posted in America, Corrupted Culture, Isms | View Comments

Spanking Lowers I.Q.

Well, that will disappoint some of the readers here. Oh wait! Not that kind of spanking. Here’s the study:

The results of a survey of more than 17,000 university students from 32 countries “show that the higher the percent of parents who used corporal punishment, the lower the national average IQ,” Straus wrote in his presentation.

In looking at spanking just in the United States, Straus and a fellow researcher reviewed data on IQ scores from 806 children between 2 and 4 years old and another 704 kids aged 5 to 9.

When their IQs were tested again four years later, children in the younger group who were not spanked scored five points higher, on average, than did children who had been spanked. In the group of older children, spanking resulted in an average loss of 2.8 points.

“How often parents spanked made a difference,” Straus said in a news release from the university. “The more spanking, the slower the development of the child’s mental ability. But even small amounts of spanking made a difference.”

I think the study writers were beaten as children.

First, when looking across cultures, how does one control for something like spanking? All Australian children eat vegemite, or however you spell it. Does that make an IQ difference? Do spanked children who eat vegemite have higher or lower IQs?

Not to mention, this statement, an obvious one, invalidates the whole study:

Those findings are plausible and make some sense, Briggs said, but she added that it’s difficult to tease out all the other factors that could play a role in IQ scores — including poverty and parental education.

Ya think? How about the parents being morons themselves since IQ is highly heritable?

Second, the presumption is that spanking a child is an out-of-control parenting experience:

Dr. Stephen Ajl, a child abuse pediatrician, director of pediatric ambulatory care at the Brooklyn Hospital Center and medical director of the Jane Barker Brooklyn Children’s Advocacy Center in New York City, said that “spanking and other forms of corporal punishment mean that someone has lost control, and if that goes on on a chronic basis, it may affect some part of children’s psychological well-being.”

And though some people believe that they can use spanking as a form of punishment without losing control, Briggs said that’s very difficult to do all the time.

“When you’re physical with your child, you open that floodgate, and the likelihood that it could veer into where you don’t have as much control increases,” Briggs said. “Plus, if you’re just spanking, you haven’t taught your child anything.”

You can’t tell me the culture of beating a kid with a stick for every response is the same as a parent who spanks a kid for running into the street. Even if the second parent is out-of-control or angry, sometimes it’s not bad for a kid to get “rebooted” now and again.

This study was put forth for political reasons. Liberals don’t like spanking. They think it’s barbaric. They also believe everyone can be rehabilitated. Ironically, the children who never learn consequences as a kid grows up to being surprised, and in jail, dealing with consequences.

Can a child grow up without ever being spanked and turn out fine? Yes. Can a child receive corporal punishment and turn out fine? Yes. The bigger thing is love being the foundation.

Also: Spanking is NOT hitting. There is a huge difference between the two. Beating is another whole level of abuse. Liberals like conflating these things because nuance scares them. They want a rule for parents to follow, but the fact is, every child is different. Family personalities are different. Parents must make different choices with different kids.

Bottom line, libs need to butt out.

Posted in America, Corrupted Culture, Mind | View Comments

How To Fill A Pothole With Tweets

Guest post by Sid Burgess.  Cross posted at  sidburgess.com

First, to set the mood you should watch this video.  It is going to blow your socks off.

As citizens, we have more and more options to reach our elected officials and leverage social media. Social networking sites are not for everyone and some people choose to leave them to their family life. But if you are interested in using your Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, or StumbelUpon account for good in your community, here is your how-to that is sure to fill your pothole.

1) Define your project/issue

Take a picture of your issue or project. Even if this isn’t something that is physically wrong in your community, a picture adds great context to your message.

Upload your picture(s) to your Flickr account. If you took a video (which would be awesome!), add it to your Youtube account and be sure to mention what community you are in, who you are, and define the issue while you narrate the video.

Go to SeeClickFix and and log in with your Facebook Account. In the “Location” type in your community. Zoom in and create your ticket. Then go to the Issue Page and check out all your options! Before you go on a sharing frenzy, let’s add some important people to your network.

2) Friend your leadership

First, find out if your local community has a web site that lists your elected officials. If they are there, grab those names and start searching for them on Twitter and Facebook or whatever social network you want to use. Once you have found them, ‘friend’ them! This is a great way to shortcut all the headaches of voicemail and unhelpful staff. Keep in mind that not all elected officials are hard to reach so don’t feel like you can’t at least try to use the phone before you drop your tweet on them.

Speaking of tweets, GovTwit is a great place to find your elected officials on Twitter.

3) Follow-up and engage your community

So you did it. You reported your issue, found your city councilman, and sent her a Facebook Direct Message. You are feeling quite proud at the moment I bet. You should be! You have just gotten farther than 95% of Americans at getting something done in their community. However, we can still capitalize on all your hard work by “sharing” what you have done. Send out the link to your project that you posted on SeeClickFix to your Twitter followers and ask them to comment or “vote up” your project. On Facebook you can share it right from the issue page. It is really that easy. When the issue is fixed or addressed, always be sure to post follow-up details for all of your friends and be sure to say thank you.

Don’t stop!

Again, what you have just done is so much more than most people ever take the time to do. The reality is our communities are falling apart largely because we are failing to let our leadership know that we actually do see and care about these things. As a councilman, I was always trying to look at the big picture stuff. It was easy to become oblivious to the small things that could be causing friction in the community. Never fall into believing that it is rude to bring up something that is wrong. These are your streets, your parks . . . it is your community! And more importantly, whatever doesn’t get fixed while we are around will get left for our children to clean up. Speak up and let’s get this stuff done.

Encore:

Try stepping up your game next time. A YouTube video with commentary is a great way to convey your message, especially if you can get helpers from your neighborhood. Here is a nice example of one.

Best of luck and be sure to report back to all of us as to how things went!

Peace.

PS: Do you have a story about how you were able to use the Internet or social media to solve an issue in your community? Would love to hear it!

Our experiences make us who we are, and I am no exception. I am a product of years of public service, small business & self-employment, and a family that believes in me. From combat in Iraq, to ‘combat’ on the city council, I have faced, learned from, and overcome challenges and opportunities. I value people over ideas, and ideas over the status quo.  Please drop by my blog and share your thoughts and ideas.

Posted in America | View Comments

Wayne Elise: The Modern Dale Carnegie Explains How To Talk To Women, Tech & Dating, And Sex V. Sensuality

A persistent complaint in the male-dominated political blogosphere is the difficulty getting a woman. Guys like Ace and Allah have made their hard luck in love laments part of their schtick. Well.

Wayne Elise makes his living helping men find women. I suggested to him that we should have a lonely hearts male blogger meet-up, video tape it and see how good he really is. I personally wonder if the male bloggers protest too much and actually have healthy personal lives or if they’re in dire need of his services. Wouldn’t it be fun to find out?

Anyway, we also talked about the culture and how it’s affecting dating. He noted that women are getting much more aggressive, that sex is talked about more but there seems to be less of it, and that mystery is gone, too.

At the end I discuss Obama v. Palin. Hope you’ll listen!

Download MP3

To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!

Posted in Corrupted Culture, Entertain Me, Isms, Mind | View Comments

Sarah Palin V. Barack Obama: Round Whatever

As President Obama pontificates before the UN talking about his four pillars, the first one being disarmament, also known as defanging the West so they’re helpless before an enemy that will never disarm, Sarah Palin talks about what is important to the American people and the economic world: It’s the economy, stupid.

Foreign policy often hinges on economic policy. The guns just back up the message.

Did Sarah Palin’s message work? No one can fully say. The press wasn’t allowed in to hear it. But here are a few of her words via the Wall Street Journal:

“We got into this mess because of government interference in the first place,” the former Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate said Wednesday at a conference sponsored by investment firm CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets. “We’re not interested in government fixes, we’re interested in freedom,” she added.

Is Barack Obama’s speech before the UN working? He is saying some interesting things, but the meta-message, weakness, will trump all words. No wonder the UN members like him, says the UK’s Nile Gardiner:

It is not hard to see why a standing ovation awaits the president at Turtle Bay. Obama’s popularity at the UN boils down essentially to his willingness to downplay American global power. He is the first American president who has made an art form out of apologizing for the United States, which he has done on numerous occasions on foreign soil, from Strasbourg to Cairo. The Obama mantra appears to be – ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do to atone for your country. This is a message that goes down very well in a world that is still seething with anti-Americanism.

It is natural that much of the UN will embrace an American president who declines to offer strong American leadership. A president who engages dictators like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez will naturally gain respect from the leaders of the more than 100 members of the United Nations who are currently designated as “partly free” or “not free” by respected watchdog Freedom House.

The UN is not a club of democracies – who still remain a minority within its membership – it is a vast melting pot of free societies, socialist regimes and outright tyrannies. Obama’s clear lack of interest in human rights issues is a big seller at the UN, where at least half its members have poor human rights records.

The United States has a study in contrasts–as does the world. There will be those who dismiss Sarah Palin’s quaint provincialism and extol Barack Obama’s egalitarian moral equivalence. Eventually, though, a world economy driven into the ground by soft-socialistic policies makes even the most ruthless tyrant hunger for the good old days when there was food and riches and wealth.

It’s a good day for evil world leaders if America goes down the toilet, but it’s a suicidal impulse. Americans, too, might want a softer place to land economically, they might desire big spending Eurpoean social programs, but that makes America weak and beholden to foreign nations. Suddenly, American foreign policy is dictated by dictators and those who hold the economic power.

In the end, Sarah Palin’s speech and philosophy will mean more for American security and sovereignty than President Obama’s empty words to a heedless world. They adore Obama but they disrespect the United States because we are buried in debt.

Foreign policy and economic policy are so wrapped together, one can’t be discussed without the other one. President Obama’s philosophy is making America weak both ways.

More on Obama’s policy objectives here:

Undermine our allies. Embolden our enemies. Diminish our country.

Those nine words define the Obama doctrine with respect to American security policy. All three elements were much in evidence in the president’s benighted decision last week to cancel the “third site” for intercontinental-range missile defenses in Eastern Europe. They will be on display as well during this week’s several conclaves with foreign leaders.

The cumulative effect is predictable: A world in which the United States has fewer friends, more enemies and fewer options for assuring its security.

Posted in America, Not America, Political Animals | View Comments

Is The Tea Party Movement A Minority Movement?

Is the Tea Party movement a minority movement? I discuss the question in my latest AIP column:

This Tea Party movement isn’t a youthful rebellion. It isn’t a response of an obvious minority to injustice such as the women’s movement or civil rights movement. The Teaparty represents what used to be the silent majority: the people busy working, building families and businesses, and going about their lives.

My question: Are these people still the silent majority? Is the Tea Party movement, not the silent majority at all, but the new minority?

Before the election, it occurred to me that if enough working Americans accepted a check from the Federal or State government or worked in state-run organizations like public schools or received welfare assistance or were on social security and medicaid and medicare, then it would be nigh to impossible to ever elect a small-government conservative ever again.

Is there no such thing as the “silent majority” now? Have the silent majority become the vocal minority?

Posted in America, Political Animals | View Comments

Honduras: What Is Obama Doing?

What is Obama doing with Honduras? Objectively, the decision to support a communist over a Democratic ally makes no sense.

What is your theory?

Posted in Political Animals | View Comments

Podcast: Defending The American Dream, The Tea Party Movement, And Why Are Women Unhappy?

Erik Telford discusses becoming an empowered activist. John Hawkins and I debate why Maureen Dowd and her ilk are unhappy. Also: My defense and criticism of feminism.

Download MP3

Posted in Mind, Political Animals | View Comments

Breitbart: NEA Conference Call, Your Tax Dollars, And Artistic Coercion–UPDATED

Here is the explosive tape from the NEA at Brietbart as well as a transcript in full. I’m listening now.

Nick Gillespie, also of Breitbart’s Big Hollywood says:

As Patrick Courrelieche, an L.A.-based arts organizer who participated in the call, reported at Big Hollywood, the people running the call, including the NEA’s director of communications Yosi Sergant and members of the White House Office of Public Engagement and United We Serve, told the assembled crew of “thought leaders” that “we’re going to come at you with some specific asks here” (that’s a direct quote from Buffy Wicks of the Office of Public Engagement).

Chief among the requests from Sergant (who was either “reassigned” from the agency or “reportedly resigned” after denying the full extent of his role in organizing the call) was “to pick something whether it’s health care, education, the environment, you know… [and] apply artistic, you know, your artistic creative communities’ utilities and bring them to the table.” Beyond the specific policy issues above, the call organizers stressed the ideologically loaded concept of “service” as the animating principle of the Obama administration and wanted the artists to do whatever they could to promote that. As Wicks put it, “We really view [our efforts] as an onramp to a lifetime of service. We really want service to be incorporated into people’s daily lives.”

Given that the NEA prides itself on being the single largest funding source for the arts in the country, such arm-twisting by agency officials, however masked in fulsome compliments to creators’ genius, is disturbing on its face. It clearly sets a political agenda for the very people who are likely to be applying for, well, NEA and other government grants. Does anyone think that the organizers were fishing around for projects that might complicate the public option for health care?

The National Endowment for the Arts has always been looked upon with skepticism by many a taxpayer. Taxpayer money has been used to fund such notable pieces of artwork such as the cross in urine jar, etc.

But this affront goes one further. Artists are asked directly to create to support the Obama administration’s agenda ends. By definition, artists should be “independent”, right? But the government is asking artists to play along with a certain perspective.

There are problems for both the taxpayer and the artist. What would happen, for example, if an artist didn’t support the president? What if an artist created art that harmed the President’s objectives? Would funding be pulled? Consider some of the things said in the preamble to the call:

“the role that we played in the campaign”

“the president has a clear ‘arts agenda’”

“all on this phone call were selected for a reason”

So artists might feel honored because they like this president, but when or if their opinion changed, this call could be construed as coercion. It IS coercion.

Now, the American taxpayer has an entirely different concern: The Obama administration is using an arm of the government to pay artists with taxpayer money to create, essentially propaganda. Art will be used to promote the taxpayer’s dime to promote a specific Obama policy.

“Valerie Jarrett is one of our fantastic leaders”

“Bolster civic engagement with this effort”

“We want to connect with labor unions, womens groups”

“It’s going to take all of us working together–progressive groups”–this is the United We Serve, a government program director talking–the Corporation for National Service.

This, obviously, is a problem all the way around.

The government is asking artists to focus on these policies: health care, energy and environment (parks), education (Department of Education), and community renewal.

Listen to the whole thing. It’s an abomination. And listen with this thought in mind: Imagine if President Bush’s surrogates engineered a similar phone call. Yeah. There’d be outrage.

Jim Gerahty says:

Perhaps Andrew Breitbart and friends shouldn’t be surprised when they find the White House staffers making “specific asks” of allegedly independent artists on a conference call organized by the allegedly nonpartisan National Endowment of the Arts. Obama’s appointee to head the endowment, Rocco Landesman, said about 20 days after that conference call, “If the president had wanted a timid NEA, he would have made a different choice.”

No timid NEA. Oh no. The NEA is the new Obama propaganda funder. Thank you, American taxpayer.

UPDATED:

Dan Riehl and the connection between ACORN, NEA, faith based initiatives and Obama.

Posted in Corrupted Culture, Political Animals | View Comments