It’s The Mass Sycophantic Gaga-Eyed Fawning, Stupid
A pattern is developing. Every time the guy makes a big speech, I find myself depressed, not wanting to think about it. Like most Obama speeches, this one is being heralded as a tour de force, the latest Reagan-FDR-Lincoln-MLK whatever. He’s being heralded for being inspirational, but I’d suggest poor marks for slow learning are in order, if he managed to actually take office without realizing it’s not his job to induce panic. But that’s between him, Bill Clinton, and the American people.
What’s depressing is not entirely what he is saying. That’s bad enough. It’s how it is received.
The reception in the House chamber was like a never-ending mass sycophancy of gaga-eyed fawning. I couldn’t take my eyes off Pelosi, who appeared to be having an impressive sexual experience, repeatedly climaxing throughout the event. Anyone else enjoy Biden’s puppy boy, when the boss patronizingly declared “Nobody messes with Joe”? Even Joe knows that’s not true, and once he stopped grinning over the pat on the head, probably figured out he’ll end up wearing that line when, you know, he gets messed with. I wouldn’t expect the full Dick “Eff you, I’m only here because I have to be” Cheney from them. But how about a little decorum.
Here’s AP, admirably enough, on a few points where Obama was blatantly full of it: Obama’s Words on Home Aid (and other things) Ring Hollow. A small offset to the usually somewhat skeptical Ron Fournier’s FDR, Reagan-comparing analysis that, in a standing hurl of sycophantic fawnism, kicks off: “President Barack Obama gave America the audacity to hope again.”
Here’s another BS check from the Washington Post. A friend of mine was gleefully keeping count of all the times Obama said “inherited.” I didn’t get a final tally but I’m pretty sure none of them were about the massive debt that will be, by our grandchildren. AP and WPost both note that Obama was a little coy about who is actually bequeathed this mess. I’d say he has repeatedly lied outright by blaming the Bush administration while omitting mention of overt Democratic acts of commission. Politico helpfully translates from the original Obamish.
Given the popular reception, much like that of his other wretched speeches, I guess you have to say the American electorate once again has gotten what the American electorate deserves. A smooth-talking bullshit artist. At least with Clinton you could tell he didn’t actually believe anything he was saying. I’m not sure that’s true with this guy. I’m not convinced he entirely understands what he is saying.
OK, some of the Internet’s mass sycophancy of gaga-eyed fawning:
A fan at The New Republic declares “Obama soars,” yet describes it as an effort to innoculate himself against Joe the Plumber and Rick the CNBC reporter.
Cernig the newspig, with a Web version of Pelosi’s face: ” … wow, what a speech! Forceful, inspirational, an appeal to Americans to not only pull themselves up by their bootstraps but to help others do so too – so refreshing after eight years of “I’m alright, Jack” republicanism. If he can pull off even a quarter of it, he’ll keep the GOP out in the political wilderness they consigned themselves to for a generation. And their faces said they knew it, too!”
E.J. Dionne posits an FDR-like Obama has inaugurated an end to the era of government-bashing. I’ll say. The era of government-fellating is here!
Halperin at TIME: 15 Things We Learned (Or Re-Learned) (Or Went Gaga-Eyed Over Amid the Mass Sycophantic Fawnfest)* About Barack Obama And His Presidency.
The Economist, more soberly, A Brighter Future, But Who Pays?
Kristol at WPost on what else we learned. He’s not a war president. Except that he is.
A stomach-settling tonic from Holman Jenkins at WSJ: Put away the childish things already. Global warming, energy self-sufficiency, class warfare.
And, by the way, he kids himself if he believes he will be allowed, like FDR, to preside over a depression without being politically blamed for it. The public is different now — the world is different — and he will own the “Obama depression” sooner than he thinks.
OK, here’s some credit where, on general principle, none is due. Andrew Sullivan has an interesting commentary blurb roundup, made better by the fact that he kept himself out of it. Speaking of fawning sycophancy.
* OK, OK, I made that part up.
Topics: Obama
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:26 am Comments (11) on Wednesday, February 25, 2009
11 Responses to “It’s The Mass Sycophantic Gaga-Eyed Fawning, Stupid”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
He wasn’t able to complete a single paragraph before he managed to piss me off. He addressed the speech to “Madame speaker, Mr. vice president, members of Congress, and the first lady of the United States.” A major policy address, and he’s presenting it to his WIFE? What happened to “my fellow citizens?”
I also found the reference to inheritance tasteless. He wants the American people to believe that our suffering now is 100% Republicans’ fault, and that’s BS. Never forget that Congress has the power of the purse, and the wheels came off after Pelosi and Reid took over Congress. If you look deeper, you’ll see that politicians of both parties made numerous bad decisions over the course of DECADES to bring us where we are today. But will an America that relies on network TV news soundbites to inform itself look deeper? Or shall we continue to get the poor government we deserve for our collective inattention and apathy?
Obama seeks to exploit the pain of the citizenry for his own political benefit. By doing so, he proves that he’s no statesman, but merely another partisan liar. If he meant what he said, he’d veto the pork-laden omnibus bill that Congress is currently producing. I don’t expect that to happen, and I believe his word is worthless.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
I’m good with ‘inheritance’ IF President al-Chicago includes the 75 years of Democrat Party Rule that includes BILLIONS of dollars wasted on corrupt, inefficient, duplicitous programs from ‘The War on Poverty’, New Deal, and anything conceived by Jimmy Carter.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
He addressed the speech to “Madame speaker, Mr. vice president, members of Congress, and the first lady of the United States.” A major policy address, and he’s presenting it to his WIFE? What happened to “my fellow citizens?”
“My fellow citizens”, surely you jest. Obama addressed his speech to the only people who count in his view. I agree with Crittenden that he probably does believe the crap that falls out of his mouth, and that’s truly, truly scary for the rest of us.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
i beg to differ: Ear Leader gets an A+ for slow learning because it’s obvious he hasn’t picked up a clue in years. Juggy trots out the same tired BS every time he opens his mouth, and no one with an IQ larger than their hat size believes a thing.
unfortunately, intelligence appears to be a constant, and the population keeps increasing.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Clinton might not have always believed what he was saying, but he certainly understood and appreciated the effect it would have. Obama doesn’t. This became obvious during the campaign, and it has unfortunately carried over into his presidency.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
I still believe, and current actions seem to support that belief, that it was never Obama’s desire or intention to actually win the election. I am convinced he wanted to lose in order to rile up the left and start some serious street violence, and thereby gain a significant block of power without ever having to be responsible to the country.
I think i would’ve loved to have been in the room the morning after, when he woke up and realized he’d actually have to, you know, uh, actually do, some of that executive, uh, stuff.
The WON and hos crew are just making it up as they go along because this sin’t the result they were aiming for. :)
February 25th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
[...] This is definitely increasing the amount of Pepsid AC I am taking. Every time the “One’ speaks, Pelosi has an orgasm and the event is reported as almost Biblical in Nature [...]
February 28th, 2009 at 10:04 am
I don’t get it. Really. “What a wonderful orator!” “What a wonder speech!” I took speech and debate in high school and I was a better speaker in both the presentation and the content senses. Rhetorical devices are fun but sooner or later there has to be actual content and other than “Look at me! Look at me! I’m so great! I’m so great! (apologies to “The Simpsons”) Bush was bad! Bush was bad!” there’s not much there.
And this fawning! What is that? This guy is not the nation’s collective puppy. “Isn’t he so smart? Look what he can do! Look at the little dickens – eating from the cat box! My leg’s a-tinglin’!”
February 28th, 2009 at 10:10 am
I noticed, after hitting “submit” after enter a comment, “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
Wait as long as you like. To paraphrase a long ago, much saner Barry: moderation’s for sissies!
February 28th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Sorry, Nolanimrod, your comment happened to include a word fragment that’s on the list. Free speech zone, within some arbitrary limits. Moderation triggers are designed to help the immoderate and porn spammers with their restraint problems.
May 15th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
[...] Jules Crittenden has [...]