>Now consider the case of an ambitious mediocrity in the Oval Office who is enamored of himself. In trying to be the Lee Kuan Yew of Chicago such a man would be blindside American polity because where people expect a president to be forthcoming, he would lie. Where his political opponents relied on the protections of the law and custom, they would encounter small minded and vindictive persecution. He would succeed for a time by breaking all the rules and congratulate himself on his cleverness, even deluding himself into thinking that his Occupy Wall Street thugs are a street fighting force on par with the thugs of other strongmen.
But once this mediocre authoritarian was pitted against the real thing he would be overmatched by the pros. They would see through his amateurish plots in an instant. To his lies they would reply one better. Lawfare and the race card would bounce off Rouhani or Putin like peas off the frontal armor of a King Tiger Tank. He would no more succeed at the Game of Rogues than Occupy Wall Street would make headway against Ernst Rohm’s Brownshirts or the Hezbollah. They would not even get to first base.
Most of Obama’s predecessors were smart enough to know that an American president fights asymmetrically against foreign despots. President do not out-despot or out-conspire them. To win they just let America do its thing. And America typically responds to challenges by smothering its foes in a burst of productivity and creativity. That’s what happened to the USSR: Ronald Reagan was not smarter than the Soviet Politburo. He was only smart enough to let America be America.
Barack Obama on the other hand is not smart enough to let America be America. But he is dumb enough to try and outwit Putin or the Iranians. While America will almost always beat Russia, Obama will almost always lose to Putin. Change the game from America versus Iran to Obama versus the Ayatollahs and the dynamic changes. Once you play the authoritarian game, you will lose. Consequently Obama is getting his ass handed to him on a platter.
Obama’s mistake was to doubt the greatness of his country and instead trust in the greatness of himself. Man bites dog and the president backs the wrong horse. Now all you boys in Yemen, swim<
Funny newrouter, I was just remarking to an online friend how pathetic that Fernandez piece is. Better off reading McCarthy’s takedown of Pete Peterson instead.
The question of course is, is change in our interests?Current sentiment seems to be, change is a virtue unto itself[ie].
Makes for interestng times…
that’s so gay president metrosexual. how about them ayrabs tossing the gay bastards off of buildings mom jeans?
If change is a virtue unto itself, why did his supporters want him re-elected?
McGehee, you are obviously racis.
>Now consider the case of an ambitious mediocrity in the Oval Office who is enamored of himself. In trying to be the Lee Kuan Yew of Chicago such a man would be blindside American polity because where people expect a president to be forthcoming, he would lie. Where his political opponents relied on the protections of the law and custom, they would encounter small minded and vindictive persecution. He would succeed for a time by breaking all the rules and congratulate himself on his cleverness, even deluding himself into thinking that his Occupy Wall Street thugs are a street fighting force on par with the thugs of other strongmen.
But once this mediocre authoritarian was pitted against the real thing he would be overmatched by the pros. They would see through his amateurish plots in an instant. To his lies they would reply one better. Lawfare and the race card would bounce off Rouhani or Putin like peas off the frontal armor of a King Tiger Tank. He would no more succeed at the Game of Rogues than Occupy Wall Street would make headway against Ernst Rohm’s Brownshirts or the Hezbollah. They would not even get to first base.
Most of Obama’s predecessors were smart enough to know that an American president fights asymmetrically against foreign despots. President do not out-despot or out-conspire them. To win they just let America do its thing. And America typically responds to challenges by smothering its foes in a burst of productivity and creativity. That’s what happened to the USSR: Ronald Reagan was not smarter than the Soviet Politburo. He was only smart enough to let America be America.
Barack Obama on the other hand is not smart enough to let America be America. But he is dumb enough to try and outwit Putin or the Iranians. While America will almost always beat Russia, Obama will almost always lose to Putin. Change the game from America versus Iran to Obama versus the Ayatollahs and the dynamic changes. Once you play the authoritarian game, you will lose. Consequently Obama is getting his ass handed to him on a platter.
Obama’s mistake was to doubt the greatness of his country and instead trust in the greatness of himself. Man bites dog and the president backs the wrong horse. Now all you boys in Yemen, swim<
link
Funny newrouter, I was just remarking to an online friend how pathetic that Fernandez piece is. Better off reading McCarthy’s takedown of Pete Peterson instead.
Look! Up in the sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! It’s Nyanprat!
the dumbest people are the ones who think they are smarter than everyone else
Heil Obama! (now in technicolor)
“With hard work and hope, change is always within our reach.”
sweet jesus this man is vapid
even more than ashley judd i think
Vapid, yes, but equally adept at hiding what needs hiding: America’s chickens coming home to roost.
And if anybody knows from vapid…
Animated.
Outstanding animation bour3!
And this photo confuses me a bit. I thought that the rainbows projected out of a entirely different part of Obama’s anatomy…
But, you know, I could just be mistaken, or a racist h8ter :)
My regards to all.
Democrats wanted a shining city on a hill. They’d settle for Marin County. They’re getting a nuclear-armed Iran.
Behold the Magic Shield in all its glory: straight out derangement taken to new heights.