Saturday, 21 August 2010

Now you have seen the bully in action

By Robin Hind

Obama and Cameron went world wide on television on the 20th July. This gave Obama an opportunity to display himself as convivial and benignly affable; an exercise in fellowship as he addressed the Prime Minister as “David”. He also showed, when he answered press questions that without pre-written notes, that he rambled ineptly, failing to get to the point of the question at times, and missing the point at others. It seemed that his aim was to show himself as a pliable, approachable, good natured fellow. He steered clear of discussing British Petroleum in his efforts to appear friendly

This performance contrasted with his earlier address to the American Nation (for that read the World) in his inflamed attack on British Petroleum after the accident in the Gulf of Mexico.

It was then that he showed the bully in action. On worldwide television there was no sign of statesmanlike wisdom. None of the dignity expected of the world leader.

The Gulf of Mexico spill is, we all know, a huge tragedy. But was the Obama assault the way to go?

Sane and objective people could have expected the following type of approach from a mature American leader:

“We are all concerned about the tragedy in the Gulf. However, we must remember that tapping the resources of the world is hazardous and always has been. The risks of drilling for oil have been shouldered by those who have taken many risks – risks of personal injury, financial risks, and risks to the environment. In America we have risked, and because of that, we have particularly benefitted from our oil resources. Much of the quality of life of our nation has rested on the availability of various forms of energy which we have mined or bought from others, always treading a narrow path between risk and benefit. The industries, which have made us the wealthiest country in the world - not only the steel, automotive and manufacturing industries but also agriculture - have depended upon this windfall of energy with which we have been blessed.

Our task now is together, in the closest of harmonies, and in earnest co-operation, to battle this catastrophe with all the intellectual, engineering, and financial resources which we and others can muster.”
What we got instead was the accusative and aggressive confrontation. It was a polarization into heroic “us” and villainous “them”. It was a litany of blame and aggression. It was a variant of “if there is blame fix it fast”. It was the adverserial lawyer’s demand for compensatory cash in its crudest packaging.

That was the bullyboy asserting his authority and pulling rank. That was a man who is showing himself that he is inter-nationally divisive, promoting his ego and trying to entrench his authority by fixing blame on a passive target.

The question which therefore arises is who he will gun for what in the future. Which of us will become victims to his arrogant, bumptious aggression? Is this the man whose true nature will polarize the world into conflict within the frame of hypocritical appeasement?

Robin Hind


Curt said...

There is no doubt that Obama is at best a poor statesman, and at worst a bully. He is inept without the aid of a teleprompter, but it must be remembered that is is but a figurehead, a public representative for the plutocracy that in fact, rules the USA and the world. Regarding offshore drilling, it is the US environmental regulations that require the drilling to take place "out of sight" of the shore (so as not to mar the view of the ocean horizon for those rich shorefront property owners) and consequently in deep ocean waters where capping an errant wellhead becomes a major problem for the drilling company that is to blame for the Gulf fiasco. This is not to absolve Obama of the charge of being a bad statesman (which he is), but to point out the true origin of the oil spill mess.

Birdman said...

It still boggles the mind as to how he was elected in the first place. Are we to believe that the folks of the US (who voted for him) were fooled by his rhetoric?

Somehow I do not believe that.

Dr.D said...

On the one hand, it is true I think that Obama is simply a front for Soros & Co., but on the other hand, in his own small mind, Obama also sees himself as a powerful free agent, acting on his own. Thus, at times, Obama seems to slip loose and say things that are contrary to the interests of Soros & Co., that only demonstrate the petty power of Obama. Soros does not have a real tight rein on him is what it comes down to, I think.

Obama is a god in his own mind, and he will strike whomever he pleases to make that point known to all. His one consistent goal is the destruction of the United States and he moves forward on that relentlessly. Every action he takes is consistent with this goal.

Robin asks, "who he will gun for what in the future?" On the one hand, the answer is, "anyone who gets in his way." A more complete answer might be, "in addition to the US, he will be out to destroy the allies of the US." Watch how he cottons up to the enemies of the US and that should tell you all you need to know.

He is a genuinely evil man.

Dr.D said...

@ Birdman
You said, "Are we to believe that the folks of the US (who voted for him) were fooled by his rhetoric?"

It is very sad to say, but there are a very large proportion of the population of the US who still believe his rhetoric. They still believe that he pays their rent, he provides for all their needs, although they have no idea whatsoever where he gets the money to do this. These are the folks on welfare, and they just think he personally provides for them. They make no connection with the fact that the government must first steal that money from someone else before it can be given to them. No, it is simply a gift to them from the government god named obama. And they really believe this, and more unfortunately, they are entitled to vote.

Anonymous said...

Obama pulled it off thru the media backing.
They used old tactics of racism, first black president in a racist nation ect.
Far from the truth, American people are too tolerant and this is what we got for our tolerance.
Its all a bunch of crap and even foreign nations see thru this garbage.
But he keeps the war going and the bankers are happy with the profit and the Christian soldiers continue to blow up enemies of said nation.
The warriors are not that fortunate though.
Wars are ugly for those deployed to keep obama in good standing in he face of his enablers.

But the party must go one for the chosen one...

-concearned American-

Anonymous said...

He is, without doubt, the leading symptom of the most serious illness ever to have stricken the major democracies.

What we are facing now is more dangerous than the Cold War (believe it or not) and at least as dangerous as Hitler.


Anonymous said...

Obama revealed his true anti British feelings when he emphasised 'British' Petroleum, ignoring the fact that BP has not been British for years, but is a multi national company. Obama learned his hatred of the British on his Kenyan father's knee, (until Daddy upped and left Obama and his mother to father several other children around the world in stereotypical black fashion.

Obama also ignored the fact that the oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico was run by American companies with Americans in charge. It was Americans who were either negligent or incompetent or disregarding safety rules for profit or bonuses.

This man, who still refuses to publicly produce his birth certificate, thus proving his true religion, is a danger to the free world. As American presidents go, and there have been several great statesmen, is a lightweight, vacuous, egotistical and not afraid to use his colour for political advantage.

Obama is a mongrel, in several senses of the word.