02-12-2010, 01:21 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
By Jory F. Goodman: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://antynomys.blogspot.com/">http://antynomys.blogspot.com/</a><!-- m -->
Below is a comment submitted to the memberâs section of Urgent Agenda by a psychiatrist who grew up in the same area that Obama created his base, and seems to me to pretty accurately reflect what we are seeing in Obama.
There have been many allusions to Obamaâs incredible narcissism. indeed, many find it is more intense and apparent than that of Bill Clintonâs. And it is. Simultaneously there have been innumerable observations about his defensiveness, surprise at being challenged, and lack of knowledge. Let me explain and interpret this for you.
First be advised that Iâm a psychiatrist with more than 30 years of experience. I practice in Beverly Hills. I grew up on the south side of Chicago in a neighborhood that later became Obamaâs venue. I went to college at Northwestern at the inception of the affirmative action, equal opportunity adventure.
Obamaâs educational experience parallels that of many of my classmates. While we, the majority sweated through organic chemistry, physiology, graduate-level courses in literature, advanced composition, and tutorial reading with the late Prof. Bergen Evans, African-American classmates showed up at their leisure, sent for tests if they cared to, read none of the 15 novels in 10 weeks, submitted no papers whatever, and passed with flying colors. They were never tested, criticized, graded or, heaven forbid, flunked. They were all literate as per the first definition in the dictionary â they could read and write. Most were illiterate by the second definition in the dictionary â they were not well read, knowledgeable, or people of letters. All of this describes and defines Obama. He is functionally literate, not a man of letters or knowledge, of only average intellect, not insightful or curious, and without ever having been challenged. The narcissism and grandiosity engendered by his life experience is of monumental proportion.
Flavor this with Chicago politics. Few people wonder why Chicago politicians rarely succeed on the national level. Does the name Rostenkowski ring a bell? During my childhood our aldermen was an amiable lush named Nicholas Bohling. He never put the arm on anybody. But if you needed the winterâs potholes in front of your house filled you dropped off a fifth of rye at his office. If you had a traffic ticket that you could not afford to fix on the scene (which means you did not have enough money in your wallet or pocket at the time to give to the police officer to âtake to the court for youâ) you dropped off two bottles of rye and a sealed envelope. Things were as efficient as Mussoliniâs trains. There was of course an underside to all of this. When a classmateâs father was late on some payments a couple of times (this with respect to his business which was not in Ald. Bohlingâs territory, but was downtown, a restaurant with a back room gaming establishment) he went missing. His remains were found a few weeks later in a sewer. It is a mystery to this day how the police new precisely which one of the several hundreds of thousands of sewers in Chicagoland to explore, but their expert sleuthing allowed the family to have a funeral.
Obama moved into the venue where he could not be challenged on any front. His fancy education made him brilliant and superior. His minister, his buddies (Dorn, Ayers) and his wife set the tone and ran interference. And of course, ultimately any critique or criticism was racist.
So you see how this man glided through life unmarred, unchallenged and unquestionable. His monumental omnipotence is matched only by his monumental ignorance. He has never been confronted (What Michele has to say in private is unknown, of course, but not pertinent to the discussion either.) And so we see what we see â a pompous, self- absorbed narcissist who can speak of virtually nothing ad libitum. He needs a Teleprompter or surrogate. And if challenged or questioned or criticized, the shock and surprise in his eyes are sincere. He simply cannot believe it. This has never happened. It is not supposed to happen. Itâs against the unwritten rules. Equal opportunity, affirmative action folks cannot be tested, challenged, criticized or ever, ever be wrong. And that is why, as he takes his health-care dog-and-pony show on the road he is absolutely rigid, and unyielding in what he wants. It is why he is so angry at being questioned or challenged. It is why his surrogates have ceased to imply and begun to scream and bellow the charge of racism against any person, organization, reporter, commentator, handicapped person in a wheelchair, and so forth and so on ad nauseam. Racism, itâs racism. Not rational, honest, open, fair, democratic debate and discussion. Itâs racism.
One final comment: Obama is not socialist, he is a communist. What is the difference? Look around. In countries that have socialist parties and have had socialist governmentsâ Scandinavia and other parts of Western Europe â they engage in debate with other parties, negotiate, and lose elections without revolutions. Communists never accept a loss as fair, will do anything to consolidate their power and control, and always follow the Marxist credo that the end justifies the means.
Jory F. Goodman, M. D.
By Jory F. Goodman: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://antynomys.blogspot.com/">http://antynomys.blogspot.com/</a><!-- m -->
Below is a comment submitted to the memberâs section of Urgent Agenda by a psychiatrist who grew up in the same area that Obama created his base, and seems to me to pretty accurately reflect what we are seeing in Obama.
There have been many allusions to Obamaâs incredible narcissism. indeed, many find it is more intense and apparent than that of Bill Clintonâs. And it is. Simultaneously there have been innumerable observations about his defensiveness, surprise at being challenged, and lack of knowledge. Let me explain and interpret this for you.
First be advised that Iâm a psychiatrist with more than 30 years of experience. I practice in Beverly Hills. I grew up on the south side of Chicago in a neighborhood that later became Obamaâs venue. I went to college at Northwestern at the inception of the affirmative action, equal opportunity adventure.
Obamaâs educational experience parallels that of many of my classmates. While we, the majority sweated through organic chemistry, physiology, graduate-level courses in literature, advanced composition, and tutorial reading with the late Prof. Bergen Evans, African-American classmates showed up at their leisure, sent for tests if they cared to, read none of the 15 novels in 10 weeks, submitted no papers whatever, and passed with flying colors. They were never tested, criticized, graded or, heaven forbid, flunked. They were all literate as per the first definition in the dictionary â they could read and write. Most were illiterate by the second definition in the dictionary â they were not well read, knowledgeable, or people of letters. All of this describes and defines Obama. He is functionally literate, not a man of letters or knowledge, of only average intellect, not insightful or curious, and without ever having been challenged. The narcissism and grandiosity engendered by his life experience is of monumental proportion.
Flavor this with Chicago politics. Few people wonder why Chicago politicians rarely succeed on the national level. Does the name Rostenkowski ring a bell? During my childhood our aldermen was an amiable lush named Nicholas Bohling. He never put the arm on anybody. But if you needed the winterâs potholes in front of your house filled you dropped off a fifth of rye at his office. If you had a traffic ticket that you could not afford to fix on the scene (which means you did not have enough money in your wallet or pocket at the time to give to the police officer to âtake to the court for youâ) you dropped off two bottles of rye and a sealed envelope. Things were as efficient as Mussoliniâs trains. There was of course an underside to all of this. When a classmateâs father was late on some payments a couple of times (this with respect to his business which was not in Ald. Bohlingâs territory, but was downtown, a restaurant with a back room gaming establishment) he went missing. His remains were found a few weeks later in a sewer. It is a mystery to this day how the police new precisely which one of the several hundreds of thousands of sewers in Chicagoland to explore, but their expert sleuthing allowed the family to have a funeral.
Obama moved into the venue where he could not be challenged on any front. His fancy education made him brilliant and superior. His minister, his buddies (Dorn, Ayers) and his wife set the tone and ran interference. And of course, ultimately any critique or criticism was racist.
So you see how this man glided through life unmarred, unchallenged and unquestionable. His monumental omnipotence is matched only by his monumental ignorance. He has never been confronted (What Michele has to say in private is unknown, of course, but not pertinent to the discussion either.) And so we see what we see â a pompous, self- absorbed narcissist who can speak of virtually nothing ad libitum. He needs a Teleprompter or surrogate. And if challenged or questioned or criticized, the shock and surprise in his eyes are sincere. He simply cannot believe it. This has never happened. It is not supposed to happen. Itâs against the unwritten rules. Equal opportunity, affirmative action folks cannot be tested, challenged, criticized or ever, ever be wrong. And that is why, as he takes his health-care dog-and-pony show on the road he is absolutely rigid, and unyielding in what he wants. It is why he is so angry at being questioned or challenged. It is why his surrogates have ceased to imply and begun to scream and bellow the charge of racism against any person, organization, reporter, commentator, handicapped person in a wheelchair, and so forth and so on ad nauseam. Racism, itâs racism. Not rational, honest, open, fair, democratic debate and discussion. Itâs racism.
One final comment: Obama is not socialist, he is a communist. What is the difference? Look around. In countries that have socialist parties and have had socialist governmentsâ Scandinavia and other parts of Western Europe â they engage in debate with other parties, negotiate, and lose elections without revolutions. Communists never accept a loss as fair, will do anything to consolidate their power and control, and always follow the Marxist credo that the end justifies the means.
Jory F. Goodman, M. D.
C U BABE