“There’s nothing new about narcissism in politics,” columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote. “Every senator looks in the mirror and sees a president. Nonetheless, has there ever been a presidential nominee with a wider gap between his estimation of himself and the sum total of his lifetime achievements?
“Obama is a three-year senator without a single important legislative achievement to his name, a former Illinois state senator who voted ‘present’ nearly 130 times. As president of the Harvard Law Review, as law professor and as legislator, has he ever produced a single notable piece of scholarship? Written a single memorable article? His most memorable work is a biography of his favorite subject: himself.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Howserfan on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Mrage on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
71 Comments
I would have to say yes. His favorite subject is ‘himself’. The only piece of published work he has done is about ‘himself’. The evidence certainly points in that direction and the man has no accomplishments to speak of. I still waiting for substance. Many of us were taken in at first with this ‘articulate’ speaker with lofty goals and catch phrases. Still waiting for the change. He is just another politician.
“Is Obama a narcissist?”
Well, duh, name a politician that isn’t. Really. Even the most sincere, well meaning, dedicated politician has a narcissist streak a mile wide.
No one dragged John McCain or Barack Obama into the presidential primaries. Both of them, along with many others, dove into the race head first.
If you can find a politician that is not narcissist, then you probably have found an ex-office holder.
In the race for narcissistic king, Obama and McCain are in a dead heat.
Krauthead predicted that we’d be treated as “liberators” in Iraq and greeted with candy and flowers.
Colossal jerkwad.
Lofty goals and catch phrases were moving slowly now. Your betting The only piece has the presidential primaries. But for The only piece in His favorite subject in 1963, the presidential primaries would remain on a narcissist streak.
Narcissism is a normal component of our human condition. The better question: “Is Obama’s narcissism pathological?” One helpful way to answer this is to look at the work product of the individual. This is a problem with Obama as his primary adult work product has been two books he wrote essentially about himself. There were no articles authored by him while president of the HLR; no post law school clerkship; no appreciable legislative product as an Illinois state senator or as a currently sitting US Senator. What bothers me most is his long-term mentoring relationships; why are they all men like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers and others in the Chicago political machine? These are men who do seem to suffer a significant narcissistic pathology. How predisposed Obama may be to a deep attraction to pathological narcissists is certainly unknown to me, but the glimmer of a pattern is there. He seems to find them and bond with them. This begs a another and more pressing question: What kind of man is it who wants to be POTUS simply because he decides he wants to be POTUS? Especially a young man with virtually no professional, private sector or public service history to back up his most lofty ambitions on which defenseless others will fatefully depend? The presidency is not ’something to win’ but a massive responsibility to assume. What are his accomplishments: two Harvard degrees and two books about himself, and two successful elections to political office. Our best presidents have been those who know what it means to fail. Obama’s life has been an exercise not of accomplishment and contribution, but one of opportunism and avoiding failure, and avoiding blame. Words matter, but deeds determine, both by their presence and their absence. Hillary was a far better choice.
“There’s nothing new about narcissism in ubber-conservative Op-Ed writers”
Willem you said it better than anyone else. Hopefully the voters will see this man in his nakedness before they vote. He is indeed an empty suit.
Well facts are facts. But lack of experience or accomplishments apparently doesn’t matter much to our sound bite society.
As long as you look good, read a teleprompter, and don’t have much of a record that can be criticized…
As much as I support and admire Obama, he may be a bit narcissistic.
However, I believe that his obvious confidence reflects his high intelligence and judgement, and he is the right person for the job at the right time.
What this country DOES NOT need is more of the same, which John McCain has to offer. He is the same old Republican who has been in the Senate forever, and offers no change and nothing new.
The way things are going now, I can’t imagine the ancient McCain possibly winning over the vibrant, enthusiastic, motivated and youthful Obama.
I have a healthy self-image.
YOU are an egotist.
THEY are narcissists.
This must be the
lamestlatest trial balloon talking point from the McLame campaign.If we’re going to do some armchair psychoanalysis let’s discuss the narcissistic character traits John Sidney McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) demonstrated when he abandoned his first wife and three kids because she was no longer a swimsuit model due to a crippling accident in favor of the sweet young Beer Queen of Arizona’s quarter-of-a-billion dollar dowry.
Or let’s get into a discussion of the leadership qualities one might expect from a lifelong “maverick.” A maverick isn’t a leader; it’s an out-of-control renegade. People don’t follow a maverick.
Leadership is an enigmatic concept for a lot of people. (Why did the Supremes flop without Diana Ross and Van Halen didn’t miss a beat between David Lee Roth and Sammy Hagar?) Abraham Lincoln had about as much experience (also in the Illinois legislature and the United States Congress) and became the most impressive president in history. All he had was “pretty speeches” and a vision.
For forty years (since they killed Bobby Kennedy) Americans have been craving someone who is thoughtful and wise beyond his years and sincerely in love with the promise of what our Founding Fathers hoped to craft with the Constitution. Americans are craving a leader.
Is Obama a politician? Well (and here I’m quoting the deep wisdom of our good friend “Nathaniel”) “Duh.
Guess what? My dentist is a dentist! My mechanic is a mechanic! My barber is a
babebarber! Perhaps when we consider hiring someone to be the most important politician in the world, perhaps we should consider a … oh, I dunno… a politician?Lincoln was a politician. FDR was a politician. Reagan was a politician.
And all of ‘em were narcissistic as hell.
Next question?
They are both owned by the same people. If you think either one of them cares about you, or me, I have some farmland here I’d like to sell you. And a bridge in brooklyn…
Recently on MSNBC the pundits and news show commentators have been saying that anything he says really doesnt matter while on his trip abroad – that its about the images – a photo op so to speak. I do believe he must be an extreme narcissist – and pundits etc are probably right. To think there are those in this country that vote for a president based on nice looking photos is what Obama is counting on – lets ask him about drilling for oil…???
what part of “they’re all owned by the same people” is so hard to understand?
Do you know the difference between a republican in congress or a democrat in congress?
me neither…
Both parties have acted irresponsibly in congress – I agree
Acted irresponsibly?
hehehehe. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Try “acting treasonously”.
Do you know the difference between a democrat and a republican in the white house?
Me neither…
When the republicans were in control they did nothing except spend spend spend – the democrats are now doing the exact same thing …. maybe they should cancel each other out?
ksfarmgrrl,
You think the “Grren” party should have control?
“Green”
ksfrmgrrl,
I think you are a radical extremist narcissist!
The dems. Will Smith vs. the Repubs. Mickey Rooney (in his later years).
Well, much more Dems voted against the FISA bill than Repubs, ditto on ending the war etc. A realistic strategy is under way, to challenge those who have credible primary challengers. I would also like to see Cindy Sheehan’s green candidacy succeed–if it’s even close enough to make Nancy Pelosi nervous, it’d be worth it!
It’s the same dilemma as always, and it’s not a new one. In “Confessions of a Congressman, Jerry Voorhis pointed out that, even at the height of New Deal Dem strength (where the Dems held 333 seats in the House), a full third of them were conservatives (and while he didn’t mention it, racism was the bipartisan consensus).
Local case in point: Our freshly-minted Dem congresscritter, Gabrielle Giffords, is a Blue Dog who represents a barely Democratic district. After campaigning on–guess what?–”Change can’t wait!”–has proceeded to spin everything in centrist-speak, taking progressive positions when the leadership gives her the nod, but equally falling in line on issues such as the FISA “compromise.”
Her opponent, Tim Bee, is stressing his “independence,” which makes me laugh–particularly after Karl Rove showed up for a fundraiser.
There are no credible third-party candidates (the Green party here tend to attract flakes–no, I mean real flakes).
So take your choice: frying pan, or fire? As pissed as I am at Giffords, taking this particular creature out this year is not a viable option (as for 2010, well, we’ll see).
I choose instead to take allies where I can find them, and hit back in whatever way works.
Well facts are facts. But lack of experience or accomplishments apparently doesn’t matter much to our sound bite society.
As long as you look good, read a teleprompter, and don’t have much of a record that can be criticized…
That could all have been easily said about Bush in 2000 and was by many. But did we hear a single conservative question it then? Oh, hell no! Inexperience was what they wanted. And Bush can’t even read a teleprompter without screwing it up!
Y’all need to go take a quick look in the mirror and see yourself looking back at you. Unless, of course, you’re a vampire…
I see that the FISA bill is still the throbbing thrombotic internal hemorrhoid that Rage can’t get rid of without first removing the Pelosi-Reid tumor.
hehehehe hehe hehehehehe
——————————————–
I think Osama Obama is more of a nar-sissy. His just borderline metro-sexual and has no legislative accomplishments he can point to. He makes campaign presidential policy depending on the poll of the day.
And, he’ll dump his friends, compadres and yes, his dear old grandmother if it will score him political points.
Osama Obama is ‘fer’ something less’n he be ‘agin’ it, if’n the polls jest ain’t right.
Osama Obama counts legislative accomplishment as merely being present and having a pulse.
The nar-sissy Obama has more skeletons in his closet than a graveyard.
Obama isn’t a narcissist, Krauthammer is just playing armchair psychologist and doesn’t know what he’s talking about. However I’m sure Obama feels pretty good. In his recent Iraq trip he was greeted with huge cheers:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/22/111651/551/182/555102
Bush, on the other hand, is met with polite applause which is understandable since they have to treat their Commander in Chief with respect and are ordered to do so. Obama, on the other hand, gets voluntary applause and has no problem meeting with the people. Where Obama goes, like where Clinton goes and has gone, there are mobs of people who love him. Where Bush goes people protest.
It’ll be good to have a President America won’t feel ashamed about. No warmonging war criminal who likes to demean heads of state with unwanted backrubs.
A narcissist is someone who depends on validation from others to reflect his perceived image and is pathologically self centered. Narcissists tend to have meltdowns when those around them can’t validate the way they see themselves. They lack compassion, empathy, and a sense of commtment to anyone else. I think McCain fits that description much more than Obama.
Obama’s not perfect, but he has class, intelligence, common sense, and vision…so no wonder that many here just can’t seem to get it.
Oh, Mary, I think they do get it. That combined with their loathing of their own candidate is why these jokers are willing to stoop to such nonsense this political season.
It will be fun to watch.
It will be sad to watch if an empty suit is our president, I dont have any faith in his empty promises. Lets set a benchmark – If Obama is elected – national healthcare should pass within his first year with the democratic congress and the seats the GOP will likely lose in the senate. How much do you wanna bet it doesnt pass? They are getting paid by the same lobbiests – the second largest lobbiest is the AMA
So whether Obama looks in the mirror is now going to be a political question?
Does he get $400 haircuts, there’s gotta be sumthin we can use!
“Nonetheless, has there ever been a presidential nominee with a wider gap between his estimation of himself and the sum total of his lifetime achievements?”
“Obama is a three-year senator without a single important legislative achievement to his name, a former Illinois state senator who voted ‘present’ nearly 130 times. As president of the Harvard Law Review, as law professor and as legislator, has he ever produced a single notable piece of scholarship? Written a single memorable article? His most memorable work is a biography of his favorite subject: himself.”
None of that seems to matter at all. Why?
Because he’s the liberals magic negro.
Who cares that he has no experience or accomplishments, they just want a liberal in office, qualified or not.
“Because he’s the liberals magic negro.”
Mighty white of you to say that, Box Head.
And what makes you say that WS? How do you know I’m not black.
You think blacks don’t care about getting somebody in office that is qualified for the job?
I think liberals don’t.
“How do you know I’m not black.”
Ah, that was too easy – no self-respecting black person would refer to Barack Obama as a “magic neg
Oh WS, a lot more offensive terms than that are used among “self-respecting black” people.
Come up out of your hole once in awhile and look and listen.
Good night WS, I have other things of equal interest to pursue, like trying to find a test pattern on TV or something.
“Oh WS, a lot more offensive terms than that are used among “self-respecting black” people.”
Really? Name just one.
Yes.
And it is a dangerous thing his quest for yet more love.
Like the young cad, he has casually tossed aside those who came to the dance with him.
NOW he wants to be loved by new people. And he does not care what party they belong to or what they believe.
He just very much needs their love. And he will do almost anything, I think, to win it.
Obama doesn’t need achievements or experience; he was selected by affirmative action, and will continue to be graded on the curve. Geraldine Ferraro was right on target about him, hopefully America will wake up and vote respnsibly in Nov.
“he was selected by affirmative action”
Don’t tell Partisan Hack Paul that – he says that Obama is actually an Arab.
“Is Obama a narcissist?”
Well yea, what politician isn’t?
The real question is, is there any substance behind the narcissism? Is the self-absorbtion based on accomplishment, a genuine record of achievement?
No.
Not even close.
Never in modern times have we had a presidential so uniquely unprepared to be president.
He’s a product of the Chicago Machine, the Dem/Daley organization, the most corrupt in the nation, one filled with bag-men like Tony Rezko. The question is: who is propping up the empty suit? How does one go from one term pretty boy to candidate for president?
Interesting question.
. . . (since they killed Bobby Kennedy) . . .
Who is “they?” If I remember my history correctly, Sirhan Sirhan fired the shots.
Is this the same “they” as on the grassy knoll? Masons? Illuminati? Knights Templar? Space aliens? Should I line you up with Pleefer?
Who is this enigmatic “they?”
That’s “presidential candidate so uniquely unprepared . . . ”
Oops.
GMC, I have no interest in joining a “discussion” that has gotten this idiotic, but c’mon . ..you’re going “oops” about a minor typo? I long since stopped giving a damn about that. Life’s too short, and this ain’t exactly the most important place one can comment.
But, on the upside, nice to see you’ve finally discovered &lang i &rang .
Pretty funny to hear a bunch of Repukes who voted TWICE for George W. Bush, the ULTIMATE “affirmative action for blue-bloods” ne’er-do-well, who occupied the weakest governorship in the United States, talk about ANY candidate being “unqualified” for the Presidency or having “no record of achievement.”
Consistency isn’t your strong suit guys–not that it bothers you.
GMC70,
Actually, judging by their twenty-year record, I’d say the Bush machine has the “most corrupt in the nation” title sewn up just fine, thanks.
He is a 3 year Illinois state senator – he started running for president before he met the year mark of his united states senate post. big big difference, he is a shoe in, gotta love it
He is a 3 year Illinois state senator – he started running for president before he met the year mark of his united states senate post. big big difference, he is a shoe in, gotta love it
peej-ks,
Barack Obama served SEVEN years in the Illinois State Senate. Got that? SEVEN. “Three year” (sic) doesn’t equal “three-term.”
At least get your facts right, numbnuts.
2FCK,
Hey “numbnuts” why don’t you “At least get your facts right”.
Obama was first sworn in as a senator in January 2005.
Typical crap info. and talk out of 2FCK’ed.
By the way, treat people decently and you will be likewise, act as you do expect the same.
peej_ks was speaking of Obama’s experience as a US Senator from Illinois, not his state senate term. Being a state senator is not adequate experience for the Presidency.
But, on the upside, nice to see you’ve finally discovered &lang i &rang .
What is that? I don’t understand.
I’m pretty dense at times, thought.
Rage was talking about your use of italics.
the &lang and &rang are the unicode for the brackets. (what you use to make italic print)
Since he can’t type them here without them being invisible to the reader, he substituted the brackets with the geek language equivalent.
Regular,
Can you explain how to print in italic, I’m not sure I understand what you just said.
Thanks, got’a run now but will read tonight.
use the arrow keys at the bottom row of the keyboard.
start the italics by using (left arrow i right arrow)
make your sentence
close the italics by using (left arrow slash i right arrow)
If you don’t close it, anything you type after that will be italicized.
“”italics
test
Regular is of course correct on this point.
GMC: Use angle-bracket-slash-i-anglebracket to close your italics. A minor point, but it will make your posts more readable.
test
test
test
Oops.. backslash, not slash.
test
P.S. Depending on when he was sworn in, Obama served in the state Senate somewhere from 7 1/2 to 8 years.
He’s been in the US Senate for 3 1/2 years.
Is is possible to discuss the man without fudging basic facts?
b – HTML tag for strong emphasis of text (i.e. bold).
i – HTML tag for emphasis of text (i.e. italicize).
link – HTML tag to create a hyperlink.
b-quote –
HTML tag to distinguish quoted or cited text.
del – HTML tag to label text considered deleted from a post. Most browsers display as striked through text. (Assigns datetime attribute with offset from GMT (UTC))
ins – HTML tag to label text considered inserted into a post. Most browsers display as underlined text. (Assigns datetime attribute with offset from GMT (UTC))
ul – HTML tag will insert an unordered list, or wrap the selected text in same. An unordered list will typically be a bulleted list of items.
ol – HTML tag will insert a numbered list, or wrap the selected text in same. Each item in an ordered list are typically numbered.
li – HTML tag will insert or make the selected text a list item. Used in conjunction with the ul or ol tag.
code –
HTML tag for preformatted styling of text. Generally sets text in a monospaced font, such as Courier.more – WordPress tag that breaks a post into “teaser” and content sections. Type a few paragraphs, insert this tag, then compose the rest of your post. On your blog’s home page you’ll see only those first paragraphs with a hyperlink ((more…)), which when followed displays the rest of the post’s content.
page – WordPress tag similar to the more tag, except it can be used any number of times in a post, and each insert will “break” and paginate the post at that location. Hyperlinks to the paginated sections of the post are then generated in combination with the wp_link_pages() or link_pages() template tag.
lookup – Opens a JavaScript dialogue box that prompts for a word to search for through the online dictionary at answers.com. You can use this to check spelling on individual words.
Close Tags – Closes any open HTML tags left open–but pay attention to the closing tags. WordPress is not a mind reader (!), so make sure the tags enclose what you want, and in the proper way.
Workflow Note – With Quicktag buttons that insert HTML tags, you can for example click i to insert the opening tag, type the text to be enclosed, and click /i or Close Tags to insert the closing tag. However, you can eliminate the need for this ‘close’ step by changing your workflow a bit: type your text, select the portion to be emphasized (that is, italicized), then click i and your highlighted text will be wrapped in the opening and closing tags
b – HTML tag for strong emphasis of text (i.e. bold).
i – HTML tag for emphasis of text (i.e. italicize).
link – HTML tag to create a hyperlink.
b-quote –
blockquote – text backslash blockquote
del – HTML tag to label text considered deleted from a post. Most browsers display as striked through text. (Assigns datetime attribute with offset from GMT (UTC)
del text backslash del
ins – HTML tag to label text considered inserted into a post. Most browsers display as underlined text. (Assigns datetime attribute with offset from GMT (UTC))
ins text slash ins
Is there a tag for “complete homophobic, sexist, racist jerk”? Based on your attack on Obama earlier this morning (narsissy, etc), you should probably use that one on all your posts. It’d warn the rest of us that it’s time to scroll-over.
thomaswitt
Posted July 24, 2008 at 12:49 pm | Permalink
Is there a tag for “complete homophobic, sexist, racist jerk”? Based on your attack on Obama earlier this morning (narsissy, etc), you should probably use that one on all your posts. It’d warn the rest of us that it’s time to scroll-over
————————–
Still have the sheep trained to back up to the fence Thomas?
Mmmm, lamb. Makes me think of Jack Stack’s BBQ in Overland Park (95th and Metcalf for those who travel). The make the most fantastic smoked lamb ribs I’ve ever had (and I’ve had lots of bbq!).
Lucky for me I get to to go Johnson County this weekend!
Regular,
You are a ‘Regular ol genius’, pun intended.
Thanks for the tip on posting in italics and bold.
I will try it later after I eat and rest, just got back from a three day business trip.
As you can see I couldn’t wait, as I am obsessive compulsive..