Emperor Obama

[babe]

To me, Obama was the most likable president. He was down to earth and relatable.

I've heard accounts from the likes of Secret Service personnel that Clinton was very pleasant and treated them well, like the Bushes but even nicer. But hillary.... Holy Hell.... she's a witch.

No doubt Obama can be pleasant to the peons as well as anyone.

But it's rather like having to enjoy people in person who are selling you down the river in a slaver.

 

[babe]

Which "philosopher" writes about the "Arrogance of Power"

Google comes back with an ex US Senator who's got a pretty weird set of ideas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._William_Fulbright

Fulbright did write the book of that title, but imo his use of the term was a kind of prostitution of the concept. I think it goes back at least to some of the philosophers of the early nineteenth century, but it was perfectly understood by most braves in any sort of war party with a competent chief, in any tribe in history, in every kingdom in human history, as well as by my older brother. He knew what he could get away with, and he always did it.

It's like Nietzsche's "Will to Power". The idea is that the way to prove or establish absolute power is to show you are above the law. It's what dictators always have to do to prove they are in charge.

It should disturb JFC folks when dems do it as much as if anyone else does.

It was Putin's point when the West undertook to take Ukraine out of his basic control. Referring to the UN and globalism generally, he claimed the new order was essentially not "New Law" but "No Law", and that the West would ignore any treating or agreement of line of understanding at will if he did not stand up to it. I think Xi sees the same problem. However you may analyze it, Globalism is on shaky footing when the major powers are all dictators and no one intends to abide by any agreement.

 

[Surely]

I think if you were to meet any of these presidents at, say, a JFC get together, or shoot the breeze while watching a game, the most affable is certainly Clinton.

If I'm there with my wife then I'm not sure Clinton is the ex president that I want to hang with (I probably wouldn't want Biden there either). ; )

 

[One Brow]

There is a massive public sentiment against establishing unelected Executive Branch officials ...

I'm sure it seems massive in some circles, especially those fond of a POTUS with unchecked authority (until one of the other party is elected).

I think the SES system needs to be cleared entirely, and the "legislative" and "judicial" functions of Executive Branch agencies drawn and quartered and sent to the four corners of the Republic.

I'm in favor of decentralizing a lot of the power.

 

[babe]

I'm sure it seems massive in some circles, especially those fond of a POTUS with unchecked authority (until one of the other party is elected).



I'm in favor of decentralizing a lot of the power.

Today, the Mark Levin show replayed his March 2, 2017 analysis of the unfolding attacks on Trump and his new set of honchos, Flynn, Sessions and such. He pulled quotes out of the NY Times coverage and the Washington Post which actually revealed Obama's direction of these attacks.... He called it the scandal of the entire US history. Never before had an outgoing President so acted to destroy an incoming elected President of the US.

Obama in his last few weeks changed the practices of our intelligence agencies to allow many more officials access to FISA reports and to unmask them, and he said Obama's reason for doing this was to try to cover his tracks and make it harder to unravel.

I'll keep this brief, but access to many official records now shows this was absolutely the correct analysis.

Some conservatives say the only way Obama can be prosecuted is by impeachment by the House. He might not be at risk for any prison time, no felony conviction by the Judiciary, maybe the loss of some of his Presidential Perks who kinows. Don't we have an island like St. Helena where we can put our Napoleons??? Or does today the itinerary of one posh hotel after another around the world work just as effectively for sequestering or diverting our political has-beens?

But, clearly, History must absolutely discredit Obama for doing this. Lesser personnel all acted at his direction while in office, and even after he was out of office.

 

[babe]

A few more thoughts for the Sir Kickies among us.

I clearly acknowledge the need for international organizations and governance, but the most difficult obstacle, imo, is establishing fair and equitable laws and equality of rights. Having a lot of corrupt honchos doing international or intranational self-aggrandizing deals is inimical to the hope of any kind of good governance.

 

[sirkickyass]

Fulbright did write the book of that title, but imo his use of the term was a kind of prostitution of the concept. I think it goes back at least to some of the philosophers of the early nineteenth century

But who though? I'm asking you pretty clearly to name any philosophers who wrote and used that phrase, cause it seems to me like you're just bullshitting again.

It was Putin's point when the West undertook to take Ukraine out of his basic control.

LOL. I think you might get some argument from all the Ukrainians who declared independence in 1991, while Putin was still working in the St. Petersburg mayor's office.

 

[babe]

But who though? I'm asking you pretty clearly to name any philosophers who wrote and used that phrase, cause it seems to me like you're just bullshitting again.



LOL. I think you might get some argument from all the Ukrainians who declared independence in 1991, while Putin was still working in the St. Petersburg mayor's office.

I'll accept your query and your representation that I'm "bullshitting again". I did study philosophy some when I was in college, though I think my wife at that time did most of the actual reading of the books. She later got her invite as a Rhodes Scholar and went to England, to Oxford, and though she left me in the dust so to speak, her political skills were such an asset. She got fed up not only with me, but with Mormonism, and followed her career in banking and is today, I think..... I haven't talked to her in almost thirty years now...... a senior vice president at a pretty impressive bank. She was for some while, when Dubbya was Governor in Texas, by her own account, a regular in his little set of enlightened superiors.

You want explicit adoption of the phrase "Arrogance of Power", which Fulbright used as the title of his book about the global manners implicit in any Imperial sort of extensive world influence or outright dominion. I think a Fulbright would use it as a deplorable sort of bad manners in international politics, which we should make every appearance of having left behind as a relic of past politics. I think his book ranks as a leading and perhaps now an "early" persuasion that it is not only needless but problematic in the new age. But I adopted the term to suit my own argument about Hillary, Obama, and now Biden being "above the law" because of their political usefulness as true idiots. Nor should I, really, exclude Trump, from the list.

So, because you asked, and especially because you asked nicely, I will follow this bs with some research as good as I can manage. Because at least theoretically, I don't really like to be an idiot myself.

 

[NAOS]

How is this quantified? To me it has seemed he is more bluster than action and really hasn't done that much. Most of his focus has been on undoing. Has he issued more executive orders than any other president? I didn't see him in that infographic.

It depends on how actions are weighted. For me, firing four inspectors general would be worth several hundred executive orders. And then there’s all the actions that are clearly aimed at homogenizing party politics; these must be heavily weighted.

Executive orders are easily overblown.

 

[NAOS]

I think if you were to meet any of these presidents at, say, a JFC get together, or shoot the breeze while watching a game, the most affable is certainly Clinton.

I’m sure all his crazy trips with Epstein make for good conversation over cocktails.

 

[babe]

I'll accept your query and your representation that I'm "bullshitting again". I did study philosophy some when I was in college, though I think my wife at that time did most of the actual reading of the books. She later got her invite as a Rhodes Scholar and went to England, to Oxford, and though she left me in the dust so to speak, her political skills were such an asset. She got fed up not only with me, but with Mormonism, and followed her career in banking and is today, I think..... I haven't talked to her in almost thirty years now...... a senior vice president at a pretty impressive bank. She was for some while, when Dubbya was Governor in Texas, by her own account, a regular in his little set of enlightened superiors.

You want explicit adoption of the phrase "Arrogance of Power", which Fulbright used as the title of his book about the global manners implicit in any Imperial sort of extensive world influence or outright dominion. I think a Fulbright would use it as a deplorable sort of bad manners in international politics, which we should make every appearance of having left behind as a relic of past politics. I think his book ranks as a leading and perhaps now an "early" persuasion that it is not only needless but problematic in the new age. But I adopted the term to suit my own argument about Hillary, Obama, and now Biden being "above the law" because of their political usefulness as true idiots. Nor should I, really, exclude Trump, from the list.

So, because you asked, and especially because you asked nicely, I will follow this bs with some research as good as I can manage. Because at least theoretically, I don't really like to be an idiot myself.

As for the Ukrainians, I think their aspirations for independence might go back to the dawn of written history, and even further. A nation without good borders of some kind, like Poland, has particular problems defining "independence". Putin's set of notions about the Ukraine probably go back to his training as a Russian in his diapers. Well, Ok. You have this point. He was a KGB chief in Germany I think when the SALT treaty was made. I think he saw, clearly, the elements in the deal that agreed to a "hands off the Ukraine" as essential to the treaty. I don't know if he had a seat at the table when it was negotiated, but is possible he did. Russia left a helluva lot of missile silos in the Ukraine, and still managed them while they were being decommissioned. Again, maybe I could be enlightened. I know one of our inspectors who for some years made regular trips there to check on the progress, and this is the impression his general comments has left me with.

But you have to admit that Putin will not be bound by accuracy in his political rants. You might with some justification call him "Babish". He has donned the robes of Russian nationalism, including the Russian Orthodox Church, and maybe some of Gogol's expansive views of Russian "Manifest Destiny" as useful ploys rhetorically. Clearly, he is a master of political analysis and political posturing. I believe he called it straight about Western management of globalism as being essentially lawless, as being conveniently exploited by the US/British faction without regard for "good manners" or careful diplomacy, as the sort of "Arrogance of Power" which Fulbright described as the bane of Globalism. And, seriously, it takes a lot of nerve for the Ukrainians to try to be "independent", and the extension of basically corrupt international efforts to influence or control them, has got to be a huge issue.

I understood, when I was in the Philippines, that the US had, after helping them run the Spanish out to sea, fought a war with their "independence" advocates for four years before the US actually achieved complete submission. We have some delightful words in our language from that little bout of Imperialism. "Boondocks" is from the native "bundok" for mountains.... jungles really. "Amok" referred to a sort of crazy attack, not following good traditional British warfare manners, any better than our Plains indians ever did. We refer to people as "running Amok", or things going out of control as "running amok, though perhaps "running amuck might serve as well. I believe, in their perspective, it figures as true Patriotism. Their War of Independence did not work out the way ours did. When I was there, ages ago, the Philippines was still under our thumb, though "independent" for decades already. Today, their President ********, Duterte I think, with a growing large "Chinoy" wealthy minority, almost a third of the population and probably over half of the political donations, with a mix of mainland and Kai Shek capitalist refugees, is trying to court favor from Xi. Not such a grand "independent"/.

I would argue, that neither did we really achieve "independence" from the British, as more than two centuries of intellectual and political exploitation of our naivete has had us serving the British Lords as servilely as any well-trained service personnel in any English "Manor", even being their convenient hired soldiers, in every time of real British need.

At least we didn't deliberately starve the Filipinos the way Stalin did the Ukrainians in the 1930s.

 

[babe]

OK. Per Sir Kicky's advice, I studied up on Ukraine and Putin. When the START treaty was first rolled out in 1991, Putin was a mere political hack, though he had been in the KGB for 15 years, six years in Dresden, Germany. He was clearly a sycophant to a St. Petersburg mover and shaker, which led to his rise to being the mayor of St. Petersburg in 1994. Almost no possibility he was actually involved in the START treaty. But his political career has been largely favored by his pro-Russian rhetoric including criticism of alleged US departures from the arms deals of the past. While, of course, beefing up his own tool box.

Put it down, babe thinks Putin is Russia's "Hillary", but much better liked and much more effective in management. Not really, exactly, a Russian "Jefferson", or say "Madison" or even "Andrew Jackson". He is exactly the sort I refer to as leadership under the sway of "Arrogance of Power", as is Xi.

Preferring efficiency in politics over the inanities of actual people's rights, it seems a compelling predilection for authoritarian organization and policy.

 

[babe]

Here is my first offering towards the history of philosophy leading to the concept of "Arrogance of Power".

Nietzsche, whom I have not studied in depth, is often credited with an idea termed "Will to Power". Here is a reference of analytical descriptive value on the subject.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/#PoweLife

In my mind, Nietzsche has always been a sort of proletarian equivalent of "neat" or "cool", because the word was used like that in commonplace household chatter. In my brief skimming over the article linked above, Nietzsche is noted for being vague while evaluating human values which most people want to be clear-cut. He sees virtue in every conceivable human impulse, something functional, something appropriate to the needs of the day as we may choose to act. He sees having a purpose as the critical fulcrum of judgment, and believes humans should be purposeful, and willing to adapt their values to the need of the day.

In my religious predilections, this is "bad", because virtue or truth exist in a timeless continuum of righteousness......, much like Science is the firmament of our material understanding, presumed to be a consistent world of natural realities or laws. God is imagined to be unchanging, eternal. There is a postulate that we should learn to follow God's commandments.

I must confess. Some people would say I'm all messed up. In a family where almost everyone could be termed "sociopathic" if not "psychopath" because, well, the seat of authority was not present, and if you could not defend yourself intellectually or on a chess board, you would endlessly be mocked and disregarded.... The idea was we had to stand up for ourselves, maybe, but that glory was a fleeting thing that had to be created anew daily.

The other extreme was our mother, who tirelessly spoiled us all with mundane service and unconditional love, who never professed to actually know anything, or require anything from us....

In this household, Nietzsche was God. The God of the Lords. Christ was also God, but only the God of the Servants.

Let's just say, I have known some people who equated with themselves the perfect right to do as they saw fit, in any circumstance of life. Some of them were scientists, some were school teachers or professors, a few were lawyers and business executives.

I note that in the Bible, some of the "sins" most abhorred include the impulse to "steady the Ark", where a non-Priest not appointed to be a bearer of the sacred covenant should be struck down by the power of God if, seeing the bearers stumble, they should try to assist. The higher virtues required respect for authority deemed established by "The Law", and the impulse to improve The Law, or scripture was deemed a most serious evil.

Jesus, when taken up onto the pinnacle of the Temple..... a spot I visited one day, alone in my reverie...... by the Devil, was tempted four times. Each temptation was rebuffed by Jesus, with scriptural citations.

The Devil offered him glory, power, honor, wealth, with perfect "Arrogance" each time.

I should probably read Fulbright's book on "The Arrogance of Power". I'm sure he will have a context for his term.

Nietzsche's musings are not that idea.

My idea of it is, simply, that authoritarians always prove they are above the law with exemplary displays of the sort which schools the peasants not to rise in resistance. That's what jails are for. That's what firing squads are for. That's why Braveheart was sawed into pieces and impaled on pikes in the four corners of the Kingdom.

And that's why, ultimately, we need a kind of Law that is above the tyrants.

And that is not the bearing which Fulbright applies in his book on getting us past quarreling nationalism. Certainly, Xi is not paying attention to Fulbright today, and assuredly..... Putin does not see a shared incompetence or shared impotence as the road to a better future. I see the teachings of Christ, in his own words, as a sort of antidote for authoritarian impulses. Stuff like service, compassion, humility.

The whole problem with Progressive ideals is we have left out the ideas which teach self-control, respect for human rights, and the need to limit our appetites for wealth and power.

 

[babe]

I have to ramble on.

I apply stuff I criticize in others to my own case, as a sort of second thought. I need to check my drives. However valid Nietzsche's observations and reasonings may be, however practical or useful, here's the rub.

I have developed, on my own, a system of values much like Nietzsche, however inconsistent with religious pieties it would seem at first glance. The reason "God" is "good" is because what He does, in my imagination, is "Service" to us, the creation of a world, or circumstance, and a life where we are basically on a self-directed course of experience..... really, ultimately, free to choose. I'd see Nietzsche's ideas as literally "God-given human rights".

And the judgment is a practical one, a look at what we did with that opportunity. This is no kind of fatalism, no sort of concrete ideology, but the present liberty to use our understanding and abilities to accomplish something needful. Something better.

People like Obama are not so different, really. Just off the better path. Getting hung up on short-term and personal gain over a view for helping create opportunity for all of us to do better. Really, we just need to do better business and get better results. We can't let the presumptions of values railroad us into poverty, or destroy the accomplishments of our history into a lesser end. We have to insist on making things better..... actually better.

Better governance, more accountable governance. More "servants" in positions of power or influence. People with a vision that is more positive towards what our lives can be.

The whole problem with "elites" who don't have a valid vision for a better world is their negative impacts on all of us.

 

[sirkickyass]

As for the Ukrainians, I think their aspirations for independence might go back to the dawn of written history, and even further. A nation without good borders of some kind, like Poland, has particular problems defining "independence". Putin's set of notions about the Ukraine probably go back to his training as a Russian in his diapers.

You might want to read up on the history of this region. The formation of "Russia" as a national idea actually takes place in Kyiv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus') . The historical independence struggle in the region, that largely defined the identity of the people there, was not Ukraine/Russia - it was Slavs/Mongolian Empire.

The Christianization of Russian identity happens in Kyiv. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Kievan_Rus')

It's very wrong headed to think of Ukraine as a place perpetually struggling for independence against its Russian neighbors. It's the birthplace of Russian identity itself.

 

[babe]

You might want to read up on the history of this region. The formation of "Russia" as a national idea actually takes place in Kyiv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus') . The historical independence struggle in the region, that largely defined the identity of the people there, was not Ukraine/Russia - it was Slavs/Mongolian Empire.

The Christianization of Russian identity happens in Kyiv. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Kievan_Rus')

It's very wrong headed to think of Ukraine as a place perpetually struggling for independence against its Russian neighbors. It's the birthplace of Russian identity itself.

OK. I've heard the same stories, but sometimes it depends on just who you're listening to. Not that the truth is all that mutable, but people have their preferences.

I figured that "Russia" with Moscow as the center was because of Viking traders settling there. Reds, of the first sort. Moscow was a short portage, about thirty miles between navigable rivers flowing down to the Baltic and the Black. Kiev also has a lot of "Reds".

I really know nothing about all that. Todays "Independence" ideas might be largely more recent, such as abuses from distant power centers.

 

[Gameface]

@babe

Can you create a timeline of all the stuff you've done. I've personally lost track but I do know you've said you studied the effects of marijuana, can't remember if it was in a private lab or at a university. You've also had some sort of connection to the British royal family, as well as LDS leadership. There's so much more and now we learn that you've also studied philosophy.

It'd be fascinating to see a timeline of all this. I think it would put Forrest Gump to shame.

 

[sirkickyass]

@babe

we learn that you've also studied philosophy.

A careful reader would note that his wife did "most of the actual reading of the books."

 

[LogGrad98]

@babe

Can you create a timeline of all the stuff you've done. I've personally lost track but I do know you've said you studied the effects of marijuana, can't remember if it was in a private lab or at a university. You've also had some sort of connection to the British royal family, as well as LDS leadership. There's so much more and now we learn that you've also studied philosophy.

It'd be fascinating to see a timeline of all this. I think it would put Forrest Gump to shame.

He's a Renaissance man.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Would that make Obama the first gay President we've had, or do you think Abraham Lincoln was gay? It does really put a spin on Obama's strong condemnation of gay marriage early in his first term.

Obama Once Wrote To Ex-Girlfriend That He ‘Repeatedly Fantasizes About Making Love To Men,’ Biographer Says

Former President Barack Obama once wrote that he fantasized about having sexual relations with other men, author David Garrow said in an interview.

dailycaller.com