Friday, August 21, 2009

More On The Theory: Obama Is Stupid And Lazy

You know, I actually have a hard time writing that the President is stupid and lazy. I really do. Which isn't, I suppose, very American. Washington used to get all kinds of crap and if Washington did—well, that sets the tone, doesn't it? Americans are not worshipful toward the Commander-In-Chief.

I thought it was overdone during W's reign: Even now, W's trips to Crawford are regarded as signs of his laziness, even though he worked while there. (Republican time away from office is always an issue to partisans, which to me makes no sense: If you don't like the guy, the more time he takes from office the better, right?)

And stupid? Fuhgeddaboudit. That's axiomatic, right?

I think that all politicians tend toward stupidity. Groupthink is pretty much the enemy of intelligence. And the way politicians seem to get elected these days is to be the head groupthinker, and to march along to some fixed idea.

Laziness, though, I think is a rarer quality. Campaigning is hard. Most politicians—the current President excluded—have to campaign hard for decades to get anywhere. And usually they have to bust their asses to make a mark that gets them noticed. Again, current President excluded. He's gone right to the lazy part that most politicians put off until they've secured their perpetual re-elections.

My question for you, blog readers, is this: Right now I'm tops for the phrase "Obama is stupid and lazy" in Google, if you quote it, and third if you don't quote it (and the sites above me don't actually talk about Obama). And I think it's an interesting and fitting topic that could really take off, but after hearing it for eight years, it might also be tiring.

So, I leave it to you. Should I run with this?

Should I, for example, point out that in the wake of extreme unpopularity over health care, Obama's handling for this was apparently to encourage people to fink on their neighbors—and then spam them? How stupid is that? "Everyone loves spam! Let's send out unsolicited e-mails to people who hate us!"

Or that Obama has put his brand on this bill, HR 3200? "My plan" he calls it. The lazy part being he had nothing to do with writing it, hasn't read it, doesn't seem to know what's in it, and has never bothered to formulate a principled theory on which nationalized health care might work in the USA, despite failing everywhere else in the world. (Maybe the French health care system isn't a failure, but it seems to have dragged the entire rest of their country down.) The stupid part being that when this mofo goes down, it's going to have his brand on it?

This constant self-contradictory pose? At first I thought this wasn't either stupid or lazy, just desperate politicking from a guy whose previous stupidity and laziness has boxed him into a corner, but it goes back to not doing the leg work to handle people's objections because in the past, you've been able to smile your way out of situations. It's the laziness of a guy who knows how to do one thing, and will keep doing it no matter how stupid.

But again, I wouldn't want to bore everyone. I don't think I'd ever post more than one of these month—no matter how much ammo the guy throws at my feet. And I'll try to be more creative than the Bush bashers were. (Although that would've been an interesting study: Examining the ways in which W really was stupid versus the hacky policy disagreements that make all Republican politicians stupid in the eyes of their enemies.)

And we can have an interesting discussion on whether something is stupid or not. Like, is it stupid to not prosecute the Black Panthers who were intimidating voters at the polls? I would say it is: I think it comes from a belief that America—I mean, the good part of America—agrees with the notion that only right-minded people should be allowed to vote.

My theory is that the votes gained—which he didn't need anyway, hello Watergate-level-stupidity—are going to be substantially fewer than those lost. There are plenty of liberals who still hold non-statist, civil libertarian values who would vote against a candidate who ignores this on principle.

Well, you see what I mean? There's just so much material. My goal would be to be as apolitical as possible: That is, BHO and his pals want socialized medicine (yeah, I know they're denying that in various ways, but that's because they can't get it as long as it's called socialized medicine) and while I disagree, this isn't about political disagreements.

It's about how BHO's stupidity and laziness—characteristics which we all share from time-to-time—thwart his attempts to reach his political goals. Think of it as an extended "Fat Albert" episode, where we all learn a little lesson at the end.

But as I said, I'll leave it to you guys.


  1. I think you don't want to be too out front about this. There can and will be problems. You need to couch it in meataphors.

    Misdirection is key. Fly under the radar. They have places where they can report you. You don't want an IRS audit. Lay low. Please.

  2. I don't like it. You need something funny. The man is a gold mine of comedy just waiting to be dug up.

    50% Nixon, 50% Carter, 50% Ford.

    Leave the vulgar truths to the anorexically thin, angry female Republican super-stars.

  3. Hmmm. Two votes "No". I'm more worried about being boring than prosecuted, Troop, but I appreciate the concern.

    So, Jason, I'm getting that if I want to pursue this, I should crash diet and bleach my hair.

    Good advice, guys. Thanks.

  4. Speak truth to power!

    Unless liberals are the powerful, in which case, shut up and sit down.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. It really just depends on if you are interested in the topic. If you are, then 1. you should write about it, regardless of other considerations; and 2. it's unlikely it will get tiring for readers. If a blogger (who's a good writer) is really interested in a subject, the posts are usually interesting. You, and lots of other bloggers I read, write about some things I don't care about--but I tend to read it anyway, because the blogger (or the commenters) make it interesting anyway.

    Just my 2 cents.

  7. Sort of what Jason said: we would already have seen the 21st Century version of The First Family, if not for fears of political correctness. Though we already have seen that, from the other side. (That's My Bush.)

    With this current thing about falsehoods on the Internet, you might want to give some consideration to re-weighting the importance of being boring vs. being prosecuted.

    Taking all that into account, If you've got the nerve for it, run with it. I think your perception is accurate.

  8. I think you should run with it. The Obama administration seems intent on providing comedy gold, so why not have some fun?


Grab an umbrella. Unleash hell. Your mileage may vary. Results not typical. If swelling continues past four hours, consult a physician.