Sunday, October 26, 2014

Obsessive-Compulsive Obama Hatred Disorder




Krauthammer is at it again. This right-wing reactionary can’t help himself. For years, his syndicated columns and his rants on Fox News are about one thing: Bashing Obama. It’s an addiction and a disorder, and he should know it, as he is a psychiatrist. On July 25 he wrote a column titled - “Obama’s Cool Detachment is Calculated - and Very Dangerous.” On October 24, he wrote “Obama a Bewildered Bystander to his Own Government.” And it goes on and on. There is no problem on the planet that is not Obama’s fault - Syria, Ukraine, Gaza, ISIS, Ebola, secret service missteps at the White House, in Amsterdam and in South America, Benghazi, unemployment, crime. Krauthammer might as well blame the President for Hurricane Fausto, the Vietnam War, World War Two and his hemorrhoids. One wonders what he’ll write about after Obama is gone.


While the rabid Krauthammer is an extreme example of blind, knee-jerk Obama hatred, a worse problem is that his condition - let’s call it obsessive-compulsive Obama hatred disorder - has become an epidemic. Obama’s ratings are bad because a majority of Americans have become brainwashed by the likes of Krauthammer.

Also, America has become a resentful society. Discontent and blame are the names of the game, and someone must be held accountable.

Americans have become a “glass-is-half-empty” country. But this is puzzling, when you think about it: To be sure, the American Dream, as it existed when I came to this country in 1960, is gone, as is American exceptionalism. We are now muddling and struggling, like the rest of the Western World.

Yet we’re doing relatively well: Thanks to the Obama administration, since the 2007-2008 Wall Street collapse, our unemployment rate has declined from 12% to under 6%, there have been five years of uninterrupted job growth, 6 million new jobs have been added to the economy, which is growing by 3% a year. Compare this to Europe and Japan, where the economy and the job market are stagnant.

Obama pulled us out of the cataclysmic economic meltdown for which President George W. Bush, the Republican Party and Wall Street were responsible.

But the American people are like lobotomized zombies - no memory, no credit given to Obama. Instead, visceral hatred.

In the long run, I predict that Obama will go down in history as one of our ten best presidents.

The most charitable accusation leveled at the President is weakness - reminiscent of what was said about President Carter. The other one, voiced as a refrain by my conservative friends, is that he is “extremely left.”

Both of these accusations are bogus: it is not weakness which has guided Obama’s brilliant decisions, but something akin to the Hippocratic principle: First Do No Harm, or in the President’s own words: “don’t do stupid stuff.”

Whether media-induced or not, it is fair to say that there is now a great deal of panic going around. Ebola, ISIS, shoot-outs in Ottawa and in local high schools, every day there is a new reason to panic. The political right exploits this very effectively, and the populace laps it up.

But the President, you see, refuses to cave in. He insists on staying calm. How does he dare! Instead of pouring fuel on the innumerable fires that have erupted on his watch, he DEFUSES crises. Instead of ratcheting UP each crisis, he winds them DOWN. How aggravating! Instead of panicking, he responds in a deliberative and responsible manner. Instead of escalating wars, he ends them. Instead of dragging us recklessly into new military adventures, he proceeds cautiously and intelligently, thus accomplishing far more.

You see, President Obama is our science officer Spock. Rational, endowed with superior intelligence, always in control of his emotions, and above all: ALIEN. He is the opposite of James T. Kirk, the charismatic but emotional and fallible Captain.

And what about the other bum rap - that he is an extreme leftist?

Also utter nonsense. He is a centrist. Why else would the Democratic Party’s left wing criticize him for being too cautious? Has he raised taxes? Is Obamacare a single-payer government-run health plan, as is enjoyed by dozens of other countries?

Take President Franklin Roosevelt, perhaps the greatest President we ever had. Now there is a true left-winger for you. He introduced Social Security, for starters. And then came his dozens of other federal programs, aimed at getting us out of the Great Depression. Ever heard of the New Deal?

Or take President Johnson’s Great Society. Johnson gave us Medicare and the most progressive civil rights legislation ever.

Heck, some of Obama’s REPUBLICAN predecessors were in some ways more liberal than he is: Eisenhower sent federal troops to enforce racial integration in Arkansas, spent billions on infrastructure and spanked France, Britain and Israel for attacking Egypt. Reagan and Bush Senior RAISED taxes, for crying out loud.

None of the “liberal things” these previous presidents did - whether Democrat or Republican - are conceivable under Obama. The country has moved fiercely to the right. Obama is a moderate centrist.

There are only two explanations for the bogus accusations by the likes of Krauthammer and for the public’s high disapproval ratings of the President: For the general public, it is a need for a scapegoat. When there is widespread dissatisfaction and diffuse anxiety, someone must be blamed. Obama is simultaneously God, who is expected to solve all our problems, and the Devil, who is blamed for them.

As to the yahoos on the far right, there can only be one explanation, and that is racism. They will never admit it, but that is what it is.

© Tom Kando 2014

leave comment here

34 comments:

drtaxsacto said...

Let's not be silly. Krauthammer and all the other people who have expressed reservations about Obama's incompetent presidency did not cause the decline in his numbers - he did. But of course he has never taken responsibility for his actions. For the first couple of years everything which did not go as he had thought it should was George Bush's fault.

We are not doing well compared to other economic recoveries. In addition most of the baloney he spewed out in 2008 has proven to be false. The most transparent administration in history? Yeah right. Pulling us out of the meltdown (which incidentally was world wide) - nonsense! This is the slowest recovery of any economic slow down since the depression.

Obama stays calm (on the golf course) - refusing to admit any mistakes (Benghazi, Fast and Furious, encouraging ISIS by his hasty retreat from the middle east (against the advice of his military staff) - just to name a few. He does not defuse crises he causes them. He is the most detached president we have ever had - even Wilson after his stroke was more involved.

Let's get a couple of things straight - has he raised taxes - look at the record starting with the ACA indeed yes he did - didn't you read the Supreme Court Decision affirming the program - it was a TAX. But that was just the start. Don't do stupid stuff - I guess the almost half a trillion dollars (which some of his own advisors fought against) wasted on Solyndra was smart?

Obama's pathetic history as a lackadaisical state rep, and US Senator was something that many people warned about - but you on the left said OK it will be so great to have him here. They disregarded his non-record and elected him because of his race not his qualifications. And all you can claim now is that as people have discovered just how incompetent he really is - is that it is a reflection of racism? It was infinitely more racist to accept that this amateur would be competent without bothering to vet his experience in a meaningful way.

Most Presidents understand the significant responsibility of their job - this president has the Bart Simpson defense when something goes wrong - It is not my fault, I did not do it and It won't happen again.

How much real time has this president tried to engage the opposition on any issue of substance? Compared to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton (Both of whom had time when both houses of congress were controlled by the opposition) NONE. Reagan and Clinton did not have a fawning press who refused to go into any possible problem in depth. Look at the lack of coverage of every major problem in the Administration and you would think that the press worked for him.

Tom you are right on one thing - Obama, based on some recent survey data is considered to be the fifth best president in history. According to the survey Reagan and Lincoln tied for first. There were 18 who tied for second place, 22 who tied for third, Carter was fourth and Obama came in fifth.

barry said...

Excellent, Tom! One of your best!

Tom Kando said...

Thanks, guys.

I like Barry’s comment more than Jonathan’s, because I enjoy flattery more than criticism.

That said, I’m glad to hear from Jonathan again. It’s been a while. And you are so elaborate, too. Thanks for taking the trouble.

I won’t respond to your substantive points HERE, as they are a rehash, and I don’t want to double-rehash something that’s already a multiple rehash. That would be over-hash.

(I DO address just about every one of your points elsewhere on this blog, clearly showing why you are wrong. Readers are urged to scroll through the dozens of pertinent posts).

Just this, regarding Obama’s ranking among US presidents: History will tell. Paul Krugman already ranks him as one of the great ones. Maybe Krugman's judgement is premature, as is yours. Let’s wait fifty years and see how Obama ranks then.

By the way, I don’t know who said that the Obama administration was the most transparent in history, but it wasn’t me...

Bill said...

Thanks for presenting an alternative way of viewing the ongoing good-bad discourse in the world today. And... what if both of you are sort of right?

Bill said...

Thanks for presenting an alternative way of viewing the ongoing good-bad discourse in the world today. And... what if both of you are sort of right?

Ann Welldy said...

Well said, Tom, and all true. I so enjoy your columns!

oahusurfer (from Open Salon) said...

Spot on. Yet, there is another aspect to the President we never hear about- he's HAWAIIAN! The inability to even visualize this much less speak to it is practically non-existent.

Jutka said...

Bravo!!!

Abram said...

Hello Thomas,

excellent piece,

Abram

Unknown said...

This one definitely needs to go to The Sacramento Bee.

Juanita

Sylvia Navari said...

Great piece. I'm with Juanita, send it to the Bee to see if they will print it as an op ed piece.

Cheers

0lder/exasperated (from open salon) said...

About once a year Krauthammer has a lucid comment in one of his op-ed pieces and he looks like a sock puppet on TV. OS has it's share of OCD Obama haters the only difference is they don't get paid to be an idiot they do it for.......nobody knows why. Despite the fact that the media and Republicans have gone out of their way to undermine and disrupt his Presidency he has accomplished a great deal. It is racism and it's blatant across the US in the Republican mindset..........o/e

gary seven (from open salon) said...

People in a political party often follow party leaders who beat the drums. They get brainwashed and start repeating the catch phrases. Lost their minds. It's funny and sad at the same time.

koshersalaami (from open salon) said...

Though I don't assess the President quite as kindly as you do, I have certainly noticed the phenomenon you're talking about, not just in the press but here. A friend and I came up with a name for the crowd that blames him for everything possible and uses his guilt as an excuse to push strategems I would characterize as extremely counterproductive: OIEsters, with OIE standing for Obama Is Evil.

The contention that he is extreme leftist is idiotic. In actuality, he represents a seriously blown opportunity for the Republicans. He came into office all conciliatory and eager to work with them, but they shut him down immediately, not even giving him the traditional honeymoon period. He has been easy on their bankers and, when faced with the question of what to do about health care, went with a plan that was written by the Heritage Foundation and proven to work by a Republican governor. How conciliatory can you get? For this he was called Radical. And a closet Muslim who was too close to the pastor of his church. And he went through the Birther crap when we can be reasonably sure that not a single Birther would have voted for Obama if it has been proven to their satisfaction that he was born in the US - it was in this respect a phony issue. Yes, he's been the target of racism.

He has faced unprecedented opposition and he did save the economy from Bushian meltdown. However, he has also been responsible for some notable problems. One was the continuation of NSA surveillance of American civilians. When your major Silicon Valley donors are telling you to pardon Edward Snowden, you clearly have a problem. Another was his failure to notice that the whole Job Creators shtick was economically wrong, and criticizing the Tea Party's nearly throwing the country into default on the basis of being unfair but not on the basis of what such refusal to tax the rich was doing to the employment picture and by extension the taxpayer population and by further extension the deficit. He has advocated very little until recently about reversing income polarization, perhaps the greatest danger the country faces, when it was obvious this was a major problem in 2008, when John Edwards made it an issue. That's an awfully big oversight and not an oversight driven by Republicans.

But most opposition to Obama, at least Republican opposition, has not been based on his actions or policies at all. Frankly, the pattern for that opposition predates his even having policies, and started with the Tea Party raising Hell about the bailout while giving Bush a free pass for the same policies, and we knew blatantly from the initial Tea Party demonstrations that race was a factor.

arthur louis (from open salon) said...

What is the occasion for this fulsome outburst of DNC talking points? (With amens in the comments section by OS true believers.) Maybe the fact that the midterm elections take place in just a week?

But I hadn't noticed that Obama was on any ballot this time. And the Dems who are running for the Senate and House can't get far enough away from their impeccable leader. You are going to have a hard time persuading people who have assessed Obama clearly that they got it wrong.

vzn (from open salon) said...

krauthammer is definitely one of the most shrill columnists out there. if one did a montage of his extreme columns, it would be pretty freaky. as for obama, not a terrible president, but not a great one either. better than the alternatives. has not really kept his word on some key campaign promises, seems to have undergone a "conversion" shortly after being installed in office (but that is also probably "to be expected"). doesnt crack the whip enough, does not seem interested in the hard work of building coalitions one phone call at a time.

gary seven (from open salon) said...

A major reason that conservative Republicans say bogus things about President Obama is that he has saved America from the problems they caused during the Bush administration, and he has moved the nation forward since then. Democratic success makes the Republicans look like failures. And people don't vote for Republican failures.

Crazy as it looks to normal people, the conservative Republican extremist braying boils down to this:

"We conservative Republicans refused to work with Obama. We obstructed progress. We lied about the ACA. We sabotaged his efforts from his first day in office. We did all we could to hurt America, even trying to shut down the government.

Now we are outraged that President Obama and the Democrats haven't been able to make more progress despite what we did to them."

It's like the Democrats have become "America's Team" while the Republicans have become the extremists and terrorists.

markinjapan (from open salon) said...

Bogus things like:

Started a new war on terror - this one on ISIS.
Dropped bombs in 6 other Muslim countries.
Said, “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.”
Bragged about his use of drones - I'm "really good at killing people".
Deported a modern-record 2 million immigrants.
Signed the Monsanto Protection Act into law.
Started a new war in Iraq.
Planned $355 billion for a nuclear weapons program.
Initiated, and personally oversees a 'Secret Kill List'.
Pushed for war on Syria while siding with al-Qaeda.
Backed neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
Supported Israel's wars and occupation of Palestine.
Drastically escalated the NSA spying program.
Deployed Special Ops to 134 countries - compared to 60 under Bush.
Did a TV commercial promoting "clean coal".
Signed the NDAA into law - making it legal to assassinate Americans w/o charge or trial.
Given Bush absolute immunity for everything.
Pushed for a TPP Trade Pact.
Sold $30 billion of weapons to the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia.
Signed an agreement for 7 military bases in Colombia.
Opened a military base in Chile.
Touted nuclear power, even after the disaster in Japan.
Opened up deepwater oil drilling, even after the BP disaster.
Mandated the Insider Threat Program which orders federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues.
Defended body scans and pat-downs at airports.
Signed the Patriot Act extension into law.
Launched 20,000 Airstrikes in his first term.
Continued Bush's rendition program.
Said the U.S. is the "one indispensable nation" in the world.
Waged war on Libya without congressional approval.
Started a covert, drone war in Yemen.
Escalated the proxy war in Somalia.
Escalated the CIA drone war in Pakistan.
Sharply escalated the war in Afghanistan.
Assassinated 4 US citizens with drone strikes?

arthur louis (from open salon) said...

Gary Seven: Obama had large majorities in the House and Senate during his first two years in office, and made no effort during that time to work with the Republicans on mutually acceptable compromises. Instead he rammed as much as he could down their throats, most notably the ACA.

This led to the outcome of the 2010 elections, where voters took the House out of Dem hands, with the mandate to stop Obama's juggernaut, which by and large the GOP did. If they hadn't, they would have been betraying their constituents.

Neither side is willing to work with the other in Congress. Harry Reid swats down every initiative that the GOP sends his way. It is baloney to suggest that the Dems are more virtuous than the GOP in this respect. Like the author of this post, you are just mimicking the unfounded propaganda of your chosen party.

gary seven (from open salon) said...

Sounds like classic OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE OBAMA HATRED DISORDER.

markinjapan (from open salon) said...

Art, denial runs deep and is impregnable in the "minds" of some.

markinjapan (from open salon) said...

Day after day,
Alone on a hill,
gary with the foolish grin is NOT keeping perfectly still
But nobody wants to know him,
They can see that fandango's just a fool

Lita said...

Tom,
You got it right.

Don said...

Hey Tom, I think this is very good, and I hope you turn it into a letter to the editor. You could even send it to the New York Times to see what happens.

Michael Harley said...

What's not to hate?

koshersalaami (from open salon) said...

Arthur,
ACA was written by Republicans and field tested by a Republican governor. Ramming shouldn't have been necessary.

Frankly, the only reason Romney didn't run on his successful health care record in Massachusetts (which probably would have won him the White House) is because Obama endorsed it, automatically giving it Obama Cooties. He should have had the guts to stand up for his own record - that was something he did right.

What kind of lunatic Republicans take a plan written by the Heritage Foundation and tested successfully by a Republican governor and act like the President who adopted Their Plan is a radical for doing so? How often does the party out of power get a major initiative written and instituted on their side of the aisle supported fully by the President from the other party?

I'm sure the President could have found a plan that was not written by Republicans and not tested at all, let alone by a Republican governor. God knows his party would have preferred that.

Mark,
The bizarre part of Republican opposition to Obama is that your average Republican is fine with most if not all of your list. They don't care who he kills overseas. They don't object to his deporting two million immigrants. They don't care about deep water drilling. They worry enough about terrorists to care about being kept safe even at the cost of civil liberties. They side very strongly against the Palestinians, including the moderates. Frankly, if this were the record of a Republican President, they'd be boasting about most of it.

And that's why some of us see bigotry on their part. He has acted in many respects like one of them, and yet they accuse him of being a radical. Radical? I'd characterize him as approaching Conservative.

I get why you can't stand him, even if I think that there are still significant differences between Democrats and Republicans, mainly outside of the White House, and that ignoring those differences could cost this country in even scarier ways than we've already seen (I live in a microcosm of that, and it's ugly). I understand why Libby can't. What I don't understand is why Arthur can't.

If ACA was pushed through by a Republican President like it was pushed through by a Republican governor, we wouldn't be hearing about how radical it was. If Bengazi had happened under a Republican President, it would barely have been mentioned - it doesn't begin to approach the disaster of the barracks bombing in Lebanon under Reagan, after which Reagan basically cut and ran, and for which Reagan was and is still given a free pass. If Osama was killed by a Republican President, they'd still be bragging about it. If there were a birth certificate question about a Republican, they'd be yelling about why anyone would even bring it up - and by the way, McCain was not born in the United States (50 states or the District), which they did not make an issue of but which we both know would have been an issue had he been a Democratic candidate.

From a policy standpoint, the Republican hatred of Obama does not add. In a lot of ways, Obama is more conservative than Nixon was.

My question is: If policy isn't the issue, what is the issue?

Tom Kando said...

This is an amazing amount of communication.

First let me thank everyone, especially those who support my views, including Bill, Unknown, Oahusurfer, Jutka, Abram, Juanita, Sylvia, Older/Exasperated, Gary, Koshersalaami, Lita and Don.

Regarding the Sacramento Bee (Juanita, Sylvia, Don): That’s a problem: these past few years, they have become less responsive (to me). For years, they printed most of what I submitted, several articles and innumerable letters-to-the editor, but in recent years, they have tended to ignore me, even though I agree with you that my stuff is brilliant (ha ha). I’m not sure what’s happening at the Bee. Like all other papers, they are struggling to survive in an electronic age, and maybe part of their strategy is to cater more to “the entire political spectrum,” i.o.w. to become less liberal/democratic...who knows. Certainly the quality of the paper has declined, but it’s still okay, kind of...

I like what Gary writes regarding Republican extremism, and I agree with just about everything Koshersalaami says in his very long comment.
Arthus Louis does the usual cop-out that contributes so much to this country’s worsening politics: He equivocates and claims to speak from the “moderate” center. But all he does, in effect, is to give Republicans and the entire plutocratic rip-off agenda a pass.
Vzn and Markinjapan are more interesting: Vzn seems to support Obama “lukewarmly” while Markinjapan hits the President FROM THE LEFT. His arguments are those of the democratic Left. Harley is the disease that I am writing about.
Koshersalaami’s reply to art(hur) is, again, excellent. Just as I said, Obama is arguably more conservative than many of his Republican predecessors. Art has no case.

Bill Potts said...

Really excellent piece, Tom.

Bill Potts

Gail said...

Thanks for this excellent piece! I support our President-I think tha tour frustrations have caused us to take things out on the president and as an academic who studies race relations in this country the fact that he is African-American creates implicit bias; please read a history of race relations in the United States and you will hopefully understand that we still live in a very racist society;unfortunately it is still a problem and the same thing will occur when we have a female president ;unfortunately people are unwilling to look within themselves and acknowledge their fears and there racism and their biases and what this means is that we ourselves are the biggest problem-why are we overly critical of our president and don't look at his exceptional work under a lot of stressful dynamics; Pres. George Bush did not receive criticism to the same degree as this president and he made blunders that were in excusable ; our society is finally showing us very unfortunate examples of racism and implicit bias going undetected-if a female runs for president sexism will be the next attack and I am sure that people will find a way to blame women for being less than equal this is just the way people are wired; however, a good education is the key to overcoming prejudice and racism if one has courage to accept their own inner problems with race and sex and class in this country.

Thanks,
Dr. Wallace

Tom Kando said...

I thank Bill Potts and Dr. Gail Wallace for their comments.

Sadly, everything Gail says about racism and sexism is right. Sometimes, it even feels that we are retrogressing. Maybe we had made more progress in the sixties.

Gail is right: The next battle will be about gender, when Hilary (or Elizabeth Warren) runs. I am already saving my money for her campaign.

George W. Bush? No one ever had LESS business being president. The first requirement for that job should be a minimal IQ.

Gail also makes the point which Pogo made long ago: “we have met the enemy and he is us.” It’s easy to blame everyone else, society, the politicians, etc. But WE elect them.

And who are “we?” 19% of all eligible voters, that’s who! That’s the prediction for the upcoming midterm election (at least in California).

Take Millennials, for instance. They may have good instincts, they can smell a rat, they sense that the Republican brand is a crock, but they are dismally informed. They have stopped reading and they get their news from the Internet and from single-sentence sound bites. They have two cop-outs for massively NOT voting: (1) they are too harried and (2) they feel that voting is meaningless because it’s rigged and corrupt anyway.
Wrong. You are part of the 81% who abdicate their responsibility and allow 19% to dictate where America is going, the 19% dominated by calcified aging white men who live in the past.

In sum, America gets what it deserves.

Gail said...

Great points!
Gail

Anonymous said...

Election day Nov 4, 2014 – a great day for “obsessive-compulsive Obama hatred disorder” voters and a “terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day” for Obama sycophants

Tom Kando said...

sycophants? Look up what the word means, you xiphosuran.

gail said...

Right on! I love what you said Dr. Tom,

congratulations on doing such a wonderful job at cohesively building a solid blog - I actually look forward to it and you have really created an interesting and diverse network that intellectually stimulates and challenges me; I think you built this over the last seven years and this is a wonderful blog with all credit going to your genius (and Madeleine's) at putting it together!I'm learning how to join in for conversation, fun and critical thought; it helps knowing that my mentor, you, is here to help me out

Post a Comment

Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!