Skip to comments.Why Do We Elect People Who So Clearly Lack Character?
Posted on 06/08/2012 6:29:24 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
By now, nearly everyone paying attention knows that Barack Obama has lied countless times over the years in order to further his academic and political career. He is, in fact, a "composite." And what we do know is just a hint of what there is yet to know, given that all his academic records are sealed.
Our president lied about his mother's lack of health insurance. He lied about his father's early life. His publisher's brochure described him as "born in Kenya" for years, until he began running for president. There are countless other examples of his prevarications that fluff out his phony résumé. It is almost certain that he did not write Dreams from My Father by himself and that his relationship with Jeremiah Wright was cultivated to serve his political future...until it didn't. And now, even Michelle is unable to keep the fabricated facts of her husband's life straight.
And then there is Elizabeth Warren, the darling of the Boston/Harvard left, the self-described Cherokee without a shred of evidence to prove her claims of Native American heritage. Her claim made her a diversity hire at two prestigious schools. She even submitted a couple of recipes to a Native American cookbook, Pow Wow Chow, that she borrowed from Pierre Frainey. She chose those recipes poorly; Oklahoma Cherokees probably did not dine on cold omelets with crabmeat!
Bill Clinton's moral lapses and crimes against women are legendary and too numerous to list, yet he still has adoring fans who would vote for him in a minute if he was on a ballot -- any ballot. Hillary does not score much better on the truth and morality scale: Whitewater, managing her husband's "bimbo eruptions," her fabricated helicopter landing in Bosnia amid sniper fire, etc.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
* The Kennedy men...they have always been, and remain, despicable cads who have used and abused women habitually. Still, people support them for public office. Jack was a hound. Ted was expelled from Harvard for cheating ( Mary Jo has no comment on this ).
* Then there is the odious John Edwards, who got too close to the White House for comfort.
* Eliot Spitzer got his own television show after being outed as a regular patron of prostitutes.
* And then there is the noted exhibitionist Anthony Weiner, who still has a dedicated fan club. Its members are convinced that he was framed! How is that for critical thinking?
Who's next? Elizabeth Warren?
People, due to their sinful nature, prefer to be lied to and told that their unhappiness and dissatisfaction is not due to their own choices, but due to their environment,
and the politician who promises to fix that environment will receive the most votes.
And in this case, incompetent and dishonest. I place a lot of the blame on the media and its’ lack of investigation along with collaberation pushing their own agenda. We here do our own leg work, but the majority of the population are lazy.
Spoken like an innocent.
Democrats KNOW the difference between right and wrong - they CHOOSE wrong. They like men who are bullies, liars and cheats. Clinton doesn't 'fool' his party they wallow in his abuse of young interns. Obama lies? They smirk at each other - stuck it to those Republicans again...
Poster boys for Democrats: John Edwards, Larry Flynt, Teddy Kennedy, and Bill Clinton.
This union usually results in the election of individuals that have no principles and bad character.A/k/a as Democrats.
I intentionally omitted Republicans from the above because Republicans that fit the no principles and bad character gategory have a deep desire to be and are controlled and whipped by the Democrats. The Republican Party abounds with them.
Maybe not the total reason, but female love of bad boys is part of what gives immoral leftist pols such an edge.
“Character” has been all but bred out of American culture and society.
“Character” is certainly something that is becoming a more and more unknown (and thanks to the NEA, unknowable) attribute.
We can't expect voters who do not know or possess character to recognize much less, demand it from political hopefuls.
Because most people lack character themselves.
Yup. We get the government we deserve.
We can cry about the democrats all we want but we don’t elect them, we elect plenty of our own bottom feeders.
“We have met the enemy and he is us.” - Pogo
——Because most people lack character themselves.-——
Simple as that.
Even around here, character often rates low on the checklist.
Indifference is a very dangerous place to be.
How can Al Gore be ignored?
If you were prone to lying, you would assume that its perfectly normal for people to be untruthful. If you were narcissistic, you would assume most people only care about themselves the same way.
What bothers me is that most people view lying, cheating, low life scum bag politicians they elect as having the same attributes that they possess. In their eyes this makes these politicians normal people, therefore acceptable for office.
How many of these people are voting? Is it 50% of the public.
Our politicians are a DIRECT Reflection of our SICK “Culture” and US!
Obama isn’t “Obama”.
He really is a shallow minded composite - a blank slate molded into a modern day Manchurian Candidate.
No one knows his history or true identity - well, perhaps a few of his handlers and programmers do.
I think so much of his life is fabricated and fantasy that he himself no longer knows what is real and what is fiction.
But when he reads those words on the teleprompter or quotes from his ghost-written biographies it doen’t matter to him if his words are true or not. He believes what he is saying and in his mind it is truth - at least for that moment in time.
The next day, when he speaks the exact opposite, that will be the truth for him.
All the lies are told to shape “the package,” which is what is sold to the electorate. Obama’s a genius. Obama’s a change agent. Obama’s fresh and new and uncontaminated. Bill Clinton is a genius. The Kennedy’s are American royalty. And on and on.
Just as in selling any product to an uncritical consumer, the package is all that’s important. Slap a “New and Improved!” label on a box of laundry detergent and sales increase. The detergent is the same old stuff but the BOX is new and improved.
Barack Obama was elected because his handlers successfully created a package that resonated with the Bush-hating crowd. Obama was never competent, had nowhere near the experience the job called for, was extreme in many of his views, and was a relative unknown, do-nothing cipher before he ran for president. But he was packaged better than crusty, temperamental old insider John McCain, and he won handily, especially among people who tend to view the presidency as little more than a popularity contest.
Now they are finding what we’ve known all along: the package is pretty, but open it up and it’s empty inside.
Mondale and Dukakis would probably have been mediocre Presidents, at best not quite as bad as Jimmy Carter, but they appear to be decent human beings. After the 1988 loss the Democrats decided to retire that model for their nominees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.