Let me sum the analysis up succinctly: FAIL
Obama biggest flaw is that he is a homo Marxist.
So what if Obama has “flaws?”
As long as the Republican Leaders in the US House refuse to hold Obama accountable and punish Obama, Obama will continue to cash in AND SPEND the endless supply of blank checks that Speaker Boehner freely gives Obama.
As long as Speaker Boehner refuses to punish Obama by appointing a Special Prosecutor, Obama will continue his very successful campaign to “Fundamentally Transform the United States of America.”
Boehner may make yet another fiery speech about “we must make sure that this never happens again,” to which the grateful members of the DEMOCRAT BROTHERHOOD Party always say:
I am not impressed by the assessments of these professional psychologists.
Obama is not easy-going and compromising. He is lazy, but that is not the same. Actually, another of Obamas characteristics is lack of any expertise (he is a complete beginner), and his willingness to be manipulated by behind-the-scenes managers.
The latter characteristic he shares with FDR in his last stages of decline: for FDR was almost totally controlled by his aids, with his great initiatives being fed to him by socialistic ideologues.
Obama is uncompromising because his handlers want him to stick to the line; but also because he would not even know how to strike a reasonable deal. He is not oriented toward any sort of compromise. Narcissists see no reason for compromise! He is a rule or ruin politician, and even if he rules (gets his way), ruin will be the result.
Obama is a complete disaster. The narcissistic personality almost always leads to the same end.
“... Accommodating, and Outgoing patterns in Obama’s profile suggests a confident conciliator personality composite. Leaders with this personality prototype, though self-assured and ambitious, are characteristically gracious, considerate, and benevolent. They are energetic, charming, and agreeable, with a special knack for settling differences, favoring mediation and compromise over force or coercion as a strategy for resolving conflict. They are driven primarily by a need for achievement and also have strong affiliation needs, but a low need for power.”
Is there anyone who can read this quote and not conclude the Psychiatry is a pseudo-science? The so-called experts perceived Obama be the polar opposite of what he truly is.
It is as though you said to me that my behavior were repugnant to Zoroastrian beliefs. It would not have the slightest effect on my thinking or my behavior. So he does not deign to have a relationship with Congress and he does not respond to crises because the crises are the normal part of a misshaped world which he alone knows how to transform. So it is with Obama. He is a Marxist who believes the system is illegitimate; he is utterly detached from that system except to exploit it and transform it into the utopia he and Saul Alinsky envisioned.
That is the philosophy which Obama in his youth has seized upon as a compensation for his inadequacies made all the more blatant by his terrible character flaw: his narcissism.
If Chuck Norris can refer to an old article of his, I can reproduce an old post of mine that goes back to 2009:
I think he is a narcissist who survives and prospers not by addressing problems but by manipulating people. Narcissists like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama are not stupid, they are wonderfully clever and exceedingly effective in reading their victims and manipulating them.
I think that Barack Obama has a worldview provided to him, posthumously, by Saul Alinsky which gives him a framework for analysis. In other words, Obama does not "analyze", rather he "sorts" and puts data into their appropriate slots provided by the philosophy of Saul Alinsky. He has learned a vocabulary which enables him to contrive a front of effectiveness, a seriousness of purpose and depth of character which is all a sham.
Think of Barack Obama as the professional coordinator at an Alinsky meeting. For those old enough, think of Barack Obama as the leader of an EST meeting of the 1970s. These experiences give him an eschatology, a vocabulary, a forensic ability to manipulate, and ego satisfaction. What was he doing as editor of the Harvard Law Review if he was not producing actual work? He was acting out as a community organizer with the shtick modified to fit a new venue. If one examines his career at every level the pattern is the same. As a constitutional law lecturer he produced no written work but he was evidently perfectly fit to the culture of the law school. In the Illinois Senate he voted present but ingratiated himself with the Daley machine. He barely passed go in the United States Senate but he knew the vocabulary and he passed muster with the likes of George Soros. In each instance, Barack Obama behaves as a narcissist, very shallow, producing no work product, but selling a great package.
If one takes away the Marxist belief system provided to him or reinforced in every step of his development from his mother to Frank Marshall Davis, to Columbia University, the Harvard Law school, William Ayres, to Reverend Wright, one is left with a truly hollow man. That is why Obama is such a dangerous ideologue. There is no Obama apart from a lifelong sham, a compensation for always being advanced beyond his competence because of his race and his ability to manipulate. He simply cannot stop the act and get off stage because there is nothing but the act.
Obama is a man without a soul and without a spiritual compass. His relationship to Reverend Wright reveals that he has no real spiritual quality to him for there could hardly be a more rank apostasy than in the church which he attended for 20 years. It has nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with ego satisfaction. It is the opposite of the Judeo-Christian message.
Obama cannot abandon his radicalism because there is no other there there. He is a massive compensation system. His body is a life-support system for his narcissism and the narcissism is utterly dependent on the received wisdom from Saul Alinsky and the rest of them.
He has spent the last 5 years insulting half the American population and then chastises them because they don’t work with him.
Hey, he did say he was flexible. More like jello. I wonder about his attitude in playing golf. Does he play to win or escape?
After checking to make sure it was actually THE Chuck Norris who wrote the piece I thought that it would be good if O took a course at the Hoover Institute under General Mattis who is writing a book on leadership and strategy. Mattis will at least give O a new vocabulary. Don’t know if Mattis’ view of leadership would include a section on asking Jarrett if it is okay to shoot.