Obama and Billy Budd

American Thinker ^ | 08-07-14 | Eileen F. Toplansky

[BlueHorseShoe]

In Herman Melville's classic story "Billy Budd," the narrator ponders what could be the matter with the master-at-arms "who has an animus toward the young seaman known as Billy Budd." Therein ensues a discussion about "natural depravity: a depravity according to nature." Thus, "one who has this natural depravity can be described as having an

…even temper and discreet bearing [which] would seem to intimate a mind peculiarly subject to the law of reason, not the less in heart he would seem to riot in complete exemption from that law, having apparently little to do with reason [other] than to employ it as an ambidexter [deceitful method of pretending to be rational, but actually double dealing] … for effecting the irrational.

Consequently,

…toward the accomplishment of an aim which in wantonness of atrocity would seem to partake of the insane, he will direct a cool judgment sagacious and

sound. These men are madmen, and of the most dangerous sort, for their lunacy is not continuous, but occasional, evoked by some special object; it is protectively secretive, which is as much as to say it is self contained, so that when, moreover most active it is to the average mind not distinguishable from sanity, and for the reason above suggested: that whatever [its] aims may be--and the aim is never declared--the method and the outward proceeding are always perfectly rational.

The narrator ends this philosophizing with the caveat that this "mania of an evil nature, not engendered by vicious training or corrupting books or licentious living, but born with him and innate, [is] in short 'a depravity according to nature.'"

[BlueHorseShoe]

Toplansky absolutely nails Obama's lack of character, depravity, and dangerous personaltiy in this article. One of the best reads I've had in a long time. She got me even more fired up to defend and help restore our great Country!

She ends with, "…Then we can stop wasting time in trying to change his mind and instead work purposefully towards ending his ruination of this country…"

[SMARTY]

As true as this is about “O”, he couldn’t have gained ANY traction in a political career IF a whole swath of Americans had not lost their way... LONG AGO!

[cornelis]

Unique take, but old news. What can you do? It is galling and infuriating and there is no quick end in sight. Perhaps understanding this, though, will finally unite a majority of Americans to fight for their country knowing that their President will undermine them at every turn. Ms. Toplanksy, understanding isn't enough. Certainly understanding him is not what is needed. I could care less if he's insane, possessed, irrational, or an idiot. What is needed is a desire for what is good, a desire so strong that it impels action. That is the strength that is lacking. Understanding in itself is weak. An ordinate fear is more productive.

[BlueHorseShoe]

But I think it wasn’t about understanding Obama. After all, we know that well. I took it that we need to stop worrying that others will finally understand him, rather it is we who must understand we can’t rely on that. We need to keep up the fight and not give up. Am I wrong? Because that’s how I read it.

[BlueHorseShoe]

Yes, again, that is true, they're the sheeple. It is why we cannot give up. Who will do this for us? It is about working to defeat the corrupt RNC and the likes of Henry Barbour who helped derail McDaniel's campaign in MS and on and on. We aren't just fighting the Democrats anymore.

And keeping up the drum beat exposing Obama at every turn can't hurt either. Hell, maybe I'm naive.

[cornelis]

There's something about that, yes. But count the paragraphs and they're mostly about him—the very fixation we are trying to avoid. I suppose a very skillful writer could use the persona of a popular president as a springboard in showing us what is good, but most writers are not skillful. I used to use popular music as a springboard to talk about a particular point. It's not easy doing that. Usually attention is drawn away from the intended focus.

[arthurus]

It is irrational to side with known terrorists and to alienate allies.

It is only apparently irrational because of the common assumption that the man is not one with the known terrorists and is not a Mohammedan. Both assumptions are foolish and do not comport with recorded statements and with continual deeds.

[onedoug]

He’s an enemy islamist with an army of supporters and facilitators in and outside the American government, which, subsequently, becomes less American by the day.

[ought-six]

Well said.

[WashingtonSource]

Bump