The Book of Barack
Bill Quick

The point of all this is that Obama worship is primarily religious in nature. It certainly isn’t rooted in anything that looks like reality.

Bill Quick

About Bill Quick

I am a small-l libertarian. My primary concern is to increase individual liberty as much as possible in the face of statist efforts to restrict it from both the right and the left. If I had to sum up my beliefs as concisely as possible, I would say, "Stay out of my wallet and my bedroom," "your liberty stops at my nose," and "don't tread on me." I will believe that things are taking a turn for the better in America when married gays are able to, and do, maintain large arsenals of automatic weapons, and tax collectors are, and do, not.

Comments

The Book of Barack — 4 Comments

  1. It certainly isn’t rooted in anything that looks like reality.

    And it never was.

    I did a post on this back in 2008. Some of the quasi-religious response to Obama reminded me of something I had seen, and I put some words from a real person in the post:

    When he went up the mountain, I couldn’t understand how it was possible that people could shout so much. Yet, when he came close to our group, I too came under his spell and shouted … just like everyone ….

    The whole atmosphere grew more and more hysterical. He was interrupted nearly after every phrase by big applause, and women began screaming. It was like mass religious ceremony. And, well, I listened to his speech, and I [felt] that more and more excited atmosphere in the hall. And for some seconds, again, and again I had the feeling, what a pity that I can’t share that belief of all those thousands of people, that I’m alone, that I’m contrary to all that. It was very funny. I thought, he’s talking all that nonsense I know, the nonsense he always talked, but still, I [felt] it must be wonderful just to jump into that bubbling pot and be a member of all those who are believers.

    Any guesses as to who the speaker is talking about?

      • Correct on your guess, but your comment makes my main point. The success of such men is rooted in human psychology, and even Americans are not immune, as Obama’s fainting supporters remind us.

        Those caught up in the wash of emotion around such men think what they are doing and feeling is perfectly rational. There are only a few, like the speaker above, who understand that it’s all just springing from the social animal aspect of being human.

        Those people therefore fail to realize the dangers. Eventually we may very well get one of these sociopathic, ruthless, quasi-religious figures who happens to be lot more competent that Obama, and much better able to seize and keep dictatorial powers.

        And that person’s path has been smoothed by Obama. He has pushed and stretched the envelope of what a chief executive can get away with. He has set precedents that will be used by such a successor, and how will those toothless apparatchiks in Congress respond when he tells them to go piss up a rope?

        The media has loudly proclaimed that impeachment of a Democratic president, or even of a high official in a Democratic president is always, always, always evidence of partisanship, and that their goal is always harassment and sabotage of a good person. They have worn a groove to a future where a more talented demagogue uses their own words to establish a dictatorship only breakable through violent revolution.

        • Another “Past Is Prologue” tale for our times…

          Interesting (and more-than-slightly spooky*) thought: If not for his general incompetence at – well – just about everything (other than getting elected…and even that seems, objectively, pretty much the competence of his backers and handlers, not the guy himself)…we could have been witnessing the rise of Nehemiah Scudder – or something even worse.

          And – as you say – there’s now a pretty well-lighted pathway to that sort of future occurrence…

          (*As a part of the “spooky” – take a look at R.A.H.’s timeline for Scudder’s election and “primacy”.)

Leave a Reply