16
   

Obama the Clinical Narcissist

 
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:33 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
Showing the levels of Obama worship per your criteria...

Actually, my post was designed to show the level of your hypocrisy. And in that it succeeded admirably.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:39 am
@joefromchicago,
Is that what you were doing? Must have missed that. Your not very good at that, huh?
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:50 am
@McGentrix,
It's right there for the grasping and not really my fault you are too dense to get it.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:54 am
Just for context about this personality cult thing, does anyone know the dates at which the first public authority named something after George W. Bush? (Schools, streets, libraries, and sports arenas all qualify.) How about Bill Clinton? George H. W. Bush? Ronald Reagan?

I would expect that at any given time, there must be be at least a few municipalities in the US who name a building to curry favor with the current president. Don't forget that the US president has a lot of favors to give. There are thousands of municipalities in the US. Naming a school or a street after the current president costs nothing. The cost-benefit calculation of such a move seems to check out for the city.

But, I could be wrong, so I'm willing to put my theory to the test. If the first Reagan library, Clinton school, or Bush street took much longer to emerge than the first Obama arena, I shall stand refuted.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:54 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

It's right there for the grasping and not really my fault you are too dense to get it.


*zing* I am surprised no one has offered you high fives yet.

Seriously though, you were trying to show hypocrisy by showing that Reagan had stuff named after him and baked goods? That all came after 8 years of service and a completed Presidency. Not after one year of barely any accomplishments to lay claim to.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:58 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

It's right there for the grasping and not really my fault you are too dense to get it.


*zing* I am surprised no one has offered you high fives yet.


I am already on record for saying joefromchicago is cute. How many times do I need to say that?
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 12:05 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
But, I could be wrong, so I'm willing to put my theory to the test. If the first Reagan library, Clinton school, or Bush street took much longer to emerge than the first Obama arena, I shall stand refuted.


I always thought the person dies, then they name the building after them.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 12:12 pm
@Gala,
How about the President George Bush Turnpike in Dallas? Both presidents Bush are still alive.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 12:25 pm
@Gala,
Gala wrote:
I always thought the person dies, then they name the building after them.

Nah. That's just when they append the word "memorial".
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  6  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 12:43 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
*zing* I am surprised no one has offered you high fives yet.

You just did.

McGentrix wrote:
Seriously though, you were trying to show hypocrisy by showing that Reagan had stuff named after him and baked goods? That all came after 8 years of service and a completed Presidency. Not after one year of barely any accomplishments to lay claim to.

I was trying to show that the enthusiasm of a person's supporters does not mean that the person is necessarily a narcissist or is cultivating a "cult of personality." It really is no reflection on Obama that a few people have gone overboard in their admiration of him, just as it is no reflection on Reagan that there are people who want to name every public building, highway, and compost heap after him. If Obama's supporters are members of a cult of personality, then that's strictly their affair. They've created the cult, not Obama. You, on the other hand, think that the over-enthusiasm of Obama's supporters is somehow attributable to Obama, whereas you don't think the same about Reagan's supporters. And therein lies the hypocrisy.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 01:54 pm
@joefromchicago,
The issue with your proof of hypocrisy is that I did not suggest that it was Obama's fault or try to attribute anything to Obama. I said that there were people that worshipped Obama. Go back and reread the posts Joe. His being a narcissist is something you will have to take up with the author of the thread, not me.
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:06 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
They've created the cult, not Obama. You, on the other hand, think that the over-enthusiasm of Obama's supporters is somehow attributable to Obama, whereas you don't think the same about Reagan's supporters. And therein lies the hypocrisy.

I think Obama has done a pretty good job of stoking the worship. He'd be nuts not to. As for Reagan, his supporters worship in a more quiet way, they also tend to be older.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:27 pm
@Gala,
Gala wrote:
I think Obama has done a pretty good job of stoking the worship. He'd be nuts not to. As for Reagan, his supporters worship in a more quiet way, they also tend to be older.


What is your source for this observation, Gala? So far the sources you have mentioned to support your comments on this thread are: "the Style section of Huffington Post," "Vogue," and "Vanity Fair."
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:32 pm
Martha Washington was the U.S. first First Lady, so I would suppose that her face on the bill is quite appropriate. I cannot think of any other first ladies, with the exception of Eleanor Roosevelt, who were much more than charming consorts. Sure, some of them were accomplished in their own right, but not more than many other people, and certainly not enough to have a publicly funded building named after them.

Basically, a first lady's claim to fame is that she married a president.
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:59 pm
@wandeljw,
Quote:
What is your source for this observation, Gala? So far the sources you have mentioned to support your comments on this thread are: "the Style section of Huffington Post," "Vogue," and "Vanity Fair."


Please. Obama at a rally, or a campaign stop. Obama on t-shirts, calendars, jackets, hats. Plus, he's plugged in, so all his campaign messages are reaching his supporters. During the election season his campaign workers were standing on street corners asking for money. I told one of them that I'd already contributed and she asked me to contribute more. I said no.

You seem to be belittling the Style section and fashion magazines as if they're some kind of petty economic drivel. They're big money draws, regardless of how distastful you may find them. You might not read them, but a large majority of people do.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 03:02 pm
@Gala,
Gala wrote:
Please. Obama at a rally, or a campaign stop. Obama on t-shirts, calendars, jackets, hats. Plus, he's plugged in, so all his campaign messages are reaching his supporters. During the election season his campaign workers were standing on street corners asking for money. I told one of them that I'd already contributed and she asked me to contribute more. I said no.


This leads you to believe that Obama "stokes" worship? What you describe is true of all political candidates.
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 03:13 pm
@wandeljw,
Quote:
This leads you to believe that Obama "stokes" worship? What you describe is true of all political candidates.

What's your point?
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 03:31 pm
@Gala,
Gala wrote:

Quote:
This leads you to believe that Obama "stokes" worship? What you describe is true of all political candidates.

What's your point?


That is exactly what I am asking you. What is your point in describing campaign activities that are typical of all candidates? How does this support your contention about Obama "stoking worship"?
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 05:28 am
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:
Basically, a first lady's claim to fame is that she married a president.

And if they make any effort to break out it, there's hell to pay. Look at Hillary Clinton. I'd say the worst thing to happen to a first lady would be she's ambitious, the second-- she's unattractive.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 05:32 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
That is exactly what I am asking you. What is your point in describing campaign activities that are typical of all candidates? How does this support your contention about Obama "stoking worship"?


You can't seem to see the nature of the worship is far different from previous presidents.

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 09:52:26