We know that the left LOVES BO, and this NY TImes paen lets them count the ways.
Historical comparisons will be kind to him. You respect John F. Kennedy for his flair and wit, but wince at how he hurt his wife through numerous affairs. You admire Lyndon B. Johnson for his courage in civil rights, but are appalled at how bathroom-level bawdy he was in private. You appreciate Ronald Reagan for his charm and friendships across the aisle, but can’t ignore how dysfunctional his family was. Under Richard Nixon, the White House was a crime scene. Under Bill Clinton, it was a place of monumental self-indulgence.Jimmy Carter, HW and W Bush are somehow missing from this rather odd comparison -- JFK's many affairs were completely unknown for DECADES. One has to be a bit of a "historian" to care at this point. Slick Willie was indeed a monument of self-indulgence, and if "lying to the American people" were still considered a crime as it was in Nixon's time, his White House was just as much a "crime scene".
But none of this really matters, the NY Times sees BO as heroic. As they say, "he is a model" ...
He’s a model, without asterisk for race. It’s a hard thing to go nearly eight years as the most powerful man in the world without diminishing the office or alienating your family. He’s done that, and added a dash of style and humor and a pitch-perfect sense for being consoler in chief.BO has trampled the Constitution, presided over the worst recovery since WWII, divided the nation by race, religion and class, used the IRS to attack his "enemies", drawn "red lines in crayon", made deals with the Iranians that even the NY Times admits are "shams", but he has not in their minds "diminished the office".
He is indeed a model, but a model of what exactly? The standard hero of America was the Cowboy -- men of few words, hard work, self-reliance, a strong moral character and the manliness to back it up -- quickly and violently if required. BO is no Cowboy.
No, BO is the unruffled, confident bureaucrat, "No Drama Obama". He is the prototype for the modern totalitarian state. Very smooth, very calculating, no scruples, all power. We knew from the beginning that he sees himself as "The One" -- to command the oceans to stop rising, to wrest the Bibles and the guns from the "bitter clingers", that pre-BOistan that revered the now hated "Cowboy". Even the anti-hero cowboys like Clint Eastwood characters believed in character, God and judgement.
It is true that BO accomplished nothing and the Times didn't try to claim he did -- BOcare is in shambles, on life support. It further damaged the middle class, which was it's goal. What used to be the "lower middle class" is voting for Trump. They are the remnants of the "bitter clingers", BO and the NY Times hope the rest of them commit suicide one way or another, as they are in an orgy of addiction and hopelessness that far exceed the AIDs death toll. Nobody cares -- gays were part of the great left wing narrative, libertinism as "freedom". Freedom as in freedom FROM morals, not as in freedom TO build character and moral fibre.
In BOistan, all is "narrative" -- a dead black two year old doesn't matter, nor really do the police lives. "Collateral damage" -- hundreds of young black men die every year in BO's own "native" Chicago, he is really a "citizen or the world", their lives don't advance his cause, so they don't matter.
As they closed the article ...
If the words have sometimes failed him and us, the man, in his personal behavior, has not.
That is our new form or hero -- smooth, always urbane, always on the TP party line. "Accomplishment" is so "old America", it BOistan it is all about image -- BOistan heroics don't need no stinkin "accomplishments" -- he destroyed a nation and created a tribal hell hole. What more of a "hero" do you really want for the post-truth, post-law, post-morals, post-meaning world?
BO is the man for "our times" ... at least the NY Times.
'via Blog this'