[img]1|left|||no_popup[/img]When I stepped out of my car at 7 o’clock this morning, I curved my bifocals toward the ground in search of the President of the United States.
Last seen in Europe, Mr. Obama was hunkering near the ground, eye-level to an amoeba.
Humiliatingly, he was groveling before the most powerful men in the world.
I pictured a smear-faced, wise-guy, horribly insecure kid dashing into the living room and braying to special company — “Betcha didn’t know Mommy burned two batches of cookies before she finally got this tray right.”
I can only imagine the sizzling hatred he childishly retains for President Bush when he ludicrously apologizes for so-called American chutzpah in the recent past, positioning itself as the leader of all lands that are free.
To our certain detriment, Mr. Obama does not believe in American exceptionalism.
Almost daily, we are subjected to embarrassingly graphic examples of Mr. Obama’s undisciplined personality. He badly needs instruction in comporting himself with class.
If he was trained in childhood on how to behave in public, Mr. Obama forgot it last week.
Every day of the G-20 summit, the President felt compelled to apologize to a different head of state for the last administration’s failure to kowtow to that leader’s remarkable acuity.
Here he was in Strasbourg:
“In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world.
“Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”
Does anyone have a bar of soap? Or is he immune by now?
What a slick way this supposedly masterful communicator has with words when he thinks nobody back home is looking.
Do you ever have the feeling that he sees this first four-year term as his payback time? Payback time for what? He will answer later.
Imagine the sizzle of 10 strips of bacon in a frying pan. Then you will have a taste of Mr. Obama’s nearly uncontrollable loathing for Mr. Bush.
How Are They Different?
Part of the reason is a Grand Canyon fissure in their values.
Jealously, vengefully, Mr. Obama resents Mr. Bush’s authentic Christian faith and his badge-wearing commitment to proudly create a moral environment wherever he goes.
Friday evening in France, without the smallest provocation, Mr. Obama’s temper, like a genie wildly whirling up from a cloudy canning bottle, flared again. He used Mr. Bush like a cigarette lighter, to ignite and underscore his desire to convince fellow European socialists to remake the world into one unified entity.
“It is important for Europe to understand that even though I'm now President and George Bush is no longer President, al-Qaida is still a threat, and that we cannot pretend somehow that because Barack Hussein Obama got elected as President, suddenly everything is going to be OK.
“This is a joint problem. And it requires a joint effort.”
This from the angry chap who denounced Mr. Bush’s War on Terror and declared last month that it was over.
Meanwhile, he is sending in 27,000 new troops, to Afghanistan. I have spent the morning searching for left-wing criticism of this wartime acceleration. I have deduced it is only dangerous when a Republican President orders troops into action. By golly, what happened to the anti-war boys and girls?
One Fault Plus One Fault
The twin eyesores of his increasingly pockmarked personality, Mr. Obama’s undisciplined arrogance and anger, reside permanently at his fingertips.
I am as fascinated by his inability to control these temperamental blotches as I am disappointed, but not surprised, by the adoring media’s daily fondling of his artfully drawn breaths.
Even the worst of the sycophantic media eventually will tire of his one-note act, as he will of them. The flaws the boys now are ignoring will be emblazoned in top-of-the-page headlines —only if any of the fast-failing left-wing newspapers and magazines survive the recession.
Did you see where the editor of The New York Times, Bill Keller, told Stanford students last week saving his failing newspaper is a moral imperative comparable to rescuing Darfur? The Times, I report with a smile, is losing money faster than G.M.
