Second of two parts
Re “The Answer to This Question May Torture Your Mind”
I know of not one pundit or politician in America who has experienced a light-bulb moment in sizing up President Obama and has concluded:
“So that is what he really is like.”
He is a jumble of chaotic contradictions — such as when he inserted his well-shined shoes into his much too large mouth over angry Prof. Henry Louis Gates or the racist preached Jeremiah Wright.
As long as his tongue works, his gaffes are likely to outnumber his accomplishments.
The reliable lapdog claque on the left has been ringing a cowbell for three years about how crack-smart he is.
They sheepishly slink like little lambs into the background when he publicly mouths off the way only a naïve schoolboy would.
Why, Prez, Why?
Just when the country was beginning to feel a little more supportive of him after going on a winning streak in the lame duck session of Congress, Mr. Obama risks or blows his gains by foolishly commenting on the disgraced dog-torturing quarterback Michael Vick.
Only an under-challenged, or radically insecure, busybody would stoop to such narcissistic behavior.
I suggested yesterday that a man who tortures — hangs, beats, drowns, kills, rips apart dogs — is a lower person than one who murders human beings because the former requires more planning and commitment. One human can murder another in a brief staccato of emotion and regret it the rest of his life. Mr. Vick’s repeated vicious acts required long and devious scheming. This wasn’t a succinct irrational outburst.
He is like a sassy 5-year-old who has as little control over his mouth and impulses as Mr. Vick does over his vile temper. Mr. Obama told the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles he thought it was cool to have given ex-con Vick a second chance. Who cares, especially when his inattention to his job constantly shows? Maybe he also thinks corn tastes better than peas. Who cares?
And Then There Is His Race
Petulant to a fault, Mr. Obama frequently has shown himself to be the most graceless, classless President in modern times.
Two days ago, our essayist Dr. Earl Ofari Hutchinson said that one undeniable reason Mr. Vick has been subjected to commonly harsh criticism is because he is black, a claim that not even the President tried to make. Dr. Hutchinson also contended that the sick Mr. Vick should be allowed to have a dog because the beast would be the luckiest of his species on the planet.
Debating the proper punishment for torturing animals, like trying to accurately, fairly assess Mr. Obama the person, can rage all day without a persuasive conclusion.
I don’t know why the immature Mr. Obama once again behaved so shoddily.
If it is wisdom Mr. Obama is seeking — and there is no evidence — he should digest the following 80 words from one of our sharpest readers after reading Dr. Hutchinson’s essay:
Michael Vick acted atrociously towards helpless creatures. How are his crocodile tears any more believable than those of a child molester or wifebeater?
It takes a special type of cruelty to do what he did. Claiming that he is reformed and wants a pet is good PR, but the courts hold people to a higher standard. Perhaps we need to see the pictures of the maimed and tortured dogs again to remind us that Michael Vick is not a victim.
