Joyfully Partisan Peeking. 
Speaking Sunday 2 on the Election Special to Robert Sullivan, editor Time-Life Books, re the timely publication of the new but surprisingly familiar picture book, "The American Journey of Barack Obama." It is a quietly laudatory volume, muted in its uniform affection for a candidate who is still not more than the youthful tyro of a joyfully partisan machine. Studying the story in pictures we can surmise what is allowed, acceptable, appropriate, in the first draft of the authorized biography. Mr. Obama's run for the U.S. Senate in 2003-2004 as well as the run for the White House in 2007-2008 have been only and completely about the careful candidate's chosen narrative. The official narrative. A most edited official narrative. And this book is an edited official authorized version in pictures, which are sometimes provided by the candidate and which are sometimes the product of expedient staging. Flipping through the chronology of the book is a challenging game of peeking into windows. There is what you see and what you don't see and what you know is there but you cannot see and what you know is just around the corner, maybe. My mind kept looking for the parts that aren't present in the frame, the missing parts, because it a certainty that the missing parts are where the unauthorized, unedited, non-official and unwelcome version will start again after Election Day.
The Missing Parts.
According to Robert Sullivan, Time-Life had a rich record to choose from, because ever since Mr. Obama made national news as the first ever African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, 1991, he has been widely photographed. The first half of the book covers the years 1962 or so, toddler snapshots, family groupings, black and white as well as color, to a visit to Jakarta, ending with a snapshot of him and his sister, Maya, in 1987. The second half of the book begins with the courtship and marriage to Michelle Robinson in the early 1990s, including the wedding in October 1992. What is missing from the first half is Occidental College and Columbia College, and certainly missing is the adventure to visit his roommate's family in Pakistan. Also missing is the three years of community organizing in Chicago, of living hand to mouth, of being a stranger in a strange land called Chicago. However it is the second half of the book where the editing is most official. Trinity Church appears in the wedding photo, and later there is the well-known picture of Mr. Obama and Jeremiah Wright smiling in what is described as "happier times;" yet there are no cameos of church-going or church events over the 20 years we are told Mr. Obama belonged an attended the most successful of churches. Also missing are the critical associates of Mr. Obama's rise as a political actor in Chicago after 1992. One shot of Mr.. Obama at his junior lawyer desk; one shot of Mr. Obama working with ACORN. Nothing of the Woods Fund after 1993, nothing of the Joyce Foundation after 1994, nothing of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Grant board that the ingenue Mr. Obama chaired after 1995, nothing of the lengthy association with Bill Ayers (right, in New York, October 2008) of the University of Illinois and Mr. Ayers's wife Bernardine Dohrn and Mr. Ayers's education partner Mike Klonsky, who all benefited from Mr. Obama's work. Nothing of of the run for the 13th Illinois senate seat after 1995, nor anything at all of the eight years in Springfield. No Illinois senate pictures at all. Nothing of Mr. Obama's leadership role in Louis Farrakhan's
Million Man March in Washington D.C. in 1995 (right). Nothing of the publication and promotion of the successful "Dreams of My Father," after 1995: no book signing pictures, no book party shots, no readings of the book. And now the missing parts accelerate. Nothing of Tony Rezko and Rita Rezko from 1995 or 2000. Nothing of the friendship with Rashid and Mona Khalidi, a most controversial pro-Palestinian couple at the University of Chicago with whom the Obamas shared baby-sitting chores. Nothing of the unsuccessful primary challenge to Congressman Bobby Rush in 2000. Nothing of the downtown Chicago event where Mr. Obama made the now famous anti-war speech in October 2002. Nothing of the fund-raising parties to raise money for the Senate run in 03-04. A photo of Obama for Senate logos but nothing of the sponsorship of Governor Rod Blagojevich nor of the most critical boost from Mayor Richard Daley (right below). Nothing of the political fetes that were routine at Springfield before and after the '04 election, including several state sponsored events in '05 and '06. What is striking about the general absence of all these events after 1995 is that most of them were political ceremonies, all news worthy at the time and ripe with photo opportunities for professionals, amateurs, campaign aides. Yet no cameos, no snapshots, no newswire group scenes, not a single picture of the candidate smoking a cigarette, despite the well known fact that he was a heavy smoker until he quit sometime in 2007. There several pictures of several visits to Africa and Kenya, including the senatorial visit in 2006, yet there are no photos of the four-day trip to Israel and the Palestinian West Bank in 2005, and there is no picture of the now famous February 10, 2007 event in Springfield, Illinois when Mr. Obama announced his candidacy for the presidency.
The House and the Lot.
There are several photos of the inside of the mansion at 5046 South Greenfield Avenue (below), and what we can see is the kitchen and halls of a spotless, plush, panelled palace. There are also two pictures that include a glimpse of the now famous lot at 5050 South Greenfield behind an ornate iron grille fence (below). The lawn on both sides of the fence is verdure and perfect, like a golf course. We cannot see the "for sale" sign on the street side of the lot, if it was there when the photo was taken. However missing are photos of the condo where the Obamas lived at 5450 South East Park View and which they sold conveniently and swiftly in the spring of '05 in order to move into the mansion. We do not see moving day pictures, house renovation pictures, family gatherings in the vastly roomy and House Beautiful pristine mansion, social events at all in the house, certainly nothing with Tony and Rita Rezko standing with the Obamas beside the peculiarly manicured and undeveloped lot.
I’m trying my best to probe my mind for a character with similar idiosyncrasies that I might project back on and obtain a mirrored view of this particular man. As I’ve iterated before, what concerns me most, is the prosaic traits and the numbing effect this has on the true believers, which also happens to include himself. Even now, the supposition is that all is well in hand even though troubling subtleties may suggest that it is not. Who might we channel that will offer insight? Where does one reside that we can regard as comparable?
Phaethon? Agamemnon? Odysseus? Hercules?
Someone help please.
Barack Obama is a media creation. He is a Hollywood film - meticulously edited. It is the story of the man who rose up from nothing to become America's savior. It doesn't quite square with the reality outside the photo frame.
Why is the media so obsessed with Barack? It's the same reason a mother is obsessed with her child. It's why she tells everyone who will listen, "He's a good boy."
The American people want desperately to believe in something good. They've been told over and over again that they've been stupid for electing Bush. Now, they're told that voting for Barack will absolve them of past sins.
It's a gun-to-the-head election; the gun, a perfect illusion by the illusionists of Hollywood. It's a gun that will claim its victims only when not fired. It's the last best chance for much of the 60's generation to redeem itself.
Alcibiades. Charismatic, yet lonely. Well intentioned, yet destructive. Patriot, yet traitor. Revered, yet reviled. A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.
Who are his close friends and confidants from the past 30 years? All we have are Ayers, Wright, Khalidi, and Michelle? Where are the non-radicals?
This may be a clue as to why it is difficult to find Obama in historical analogies, even especially to literary characters: Flatness.
And Mark Steyn comments on Obama in 2-D at NRO:
Get back to me on that Tuesday night. We’ll know by then whether an entire constitutional republic has decided to contract marriage with a two-dimensional character and to attempt to take up residence in the two-dimensional world. For many of his supporters, Barack Obama is an idea. He offers “hope, not fear”. “Hope” of what? “Hope” of “change.” Okay, but “change” to what? Ah, well, there you go again, getting all hung up on three-dimensional reality, when we’ve moved way beyond that.
A (one-dimensional) dot may be imprisoned by a (two-dimensional) circle. It would take a three-dimensional entity to free it from its (circle) prison. The three-dimensional entity could imprison it once again by building box. Then there's the fourth dimension, fifth, sixth, etc., all of which can't be seen but nevertheless exist theoretically (up to and including the 11th or 12th dimension) when calculating problems involving string theory. Interestingly, each higher dimension is capable of resolving problems that are intrinsic to the next lower one.
Why then would we settle for a (two-dimensional) cardboard cut-out to lead our country?
Stevenson, I think.
WHERE DOES BO STAND? WHEREVER YOU WANT HIM TO.
On the John Loftus Show last Tuesday night, JB asked JL and Craig Unger what BO would do once he got into office. Aside from national health care, all I heard was both JL and CU projecting what they wanted a liberal democrat to do. There was a lot of silence.
Many months ago, it was said that if BO did not define himself, he would be defined by the opposition. But happened late in the game. Not by HRC or John McCain, but by Joe the Plumber.
Because BO is a basically a blank slate (i.e two dimensional), his supporters are supposing he will do whatever they think needs to be done. However, it's all unknown.
Will BO be dominated by the programs of Pelosi and Reid? Unknown. Will he play to the middle like Clinton (after HRC's health care plan was soundly defeated)? Unknown. Will he try to rock the boat? Will he try to sink it? Unknown. Right now, all we know is your guess is as good as anyone's.
Mike,
Sorry, but we've seen exactly how BO would govern: show and flash with no substance. Substance he leaves to others. A fighter with principles he is not, so Reid/Pelosi/Emanuel will run the show while BO's operatives shower us with fireworks and dash and a 24/7/365 election campaign-cycle focused on 2010.
Those opposed, those who would cry foul would be investigated, castigated and marginalized as selfish racists. We live in an unfair place, so those dollars you earn are not yours. They belong to the common good, so hand them up to your betters.
Orwell would smile sardonically at the fools who voted in their destructor. Pain is happiness. Depression is uplifting. Hate is good (as long as you hate whom we instruct you to hate).
Sting has a line in a song about politicians seeming like gameshow hosts. That is Obama. Welcome to Queen for a Day. Tell your tales of woe and claim government's dollars and that free washer and dryer combo.
Meanwhile the USA would devolve into Chicago, murder capital, corruption capital of America. Millions would die around the world as America spent its dollars on making its society "fair". Trade would collapse as we spent our dollars on unions, social justice seminars and protected home-grown products.
And a darkening world would make America appear brighter to those with vague memories of how things used to be. We'd thank our lucky stars we're not living in Europe or some emerging market country.
Thankfully, I don't believe we'll have to live through any of that, because I believe the American people are fundimentally more serious about their country and the future than Mr. Obama & friends seem to think we are.
Well, if flatness is the clue to Obama, then Friedman is his John the Baptist, pronouncing the world to be "flat" now. Obama is the perfect man for Friedman's world: hip, young, connected, featureless, half-self-invented, half-reflective of his surroundings, citizen of the world, NGO-embracing, hostile to nationalism, the perfect EU image of an American president. Makes me wanna gag.
Just to be fair, Steyn and Friedman are using different definitions of flatness (that's a nice way of saying you're equivocating).
Friedman is talking about the removal of geography as a competitive advantage. It is now irrelevant if your team all work in the same office building in Manhattan or if they live in Brazil, Russia, India, China, or Seattle - or all of the above. That's not Friedman's doing. You can thank the internet for that - and the internet is not going away.
How about Peter Keating?
I would liken Obama to a doll with a string in the back that you pull to hear it talk. It's always the same message...I keep waiting for someone to ask the doll a question he can't answer and hopefully see sparks start flying out of his head and be exposed for the automaton he is. Then again, may be he's more like the The Monkees and people will buy it just because it sounds good and don't care if it's manufactured.
Dying by being jabbed or counterpunched to death. All the negative press this week is on Obama , the redistribuion tape,Khalidi, his aunt and being an illegal immigrant. His ship is sinking or rather maybe the Obama balloon burst.
Another succinct descriptor:
Prince Black-by-Convenience who views his whiteness as surrogacy.
No one more typifies the worst of politics,crooked bedfellows.
Obama for President-----of Kenya.
JB,
Did you decline to post my comment yesterday to Mike or was it lost in the aether?
Thanks,
Mark
I think maybe I have found him in Adolphus Cusins from G S Shaw's "Major Barbara"???
From Sparknotes>
Adolphus Cusins
Cast as the poet within the play's triumvirate of madmen, Cusins is a "slight, thin haired, and sweet voiced" Greek scholar determined to marry Barbara at all costs. As Shaw notes, it is not love that drives him to Barbara but an unmerciful "instinct." He joins the Salvation Army as a result but, as Undershaft remarks, the hollowness of his Army drum symbolizes the hollowness of his conviction in the organization. Indeed, Cusins uses the Army much like he does his drum, considering it an instrument for his Dionysian ecstasies. Understanding himself as a "collector of religions," he does not subscribe to any particular "pathfinder of salvation," but seeks only that which brings reality, power, and jubilation to the people. A student of the great democrat Euripides, he clings above all to a belief in this love for the people.
Upon Undershaft's attempt to convert him to his gospel, Cusins is particularly seduced by what he describes as his Mephistophelean "ecstasy of mischief." By "mischief" Cusins refers to his calculated sense of irony and wily argumentation in securing demonstrating to Barbara how he holds the Salvation Army and all its guests in his power. He alone perceives this irony as Undershaft adopts him as a sort of coeval in the previous scene.
This demonstration gives Cusins over to Undershaft's cause. As he cries joyfully, the spirit of "Dionysus-Undershaft" possesses him entirely. Ultimately Cusins will become his successor, shedding his name to assume that of the firm. Unlike Andrew, however, Cusins takes over the armory in the name of his love for the people. He declares that through the armory, he will abandon his bookish studies, work that only served to arm the intellectual against the commoner, and make power for the masses. For Cusins, gunpowder is a power accessible to the common people and that forces the "intellectual oligarchy" to exert itself for the general good.
Shaw describes Cusins as a "determined, tenacious, intolerant person" who presents himself as he is: "considerate, gentle, explanatory, even mild and apologetic, capable possibly of murder, but not of cruelty or coarseness." The "lifelong struggle of a benevolent temperament and high conscience against impulses of inhuman ridicule" has wrecked his constitution.
Maybe? Close? Spence
.
This* article is the best ever written about Obama. Explains everything. A must read!
.
"... Obama evinces symptoms of pathological narcissism [NPD], which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton, for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined.
... The narcissistic leader prefers the sparkle and glamour of well-orchestrated illusions to the tedium and method of real accomplishments,...
... Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience.
... It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president."*
.
Sina enumerates characteristics of NPD here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLQ5rlvPlzM
.
.
* http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html
Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer
By Ali Sina
2008/09/22
...............
Ali Sina is the author of 'Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography of Allah’s Prophet' and the founder of Faith Freedom International, the movement of ex-Muslims created to eliminate hate through knowledge and foster amity among all mankind.
.
How about Peter Keating?