Posted on 04/02/2009 1:28:25 PM PDT by StAntKnee
That's the Obama enigma: boldness wrapped in caution rooted in an ambivalent relationship to the status quo. This is why Obama will, by turns, challenge not only his entrenched adversaries but also his natural allies.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Is “enigma” double speak for “evil” these days?
He’s not an enigma - he’s an anathema.
0bama is a Useful Idiot and Stooge and they will throw him
away when he’s served his purpose. Count on it.
Dionne should be told that April Fool’s Day was yesterday.
As I recall, Sir Winston Churchill once described the Communist Russians as something of an enigma. You’re judged by the company you keep....except in dhimmicrat circles..
“That’s the Obama enigma: boldness wrapped in caution rooted in an ambivalent relationship to the status quo.”
Mommy, please make him stop writing this tripe.
Ack!
TOTUS will be very upset. It has chosen its words and is, no doubt upset that it hasn’t resulted in the outcome ayers and soros wanted.
Dionne is way over-thinking this thing
What Dionne would have said if he weren't a deranged nitwit.
Move over Ms. Lewinsky, EJ is now earning his Presidential kneepads.
There. . .fixed it.
E.J.’s sphincter is not much of a riddle, wrapped around a gerbil.
No enigma. Hate is synonymous with weakness, incompetence, stupidity and lack of character.
Good food is bonded with, excrement is debonded from. Obama is an analo-scato homosexual who “bonds” with excrement.
All he does is actualy prepping to debond/excrement with the folkes he claims to be in relations with. Be prepared for a serious case of the runs America, because this stuff is going to be bad digestion.
...covered in confusion, layered with incompetence, encrusted with hypocrisy...blah, blah,blah
Then watch all the other politicians, diplomats and observers tie themselves in knots as they ponder the question, "We know that is what he says he wants to do, but of course, no one in politics says what he means, so he must really be up to something else. I wonder what it is. Hmmm." These oh-so-worldly sophisticates (would Messers David Brooks and Christopher Buckley please pick up the white courtesy phone) go on to paralyze themselves with ever more elaborate analysis and speculation about the nature of the secret, behind the scenes, plan, without ever twigging on that there isn't one.
Barrack Hussein Obama was the most leftist member of the United States Senate, a distinction he won while clearly contemplating a run for President. Most politicians would have trimmed their sails, and tried to appear moderate, for political reasons. He did not, because he was a committed lefty as Senator. He is a committed lefty as President.
BO ran for President because he wanted to change the Country. Just as Reagan was perfectly willing to lose in 1984, if he changed the Country in the meantime, BO is willing to lose in 2012, if he changes us wildly to the left in the interim. It may be the only thing the two men have in common.
Great analysis. Thanks for the insights.
I read the first sentence, wondering: Could any sentient being generate such twaddle? Then I saw it was E.J. Dionne. So the answer is still No.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.