Obama is the decoy. We do not have to be the ducks.

Obama appears quite unique in presidential annals. A campaign promised a fundamental paradigm shift, the creation of the Magical Land of Hope and Change. After victory, a strange lassitude followed. That is, with the exception of “Health Care,” the President took demonstrable action on very little else of the nation’s business, creating the extra-constitutional “Czar” system and appointing a radical “Team” to run things without much direction or input from him. This strange passivity is delivering the fundamental change promised. His behavior patterns fell into place. I am fairly sure that a psychiatrist might call them “Passive/Aggressive. It is strange that this syndrome could be adopted as a method of operation by an entire administration and go completely unremarked upon by the media.

Passive/Aggression: What is it? Briefly, it is characterized by highly provocative behavior. That is, behavior that rather than taking any direct action, is designed only to provoke a response; a response that can be used to aggrandize oneself. So, on an individual level it can be said that the behavior is extremely egocentric, with no regard to consequences. The primary purpose of the self-aggrandizement is foremost to achieve avoidance of any blame, or rather responsibility. Any negative consequence is caused by “someone else.” Merely by attaching blame to “someone else”, the passive-aggressive personality is then self-enabled to claim credit for “solving the problem.” But this isn’t just an individual, it is an entire administration.

Practical Application: Obama is to do nothing, therefore he CANNOT BE BLAMED for anything. The strategy crafted for Obama is to ‘lie in wait’ for events to occur, then activate a protective mechanism to “spin” that event regardless of its nature, taking credit and casting blame as the case may develop. Even if the fallout of a particular event might be potentially harmful to the country, he can take credit for ending the situation. Of course blame must be meted out among those whom he claims caused it in the first place.

The implementation of this unique strategy of actually doing absolutely nothing makes blaming Obama fool’s work, as does complaining about him, or personal attacks upon him.

In fact, it is my contention that these tactics may very well only strengthen a manipulative Passive/Aggressive character and make the accusers look weak and inconsequential. Call it psychological “Judo.” Let me repeat that: IMHO, directly attacking Obama is a bad idea. It makes his base idolize him all the more and makes it easier for Team Obama to turn the “blame” for any problems that affect the country as whole a lot easier.

Passivity followed by Aggression to claim credit and to place blame. In the thoroughly modern, deconstructive paradigm any critique of anything is negative. The object of the criticism automatically becomes an the injured victim. Those persons issuing the mildest of objections … or even differences of opinion … are automatically (a) wrong, and (b) guilty. Of course, in these uber politically correct times, if the person issuing a contrary thought happens to be of a fairer complexion than the object of the thought, all effects of the observed phenomenon are immediately trebled. Opposition of any kind thus becomes psychic support. The paradigm is shifted.

The goal of the paradigm Shift is the achievement of a socialist system in a country whose traditions are fundamentally opposed to it.

Rationale: Just as Slavery was abolished, so must be Capitalism. It might be fair to call it a Marxist perversion of the Abolitionist mindset. The figurehead consciously chosen to lead the change is of course Barack Hussein Obama, II. He was first identified by Joe Biden, who enthusiastically endorsed him to his fellow Democrats as, “…a clean Negro …no black accent … sharp looking.” Biden recognized that once identified as “non-white,” Obama (and therefore his administration) would be automatically excused from scrutiny and criticism.

The present administration manifests these Passive/Aggressive strategies with a strange set of work habits. A good example is the typical White House workday during the 10-14 day interludes the President actually spent in Washington, DC in his first term. Obama spent most days sequestered in a “den” equipped with very large flat-screen TV’s tuned to various ESPN basketball outlets. His daily companion was special assistant Reggie Love, a young former Duke basketball star and a White House resident. Occasionally, they would venture out as far as the White House gym to “shoot some hoops.” Meals were brought into to them. For days on end, the only visitor regularly allowed in the inner sanctum was Valerie Jarrett, who also acted as doorkeeper for any other administration officials or cabinet members requesting an audience.

During this unremarked-upon period in his Presidency, the POTUS and Mr. Love traveled the country together. The Presidential golf game became an obsession. He literally did nothing else for long periods of time. It was also during this time that a new tradition of “Michelle and the Girls’” separate vacations began. Separately or together, the Presidential Family and Mr. Love traveled and vacationed extensively, spending many weeks away from Washington.

As the demands of the 2012 campaign developed, the tenure of Mr. Love as a live-in companion ended abruptly. A rather homoerotic video featuring Mr. Love somehow emerged on the Web, from which it was quickly removed. Even more quickly, Mr. Love was removed from Washington, DC, with an overnight relocation reminiscent of the Witness Protection Program. He had effectively been disappeared.

Obama did nothing. The staff handled the sudden disappearance. The President was never mentioned. Among the media, no questions were been asked about this interesting White House residential companion. The election behind, Reggie Love has resurfaced. No longer a White house resident, he joins the President on the road on both “official” jaunts and personal travels. He has even resurfaced in Washington when the First Lady is on separate ventures. The media ignore this of course, although the relationship appears at least as close as that between J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson, about which many millions of words have been written.

Nothing has changed in the Presidential work routine and the fact remains that the President actually spends very little time ‘at the job,’ even compared with JFK and Bill Clinton. When in Washington, he will actually be “in the office” for perhaps one or two hours in the afternoon, and never in the evenings. Protected deep within a Passive/Aggressive fortress and tasked with nothing, this President does not govern. His assigned task is to campaign. His primary role is that of Democrat Party fundraiser, at which he has succeeded admirably. The sole concern of the President and the Administration is to carry both House and Senate in 2014.

Valerie Jarrett runs the administration, handing off chores on a day-to-day basis. Behind Jarrett are Van Jones, of the Communist Party of the USA, and the true eminence grise of the Obama administration, the billionaire ex-concentration camp kapo, George Soros

The Presidential marching order: do nothing. Maintain power. Place blame. Take credit. The Passive/Aggressive Presidential Strategy was grafted onto an individual chosen for traits other observers have characterized as extremely “narcissistic.” The two styles are a perfect fit. A “perfect” being has been cast in a role that requires him to do nothing but admire himself. An adoring press applauds.

This working model closely matches Obama’s tenure as President of the Harvard Law Review. Classmates report that any work actually required by the administrative, non-editorial post had to be performed by others. Obama’s role became ceremonial. He showed up for social functions, usually cocktail parties, and held forth at some staff meetings. Any positive results, occurring as they did on his watch, were to his credit. Of course if anything did not go quite so well, it could hardly be “blamed” on him because after all, he had done nothing. Fortunately others picked up the slack, and things went fairly well. He was lionized by some, and loathed by others, probably by those who had to “pick up the slack.”

In his brief legal career he personally handled the sum total of one case. Oddly enough, as this one case devolved, he was given the choice of leaving the bar voluntarily, or facing a bar hearing. As in normal in cases of “voluntary” surrender of the license, all details are sealed. It is possible that an attorney on the opposing side noticed that his “autobiography” contained information at variance with answers made on the Illinois Bar Application. When the Bar Application in question was available on line it was easy to spot certain discrepancies, namely the denial of use of an “alias,” omission of traffic offenses, and no mention of the drug use extensively referred to in the “autobiography.” To avoid a hearing, he chose the option voluntarily: to permanently leave the Illinois Bar with absolutely no chance of reinstatement and went into politics. The rest is history.

Benghazi handled with Passive/Aggressive methods: There can be little doubt that the White House was immediately aware of the attack on the Benghazi compound through live surveillance video and that the President was notified and probably even watched in the Ready Room. However, the first reaction was completely passive, in order to build a case that the POTUS “knew nothing.” This was inadvertently admitted by Joe Biden in his debate with Paul Ryan. Of course in Biden’s case, it is entirely possible he was not told.

But as the crisis developed, the President took absolutely no action. At 5 PM, he left on a fund-raising excursion and was incommunicado for over 8 hours! His departing instructions: “Do what you have to do.” Even as he disappeared from the scene, a disinformation campaign took immediate shape, with the “video” story being floated successfully in the MSM, allowing the President to claim he could do nothing because of a lack of information. As the massive cover-up continued (continues) others in the Department of State, the military, and the intelligence services were used to take the heat in wave after wave of disinformation.

Where was the President for the 48 hours incommunicado? The truth remains that help for our people in Benghazi was readily available. Orders to go to their aid were countermanded, by whom remains unclear. Those military authorities who wished to go to the aid of those under attack have already been replaced. The truth also remains that the administration is now openly dedicated to the complete overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria, when it is abundantly clear that what will replace it is going to be a Jihadist regime.

The official line: the President is solving the problem of who attacked and killed the Ambassador and the other men. To paraphrase the script now in play: “The State Department was horribly lax in security. We will fix that. Democracy will be said to be brought to Syria, just as it was to Egypt in a sequel to the “Arab Spring,” and that the rapprochement with radical Islam will be achieved with mutual discussion and respect.”

The scenario is not quite complete. But they will try to re-direct blame. Responsibility will be shifted. Success will be claimed. The original design was "by doing nothing but placing blame and taking credit, the administration’s “personality” will be aggrandized. This is Passive/Aggression. That this has started to unravel is quite remarkable.

The Failure of The “Other Party” to recognize the syndrome is easy to explain. A passive/aggressive Presidency is so alien to the traditions of the country that perhaps the Republicans could be forgiven for failing to recognize its deconstructive potential (except that the phenomenon is by now over 5 years old).

However, as a practical matter, the upper reaches of the GOP, mystified to their core by theories of Deconstruction, even more by its skillful implementation, and having been severely beaten in various elections by its adept practitioners, have decided to ignore it. The GOP will tend to do a very American thing: i.e., treat it as a business challenge, make friends with it, stake out a franchise from it, and get rich with it. Continuing an arrangement begun in the 1950’s if not earlier, the Republican Establishment has settled for minority party status in lucrative safe seats from which they can continue to directly benefit key contributors, while avoiding any time-consuming governmental responsibility. The GOP long ago decided to go along to get along. It is not a power-sharing arrangement. It is more of a pact among thieves. The bureaucracy, essentially in Democrat hands since the 1930’s, runs the government, while the elected GOP joins their colleagues across the aisle to support major contributors. This is demonstrated by the absolute Republican befuddlement and impotence during those strange interludes when the electorate decides to place them in the majority in Congress.

It is becoming increasingly clear that if there is ever to be any opposition to the present course of the growth of socialism in this country, it will not come from the Republican Party as we now know it. It is loathe to change because the deal they have struck is simply too good for those who direct the party to end it. Unfortunately, it is also quite possibly the sign of the party’s approaching death.

It is an historic failure because The leaders of the GOP cannot see, or refuse to accept that those who would step forward to save the Republic will also step up to join with the Founders of that Republic. Instead, they came up with a Mitt Romney, a bland sort of personage, who campaigned largely on the idea that he “was not Obama,” a subject exhausted in the first 30 seconds of the campaign. A timid Romney failed to reveal any Program, or Plan to implement it. His was essentially a respectable, painfully non-offensive campaign delivered in the very “nice” way that has come to be expected of the Republican Party. E.G., he let Obama completely off the hook of Benghazi in debate.

But neither of course did any “Conservative” spokesman ask him to delineate his Program or his Plan. Instead, the Republicans accepted the ludicrous “Class Warfare” terms of the debate as put forward by the Democrats. This apparently had the effect of depressing the Republican base, while at the same time energizing the low-end Democrat.

Obama became increasingly the beneficiary of psychic and emotional investment on the part of his base. The theory of a Passive/Aggressive Presidential Strategy was proven, at least well enough to win. Even if their primary motivation was a sort of artificially generated class envy, these “low-info” voters were apparently at least smart enough to turn out… or if they weren’t that intelligent, be turned out in any of the myriad ways the Democrats, without Republican objection, have developed.

The sad fact seems to be that many traditional Republicans demonstrated that they would probably prefer to be in that notorious dog crate on the roof the station wagon, rather than be trapped in the car listening to this bland and boring Milquetoast, or show up to vote for him. Who then is the Leader to be? What will be the name of his party? Perhaps there is no reason to euthanize the GOP. It might be easier to shift it away from its current leadership and rebuild it.

Place Obama into a rhetorical limbo. Don’t play his game. Leave him out of the discussion. Instead: Design and “SELL” a PROGRAM. Lay out what needs to be done … in this case to save the (a) Economy and (b) the Republic itself. Turn to PLAN: That is, what precisely are the steps to be taken to IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM.

Sample Policies: Domestic Energy policies for an expanding economy. End ethanol subsidies and requirements. End boutique fuel requirements tailored to specific locales by means of pseudo-science. Roll back the EPA, defund its harmful programs, or eliminate it entirely. Encourage something boldly and immediately useful, such as the use of clean, modern diesel engines in passenger cars. Stop the subsidy of Wind and Solar Power, instead realistically develop the Nuclear, Petroleum, Natural Gas, and Coal options on hand … actually planning the next 150 years of energy use, research and development … adding sensible alternative options.

Return to ‘0’ base budgeting. Why is there still a built-in increase under the budget rules adopted in the 1970’s by a Democrat-controlled Congress?

Where (or what) are the “Grass Roots?” The by-and-large poor results “conservative” or “constitutional” candidates were suffered at the hands of highly organized and magnificently funded “Republican Moderates … i.e., RINOS” in state primary elections, and are not encouraging.

Where then is the drive toward fiscal sanity and smaller governments to begin? Can we expect the movement to begin like Abolition, in drawing rooms and churches? Yes. But today’s drawing room and church is the Internet.

The biggest vote-getter in Italy ‘s election bought NO advertising; was not speechifying on TV; had no inane feel-good commercials. No billboards. He took a dominant position in parliament (over 20%) on the strength of a mighty presence on the Internet. What happened is history. It is also hope for those who can see the breakdown of the “Two-Party” system, which has actually become a variation of the one-party system, just like the one-party system that controlled (and economically ruined) Mexico over the past century.

Unfortunately, what we have to overcome is the fact that the breathtaking ineptitude and arrogance of the present administration is already coupled to a strong social media campaign aimed at their base, buttressed by a supportive main-stream media. The way out of this is NOT listening to “right-wing” media. By personalizing the attack on Obama, they fall into a well-laid ambush. By not offering or supporting a clear policy-based alternative, “right wing talk radio” makes things worse. That is, the effect they have is hardening Obama’s support and helping him build his base. The negativity has in my opinion, depressed turnout, too.

Again, Team Obama’s goal: a sweep of the House and Senate in 2014 that will rubber-stamp the social revolution begun by the radical Left and their passive-aggressive, do-nothing front-man. Their hope is to create an opposition-free rule by introducing and passing social legislation that will mask the tyranny inherent in Executive Orders by allowing the President to rubber-stamp the rubber stamp Congress. That is what we fight.

We need a massive win in '14.

So, we have to play according to our game plan. Not Team Obama's.

Question: Do we have a Game Plan for '14?
It's tomorrow.
Game on.

I think there is a lot of food for thought here. One problem I see is that the advice to "design and implement a program", although this seems to me to be exactly right, it nevertheless is not something the GOP seems to be able to do.

We nominate guys like McCain and Romney. We put Boehner is charge of the House. The Republican Party designs and implements plans that are very (very) similar to the Democrat plans.

I think the right strategy is to swing for the fences and stop compromising: push for real Conservatism and accept nothing less. Design and implement THAT program. That might be a fool's errand, but to look to the GOP leadership to lead the way is not less of a fool's errand.

PING to a great thread!

_____________

Impeachment File on Benghazi Coward B. Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, a legal citizen of the sovereign Nation of Indonesia.

You are brilliant.

This is perfectly on-target.

It is NEVER possible to win in a battle with a passive-aggressive on their own turf.

Reacting never works because responding to them is simply stepping into the trap they’ve set, probably a very subtle and far-reaching trap.

We must come to know that we do not and will never think the way they think.

As long as we don’t see and understand this, it is a strong weapon which they use against us.

....push for real Conservatism.....That might be a fool's errand, but to look to the GOP leadership to lead the way is not less of a fool's errand.

There is no doubt that we are in a very tough spot. I certainly don't want to over-simplify the ways to get out of it. What I am trying to do is figure out the rules of the game we are actually in.

Team Obama has used the ultimate 'Straw Man' strategy on us. That is, setting up the POTUS as their very own "Straw Man" for us to be very busy demolishing ... so we might not notice as they burn the place down.

Your question and mine is, "Now that we have noticed, what do we do about it?"
One part of the answer I suggest is, "Let's take our eye off the "Straw Man!"

“...directly attacking Obama is a bad idea.”

Then, I suggest we start attacking Valerie Jarrett, as well as the media..

(I especially like your post because it makes me think of the saying, hate is not the opposite of love; indifference is.

If the petulant POTUS survives on adulation, he might just shrivel up if he is ignored.)

This is everything the clinton administration wanted to do but couldn’t. There are no surprises here, even down to the eos...and including every appointee.

You make some great points. We should all be heeding the emotional and psychological tactics that are employed to manipulate us into making mistakes and feeding the monster. Passsive/agressive behavior is not something most of us understand.

“I am fairly sure that a psychiatrist might call them “Passive/Aggressive. “

Actually, this board certified psychiatrist simply calls them treason.

The institutions in power — government, both political parties, the media — are happy with their solidly entrenched position. Until there’s a massive change of heart by the U.S. public, the situation will not change for the better.

Then, I suggest we start attacking Valerie Jarrett

Waste'o'time. Walk down Main Street. Ask everyone you meet, "Who is Valerie Jarrett?" If three strangers in your town know, I'm buying.

Attacking is negative. Negative is bad. That much the low-info voter knows, or has been taught. What's our Program? What's our Plan? Who's our Leader?

Valerie Jarrett is not running min'14 or 16. Neither is Barack Hussein Obama, Jr (or II).

Nice writeup on the Limbaugh Theorem.

Every time I listen to Rush (and others), it's the same mantra: "How bad Obama is, How bad his administration is, etc. ad nauseam.

When the unfortunate Mormon Milquetoast was running Rush (and the others) did not press him as to Program, or a Plan to implement it.They went along with his "campaign," i.e., "I am a nice guy and I am not Obama."

Any, I say ANY FReeper worthy of his salt could have handled the campaign better. Right Wing Talk Radio is preaching to a choir ... agreeing with it to sell it gold bars, trick mattresses and ID protection Software. I claim the negativity oozing forth over the conservative airwaves represses turnout

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.