Up to now Barack Obama's youth has been a cipher. The future President,Nobel Prize Winner and world-changer was not a student council president club president, or much of a presence at all in high school, Occidental, or Columbia.
But now David Maraniss, in his new Barry bio, digs up compelling evidence of Barack as a young leader. We are with the 'Choom Gang', a group of highschool potheads:
The first Obama-inspired trend: “Total Absorption” or “TA”.
“TA was the opposite of Bill Clinton’s claim that as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford he smoked dope but never inhaled,” explains Maraniss. Here’s how it worked: If you exhaled prematurely when you were with the Choom Gang, “you were assessed a penalty and your turn was skipped the next time the joint came around.”
As one of Obama’s old high school buddies tells Maraniss: “Wasting good bud smoke was not tolerated.”
Another Obama innovation: “Roof Hits.”
“When they were chooming in a car all the windows had to be rolled up so no smoke blew out and went to waste; when the pot was gone, they tilted their heads back and sucked in the last bit of smoke from the ceiling.”
Maraniss also says Obama was known for his “Interceptions”: “When a joint was making the rounds, he often elbowed his way in, out of turn, shouted ‘Intercepted!,’ and took an extra hit.”
I think some of that has carried over to the White House. Of course, "TA" is now "Total Self-Absorption".
Good grief!
Posted by: Joan | May 25, 2012 at 09:43 PM
Awful isn't it, the way all this info was sealed away in a lead lined mine thousands of feet underground, guarded by a million armed to the teeth goons in 2007?
Posted by: Clarice | May 25, 2012 at 09:47 PM
How proud we should be of our president.
Posted by: Jane | May 25, 2012 at 09:48 PM
to Bill Maher, John Stewart and the rest of them, these stories about Obama will be all the more reason for them to worship him. They will think it is so cool, far be it from them to be fuddie-duddies.
Posted by: Chubby | May 25, 2012 at 09:51 PM
Great. My OT post on the other thread has now become au currant.
Couple the information in this report with Obama's ultra thin resume and his composites and ask yourself, what's wrong with this country.
Posted by: MarkO | May 25, 2012 at 10:04 PM
Disgusting. Obama was/is disgusting. What many of us realized from the beginning.
Posted by: centralcal | May 25, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Centralcal, 10:07. "What many of us realized from the beginning."
Yes, we did, and that's why I never, never, ever have been able to understand the people who voted for him who just 'thought' he'd be a good president. I'd read or hear people say that and I'd think "don't you all read?" He didn't have one important event or contribution or piece of statesmanship to put on his CV. Aargh, makes me want to scream.
Posted by: Joan | May 25, 2012 at 10:12 PM
Amen, Joan. Amen.
Posted by: centralcal | May 25, 2012 at 10:14 PM
The man was a cipher. Totally. And our press drooled over him and continue to drool over him.
Double "aargh!"
Posted by: Joan | May 25, 2012 at 10:14 PM
Obama is merely a reflection of our "press," journalist, journolists, MFM.
And, they, are merely a reflection of him.
We can vote out Obama. We will have be be much more committed and diligent about defeating and destroying his cohort - the MFM.
Posted by: centralcal | May 25, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Americans have low expectations. Obama is the guy to beat, and Mitt Romney may not be able to do it. Since when are republicans all that popular?
Posted by: Carol Herman | May 25, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Since when are republicans all that popular?
Never; hence the Tea Party.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 25, 2012 at 10:21 PM
Marijuana is something lots of Americans have smoked. It wasn't a big deal when Bill Clinton acknowledged "doing it at Oxford." He also screwed around a lot. Since when has that been a handicap?
As to the press, it's a good idea for Obama to be considered "beatable." Why? Because it makes for a more interesting race. Low turnout will be a problem for both sides. Make the race (which isn't) ... interesting ...
Plus, they haven't been able to deliver a race riot.
Posted by: Carol Herman | May 25, 2012 at 10:21 PM
The photos here are funny as hell.
A User's Guide To Smoking Pot With Barack Obama
http://www.buzzfeed.com/gavon/a-users-guide-to-smoking-pot-with-barack-obama
Posted by: xyz | May 25, 2012 at 10:38 PM
If you exhaled prematurely when you were with the Choom Gang, “you were assessed a penalty and your turn was skipped the next time the joint came around.”
Puff, puff, pass. Story of his life.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 25, 2012 at 10:38 PM
Choombama!
Posted by: Chubby | May 25, 2012 at 10:40 PM
Puff, puff, pass. Story of his life.
Lol. Insane Choom Posse
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 25, 2012 at 10:46 PM
((“you were assessed a penalty and your turn was skipped the next time the joint came around.”))
so he's always been big on penalties, eh? they are a linchpin of Choombamacare, to force it into single payer
Posted by: Chubby | May 25, 2012 at 10:49 PM
I hope Maraniss mentions who paid for BO's weed, because it certainly doesn't look like he was interested or capable of handling a job. His drug dealer was probably the only small business owner he's ever known.
Posted by: DebinNC | May 25, 2012 at 10:53 PM
Deb: Didn't he have some kind of job at a take out place or something?
The drug dealer was gay, what about the rest of the Choom Gang?
Posted by: Sara | May 25, 2012 at 11:02 PM
I have no idea where his allowance might have come form.
None.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 25, 2012 at 11:09 PM
My childhood best friend was in Barry's Punahou class for 3 years, through Junior year. Now I'm just as glad they only met in JV basketball tryouts (my friend was the last one cut). But like me, he's never smoked a regular cigarette, so he wasn't cool enough for O.
Posted by: Ralph L | May 25, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Now playing: The Comeback Kid
Coming to a polling place near you in November.
Posted by: Carol Herman | May 25, 2012 at 11:25 PM
In July 2008 Factcheck.org debunked an Obama ad's claim that "he worked his way through college and Harvard Law" When challenged, his campaign only came up with one summer job "in construction" (ha!) and one fictional one in a big Chicago law firm, so it's unlikely he found time between stupors in hs to work.
Posted by: DebinNC | May 25, 2012 at 11:26 PM
His drug dealer was probably the only small business owner he's ever known
Romney should use that line at his next campaign rally....but he won't
Posted by: sammy small | May 25, 2012 at 11:35 PM
Man, I am so baked.
Pass the chihuahua.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 25, 2012 at 11:35 PM
I don't think they were that hungry, Dave,
Posted by: narciso | May 25, 2012 at 11:42 PM
LOL, Dave.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 25, 2012 at 11:44 PM
The media was too busy demonizing Sarah Palin and trying to tell us about every aspect of Joe the Plumber's private life to ever bother finding out anything about Obama.
Posted by: Crazy Bald Guy | May 25, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Joe the Plumber was the preamble for the next 4 years. He has nothing for people who want to get ahead in life.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 25, 2012 at 11:48 PM
Just a light snack, narciso. Otherwise, he'd have asked for a lab.
Posted by: Ralph L | May 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM
Right, what was I thinking, it's ironic in light of how the subject of the last thread, came to public notice, he only had to allege
that he had sold pot to Quayle, and that made up for a whole host of criminal actions,
Posted by: narciso | May 25, 2012 at 11:52 PM
TA? How about Total Ass?
Posted by: Comanche Voter | May 26, 2012 at 01:20 AM
So Obama's leadership skills were developed in in high school in determining the rules of pot smoking with a bunch of slacker, dumb ass shitheads. This is where his genius was first discovered and stoned high school boys could marvel at his awesomeness and brilliance. He found that he could bully, laugh at, and dominate them. Sounds like the blue print of his presidency. Too bad the entire country is not cool, arrested development, misogynistic, lazy bums like the Democratic party and the press then everyone would admire him.
Posted by: Bob | May 26, 2012 at 06:43 AM
The Panic Begins http://weaselzippers.us/2012/05/25/report-obama-supporters-starting-to-panic-as-he-stumbles-badly-out-of-the-gate/
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2012 at 07:07 AM
The Choom Gang news has been around - Here it is at the Obamafile. (scroll to Punahou)
The MFM make me sick.
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2012 at 07:52 AM
“TA was the opposite of Bill Clinton’s claim that as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford he smoked dope but never inhaled,” explains Maraniss. Here’s how it worked: If you exhaled prematurely when you were with the Choom Gang, “you were assessed a penalty and your turn was skipped the next time the joint came around.”
Can we lay to rest the notion that extreme potheads don't do well later in life?
Good.
Smoking a substance that promotes calm isn't as scary as a gang of males assaulting a homosexual.Unless hatred,bigotry and intolerence are qualities you admire.
Posted by: dublindave | May 26, 2012 at 08:30 AM
The problem, is there is no evidence as with Gore and Clinton, that they ever exhaled.
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 08:38 AM
In the racial tensions category.
http://thegrio.com/2012/05/09/cornell-university-suspends-fraternity-for-racial-insults-about-trayvon-martin/
Cornell University has temporarily suspended an off-campus fraternity pending the outcome of an investigation into an incident involving racial epithets and beer bottles thrown at a group of black pedestrians. The Sigma Pi fraternity Tuesday was placed on “interim suspension” by the school’s Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs.
Posted by: Jim,MtnView,Ca,USA | May 26, 2012 at 08:43 AM
Apparently, janet, they didn't read 'Dreams' either,
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 08:48 AM
In the dept of the calculus may not work out as planned in predicting tax consumers will vote Dem this year in the Pres race, the angry teachers have started talking to each other and sharing my website. My guess is the all-powerful Gypsy Principals said things in last day of planning periods meetings on the way things would work next year. The teachers went out for drinks to complain. That's what yesterday's blog traffic patterns would indicate.
There are a lot of teachers in this country and they are very angry about being told what they can't do in the classroom that they know works. They are angry that the most mediocre quickly go into admin for more money and become their bosses. Telling them what they may not do. The good ones are taking it as the lousy teachers are ganging up on the good ones for profit.
Engrenage relies on the gears working together but being widely perceived as separate. When you can accurately describe the engrenage and how it works, it merely heightens the sense of betrayal for everyone interacting with those gears in education. Or climate change. Or attack business as "enriching the owners."
Faux attacks designed to mislead from the accurate portrayal of Stanley Kurtz in Radical in Chief. Now that will be a good sequel for August at this rate.
Posted by: rse | May 26, 2012 at 08:58 AM
Yes, rse, our own leprechaun, is gamely trying, but we've read their book, as Patton said of Rommel.
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 09:01 AM
Even the stoners are turned off by Obama (well at least Obamney) see LUN; first post
Posted by: peter | May 26, 2012 at 09:12 AM
I'll wager on tall odds not a single one of you identity conservatives care one iota that the "MSM" never even bothered to get to the bottom of whether GW Bush ever used cocaine. He simply refused to answer the question and that was THE END OF THE STORY.
Talk about double standards...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 09:15 AM
--Can we lay to rest the notion that extreme potheads don't do well later in life?--
Yes, if you define "do well" as enriching himself at the public trough and snookering boneheads.
No, if you define it as being competent at the job he was elected to do.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 26, 2012 at 09:16 AM
I think RSE and Narco should write free-verse poetry together and call it non-sequitor squared...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 09:19 AM
What's an identity conservative?
So you care is W used cocaine bubu? Is that a disqualifyer for office for you?
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2012 at 09:21 AM
CH,
The Politico piece was redolent of the stench of garbage which characterizes the vast majority of its work product. Obama has not "stumbled badly out of the gate", he's still in the gate and facing the wrong way. It appears that Mob Obama (there ain't no 'Team' involved) did not test the effect of Perry and Gingrich's attack upon Bain. The T1000 Group certainly did and the Languid Response Team effort might even have been purposeful in holding back in order to test the effectiveness of the attack. I thought they were blindsided but now I'm having doubts.
Allen and Vandehei also neglect to contemplate the possibility the negative response from Democrats who will be damaged by the President's "It's either Bain Capitalism or Obamunism" was coordinated in a manner designed to send the President a public message corresponding to the private disapproval for what will prove to be both a tactical and strategic failure.
I've been totally underwhelmed by the quality of political reporting this year and this article was no improvement. They're murdering trillions of innocent pixels to no purpose.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 26, 2012 at 09:21 AM
Just a thought about the Kenyan bio story..maybe Obama wasn't the one to write & check the bio. Maybe he didn't change it in 2007...maybe the real author did all of that. Were Dystel & Goderich in touch with Ayers? We know Dystel represented Rudd. Even Obama seems unfamiliar with "Dreams From My Father".
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2012 at 09:21 AM
I think this is the end of Obama's "Magic Negro" status
Posted by: Neo | May 26, 2012 at 09:22 AM
So you care IF
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2012 at 09:22 AM
These high school kids were just on Fox.
If you are looking for the future, it's right there.
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2012 at 09:30 AM
Jane: An identity conservative is a person who's primary interest in politics is derived from a desire to justify and rationalize their failure to succeed socially or economically or politically, or, indeed, to have failed at all three.
The identity conservative doesn't think liberals are misguided or wrong, she thinks they are "crazy" and "dangerous."
Identity conservatives refuse to distinguish between the many varieties of liberals and, instead, compulsively resort to the convenience of defining all liberal views and actions as of a piece with those of the least intelligent, least logically consistent and least plausible elements within liberalism.
I do the opposite. I draw a distinction between ordinary conservatives -- whose views are important, well considered and internally consistent -- and identity conservatives, whose views are only consistent with their desire to ameliorate a deeply entrenched sense of intellectual and moral inferiority...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 09:32 AM
"those of the least intelligent, least logically consistent and least plausible elements within liberalism"
So ... you're claiming that's not you?
Posted by: boris | May 26, 2012 at 09:38 AM
Whoda thunk ..
Posted by: boris | May 26, 2012 at 09:39 AM
Can we lay to rest the notion that extreme potheads don't do well later in life?
Saint Trayvon is doing an excellent job of feeding the worms.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2012 at 09:47 AM
Buubmeister, you must be bursting with pride that your analysis of Obama's reckless spending spree was given three Pinocchios by the Washington Post. Rebut as you please. Or not.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 09:49 AM
--I do the opposite. I draw a distinction between ordinary conservatives -- whose views are important, well considered and internally consistent --
Could you name a few examples?
--An identity conservative is a person who's primary interest in politics is derived from a desire to justify and rationalize their failure to succeed socially or economically or politically, or, indeed, to have failed at all three.--
Is there anyone here who you do not define as an identity conservative?
Posted by: Ignatz | May 26, 2012 at 09:50 AM
boris: if you'd like to characterize me as an identity liberal, or a particularly idiotic liberal or what-have-you, that would be a good start, but you'd be undermining the meme here that asserts liberalism, in general, at large and of-a-piece is a mental illness.
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 09:52 AM
Bubu I have to congratulate you. You called it. I would say projection looks good on you, except it doesn't. Sorry.
But back to the congratulations part, I digressed. You have managed to exceed your both your quota and your all time record for rotten ill considered tripe, and believe me that is saying a lot.
Maybe you should consider small ball instead? You know go back to telling how the police security cam proves Zimmerman was not injured. It wont be any less wrong, and a hell of a lot less embarassing for you.
Posted by: GMax | May 26, 2012 at 09:54 AM
LUN is not a non sequitir nor is much of anything I write. I suppose that's the real source of angst from the mother's basement brigade.
LUN says the Gates Foundation is giving a $550,000 grant to the NEA foundation. Now where are those old airline barf bags when you need one.
For those of you not aware, Gates is a primary funder of everything having to do with Common Core. At least when you the taxpayer isn't the source of the funding. Chaired by a woman who has written about the need to use education to achieve irreversible change. I do not think she is on board with the way the US political system was set up to work.
It looks to me like all these tech companies funding all these ed initiatives are really just trying to sell more of their products and make sure no one in future is likely to have the knowledge to dethrone their monopoly with dynamic innovation.
I am reading Guy Sorman at the moment and he doesn't think much of MS business practices. Imagine MS dictating and limiting what every American child can know or do.
Posted by: rse | May 26, 2012 at 09:56 AM
"He simply refused to answer the question and that was THE END OF THE STORY."
But the Watchdogs of the Fourth Estate were able to tell us his SAT scores and his grades at Yale and Harvard Business. No apparent interest in Obama's, and his innate modesty prevents him from telling us himself.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 09:56 AM
Well it is the 'Black Knight', Norwegian Blue,
and other reserve units in the Cave, Rick, from their perspective, they have incurred a minor flesh wound,
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 09:57 AM
In what era was the word "choom" popular? I didn't grow up in Hawaii or the west coast, but I've never heard this one until now. Was it a regional late 70s thing?
Posted by: Extraneus | May 26, 2012 at 09:58 AM
"liberalism, in general, at large and of-a-piece is a mental illness"
Well if constant projection, delusions of mind reading abilities, name calling and self parody are indications of mental illness you might have a point.
Posted by: boris | May 26, 2012 at 10:00 AM
Jane, thank you for the SOS Liberty link. It's amazing to see students with common sense and logical thinking escape the leftist education nightmare.
Posted by: pagar | May 26, 2012 at 10:01 AM
" An identity conservative is a person who's [sic] primary interest in politics is derived from a desire to justify and rationalize their failure to succeed socially or economically or politically, or, indeed, to have failed at all three."
Rats. I guess that means that the many of us here who have succeeded wildly at all three don't get to be Identity Conservatives.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 10:02 AM
I don't think "liberalism" is a mental illness. It's a lusting after other people's property. Perfectly sane, but immoral to the core.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 26, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Short BuBu:
I hate you. I hate you. Something I occasionally heard from my daughters when they were afflicted by adolescence.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | May 26, 2012 at 10:04 AM
I have to turn in my Identity Conservative badge? It was just getting fun at the club meetings too...
I fee like the commercial that used to a lithe nubile young thang say "Dont hate me cuz I'm beautiful."
Besides being the Earl of your mom's basement, exactly what have you to brag about bubu, seriously? I will be happy to see ya and raise ya on any success story you can conjure up...
Posted by: GMax | May 26, 2012 at 10:06 AM
Ig: I think Tom is a borderline case. Beyond that, I don't know of any commenter here I would not consider an identity conservative. All the regulars I'm aware of make it abundantly clear that their politics makes them feel personally aggrieved and that the aggrievement is their key motivating force in politics.
Such emotional fragility helps explain identity conservatives' tendency to feel more aggrieved than aggrieving, even as their crusade is to afflict liberals. There is a remarkable disparity, for example, between the degree of overt approval identity conservatives crave in order to feel liked and respected and the much greater degree of disapproval one can have toward them and still like and respect them.
As for internally consistent conservatives, I'd cite Edmund Burke and, in some, but not all, areas, William F. Buckley. I almost always disagree with George F. Will but he demonstrates a respect for logic and fact that earns full reciprocation.
David Brooks often delivers spot on criticisms of liberals and liberalism and, thereby, makes a worthy contribution to the mainstream media-level discussions of politics. He is clearly conservative, even if wingnuts can't stand him because he doesn't always toe the party line.
Beyond the individual conservatives I respect and whom I believe contribute positively to our politics and society, I think the idea of limited government is essential, as is the role of a political faction demanding such limits. Likewise, I think it's important to have a political faction that argues for the status quo. Change for it's own sake is naturally appealing and, especially in the entertainment-driven media culture we now live in, old values can easily be dismissed in the absence of a political force that demands their preservation.
Nevertheless, I remain a liberal because I think the fundamental liberal belief in progress is the MOST essential pillar of democratic preservation.
Conservatives have an important, salutary critique of government power, but they don't have important, salutary ideas about how to govern...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 10:07 AM
I guess she had to check with her minder, before actually getting around to the story,
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/26/2817692/witnesses-in-trayvon-martin-case.html
One is reminded she spouted Zelaya's ramblings
without practically any commentary.
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:09 AM
Can we lay to rest the notion that extreme potheads don't do well later in life?
"Saint Trayvon is doing an excellent job of feeding the worms."
Yeah,'Murder victims make $750,000 less over the course of their working life than non-murdered victims,so remember kids,stay in school and don't get murdered'.
But if smoking pot doesn't dictate your eventual economic or social status,one can only imagine what Trayvon might have become later in life had he not been murdered.
Posted by: dublindave | May 26, 2012 at 10:09 AM
Mamet nailed it when he got into the habits of the herd.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 26, 2012 at 10:10 AM
Minus 12 at Raz today.
Trails Romney by 1.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 10:11 AM
Was it a regional late 70s thing?
Yeah, Extraneus. This is odd, but the "reference" link at the Obamafile - "The "Choom Gang" is a reference to "chooming," the Hawaiian slang for smoking marijuana." - used to go to a blog post on choom. It goes to a bland Chicago Trib article now.
Weird.
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2012 at 10:11 AM
Another success story from the Levick Group/Seton Hall program;
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/26/2817692/witnesses-in-trayvon-martin-case.html
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:12 AM
Sorry, speaking of templates;
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/26/2818406/militants-post-appeal-of-kidnapped.html
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:14 AM
Here's an example of the precursor to what happened with Chief Lee, the city manager was quite nearly as clueless as Bonaparte;
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/26/2817404/former-miami-police-chief-miguel.html
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:19 AM
An identity conservative is a person who's [sic] primary interest in politics is derived from a desire to justify and rationalize their failure to succeed socially or economically or politically, or, indeed, to have failed at all three.
The OWSers are identity conservatives? Who knew?
Posted by: DrJ | May 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM
I guess the tallest odds of all are when no when will even take up your wager. Like on the question of why the "MSM" never made Bush answer the question about whether he used cocaine.
A real conservative would have a good answer and would readily confess that the "MSM" didn't pursue it because they bent over backwards to be fair to Bush and were professional enough to calmly, rationally assess that any such drug use wasn't affecting his ability to run the U.S. and so wasn't relevant enough to warrant full investigation. An identity conservative can't admit that, because their worldview requires a paranoid assessment that the news media is allied against them. To admit that their ideas are simply unpopular is anathema, because their identity is at stake, not merely their political take...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Are you using Firefox, Janet, because they haven't scrubbed that search string there.
We are reminded curiously, who floated this
rumor about W, a Kimberlin type, an attempted
bomber named James Hatfield, whose book was allegedly mulched by St, Martin's Press, but
in actuality was dumped in every public library, far and wide, It was expanded into
an even crazier tome, overseas, with contributions by Saramago, and others,
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM
DoT: There can be no question but that Obama's grades were excellent. He graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard.
Bush didn't earn a reputation for stupidity at Harvard, he earned it in elected office by saying stupid things. Obama makes plenty of gaffes, but he clearly is capable of forming clear sentences and expressing thought extemporaneously. Bush was not and while that is not the ONLY measure of intelligence, it's an important one for a president. Moreover, Bush achieved none of the other conventional milestones of intellectual achievement, eg publishing a critically acclaimed and best-selling book or graduating with honors.
Again, a real conservative would simply make the obvious and plainly valid point that above-average intelligence is not the key to being an effective president and that academic achievement is only a crude measure, especially for the special variety of intelligence needed to preside over a major democracy. An identity conservative can't do that, though, because they take criticisms of Bush personally and therefore compulsively defend him on all grounds, no matter how flimsy...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 10:31 AM
" Like on the question of why the "MSM" never made Bush answer the question about whether he used cocaine."
1. What is the wager, and how would one take it up?
2. How were the media to make him answer that question, any more than the can make Obama disclose his transcripts.
3. If the media didn't pursue the cocaine issue because they knew it wouldn't affect his performance, why was his DUI front-page news for the final three days of the campaign.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM
"in" groups almost always have secret languages, Way back in the ancient times we were obscurely legendary on the south coast of Orange County for our perceived exploits, mainly driving fast, drinking a lot, smoking reefer, surfing and getting into minor scrapes.
Some of us are doctors and lawyers now or businessmen. Several went into the military and served honorably. Most of us were never really damaged by the experience. A couple faded away into alcoholism or drug use, but that's another conversation.
It's not Obama's boyhood stupidities that are at issue, but rather the media whitewash. The teenage years are the ones where we make our mistakes, after all.
But the image of our President is one of an immature, irresponsible lightweight. If anyone know the Islands, there is a different standard of education and lifestyle.Punahou and Bishop are the schools for a not very motivated elite.
It is the complete whitewash of Obama's history that offends so deeply. The man simply has not been to any standard with meaning and has voted "present" through his entire life.
He is of no consequence except in his most recent position, where he has managed to do considerable damage to our finances, to our national security, and to our Constitution.
Posted by: matt | May 26, 2012 at 10:33 AM
DrJ: indeed there would be a large faction of identity liberals within OWS who come by their politics in more or less the same way identity conservatives do and who show the same pattern of emotional involvement...
Posted by: bunkerbuster | May 26, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Yes, I was remembering it right,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hatfield
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:34 AM
I do the opposite.
Really?
SO who here is an identity conservative?
Are you an identity liberal? If not, what are you successful at?
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2012 at 10:34 AM
Is this a time warp? What the carp does Bush have to do with this thread? I thought The choice this year is between the choomer (who by his own admission used "a little blow") and a guy who doesn't smoke or drink alcohol or caffeine.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | May 26, 2012 at 10:35 AM
"...who show the same pattern of emotional involvement..."
You mean they're just like all thos Identity Conservatives who crap on cop cars, commit rape, smoke dope in public, trash storefronts and take over port terminals?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 10:42 AM
Conservatives have an important, salutary critique of government power, but they don't have important, salutary ideas about how to govern...
Yeah like Obama or Carter. I can certainly agree that no republican has ever governed like them. Perhaps you are looking to be ruled rather than governed bubu. It sure sounds like it.
I guess the tallest odds of all are when no when will even take up your wager. Like on the question of why the "MSM" never made Bush answer the question about whether he used cocaine.
And what is your answer to my question to you, on whether the use of cocaine is a disqualifyer for office? Is the failure to disclose a disqualifyer?
Posted by: Jane | May 26, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Or public officials who don't pay their tax,
despite being the most assiduous supporters of raising taxes for others,
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:44 AM
--Beyond that, I don't know of any commenter here I would not consider an identity conservative. All the regulars I'm aware of make it abundantly clear that their politics makes them feel personally aggrieved and that the aggrievement is their key motivating force in politics.--
Doesn't every person at some level feel "aggrieved" by the opposition's politics? Conservatives, libertarians and leftists all believe their opponent's politics are harmful to the country and since we are all citizens of the country they are bound to have some harmful effects on us and our families as well, right? And I imagine just abut everyone in all three groups feels a sense of personal aggrievement of policies they disagree with while simultaneously being concerned, often more so, about the effect those policies are having on others, or the country as a whole. I detest welfare not because of any effect it has on me but because of the dependence and distortions it causes in the lives of those induced to accept it.
Your contention however that some sense of personal aggrievement is the "key" motivating force in the politics of anyone here is without foundation. The vast majority of discussions here are of the effect policies will have on the country as a whole or different large blocs within it.
Your entire premise is flawed and is a reflection not in what you observe in others but is what you attribute to them in order to dismiss or avoid their arguments.
--Such emotional fragility helps explain identity conservatives' tendency to feel more aggrieved than aggrieving, even as their crusade is to afflict liberals. There is a remarkable disparity, for example, between the degree of overt approval identity conservatives crave in order to feel liked and respected and the much greater degree of disapproval one can have toward them and still like and respect them.--
This is remarkably vacuous psychobabble by any standard. What evidence is there anyone here is more or less emotionally fragile than those whom you don't label "identity" conservatives?
And what bizarre belief spawns the idea that conservatives crusade to afflict liberals? Doesn't that weird belief reveal precisely the sense of aggrievment you attribute to others?
The last sentence, to the extent it is coherent, is so presumptuous and self serving as to be a fitting punchline to a joke but pretty useless otherwise.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 26, 2012 at 10:45 AM
Shorter bubu,
Identity conservative is what ever he wants it to be and is whoever he wants or needs it to be to feel good about himself.
Posted by: Abadman | May 26, 2012 at 10:46 AM
It is irrelevant, except in the sense, that the left will entertain any charge against a center right figure, no matter how ludicrous
and from what source. and will endeavor to obscure any wrongdoing by a center to far left one.
Posted by: narciso | May 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Are you using Firefox, Janet, because they haven't scrubbed that search string there.
Yes, narciso....but when I hit the "reference" link it goes to a useless Chicago Trib article. It used to go to a blog that had the yearbook picture & an explanation of choom.
Posted by: Janet | May 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM
"There can be no question but that Obama's grades were excellent. He graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard."
Actually, that was Harvard Law School. We know nothing of his performance as an undergraduate. We do not know what courses he took at HLS, nor the criteria for Magna Cum Laude honors during his era.. We do know that there were affirmative-action slots on the Law Review, and that the presidency of the Review was an elective office. During his time at Harvard and at Chicago he published not a single word of legal scholarship. His Chicago colleagues thought him lazy and intellectually overmatched.
I seriously doubt that Bush--or anyone else--would have ever thought to write a book about himself at age thirty, and one wonders why Obama did. His book ia almost certainly ghost-written, and stands out as the only writing attributed to him that is other than mediocre.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 26, 2012 at 10:53 AM
Why didn't the press as about the coke? I don't share your mind reading powers, but maybe they were too busy ginning up fake Nat. Guard memos.
Posted by: Abadman | May 26, 2012 at 10:53 AM
Are you an identity liberal? If not, what are you successful at?
I am with Jane, slay us with your razzle dazzle here bubu. Or we are free to assume the "tallest odds" are that you are pathetic projecting loser...
Posted by: GMax | May 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM
Btw, for all the pot heads here that like to feel good about themselves: You've been supporting Kimberlin and his ilk as much as Lurch and Lovey have. So please continue to toke up and contribute to the vermin. And hector the rest of us.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 26, 2012 at 10:56 AM