Just How Delusional Is Barack Obama?

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.[1] _ (Wikipedia)

In the early days of this blog,  I wrote a tongue-in-cheek piece in which I suggested that there was a psychological explanation of why Barack Obama thought he was so smart when he clearly was anything but smart. I had come across an article on the Dunning-Kruger Effect and it seemed to fit Obama to a “T”. At the risk of over simplification, describes people who are in fact inept but see themselves as smarter than anyone else. They are incapable of seeing their own ineptness no matter how many facts or counter arguments are presented to them. So, I ask that you keep this simple definition of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in mind as we review a couple of articles that were recently published.

Paul Mirengoff , of Power Line, decided to weigh in on the now famous statement by our Fearless Leader that the private economy is doing fine.

… In my view, Obama was driven to his unfortunate remark by frustration with the private sector for “sitting on its money.” Since the president always thinks it’s about him, I imagine that he takes it personally that businesses are hoarding their money, rather than expanding rapidly, as he wishes he could direct them to do. Since he naturally takes an adversarial view of the private sector, he must feel it is out to get him.

[...]

What a sorry combination of self-pity and ignorance. And how ironic, coming from “no drama Obama,” our “smartest president.”

Okay, admittedly, this is supposition on the part of Mr. Mirengoff. But, what he suggest does seem to fit what we know about our President, doesn’t it? So, let’s move on to something that is not supposition.

When I read the title to this Fox News article by Edward Klein, What do historians really think of Obama?, I don’t know what I expected; but, it wasn’t this:

On the evening of Tuesday, June 30, 2009—just five months into his  administration—Barack Obama invited a small group of presidential historians to  dine with him in the Family Quarters of the White House. His chief of staff,  Rahm Emanuel, personally delivered the invitations with a word of caution: the  meeting was to remain private and off the record. As a result, the media missed  the chance to report on an important event, for the evening with the historians  provided a remarkable sneak preview of why the Obama presidency would shortly go  off the rails.

Unbelievable! Obama has been office but five months and he was already looking for his place in history. We know this because Klein knew one of the “presidential historians” that was present at this and two other such meetings with Obama. Klein names all the historians present; but, of course, does not identify the one he interviewed. here are some revealing excerpts from the interview:

Judging from Mr. Obama’s questions, one subject was uppermost in his mind:  how could he become a “transformational” president and bend the historic  trajectory of America’s domestic and foreign policy?

When one of the historians brought up the difficulties that Lyndon Johnson,  another wartime president, faced trying to wage a foreign military venture while  implementing an ambitious domestic agenda, Mr. Obama grew testy. He implied that  he was different, because he could prevail by the force of his personality. He  could solve the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, put millions  of people back to work, redistribute wealth, withdraw from Iraq, and reconcile  the United States to a less dominant role in the world.

[...]

Over the two-hour dinner, Mr. Obama and the historians discussed several past  presidents. It wasn’t clear from Mr. Obama’s responses which of those presidents  he identified with. At one point, he seemed to channel the charismatic John F.  Kennedy. At another moment, he extolled the virtues of the “transformative” Ronald Reagan. Then again, it was the saintly Lincoln…or the New Deal’s “Happy  Warrior,” Franklin Roosevelt….

[...]

In the wake of the shellacking the Democrats took in the midterm elections in  2010, Mr. Obama held a second dinner with the historians, which was devoted to  the question of how he could “reconnect with the public.”

A third dinner took place in July 2011, shortly after Mr. Obama and his team  botched the budget-deficit negotiations with Congress, and the United States  government lost its Triple-A credit rating for the first time in history. It  revolved around the theme “the challenge of reelection.”

Klein wanted to know ” how this liberal historian, who had once drunk the Obama Kool-Aid, matched the  president’s promise with his performance ” here is part of the historians response:

There’s no doubt that Obama has turned out to be a major enigma and  disappointment,”…

For a long time, I found it hard to understand why he couldn’t translate his  political savvy into effective governance.

“But I think I know the answer now,” he continued. “Since the beginning of  his administration, Obama hasn’t been able to capture the public’s imagination  and inspire people to follow him. Vision isn’t enough in a president. Great  presidents not only have to enunciate their vision; they must lead by example  and inspiration. Franklin Roosevelt spoke to the individual. He and Ronald  Reagan had the ability to make each American feel that the president cared  deeply and personally about them.

[...]

More than that, Obama might not have the place in history he so eagerly covets.  Instead of ranking with FDR and Reagan and other giants, it seems more likely  that he will be a case-study in presidential failure like Jimmy Carter.”

Yes, indeed! And when that verdict comes in, you can bet that Barack Obama will be standing in his study with his head turned up and his jaw jutted out and he will be thinking “Those fools are too stupid to see what a great President I was.”

Is it Extreme narcissism, delusions of grandeur, Dunning-Kruger effect, or is he just a man-child who took to heart his mommy’s assertions that her little boy was “soooo smart”. I’ll leave it to you to decide.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

About these ads

28 thoughts on “Just How Delusional Is Barack Obama?

  1. Jim, “Interesting, entertaining, and revealing”, is how I describe your Post.

    Soon after I started reading my mind began to push two words with perseverance, “Jimmy Carter”. Finally I encountered them in the final words of the final quote. I’m satisfied!

    1. Thank you for the kind words, John. As I first read that article, I was thinking both Carte and Nixon. I remember when the Watergate story broke thinking there was no way Nixon was envolved because his reelection was a no-brainer. But, I was wrong. The man was paranoid in the extreme.

  2. The answer is: Very delusional. Great. Now when he gets his hat handed to him in November we’ll have 40 years of holier than thou scolding to look forward to Just another way he’ll be just like Carter.

  3. He is a typical, self-absorbed liberal, worried more about image than actually rolling up his sleeves and getting the job done. Excellent and interesting post, Jim!

  4. Everything seems to be smoke and mirrors with this guy…no substance, just WIN THE ELECTION and RUN THROUGH FAR LEFT LIBERAL AGENDAS. That historian luncheon is amazing, huh? Well, let’s face it, we have to remember he got a Nobel Prize even before 5 months of presidency, right? Is he paying people off? Or is someone else?
    I’ve had the feeling Axelrod’s more important than Obama in the leftwing scheme of things and I’m thinking it more and more these days. If Axelrod were half Black, I think we’d have had ourselves a President Axelrod instead. But Obama’s half blackness seems to have filled the bill for the Wizard behind this throne. Obama’s a fool…Axelrod is NOT. And whoever’s backing them knows that.
    And now I’ll go back down my Yellow Brick ROad to geeeZ….:-)

    1. Interesting what you say about Axlerod. You are right, he is not dtupid. I read an article a couple of months back in the Chicago Sun Times tha Rham Enmanual is thinking of running for president in 2016.
      Who is behind the curtain besides Soros is the question we would all like to hear answered.

  5. Ha….my favorite psychoanalytic diagnosis, Dunning-Krueger!! Worse than Carter, this guy should go down in history as an economic Stalin. The damage he is sowing during this 4 years will last for decades, similar to Carter, but worse. (I’d add several other Presidents in that as well.) Historians ….hmmm. Wonder how that will play out. Guessing he will be hailed as the Messiah he thinks he is. Unfortunately. That’s what has happened with FDR.

    Interesting read, Jim! Thanks!

  6. Excellent post, Jim. Very thought-provoking and, I believe, very revealing about the kind of person Barack Obama really is. It explains a lot about how we have seen his first years in office progress. He is as stuck on himself as anyone I have ever seen, unable to believe that others really do not agree with his superior ideals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s