PDA

View Full Version : Going Bulworth



Chris
05-20-2013, 05:58 PM
The NY Times reports:


Yet Mr. Obama also expresses exasperation. In private, he has talked longingly of “going Bulworth,” a reference to a little-remembered 1998 Warren Beatty movie about a senator who risked it all to say what he really thought.

@ http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/16/us/politics/new-controversies-may-undermine-obama.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0

But the full import of going Bulworth is as follows:


In confessing his dreams of “going Bulworth,” Obama confirmed that what he thinks and what he says out loud are two different things. He let slip the mask of a center-left moderate — a “pragmatist” who only cares about “what works.”...

...With nothing left to lose, Bulworth speaks his mind and becomes a sensation and unexpected contender for the presidency by giving far-left campaign speeches in rap form. In the movie’s centerpiece moment, Bulworth does a rap about health care and cries, “Socialism!” to a stunned crowd. (The lyrics run, “Yeah, yeah / You can call it single-payer or Canadian way / Only socialized medicine will ever save the day! Come on now, lemme hear that dirty word: Socialism!”)

This is President Obama’s id, the little man he wishes he could let out to party.

@ http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obama_admits_he_socialist_pW7TL907rIGq7SyJCYLBoN

Common
05-20-2013, 08:36 PM
I dont doubt that for one minute. He was forced into a slight left of center position, by events not by choice. If he had the support he would be much more progressive.

Chris
05-26-2013, 09:43 AM
If this is what he meant by “going Bulworth,” heaven help America.

Beset by growing world disorder, a sluggish economy and big scandals at home, President Obama tried to reset his presidency last week with a long speech on national security and terrorism.

At least that’s what he said the speech was about. In reality, it was — surprise — about him. Both sides of him.

It turns out the president doesn’t like war, but believes it is sometimes necessary. He doesn’t like it when our military causes civilian casualties, but says bad things happen in war.

He believes drones save lives with their precision, but he’s not sure he should have unilateral power to use them. He ponders “profound questions” about targeted killings of al Qaeda leaders, but concludes they are legal and moral.

Does the name Hamlet ring a bell?

@ O’s split personality (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/split_personality_aQwklgdFq8zppEhPp9CbJI)

It goes on...


...Liberals who view ambivalence as proof of superior morality and intellect probably swooned. Hairsplitting and hand-wringing makes them feel good about themselves, which, as George Will noted, seems to be the whole point of modern liberalism.

By that standard, the Obama presidency is a raging success. Relentlessly self-aggrandizing about its “unprecedented” approach to everything under the sun, it is, as a result, blind to the problems of everyday Americans. With the scandals, especially the abuse of power by the taxman, further eroding trust in government, even supporters are wondering whether they represent evidence of incompetence or corruption.

Neither option seems to worry Obama, with his speech full of semantic preening instead of persuasive policy ideas. In one passage, he insisted that America was not engaged in “a boundless ‘global war on terror,’ ” calling our efforts instead a “series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists” around the world....