Follow by Email

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Maureen Dowd, "Brutality of Servility": Politics and Narcissism

Today, in an op-ed entitled "Brutality of Servility" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/opinion/dowd-brutality-of-servility.html), Maureen Dowd holds John Edward's stinky feet to the fire. Edwards is being prosecuted for receiving illegal campaign contributions, however, as observed by Dowd:

"The case is supposed to be about exceeding a $2,300 individual campaign contribution limit, quaint in light of Citizens United. But it’s really a set of intersecting love stories. Andrew, a caricature of calculated servility, loved his golden boy boss — 'more than he loved Cheri,' his wife, Rielle said.

Flaky Rielle loved the 'hot' meal ticket Johnny. Bunny Mellon crushed on John because he reminded her of the Kennedys. And John, of course, loved John, growing so narcissistic that he was blind to Andrew’s bile and his own grand delusions."

If there is a silver lining to this story, Edwards, according to Dowd, has learned to get his hair cut "for $12.95, not $400." Hmmm. If Edwards is not convicted, maybe Obama should hire him to head up the Office of Management and Budget.

But what about Obama? No, I'm not suggesting any extramarital hanky-panky (Michelle would whip his ass), but why does Dowd avoid reference to the purchase of Obama's Chicago mansion? On the same day Obama purchased his house, the wife of convicted felon Tony Rezko bought the adjacent empty lot from the same seller, who wanted to sell both properties together. However, as reported by ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4111483&page=1):

"While Rezko's wife paid the full asking price for the land, Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the house. The house sold for $1,650,000 and the price Rezko's wife paid for the land was $625,000.

Obama denies there was anything unusual about the price disparity. He says the price on the house was dropped because it had been on the market for some time but that the price for the adjacent land remained high because there was another offer."

Nothing unusual about the price disparity? Yeah, right, this was no sweetheart deal . . .

But let's ignore any possible allegation of a bribe or kickback. Instead, let's focus on whether Obama received a gift, which went unreported to the IRS. According to the IRS (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=108139,00.html#2), a gift is defined as "Any transfer to an individual, either directly or indirectly, where full consideration (measured in money or money's worth) is not received in return."

In 2005, when the Obama/Rezko real estate transaction was consummated, there was an annual exclusion of $11,000 to each donee. Did Obama receive a "gift" in excess of $11,000? Should a Form 709 have been filed by the Rezkos, listing Obama as a "donee"?

Yes, narcissists, whose lives are guided by an exaggerated sense of self-entitlement, are drawn to politics like moths to a flame.

10 comments:

  1. Jeff, did you notice Krugman's blog on Israel.
    I am fuming. No, I am more than fuming. This absolute bastard can't find time to learn anything about Jewish history, or history in general, but can find time for disgusting antisemitic comments.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, I read it. Arrogant and sickening.

    Jeffrey

    ReplyDelete
  3. The same Obama who was crying "poor mouth" yesterday,about being incapable of paying back his college loans until just eight years ago.
    Personally,I'd be ashamed to make such a confession,well after I had started a family,made other achievements.
    Abuse of the system in my opinion,and a declaration designed merely to garner sympathy or the young liberal vote,or to make Romney's success seem un-American..

    ReplyDelete
  4. This guy (Krugman) is evil. He can’t say that nobody told him about the abuse of the Jewish concept “Speak truth to power.“ I personally posted a couple of lengthy comments on his blog in response to his previous posturing.
    I explained slowly, slowly that “Speaking truth to power” means speaking truth to one’s own power, risking loosing … something dear - freedom, life, family members or in American reality a job with significant consequences, such as loosing access to health care, home etc. Now, you have a situation when extremely wealthy and extremely opportunistic individuals posture as heroes and silence anyone who actually has the courage not to march as powerful “international” forces of the Ajmedinejads and Grasses dictate. Evil, Orwellian people.
    I own someone an apology. Several years ago, I had an accidental conversation with a Princeton student (and a graduate of your alma mater) who spent a night between Princeton spring and Columbia summer in my apartment (her friend, a relative of mine was staying with me and asked to offer a home to a one night homeless). I, a real progressive, was defending Krugman. The girl couldn’t stand the guy. Guess who was right. A humbling experience.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jeff, if you have any masochistic inclinations, read comments in response to Krugman's blog. All the neo-Nazis, all so called leftists (I don't see the difference) are in force there. There is plenty of material for my analysis (yes, antisemitism is one of areas of my expertise), but I really, really, really don't have energy for this today. Thank you, Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, Paul, for your contribution. Although you would never know it from the limited number of comments, persons from 21 different countries have thus far read this blog and your comment today.

    Descend into the sewer of the increasingly new left mind-set of the readership of The New York Times? Sometimes you need to know when to stay away.

    Jeffrey

    ReplyDelete
  7. At day's end, 25 different countries . . .

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am still fuming. I've been thinking ... It doesn't look normal. It looks like we have a case of sicko ... at other people's expense.
    Dangerously narcissistic, stubborn and yes, absolutely idiotic. Something I really don't understand - when you are so lucky and practically have everything, why this frenetic pace, this constant need to please, placate your enemies (I throw you my people, just praise and applaud me), constant need to win, constant need to explain away his personal behavior. Some messianic ambitions? I am not a psychologist (obviously), but something is really, really wrong.
    I know it really doesn't matter whether it's a case of absolute evil, or a mental problem.
    It's ugly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. More, more it looks like Krugman is posturing as Jesus in his second coming. He certainly will have a competition (Obama?) and possible rejection by those who are waiting (evangelicals for example)
    Again, something is not normal. All this constant posturing (beginning with the title of his blog), pretensions, insane ambitions and ... absolute lack of scruples.

    ReplyDelete