Obama is full of himself? Is that a bad thing?
April 22, 2010 § Leave a comment
From a RedState blogger who thinks it is time to put the slap down on Obama:
Forgive me if I’m a little angry. Also, forgive me if i don’t insert citations and links. I really don’t like them. Besides, you know what I’m talking about here. It’s the sense of the man I’m speaking to and not the “debatability” of his policies. On policy, even he doesn’t believe what he says anyway. But about the power of his station, he means every word. I think it’s time he were set straight as to just what the limits of that power is.
Since the passage of the Health Care bill, President Obama’s sense of himself has risen and risen. He struts and poses. He’s just one quart short of speaking of himself in the third person. Just a week or so ago, after Gov Bob McDonnell made that gaffe about Confederate History Month, Obama said he found it “unacceptable”. I nearly leaped out of my chair, i was so angry. How dare he? I made a little noise here, but was surprised to see that no one else did. Here or anywhere else. I don’t care, it simply is not within the authority of the President of the United States to find the conduct of any elected official of any sovereign state in America “unacceptable”. He assumed a pay grade, by God, he ain’t got.
First this is a silly, petty post and a wasted effort. Second, it brought to mind BG&E and Nietzsche’s take on the a man who behaves in this way:
—What is noble? What does the word “noble” still mean to us today? What betrays, what allows one to recognize the noble human being, under this heavy, overcast sky of the beginning rule of the plebs that makes everything opaque and leaden?
It is not actions that prove him—actions are always open to many interpretations, always unfathomable—nor is it “works.” Among artists and scholars today one finds enough of those who betray by their works how they are impelled by a profound desire for what is noble; but just this need for what is noble is fundamentally different from the needs of the noble soul itself and actually the eloquent and dangerous mark of its lack. It is not the works, it is the faith that is decisive here, that determines the order of rank—to take up again an ancient religious formula in a new and more profound sense: some fundamental certainty that a noble soul has about itself, something that cannot be sought, nor found, nor perhaps lost.
The noble soul has reverence for itself. (emphasis is Nietzsche’s)