Yesterday I saw an analysis which pointed out that Obama seems now to be building his post-presidency constituency, and ignoring everyone else. By contributing to racial disharmony, he is solidifying race as one of the Victimhood Categories that he will own as a gentry ex-president, surpassing the current blacks with his own glory.
Today, there is this: Obama has insulted and attacked the Prime Minister of Australia, our steadfast ally. He did so in service of another Victimhood Category, environmentalism.
Along with displacing current black leaders by assuming the title for himself as ex-president, he appears to be gathering the AGW true believers for his personal post-presidential constituency as well. He would displace Al Gore as chief climate Messiah. By co-opting these Leftist groups at the expense of everyone else, perhaps he can make himself into a Messiah King-Maker?
He already has 5 million Hispanic interlopers who will revere him forever. Could he also gather the LGBT/feministas? He could do a lot of post-presidential damage by inciting these Victimhood Groups.
Obama definitely doesn't care about anyone else at this point. All he has left of his presidential legacy is to protect ObamaCare and to maintain Messiahship as best he can, in the face of the crumbling blue model. But he could, conceivably, extend his legacy into his post-presidential years by becoming the driving force for consolidating his Leftist Victimhood Groups.
Here's an interesting thought: how does a newly elected president control a renegade ex-president? I don't remember anything in the Constitution which addresses that.
3 comments:
Stan
Is it correct to say that our laws are formalized morality or codified moral principles?Can an Atheist claim that these are his secular and natural moral principles?And lastly,are there realy any differences between our rules of law and transcendent moral principles?
Phoenix,
That statement is too broad and too weak. First, there is no moral compunction for driving on the right side of the road or stopping for red octagonal signage.
As far as Atheist morals go, we can say that they don't want to pay the penalty for violating laws, so they don't violate them - when the gendarmes are around.
True moral law is that which builds character by providing a discipline based in metaphysical principles. The purpose of Law and laws is to lubricate culture so that it flows smoothly.
The Atheist might claim that when laws change, then his morals change also. That means that he has no morals, and merely does what he is told when that is necessary to keep out of jail. And actually that is exactly how Atheist behavior works, because it is situational and subject to radical change without notice.
So, not being arrested is not a moral code, it is a pragmatic approach to living in a social structure.
Finally, the Atheist approach to laws is this: change them (gradually if necessary) to allow all behaviors to be legal - except for dissent. Dissent is a hate crime.
Yes,you have said exactly what I suspected but I just could not articulate it this well.As always,I appreciate your exposition
Post a Comment