**A Post from Patricia**

The Washington Examiner interviews countless people in a four month investigation into the “Real Obama.” This is a ten chapter series that exposes who we elected and the failure of media to properly vet a candidate because his skin tone.

From ‘The Obama You Don’t Know’:

Few if any of his predecessors took the oath of office with higher public hopes for his success than President Obama on Jan. 20, 2009.

Millions of Americans hailed his election as an end to partisanship, a renewal of the spirit of compromise and a reinvigoration of the nation’s highest ideals at home and abroad.

Above all, as America’s first black chief executive, Obama symbolized the healing of long-festering wounds that were the terrible national legacy of slavery, the Reconstruction Era and Jim Crow. We would be, finally, one nation.

But after nearly four years in office, Obama has become a sharply polarizing figure.

His admirers believe he deserves a special place alongside Wilson, the Roosevelts and LBJ as one of the architects of benevolent government.

His critics believe he is trying to remake America in the image of Europe’s social democracies, replacing America’s ethos of independence and individual enterprise with a welfare state inflamed by class divisions.

In an effort to get a clearer picture of Obama — his shaping influences, his core beliefs, his political ambitions and his accomplishments — The Washington Examiner conducted a four-month inquiry, interviewing dozens of his supporters and detractors in Chicago and elsewhere, and studying countless court transcripts, government reports and other official documents.

Over the years and in two autobiographies, Obama has presented himself to the world as many things, including radical community organizer, idealistic civil rights lawyer, dynamic reformer in the Illinois and U.S. senates, and, finally, the cool presidential voice of postpartisan hope and change.

With his air of reasonableness and moderation, he has projected a remarkably likable persona. Even in the midst of a historically dirty campaign for re-election, his likability numbers remain impressive, as seen in a recent AP-GFK Poll that found 53 percent of adults have a favorable view of him.

But beyond the spin and the polls, a starkly different picture emerges. It is a portrait of a man quite unlike his image, not a visionary reformer but rather a classic Chicago machine pol who thrives on rewarding himself and his friends with the spoils of public office, and who uses his position to punish his enemies.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
3 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. Shifra says:

    There is a projective psychological test called the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), in which the person is given a series of cards with various scenes, and is asked to tell stories about the various scenes. The rationale behind the TAT (I am not a big fan of this test) is that people would reveal their unconscious motivations as well as past experiences within their stories. The last card of the series is a blank one, and the person is urged to “make up a story.” Obama reminds me of the blank card.

  2. Sailing_J says:

    Four years later and I’m still waiting for somebody to show me this wonderful community that the almighty supposedly organized. Community organizer was one of his qualifications to be president, and a microcosm of what he was going to transform the rest of the country into.

    It is somewhere in Chicago right?

  3. IslandLibertarian says:

    “Look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.” President Obama

    8. Psychology
    a. The attribution of one’s own attitudes, feelings, or suppositions to others
    b. The attribution of one’s own attitudes, feelings, or desires to someone or something as a naive or unconscious defense against anxiety or guilt.

You must be logged in to post a comment.