The Postmodern philosophy is turning out everything it promised to be: hot air, empty rhetoric, yada yada, sticking labels ... that's it! It produces nothing, because it is nothing.
Only God can create ex nihilo, something out of nothing. Oh, it works okay in campaign mode, as long as people's minds can be manipulated, but contrary to the Postmodern premise that thought creates reality, it is concepts that lead to molecules and atoms!
Only God can create ex nihilo, something out of nothing. Oh, it works okay in campaign mode, as long as people's minds can be manipulated, but contrary to the Postmodern premise that thought creates reality, it is concepts that lead to molecules and atoms!
Consider Lawrence Eagleburger's recent laments in an interview with FoxNews' Greta van Susteren during which he rather concisely summed up the problem (btw, he must be another one of those racists!):
(...) This President has spent his time talking in public every chance he gets, yet I see nothing that comes out of that talk that leads to anything concrete (...) Eagleburger mentions as a classic example the debate over health care reform.
(...) The Democrats have control of the Congress and one would think they can pass any legislation they wanted within a short period of time. Instead it goes on forever. (...) We still have no idea what the Bill may be in the end and the reason we don't is because when it comes to the right place to make some decisions - make it clear that this is what the President wants - it disappears (...) Shut up until you've decided what it is you want (...) there's no direction ...In a recent post entitled "The O Team: Mental Babies With Razors" we explained it as follows:
Their skewed philosophy rests on the error that universals are but a figment of man's imagination. From this fallacy follows thatconcepts and essences - being universals - also do not exist. As a result, some arbitrary attribute may attach itself to - for instance man or a system - and mistakingly serve the purpose of an essence: what to think of systems that take decisions (no parenthesis there, and taken quite literally) or an angry mob.
- Caption: pomo concept of 'a running nose' -
If you think this mushrooming of nothing is harmless, think again. As the empty suit is vaporizing hot air, enemy clouds are gathering. Consider this article by Jennifer Rubin in Commentary Magazine, "No Master Plan at All":
"As the media and political observers pick over the remains of the failed Olympics-bid debacle, the debate has boiled down to this: (...) Suddenly, the entire country realizes that there is no “master plan” behind what Obama does. In fact, there may be no plan at all."
Rubin mentions the Obama's upending of the Clinton machine in the Democratic primary, the Reverend Wright flap, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid crafting the stimulus as examples during which the Obama mystique held sway: "There must be a reason ... he was laying the groundwork for something or other (...)"
And all that genuflecting on the world stage and those unilateral concessions—there must be a game plan, a secret deal, with Russia. He’s got it wired. The same with that secret Iranian nuclear plant. Sure he knew about it and didn’t say anything, but it really was better—and he knew this all along—to delay the revelation and let months and months pass as the Iranian mullahs worked diligently to cement their regime and advance their nuclear program. Can’t you just hear the gears whizzing in the White House? (...) Observers were convinced that the deal to give it to Chicago was set, because no president would go—and no staff would let him go—to Copenhagen to be humiliated, right? Uhh, no."
I'm no card carrying member of the O personality cult, but as late as last week our entry in the Articles dossier on nuclear proliferation read:
"The Iran conundrum: This doesn't make any sense - at all! How does one gell the fact that only last week Obama tossed the Czech Republic and Poland under the bus (not to mention the 2007 NIE, that political construct dating back to the Bush years, that denied Iran has nuclear capability altogether) with the following? Update: add this to the mix: Robert Spencer: "Iran test-firing missile that can reach Israel" ...
But now we know better. Narcissism instead of nukes may well be the real killer ... Charles Krauthammer in NRO The Corner: "Obama’s French Lesson":
"When France chides you for appeasement, you know you’re scraping bottom (...) On September 24, Obama ostentatiously presided over the Security Council. With 14 heads of state (or government) at the table, with an American president in the chair for the first time ever, with every news camera in the world trained on the meeting, it would garner unprecedented worldwide attention.
Unknown to the world, Obama had in his pocket explosive revelations about an illegal uranium-enrichment facility that the Iranians had been hiding near Qom. The French and the British were urging him to use this most dramatic of settings to stun the world with the revelation and to call for immediate action. Obama refused. (...) “The administration told the French,” reports the Wall Street Journal, “that it didn’t want to ‘spoil the image of success’ for Mr. Obama’s debut at the U.N.”
Image? Success? Sarkozy could hardly contain himself. At the council table, with Obama at the chair, he reminded Obama that “we live in a real world, not a virtual world.” He explained: “President Obama has even said, ‘I dream of a world without (nuclear weapons).’ Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite.”
Sarkozy’s unspoken words? “And yet, sacre bleu, he’s sitting on Qom!” (...) Bismarck is said to have said: “There is a providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children, and the United States of America.” Bismarck never saw Obama at the UN. Sarkozy did."
"The Iran conundrum: This doesn't make any sense - at all! How does one gell the fact that only last week Obama tossed the Czech Republic and Poland under the bus (not to mention the 2007 NIE, that political construct dating back to the Bush years, that denied Iran has nuclear capability altogether) with the following? Update: add this to the mix: Robert Spencer: "Iran test-firing missile that can reach Israel" ...
But now we know better. Narcissism instead of nukes may well be the real killer ... Charles Krauthammer in NRO The Corner: "Obama’s French Lesson":
"When France chides you for appeasement, you know you’re scraping bottom (...) On September 24, Obama ostentatiously presided over the Security Council. With 14 heads of state (or government) at the table, with an American president in the chair for the first time ever, with every news camera in the world trained on the meeting, it would garner unprecedented worldwide attention.Unknown to the world, Obama had in his pocket explosive revelations about an illegal uranium-enrichment facility that the Iranians had been hiding near Qom. The French and the British were urging him to use this most dramatic of settings to stun the world with the revelation and to call for immediate action. Obama refused. (...) “The administration told the French,” reports the Wall Street Journal, “that it didn’t want to ‘spoil the image of success’ for Mr. Obama’s debut at the U.N.”
Image? Success? Sarkozy could hardly contain himself. At the council table, with Obama at the chair, he reminded Obama that “we live in a real world, not a virtual world.” He explained: “President Obama has even said, ‘I dream of a world without (nuclear weapons).’ Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite.”
Sarkozy’s unspoken words? “And yet, sacre bleu, he’s sitting on Qom!” (...) Bismarck is said to have said: “There is a providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children, and the United States of America.” Bismarck never saw Obama at the UN. Sarkozy did."
On the eve of the 
Posts
