Obama, Hillary and Kim Kardashian

hillary87Occasionally someone pranks an unwitting MSNBC panelist or a bunch of teenagers by asking them to name a single Hillary accomplishment. Even though Hillary has piled up more awards than Charles de Gaulle, nothing comes to mind. An editorial in the Chicago Tribune has the writer asking a group of Chicago leaders the same question about Obama’s foreign policy.

Silence follows.

Obama and Hillary don’t just suffer from a shortage of accomplishments. They’re also burdened with a surplus of failures. Benghazi worries so many Hillary supporters because there is nothing to balance it against. There is no, “But look at all the good she did.” Hillary didn’t do any good. She didn’t do much of anything except tour countries and pose for photos.

As a Secretary of State she made a perfectly adequate First Lady.

Obama talks the teleprompter talk, but when you look at the results they’re universally awful. Whether it’s the things that he only pretends to care about, like the VA, or the things he does care about, like Obamacare, after the splashy ribbon cutting ceremony comes the disastrous mess.

Like every other summer blockbuster, it’s great marketing for a terrible product. And just like the summer blockbuster, Obama’s policies are treated as disposables to be forgotten about. Scandal management consists of Obama making a serious face and promising to take this serious problem very seriously before heading out for a round of serious golfing.

Don’t cry for Hillary and don’t write off Obama. Achievement of the old kind is overrated. It’s not about how high your GPA is but how many politically correct extracurriculars you have. In politics, just like in college, diversity and style increasingly count for more than achievement.

Post-American politics are also post-achievement politics. The morality of progressivism is more important than the substance of progress.

From the Sociology major who keeps thinking that she should volunteer at a soup kitchen to the most powerful man in the country who keeps saying that he wishes he could do something about all these problems, the left thinks that wanting to do something is what makes you a good person. It doesn’t matter if what you’re doing does any good. It doesn’t matter if you succeed.

The politics of the left are narcissistic. Its members are less concerned with changing the world than with being good people by wanting to change the world. That’s what Obama received his premature Nobel Peace Prize for, not for what he did, but for what he talked about doing.

It’s not the things that Obama has done that the left loves him for. It’s his empty talk, his worthless words and his teleprompter visions.

There are two Obamas. One is the real politician. The other is the imaginary Obama of 2007; a figment of David Axelrod’s imagination layered over with bizarre art and visions that transformed him into a superhuman being of light before he ever set foot in the Oval Office.

This Obama can never fail because he doesn’t really exist. It’s this Obama who makes the public appearances on the front pages while the other Obama’s policies are discussed somewhere in the meatier parts of the paper. The imaginary Obama shows up on American Idol while the other Obama sends vets to cemeteries. And to millions of Americans, the imaginary Obama is more real than his destructive real life counterpart. The idea of Obama is more real than his policies.

The imaginary Obama has his counterpart in a reimagined Hillary.

Hillary’s lack of achievement as Secretary of State gives her a purity that she lacked when she went from the Senate to the campaign trail. It’s easier for the left to project its visions onto a blank space that spent a few years touring the world than on Senator Clinton who had actual political positions. Like Obama, she is free to be anything. She too can lower the oceans or raise them, fix all the things that her predecessor broke and usher in a new age of world peace.

If Hillary Clinton had successfully brought peace to the Middle East or negotiated an important territorial accord in Asia, those things would actually disqualify her. They would be real world achievements that could be critiqued and taken apart. They would highlight her flaws as a real diplomat and a real human being. But having done nothing, even while four Americans were dying, she is flawless. A perfect void of nothingness that the left can project everything on.

That purity of blankness is why Obama approaches every scandal as if he had just heard about it on the evening news. It’s as if every day in office is his first day. It’s important that he have no specific track record, just the vague one of fighting for the right things like gay rights, illegal aliens and 3D printer hubs. Not to mention gay illegal aliens running 3D printer hubs.

Forget the last three scandals. Obama is still Miss America. He wants to feed all the hungry children and bring world peace. It’s all intentions and no results. If he’s in a red state, he might mention killing Bin Laden, but mostly it’s all visionary talk about investment, opportunity and reaching out. He’s still running for office with no track record on a platform of hope and change.

Obama and Hillary run on a personal history made out of lies while refusing to run on their track records. They want everyone to know their fictionalized life story while refusing to discuss the things they actually did while in office. They become icons who represent all minorities or all women, but who cannot be held accountable for anything that they did as individuals.

Don’t ask Obama or Hillary about Benghazi. Dude, don’t you know that was two years ago? Ask them what they think about Kim Kardashian or Donald Sterling or racial injustice in America. Ask them what their favorite movie or song is. Treat them like celebrities, not politicians. Don’t ever ask them what they achieved. It’s like asking Kim Kardashian what she achieved.

She’s famous and they’re famous. And they’re all famous for being famous. Hillary Clinton will run for the White House on a platform of being famously famous. As the Kim Kardashian of national politics, she’s the inevitable nominee. Her accomplishments are self-referential. Hillary’s accomplishment is being Hillary. She deserves to be the nominee because she is Hillary.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Judahlevi

    In the simpleton world of the politically correct leftists, Obama was selected because of his skin color (to make history) and Hillary will be chosen for her gender (to make history).

    It is not about competence, it is about having “The First…Whatever”

    Naturally, you must share their ideology, but once past that small hurdle it is all about making PC history. Competence? What difference does it make?

    • Jeff Ludwig

      Well said. Thanks.

    • nimbii

      This would never have happened if the MSM did their jobs. Obama would be a hack Chicago Committeeman and Hillary would be president of a small liberal arts women’s college on Long Island.

      • truebearing

        “If” doesn’t count in the world of leftistist lies. It is assumed that the Left willl lie.

        • GOPvsUSA

          Speaking of lies …

          You said “Everything I wrote is false”.

          Then why didn’t you refute “everything” I said, you gutless, lying punk?

          You only have 16 facts in that post to refute, right?

          Again … better get busy, inbred trailer-dweller!

          I’ll now count off how many posts it takes for you to PROVE that “everything I said is false”.

          I’m gonna keep throwing you a truebeating until you either prove all of them are lies or you admit that you lied when you posted that.

          • Daniel Greenfield
          • mel

            Too funny. What a marvelous response. GOPvsUA is a whack job.

          • GOPvsUSA

            You posted again after what I did to you last time?

            OK, I’ll just post the same thing back to you that you predictably never responded to.

            You want “details” on Mitch McConnell do you?

            OK, I’ll do your homework for you on this one, kid.

            McConnell has been the chief architect behind the obstruction of the majority by a minority in the Senate – to the tune of a RECORD number of filibusters of the opposing party.

            Harry Reid has been the majority speaker about as long as Lyndon Johnson. Lyndon Johnson was filibustered once.

            Harry Reid? He’s been filibustered over FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY times.

            Want more?

            The nominations filibustered under EVERY other President in over 230 years = 86.

            The number of nominations filibustered since Obama took office … as of 1/22/13? At least 82.


            Treasonous McTurtleface even filibustered his own bill to raise the debt celing because Obama said he would sign it.

            With it being this easy to tear you down when you mouth off over here where you don’t belong, you might want to just stay over on the Fox “news” boards, conservative troll. Because I could easily pick up where I left off and just keep embarrassing you with inconvenient facts that your conservative media goes out of their way NOT to tell you.

            You might want to stick to dishes and laundry because geopolitics clearly isn’t your thing.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            “I could easily pick up where I left off and just keep embarrassing you with inconvenient facts”


          • Lawrence Lawrence

            Real Address ?

          • GOPvsUSA

            If you think I wont say this stuff to your face I’ll give you the place where I’ll be waiting.

            Are you getting the picture here?

            Now please stop posting pictures of yourself when you’re done playing GI Josephine.

          • BagLady

            Ooh, go on GOP, give us the name of the place you’ll be waitin’. Loads of us will turn up! Give me a bit of notice and I’ll come on an horse.

          • GOPvsUSA

            Something tells me you’ll BE the horse. But don’t worry, I’ll bring some grass in case you get hungry.

            The SE corner of 147th and Central Avenue in Oak Forest, IL. And it’s right out in the open too.

            You now have the place.

            Hint: Don’t EVER call my bluff. I’m always exactly where I say I’ll be exactly when I say I’ll be there.

            Just let me know if you want the date and time too.

            And be sure to bring a list of whatever it is you don’t think I’ll say … in person … an inch from your horseface.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Congratulations Internet Hero, you just threatened to throw down with a British lady.

            I know we’re all awed by you now.

            You should do something to celebrate. Maybe eat a pound of cookie dough. Then have a fantasy where you meet Obama and he decides to let you buy him a smoothie.

          • truebearing

            Wow! You’re one bad dude! What will you do if I continue to identify you as a deranged liar? Post more proof?

            In the alternate world you live in (your mind), where you are “The Great and Powerful Oz,” I have no doubt you are a giant among men. A Hercules, a Superman, but here at FPM, rationality is your kryptonite. You’re nothing but another ranting, delusional, lying, leftist fool.

            I hate to break it to you, Scarecrow, but you really don’t have a brain.

      • BagLady

        Doesn’t make much difference in the long run. Either side’s mouth-piece will deliver what is required of them. It’s just a matter of who has the charisma and staying power.

        Judging by the greasy, disheveled state of her hair at the end of her Secretary of Statehood, not to mention her gauntness, I’d say she’s not up to it. All those “er” in her speeches there to give the impression it’s off-the-cuff and therefore straight from the heart.

        • MorganValerioyse321

          until I saw the paycheck which said $8694 , I didn’t
          believe that my sister was like trully erning money part time on there
          computar. . there friends cousin had bean doing this for only thirteen months
          and resantly repayed the dept on their home and bought themselves a Infiniti .
          check out the post right here F­i­s­c­a­l­p­o­s­t­.­C­O­M­

    • BagLady

      Maybe you’re right but the GOPs didn’t offer much as an alternative.

  • truebearing

    The Left has a number of well known propensities. They are chronic liars, and even admit being followers of an evil political guru, Saul Alinsky, that openly advised them to lie. They see nothing wrong with lying.
    They are idealistic to the point of delusion. They have to be to still adhere to a political religion from the 1800s that has been a disaster every time it has been imposed on a population. They feel no compunctions against repeating those disasters.
    They are highly prone to project onto the Right what they are thinking or scheming. Hillary’s “vast right wing conspiracy” being a perfect example. Concurrent with her sweeping, paranoid allegation about the Right was a budding scheme between her, John Podesta, and George Soros to create a vast left wing conspiracy. They aren’t remotely ashamed of their rank hypocrisy.
    These three essential elements, lies, delusional idealism, and projection, are what political candidates on the Left are made of. The less substance, the better.The less history, the better. They are creating candidates that are vacuums, and the voting public appears to abhor a vacuum. They imbue these characters with what they want to believe about them. The voter is going to like the candidate all the more because the candidate is a creation of the voter. in tough times, the more anxiety a voter has, the more susceptible to this game a voter becomes. The meritless arrogance of an Obama or Hillary can easily be confused with capability or confidence.

    The similarities between the way the Left’s candidates are created have a striking similarity to the way con men create narratives and manipulate people by telling them what they want to hear. Most com men are sociopaths. So are most leftists. Chronic lying and manipulation are dead giveaways. Now we’ll see if American voters will make history by electing con artists three times in a row.

    Great article, Daniel. Very thought provoking and right on the money.

    • Jeff Ludwig

      You use the word “delusional” twice. Very good word choice in my opinion.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      people are most compelled by lies when they believe that they are their own invention

      • Michael Garfinkel

        This is an interesting observation that requires some elaboration.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          it’s easier to believe a lie if you think that it comes from inside you, rather than from outside

  • Douglas J. Bender

    What if Kim Kardashian won the Miss America pageant? Mmmmmmmmm…mmmmmmmmm…mmmmmmmmm…Barack Hussein Obama.

    • Jeff Ludwig

      She be hot. Very mod. Who wouldn’t admire a woman like her? Real class.

  • Webb Cook

    But but but, Hillary has powerful thick cankles to strut around on.

  • CapitalistPig

    I’ve seen it opined that Hillary “accomplishments” are like Bigfoot sightings…..rumors, legends, the occasional eye witness with past fuzzy memories of the details, some short, grainy, unstable, but largely inconclusive video snippets–& in the end —–nothing of substance.

  • darnellecheri

    I like your process of thought in this article. “As a Secretary of State she made a perfectly adequate First Lady.” Excellent caption! “Obama is still Miss America. He wants to feed all the hungry children and bring world peace. It’s all intentions and no results.” We all see it, believe it, and bemoan it.

    Let’s face it, some of the most distinguished Secretaries of State (Adams, Seward, Fish, Marshall & Kissinger) made extraordinary accomplishments because they believed in the extraordinary role and power of the United States and worked towards that goal. Call it “Manifest Destiny,” (yikes, that is a naughty word today), but, building and keeping America as a super power was, I believe, the basis of their courage and tenacity.

    Sure, national interests are paramount (what nation doesn’t work for their own interests?), but in the above mentioned Secretaries, I think they also believed that the power of America was a beneficial thing for the progress of democracy in the world.

    • Jeff Ludwig

      Power?! You must be one of those out of control nationalists. Why aren’t you promoting a kinder, gentler world instead? You will never, NEVER (mark my words) be booked as a guest on Meet The Press. However, I might invite you to a barbecue if you agree to bring cole slaw. Best regards, Jeff

      • darnellecheri

        I like cole slaw. Less cream and more vinegar.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      they understood that you cannot build on a base if you reject the base

      you can’t use American power for good if you reject America

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    It’s not that voters haven’t been shallow in the past, but as you note they’re reached rock bottom. In the past, even if the voters stayed on the surface, the news reporters felt obligated to discuss weighty issues. Editorials debated the principles and track record of candidates. They fulfilled their proper role in a democracy.

    I can’t imagine any of the legendary media newsman of the 50s patronizing President Kennedy by repeatedly saying little more than “Isn’t it great we elected a Catholic?”

    • Jeff Ludwig

      Yo. Kemnedy, he be da man.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      the culture has reached rock bottom and people are dragged down with it

      • lyndaaquarius

        so many people I talk to in a Leftist arena feel that “dragged down” feeling and shy away from talking politics. Americans aren’t happy in Obama’s America. How could we be with a leader who turned his back on Americans fighting for their lives in Benghazi ? All to protect his election. SO repulsive.

  • Jeff Ludwig

    Mr. Greenfield’s recent articles use irony, sarcasm, and paradox to reveal the wickedness and concomitant vacuity of leading figures of our time. They are failing us in new ways, not merely by mistakes (although they are making plenty of mistakes). He has recently been effective, as in this article, at capturing how the leaders of the left are not only making mistakes, but sapping the U.S. of its sense of purpose, its sense of the meaningfulness of experience (our own experience and that of our fellow citizens), and its sense of hope. You see dear fellow readers, it’s time for a rapier-like, informed mind to cut through the fetters of our (mis)understandings. Mr. Greenfield has such a mind. Reading him, I begin to understand more and more why during the last few years I have found the 11:00 pm news not only boring, but sometimes nauseating. Or when I see Hilary being interviewed by Barbara Walters, I see her educated, confident speech as a disguise covering bottomless vacuity and selfish soulessness.

    • DogmaelJones1

      I very much suspect that Daniel’s irony, sarcasm and paradox is in part influenced by detective novelist Raymond Chandler; I’m betting he’s a fan of that writer. Take this line from “Farewell, My Lovely”:– “Even on Central Avenue, not the quietest dressed street in the world, he looked about as inconspicuous as a tarantula on a slice of angel food.”

      • Jeff Ludwig

        Interesting reference. Thanks.

      • http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Media-Martial-Conspiracy-ebook/dp/B009063F5W/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1345573494&sr=1-2 jeffreyafriedberg

        I seize your point. However, as an ex private eye, fan of Chandler, and author—I can say that DG is totally original.

        DG is probably the best at this in the world. I don’t know of any better.

    • Habbgun

      “when I see Hilary being interviewed by Barbara Walters, I see her
      educated, confident speech as a disguise covering bottomless vacuity and
      selfish soulessness.”

      Are you referring to Hilary or Barbara Walters?

      • garyhope

        Why not both?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      it’s the product of a shallow media culture and its pet politicians who exist in a world with no soul, whose only hedge against materialism is their political agenda

    • truebearing

      Well and accurately stated. Daniel cuts through the Left’s deception with laser-like precision, exposing the malignancy and necrosis in the American body politic. The clarity of his work makes his insight readily accessible to a wide audience, which is exactly what he deserves and this country needs.

    • Michael Garfinkel

      Barbara or Hillary?

      Oh, at this point, what difference does it make?

    • lyndaaquarius

      very good observation”educated,confident speech as a disguise covering bottomless vacuity and selfish soulessness.” That “educated,confident” speech has fooled so ,so many.Can anyone remember anything clever or prescient that she has ever said? She’s an insecure Marxist all wrapped up in White privilege. Her ascent to the WH will be a long,tough slog because she’s ,frankly, not very bright and she’s certainly not beloved or trusted by the American people.

  • charlesruss

    Daniel Greenfield , Thank You for the articles that you write. Mark Levin,Rush Limbaugh and Daniel Greenfield are doing the Lord’s work by providing great guiding light during these dark times. Keep up the great work!!

    • lyndaaquarius

      you men are the best!!

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    What do Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe and John Quincy Adams have in common? (Don’t peak!)

    They were all Secretaries of State before they were President. Oh, how standards have fallen!

    • Douglas J. Bender

      Hey, there weren’t as many States back then, so Hillary has them all beat.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      we’re in the past standards age

      • lyndaaquarius

        As Rush talked about recently,it’s all about who is perceived as “really caring”. This nonsense needs to be mocked over and over.Ridiculing the Left’s biggest weapon should become a relentless assault. Take that “we care” more than anyone crap away from them.

        • Daniel Greenfield


  • USARetired

    Dishonest people usually are not very successful, at least not for long, and Hillary is a prime example, as all she has succeeded at, were the illegal actions! She has an uncontrollable temper, and a mouth that resembles 10 drunken sailors, resulting in dialog not fit for man or beast! She has been a dismal failure at all avenues of her life!
    If Hillary is chosen for anything more then ‘Dog Catcher’, I will have lost all faith in humanity and intelligence in America!!

    • Michael Garfinkel

      I’m surprised no one has mentioned Hillary’s long and felonious history: the “missing” billing records, the cattle futures, the illegal money rackets, etc.

      If Greenfield is right, and the American electorate remains mired in infantile narcissism, as it has with Obama – then I think it very likely that this country is in for some terrible times.

      • Debbie G

        And as a 27 year old staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigation, Hillary was fired by her supervisor, lifelong Democrat, Jerry Zeifman. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer….She conspired to violate the constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the Committee and the rules of confidentiality…”

  • Guest

    “. . . [Obama] might mention killing Bin Ladin . . . ‘ There’s no objective evidence that Bin Ladin was killed on Obama’s watch. He may well have died from illness months earlier.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Obama did not set out to kill him, he wanted to try him in civilian court

  • Aterg

    You are wrong, Hillary has many accomplishments defending the black panthers, the daughter father in law a felon who served 5 yrs in jail, and her personal friends. But her biggest accomplishment is forgiving Monika and Bill .Bu really “what does it matter now, it is just a bump on the road ” .

    • BagLady

      Hillary has many accomplishments defending the black panthers,” I thought they were still languishing in prison with many questions unanswered.”

  • ricpic

    The great advantage of the Left is that the young are pickled in Left worship. It takes at least a decade of real world experience, at a minimum, to break the grip of that worship. I’m a living example. I grew up in a household that worshipped FDR. I cannot remember a single specific given as to why he was worshipped. FDR was simply a god, if not God. And Republicans? They occupied the other shore. And to swim the icy river in order to reach that shore? Out of the question. Amazing the grip of that initial imprint. God help me, I was in my thirties, knew the Left peddled a total lie and yet still voted for Carter in ’76. Such is the power of initial imprinting. All this about myself merely as one example of the path millions must traverse to escape the zeitgeist. And of course millions don’t.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      breaking out of one’s unquestioned assumption is a real challenge

  • http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Media-Martial-Conspiracy-ebook/dp/B009063F5W/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1345573494&sr=1-2 jeffreyafriedberg

    Another really great classic essay—top 20. I mail these out to my list every day. And you should too, especially of you are a Liberal; send these to all your liberal Whatevers :)

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thank you

  • france john

    “This Obama can never fail because he doesn’t really exist.” Is that what people mean when they say the devil is an absence?


    • Michael Garfinkel

      No. The Greeks saw Evil as a function of the absence of the Good.
      The Christian view is quite different.

      • Michael Garfinkel

        Then again, Bishop Sheen famously said that “God says I AM, and the devil says I am not.”

        So there is something to what you say.

        I suppose it is unavoidable to deny: What we are seeing in the rise of personalities such as Obama and the Clintons is the ascendancy of evil…

  • Steven Pettijohn

    Excellent article, Mr. Greenfield. You perfectly describe Mrs. Clinton’s “accomplishments.”

    • Daniel Greenfield


  • Texas Patriot

    In the Television Age, politics is no longer about policy; it’s about personality. And with the exception of Ronald Reagan, Republicans have been losing the personality game since John Kennedy body-slammed a visibly sweating Richard Nixon in the first televised Presidential debate in 1960. As Marshall McLuhan said, television is a cool medium, and for whatever reason, with very few exceptions, Republicans have had an extremely hard time being cool on TV.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Few politicians are good on television. Reagan was. Unfortunately Obama is too.

      • Texas Patriot

        I don’t know if you remember the story, but at one point in the 1988 campaign, H.W. was trailing Michael Dukakis badly in the polls, and everyone was concerned that he just didn’t have the charisma to follow in Ronald Reagan’s footsteps. It was so obvious and pronounced that some people were calling it the “wimp factor”. The story I heard was that Lee Atwater took matters into his own hands and made Bush go out to a Wyoming Ranch and do nothing but watch John Wayne movies and act them out all day long every day for six weeks. By the time he gave his now infamous “Read my lips. No new taxes” speech, the wimp factor was history, and Bush won easily. Where is Lee Atwater when we need him!

        • Chavi Beck

          Yup. We need media training for our favorite candidates.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            It should be Job 1. Do not roll out anyone for a top job until they’ve gotten good at it.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          I don’t think H.W was blowing anyone away, but neither was Dukakis. That kind of rehearsal may have made him a bit more palatable, but Romney if anything was overly polished.

          Audiences tend to respond to a kind of fake naturalness. Unfortunately that’s a lot harder than JW movies.

          • Texas Patriot

            Spencer Tracy had it right. Acting is fine. Just don’t get caught at it.

            What we need in American politics is real honesty and real integrity, and that’s much more difficult.

    • American1969

      That’s the problem: We’re more worried about being “cool” than being a good leader with good ideas that actually work. That’s what happens when you vote style over substance, and that’s why we ended up with a Marxist piece of trash like Obama.

      • Texas Patriot

        The achilles heel of most modern American conservatives is thinking that “cool” doesn’t matter. As Lee Atwater understood better than anyone, it does matter. A lot. But if you think you can win with an uncool and clueless candidate with no vision and no plan for the future, go for it.

        Think of it this way. If your idea of happiness is being able to moan and complain about how bad it is to live under an administration dominated by Democrats, running an uncool and clueless candidate is probably your best bet for a happy life, at least in the short term. In the longer term, look out. No nation has ever been able to survive more than two or three generations of dysfunctional national leadership.

        Unfortunately, we are now at the beginning of the sixth decade since John Kennedy’s death and the imposition of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society characterized by poor education, poor health, job loss, a permanently dysfunctional government, and exploding national debt, and it is highly unlikely that we will be able to continue in this direction for very much longer.

  • DontMessWithAmerica

    Special thanks, Daniel, for three great lines:

    “Like every other summer blockbuster, it’s
    great marketing for a terrible product.”

    “…the left thinks that wanting to do
    something is what makes you a good person.”

    and “Not to mention gay illegal aliens running
    3D printer hubs.”

    You can make me laugh about a great tragedy, the accelerated decline of America – but he will be remembered for years as the man who brought socialized medicine to America. He brought it in by doing what he does best and always does: lying through his teeth. He doubtlessly wanted a single payer system which he could never have introduced. There will be a few years of great turbulence and confusion. Eventually, the insurance companies will be squeezed out and America will join Canada and most European countries in low quality health care with constant shortages of doctors and nurses but theoretically free for those who can’t pay.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      maybe, unless conservatives manage to turn the tide

      • Lightbringer

        That’s a big “unless”, Daniel. I see very little opposition to the liberal agenda on the part of the Legislative or Judicial branches, and I see increasing exhaustion and a sense of “Well, I’ll be dead soon so I might as well not aggravate myself” on the part of paleoconservatives like myself. It’s hard to fight for your children’s future when they themselves buy into the program or just don’t care, so why bother? I am very grateful for passionate young people like you who have picked up the flame some of us are just too weary to carry anymore. Thank you.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          I don’t think it’s hopeless yet. History has a way of taking sharp turns that no one at the time seems to see coming.

          If everything goes on as it is now for twenty years, then yes we’re doomed. But how often has that happened.

  • http://oldschooltwentysix.blogspot.com/ oldschooltwentysix

    This captures not only the escapism of the left, but much of America as well.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      leaders tend to reflect the nation to some degree

  • Bill_H2

    Great essay on the latest advances in the social technology of the “cult of personality”. Its latest innovations are:

    The shield of “unaccountability”, for example when Hillary was secretary of state she deliberately made no notable accomplishments for which she could be held accountable (including Benghazi). It was the same way with then Senator Obama, who would often vote either present or abstain from voting at all.

    The “gazing ball” technique, where a person like Hillary or Obama provides a perfect reflection of their social environment while revealing absolutely nothing about their real intentions. The technique dupes the gazer into only seeing what the gazer wants to see and hear. Its also a perfect disguise for hiding the evil within.

    We certainly live in interesting times.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Interesting times in the Chinese sense

  • BagLady

    She didn’t do much of anything except tour countries and pose for photos.”

    She wagged her finger a lot in little countries. Once she’d left and they’d mocked her in the media, China rushed in with respect and a lucrative deal….for some.

  • American1969

    An excellent article! I like how Mr. Greenfield points out that for leftists, it’s not about actually accomplishing something, it’s about “feeling good”. That sums up leftist policy in a nutshell.
    With regard to this, I have to say that this is what happens when you vote style over substance. Obama was a creation of the MSM, portrayed as the Second Coming that would save the world. We all know how that turned out.
    Now Hillary Clinton is portrayed as the successor to Obama, for no other reason than being Hillary Clinton. Big deal. What has she accomplished during her time in the Senate or as Secretary of State that’s noteworthy? What has she done that she deserves the presidency?

  • Joe The Gentile

    It’s true they elected Obama because of his skin color, which makes president Obama a DIVERSITY HIRE. If Hillary Clinton gets elected it will be because she is a woman, which would give America two diversity hire presidents in a row. Sixteen years of diversity hire presidents in a row can’t be good for any country, can it?…..

    • Guest

      This comment was deleted.


    I would vote for Kim Kardashian over Hillary or Obama. At least with her we could always distract her with a camera

  • garyhope

    Great article and points. Vacuous and vapid, perfectly descriptive words for our dear leaders, culture, celebrities and times. We are in a world of hurt. Worst I’ve ever seen in my longish lifetime.