Is Barack Obama's dream, now a reality

[putnam6]

Is Barack Obama's dream, now a reality

Watch the video and I'm not going to lie a good part of me hopes this is true, and to a certain extent it probably is.

The current administration is likely leaning heavily on Barack during these trying times. The question is how much?

They call out Barack whenever they need money or polling is lagging.



Barack Obama's dream, now a reality:

https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1802388913488597271

[Maxmars]

Politicians are just "for the show."  There are a special class of thespian. (It's all about "appearances" that "sell.")
Most of the great ones were great because they could think on their own.

But that is no longer why parties 'select' candidates.  They select "marketable imagery."

This is not specific to Democrat politicians... it applies to Republicans as well.

I remember similar lamentations about the second "Bush" era.
It comes with the terrain of 'legacy thinking."

[Byrd]

Biden and Obama give a speech together.  They're from the same political party and have the same general values.  Their presidencies reflect the Democrats' platform.

It's not Barack's platform.  It's not Joe's platform.  It's the party's:
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

I might also point out that when you look for the Republican Party's platform (go look!)... the only platform statement that shows up is from 2016: https://www.gop.com/about-our-party/ 

Ballotpedia indicates that their 2020 platform was just the 2016 platform with a few revisions: https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_P...form,_2020

I like to see political parties that change with the times.  We don't need things like humiliating people by putting them in stocks or drowning them to see if they're telling the truth.

[FlyingClayDisk]

Biden and Obama give a speech together.  ...

Oh boy!  Wouldn't THAT be a sight to see!  Obama would be orating away about various topics, and Biden would be wandering around behind him on stage, shaking hands with imaginary people and eating the decorative house plants.  (just kidding...well, sort of)

Seriously though, whether it's someone whispering in an earpiece, or a script on a teleprompter, or just intense coaching (or all three), I honestly do not believe that Biden is actually in charge (other than in name and title).  This should be concerning for every American.  And, the larger question is...if he isn't in charge then who is?  And the "who?" part of this is really disturbing.  Whomever that is was not elected, and they have been kept from public view.  That alone should be concerning.  But it's likely not just one person, but rather a whole group of people, which is even more concerning.  We have a 'system' which elects one leader under a framework, the Constitution, which is replete with language calling for "checks and balances".  And we have a whole cadre of people who serve in support roles to the president, whether for protection, or subject matter expertise, and all manner of other things. 

All of these people behind the scenes would have to know what is going on; they would be witnessing it every day.  So, they would all have to be complicit with this charade (if true).  We're not talking about just a 'few' people here either; there's hundreds.  They'd all have to be complicit, and they'd have to be in agreement, else someone would speak up.  So, if this is truly the case, then we have a far more serious problem than just an elderly president Biden.  If this is the case, we have a system which is dangerously corrupted and broken (and I mean 'dangerously' in every sense of the literal meaning).

Now, as with everything there are always shades of grey, matters of degree, and maybe Joe Biden just doesn't perform well on a public stage (press conference, address, interview, whatever).  Okay.  And maybe he just needs a little help here and there doing physical things.  This is fine too.  People as they age sometimes need a little assistance; there's nothing wrong with this.  But this isn't what we're seeing.  I mean, let's be honest; what we are seeing is a person who is wholly incongruent with needing just a 'little' assistance here and there, a person who needs a little help getting out of a chair.  That's not the person we're seeing.  We are seeing a president who needs a 'whole lot' of assistance, a president who seemingly cannot function without 80-90% 'control' and guidance...even with simple tasks.  This is not a "Commander in Chief" and leader of the most powerful nation in the free world; that's not who we see when we see Joe Biden.  There aren't really any shades of grey now.  Maybe two years ago there were some shades of grey in his performance, but not now, and certainly not for another four years.

This scares me, it truly does.  I don't hate Joe Biden (if anything, I actually feel badly for him), but I'll be honest when I say I'm not sure I could extend the same feelings towards the people who knowingly use president Biden as the face of some giant charade, some illusion (if that is indeed the case).  Those people are the embodiment of true evil, and they must be stopped.

Democrat or republican, it doesn't matter.  Step back for a moment and take stock of what you really see.  Can you honestly say you don't see a man who is failing physically and mentally?  It's sad really (and I mean that from the heart).  It's painful for me to watch...every time.  What's not sad though is the people who continue to prop this man up, who continue to make excuses and ply deceptions suggesting nothing is amiss.  No, that's not sad at all; that's calculated, conscious and pure evil.  In a word, it's dangerous.  But what does 'dangerous' mean really?

We all have family and loved ones in this world.  We have expectations of waking up tomorrow and seeing the sun come up.  We don't expect that things will be the exact same as they were yesterday, and we understand there will be some days which are better than others, some good and some bad.  And, we do expect that tomorrow will not be dramatically different than today, that tomorrow the sun will rise (metaphorically) like it always does.  These are all reasonable expectations.  So, the definition of "Dangerous" in this context, is that there is the very real possibility things in fact could be very different when the sun comes up tomorrow morning, that things could be so dramatically different we never could have reasonably expected or even imagined them.  That's scary, and it should be scary to everyone.  There is no bravado in my words, but there is grave concern.  When we reassure our families and loved ones and tell them not to worry, "everything is going to be okay (tomorrow)", now, all of a sudden, this may no longer be true.

Whether president Joe Biden has an earpiece or a script on a teleprompter for a campaign speech isn't so much the point.  The larger point is the very real concern that the person we see up on that stage is not really the person in charge of this nation, and the person who is in charge of this nation is being intentionally concealed from us, whomever they are.  That is the real concern, and it is a very grave concern indeed.

---

.
.
.
===========================================================================================================
.
.
.
Case in point, two weeks ago president Biden traveled to France to participate in the Normandy "D-Day" anniversary ceremony.  The ceremony was several hours long, and the heads of state from England, France and the United States all paid tribute.  But the ceremony was quite long.  During the ceremony president Biden was observed doing a number of unusual actions seemingly without explanation.  At one point he appeared to attempt to take a seat in a chair which wasn't present.  In another moment he seemingly turned the wrong random direction during the memorial song, Taps.  And there were also several examples of unusual and unexplained behavior at other points as well.  These unusual behaviors were pointed out by numerous MSM media outlets shortly after the event.  The point here is not to dwell on these actions or strange behaviors two weeks ago, but rather to focus on some more important things which happened yesterday and today (two weeks later).

Earlier yesterday, White-House Press Secretary and spokesperson, Karen-Jean Pierre issued a statement suggesting that the MSM media outlets who had documented the strange behaviors of Biden had "edited" the videos, and accused the media of having "manipulated" the images to cast the president in a bad light.  She basically dismissed all of the stories as "fake".

Two weeks ago I remember seeing some of these short videos, and my immediate reaction was the same thing...that they had been taken out of context or doctored.  I also immediately expected to hear the same thing from the White House.  So, to just see for myself, and to see what really happened I then watched the entire full length video recordings of the entire event, specifically to see if the videos critical of Biden's behavior were somehow taken out of context (as short videos can often do).  Well, they were not taken out of context, and they did not misrepresent what had taken place, nor did they misrepresent Biden's unusual behaviors.  Now, two weeks later, the White House Press Secretary goes on the record saying exactly what I had expected to hear the day after the ceremony...that the images were "fake" and taken out of context.  Why the delay?  Well, this is the telling part.

It didn't take two weeks for the White House to digest the videos or the media's reaction.  There was no 'trickle down' delay; that wasn't what was happening.  What was really happening was a very carefully calculated public relations ploy and obfuscation of the facts.  A deception.  And this is important to understand.

The White House and Biden's handlers knew that if they reacted publicly to the media comments about Biden the day after the ceremony that there would be push back from both the media and the public.  Why?  Because the event was still fresh in everyone's mind, and the fact that numerous full-length videos of the entire ceremony were still circulating on the Internet.  Two weeks ago, it would have been easy and obvious to prove press secretary Pierre was not telling the truth.  But two weeks later, people's memory has faded, and those full length videos are still out there but not circulating widely in the media any longer.  Now it is much easier to deceive the public about what really happened...two weeks ago.  And this is exactly what the White House did on Biden's behalf.  They were knowingly misstating the facts in order to shape public opinion about Joe Biden to something other than reality.

The statements yesterday from press secretary Pierre wasn't a 'press release'.  No, it was a campaign advertisement in reality.  A very calculated effort to cast Joe Biden in a light which is not factual.  That's not news, it's propaganda, pure and simple.  Pierre knew it was a lie, but she likely convinced herself it was okay to lie because she could confidently say some cartoonist had indeed released an obscure caricature of Biden in some backwater newspaper and it was this she was referring to...when in reality her statements were clearly addressing the very real videos of the event.  In short, it was a lie. 

But why?

Well, to my earlier post above, there are people controlling both Joe Biden and very carefully controlling his image, shaping people's opinion about Biden's competence.  They are consciously and knowingly presenting an image of Biden which is at odds with both the facts and reality.  This is control.  And, this is wrong.

[putnam6]

Politicians are just "for the show."  There are a special class of thespian. (It's all about "appearances" that "sell.")
Most of the great ones were great because they could think on their own.

But that is no longer why parties 'select' candidates.  They select "marketable imagery."

This is not specific to Democrat politicians... it applies to Republicans as well.

I remember similar lamentations about the second "Bush" era.
It comes with the terrain of 'legacy thinking."

Exactly but if I could turn back time, I would not waste it discussing the crookedness and graft of the Cheney administration.

I remember when those with a conspiratorial leaning mostly knew both sides were equally "sneaky" little shits they just had different methods and tactics, hell it was preached quite a bit on ATS and elsewhere. Then there was a shift, and it became en-vogue to denigrate conspiracy theorists, especially from one side.

[putnam6]

Biden and Obama give a speech together.  They're from the same political party and have the same general values.  Their presidencies reflect the Democrats' platform.

It's not Barack's platform.  It's not Joe's platform.  It's the party's:
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

I might also point out that when you look for the Republican Party's platform (go look!)... the only platform statement that shows up is from 2016: https://www.gop.com/about-our-party/ 

Ballotpedia indicates that their 2020 platform was just the 2016 platform with a few revisions: https://ballotpedia.org/The_Republican_P...form,_2020

I like to see political parties that change with the times.  We don't need things like humiliating people by putting them in stocks or drowning them to see if they're telling the truth.

Where did I say infer or suggest they weren't likeminded at one time? 

Im a huge believer Dick Cheney was the person behind the scenes during "Dubya's" tenure. Rumors were Wilson's wife basically took over after Woodrow's stroke, some would suggest to the detriment of the country. 

I can be skeptical AF of the machinations that occur in DC on both sides and still realize the uniqueness of Obama's quote. Similar uniqueness to his rumored quote in 2020 and I paraphrase "to not underestimate Joe's ability to f--- things up"

The thread is about Obama's famous quote about pulling the strings behind the scenes and not having to deal with the extraneous details of being the President. Nothing wrong with it per se, but it is an interesting topic to me. Especially in our current Presidential situation. 

I can't recall any other President even being asked such a question, fairly certain none of the other Presidents in my lifetime hinted that they would like to be the man behind the curtain after 2 terms as Commander in Chief. 

Im not even going to argue your overly simplified assertion that Trump's platform was the Republican platform. Virtually in name only, there is plenty of evidence where DJT and the Republican Party disagree. 

For me to address the" put people in stocks or drown them" I will need some clarification, as to what that actual means

I do know ever since the US could "drone strike" Presidents of both parties have shown no aversion to reaching out and touching the nefarious never-do wells of the world.

What I did say, suggest or infer is considering our current administration, Im optimistic Obama is there to keep them from making critical mistakes. It's not a far-out concept 

It's not much different than both parties consulting Henry Kissinger at various critical and chaotic points since he left public service. 

https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/dis...9175-e-722
 

During the Carter presidency, he operated as something akin to the “shadow” secretary of state, offering support for some of Carter’s initiatives, such as the Panama Canal Treaty and the Camp David Accords, but provided withering criticisms of other aspects of Carter’s foreign policy, including its emphasis on human rights and its policy toward Iran. Kissinger lobbied hard for the Shah to be admitted for medical treatment but was criticized harshly when this led to the seizure of American hostages.

Kissinger developed a strong bond with Sadat, effectively turning Egypt away from its pro-Soviet stance toward the United States and planting the seeds for the Camp David agreements of the Jimmy Carter years.

Kissinger did maintain close and friendly relations with President Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Famed Washington journalist Bob Woodward argued that Kissinger played a key role in advising George W. Bush on the Iraq War, urging him not to withdraw American soldiers from Iraq without a military victory. In the 2008 presidential contest, Barack Obama cleverly used Kissinger’s advocacy of direct diplomacy with American adversaries like Iran and Syria to undermine Senator John McCain’s position during their first foreign policy debate in 2008. Although his advanced age made Kissinger a less visible figure during the Obama years, as recently as the 2016 Democratic primary debates, Senator Bernie Sanders could still attack Hillary Clinton for her willingness to take advice from Kissinger when she was secretary of state.

[Byrd]

Seriously though, whether it's someone whispering in an earpiece, or a script on a teleprompter, or just intense coaching (or all three), I honestly do not believe that Biden is actually in charge (other than in name and title). 
(big snip)
Well, to my earlier post above, there are people controlling both Joe Biden and very carefully controlling his image, shaping people's opinion about Biden's competence.  They are consciously and knowingly presenting an image of Biden which is at odds with both the facts and reality.  This is control.  And, this is wrong.

I think we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree.

I worked with Alzheimers and dementia patients for awhile in my early work life, and do see a difference between normal aging and rapidly declining cognition.  The presidency is a stressful job, and it does take a terrible toll on anyone in office.  But when I compare Biden to Reagan (who was showing signs of his Alzheimers in office and who was being "helped" by others), I see a clear difference.

And yes, at least some footage was misrepresented or altered (the one where he turns and appears to walk away; a wider view shows that he turned to talk briefly to a skydiver.)

But... as I said, we both have our views and our experiences.  I respectfully disagree with  your conclusions.

[putnam6]

I think we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree.

I worked with Alzheimers and dementia patients for awhile in my early work life, and do see a difference between normal aging and rapidly declining cognition.  The presidency is a stressful job, and it does take a terrible toll on anyone in office.  But when I compare Biden to Reagan (who was showing signs of his Alzheimers in office and who was being "helped" by others), I see a clear difference.

And yes, at least some footage was misrepresented or altered (the one where he turns and appears to walk away; a wider view shows that he turned to talk briefly to a skydiver.)

But... as I said, we both have our views and our experiences.  I respectfully disagree with  your conclusions.

It wasn't that he went to talk to a skydiver, it was there was a demonstration for all the G-7 leaders to watch. Biden was like a dog with a squirrel running around nearby. 

Biden, Reagan, Reagan, Biden the main difference is the world wasn't so full of immediate and crucial challenges Ronnies last term.

[Maxmars]

It wasn't that he went to talk to a skydiver, it was there was a demonstration for all the G-7 leaders to watch. Biden was like a dog with a squirrel running around nearby. 

Biden, Reagan, Reagan, Biden the main difference is the world wasn't so full of immediate and crucial challenges Ronnies last term.

I think I am uncomfortable with the comparison between the terms of Reagan and Biden as being "more challenging" to an aging mind.  I don't think either President "had it easier," help notwithstanding.  Without going into histrionics, Regan's time was at least as difficult as Biden's, multiplied by two.

The main difference in my perception of them is that while Regan was an experienced actor and well suited to "playing a role" as a professional, Biden's 'playing a role' just comes off less polished and focused on "surface appearances."  As if a committee were responsible for programming his character and conduct.  The media was kinder to the aging Biden, firmly demonstrating that he requires 'special' marketing and PR help from them (and it was given in abundance, to include a concerted and directed effort against any and all detractors, in the most publicly visible way...)

Both Presidents deteriorated through their respective terms.  Reagan was just a better performer.  That may or may not translate to a better 'image projecting' public servant, but nowadays, some believe that 'you only have to "look good" to b effective.  (At any rate, 'modern' politicians are simply of 'diminished' stature when one considers what have they actually 'done' as opposed to what they 'promise' to do.)

And history is replete with examples of Biden saying 'whatever it takes' to manipulate a useful narrative... remember, before his Obama time, Biden was a laughing stock in the media for his outright lies and plagiarism, as well as several instances of verbal blunders. Reagan had no such press in his history, or at least, nothing remotely comparable.

[putnam6]

I think I am uncomfortable with the comparison between the terms of Reagan and Biden as being "more challenging" to an aging mind.  I don't think either President "had it easier," help notwithstanding.  Without going into histrionics, Regan's time was at least as difficult as Biden's, multiplied by two.

The main difference in my perception of them is that while Regan was an experienced actor and well suited to "playing a role" as a professional, Biden's 'playing a role' just comes off less polished and focused on "surface appearances."  As if a committee were responsible for programming his character and conduct.  The media was kinder to the aging Biden, firmly demonstrating that he requires 'special' marketing and PR help from them (and it was given in abundance, to include a concerted and directed effort against any and all detractors, in the most publicly visible way...)

Both Presidents deteriorated through their respective terms.  Reagan was just a better performer.  That may or may not translate to a better 'image projecting' public servant, but nowadays, some believe that 'you only have to "look good" to b effective.  (At any rate, 'modern' politicians are simply of 'diminished' stature when one considers what have they actually 'done' as opposed to what they 'promise' to do.)

And history is replete with examples of Biden saying 'whatever it takes' to manipulate a useful narrative... remember, before his Obama time, Biden was a laughing stock in the media for his outright lies and plagiarism, as well as several instances of verbal blunders. Reagan had no such press in his history, or at least, nothing remotely comparable.

If the President is overly concerned with the press they are likely a lousy President to begin with. Not to mention Reagan's issues appeared in his 2nd term, we aren't even through Biden's 1st term, a 2nd term could be an extremely bumpy ride. 

Not only that but I was referring to what was/is occurring in the world at the time of thier respective diminished capabilities.

Russia wasn't a threat that it is today. We could be a few errant missiles from having to defend NATO

Ronnie had some attacks like the USS Cole from Iran but they didn't shoot dozens and dozens of missiles toward Israel.  Israel is being immediately threatened by Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran while getting uncertain and mixed messages from the Biden Administration. Of course, we had Israel and Lebanon in the 80s too, it just didn't seem as critical as it does now. We certainly didn't have the anti-Semitic protests in the US, there is a lot this administration has to negotiate with.

Let's not forget we also had the George Sr. as VP, who flawed as he was didn't give the country a collective case of the heebie jeebies if he had to assume the Presidency.

Lastly, though this is more about Obama, and my rationalization he is atleast being consulted and can perhaps guide the Biden administration