Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Bill Whittle Goes There – Is Obama Evil or Stupid?

Bill Whittle Goes There – Is Obama Evil or Stupid?

“These things are starting to add up you see.”

In the latest edition of Afterburner, Bill Whittle examines the Bergdahl swap but first touches on Fast and Furious, Obamacare, Benghazi and the IRS scandal. In all of these cases, Bill reminds us that Obama is ignorant and is just as mad as you are. In every case one must ultimately ask, is Obama stupid or evil?

Whittle answers his own question at the end of the video so be sure to watch it all.

Here’s the description from YouTube:

So many scandals in Obama’s years as President. So was he evil or was he just stupid? He portrays himself as ignorant or stupid for each of these. He finds the news from the media, not from his administration. But which is worse? What ever happened to the ‘Buck Stops Here’ motto?

Watch the video below and leave your thoughts in a comment. Is Bill Whittle correct?

Featured image via YouTube.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

My new nutshell for explaining Obamic actions….

“Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice”.

Until someone shows me different…

And perhaps anti-Americanism should be substituted for “malice”. Perhaps what drives the man is not so much outright bad intent, but a set of values completely antithetical to our national identity. A set of values that are warped by arrogance, hubris, and resentment of others who offer any opposition to his values and his ego.

I’ll stand by that as being the best-fitting hypothesis to explain this goat-fluck we’ve lived the last several years. If we were done with it last weekend, I would be profoundly grateful. We are not, tragically. We have miles to go before we can begin to correct the awful legacy of this abhorrent gang. And THAT will take some doing…

Both.

Whittle sets his sights too low. Obama can be both stupid and evil. When stupid doesn’t get him through the day, he can always fall back on evil to make up the shortcoming.

And he does, most reliably.

But the list of indictments does make it pretty clear that stupid alone isn’t enough, particularly the “Fast and Furious” fib. Obama can keep claiming ignorance, or he can keep Holder, but he can’t keep both. So evil is definitely a factor.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to tom swift. | June 8, 2014 at 8:59 am

    Whittle’s final words were, “is Obama evil or stupid?” and his answer was “yes”, meaning both.

    Ragspierre in reply to tom swift. | June 8, 2014 at 9:02 am

    First, let’s define terms: stupid means he lacks intelligence.

    I see no evidence to support that. While I also see no evidence to support the “stellar intellect” he has been reputed to have, he clearly does possess well above-average intelligence. Even a high level of cunning, I would assert.

    He also has demonstrated a breath-taking ignorance of any number of subjects, history being high on the list. Sometimes we use “stupid” when we mean “ignorant”.

    But ignorance…and even incompetence…can be corrected. They can also easily be remedied by finding help, and the President of the United States has at his disposal the means to bring in the very best managers and “doers” in our nation. Instead, we are provided Kerry and Hagel, Rice and the rest.

    That puts us back to my formulation stated above. If you were devoted to some variation on Cloward-Piven, what would you do differently than what Baracula has done?

    If you had a post-modern concept of “truth”, what lie would strike you as “bad”?

    If, like Wilson, you had contempt for the Constitution and considered it an impediment to the climb of the nation to the bright uplands of “scientific governance”, how would you behave EXCEPT as has Pres. ScamWOW?

      platypus in reply to Ragspierre. | June 21, 2014 at 8:19 pm

      If, like Wilson, you had contempt for other races and considered them an impediment …

      Jugears detests the white side of his genetic tree and he shows it every chance he gets. His grandmother couldn’t stand the “darker” thugs she observed in Hawaii and did her best to steer little Barry away from that way of life, going so far as to enroll him in the top school in the state.

      Sadly for all of us, she failed.

I agree with Bill: Yes

His whole “stupid” act is evil.

Totally Evil but very stupid with his use of Taqiyya.

Henry Hawkins | June 8, 2014 at 9:00 am

Obama’s is a clumsy evil.

Definitely both. His American hating and policy making for the country are evil and he’s stupid enough to keep doing all the evil he can to destroy the things that are good in the country and the world.

He is of average intelligence; certainly no genius. I attribute a lot of his epic failures to cultural(ours)ignorance and malice.

And the next question good Americans have to ask is, ” Is CONGRESS evil or stupid?” as they have permitted this lying fraud to destroy the nation.

We’re screwed unless someone grows a spine.

    MarkS in reply to clafoutis. | June 8, 2014 at 10:26 am

    Congress is composed, on the Republican side, of milquetoasts, to wit Lindsey Graham pontificating that the “next time” Obama releases prisoners from Gitmo w/o telling Congress he will be impeached. My question for Lindsey is, what’s wrong with this time and what five more dangerous detainees could Obama release.
    As far as any Republican “growing a spine”, you have a better chance of winning the lottery!

Obama owns Obama; he has lost the benefit of the doubt and our scorn and anger of and towards him is growing.

He is evil.
He is dangerous.
He has never taken a shot to the jaw.
There is a whole lot of whoop-ass stored up in this country and it is looking right at his sorry ass.

Expect a preference cascade on our side; expect a coup-attempt on his side.

Good job, Mr. Whittle, you are a brave American man.

Orwellington | June 8, 2014 at 10:16 am

Obama is the Peter Principle writ large. Factor in his certain desire to oversee America’s destruction, and you have a dangerous man, indeed.

I think Obama uses the facade of stupidity to mask his evil. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature could not be this stupid without trying.

I was 5 years old in 1961 and stayed with my grandparents for a week while my parents made an urgent road trip. One morning after breakfast, my very proper English grandmother walked me to the variety store and bought a shiny red bouncing ball and I spent that afternoon playing with it in her front yard. A black boy about my age who was staying at the house next door came out and joined me in Grandma’s yard and we played with the ball together.

Eventually, my grandmother called me in and when I went to take my ball, the black boy refused to return it and insisted it was his. I can still see the 3 of us there on the porch, the black boy telling my Grandma it was his ball over my strenuous objections. Surely Grandma would set the boy straight and send him home. Instead, she shushed me and told the boy to take the ball and go home. Grandma collared me and turned me into the house, saying “I’ll get you another ball”.

I think that boy grew up to be Obama.

Joke aside, the labels “stupid” and “evil” seem overly simplistic to me. The issue from my POV is a culture malformed by a pervasive victim’s point of view whose members have become habitual liars as a means to acquire and evade.

The book “People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil” by Dr. M. Scott Peck is a good read on the subject.

    tom swift in reply to MrE. | June 8, 2014 at 12:36 pm

    the labels “stupid” and “evil” seem overly simplistic to me.

    If you’d be happier, replace “stupid” with functional equivalents; Carteresque haplessness, incompetence, chronic insensitivity to empirical observations and social cues, whatever. And consider “evil” to be easier to type than more colorful terms, such as sophmoric socialist, Mussolinian wannabee, or malignant dwarf.

    But the question is, are his missteps deliberate, or accidental? In this case, that’s the distinction between evil and stupid.

      Ragspierre in reply to tom swift. | June 8, 2014 at 1:14 pm

      Jimma Caaaater was a nuclear engineer.

      Calling him “stupid” is…well…stupid.

      You aren’t even trying.

        retire05 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2014 at 5:43 pm

        And Sheila Jackson Lee has a B.A. in Political Science from Yale and a J.D. from the University of Virginia. Do you want to agree the point that she is not stupid?

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | June 9, 2014 at 12:01 am

        Apples and very odd oranges…

          retire05 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 9, 2014 at 9:45 am

          No, it’s not apples and very odd oranges. You said:

          “First, let’s define terms: stupid means he lacks intelligence.”

          On what do you base your assumption that Obama is intelligent? Have you seen his grades? Or do you not acknowledge that you can train a seal to do tricks? Just because he went to three tony universities, and received a J.D., just as Sheila Jackson Lee did, doesn’t mean Obama is intelligent.

          Or do you base your assumption on the fact that Obama was editor of the HLR? Even he admitted that he was an “affirmative action” placement and was editor for a year that has been the least referred to edition of the HLR.

          Obama is not intelligent. He was trained, well trained, by David Axelrod who admitted that he trained Obama to speak well by placing Obama in front of mirror, while trying to emulate the speaking practices of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for hours a day. i.e. trained seal.

          Most intelligent people are articulate, or at least cognitive. Take away the 2-3 teleprompters, and Obama can’t recite his own name without error. That’s not intelligent.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | June 9, 2014 at 10:40 am

          Well, we disagree.

          You seem to be trying to pick a fight. Is that right?

NC Mountain Girl | June 8, 2014 at 11:14 am

Labels add nothing to the debate unless the can become the focal point for decisive action.

The only issue is how to stop Obama, something some on the left are starting to see may be necessary, including Noam Chomsky. For practical reasons such a move requires bipartisan support and the Democrats have a problem with that because their viability as a national political party requires they not insult black voters. A finding of malfeasance, the grounds for impeachment, risks that. But what of a medical finding that the President has become seriously out of touch with reality? Might the answer be found in the 25th amendment?

    randian in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | June 8, 2014 at 9:18 pm

    Lefties like Chomsky see stopping Obama as necessary only because he’s moving too far too fast and damaging the brand, not because he disagrees with Obama’s fundamental goal. That’s always the problem with the left: they disavow their people, but never their actions. That’s why they come up with stupid memes like “the wrong people were in charge” to justify communism.

Listen to me. If Whittle doesn’t say “evil”, then we leave him behind.

Obama is a brilliant sociopath whose goals are the ruin of American culture. Deliberately.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | June 8, 2014 at 11:46 am

I like most of Whittle’s work, but this is not one of his finest. The binary “stupid” or “evil” is overly simplistic. The world is rarely black and white. As Obama himself would say, choosing between one or the other sets up a “false choice”.

When Obama says he’s going to be transformative, that means he intends to be remembered for the big ideological shift. The guy who will take us further leftward – past what FDR did with “The New Deal” and LBJ did with “The Great Society”. Obama is Big Picture. That’s why he claims all the scandals are merely ginned up distractions. He’s right about that because they’ll eventually pass and become footnotes.

But Obama’s big ideological transformation leftward will endure. So selling Obamacare on a stack of lies a mile high will eventually pass. Obamacare, at least for now, looks like it is forever. Is it evil to lie and grossly mislead the public about a policy that will cause a “permanent” leftward ideologically shift for the country? Absolutely. But he and his advisors weighed the evil and decided the “good” that would come from the overall policy outweighed the evil. So he won’t be remembered for the evil, he’ll be remembered for the good. The imperial president, like the benevolent dictator, knows what is best for the peons, and if he has to lie to accomplish a greater good, then he’s fine with that.

Here’s a 2008 video of Ezra Klein at a Nutroots Nation conference before Obama had won the presidency explaining that the country would not tolerate a government takeover of healthcare if the left were honest about it, so they knew they’d have to lie to get it done:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FElipqE_Dl4

Lying was part of the plan all along. As Klein explains, they had to lie to “win” the policy debate. It’s like the Soviet era phrase of “lying for the sake of the truth”. Lying was a small price to pay to accomplish a policy goal that Obama wanted.

The website failure, horrible rollout, adverse effects on a few million people are all yawners to Obama. It’s more apathy than evil or stupidity. He simply doesn’t care. They’ll eventually get fixed. And forgotten. But the transformation will change society forever. That’s what he cares about.

He wants to be on The Mount Rushmore of American neo-communism:

FDR – New Deal;
LBJ – Great Society;
BHO – Obamacare and Global Warming Planet Saver.
EAW – ????

    This all assumes that there will indeed be something positive in the end, like, say, flooding a few dozen towns to make a huge reservoir and hydroelectric dam project. The towns are eventually forgotten, but the reservoir remains.

    On the other hand, it if turns out to be more like Stalin’s perversion of biological science in the Soviet Union, we can’t say that biology will be forgotten and Lysenkoism will remain, because Lysenkoism was an abject failure – a fundamentally wacky concept, incompetently executed. A healthcare system which inflicts all of us to the abuse currently only suffered by veterans will not be considered a success no matter how long we wait. The only way to make it seem like a success will be to continue the fabrications and lies indefinitely.

Henry Hawkins | June 8, 2014 at 12:05 pm

How to Spot the Reptilians Running the U.S. Government

“As 12 million Americans ‘know’, the United States government is run by lizard people (or, to be scientifically accurate, reptilians). But they never said which members of the government are the reptilians. So we’re here to help.”

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2013/10/how-spot-reptilians-runing-us-government/71020/

He is a selfish, sociopathic narcissist.

Since most of the rest of us aren’t sociopaths, we will NEVER be able to understand what makes this guy tick, and it is useless to even try.

Because sociopaths can’t be integrated into society.

He is cunning and manipulative and nothing anyone does will make him feel empathy towards anyone else. He wants what he wants when he wants it, and that is all there is to it.

You can never change a sociopath; the most you can hope to do is to isolate them from the rest of society and attempt to remedy the havoc they have caused.

I do not think Bill Whittle has over simplified anything. Barack Obama and his whole administration operate on the notion that it is justifiable to lie in order to get their way. There is a moral aspect to this attitude, but there is also an intellectual aspect. The Obama administration deliberately ignores the hard-won rules and safeguards in our system that are designed to permit the admission of counsel, and thereby avoid bad decisions and perverse results. Getting caught at circumventing these rules makes them look stupid, due to the blowback.

If you think it is evil to lie to get your way, then this administration is evil. If you think pursuing avoidable tactics that are bound to fail, have perverse results, and bring shame to your country and party is stupid, then this administration is stupid.

So, the answer is “both.” Agreed.

    What you are describing is an “amoral” person in neutral terms and as such is self righteous to a fault. An amoral person believes the ends justify the means. By all indications Obama had no problem with the results of Fast and Furious killing over 300 Mexican nationals and a US border patrol agent; Obama had no problem with the deaths of thousands of people in Libya due to his determination to remove Khadafi; Obama had no sense of grief at the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi; Obama still to this day insists that the Muslim Brotherhood be back in power despite the fact thousands upon thousands of people died in Egypt when he demanded Mubarak step down. Obama is still pushing the Syrian Civil War aiding al Qaeda after 120,000 have died since his ego is so big that when he said Assad had to go and hasn’t.

    Obama, if given the chance will cut a permanent deal with Iran giving them unfettered use of nuclear material. What will be those results? Millions dead?

    Obama is not some Machiavellian figure, he is an evil man by the very definition of evil whether he arrived at that destination through cleverness, stupidity, ideology or sheer determination. EVIL is the act of causing other people loss, pain, suffering and even death to achieve their desires. Anyone who believes the ends justifies the means IS AN EVIL PERSON. The only thing that distinguishes one evil person from another is the number of dead bodies they walked over to get what they want. Obama has figuratively walked over thousands of dead bodies and isn’t done yet. Only a truly evil person would stay the course with the full knowledge their actions to achieve their desires no matter how self centeredly trivial destroys lives.

    But we miss even a greater point by considering whether Obama is an evil man, we miss that he did not do this alone. He was and is aided by like minded people whom he gathered to himself to achieve his goals. Those who applaud or excuse his actions are likewise no less evil as himself. The issue is NOT that Obama is an evil man, the issue is a group of evil people have grasped the reigns of power and are free to engage in their whims and delusions of grandeur.

      auntiemo42 in reply to dscott. | June 14, 2014 at 2:05 pm

      Yours is the most accurate and eloquent analysis of Obama, his administration, and lackeys I’ve seen on this and any other website. I agree with everything you’ve said and congratulate you on your complete insight into the fundamental definition of the problem. This is the bottom line; no further speculation as to what is going on is necessary. Thanks.

PersonFromPorlock | June 8, 2014 at 2:11 pm

But if he’s stupid, what’s left for the Republicans to do?

Anyone else having trouble getting that video to run? It won’t load here or directly on YouTube, though other PJM vids run for me there.

Stupid, evil or both, Obama is no different from Kerry or any other progressive. With the help of the media, he’s just more effective in duping people and getting his way.

Nobody would call Kerry or Edwards or Biden or Hillary a lightworker. No presidential historian would have deemed them, “probably the smartest guy ever to become president,” like Michael Beschloss did.

Nobody would have given then a Nobel Prize just for showing up.

Obama is not stupid. The people who believe in him are.

Both!

Henry Hawkins | June 8, 2014 at 7:05 pm

Obamacare is a failure only if you assume the goal was to improve delivery of health care and to insure more of the uninsured. Those were among the stated goals, but so were “if you like your plan” and “if you like your doctor”, both of which the WH knew would never come true.

So, what was the actual goal and has it been met or will it be met post-full rollout?

Among those who designed and implemented it, Obamacare is a huge success, a fantastical power grab, and the neutering of several industries, such as health insurance, health delivery, etc. It is a big gov expansion of monumental scope. THAT was the goal. Does it or will it work? Who gives a shit if you’re a liberal elitist? You’ve enough $$$ to take care of yourself privately, and you’ll sit atop a huge new government power structure and bureaucracy. F**k the peasantry; we’ll always have peasants. But now we have by the short curlies called ‘medical insurance and treatment’.

Adaptation takes eons, and beneficient mutations are impossible to predict or reliably induce, so it’s a fool’s game to expect the current GOP to develop testicles and do anything about it.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 8, 2014 at 7:07 pm

    But now we have THEM by the short curlies called ‘medical insurance and treatment’.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 9, 2014 at 1:33 am

    “Adaptation takes eons, and beneficient mutations are impossible to predict or reliably induce, so it’s a fool’s game to expect the current GOP to develop testicles and do anything about it.”

    They would have to develop a spine before the testicles would be of any value.

    That they are able to walk upright remains a mystery.

JackRussellTerrierist | June 9, 2014 at 1:28 am

Evil.

Stupid evil mf

re Obama, the balance tips more on the evil side than on the stupid side though if stupid means being just barely a little above average in intellignece i guess the balance balances out.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend