'Foxy' Trump: Non-Binary President

Whatever the label, Donald Trump is as sly as a fox. (By comparison, the MSM's harebrained analysis of him and the GOP is as insightful as a squawking and confused Chicken Little.) As the political landscape rightful quakes with the People's voice through The Donald's brash persona, is the sky falling? Well, it is, but only for beltway insiders—of either party. For these polarizing, irresponsible spendthrifts who have transformed America into a 19 trillion dollar debtor nation with 93 million jobless—a dysfunctional mess—the “party” of the ruling class is over. The voters have nominated our first non-binary political candidate—since George Washington at the nation's inception—an “outsider” also not beholden to either side of the aisle.

In two hundred and twenty years we have come full circle to the Founding Father's sage warning about the factionalism of our then emerging two-party system. In his 1796 Farewell Address, Mr. Washington said:

“[Political party] serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption [read: Hillary Clinton], which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

What is crumbling is not the Republican party. (That authority ultimately resides with voters and elections.) What's “cracking up” is dead wood emblematic of House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI): entrenched elites who don't want a power vacuum created by an upstart. For further historical context, look to 1975: Ronald Reagan faced identical resistance in his unsuccessful insurgency campaign against sitting president Gerald Ford. Indeed, Mr. Ryan's shallow praise of Mr. Reagan is an example of the real problem that plagues Republican “leaders”: insulated powerbrokers who systematically (and hypocritically) pay lip service to disregarded conservative principles like fiscal responsibility and limited government. That went out the window when Mr. Ryan rubber stamped two trillion dollars of additional spending to the nation's Chinese credit card.

Actions, rather than words, are key because they demonstrate anyone's inherent character. This obvious truth is evident as readily in life as it is in politics. This is why Mr. Trump is a live wire when compared to traditional politicians empty rhetoric (read: Mr. Obama). With speechifying, progressives say its important to make unoffending noises about one's neighbors, but they consistently act in ways that are polarizing and destructive to our republic. Of this specific modern day development, George Washington foretold:

“However combinations or associations [ie, the Democratic Party] of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

If that isn't an indictment of the lawless, corrupt and anti-American Obama regime, perhaps this is an even more apt description:

“The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.”

Are we more free or less so under the disastrous Obama years? (Hint: check your Obamacare bill and bank account balance.) Has he not been considered an almost quasi-religious “savior” by his unquestioning party—and universally praised by the hard left propagandist MSM—despite a laundry list of domestic and international failures? Worse still is an administration that has done its best to consign the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the ash heap of history. All for a pro-Castro fascist (an anti-JFK Democrat) to seize ultra-constitutional power under the banner of nebulous “hope and change.”

Not so fast. Mr. Obama has had a great deal of trouble with political tar baby that is the Second Amendment. Likewise, the foundational protection of The First Amendment is similarly intractable. Therefore, dissent is still guaranteed (despite NSA surveillance). That includes Mr. Trump's unpopular speech, bothersome as its tone is to some hypersensitive segments of our society. Yet, The Donald's independence from politics-as-usual is essential. Despite being criticized as a vulgarian, his bare knuckle style provides immunity from the vagaries of squabbling, out of touch political parties. Moreover, his track record of proven private sector success—and his Reaganesque pledge to “Make America Great Again”—are all that matters to the Silent Majority turbocharging this unconventional candidate's meteoric rise.

For the record, Mr. Trump's impolitic statements were a necessary strategy to distinguish himself from the pack of 16 other major contenders. Likewise, the same method will be a highly effective mechanism, the hammer to the nail of crooked Hillary's presidential prospects. As past is prologue, as savvy as any seasoned pro—and despite breaking every conventional rule—Donald Trump is the last man standing in what was a vigorous Republican contest. He masterfully achieved that little feat while simultaneously finessing two billion dollars in free advertising from a hostile (and hoodwinked) MSM. Only a fool believes these are flukes of a bigoted ignoramus.

Speak of which is Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson who incorrectly claims support of Trump is tantamount to seeing “lunacy dancing in high places.” His skewed perception is classical psychological projection. The dancing lunacy isn't the Trump phenomenon, it's literally Barack Obama's careless tango in Cuba. With no offense intended to the quoted words of obscure G.K. Chesterton, another brainy guy said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” That's what one gets from a Hillary Clinton presidency—and her promise of an Obama third term.

Who knew Mr. Trump would turn out to be a George Washington style “America/n First” patriot: unbound by the constraining weight of a close political affiliation? Therefore, our path out of the land of liberal looney tunes—which includes do-nothing Republican elites—is clear. In 2016, it appears the winning skill set of a U.S. president is a flexible outsider, a true-blue capitalist of considerable business acumen; a Manhattanite marketing genius. In this regard, this presumptive nominee ran a successful insurgency campaign within the umbrella of the Republican party. However, in contrast to either party's inherent pack mentality, The Donald stands unique: a no-holds barred fighter in this peculiar age of coddled Obama Pajama Boys. Speaking of an insufferable man-child, there is the Democrat-capitulating Paul Ryan, the poster boy for a Republican in Name Only (RINO). He and fellow travelers like the left's law-breaking Hillary and America's geo-political foes should beware. 

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002 

Barack's Shaming, MLK Mirror

Given the ongoing, fawning MSM coverage of our first black U.S. president, to revisit the 'him' of this pair of peas in a political pod now seems inevitable. 'Hers' was an appropriately appalled reaction to a Marie Antoinette-style sense of coddled, arrogant entitlement called Michelle's chastising, honest mirror. Likewise, 'his' will detail her fascist hubby as the antithesis of MLK's dream. MLK would have advocated a positive, unifying figure who, through example, sees beyond superficial differences of color or creed. We got the opposite: a manipulative, divisively petty personage who stirs up current or “past grievances” (reflecting his personal biases) for a divisive political effect beneficial to Mr. Obama and his fellow travelers in the Democratic Party.

An important critique of Obama's classless “character” such as it is: our black president ignores Lincoln, the Great Emancipator's 150^th anniversary rather than appropriating honoring a truly prescient American leader. (That was a president who knew how to use executive orders to good, long term effects.) Contrast an abolitionist decisively ending the horror of slavery with something beyond his wildest imagination: a black president who customary race-baits (same as differences of class, gender, orientation etc.) as political wedges to turn American society against itself. This ideologue's reason? To distract from personal ownership of his abject failures domestically and abroad.

Specifically, Mr. Obama constantly changes the subject from his obtuse ineptness. To that end, he uses the visibility of the presidency to repeatedly elevate and exaggerate the import of minor, otherwise isolated and unfortunate incidences (read: Henry Louis Gates Jr.; Trayvon Martin; Darren Wilson UN speech) into full-blown scandals. Given his well established pattern, he perpetuates artificial crisis to short-circuit debate (read: demonized Republican objections to his “pen and phone” imperialistic change.) Indeed, Mr. Obama wields power to compel progressive change. This is the way of all law-violating fascists. (In retrospect, the “hope,” it turns out, was a pipe-dream; a superficial sound-good 2008 campaign slogan.)

Aided at every turn is the biased MSM, the Democrats' slavish humpbacked creature who minimizes (or completely ignores) the virtual Noah's Ark of unresolved pink elephant issues (illegal aliens; porous U.S. borders; potential terrorists re-settled here as Islamic migrants), and shrieking gorilla situations (read: ISIS; Iranian nuclear deal; 19 trillion debt). Then, there is the third category, those alternate-universe dupes who carry press badges like devotional rosaries who waste breath on the embers of this man's presidency, and his shameful legacy. That's The Washington Post's Petula Dvorak.

Ms. Dvorak wrongly claims that Mr. Obama is the victim (rather than a perpetrator) of hate. Fallout, she assumes, from what is admittedly the most crassly juvenile, small-ball issue, unpredictable presidential race in modern history. Yet, given how these same dynamics have exactly mirrored Mr. Obama's own contentious tenure, one would think he would be quite at ease.

In nature, what else would Mr. Obama be other than a parasitic organism, a bottom-feeder sapping America's strength and poisoning her citizens' good will? Look around at the carnage of a once thriving nation. From E Pluribus Unum—out of many: one—to the divisive Obama Doctrine of rewarding friends (read: cronies of now bankrupt Solyndra) and punishing enemies (read: the American people; Republicans; Israel and the West). What hasn't fallen apart in his almost eight years of honing little more than his golf game? Truthfully, Mr. Obama has damaged our republic at every opportunity—perhaps beyond repair—with his nebulous “fundamental transformation of America.”

The only hate that truly exists is reflected back in Mr. Obama's own gilded presidential mirror. What Ms. Dvorak is completely oblivious to is the simple logic that one does not “fundamentally transform” anything that is truly beloved in the first place. (I challenge Ms. Dvorak to try that tack on her significant other some time—and see where she ends up. I'm betting the dog house, if she is lucky.) Moreover, his hate-filled effort to change America from a capitalistic haven of upper-mobility to a full-on big-government socialistic hell, has been neither gentle or measured. It has been more than seven years of polarizing gale-force winds, boiling over American's “melting pot.” In effect, he has pressure-cooked America's First World golden goose status to a ruined, debt-laden husk.

As America's first rabble-rousing president, Mr. Obama has intentionally exploited our society along its inherent fault lines. Specifically, he used his ethnicity to silence (and unfairly smear) detractors as innately intolerant, rather than respecting their legitimate right in a democracy to object. Case and point: on the campaign trail, he certainly objected to George W. Bush's accumulated debt (4.899T) as irresponsible and unpatriotic. And how Mr. Obama—grand hypocrite that he is—has outdone Mr. Bush on these measures (to a degree the Republican could hardly fathom) is obvious. In any case, what loyal American would not take issue with Mr. Obama's anti-American posturing (read: Castro Cuba trip). His job-killing economics (read: 93 million jobless; 8.63T Obama debt (difference between 10.6 debt at end of Bush II presidency and current escalating figure of 19.23T))? His wealth redistribution via the government's bureaucratic ObamaCare take-over of the one-sixth of the economy (and the world's best medical system)?

Have the well-heeled Obamas forgotten where or how they have lived for the better part of almost two presidential terms? Perhaps the greatest sin of these truly careless people is their complete disregard of the widespread suffering of average citizens during the Obama years. They forgot long ago that they work for us, not the other way around. It is we—not once, but twice—who have placed them in the rarefied air they frivolously waste. They are there by electoral votes, not divine right (much as they pretend otherwise.)

What is truly unseemly here is the lack of compassion, kindness or respect shown by the Obamas for the rest of us. We struggle to pay bills, and worry mightily about an uncertain future—caused, in large measure, by this president. Meanwhile, utterly tone-deaf, Mr. Obama has “transformed” the presidency into “lifestyles of the rich and famous.” His mindless extended vacations of golf games, tangos in far-flung tropical locales, and watching baseball with decades-old American's geo-political foes are a complete embarrassment. The intrepid Ms. Dvorak makes a real funny with: “For someone who has been attacked the way Obama has... who has endured verbal assaults and [unrealized] physical threats to his family President Obama's demeanor has been dignified.” So, one again, a Post columnist discloses that Mr. Obama shares his wife's high class problem: what others say about them. In the final analysis, how dignified is a president who heartlessly abandoned Chicago families to record-setting, senselessly tragic killings of their children at the hands of their peers? Spinning no doubt restlessly in his grave, I wonder what colorful language MLK would have for Mr. Obama's pampered sensibilities!

For her part, Ms. Dvorak does her “journalistic” duty as professional fluffer for Mr. Obama's deservedly tattered reputation. She cites the meaningless measure of a weekly Gallup poll of presidential approval: Obama's 53 percent compared to that of George W. Bush, his predecessor's 32 percent during the same time frame. (A partisan swipe at Republicans for good measure.) Speaking of world leaders, I would dearly like a candid poll of their impressions regarding this current president. Out of Mr. Obama's earshot how friend and foe alike must snicker at this apology-tour adventurer, this emperor with no clothes. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize a pervasive level of rightful resentment for this Tiger Woods-style fop literally “playing at being commander-in-chief.” (Incidentally, this precise, unfounded Ronald Reagan smear by liberals fits Mr. Obama to a golf link “tee.”)

Ms. Dvorak's column reads like a '60s-style homage to the period piece “The Help.” A time now long past, when blacks were routinely marginalized and discriminated against solely due to their skin color. Her writing apes this warmed-over, superficial skin-deep claim. Specifically, for her ilk, race is always the causal factor for any negative attention directed at this first black U.S. president. Meanwhile, she completely neglects even the merest mention of Mr. Obama's real-life track record of aforementioned failures: “Obama received triple the number of threats that previous presidents faced... [b]oth the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center have seen huge jumps in threats against the president and the formation of hate groups during the past seven years.” The social and economic context—which this piece briefly details—is never even hinted at, stated explicitly or adequately explained.

Undercutting the serious nature of her subject matter, she uses slang unworthy of a precocious middle-schooler—let alone a major newspaper scribe—when she scribbles, “It's impossible to utter a single word about the White House, the first family or the president without a blast from the fire hose of haterade.” (For those of us rare birds who confine ourselves to the use of proper English, the Urban Dictionary defines this absurd term as a figurative drink consumed by those who, in turn, are consumed by the negativity of their subject matter.) Beyond demonstrating that she truly is a bad writer, this half-wit is an insult to even the yellowest journalist. Ms. Dvorak is so out of touch—so hysterically blind as the man she thoughtlessly lionizes—she mistakenly assigns bile appropriately directed at him as a “sign of the times” rather than as a natural consequence of Mr. Obama's own words, deeds and policies.

As spurious proof of “everybody else's hate,” she cites one reader's irate response to Mr. Obama, “Go back to Kenya.” The reader's curious assertion brings up a salient, still unresolved point: Mr. Obama's nebulous background and upbringing. (To make an analogy, Mr. Obama's authentic-or-not released long-form birth certificate continues to be as controversial and uncertain as the “settled” science of “global warming,” now discredited, and re-labeled as vague “climate change.”) Likewise, Mr. Obama's own wife publicly muddied the waters at a Denver luncheon during an August 2008 GLBT speech: “When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya... showing folks in Kenya that there is nothing to be embarrassed about in getting tested, and we did it as a couple.” Would any worldly and educated spouse in a 20 year marriage ever misspeak her husband's birth origin—and not bother to issue a correction? Moreover, would any American generally confuse a home country with somewhere else? No wonder the rumor persists to this day that Mr. Obama is a foreign-born Muslim. After all, that's how he acts, and where his loyalties evidently philosophically lie.

Ms. Dvorak is encroaching dangerously on Courtland Milloy's murky turf as the Post's resident racial-scribbler. Not surprisingly, both of these progressive potted plants masquerading as journalists sing from the identical Democratic-sanctioned sheet music: both summarily condemn Americans as being secretly guilty of “racial contempt” regarding the Obamas. Yet, this is a factual impossibility. After all, by large margins, average Americans voted Mr. Obama into the highest office in the land through two election cycles. If race truly was a negatively pervasive element that could never have happened.

Therefore, the unfounded rumor and intangible innuendo these columnists wrongly engage in is nothing more than propaganda. They blame the “scenery” rather than the “star” of the show. In Ms. Dvorak's case, she compares the current presidential campaign to a primordial swamp (another veiled, unworthy swipe at Republicans). Yet, the real problem remains where it always has been with Mr. Obama—likely the worst U.S. president in recent memory, if ever. Certainly, her unwarranted, sycophantic praise of a black man bereft of MLK's content of character only mirrors a delusional true-believer with sludge stuck between her ears.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Michelle's Chastising, Honest Mirror

If ever there are two peas in a political pod they are Barack and Michelle Obama. Even before Mr. Obama's first election Michelle Obama said of her fascist hubby, “Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.” That sounds like something that would come easily out of the mouth of a Castro spouse rather than a supposedly liberty-loving first lady. Indeed, Obama and wife are chock-full of these nebulous statements which when seen correctly lay plain their anti-Americanism (that the similarly biased MSM ignores.) Family vacationing from Cuba or passively watching her mindless husband tango in Buenos Aires, who besides brain-washed millennials (who waste their votes on Socialist Bernie Sanders) believe in the Obamas' fidelity to America?

While Courtland Milloy's biological age technically precludes him from the millennial generation, his role as The Washington Post's resident racial-scribbler—and his latest Michelle Obama puff piece—has the same probative value as millennial ideas about future political leadership. Of this lady, Mr. Milloy sycophantically sings the blues: “Michelle Obama, still standing tall, chin up, despite nearly eight years of enduring... racial contempt for the Obamas [and] an unprecedented barrage of ugliness toward her.” Fundamentally, this statement is patently false, and irrational. Precisely how can a voting citizenry who freely, proudly and publicly elevate the first Afro-American couple to the White House—not once, but twice—be secretly guilty of “racial contempt?”

In retrospect, although well-intentioned, a hope-filled American people foolishly gave the Obamas an eight-year key to the kingdom: stewardship of the greatest country in the world. In return, the Obamas—like the petulant low-rent tenants they are—have entirely squandered a golden opportunity to unify the nation as MLK dreamed. Worse, they have been MLK's antithesis, having wrecked the joint abroad (read: the Middle East) and at home. Domestically, they have constantly exploited “history-based racial grievances” (read: Democrats' victimization playbook) whenever a gracefully long-suffering public (not Michelle as Mr. Milloy wrongly claims) legitimately complains about her husband's job-killing, wealth redistribution policies. For example, almost 10 trillion added to the debt is just one of the Obama booby prizes left to yet unborn future American generations to pay for. Exactly who is being ugly here? Is it the Obamas who act with the carelessness of Roman emperors or the American people who have generously entrusted them with such never-ending faith?

It's a wonder to me that a beneficiary of more than seven years of tax-payer funded 24-hour Secret Service protection would ever have “ a lot of sleepless nights... fearing how my girls world feel if they found out what some people were saying about their mom.” So, 'Madam Political Correctness'—like all proponents of anti-First Amendment word-burning—worries about what other people say about her. That's a pretty high class problem to any Chicago mother whose child is gunned down by the ongoing, almost daily black-on-black homicide ignored by the Obamas since their 2008 departure. Mr. Milloy equates the act of one unhinged gunman that broke a White House window in September 2014 or the generations-removed vandalized Georgia monument (dedicated to her slavery-born great-great-great grandmother) as spurious evidence of how she has greatly suffered ugliness to rule us. Meanwhile, ensconced in perpetual 5-star accommodations (that would make pampered Marie Antoinette green with envy) with Air Force One at the ready and a cadre of personal assistants in tow, the Obamas' attitude of arrogant entitlement has disgraced MLK's memory in the same manner as their lack of care has betrayed the black community.

Under the guise of the yellowest journalism, Courtland Milloy repeatedly promotes the general fiction of hidden “American racism.” To reiterate today's “proof”: a toppled marker and a broken window. To any clearly thinking person, how do two isolated, indirect acts of criminality demonstrate anything of greater importance? Simple answer: they don't. Leftist ideologue Milloy has manipulated these unremarkable, unconnected occurrences to conjure a bogeyman out of whole cloth designed to silence warranted criticism of Ms. Pouty-Face 'hashtag bring home our girls.' (Incidentally, since her 2014 selfie, it seems the hundreds of kidnapped Nigerian schoolgirls by the Islamic Extremist group Boko Haram have fallen completely off the Obama radar—same as America's current prospects as the Obamas globe trot to tropical locales: Cuba, Buenos Aires and beyond.)

Mr. Milloy's fortuitous column artificially burnishes Michelle Obama's flagging reputation, much like that of her politically lame-duck husband. It's all rubbish, of course. A distraction from all of the above; a change of subject from the real 300-pound gorilla shrieking a reality that no one in the MSM will address. That truth: criticism of the Obamas has nothing whatsoever to do with skin color. It never has. In the 21^st century, the American people have graduated to the consistent use of MLK's content of character as a means of evaluation. (Proof of this is seen everywhere in the greater acceptance of gay rights and gay marriage.)

In the case of the Obamas, they have failed to honor American economic and geo-political interests or dearly-held cultural values. All the while, they are rightly blamed for living-large while the rank and file have suffered mightily under the inept, tone-deaf ministrations of Mr. Obama—and his no better, coddled wife.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Obama: a 21st century Nero?

Myth has it that Roman Emperor Nero (15 December 37 AD – 9 June 68 AD), fiddled while Rome burned. Historians tell us this story isn't 100 percent true. Violins didn't technically exist in 64 AD, but Nero—and the six-day Great Fire of Rome that destroyed approximately three-quarters of the city—were real enough. At the time, Nero blamed Christian scapegoats (then an obscure sect) for all the trouble. Sounds a lot like our current Islam-inclined U.S. president, and a political landscape where history is repeating itself.

Another telling parallel, like every opportunistic fascist, Nero happily used the crisis to clear land for his planned palatial complex—the Golden House—the Domus Aurea. You read that correctly: the buildings and ornamental gardens were already planned. This disruptive circumstance—which made half of Rome's residents homeless—makes for nice symbolism for Mr. Obama's own corrosive philosophy, the “fundamental transformation of America.” That too is burn, baby burn, metaphorically-speaking, of course.

In Nero's time, his understandably skeptical citizenry suspected he caused the calamity to promote his personal agenda, but nothing was ever proven. Mr. Obama is no different in this regard. For example, his longstanding, well publicized attitude of 'stupidly-acting cops' and 'if I had a son he'd look like Trayvon' similarly exploit misfortune to advance his own anti-law and order mind-set. In this same vein, using televised speeches to figuratively 'crack a few police noggins together' foments crises that force the vague “change” of Mr. Obama's 2008 campaign slogan.

As a result of the last more than seven chaotic years of his Constitution-violating overreach, the political needle has swung violently hard left. He has accomplished this with an imperialist's disregard for established law. Moreover, he has also ignored custom by jerry-rigging the reassuring presidential podium into a rabble-rousing bully pulpit. His aforementioned publicly uttered racial pronouncements have encouraged the vigilantism of the Black Lives Matter mob. However, the Obama clan has no skin in the game. Unlike the rest of us, they enjoy armed 24-hour Secret Service protection.

This past week, to add further injury to the Western psyche, his anti-American ideology is in full flower from nearby Cuba; a totalitarian slave-state, and communist bur in America's side since JFK's 1960s. His extended selfie photo op, a three-day Obama family vacation, will do nothing to promote human rights or the American ideals of freedom or liberty. This “unconventional” choice contrarily highlights Mr. Obama's paper tiger legacy while simultaneously further obscuring his still-undisclosed true intentions (amid an already murky personal background.)

Unfortunately, a checkered reputation is not new phenomenon in politicians. Today, as Nero, our national leaders are similarly skilled at keeping their own fingerprints off of suspected wrongdoing. Think of Hillary Clinton's habitual lies, stream of subject-dodging double-speak, and her many scandals: Benghazi, Server-gate and Charity-gate (also known as “Clinton Cash” influence-bartering). All of this brown haze, its corrupt stink dogs Democrats like a nebulous, intangible political smog.  It doesn't matter too much with a supportive propagandist MSM in tow.

Obama mindlessly fritters away his last year while the never-say-die Clinton political machine sputters to a predetermined inevitability. (A so-called “Democratic” presidential nomination that in reality is ironically autocratic.) Nero, too, was known to “fix things” to his liking. How is that different from the ongoing absence of Justice Department indictments against she who promises a legacy-preserving Obamaesque third term? Beyond that, same as long-dead Roman emperors, Mr. Obama shares pleasure-seeking for personal gratification (read: once again, that meaningless Cuba “ego” trip.) History's echo warns that all men of their ilk practice big-government, top-down pandering to the public (when it serves their personal interests.) No sweet Shakespearean rose is this, but an ancient weed known in today's age as progressivism.

Also analogous to Nero's insensitive “playing” is Mr. Obama's enjoyment of baseball in Havana with Bolsheviks. His very presence there bolstering the world standing of brutal leftist dictators. Meanwhile, the smoldering terrorist-bombed Brussells tragedies that killed many (including four Americans, two young marrieds Justin and Stephanie Shults among them) is bereft of his attention and his set-in-stone schedule (read: attending a Las Vegas fundraiser after the aforementioned Benghazi attack or golfing directly after presidential remarks regarding the terrorist beheading of American journalist James Foley). How is any of this behavior fundamentally different from Nero's reported “fiddling” response to Rome's catastrophe?

Yet, in the final analysis, Mr. Obama might be more cold. Even Nero was sensible enough not to get caught the next day dancing a celebratory jig or Mr. Obama's equivalent, an oblivious tango in Buenos Aires. For our president's sheer insensitivity, perhaps a closer personality model is another, Roman Emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (nicknamed “Caligula.”) Known to be similarly self-consumed, power-loving and unfeeling to human suffering, both men specifically share a public contempt for his government's respective Senate. Although the circumstance is unsubstantiated, to the Roman version of this deliberative body “Caligula” appointed a horse as senator. For his part, Mr. Obama simply employs an ultra-Constitutional middle finger to Congress. As a result, societal chaos is a hallmark under both men's regimes. Incidentally, “Caligula,” means “little boots,” making his example also a perfect fit for Mr. Obama's dancing feet. Cha-cha-cha.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976