Obama: “Waaaaah! They’re picking on me! Everything is all THEIR fault!”

Mr. Obama, did Fox News force you to pass Obamacare? Did Rush Limbaugh force you to support terrorists in the middle east? Did conservatives force you to allow the NSA to spy on Americans? Did Sean Hannity force you to violate your constitutional duty to enforce ALL laws, not just the ones you like? Did Bill O’Reilly force you to exceed your constitutional authority, changing laws without the involvement of congress? Were all the people who voted for you twice ‘cool’ then, but somehow ‘RACIST™!’ because they don’t like you now?

What a megalomaniacal, self aggrandizing, narcissistic ass. Get over yourself.

---

Obama Blames Conservative Media, Limbaugh and Fox News For Failures…Again

Katie Pavlich | Jan 24, 2014

Earlier this week in the New Yorker, President Obama suggested his approval ratings are down because America is full of racists (the same racists who elected him, twice). Now, bonus excerpts from the same article by David Remnick show President Obama blaming his failures on Fox News while accusing the network, conservative media and Rush Limbaugh of turning him into a “caricature.”

Democrats: We’re Higher Than God

“I don’t know how people felt when they passed Social Security or Medicare, or when the civil rights laws of the 1960s were passed, but I do believe that what we are doing with this legislation is establishing health care as a fundamental right in this country,” —Rep. Jim Clyburn

“I consider this to be the Civil Rights Act of the 21st Century— because I do believe that this is the one fundamental right that this country has been wrestling with now for almost a hundred years. I think tonight we took a giant step toward the establishment of a more perfect union.” —Rep. Jim Clyburn

Mr. Clyburn aptly illustrates what is wrong with our government today. The majority of the democrat party, and some in the republican party are progressive liberals whose ideology is diametrically opposed to that upon which our country was founded. They stand in direct opposition to the American way of life, but typically will not come right out and say it. They achieve their goals through subterfuge. Flowery language and false advertising typify any legislation they bring forth. They have attempted to place themselves on par with God. How can I justify this statement you might ask? Because RIGHTS come from GOD, not from any man. Governments proper role is to protect and defend rights, not to create them, as this government has attempted to do.

Rights by definition do not infringe upon another persons rights. For example, my right to free speech doesn’t cost anyone else anything. Declaring health care to be a “right” rather than the SERVICE that it actually is supposes that slavery and theft are OK. By saying that you or I have a RIGHT to health care says that I can get the SERVICE of health care from a doctor or provider without compensating him in any way. Forcing someone to take actions that benefit you without compensation is what’s known as SLAVERY. If you say “Of course a doctor has a right to be payed for his services, but health care is still a right,” then you are saying that it’s OK to take something from those who rightly earned, possess or own it, against their will, and give it to those who did not earn it and don’t deserve it. You’re saying that I who have made good choices, worked hard, sacrificed, and saved enough money to afford my own health care must pay for someone who made poor choices, won’t work, and is just looking for a hand out. In its simplest form, that is theft. On the scale put forth in this bill it is socialism on its way to communism.

No Nancy, Harry, and Barack. You are not God, nor are you gods. But the size of the crater you make when you fall from power will indeed be Biblical in proportion.

---

State of the Union-Loving, Narcissistic, Undocumented President

Lie after lie after lie.  David said it quite well when he said “Obama not only wasn’t contrite about his broken promises and disastrous record; he was on the attack, daring anyone to oppose his agenda.“

Here are a few of the adjectives I would use to describe Chairman Maobama’s State of the Union(s) speech: angry, narcissistic, disjointed, dishonest, unrepentant, unpresidential, classless, lacking decorum, and pathological.

The writer of his speech should be fired, then taken to the woodshed for the number of lies, lack of facts, and other breaches of decorum in the speech.  But we know that will never happen, because O-bow-ma believed just about every word of the speech (except, of course, the part about drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants.)

The few democrats left that might remotely consider themselves as AMERICANS need to head for the life boats.  The true “progressives,” the followers of “the one,” are going down with the ship.

It’s time to start whispering “IMPEACHMENT.”

---

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/dlimbaugh/2010/dl_0129p.shtml
There Was the President’s Speech, and There Is Reality
By David Limbaugh
January 29, 2010

Watching President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech makes me wonder whether the reason he tells so many fibs is that he believes them himself. Either that or he is an even better actor than he is a teleprompter reader.

Obama not only wasn’t contrite about his broken promises and disastrous record; he was on the attack, daring anyone to oppose his agenda — even in the face of the Massachusetts rebuke. But let’s see how some of his statements match up with reality.

On health care, he taunted congressmen to “let me know” if any of them have “a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses,” as if his own plan would do those things.

Even the Congressional Budget Office has said most of the Democratic plans would increase the budget. Besides, you can’t reduce overall costs when government forces an increase in demand, even if it caps insurance premiums and shifts costs elsewhere and/or imposes rationing. The CBO has also reported that with Obamacare, millions would remain uninsured. So under his plan, costs would rise, quality and choice would decrease, care would be rationed, millions would remain uninsured and, worst of all, the government would acquire an unprecedented level of control over all aspects of our lives.

Do conservatives have better ideas? Of course. Restore market forces through tort reform, strengthening health savings accounts, abolishing government coverage mandates, allowing consumers to purchase policies across state lines and eliminating the tax laws incentivizing employer-provided health care, which unnecessarily increase demand by making prices invisible to consumers.

A candid Obama would have said, “If any of you have a plan that does not involve restoring market forces and reducing government’s role in the health care industry, I’ll at least pretend to look at it.” “Make no mistake,” neither Obama nor his Democratic colleagues will support genuine health care reform, because to reduce costs, we must reduce government control, and they can’t abide that. Period.

As for spending, Obama didn’t once apologize for his reckless expenditures. Instead, he blamed his soaring deficits on his predecessor, completely misrepresenting the projected deficits under President Bush and ignoring his own deliberate doubling of the national debt over the next 10 years. That’s the issue Americans are losing sleep over, and he offers only Band-Aids and smoke and mirrors.

He says he will freeze a portion of the discretionary budget, but as Cato Institute reports, 83 percent of the budget will be off-limits. Other than his “stimulus” insanity, the real explosion in spending is occurring in the entitlements that he refuses to touch. Even his mini-freeze wouldn’t begin until 2011 (why wait?), and it would be dwarfed by his planned spending increases for other socialistic projects, including a new “stimulus plan.” And how about that assault on personal and fiscal responsibility with his promise to forgive student loans after 20 years?

How Obama can stand before the nation and insist on spending more borrowed money to accomplish something his first “stimulus plan” didn’t achieve (job creation), but exacerbated, is beyond me. How he can blame President Bush for his own broken promise that unemployment wouldn’t exceed 8 percent if his “stimulus” bill were implemented is jaw-dropping. He even said he saved 2 million jobs. Scary delusional! Or scary sinister!

Speaking of chutzpah, did he actually dare to utter the words “transparent” and “accountable”? How about those phantom legislative districts receiving stimulus monies, Mr. President? How about that promise to televise the health care debates on C-SPAN?

He said he hadn’t raised income taxes “a single dime” on 95 percent of the people. Yet in almost the same breath, he promised to redouble his efforts on cap and tax, which would increase the average family’s energy costs by almost $3,000 per year. I don’t believe his campaign promise was limited to income taxes, by the way. (He also said he had CUT taxes on the middle class. Being solidly in the middle class, I think I would know if that had actually happened. Reducing my withholding so it looks like I’m getting a tax break, when it actually pushes me into a higher tax bracket forcing me to pay that much and more on April 15th is NOT a tax cut. A “stimulus” check, which just gives back a small portion of what was mine to begin with, is not a tax cut. Giving that same “stimulus” check to those who don’t pay taxes at all is just a handout, and communist redistribution of our hard earned money.)

How about his righteous ranting on earmark reform? Sorry, we’ve been down that twisted road with you before, Mr. President. (There were some 9,000 earmarks in the O-bow-ma porkulus bill. I’d call that a step in the right direction, wouldn’t you? (facetiousness intended))

Then there was his audacious riff on lobbyists. Been there, done that, too, Mr. President, with your phony promise to keep lobbyists out of the White House.

Obama also railed against “partisanship, shouting and pettiness” as he filled most of his speech with just those things, even castigating the Supreme Court, erroneously, for opening the door to foreign corporations’ campaign contributions.

How about his statement that “America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity”? Hmm. Tell that to the Iranian and Honduran peoples. He must have meant once he’s out of office.

Then there was his bizarre out-of-body pivot, when he blamed Washington for our problems. (Narcissistic clown.)

All of this, especially Obama’s obvious incapacity for self-doubt, is disturbingly surreal. (It’s like the speech he gave the other day on “tax cuts.” In that speech, he said “I” over 120 time while mentioning the subject of the speech, tax cuts, only TWICE. It’s kind of like the Toby Keith song “I wanna talk about me.” (I wanna talk about me, Wanna talk about I, Wanna talk about number one…) He is a self-centered, communist/progressive, anti-America, probably NOT American danger to America, our constitution, and our way of life.)

—

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His book “Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party” was released recently in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at http://www.DavidLimbaugh.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

---

Obama’s State of the Union, January 2010: Unpresidential and Uninspiring

An open letter to Barack Obama in response to his State of the Union speech:

---

State of the Union, January 2010

Mr. Obama, here are my reactions to and impressions of your State of the Union speech last night.

First of all, let me make one overall recommendation to you, Mr. Obama.

Grow up and take responsibility.

You say “I’m not interested in re-litigating the past.”  Yet you continue to blame George W. Bush for EVERYTHING under the sun.  You point fingers and blame everyone else on the planet for your problems, and for things you don’t like while dodging any and all personal responsibility for events taking place in America now.  It makes you look immature and petty.  The minute you signed onto the stimulus and began taking over companies and banks, you owned this economy, and your senatorial votes during the Bush administration played a significant part in the economy’s demise.

You said that you understand the “burden of working harder for less,” and “I know the anxieties out there now.”  Really?  Sir, most of your life has been one of privilege financed by others.  Now you are at the pinnacle of that life living in the lap of luxury, throwing lavish parties, traveling all over the world, flaunting power all at the expense of the American taxpayer.  If you really understood, you wouldn’t be throwing your weekly parties for your cronies, and you wouldn’t be spending millions of taxpayer dollars flying all over the country and world on Air Force One just to get photo ops for your never ending campaign.  You would be staying in Washington, D.C. working on REAL, bipartisan solutions.

You stated that you had cut taxes for millions of us in the middle class.  Really?  Being solidly in the middle class, I think I would know if you had.  Allowing us to keep more money up front and then taxing it away from us on April 15^th is not a tax cut.  Mailing me a check for a SMALL PORTION of the tax money that was mine to begin with is a REBATE, not a tax cut.  When you mail those same checks to the 50% of Americans who don’t pay income taxes anyway, that’s just a handout.  When you’re charitable with your own money, that’s generosity.  When you’re charitable with OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY, that’s called THEFT or REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH when it’s done by the government.

You talk of creating government/public service jobs to help the economy.  Since you were supposedly a “professor,” I would expect you to be educated enough to understand that public-sector, government jobs by definition CAN NOT CREATE WEALTH, which is what will stimulate our economy.  A government job by definition takes money away from the economy to pay for itself.

Mr. Obama, you said you wanted a “jobs bill” on your desk immediately.  Sir, here’s the jobs bill guaranteed to create jobs, and stimulate economic growth.  I’ve delivered it to you before congress could, and kept it so brief that any child could understand it.  Here it is.  Are you ready?

CUT TAXES!

Cut personal income taxes, cut corporate taxes, and eliminate the “death” and “marriage” taxes, and I GUARANTEE that the economy will take off like a rocket.

You also mentioned that you were going to “double exports” to reduce our trade deficit.  That sounds good, but how do you plan to achieve that, and what do you plan to export?  The liberal policies of taxing businesses and creating a business climate that forces them to move their businesses overseas has left us with very little to export.  When you make a corporate environment that ATTRACTS businesses, we will once again produce what the rest of the world wants, and exports will be a natural byproduct of that.

When it comes to health care reform, you have been wrong, and continue to be wrong.  You have been dishonest in your dealings with the American people, and have outright lied about the “transparency” that was supposed to be the hallmark of these negotiations and of your administration.  CSPAN?  How’s that working for you?  I guess I just missed all of those broadcasts, because I haven’t seen any of them.  You said “if anybody has a better idea (about health care) let me know.”  Oh, dear Lord in Heaven (I can introduce you to Him), please keep my head from exploding.  You and the rest of your “progressive” (read communist) buddies have SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED REPUBLICANS from the entire process, and refused to listen to, include or consider ANY of their ideas while crafting your government takeover of the health care system.  Sir, the ideas are there but you are unwilling to listen to any ideas that do not fit your agenda.  Tort reform, tax cuts, competition across state lines, and several other ideas have been put forth that are proven successful strategies for making health care better and more affordable.  Yet you won’t allow them to be put on the table because they don’t pay your union buddies, or contribute to the takeover of health care.  I pause to conjure the spirit of Rep. Joe Wilson.

You said you were going to “freeze spending for three years.”  You speak of how that won’t start until 2011 because “that’s how budgeting works.”  How convenient that it works out that you are putting it off until AFTER the midterm elections so that any possible pain associated with your policies won’t be felt until after Americans cast their votes. Your “spending freeze” sounds good to the uninitiated and uneducated that you hoped were the majority of your audience last night.  But the reality is that you have already allowed HUGE spending increases in nearly every government agency that they wouldn’t have seen in the next 5-7 years COMBINED.  Then you exempt the largest portion of government spending from any freeze.  That would be the ENTITLEMENT SPENDING upon which you and the liberals depend for your political lives, and to which NO ONE IS ACTUALLY ENTITLED.  If you were serious about eliminating the deficit, and paying down the debt, then you would get serious about ELIMINATING GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.  Go to a flat tax (which is a FAIR tax) with no exemptions and eliminate the IRS.  That would save about $11 Billion per year.  The Department of Energy was established to “end our dependence on foreign oil.”  How would you say that’s working?  The DoE is about as useful as mammary glands on a boar hog.  Scrap it and save the billions of dollars per year that it sucks up from the tax payers.  You could legitimately close the doors of 75% of the Federal government with no negative impact on America.  You would in fact allow America to prosper by simply getting government out of the way, and saving us all of that money.

You speak of dismantling our nuclear arms and “agreements” with the Russians.  You obviously are not a student of history.  When we weaken ourselves, our enemies do not follow suit.  Whether it be the Soviets/Russians, the Iranians, or the North Koreans, they have proven themselves to be liars.  They will say whatever you want them to say to gain short-term political favor.  They will not disarm themselves.  Disarming unilaterally and dealing from a position of weakness will only open us up to aggression and attack from the likes of Russia, China, and Iran, not to mention the many terrorist groups who want nothing more than to see Americans die.  We need to be the biggest, strongest kid on the block to ensure peace for us, and for the rest of the world.

The one thing from your speech on which we agree is the building of nuclear power plants, and removal of restrictions on offshore drilling.  Everyone agrees that we need to try to develop clean, self-sustaining forms and sources of energy.  But letting private innovation lead the way and develop products that Americans ACTUALLY WANT is the only way to make “green” energy a success.  By forcing it down our throats while demonizing and destroying our other inexpensive, reliable forms of energy will only destroy those jobs before new ones emerge, skyrocket the cost of energy (which you promised us under YOUR plan), and destroy an economy that depends on energy at an affordable price.  I’m beginning to think this may actually be your intent.

Finally, you displayed your true, anti-American, communist, thug, street organizer colors when you quietly announced your “enemies list” during your speech.  You and your band of thugs like Rahm Emanuel bully and intimidate people to get your way.  You did so with Fox News and the other news outlets when you declared that Fox News was not a legitimate news organization, would not be treated as such, and that the other “news” outlets would be “wise” not to treat them that way either.  Attempt to destroy one to make an example of them, and use fear to control the others, a strategy from your idol, Saul Alinsky.  In a total breach of decorum and decency, you publicly flog the Supreme Court, who can’t defend themselves, and lie about their decision that actually reaffirms the 1^st Amendment freedom of speech.  You hand down the list of people whom you will combat and try to destroy if they stand in your way, a list which includes bankers, capitalist “fat-cats,” the Supreme Court, and anyone in the media or with a microphone, megaphone, or pulpit from which to deliver a message that exposes the fallacies of your agenda.  You are blatantly trying to stifle free speech.  Woodrow Wilson and FDR were two of the “progressives” who employed similar tactics.  No more, Mr. Obama.  We will not tolerate your attempts to silence us.

Mr. Obama, you simply don’t care about Americans or America.  The people of Massachusetts, a solidly liberal state, sent you a loud and clear message.  But you won’t listen.  Congress didn’t give you what you wanted, so rather than reevaluate whether what YOU want is what Americans want or need, you boldly declare that you will simply sign executive orders to bypass the congress, and any other entity that stands in your way.  You attack and besmirch the Supreme Court because you don’t control them.  You lied when you said you “never said you could end divisiveness and start a post-partisan, post-racial era.”  BULL CHIPS!  You campaigned on EXACTLY THAT PROMISE!

Sir, you are an arrogant, dishonest narcissist who is a danger to America.  You attempted to include yourself in the greatness of America when you said that “our ideals built America.”

Mr. Obama, it was OUR ideals that build America, NOT YOURS.

Out of patience,

///SIGNED///

---

Obama’s Narcissistic Rage

Talk about the nuts running the asylum…  People suffering this severely from serious psychosis need to be institutionalized, not be put in charge.

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/narcissistic_rage_in_the_white_1.html

Return to the Article

October 28, 2009

Narcissistic Rage in the White House

By James Lewis

The term “narcissistic rage” gets 26,000 citations in Google Scholar. It is a common feature of extreme or pathological narcissism.

While psychiatrists often say they can’t do long-distance diagnosis, it really isn’t that hard if you have a lot of information about a person and can watch how he operates from day to day. Intelligence agencies around the world have psychiatric staffs for exactly that purpose.

While most people are pretty hard to predict, extreme narcissists are comparatively simple. They constantly hunger for ego gratification (sounds like a certain always-in-the-spotlight president I know), they are immature (constantly lashing out at those who disagree with him), constantly need to demonstrate their own superiority (or perceived superiority), often need endless sexual conquests (like Bill Clinton), are manipulative (right again), constant liars (NAILED IT!), are completely cold about the human beings they harm (like John Edwards), and they deal with frustration by uncontrollable fits of rage.  (the classic clinical description of “pathological narcissism” describes Barack Hussein Obama to a T)

I think that’s what we saw last week with the White House lashing out at Fox News.

According to the New York Times,

“Speaking privately at the White House on Monday with a group of columnists and commentators, including Rachel S. Maddow and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich and Bob Herbert of The New York Times,

President Obama himself gave vent to sentiments about the (Fox) network, according to people briefed on the conversation… ” (italics added).  (“Waaahhh, waaahhh, waaahhh!  Those mean people disagree with me!  I’m going to beat them up!)

So Obama didn’t even keep this thing on background. He allowed himself to be quoted in his favorite rag, the New York Times. Dowd, Maddow, Herbert, and Rich did their part by going into attack-dog mode against conservatives. They know exactly what Obama needs and wants, and to keep in good stead with this White House, they feed that hungry ego with the most outrageous flattery and imitation.

It is a perfect symbiosis. Obama is easy to manipulate, and liberal commentators are used to demonize the opposition. They’ve all been raised on Rules for Radicals.

Obama’s thin skin is shared by his coterie. US News and World Report wrote:

Team Obama was pushed over the brink by a growing list of what it considered outrageous anti-Obama conduct by Fox that showed no sign of stopping. Obama’s advisers say that they seethed while Fox commentators used their shows to encourage protests against Obama’s healthcare proposals last summer. Team Obama fumed as Fox personalities tried to pressure some controversial Obama advisers to resign.

White House officials say that Fox has continued to stir the pot against Obama in a regular pattern — raising a criticism, having Republican congressional leaders comment on it, and then using those comments to keep the criticism alive.  (In other words, Fox News was doing EXACTLY what journalists are supposed to do.  They are supposed to be skeptical, supposed to question EVERYONE, and supposed to verify EVERYTHING.)

A break point came when Fox tried to create the impression that angry anti-Obama protesters at congressional town hall meetings last summer signaled that Obama’s healthcare proposals were dying, a story line that other news organization picked up. White House officials say this was untrue, that those proposals were not dying at all.

Another break point came when Fox commentator Chris Wallace called White House officials “crybabies.” A senior Obama adviser tells U.S. News that White House staffers developed “a growing realization” that the president would never get a fair shake from Fox.  (To Obama and his zOmbies, it’s only fair if it’s what Obama thinks and wants you to say.)

Notice the need to have total obedience from the whole press. Fox News is a small part of the total media, but they’ve driven the Obees into a fit. Of course, every single president in American history has been targeted by the media, and generally much, much worse than Obama has. Take George W. Bush, for example. (But I forgot…Bush was Evil, and Obama is Good.  Well, that explains it.)

Last week’s coordinated Obama attack on Fox News made no PR sense. Fox increased its viewership by 10%. Obama lost points in the polls; you can give the American people only so many demonstrations of the Chicago Way before they figure out you aren’t the Great Healer after all.

Obama is far and away the biggest and most naïve narcissist in living memory to occupy the White House. He hasn’t been smoothed and polished by years of deal-making in the Senate like LBJ. The outrage looks like it was just an uncontrollable expression of who Obama and his crew are. If we get more of this, Obama’s carefully buffed sheen will be permanently damaged for the saner 70% of the population. The other 30% will always fall for him anyway.

Pathological narcissism is a reflection of weakness, not strength. Tom Bevan at RealClearPolitics points out how much of it has been happening in less than a year of this administration, including months of a honeymoon period. Obama constantly uses wild and irresponsible accusations against his perceived enemies. Bevan writes:

In the first nine months in office President Obama and/or members of his administration have accused doctors of performing unnecessary medical procedures for profit; demonized bond holders as ‘speculators’; produced a report suggesting military veterans are prone to becoming right wing extremists; attacked insurance companies and threatened them with legislative retribution; ridiculed talk show hosts and political commentators by name from the White House podium; dismissed and demeaned protesters and town hall attendees as either unauthentic or fringe characters; maligned a white police officer for arresting a black man without knowing the facts of the case; launched an orchestrated campaign to marginalize the country’s biggest pro-business group; and publicly declared war on a news organization.

When Obama runs into brick walls, he seems to reflexively go into a state of rage. Bill Clinton was the same way, and so was LBJ. But Clinton and LBJ had a lot of time to learn to moderate their own worst instincts. The best thing that ever happened to Bill Clinton as president was the election of the Gingrich Congress in 1994, which forced him to deal with reality. Jimmy Carter has been on a constant narcissistic revenge campaign since he lost to Ronald Reagan and never got a second term. It explains a lot about Jimmy’s amazing destructiveness against his favorite whipping boy, Israel.

The same thing will happen to Obama if and when he loses the election in 2012. Since narcissists in power keep people around them in a constant state of fear — everybody gets targeted and feels insecure — you can expect a ton of dirty tricks in elections to come. But then Democrats constantly use dirty tricks.

I fear two things with Obama. One is if the GOP fails to elect a House majority in 2010 to keep Obama within the bounds of sanity. A GOP majority is essential for the safety of the country and the world. But even if Obama is defeated in 2012, he will just turn into an angrier version of Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. He will haunt the political future of this country as long as he is alive, because that famished ego never gets enough. Malignant narcissism often gets worse over time. And on the Left and among blacks, Obama will still have love and adoration enough to keep him supplied. He is an easy target for flattery by the Saudis, even the Iranians — in fact, by all the real enemies we have.

So even if the voters throw out this very dangerous cult-like administration, you can expect Obama to be popping up in our politics for years to come. He will haunt the Democrats, which might be a good thing. But he will haunt the United States as well, even if he is defeated in 2012.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/narcissistic_rage_in_the_white_1.html at October 30, 2009 – 03:02:26 PM EDT

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Self Portrait

The problem with this poser is he knows how to divide loaves and fishes, but he doesn’t know how to multiply them.