The media, in their mania to obscure the Obama scandals, will occasionally try to focus us elsewhere, e.g., the Redskins (by their logic, wearing the number three is an insult to Babe Ruth) or the “epidemic” of bullying.
We are learning that bullies are no longer simply categorized as the muscular brutes from my youth. Maureen Dowd, a liberal Obama sycophant, recently called Dick Cheney a “nasty bully.” Apparently Cheney’s being a bully is not enough for Dowd; he must occupy a special category of “nasty.” Jonathon Martin, a six-and-a-half foot professional football behemoth, quit his team allegedly because they were bullying him. So along with being nasty, today’s bullies inflict nonphysical damage to their victims which, sadly, may result in suicide.
Nonphysical bullies bully verbally to frighten, coerce, intimidate and dominate their victims. Cyberbullies spread rumors and socially alienate others by using the cosmos. The most obvious characteristic of bullies is their cowardice. They don’t pick on their intellectual or physical equals, let alone superiors, unless they have a mob to back them up. We could go on and on about the categories and nature of bullies, but what is most important is to identify them in our culture and shield ourselves from their insidiousness.
When the term bully pulpit was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt, he meant the president had a superb platform to promote his agenda. Bully then meant superb or good as in bully for you. Bully today, as we have seen, has taken on a whole new meaning – and so has bully pulpit.
If Cheney is a bully, he could damage a lot of people because he has a significant bully pulpit in our society. Think of the damage that could be done if we had a bully in our premier bully pulpit. Unfortunately, we do.
When bullying became newsworthy, and I noticed President Obama’s numerous bullyings, I had no idea that there was actually a definition for serial bullies. If Maureen Dowd wanted to focus on a really nasty serial bully, she could easily have chosen President Barack Obama (although our political class is full of them. Sen. Harry Reid, for example, at Obama’s behest, bullying the Senate minority on the nuclear option).
Let’s look at the definition. A serial bully: “Is often found in popular circles; is controlled, charismatic and calculating; is a skilled manipulator and convincing liar; excels at deception; is glib, shallow and superficial with exceptional verbal facility; is self-opinionated, arrogant with a superior sense of entitlement; appears sweet and charming; is a control freak; displays a compulsive need to criticize; portrays himself as wonderful, kind, caring and compassionate; refuses to be specific and never gives a straight answer; has a Houdini like ability to escape accountability.”
Does any of this sound familiar? It goes on but someone has done a lot of work in this arena.
For all those focused on the president’s alleged narcissism, they might look at the definition of a serial bully.
Keeping in mind the definition of verbal bullying (frighten, coerce, intimidate and dominate others), let’s look at some examples of Obama’s serial bullying: The Supreme Court, the Cambridge police (acted stupidly), those who cling to their guns and Bibles (most of America), the Republicans, Christians, George Bush, George Zimmerman, the Redskins, Paul Ryan, the CIA (alleged torturing), military leaders, his grandmother (typical white person), the tea party, conservatives (through the IRS), insurance companies (the health-care issue was never about health care; it was about the insurance companies), Israel, successful Americans, Fox News etc., ad infinitum.
In fact, he bullies anyone who disagrees with him. Now he could not – and would not – bully without serious backup: His mob is the media, who, by the way, are the worst bullies in our society.
Perhaps as interesting as who he bullies are those he does not bully – radical Muslims as such, Islam on treatment of women, late-term abortionists (did he ever denounce the greatest serial killer in our history, Kermit Gosnell?), supporters of same-sex “marriages” (he once lied that he supported traditional marriage), North Korea’s dictator, the Muslim Brotherhood, black “leadership” (race fascists such as Jackson and Sharpton) on black crime and the breakdown of black families (soaring illegitimacy), “knockout” black thugs and Hollywood. How about those incredible incompetents in his own administration? (He is afraid to fire them, knowing many would become whistleblowers.)
Of all the responsibilities of the president, none is more important than the example he sets for our children. We have seen how many of our youth, after Clinton, thought fellatio was OK. It is unseemly for young people to see the president publically intimidate lesser nobles. Reasoned debate is a good thing; bullying is another. It would be tragic in this time when bullying is a national tragedy if they took his lead, as they did with Clinton, and imitated it in their lives.