Instinctively, he’s wrong

Byline: | Category: 2012 | Posted at: Monday, 26 March 2012

I have followed the Trayvor Martin/George Zimmerman issue only slightly, which is to say that I have as little information about the facts of the case as do 99% of other commenters–including, apparently, the President.

After it has been alleged that there may be exculpatory evidence that would support Mr. Zimmerman’s version of the events, Glenn Reynolds voiced concurrence with a reader’s comment regarding the oddity of the President’s willingness to take sides in an ongoing investigation of a local matter.  The reader believes that the President got involved in the case, as well as in other controversial issues, because of bad poll numbers:

IMHO, what’s going in in the WH these days is really, really bad poll numbers. How else can one explain an investment in clearly polarizing issues like picking a fight with both the church and Rush Limbaugh, race-baiting with Trayvon, a flirtation with an advocacy of gay marriage, Stalin-esque striking down of voter ID laws, et. Al. The softness in numbers with the black population must really be stark, otherwise, why bring this stuff up? There’s no upside with independent voters with any of these issues.

Let me suggest another, simpler cause:  the President has bad instincts.

A couple weeks ago I had lunch with a Republican friend who shared with me his contempt for Sarah Palin in 2008.  Let’s discuss Governor Palin another time, but I bring this up because I rebutted with the fact that I like her because I like her instincts.  Instincts are those things that we are programmed by experience to do automatically in the face of incomplete information.  The one quality I absolutely want to see in a leader at any level is good instincts, because often, there just isn’t time to be 100% sure of anything.  As Governmor, Ms. Palin demonstrated a history of trusting indivduals Alaskans over the entrenched interests of big oil and big government.  I happen to share those same biases, so I trust her instincts.

So what do we know of President Obama’s instincts.  In the absence of complete knowledge, apparently he reflexively views typical white people, particularly the police, as bitter clingers to antiquated doctrines.  Meanwhile, he appears to be solicitous towards adversaries and competitors, even at the expense of friends and while giving short shrift to long-time allies.

There is a name for this kind of instinct:  it is called bad judgment.  We see it recently when the Administration supports the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars on projects with little potential for return on investment without government intervention, but who denies approval for projects that cost the taxpayer nothing because investors are glad to bring their own money to the table.  I could go on, but there are numerous other examples of where the President’s choice has been magnificently wrong.  

The President’s acoyltes attribute the shortcomings of his actions to bad luck, incomplete knowledge, and political opposition, but maybe the truth is that he is wrong far more often than he is right and that the President’s frequent miscues are not part of a political plan, but are simply the result of the President’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad instincts.

UPDATE:  Thanks to Glenn for the link.  While you’re here, take a look around.

Share this post:

25 Responses to “Instinctively, he’s wrong”

  1. Sean Braisted Says:

    What exactly in the President’s response to the question about Treyvon Martin do you take umbrage with?

    Calling it a tragedy?
    Saying it should be investigated fully?
    Expressing sympathy for the parents of the dead child?

    Even if Treyvon Martin attacked this guy with his skittles, its still a tragedy. Even if this Zimmerman guy is cleared of charges, does that make this kid’s life worthless or his parent’s pain any less real?

    Maybe he should’ve just avoided answering the question, but then it would’ve disheartened and disappointed an entire community that looks to him as a role model. He straddled the line between expressing sympathy and prejudicing the case. His response was completely appropriate.

    >> mr. president, may i ask you about this current case in florida, very controversial allegations of listenering racism within our society of the so-called stand your ground law and the justice in that. can you comment on the travon martin case , sir?

    >> well, i’m the head of the executive branch . and the attorney general reports to me. so i‘ve got to be careful about my statements to make sure that we’re not impairing any investigation that’s taking place right now. but obviously, this is a tragedy. i can only imagine what these parents are going through. and when i think about this boy, i think about my own kids. and you know, i think every parent in america should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this. and that everybody pulls together, federal, state and local, to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened. so i’m glad that not only is the justice department looking into it, i understand now that the governor of the state of florida has formed a task force to investigate what is taking place. to do some soul searching to figure out how does something like this happen. and that means that we examine the laws and the context for what happened. as well as the specifics of the incident. but my main message is to the parents of trayvon martin. you know, if i had a son, he would look like trayvon. and, you know, i think they are right to expect that all of us as americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened. all right.

    Ed: The correct presidential response was, and still is: “It’s a tragedy that a young man is dead. But this is an ongoing local investigation and I’m afraid that I have no more details about the situation than do you. Therefore it would be inappropriate for me to comment.”

    Where you are wrong is when you state that this response “would’ve disheartened and disappointed an entire community that looks to him as a role model.” Yes, that might have disappointed the black “community,” but President Obama is no longer a community organizer. He is President of all Americans, to include those “white Hispanic” citizens who don’t look like his sons. And as such he doesn’t take, or even imply that he has taken, sides. Instinctively, however, he has.

  2. Instapundit » Blog Archive » OBAMA’S PROBLEM: Bad Instincts? Says:

    [...] OBAMA’S PROBLEM: Bad Instincts? [...]

  3. Jack Says:

    This ginned up furor about a “white” Hispanic killing a black teenager is very similar to the ginned up outrage that occurs when a non-muslim kills a Muslim.

    When black men kill black men or black women in outrageous numbers no one in the black community seems to care.

    This is tribalism hiding its own implicit racism, straight up.

  4. JeffC Says:

    “would’ve disheartened and disappointed an entire community that looks to him as a role model.”

    in other words they expect him to be a racialist …

  5. Lars Groteballen Says:

    Looks like Sean is making light of the situation with “Even if Treyvon Martin attacked this guy with his skittles”.

    Not sure Trayvon was still holding the famed and heart-wrenching Skittles while he broke Zimmerman’s nose and split the back of his scalp on the pavement.

    Sean, you’re coming off as a little dense if you don’t see the connection between Obama making mention of Martin’s skin color, and the growing mobs, “Cracker” t-shirts, the bounty offered by The NEW! Black Panthers. Why do the NBP feel so comfortable that they can run a lynching contest?

    Don’t answer that, for you it’s obviously a trick question. You should stop trying to be not-so-racist, and try to be more aware of the world around you. My guess is you’ve never been in mortal danger, so your world view is more that of child, than an adult.

    You might even be fully unaware of where the tragedy lies.

    BTW, Trayvon’s Mother is busy cashing in. Send her some money if it makes you feel better. Meanwhile Zimmerman is in hiding, stripped of his ethnicity to serve a higher purpose shared by Sharpton, Jackson, The NBP and yes, Obama.

  6. Cory Says:

    A person’s instincts flow from their world view (their religion, ideology, fundamental belief system). The president has very bad instincts because he has adopted a very faulty world view.

    His view consists of a world of victims and oppressors, with those roles having been predetermined and not subject to debate (whites and capitalists are the oppressors, all others are the victims).

    It is true there are victims and oppressors in this world, but they are a far more multicultural crowd than the president’s world view seems to allow.

  7. All Too Much Says:

    http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/trayvon-martin-trademarks-769123

    MARCH 26–The mother of Trayvon Martin has filed two applications to secure trademarks containing her late son’s name, records show.

    Sybrina Fulton is seeking marks for the phrases “I Am Trayvon” and “Justice for Trayvon,” according to filings made last week with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. In both instances, Fulton, 46, is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products..”

  8. Rich K Says:

    If the dude was white or hispanic or asian the pResident would never have opened his yap in the first place so STFU all of you who think he should have said anything or even bothered to address this non event.Only “black” made this a big anything,nothing more.

  9. Multitude Says:

    Sean can’t possibly be sincere and lacks basic credibility in his clearly skewed comments above. Every marginally aware individual understands that there are hundreds of millions of events daily in the country (not to mention the greater world); for the President to freeze, analyze, highlight and comment on one itself is a profound statement. It is the foundation of the framing, construction and production of narrative.

    Obama’s existence is about the advancement of that radical communitarian narrative, built upon fear, power and control. His language about how Treyvon could almost be his son had no place in civil discourse but was effective in linking the fainting mindless Obama drone masses and their emotional connection to the minister of hope and change to the reason-avoiding emotion of the Treyvon event. This very emotional construction is necessary to get blacks worked up hating whites even further (even though Zimmerman’s not a white, as much as Reuters and the Times try to impose this new “white hispanic” fiction). Hate, fear and anger are necessary to mobilize the progressives into the streets to sustain Obama’s program of totalitarian advancement.

    And regarding the parents, Sean, I’d be curious how you respond to the news that Treyvon’s mom is out shopping for a registered Trademark on Treyvon’s name so she can ensure a larger cut of the profits on all the t-shirts, bumper stickers and books the radical left is about to produce to exploit the event for political purposes.

  10. Moe Lane » #rsrh Obama Hoodies? …That’s just low-rent, Mr. President. Says:

    [...] like Obama and his campaign team never think about this stuff, you know?  Bob Krumm (via Instapundit) has the right of it: the President has inherently poor judgement and worse [...]

  11. Bruce Hayden Says:

    To further make your point about bad political instincts, keep in mind that Zimmerman is apparently Hispanic. The Blacks, if they go to the polls, are going to vote for Obama, regardless. But, one of the reasons that he won was that the Hispanics swing towards him pretty strongly in the last election.

    I remember back in 1999, seeing those pictures of the federal storm troopers removing Elián González from his relatives at machine gun point, that that may have cost the Dems the election. And, sure enough, a bit over a year later, Clinton’s VP, AlGore, lost Florida by a whisker (and a Supreme Court decision), and, as a result of that, the Presidency.

    The right instincts here, among other things, would not have had the President take sides against a larger minority, that is much more likely to swing decisively against him.

  12. TB Says:

    Obama’s “instincts” are perfectly consistent with his long-held beliefs.

    The confusion comes when people keep pretending his beliefs are something other than what they are.

    As for the trademark deal, I suspect some greedy lawyer or self-styled manager pushed a distraught mother into that for his own reasons.

  13. Diggs Says:

    Using Occam’s Razor, it’s a bit easier to believe that Obama is simply not that smart.

  14. TRice Says:

    As noted in a few of the comments so far, instincts are filtered through a person’s world view and life experience. What we know of Obama is that he was raised and mentored in a stew of hateful and marxist ideology from his parents, grandparents, and his choice of colleges, churches, and political affiliations.

    I’m new here via Instapundit, but I think the intelligence and common sense represented in the commentary is a nice reflection of your readership.

  15. Andrew Says:

    Yeah, I agree with this. The president seems to have a high degree of in-group loyalty toward certain ethnic groups and demonstrates some of the more negative side effects of our K-16 education system. He is a rational fool.

  16. ExRat Says:

    Well, I hope to God you’re right about the President’s instincts, because one really scary alternative is that he is trying to bring down the United States.

    Why? Because he was brought up to believe that the United States’ success came at the cost of third world squalor, and he believes the US must atone for its sins.

  17. crypticguise Says:

    Instinctively, he’s what he is – a Marxist ideologue and he’s simply playing the race-card for all it’s worth.

    Obama looks at this incident the same way, Jeremiah Wright would, and Jessie Jackson, and the Reverand Al, and the New Black Panthers and Black Muslims – they are all RACE HUSTLERS.

    Zimmerman is darker than Obama. And this incident is just so much BS. Blacks are 13% of the population and they commit at least half the murders and violent crimes in the United States. Blacks also kill 98% of the blacks who are murdered.

    White people are just fed up with this nonsensical race-baiting, race-hustle of our President and his followers.

  18. Wondering Says:

    If Zimmerman is a “white Hispanic” for purposes of ginning up antipathy and polarizing the racialist community against him, then it would follow that the pResident should be referred to as a “white African” for the same purposes? The comparison is completely analogous.

    Of course, the analogy points out the utter corruption of the point of view, for neither person should be viewed based upon their genetic or ethnic heritage, which they cannot control, but for their motivations and actions alone.

  19. Black-on-Black Says:

    Obama’s elaborate bid for the 2016 Olympics was undone by black-on-black violence on the streets of his “home town.”

    The President was outdone by a YouTube video of four shirtless black brutes opening honor roll student Derrion Albert’s skull with two-by-fours.

    In Denmark, Obama enthused, “visitors from around the world (will) feel welcome and will come away with a sense of the incredible diversity of the American people…”

    Then the committee looked at the video produced by Obama’s presumed constituents in the streets of Chicago and decided they weren’t interested in that kind of “diversity.”

  20. Baby M Says:

    Mr. Obama is undoubtedly a very intelligent man, in terms of raw talent or book-learning ability or IQ tests or whatever yardstick you want to lose. He’s probably been told all of his life that he’s the smartest guy in the room, and that observation was probably true on many occasions.

    He is not, however, very smart.

    he’s spent his entire life until the last few years among people who pretty much agreed with him on everything, and never had to interact on any sustained basis with people of different ideologies or from different subcultures from the left-liberal elite. he’s never had the experience of working with, and learning to get along with, someone who thinks differently from him. He has a profound lack of empathy, and a poor understanding of human nature to go with it, and he’s constantly surprised by how people react to what he does.

    He also seems not to appreciate that even the smartest guy in the room doesn’t know everything. I get the distinct impression that his ego’s a little overclocked, and that manifests itself in an unwillingness to compromise–and probably contributed to the fanatical determination he had to shove Obamacare down the throats of the American people.

  21. richard40 Says:

    Have you ever noticed that the big point in Obamas favor, from the media in 2008, was that his election would promote racial healing, but that almost every statement Obama and his allies have made on any racial matter since he has been elected, has actually made things worse, and devided us even more. Obama, racial healer, NOT.

  22. Micha Elyi Says:

    Obama’s ‘instincts’ aren’t telling him but (1) the statute of limitations on payback for Jim Crow has run out and, (2) in large part because of Obama himself, the general public is slowing waking up to that fact.

  23. JoeS Says:

    Will the President stand up and condemn the New Black Panthers for offering $10,000 DEAD OR ALIVE for Mr Zimmerman?

    I guess he is not a man of valor, Sarah Palin is correct.

    Is his support for the New Black Panthers the reason the “Justice” department did not prosecute the NBP members blocking a polling place with clubs?

    Notice that Mr Zimmerman and his wife mentored two black children.

    http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?catid=57403854&feed_id=1&videofeed=null

    Obama and Eric Holder are the racists, not Mr Zimmerman.

  24. anne scheidler Says:

    You could be right in saying that the President has terrible instincts which explains his prejudicial responses in several cases in the past three years, especially including the several race issues you have highlighted. I might agree with you if he occasionally made a bad judgment. Or even frequently. But the President has continually made “bad judgments” on almost every situation he has responded to including energy issues, financial issues, social issues, military issues, foreign issues and on every policy front that there is. Since I cannot name one decision he has made that has been in the end a positive, I am convinced that this can no longer be chalked up to bad judgment. I think at this point, I can only surmise that the President has a deeper, more pervasive and destructive ideology which is driving his decision making. That ideology is not in line with the guiding principles of our Republic. It is not even in line with our Constitution or with America as we have known it. Cutting him a break with a few bad judgments is reasonable. Continuing to give him the benefit of the doubt is foolhardy!

  25. BobKrumm.com » You betcha! Says:

    [...] promised last week to discuss Sarah Palin and why some people are fascinated, repulsed, and generally obsessed with [...]