will the real slim shady please stand up?

“I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street. They’re still puzzled why is it that people are mad at the banks. Well, let’s see. You guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it’s gone through in—in decades, and you guys caused the problem. And we’ve got 10% unemployment.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 12 December 2009

“I know both those guys [JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO Jamie Dimon and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein]; they are very savvy businessmen. I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 9 February 2010

“What that means then is that as we try to resuscitate this notion that we’re all in this thing together, leave nobody behind, we do have to be innovative and thinking what are the delivery systems that are actually effective and meet people where they live. And my suggestion, I guess would be that the trick, and this is one of the few areas where I think there are technical issues that have to be dealt with as opposed to just political issues. I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure everybody’s got a shot.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 19 October 1998

“My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 11 October 2008

“I’m gonna cut taxes a little bit more for the folks who are most in need and for the 5 percent of the folks who are doing very well—even though they’ve been working hard and I appreciate that—I just want to make sure they’re paying a little bit more in order to pay for those other tax cuts.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 9 February 2010

“So these investments—in things like education and research and health care—they haven’t been made as some grand scheme to redistribute wealth from one group to another. This is not some socialist dream.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 10 April 2012

“I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 15 February 1996

“Well, what I believe, in my faith, is that a man and a woman, when they get married, are performing something before God, and it’s not simply the two persons who are meeting. But that doesn’t mean that that necessarily translates into a position on public policy or with respect to civil unions. What it does mean is that we have a set of traditions in place that, I think, need to be preserved, but I also think we have to make sure that gays and lesbians have the same set of basic rights that are in place. And I was glad to see, for example, that the president today apparently stated that he was in favor of civil unions. This may be a reversal of his position but I think it’s a healthy one. I think, on this, President Bush and I disagree, apparently, with Mr. Keyes on this, because I think that that kind of basic ethic of regard towards all people, regardless of sexual orientation, is a valuable thing.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 26 October 2004

“With respect to the issue of whether gays and lesbians should be able to get married, I’ve spoken about this recently. As I’ve said, my feelings about this are constantly evolving. I struggle with this. I have friends, I have people who work for me, who are in powerful, strong, long-lasting gay or lesbian unions. And they are extraordinary people, and this is something that means a lot to them and they care deeply about.
    At this point, what I’ve said is, is that my baseline is a strong civil union that provides them the protections and the legal rights that married couples have. And I think—and I think that’s the right thing to do. But I recognize that from their perspective it is not enough, and I think is something that we’re going to continue to debate and I personally am going to continue to wrestle with going forward.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 22 December 2010

“I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors, when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together; when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.”

—Barack Hussein Obama, 9 May 2012

5 thoughts on “will the real slim shady please stand up?”

  1. Mr. Zeleny, I understand your disgust on hypocrisy, unprincipled opportunitisms in general.

    However, fairly recently, I’ve come to an understanding that hypocrisy, and unprincipled opportunitism are not necessarily mututally inclusive.

    In fact, in profoundly courageous in philosophical sense, (I don’t like to use the word, ‘moral’ since ‘moral’ according to whom?) hypocrisy, at least in technical sense can be mutually exclusive with unprincipled opportunism.

    I’ll provide examples of how an act of hypocrisy can be ‘morally’ courageous, and humane, even by the people who I believe believe hypocrisy is ‘morally’ wrong, and cowardly.

    1a. Philosophy

    There are several kinds of philosophy associated with a person.

    A. A philosophy one really believes in.

    B. A philosophy one thinks one believes in.

    Now, remember, they’re not necessarily the same.

    c. A philosophy one knows one doesn’t believe in, but merely pretends to believe in. There are two variations of C.

    C1. A philosophy one merely pretends to believe in so as to boost one’s own self-esteem, and/or to rationalize all the acts one regards as mistakes one has made and/or will make.

    C2. A philsophy one merely pretends to believe in so as to derive certain kind of benefits from one’s ‘audience’, be they ‘allies’, ‘friends’, or ‘enemies’, or ‘opponents’.

    d. A philosophy one’s ‘audience’ thinks one believes in.

    It’s not necessarily A.

    e. A philosophy one’s ‘audience’ thinks one thinks one believes in.

    It’s not necessarily B.

    f1. A philosophy one’s ‘audience’ thinks one knows one doesn’t believe in but merely pretends to believe in for purpose C1.

    It’s not necessarily C1.

    f2. A philosophy one’s ‘audience’ thinks one doesn’t believe in but merely pretends to believe in so as to derive certain kind of benefits from one’s ‘audience’.

    It’s not necessarily c2.

    Well, enough philosophy for the time being. Now, time for stories.

    1. The strange case of Arthur Nebe, kind of darker, more ruthless version of Shindler.


    Did he not save far more people, both Jews and Gentiles than Shinder?

    Could he not have played a far more decisive role in ending Holocaust than Shindler? After all, what Shinder did was nothing more than a band aid solution.

    This leads to an interesting predicatment.

    What should a rational person do?

    1. Save 1,000 innocent people without killing anyone


    2. Save 1,000,000 innnocent people, but have to kill

    250,000 innocent people to do it.

    3. Same as 2, except these 250,000 innocent people to be killed are doomed anyway whether one kills them or not.

    Obviously, Mr. Zeleny, I do not expect you to answer the question. I just want you to think about it.

    Then there’s the case of Strom Thurmond.

    Yes, he was a liar, and a hypocrite, but he couldn’t have accomplished what he accomplished without being a liar and a hypocrite.

      1. “If you think that all politicians are assholes,…..”

        No, I don’t, but I think about half of them are, and the most of the rest are either cowards or whores.

        “I stand by my counterexamples.”

        What I am saying is hypocrisiy by ITSELF, alone (that is, based on what a politician SAYS he/she believes to get the votes AT THE MOMENT) cannot be the basis of deciding whether the politician is an asshole or not.

        The criteria of deciding whether a politician is an asshole or not should be based on what the politician really believes and whether he/she stays true to those beliefs and whether he/she adopted those belief out of ideal or whether he/she accepted the belief out of ideal if initially adopted for other reason(s) and whether he/she genuninely believes the belief would lead to the most optimal condition for the society he/she believes in, using the most up to date information available to him/her.

        I’ll give you another real life example from Korean history.


        Obviously, the eldest prince was a liar and a hypocrite, and did everything he could to make others think he was an asshole.

        But was he?

        Btw. I am sorry that I had to use wikipedia since now I am aware wikipedia is not really necessarily trustable source of info unless verfired by some other sources that I trust. I had been aware of this particular story long before wikipedia.

        “Obama is in a whole nother category.”

        That Obama is a liar and a hypocrite, I do not dispute. I had been aware of this long before I read your post.

        You may be right.about him. . I am simply saying I don’t agree about the criteria you used to judge him as such.

        1. Obama is mostly a lightweight blowhard. Sejong the Great was anything but that. All the same, there are no straightforward analogies between the POTUS and a mediaeval monarch.

          1. “Obama is mostly a lightweight blowhard.”

            I THINK he is, too and a bit of coward and a whore as well, but a whore with very talented mouth, certainly better than Monica.

            However, I do not wish to confuse what I THINK with what IS, and/or what may be and/or what could be.

            “Sejong the Great was anything but that.”

            I was talking about the eldest prince who interntionally behaved as if he was an asshole so that the more talented younger prince/brother acend to the throne.

            “All the same, there are no straightforward analogies between the POTUS and a mediaeval monarch.”

            The analogies was about the BEHAVIOR and the interntion behind it, not the title.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *