Piecing Together Obama’s Grab for ‘Legacy’

Scrambled puzzleBy Jeff Rutherford

I believe President Obama honestly does not want Iran to have a nuclear bomb.  Many conservative bloggers won’t concede that, but I will.

However, I cut Obama no further slack – because he and his administration are being spectacularly naïve in their tunnel vision pursuit of a deeply flawed nuclear disarmament deal with Iran.

Yes, spectacular.

Barack Obama’s second-term Administration is unprecedented in its impetuous strutting out onto the thinnest of tree limbs.  On Iran, this White House has ignored warnings, side-stepped checks and balances, abandoned all respect for Constitutional separation of powers, criticized qualified skeptics, and turned a deaf ear to the increasingly alarmed public opinion.

Obama’s solo high-wire act was foretold by his Chief of Staff Denis McDonough on Nov 7, 2014:  “…Washington [will be] working better if the President has his way.  And that’s what he’s gonna do.”  When asked how, McDonough grinned and vaguely said “Well, we’re gonna do it any number of ways.”

Every fiber in Obama’s body apparently assures him, “I got this.  Back off, everybody.”

But why??

I already wrote recently that Obama’s foreign policy naïveté clearly matches the centuries-old pattern – according to Dr. Thomas Sowell – of the Left’s utopian dogma on how to secure international peace.  Leftist diplomacy is rooted in a philosophy of wishful appeasement.  The 6 steps on the left side of this graphic could be straight out of Obama’s current foreign policy playbook.

Side-by-side comparison of peace keeping stepsTo me, Dr. Sowell’s analysis of the Left’s unconstrained vision fully explains Obama’s flawed philosophy about striking world peace.

But what explains Obama’s unleashed audacity?  His razor sharp elbows?  His raw greed for this Iran deal?

A theory hit me 2 weeks ago, but I wanted to do some reading first, gathering research to substantiate my hunch.

I compiled an Obama-presidency timeline of relevant news headlines.  I was careful to stay away from pundit opinion columns.  I’m only listing actual news articles from respected major sources, who (we’re constantly assured) are reliable sources of straight news:

Puzzle bullets6/16/2009, NY Times:  Obama Warns Against Direct Involvement by U.S. in Iran [Protests]

6/24/2009, CNN:  Obama Sent Letter to Iran Leader Before [Iran’s Disputed] Election

10/9/2009, CNN:  Obama: Nobel Peace Prize is ‘call to action’

3/21/2010, Newsweek:  Why Obama Was So Angry at Netanyahu

7/6/2010, London Daily Telegraph:  Barack Obama: NASA must try to make Muslims ‘feel good’

12/9/2011, Washington Post:  Obama’s Iran policy shifts to containment

4/5/2012, Washington Post:  Obama’s Signal to Iran [that he’ll accept a nuclear program]

9/13/2012, NY Times:  Obama Rebuffs Netanyahu on Setting Limits on Iran’s Nuclear Program

9/23/2012, CBS News:  Obama will “block out any noise that is out there” [from Netanyahu]

11/24/2013, CNN:  Iran nuclear deal – President Barack Obama’s legacy moment on Iran

12/7/2013, LA Times:  Obama says Iran could be allowed a modest nuclear enrichment program

12/9/2013, Time:  Obama’s Iran Gamble: The President’s diplomatic legacy of transformation

3/20/2014, CNN:  Obama to Iranians: “We have the opportunity to start down a new path”

4/26/2014, US News:  Why aren’t the terms of the Iran nuclear deal public?

10/19/2014, NY Times:  Obama Sees an Iran Deal That Could Avoid Congress

12/29/2014, Reuters:  Obama interview at NPR: Iran has “chance to get right with the world”

1/21/2015, US News & World Report:  Obama Administration to Congress on Iran: Butt Out

1/28/2015, Washington Times:  Obama-tied operatives hit anti-Netanyahu campaign trail in Israel

3/3/2015, Reuters:  Israel’s Netanyahu draws rebuke from Obama over Iran speech to Congress

4/2/2015, Seattle Times:  Obama hails Iran framework as ‘historic’ understanding


What is the Obama mindset formed by these puzzle pieces?

First, here’s what his mindset isn’t:

Obama isn’t just shunning Congressional involvement because he believes the critics in Congress are wrong.  It’s more than that.

Obama isn’t just exhibiting the Jimmy Carter-esque dreamer’s diplomacy, believing events magically come true by simply wishing they were true and smiling a lot.  It’s more than that.

Obama isn’t just hoping Iran will change, and earn the trust that he is speculatively pre-investing in them.  It’s more than that.

Obama isn’t just ignoring the Reagan doctrine of Peace Through Strength which brought down the USSR’s iron curtain.  It’s more than that.

Here’s what his mindset is:

Obama wants to demonstrate that the Middle East’s entrenched theocratic governments do not need to be overthrown by protestors, or collapsed under crushing sanctions, for their human rights policies to graduate into modernity.  He wants to win them over, intact, to “the right side of history.”

Obama wants nobody else’s ingredients mixed into his recipe for reaching a nuclear weapons deal with Iran.  He wants the Obama Doctrine to prevail.

Obama wants the peaceful ideology of the Middle East’s theocratic countries to rise above the bloodstained sand-scapes.  He doesn’t just believe Iran will “see the light.”  Obama sees HIMSELF as the BRINGER of that light.  He wants this deal to occur BECAUSE of his patient confidence in Iran’s imminent reform, as a triumph of the Left’s benevolent wisdom of peaceful diplomacy.

Thus, the President wants these seminal achievements to be inarguably attributed to Barack Obama.  His visionary courage is to be lauded as the singular catalyst for these events.  His sheer force of will, persevering against all skepticism and opposition, is to be solely credited for achieving the greatest single leap forward for world peace in modern history.  He yearns to secure this lofty legacy as his rightful tribute.

Clarified puzzleThis is the root of Barack Obama’s “aggressive ignorance” of reality.  If he incorporates anybody else’s precautions into his solution, then it would be watered down and no longer indisputably HIS legacy.  He longs to stand ALONE in the spotlight of the history books.

As a result, he has John Kerry pushing this nuclear negotiating strategy mostly in secret, and seems to have instructed Kerry to stop at nothing to get a deal.  Like Thelma and Louise, Obama and Kerry think the way to drive into the history books is to clasp hands, punch the gas pedal and “Go.”

Obama and Kerry clasp hands


About Necessary and Proper

Jeff believes in the Individual's ability to excel when liberty and freedom of choice are protected. Also believes in the Community's ability to take care of the vast majority of its own issues and needs when the federal government leaves the Community's resources and sphere of control alone. State and local choice produce better results than centralized federal control. https://necessaryandpropergovt.wordpress.com/
This entry was posted in Politics in Practice, Theory of Gov't and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Piecing Together Obama’s Grab for ‘Legacy’

  1. It’s all one big pipe dream. You cant’ reason with a psychopath. And if Iran was a single person, it would be a psychopath. So you have a narcissist believing they can control a psychopath. And all being advised by an Iranian born, American hating, lawyer from the Chicago gang.of Obamaites……Geeze.


  2. That’s a hell of a read, Jeff – and a point of view I hadn’t previously thought of. You may well be right. One point I found particularly interesting:

    “He doesn’t just believe Iran will “see the light.” Obama sees HIMSELF as the BRINGER of that light… If he incorporates anybody else’s precautions into his solution, then it would be watered down and no longer indisputably HIS legacy. He longs to stand ALONE in the spotlight of the history books.”

    This makes perfect sense, and demonstrates what we all know, or perhaps I should say it magnifies what we know – that Obama has illusions of grandeur and wants to secure a place for himself in history AT LEAST equal to the founders of this nation. More likely he wants to go down in history as greater than them. Still, Obama’s way of trying to achieve this isn’t going to work because Iran holds a hatred for all things western as demonstrated by their “Death to America” chants and their vow to annihilate Israel. Much as Obama would like to believe otherwise, this isn’t going to change; hence Obama’s naivety.

    In the CBS article from 9/23/2012, there is a remark from Obama at the last of the article that illustrates a fundamental difference between his way of thinking and most of the rest of us: “Now I feel an obligation, not pressure but obligation, to make sure that we’re in close consultation with the Israelis on these issues because it affects them deeply. They’re ONE OF OUR CLOSEST ALLIES in the region.” (Emphasis mine)

    Israel isn’t ONE of our closest allies in the region – they ARE our closest and perhaps only true ally in the region.

    As I mentioned, your article brought some fresh perspective on Obama’s possible motives, but it reinforces my belief that this president is a narcissistic prima donna with dangerous tendencies bordering on megalomania.


    • TC, regarding your last sentence……I agree with you, but my goal was to avoid using the short cliches and terms of exasperation often used by conservatives who have thrown their hands up in frustration. Notice that my article was essentially a 960-word examination of the inner dynamics of narcissism, without ever using that word. That was no accident. I try to avoid having my articles sound like knee jerk diatribes or talking-point platitudes. Doesn’t mean I don’t agree, but I believe those who use ONLY that kind of phrasing have no chance in hell of ever persuading moderates to reject liberalism and become interested in the political philosophies of individual liberty and empowerment of entrepreneurial thinking. You haven’t ranted, but others have. Ranting may feel good, but it doesn’t CHANGE anybody’s mind. If we don’t change minds, we’ve accomplished nothing.

      Kind regards,
      – Jeff

      Liked by 1 person

    • vicki530 says:

      Tom, I’m convinced BHO is mentally ill, in the sense of, being wildly neurotic…and most likely something far worse. Sheesh, I guess we need to start vetting candidates over the state of their mental health. But, then, part of the major mental illnesses and personality disorders is their ability to look. speak, and act as though they are normal and brilliant. If Hillary is elected, I’m going to turn my focus to the frightening prospect that a vast majority of the citizenry are crackers and need strong meds…….


  3. Greg Ward says:

    “Obama sees HIMSELF as the BRINGER of that light.” – just brilliant! Very well researched and thought out post – great job!


  4. Mark says:

    Your observation that Obama see himself as the bringer of the light I believe is spot on. He is, after all, the one who will heal the nations and cause the oceans to stop rising. But there is something more. When the people of Iran revolted Obama stood with the Mullahs. Obama has wasted no chance to ingratiate himself with those that hate America and has gone out of his way to alienate and offend our true allies (From the UK to Ukraine and from Poland to Israel). He has toppled friendly regimes that were helping us fight terrorism and has replaced them by Al Quedia (at best) to ISIS (at worst) thug-theocracy. The thing that needs to be defined now is what kind of light bringer does Obama see himself as? From where I stand it looks like he is doing all he can do to usher in a new Dark Age.


    • Hi Mark,

      Thanks for the comment.

      One of the news articles I referenced (this one) addressed the June 2009 Iran election protests where Obama was silent at first. And then, as you point out, when he was essentially shamed into speaking out, the President criticized the Iranian government’s crackdown but he didn’t support the protesters. That’s what leads me to believe that he doesn’t want to topple ANY of the current Middle East theocracies. He wants to reform them in situ. He likely views the Middle East region as an “untapped” market for encouraging the spread of socialism, and he probably feels that can’t take root in anarchies like Libya and Somalia — since socialism requires a very pervasive state apparatus.

      – Jeff


  5. Steve says:

    Excellent piece of work. Impeccably researched as is your norm. You have a unique and, I believe, accurate read on Obama’s motivation. Still difficult for me to understand how he could be so blind to (or dismissive of) the improbability of his being successful. If I remember correctly, that ‘Thelma and Louise’ punch the gas pedal and go approach didn’t end well.


    • Thanks, Steve.

      In the midst of negotiating a deal with Iran that essentially gives them a green light to legitimately start making a nuclear bomb after a 10-year time out, President Obama said this in an interview with Thomas Friedman on April 5th:

      “I’ve been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch, and I think they should understand that we mean it.”

      So the good news is he’s now committed to relinquish his occupancy of the White House sometime in the next 10 years. Whew.

      – Jeff


  6. vicki530 says:

    I trust my friend, Tom Williamson, when it comes endorsing a blogger worth reading. Thanks to Tom for introducing your blog to me. It is topnotch. I like the ‘Bringer of Light’ aspect, because surely, our fearless leader imagines himself some sort of enlightened Messiah who will save us from ourselves and make the world a more peaceful, safe place, It’s frightening to know we have a POTUS that is truly, clinically delusional. I suppose our Founding Fathers could not have imagined such a perilous scenario. There doesn’t seem to be any other explanation for the bizarre way his thinking works…..


    • Hi, Vicki.

      There are other explanations, but they are difficult for conservatives to fathom because they’re based on emotion and idealism, rather than logic and realism. I have many articles that try to illuminate the connection between Leftist philosophy and their resultant policies and behaviors. If you use the search box in the upper-right of my page to search for “Sowell”, you will find most of them. Here are three:
      Regarding a Nuclear-Armed Iran — ‘A Conflict of Visions’ on Keeping Peace
      America’s Political Bilingualism
      Groping for Utopia

      I quote Thomas Sowell often enough that I think I finally got TC to commit to getting the 2007 revised edition of Dr. Sowell’s critical 1987 book “A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles.” I have other economics books by Sowell (along with Milton Friedman, Henry Hazlitt, others), and I used to find time to write articles about economics once in awhile, but politics and ideology have dominated my attention since Obama’s 2nd term began and his anti-Separation of Powers behavior has skyrocketed.

      Hope you’ll stick with me, and comment often.

      – Jeff


  7. vicki530 says:

    Whoops, forgot to check the boxes to inform me of new comments…..


  8. Bullright says:

    Well, a pretty good in-depth analysis. About the only thing missing is Valerie Jarrett. She’s a very active participant. At this point, he is so far invested, they don’t have to do anything more. Obama spinsters will spin it into some achievement. I think the Iranians are on to that, as is Putin. (he needs accomplishment more than they do — in fact they don’t) His people will fill in the gaps. Jimmy Carter could only dream for that much support(help) from within.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. tannngl says:

    I notice you avoided calling him the ‘Light of the world’.
    Hard to believe we have elected to the seemingly most Christian and most free nation, a person who wants to change all of that.

    Your post is excellent. Not so sure he’s consciously building his legacy. I think he believes his thinking to be so right and perfect that if his actions don’t end with world ‘peace’ and ‘fairness’ it will of course be someone else’s fault. Agreed. He wants no interference in this Iran deal by congress or anyone else (Israel) so that peace and love (Oh boy) can occur.

    One thing: if I may disagree, I believe Obama and his administration are responsible for the disruption and take down of the dictators in Egypt and Libya and possibly the on going war in Syria. Not sure how, although Andy Stern, president emeritus of SEIU was a very, very frequent visitor to the White House through 2009. He resigned from the presidency of the SEIU and disappeared. Soon there were huge rebellions in Egypt, after the Wall Street sit ins. Lots of community organizing. I’ll stop there for I have no proof for my thoughts but the events as they occurred. Oh! Then there was the campaign to boot Bibi from leadership in Israel.

    Enjoyed watching your thoughts proceed on this man who sits in our White House.

    Liked by 1 person

Chime in! Leave Jeff a comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s