Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist

[Shalamar]

Someone is certainly butt-hurt that others didn't accept opinion as fact.

 

[Ziggurat]

....or because it was off topic for the thread it was brought up in so I spawned a new thread to address just that claim.

There are plenty of off-topic insults of politicians, so this still doesn't explain why this insult triggered a whole thread.

Also, it was a ridiculous claim that I thought should be challenged.

Like I said, it struck a nerve.

Wouldn't a much better way of shutting all this down be to just provide the evidence that you insist exists?

You're assuming that "shutting all this down" is something I care about. You want me to play by a particular set of rules, rules that apply to conservatives but don't apply to liberals, and you think that you can exert pressure on me to get me to comply. The thread goes on until I obey. But it won't work. I don't care.

Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist.

 

[Ziggurat]

Someone is certainly butt-hurt that others didn't accept opinion as fact.

I never demanded anyone agree with me. I never even asked anyone who disagreed with me to justify their disagreement. I'm not the one having trouble accepting other people's positions.

 

[Belz...]

Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist.

Citation needed.

 

[The Don]

What I found amount to "Yep, that Obama sure is a thin-skinned narcissist." I never found out where the echo in the chamber originated from.

I think I got a little deeper than that. There is a perception that Obama is sometimes less that deferential to experts with whom he disagrees - this seems to be the source for the claim of narcissism. In another President, that same kind of behaviour could be interpreted as confidence and/or assertiveness.

Regarding the claim of Obama being thin-skinned, that one has me beaten. In fact I think that the opposite allegation could be made, that he's insufficiently passionate and that he takes a far too cerebral approach to criticism and conflict which results in him coming across as cold or lacking passion.

 

[A'isha]

That's a whole lot of effort to avoid backing up your claim, Ziggurat.

 

[Ziggurat]

Either provide evidence for your claim or accept that others will reject said claim.

I've always accepted that.

Enlighten me.

No. If you care enough, you can figure it out from what I've already written. If you don't care enough, that's fine too.

 

[Ziggurat]

That's a whole lot of effort to avoid backing up your claim, Ziggurat.

Now ponder why. And ponder why others are exerting so much effort to try to get me to back up my claim. This isn't really about Obama. Though he is a thin-skinned narcissist.

 

[Tolls]

Why? Of all the insults offered up about politicians in these forums, why was this the insult that demanded its own thread?

Because it struck a nerve, that's why.

Or because (just maybe) it seemed clearly incorrect, and the OP wanted some evidence for it to get an idea of why you think this is the case.

 

[The Don]

I never demanded anyone agree with me.

Correct but irrelevant

I never even asked anyone who disagreed with me to justify their disagreement.

Correct but irrelevant

I'm not the one having trouble accepting other people's positions.

Irrelevant, but not IMO correct. I'm not sure people are having trouble accepting that you think Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist. I for one on the other hand just want you to provide the evidence that you claimed to have much earlier in this thread.

Because there is evidence that he is one.

 

[A'isha]

Now ponder why.

Because you can't.

ponder why others are exerting so much effort to try to get me to back up my claim.

Because this is a skeptics forum and demanding that people back up their ******** is what we do here.

 

[The Don]

Because this is a skeptics forum and demanding that people back up their ******** is what we do here.

....and Ziggurat explicitly claimed that they had the evidence. In that case is it unreasonable to ask what it is ?

 

[Ziggurat]

Because you can't.

Try again.

Because this is a skeptics forum and demanding that people back up their ******** is what we do here.

No, people here do not. They only demand that of opinions they don't like.

 

[Shalamar]

....and Ziggurat explicitly claimed that they had the evidence. In that case is it unreasonable to ask what it is ?

The evidence that Obama is a Thin Skinned Narcissist is that Obama is a Thin Skin Narcissist.

Probably because he's a Democrat, or something.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited breach of rule 0 and rule 12

 

[Ziggurat]

Correct but irrelevant

It's absolutely relevant to Shalamar's post. If you don't think it's relevant to the thread, then perhaps you should address your complaint to Shalamar.

I'm not sure people are having trouble accepting that you think Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist.

Argumemnon is.

 

[Belz...]

No. If you care enough, you can figure it out from what I've already written.

In other words, you know full well that you're talking nonsense and can't support any of it. And you wonder why people assume that you're being dishonest.

"If you can't understand it by yourself, I won't explain it to you" is a very basic, schoolyard-level rhetorical tactic that fools no one.

 

[A'isha]

Try again.

Then you should have no problem providing the evidence you asserted you already had but were merely unable to post because you were traveling at the time.

 

[Belz...]

Try again.

No need. She's quite right.

No, people here do not. They only demand that of opinions they don't like.

Irrelevant: the principle of supporting your claims is there for a reason. You don't support your claims, especially with the excuses you use, so it's easy to conclude that you're talking out of your ass for ideological reasons.

 

[Belz...]

Argumemnon is.

I know for a fact that you don't believe that. Your dodging and weaving shows that you're very much aware that your claim doesn't hold water.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Th

ere's more to give, Tubba, but at this point I'm asking myself why I should bother. Where's the return on investment? It's just not there anymore.

There's a double standard on these forums, where insults against conservatives are taken as given and insults against liberals demand proof, and I'm tired of that game. So, I'm simply not going to play anymore. If I want to insult someone I think deserves an insult, I will, and I feel no need to justify those insults to anyone else's satisfaction.

Because that's what this thread is really about. It's not really about Obama and his narcissism, and whether or not I have proof of it. It's about trying to shame someone who doesn't toe the line, by threatening me with some loss of imagined status if I don't comply. This is an entire thread dedicated to trying to punish me specifically for contradicting the orthodoxy. But it won't work, because I don't care. I cannot be threatened by the prospect of losing anyone's respect but my own. If one of the side effects of not caring about my imagined status on this board is that you're disappointed in me, that's unfortunate, but it won't change

anything.

Obama is a thin-skinned narcissist.

Tidied for tidiness

Repeating your assertion without proof doesn't make you look sensible, honest, or in possession of a valid point. It makes you look stubbornly ignorant and unselfconsciously biased.