---

Obama Says He’s Spock Then Misuses English Language

-By Warner Todd Huston

Remember how the left always asserted that George W. Bush was stupid? Remember how they were so thrilled to have the Obammessiah that spoke so well, a president that was perpetually the smartest man in the room? Well, after the many stammering TelePrompter free stump debacles during the campaign, many began to doubt this claim of his superior intelligence. Certainly by itself this is no big deal. But added with the whole here is another small dent in the perception of Obama’s overrated superiority.

Newsweek conducted a Q and A with the president at the end of which appears a few questions concerning his recent choices of entertainment. During the Q and A The One admitted he watched the reboot of Star Trek in the White House movie theater claiming that everyone was saying he was Spock. But two other things he said clanged badly: one arrogant and the other somewhat ignorant.

First the arrogant:

And the last movie you saw?

Now, movies I’ve been doing OK [with] because it turns out we got this nice theater on the ground floor of my house … So Star Trek, we saw this weekend, which I thought was good. Everybody was saying I was Spock, so I figured I should check it out and–[the president makes the Vulcan salute with his hand].

So The One likes to be called Mr. Spock, eh? That is bad enough, but the fact that he so automatically called the White House “my house” is simply as arrogant as it comes. It isn’t “your” house Mr. President. It’s the people’s! The man’s sense of entitlement is disgusting.

Next the ignorant:

Did you watch that when you were growing up?

I used to love Star Trek. You know, Star Trek was ahead of its time. There was a whole–the special effects weren’t real good, but the storylines were always evocative, you know, there was a little commentary and a little pop philosophy for a 10-year-old to absorb.

I find it amusing that the “Spock” of the White House, the smartest president evah doesn’t know the difference between “evocative” and “provocative.” By the later half of his sentence Obama clearly meant provocative, not evocative.

The word evocative simply means to provoke emotional response or memories. But by focusing on “philosophy” and “commentary” Obama obviously meant that Star Trek provoked thinking so it was intellectually provocative not emotionally evocative. Additionally, how much evoking can a 10-year-old indulge?

So, why doesn’t the smartest man in the world know the difference between provocative and evocative?

Maybe he isn’t as smart as the left would have it?

(As for me, I saw Trek last night. Fun film. Unfortunately, it never once felt like Star Trek to me. But it did evoke some fond memories with its homage to the original series!)

____________
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as newsbusters.org, RedState.com, Human Events Magazine, AmericanDailyReview.com, townhall.com, New Media Journal, Men’s News Daily and the New Media Alliance among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events and is currently the co-host of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Conservatism” heard on BlogTalkRadio. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of publiusforum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions : EMAIL Warner Todd Huston

Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.