|
|
Saturday July 26, 2008
The writing on the wall
What Obama's message to God reveals through the magic of graphology
First
of all, what utter hypocrisy for an orthodox adherent to invalidate the
sanctity of a major religious premise by removing Barack Obama's prayer from
its niche in the Wailing Wall and passing it on to the media.
But experience
has taught me that religion pretty much encourages hypocrisy because
the mere humans who set themselves up as being the voices of God, while
in reality desiring to control " the masses", have laid down
life-sucking, mind-destroying rules that no human, including
themselves, could possibly live up to, so that when one sees one's
chance to deviate, one first looks this way and that way, and
then quickly snatches it - and worries what God will say later.
That
being said, logic would have told Obama that his missive to God would
be of keen interest to the media, which may well have influenced to a
certain extent the careful choosing of his words. They do make him look
awe-fully sincere, don't they?
How do I know the words were carefully chosen? Not just because he is mindful of wooing evangelical America, but because his handwriting
reveals that he is logical, careful (cautious), and mildly intuitive. I
had an uncle, see, who as an avocation earned a diploma in
grapho-analysis and passed his knowledge and his books on to me.
Obama's
intuition is revealed in breaks in some words (such as "pro-tect,
wi-sdom and in-strument), and logic in lots of unbroken words. His
carefulness is shown in the placement of his "i" dots.
People
who exhibit spontaneity, imagination and originality, for instance,
tend to use what are called "flying 'i' dots" - the dot is high and way
off to the right. Those whose dots are way off to the left are
notorious procrastinators.
Listen,
some quack
graphologist (or "grapho-analyst" - there is as much bickering over
language in that field as in any other) is going to publish an analysis
of Obama's handwriting, so
why shouldn't I? But I will also let you know my sources so as not to
appear to take credit for my own brilliance.
Obama generally places his "i" dots directly over the letter, and only occasionally a tiny bit to the left or right.
From Between the Lines by Hannah Milner Smith (Pg. 23)
"The
person who places dots carefully and directly over the letter is a
person who is very precise and not too original. This person hates
change and would stay with any job that calls for detail work; he could
not be an administrator nor plan detail work for others."
There
are, of course, other indicators of Obama's avoidance of veering from
the traditionally accepted path. When there is a "t" at the beginning
of a word, Obama joins it to the next letter by looping to the left and
then back to the right. But he makes no effort to cross any of the t's
that come at the ends of words. Forgetting to cross t's is generally
said to show absent-mindedness and, if done too often, carelessness,
but Smith says on Pg. 22:
"Some schools used to insist that the final t
remain uncrossed so I do not call this absent-minded or careless, but
rather immature in some cases and hidebound in others, depending on the
rest of the writing."
In
other words, Obama's handwriting is heavily influenced by how he was
taught to write, while most people, through maturation and
experimentation, eventually develop their own style.
Another sign of immaturity is revealed in Obama's "d"s. Smith says on Pg. 25:
"The small letter d
which has a high stem belongs to the dignified person who has a high
sense of honour. On the other hand, the person who makes a very small
stem compared to other letters is one who makes excuses for everything
he does and is often lax in his moral behaviour"
Ouch, eh? But, go ahead, compare his "d" stem to the "f" in the first line and the "h" in the third line.
On Pg. 32, Smith deals with the letter "g":
"The g which forms an 8 shows a person who has natural culture and refinement and who, as a general rule, thinks and speaks quickly."
So
that's good, right? But the bottom of the "g" is inflated, suggesting
sensualism and materialism. Which is not really so bad in somebody who
has a lot of self-control, even if it is based on obedience to
"authority".
From Pg. 75 of "What your handwriting reveals - Albert E. Hughes, B.A."
"Fullness
in the lower zone can be interpreted positively as erotic fantasies and
behaviour, sensuousness, materiality, country-side interests.
Negatively it can be interpreted as perverse fantasies and behaviour,
sensuality, earthiness, gross materiality."
Obama's
handwriting does not reveal perversity or grossness. His overall script
is garland style - his "m"s and "n"s look like "u"s and "w"s.
From Handwriting Analysis by Dorothy Sara (Pg 119-20):
The
outstanding trait in a garland handwriting is the person's desire to
live in a luxurious manner and not to have to work hard to earn the
money to pay for the luxuries. The garland writer is a pleasure-loving
individual. But if it is necessary for this person to work for a
living, he or she will usually look for a job that has a touch
"glamour" to it, where the surroundings are attractive and where there
is a chance to meet interesting people, and perhaps to have a good
social life as a "fringe benefit" of the job.
The
garland writers usually have outer manners which are gracious;
consciously they have a need to impress other people, so they may use
tact and "put on an act" and appear to be much more interested in some
people and activities than perhaps they really are. It is important to
the garland writer to be noticed and admired, because usually that
person does not possess as much real self-assurance as may appear on
the surface.
So
this would account for Obama's tendency to be charming and say what
people want to hear, but is he really lacking in self-assurance?
According
to Smith (Pg. 136) the long ending strokes on some words ("me" in the
first line, "and" in the second line) suggest a certain kind of
self-confidence:
"The
final stroke which is done with a downward curve shows the person to be
stubbon, but not in a fixed manner. There is flexibility in this
stroke; the writer is generally a conformist even though there may be a
tendency to want to do things which are different from the usual
conventional pattern."
Obama's
long ending strokes do end up below the baseline, and so do most of his
periods. I would have to say that Obama's self confidence comes from
knowing the rules and sticking to them, period.
Apart
from loving the good life, he likes to keep things simple and
uncomplicated, with no boats rocked. This is borne out by the lack of
beginning strokes on the first letters of lower case words.
Says Smith on Pg. 144:
"The
person whose mind wants to be uncluttered, who wishes to eliminate
nonessentials and get everything down to a simple formula, is the one
who is most likely to eliminate the curved beginning and ending stroke
on the upper and lower loops. There is nothing pretentious in this
personality, the mind is resourceful, and if necessary to adapt to a
new situation this person can usually find a way of doing it."
So
when Obama says one thing in Berlin, and another thing in Israel, he is
not being devious, he is just trying to keep things simple and
appropriate to the moment..
I leave it to you to determine whether you see in him what the "experts" see in his handwriting.
That was fun, wasn't it. Who doesn't like fortune-telling, even when it's forbidden by God.
Me,
I trust my own habit of simply looking into eyes. First I look at the
smile, then I cover the mouth and look at the eyes to see if they
match. Obama has an affable smile that is reflected in his eyes. He is
what he appears to be. Affable, charming, sincere. But not terribly
astute or courageous.
Still, it's much better than seeing a smile with dead, cold eyes attached. Obama doesn't need to be seen in the company of helpless kittens to appear benign.
PS: Obama's "a"s and "o"s are tightly closed, indicating that he might be harbouring a secret.
yayacanada
|
|
