President Obama rode into the White House like a snake oil salesman into a old western town as Obama promised he could cure everyone's ills with a worthless elixir of "hope and change".  Then the voters came to the realization of exactly what they had bought into and did not like it.  In the old days, the townsfolk would tar and feather the charlatan.  In the political world, the charlatan Obama and his accomplices got a symbolic tar and feathering at the ballot box this past November 2nd.

With the Republicans yet to take power in the House, but facing a rare unified front of 42 Republican Senators in the Senate, Obama has been forced to negotiate an extension of the Bush tax cuts.  Obama did get his extension of unemployment benefits which I believe will end up being used as a ploy in the 2012 elections, but that's an argument for another day.

Despite both sides getting what they wanted in one shape or form, President Obama still found his way to the front of the cameras, tossed aside his "post-partisan" ways and described dealing with Republicans:

"It's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers unless the hostage gets harmed," President Obama said at his Tuesday press conference.

"In this case, the hostage was the American people," Obama said.

This follows plenty of rhetoric of hostages and Republicans as terrorists recently from the MSM and others.  This got me thinking a bit about Rush Limbaugh.  Rush labels himself an entertainer so when Rush came out firing describing President Obama as a "man-child", I figured it was just Rush getting his digs in while doing another "media tweek".  After Obama's "hostage" outburst, I know now that Rush was right.

This revelation came to me while hearing Obama's soundbite which then in turn made me remember my Adolescent Psychology class.  More specifically, I remember the lessons about Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development.  Kohlberg argued that as children progress in age, their ideas of morality develop.  Apparently, the Man-Child in Chief hasn't progressed that far up Kohlberg's scale, justifying Rush's observation.

Pre-Conventional

The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners at this level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stages of moral development, and is solely concerned with the self in an egocentric manner. A child with pre-conventional morality has not yet adopted or internalized society's conventions regarding what is right or wrong, but instead focuses largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring.

This would fit our President who is "concerned with [himself] in an egocentric manner".

In Stage one (obedience and punishment driven), individuals focus on the direct consequences of their actions on themselves. For example, an action is perceived as morally wrong because the perpetrator is punished. "The last time I did that I got spanked so I will not do it again." The worse the punishment for the act is, the more "bad" the act is perceived to be. This can give rise to an inference that even innocent victims are guilty in proportion to their suffering. It is "egocentric", lacking recognition that others' points of view are different from one's own. There is "deference to superior power or prestige".

This would described Obama's obsession, even two years later, with blaming George W. Bush for everything and his demonizing Republicans.  Bush and the Republicans were soundly rejected in the 2006 midterms and in 2008 to Obama.  In Obama's eyes, the spanking Bush (McCain too) and the Republicans took those two elections show the Republicans as morally wrong and Obama has done everything in his power to show this by his labeling of blame on Bush and Republicans any chance he gets.  The Man-Child can't comprehend the results of November 2nd, because it goes against everything he thought as morally wrong.  It's short-circuiting his thoughts as the conflict of his ego and being morally superior meets head on with reality.

Stage two (self-interest driven) espouses the "what's in it for me" position, in which right behavior is defined by whatever is in the individual's best interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it might further the individual's own interests. As a result, concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect, but rather a "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" mentality. The lack of a societal perspective in the pre-conventional level is quite different from the social contract (stage five), as all actions have the purpose of serving the individual's own needs or interests. For the stage two theorist, the world's perspective is often seen as morally relative.

He's the HCRA and tax cut extension rolled into one.  The backroom deals done during the healthcare debate were morally justified to President Obama.  Furthermore and armed with his morally justified superiority, Obama takes anything that is against him as a personal slight.  It's all about him and his interests and his needs.  Much like a spoiled child throwing a fit in a grocery store checkout because mommy won't by a candy bar.   

Conventional

The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. Those who reason in a conventional way judge the morality of actions by comparing them to society's views and expectations. The conventional level consists of the third and fourth stages of moral development. Conventional morality is characterized by an acceptance of society's conventions concerning right and wrong. At this level an individual obeys rules and follows society's norms even when there are no consequences for obedience or disobedience. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid, however, and a rule's appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned.

Obama almost crossed over to the next two stages (at least Stage 3) of moral development because of his perception that his win in election for President showed he was fulfilling society's views and expectations.  Neil Stevens at Redstate lays out beautifully Obama's perceived mandate and where we sit now.   Obama's view of what he thought society wanted carried into the healthcare debate and further on, but his polling numbers dropped and a majority of Americans were consistently against his and the Democrats' policies.  Despite the changing public desires, Obama and the Democrats never changed their agenda.  Therefore, Obama missed growing up and slid back into the childlike stages of the Pre-conventional. 

So Rush was right.  President Obama is acting like a man-child.  On a personal note, I have to say I have never seen such venom spewed from a President.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember George H.W. Bush, Clinton, or George W. Bush saying such harsh things while still in office about their political opposition.  You can almost feel the absolute contempt and near hatred Obama has for anyone that goes against his vision for the country, even if that vision was soundly rejected November 2nd.  In the old days, after an offender was tar and feathered, they were forced to ride a rail out of town.  Mr. Post Partisan seems to be ramping up the rhetoric and I hope the people in 2012 will see him for who he is - a man-child - and use the ballot box to ride Obama and the rest of the Democrats out of town on a rail.