What Does Obama Believe? Norman Podhoretz Gets it Right
Contrast that with how liberals examine the past ties of their current conservative opponents. In last week’s issue of The New Yorker, correspondent Ryan Lizza dug back deeply into Michele Bachmann’s ties, going to old friends, her pastor, and other associates. He writes: “Her appeal, along with her rapid ascent in the polls, is based on a collection of right-wing convictions, beliefs, and resentments that she has regularly broadcast from television studios and podiums since 2006, when she was first elected to Congress.” He goes through all of them, many quite disturbing, and of course, Lizza’s readers take them into account in evaluating whether or not to support her candidacy. When conservative writers did the same for Obama, they were roundly condemned for dealing in irrelevant smears, and written off completely. I do not recall Lizza, when he was a correspondent during the 2008 election, writing a similar piece on Obama, and engaging in the same kind of legwork about his background and ties. In dealing with Bachmann, Lizza goes all the way back to her associations in the 1970s and 80s, and argues that they are most relevant for understanding how she thinks and estimating what her beliefs are. As usual, liberal journalists have one standard for conservative candidates and another for those on the Left, like Barack Obama.
Returning to the observations made by Norman Podhoretz, I fully concur in his conclusion that after years of failing to get a candidate to their liking, “It was only with the advent of Barack Obama that the leftists at long last succeeded in nominating one of their own.” Why did so many give Obama a pass? Podhoretz thinks it was because he was black, and secondly, because it was supposedly ancient history — as if one’s past has no relationship to what one thinks in the present.
He concludes with this thought:
And so it came about that a faithful scion of the political culture of the ’60s left is now sitting in the White House and doing everything in his power to effect the fundamental transformation of America to which that culture was dedicated and to which he has pledged his own personal allegiance….
He is still the same anti-American leftist he was before becoming our president, and it is this rather than inexperience or incompetence or weakness or stupidity that accounts for the richly deserved failure both at home and abroad of the policies stemming from that reprehensible cast of mind.
In the coming campaign — one of the most important for our nation’s future — the president’s past will again be put up to scrutiny. This time around, let us hope that unlike in 2008, it will not be ignored.
Addendum: A kindly reader has pointed out to me that indeed, Ryan Lizza did write about Obama’s past, both in The New Republic and in The New Yorker. But the point of his articles was to immunize Obama from the charges made against him by conservatives, and to ridicule the charges that he was still some kind of radical. In Kurtz’s book, he cites Lizza as being too credulous about understanding the purposes of Alinskyite organizing.






One
Big
Assed
Mistake
America!
January 20 2013 – The End of an Error!
Mr. Podhoretz is a genius and is spot on until he gets to the part about whether Little Lenin is purposely trying to destroy the country.
He should have read up on the festering cauldron of influences on the Menace that go much much further back than Ayers and Wright. This little man was raised by haters from the cradle. There is no possibility that he has anything but loathing for this country. Find an influencer who had anything close to a neutral view of the US, just neutral. There isn’t one. Not a single one.
This Criminal;s mind was poisoned while he was learning to talk. A person just can’t get past something that. No way.
We’ll be lucky to escape with just a 20-year tunnel to have to claw our way out of.
Right on! The messiah was mentored several hours a day for several years of his adolescence by the black communist, self-admitted bi-sexual and pedophile Frank Marshall Davis.
He is an undereducated brainwashed 60s/70s radical with no grounding in Western history and culture, and only God knows who pulls his strings.
exactly, he is, was and never has been an American in the sense of We, The People. He is a grifter and even in that definition, there is irony in Obama being the first black president, because he isn’t. He is the first black/white president! He “moved on up” to his “pie in the sky”, but decent, hard working black Americans who have worked for a living all their lives are totally offended and insulted by this imposter.
Obama has nothing in common with the average African-American experience in the US. Raised by his white communist grandparents, either out of the country or in racially mixed Hawaii, Obama – at least it seems to me – is far more at home among white leftists than he is around African-Americans. There is a certain “phony” vibe he gives off, when he attempts to mimic the mannerisms of an American black (I’m black myself, so perhaps that’s why I pick up on it). It’s as if he just flew in from out of country, and is trying to “hang” with the natives. Often he gets by, because he tells black audiences what they want to hear (and skin color).
All Leftists are anti-American. Leftism is anti-social. Leftism is a collection of most of society’s one-percenters, united to destroy the normal human society that excludes them. You have sexual deviants, criminals, the mentally ill, non-members of society based on race/religion/language, and just palin misfits. Sure, each group might represent only a small percentage of the population, but acting in unison, they can represent a large proportion. Marxism (economic or social), civil rights, militant atheism, pornography, anti-family programs, and anti-white discrimination are just distractions justifying the destruction of American (WASP) culture. Leftists are people who will not or cannot adapt to normal society. Given this, what is their best option? Destroy this society.
Never to be believed, I know — but not a Freudian slip: ‘plain’ not ‘palin’.
ARE WE FINALY WAKING UP ?
Maybe you are but I’ve been awake since BHO debated with Alan Keyes in 2004. This guy came from the same mold as Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Trotsky, Gramsci and other totalatarians.
In 2008 America got drunk, went to bed with Beyonce, and woke up with Maxine Waters.
Maxine Waters?
Hell, Helen Thomas.
/Shudder
Now, now eman. When Maxine gets her inner black girl going, her eyes narrowing as she gets ready to let us know just what it is she is going to do to us if we don’t get with her program, I am sure you begin to say, ya…you go girl, we could get something going on here – that’s right, you and me sister. Who you seeing to get that hair so dolled up Maxie? Go Girl! I know I do.
“In 2008 America got drunk, went to bed with Beyonce, and woke up with Maxine Waters.”
I think this image is going to scar me for life.
Sarah Palin, time after time on the campaign trail in 2008, brought up Obama’s close ties “pallin’ around with terrorists” William Ayers, and Bernadine Dohrn, and she was the only one out there with the guts to do it, right up front and often.
Let’s remember that, folks. That goes for you, too, Norman Podhoretz, and Charles Krauthammer, remember?
Where the hell were you all then?
They were hiding under their desks in fear of what the NYT would say about them, knowing that when the NYT called them racist, it would be quoted by all of the MSM as the gospel.
To this day, despite all of the evidence to the contrary, they still preface criticism of Obama with praise for his intelligence, goodness or love of country. They are still afraid to tell us what we have already figured out– Obama is not smart or good, does not love America (One does not “transform” that which he loves)and is determined to forever change our traditions and ideals.
Believe you are absolutely right Henry. Couldn’t have said it better.
True. It’s also why Obama is always shown smiling in every photograph and even in every political cartoon, as if his jaw muscles are frozen. Everyone is scared of portraying Obama as The Angry Black Man that even his political opponents picture him favorably.
There were many average Americans like myself who tried to expose Obummer before he was elected. There were just too many Kool-Aide drinkers who refused to listen.
When examining his self-admitted history, Obama could not have been accepted as a law enforcement officer or have joined the military.
His self-admitted use of cocaine as an adult in college would have barred him from law enforcement. His self-admitted association with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist would have disqualified him from the military. Oh yea, and there was that bombing of the Pentagon and a police station too by Ayers.
If elected he will be Commander in Chief and the boss of the Justice Department, the head law enforcement agency in our country. Reason has been sucked into a black hole!
And if I’m not mistaken, there was a policeman killed from the police station bombing by Ayers. I believe that was on his prison rap sheet.
People didn’t want to believe what their eyes and ears were telling them and few actually read his books, which are quite revealing. Just like no one wanted to believe that Hitler would do what he said he would do in Mein Kampf. Also, not many people are used to dealing with people like BHO. I spent the last decade or so of my career dealing with Alinsky-school union organizers and representatives. I saw the same disbelief, experienced it myself, as the homegrown employee associations were replaced by national public employee unions which sent their storm troopers from the DC office out to deal with us. Fortunately, most of us doing labor relations for my government were boomers with at least a nodding acquaintance with the SDS and other ’60s radical groups and we’d read Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and Saul Alinsky. It took us a bit but we soon figured out what we were dealing with and over time how to deal with them. Consequently, we have remained on of only two or three states with a unionized workforce that usually has Republican governance, though even here they were able to buy a governor for two terms – with the aid of some silly Republican fratricide. I knew what Comrade Obama was the minute I laid eyes on him giving that convention speech, I said to myself, “so you’re the one they think they can dress up and send out to deal with real people.”
He can be dealt with, but not by a bunch of people who came to prominence by being a “hail fellow well met” at the Chamber or Rotary Club. You need people who understand communist organizing tactics and who can be just as ruthless as they are. We on the right don’t have any of those or if we do, the nice guys can’t stand to have them around so nobody is listening to them yet. I carried a lot of water for the Republicans in my state in dealing with our unions but I’ll guarantee that if I showed up at some grip ‘n grin it wouldn’t be five minutes before somebody said, “here comes trouble.”
Excellent post and you are correct. The only way to vanquish outlaws is to get a bad assed Sheriff. We have few in the wings in pubbieville. The only one that comes to mind rides a bus with the constitution spread all over it and her name is Sarah.
No, it ain’t Sarah Palin. Palin is a lightweight opportunist who wouldn’t know Saul Alinsky if she fell on him. Sorry, this guy is out of Sarah’s league.
“Here comes trouble” was probably not meant as a compliment, but in fact it is: This is what all the PC pieties are all about: You are welcome to open your mouth, as long as you don’t mention anything that is true enough to annoy the spinners.
There better be “trouble” at the next election!
The Hammer, who is an incredibly smart and perceptive man, proves to all of us that there is no such thing as human perfection. Why? Because, for all his smarts and intuition, he has some kind of personal animus towards Sarah Palin. Don’t know what it is, but something about Sarah just rubs him the wrong way. Maybe it’s her style of speech; maybe it’s because she wears the wrong kind of eyewear, maybe it’s because she looks so damn good, while being smarter than anyone gives her credit for. I don’t know what it is, exactly … but Hammer has something against her.
It’s a shame, but it happens sometimes with human nature. Too bad … cause they’d make a hell of a team.
Because he’s smart enough and grounded enough to see through her. Sarah is a nice person until you get to know her, and I do know her, worked with her. If McCain had won, he’d have been the most miserable, paranoid man in the World just waiting for the knife between his ribs. Her career is built on the dead bodies of everyone who helped advance her. Read Frank Bailey’s book; the Palinbots have roundly trashed it but those of us who know her and know the truth of her Alaska career know that Bailey is telling the truth about working with Sarah Palin.
We don’t need a nice candidate. We need an effective candidate. Who better to deal with left-wing cutthroats than a right-wing cutthroat?
Sarah only became “rightwing” when she came to National prominence. As governor, she worked far better with the Democrats than with the Republicans, who mostly hated her and still do, I among them. It’s all about Sarah and she’ll ally with whatever “wing” makes Sarah more important or better off.
Interesting. So maybe she caught wind of the conservative resurgence and decided to ride it…somewhere. I’m still not sure what she’s up to. Running for President? Becoming the next Oprah? Has anyone got a clue at this point?
Like I said, I wouldn’t mind a Machiavellian politician on our side. We could use one, but only if they could be depended on to exercise their ruthlessness against the other side. Maybe Palin’s not the one.
I don’t recall Norman Podhoretz and Charles Krauthammer not being in the fray (but then maybe it is just age), but I still have shivers (and not up my leg) when I think of Peggy Noonan swooning and fawning over how great Obama looked to be how caught up she was in the Hope and Change nonsense. I was shocked that someone with her conservative credentials and supposedly an intellgent being couldn’t take a moment out of her day to do some simple research, thoughtful reflection and apply a little analysis to who this guy was. She didn’t and in the process helped propel this marxist into the WH.
It is doubtful she will have me back as a reader of her comments anytime soon albeit she seems to have found the lord with regard to Obama at this time.
Yes Obama must be exposed (for the first time). Let’s hope conservatives are up to the challenge and even more so that they are able to fend off the raging attacks from the left.
The left is quite good when it comes to messaging and staying on that message and conservatives seem to taken up with being nice and too often accomodating and all too often very unclear in their messaging or in having no message or a message the guy on the street doesn’t get or just plain sitting on the sidelines watching the lefts parade.
Why this man and the left was not exposed in 2008 is utterly beyond me. That’s gotta end or we are doomed.
Why he wasn’t exposed is easy,it’s all about race.
Ozero has been playing the race card and pulling it from the bottom of the deck ever since he branded Bill and Hill in SC to win the title of DNC Emperor.
Even today at least 1/3 of the rat party would back Hillary in an instant with many more coming around if it weren’t for his undying relentless play of “I’m black and that trumphs all.”
The Joker has set back race relations in the US 20 years and expect anyone of color in either party to have a huge uphill battle vying for any major office these days as the memory of what this Marxist has put us through slowly wanes.
Obama was exposed, by Sarah Palin, going against the tide good and loud and often during the 2008 campaign. If it weren’t for Sarah Palin getting on his case the way she did, Obama would have won in a landslide.
It occurs to me that Alaska isn’t exactly overrun with African-Americans, so an Alaskan wouldn’t exactly be ultra sensitive to charges of racism for historical reasons. I would think that the only stigma of “racism” in Alaska, might be prejudice against Native=Americans – and isn’t Gov. Palin’s husband partially Native-American? I would think that she went after Obama, despite his race, because it would have never occurred to her that she shouldn’t go after him because of his race. Unfortunately, the same didn’t hold true for her running mate. You could see the reluctance of McCain to get down and dirty with Obama. Why any Republican would allow themselves to be painted as a “racist” given the history of the Democratic party, is beyond me.
Yes, Obama is operationally a hardcore socialist, a leftist of the most anti-American, anti-capitalist mode, anti-individual, anti-freedom…etc etc.
But he is all of this, not because he intellectually has explored and analyzed and supports the political theories of socialism. He is a psychological socialist. That’s completely, totally different. And I think we have to be aware of the difference.
Obama doesn’t believe in the theories to enable a ‘better world’. He is embedded in these theories, certainly, by his upbringing which from his mother, father, grandmother etc – was nothing but anti-American socialism. But my view is that Obama, as a young boy, moved into a psychological cocoon, alienated from facts, from reality, from theory…a psychological cocoon of pathological narcissism. This means that his interactions with others are reduced to a singular need to CONTROL others.
And, if you move into the political realm, and have a dominant need to control others, then, you are a socialist. Socialism sets up Rulers..and the Ruled. It sets up the Wise…and the Ignorant. It sets up Those Who Must Be Obeyed…and the Submissive Powerless.
The people whom Obama has surrounded himself with, both elected and unelected, are in the Socialist Camp because it gives them Power. Pelosi, Reid, Frank..all of them, are focused only on power and their own gain. Obama himself is focused only on Himself, and his feeling of supremacy over, and control over, Others.
If he had been left as an irrelevant community organizer, the harm he effects would have been confined to a local domain. But put someone as pathological as he is, into a position of power-over-many, and his need to assert this power, to reduce the freedom and independent strength of others explodes.
Obama needs to control Americans..more and more and more. More regulations, more centralist policies. Congress? His disdain for, his contempt for, his ignoring of its rules and due process is obvious.
Note – Obama is even now blaming Congress for all the economic ills of the nation. Yes, he also blames the Japanese earthquake and the Arabs and the GOP and Bush and…. But, Obama, with this pathological need to assert his supremacy cannot, psychologically, accept blame. So, he’s moved Himself into a detached Role; he’s ‘above it all’, above the debates and arguments (heh)…Has he forgotten that he threatened to veto Cut,Cap and Trade as well as Boehner’s bill?
But – again, the problem with Obama is not the intellectual content of socialism; I maintain Obama has no intellectual content…theories and policies bore him. The problem is his pathological need to disempower others and reduce the ability to be free, the capacity for freedom, the capacity to work, produce wealth..in this nation.
How does one deal with this? Constantly attack his failures; be specific about them, provide data and facts; laugh at his blaming others – publicly belittle him for blaming others. Ignore the ad hominem attacks..and attack him for allowing his administration to carry out such smears.
Well said!
Hear! Hear!
ETAB, you’ve described a few ‘fourty-somethings’ that I’ve known over the years, so I looked for some similarities and found these: They are all in their mid-to-late fourties. They are all from small families- often only-children. Their mothers are/were unabashed liberals in the sense they were “liberated” as the women’s movement dictated.
I, myself, might have turned out to be a selfish, narcissistic, spoiled brat had it not been for my six other siblings. “Works well with others” is likely one area on a report card where Obama may not have scored well. My marks in this category were high because, well, I didn’t enjoy marks on my body.
The Women’s Liberation Movement produced the mothers of children like Obama and there are many, I suspect (mothers that is, children, thankfully not). You know, the ones who’d look at you with scorn (if not swear at you) for holding a door open for them. About the only meritorious change brought during this confusing Movement would, in my opinion, have been the no-bra-look. Subconsciously I too knew it wasn’t right to keep those things locked-up like that and celebrated their liberation. A lot.
For the record, the no-bra look has long-term consequences that are not quite as attractive!
Ain’t that the truth! Those 38DDs of Wife 1.0 that looked so good in one of those little mesh halter-tops in ’69 really didn’t do much for me spilling out over her arms or dangling down to her waist in ’79.
I think that’s the most effectively commumicated spot on analysis of Obama I’ve read. His core lies so outside of what America stands for that it’s difficult for most to grasp and accept his essential being given he was actually elected president and fooled so many voters. Liberals were swooned by him being the anthisis of the American spirit and others supporting him for the promises of a handout as well as massive voter fraud and tactics by groups like Acorn. God help us all if he’s elected a second term.
Yes, a psychotic craving for absolute power is the common genetic thread shared by all modern leftists from Lenin through Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Fidel, dozens of tinpot dictatators around the world, the ruling elite of Europe, and now the most dangerous man in the world, Barack Obama.
Their ideology is a pitiful second to their lust for power, which gives them the secret sauce that easily defeats any leader with even a tinge of honor. Obama can do or say anything, without remorse, because the equivalent of morality, for him, is whatever he wants at the moment. So you see him overruling settled law to stiff the Chrysler bondholders, ignoring multiple judicial orders in the Gulf of Mexico, summarilly repudiating the multiple judicial rejections of obamacare, refusing to enforce border law while vociferously entreating illegals to enter and pillage the country…. and thousands of other actions that violate the laws and practices of the most lawful country in the history of the world. No means is beyond a criminal like him. The only reason he hasn’t resorted to the measures of the Big 4 Communist despots is that he knows it can’t work in the United States…yet.
200 million firearms in private hands is the greatest gift of the Founding Fathers. The boom market in ammunition hasn’t is one bubble that hasn’t crested yet.
I made the mistake of posting something very similar to your comment over on a left-wing site a few days ago. My gosh, the vitriol that spewed forth was beyond belief. I shoulda known better, but something in me just wanted to splash a little bit of cold water in their eyes, you, know, to sort of wake them up? Oh well, I think we’re better off if they just stay asleep. Like Rip van Winkle, maybe for 20 years or so.
Great writing and observations ETAB. Pity there is no way to get this comment circulated from one end of the web to the other.
Hey Radosh, tell us SPECIFICALLY what is so disturbing about Bachmann’s beliefs, don’t just do the standard leftist hit and run of telling us her beliefs are disturbing, give us SPECIFICS, you worm.
How did a comment calling a PJM blogger “you worm” get through the “moderation” process. What happened to the PJM Rule #3 forbidding ad hominem attacks? I hope this rude comment will be removed. If and when it is, please feel free to remove this comment of mine complaining about it. It debases the exchange of ideas to have to read Professor Radosh called “you worm.” I’m a big guy, with a thick skin, but trolls are trolls and should be forbidden.
Did you read the article? Ron didn’t discuss Bachmann as the subject of his essay. He discussed Ryan Lizza’s treatment of her and how his deep dive into her background contrasted with his shallow wade into Obama’s background. Reread the article. Or just read it.
But the manner in which he lets Lizza’s treatment of Bachmann’s background off scot-free, without so much as a contradictory fact implies that Lizza has a point and that Radosh agrees with him; so then maybe Lizza’s easy going on Obama’s baggage is correct?
It can be inferred from reading him regularly that what Radosh finds disturbing about Bachmann’s background is that she’s an evangelical Christian, who is opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
“Patrick of Atlantis
It can be inferred from reading him regularly that what Radosh finds disturbing about Bachmann’s background is that she’s an evangelical Christian, who is opposed to abortion and gay marriage.”
I’ve always felt that despite varying social beliefs, it should be satisfactory – on the right side of the aisle – if these decisions are made by the voters either via the legislature or initiative at the INDIVIDUAL STATE LEVEL. In that case if the mores of Manhattan and San Francisco disgust you, you can then move to a more conservative clime. What I hate is for some judge (of whatever stripe) imposing their particular view.
What are you going to do about voter fraud and the hundreds of thousands ,possibly millions of welfare hand out voters and illegals whom the criminal in the White House is set to make legal ?
‘the press bought the lame excuse that when Wright made his most contentious comments, Obama was not present and knew nothing about them.’
It’s extremely naive to think that the press bought anything,they sold this lie Obama to the nation ,they cover up and lie and that is why his school records are still sealed and it’s open season on anything Bachman.
The revolution happened and they’re not going to give it up.
Marxists don’t play by your rules and that is why you’re going to lose again.
“reprensible cast of mind” indeed. Thank you for bringing this important article to the attention of your loyal readers. I hope that in 2008 the horrifying truths about this president and his associates will finally be brought to light. It is one of the most shocking derelictions of duty of the MSM that his background was deemed unimportant compared with the thrill of the euphoria that surrounded this grotesque excuse for an American. Thank you, Professor Radosh, for this fine analysis.
I wish leftist journalists had some shame, but, of course, they don’t—it comes with the territory. This is why 2012 campaign season will be the dirtiest ever from the dem side.
Some not so lefty, but merely liberal, journalists might even see the pass they gave Obama in ’08 as shaming them personally and disgrace to journalism. No matter, all of them will defend him tooth and nail. The potential loss for the dems next year could be historic, if not epic. This threat will make even bigger liars of them than they are already.
The conclusion is simple: bHo is a puppet whose strings are being manipulated by the hands of his enablers, foreign and domestic, who bought him the election. They all will profit in some way by the collapse of our Country in particular and western civilization in general. His administration (policy and appointments) is working to advance this anti-American agenda. If this premise is accepted to be a reasonably accurate description of bHo’s intent, his actions can easily be judged, not as inept or mistaken, but as logical steps in implementing his nefarious objectives.
No, the leftist journalists have no shame, if by shame you mean refusal to do what you and I think is their duty. They have ample shame if they fear they have failed to do their duty, which is to progagandize in favor of what they consider worthy politial causes. What they want isn’t to inform people but to improve society, as they see it. If the facts get in the way, to hell with the facts.
@ Jack Olson
“which is to progagandize in favor of what they consider worthy politial causes. What they want isn’t to inform people but to improve society, as they see it. If the facts get in the way, to hell with the facts.”
The leftists, masquerading as environmentalists, have been doing this for decades although only visible to the most discerning. Obama is, perhaps, the final act, the “tipping point” that causes the greatest community organizing this country has ever seen. Time will tell and we can all hope that change is on the way.
Actually, no, that’s totally false. I completely destroyed this notion, in an essay I published in the waning days of the 2008 election, but alas in the total media overload in those final days, my piece didn’t receive the attention that (in my humble opinion) it ought to have:
Barack Obama’s Close Encounter with the Weather Underground.
In this essay, I prove that Obama basically crossed paths with the Weather Underground in real time — him at the very beginning of his political life, and them at the very tail end of theirs.
I strove to find that key missing final missing piece of evidence that showed he actually was involved with them, but alas could not uncover it; though to this day I remain convinced Obama did indeed have some involvement with the Weather Underground, and that it was at this time that he began his association with Ayers/Dohrn — not later in Chicago, as most assume.
In short, the facts:
- In college, Obama was involved in anti-Apartheid activism.
- When he attended Columbia in 1981, he joined the Black Students’ Organization, as did almost black students at that time, and their focus in that era was also anti-Apartheid activism.
- On September 26, 1981, there was a widely publicized anti-Apartheid protest against the South African rugby team that was passing through NY on a publicity tour.
- Many young activists — including, possibly, Obama, and most certainly his fellow BSO members — showed up at the protest.
- The Weather Underground ALSO crashed the protest and turned it violent, staging a minor terror attack that ended up blinding a policeman.
- The same people who staged the blinding attack turned out to be infamous Weather Underground revolutionaries who were later arrested just a few months afterward in the Weather Underground’s final crime, a bank robbery that went bad.
- Bernadine Dohrn helped to facilitate (and probably masterminded) that bank robbery, but got off on a technicality.
- Bill Ayers helped her avoid the charges.
While I could not prove that Obama actually met Ayers and Dohrn at this moment in his life, it is entirely possible, bordering on the probable.
While this doesn’t prove that Obama himself was a terrorist or a Weather Underground member, it obliterates the naive claim that he was “just an 8-year-old kid” when all the Weather Underground stuff was going on, and that he obviously had no knowledge of them. At a minimum, he learned of their existence at this moment in his life, and thus these facts also destroy his later claim that when he first met Ayers, he had no idea of his violent past.
Even as an 8-year-old, Obama was aware of what his parents were talking about, and greatly influenced by it. I’m a few months younger than Zero and the daughter of two dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrats. When I was 8, my mom was working for HUD in Chicago as part of the Great Society/War on Poverty initiatives. I was in awe of her position–a double-whammy of awesomeness in the middle of the feminist revolution–and of course I wanted to follow in her footsteps. It was after I grew up that I fully understood who various persons were in my mom’s political circles. So even if Obama heard of Ayers via his parents, when he grew up following in his parents’ footsteps, he eventually understood exactly who and what Ayers was.
The difference between Obama and me is that I actually looked at reality and decided that being a political thief/moocher was NOT a good idea. My parents did too good a job raising me to use my own judgment!
What a coincidence that he ended up living a few blocks away from Ayers in Chicago, just as he had lived a few blocks away during his Columbia days. And even more amazingly, they share an identical ideology, as well as a writing style, down to the exact descriptions of Obama’s only “girlfried”, and the girlfriend Ayers describes in one ow his own books.
Little Lenin’s life is filled with amazing coincidences.
I read somewhere that Barracky boy wanted to join the Weather Underground; They told him he would be accepted if he blew up a car. He came back with burnt lips from a hot tail pipe. The rest is history.
“Evidently, the press bought the lame excuse that when Wright made his most contentious comments, Obama was not present and knew nothing about them.”
The press is and was a participant in the confidence game of Democrat/Bolshevik politics. More proof here:
http://www.breitbart.tv/conservative-reporter-crashes-durbin-presser/
It’s shocking to see this type of inflammatory and false rhetoric in as venerable a publication as The Wall Street Journal. President Obama is not an “anti-American leftist,” but a patriotic moderate, as the totality of his actions have proven. If you cherry-pick, you could even paint him as a conservative, with his massive tax cuts, support of spending cuts, and military buildup in Afghanistan — but then you could also paint George W. Bush as a leftist, with his support of amnesty for illegal immigrants, his Medicare Part D drug benefit, and his massive aid to Africa. But it would be dishonest to cherry-pick like this, just as this column is dishonest in cherry-picking President Obama’s record. I expect better of the WSJ, but it looks like the Tea Party cancer is spreading.
Bush also violated his oath of office by signing McCain-Feingold into law. But Obama is much worse than Bush. He holds the Koran holy, but not so much the Constitution. He seems to treat the Constitution with the utmost contempt, and his choices for judgeships and DOJ lawyers, and his actions and derelictions reflect that contempt. The question posed by Rush Limbaugh and others is worth pondering: If one were trying to destroy America from the office of the Presidency, what would one do different from Obama?
Almost all Democrats and leftists treat the Constitution with contempt. That’s what the “Living Constitution” doctrine means, that the Constitution does not have any meaning except what some liberal judge wants it to have. You could hardly treat it more contemptuously than that. Taken at face value, that “Living Constitution” doctrine would enable a liberal judge to interpret the Constitution to allow slavery once again, if that had become the consensus position of liberal jurists, intellectuals, and politicians. A respect for the original meaning and intent of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments would preclude that.
If you think that is a far fetched position, remember that Roe vs Wade interpreted the Constitution to allow homicide by private individuals, on a whim for any reason or none, without due process of law.
I heard a good one Patrick the other day. A commentator was talking about Obama and his disdain for the constitution and he used the ending scene from Scooby-Doo to describe Obama. At the end of Scooby-Doo the bad guy always said something like; “and I would have gotten away with it, if it were’nt for those meddling kids” with Obama it is; “and I would have gotten away with it, if it wasn’t for that [meddling] Constitution”. I thought that was very accurate.
Take Care.
“President Obama is not an “anti-American leftist,” but a patriotic moderate, as the totality of his actions have proven.”
The Hollow Men by T.S. Eliot
I
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death’s other Kingdom
Remember us — if at all — not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.
II
Eyes I dare not meet in dreams
In death’s dream kingdom
These do not appear:
There, the eyes are
Sunlight on a broken column
There, is a tree swinging
And voices are
In the wind’s singing
More distant and more solemn
Than a fading star.
Let me be no nearer
In death’s dream kingdom
Let me also wear
Such deliberate disguises
Rat’s coat, crowskin, crossed staves
In a field
Behaving as the wind behaves
No nearer –
Not that final meeting
In the twilight kingdom
III
This is the dead land
This is cactus land
Here the stone images
Are raised, here they receive
The supplication of a dead man’s hand
Under the twinkle of a fading star.
Is it like this
In death’s other kingdom
Waking alone
At the hour when we are
Trembling with tenderness
Lips that would kiss
Form prayers to broken stone.
IV
The eyes are not here
There are no eyes here
In this valley of dying stars
In this hollow valley
This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms
In this last of meeting places
We grope together
And avoid speech
Gathered on this beach of the tumid river
Sightless, unless
The eyes reappear
As the perpetual star
Multifoliate rose
Of death’s twilight kingdom
The hope only
Of empty men.
V
Here we go round the prickly pear
Prickly pear prickly pear
Here we go round the prickly pear
At five o’clock in the morning.
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow
Life is very long
Between the desire
And the spasm
Between the potency
And the existence
Between the essence
And the descent
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
Your ‘moderate’ is filled with angry dogma and seeks death’s other kingdom for Western Civilization. Sending the bust of Winston Churchill back to the UK was a sign. Directing NASA to reach out to Islamists to tout the glory of Islam’s scientific achievements was another sign. The signs where everywhere right down there with Wright’s goddamn America and calling Ayers “just a guy in the neighborhood”. BTW, when will your ‘patriotic moderate’ release his transcripts from Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard? Curious minds want to know.
Some people lie because they are afraid to admit their wrong…
Some people lie because they don’t feel good about themselves…
Some people lie because they want to get something for nothing…
Some people lie because they don’t want to take any blame…
Some people tell lies about others, because they want to make others look bad…
Some people lie because they are good in lying…
Some people lie because they have no respect for themselves….
Some people lie because they are not sure of themselves…
Some people tell lies because they want to fool others…
“To Tell Lies Is To Honor Devil”…..
your pathetic trashing of a poem to attack the President is a replica of same anti-Democratic hate-filled rhetoric like Fox news and nothing it was before, being acquired by Mr Rupert Murdoch.
It is now a poor reflection of its glorious past and today shows the inexperience or incompetence or weakness or stupidity that accounts from a richly deserved failure both at home and abroad of the policies stemming from that reprehensible cast of mind called the NEWS CORP corporate board, which muzzles independent editors and transplants agenda on all and sundry.
So, what you end up with is a mouth piece and propaganda tool, rather than a balanced and thorough investigation and analysis, as Wall Street Journal should have been.
This article is vitriolic and full of angry rhetoric with a specific agenda of creating more animosity, rather than giving solutions or thinking of moving ahead from dire times as exist.
Hey, Fogblow, every rationale for lying that you listed applies to Obama. Thanks for pointing them out to others.
Your “moderate” president has created more animosity in America than most of us have ever seen. He does not even pretend to be the president of all of us.
Excellent post Parker. Especially your response. It’s apparent the leftists are out of ammunition. They are desparate and are only supporting their naked Emporer because progressives must never apologize or go back. It has always been about the power not about doing what’s right or what helps mankind. They are my enemy and I am ready to fight.
BTW. your poem made me remember this one from Bork’s book “Slouching Towards Gommorah:
THE SECOND COMING
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
We are the sum total of our beliefs, thoughts, and actions. To not summarize Obama as a dangerous radical is intellectually dishonest.
Massive tax cuts? You are in a fantasyland. List them, specifically.
No, you cannot count the Bush tax cuts as Obama tax cuts, even though Obama has attempted to do just that. And handing out tax credits to homebuyers is also not a tax cut. Neither is “Cash For Clunkers”, a massive failure that, in reality, increased the spending while doing harm to the auto industry, and destroying many used cars that actually ran quite well.
Have you tallied up the taxes imposed on us by Obamacare?
Obama has constantly argued for more taxes, and can’t ever get past his idiotic ideology that craves class warfare (He is bringing race warfare to America next year– count on it. That will be what his campaign is all about.)
You need to quit listening to what Obama says and focus on what he and his repulsive far-left administration are doing.
Actions, not words. Remember all that C-Span transparency that was supposed to happen? Then we got: “We have to pass this bill so you can see what’s in it.”
The slogan was: “Yes We Can.” But it turned out to be: “Yes We Will,” then never carried out, except Lefty policies that were never mentioned, other than: “Change We Can (and Will) Believe In.”
Is that the patriotic moderate who refused to put his hand over his heart? Is that the patriotic moderate who would rather wear garlic than an American flag pin?
His actions don’t speak louder than words, they scream “I Hate America”.
Not to mention the little woman’s “America’s a downright mean country”.
Tell your fabrications to stoners, pal, it’s an easier sell if your audience is non compos.
yep, cherry picking in a cherry orchard.
Why would democrats or anyone vote for an incumbent president who, even with both the congress & senate on his side, only manage to come through on one campaign promise. (European style health care). In the last 800 plus days he hasn’t even passed a budget. Most of his other campaign promises he actual did OPPOSITE of his word. For example, he promised no new taxes for anyone making less than 200,000. Maybe Hilary is prepping to challenge.
The Founding Fathers would be shooting by now.
I wish that both Norman and Ron would name names and tell us more about the red-diaper babies around Obama. They clearly know more than they are revealing. Are they afraid to talk about the communist relationships of, e.g., David Axelrod’s parents? Can they not take on the backgrounds of the many ex-SDSers who have actively pushed Obama forward, including those in “journalism” (e.g. Todd Gitlin) and in public sector unions? Stanley Kurtz did expose some of the cast of characters. David Horowitz has mentioned others. They should be household names. And exposing them would make Podhoretz’s and Radosh’s case much stronger.
It’s shocking to see this type of inflammatory and false rhetoric in as venerable a publication as The Wall Street Journal. President Obama is not an “anti-American leftist,” but a patriotic moderate, as the totality of his actions have proven. If you cherry-pick, you could even paint him as a conservative, with his massive tax cuts, support of spending cuts, and military buildup in Afghanistan — but then you could also paint George W. Bush as a leftist, with his support of amnesty for illegal immigrants, his Medicare Part D drug benefit, and his massive aid to Africa. But it would be dishonest to cherry-pick like this, just as this column is dishonest in cherry-picking President Obama’s record. I expect better of the WSJ, but it looks like the Tea Party cancer is spreading.
Obama is not only an anti-American leftist, he is a socialist with fascist tendencies.
If you are upset by “inflammatory rhetoric,” you had better be prepared for the vile that will come out of the Obama campaign against his 2012 opponent. He will be vicious.
It is interesting that Podhoretz concludes the reason for Obama’s failure is not that he is inexperienced, incompetent, weak or stupid but that the policies he favors do not work. As the saying goes ‘stupid is as stupid does.’
Similar thoughts here. Obama is baffled at the rejection of his policies — because he’s too dumb to see that his policies could only spark rejection.
He’s not baffled.
What’s he gonna say “My marxist coercion has plunged the country into a depression and downgraded our economy, but I’m sticking with them because I want to rule over you like a king commanding an army of serfs”?
Ron, Thanks for linking to the Lizza article. Unlike you, I found nothing at all disturbing about. In fact, I have had the pleasure of meeting John Eidsmoe, one of the “villains” in the article. He is one of the sweetest, most decent men I have ever met. If only Obama surrounded himself with such “fanatics.”
have to agree that this socialist/marxist/commie plant is still dangerous. he still has some teeth, but i think mostly the Tea Party snatched off his sheep skin and exposed the ravenous wolf within. for the next few months he will keep trying to wipe that drool off his chin and play nice. imho, by next november he will be old news in a changing world. that old ‘runnung up the leg feeling’ thing, well that’s kinda like a honeymoon, it wears thin after he spends day after after day after day on the golf course, or so my x says.
these type people do not let go of power easily. the former u.s.s.r. shook them off, just to find their teeth back at the necks of the people again. putin is a scary guy, and that type especially so when they control your country; and, they don’t have our protective documents (Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) to help guide and protect them.
socialism/marxism do not work. those of us old enough watched this play out tragically in our lifetime.
one thing for sure, the next year or so will be interesting, and maybe very dangerous.
“one thing for sure, the next year or so will be interesting, and maybe very dangerous.”
BHO is indeed very dangerous. Before BHO I would never have conceived of thinking that I would welcome an military coup in America. Now, I think that may be our fail safe option.
I made a similar comment on the American Thinker website and it couldn’t get past the moderator. If O wins in 2012 (especially by fraud), emergency means would be needed to prevent the ship of state from foundering.
Mr. Podhoretz is one of America’s most important thinkers and has been for forty years. He is also quite simply a very brave man. When he broke with the Left he willingly exposed himself to the feral ferocity that is their stock-in-trade. And he has given as good as he got which has only led to further radical hysteria.
There is no doubt that Mr. Obama has been marinated in all of the juices let loose by 1960′s radicalism. To deny it is patently abusurd. His father was an avowed anti-colonial Marxist whom he romanticizes in his autobiography. The influence of men like Ayers and Rev. Wright is well-known. The fact that virtually none of his undergraduate or graduate research writing has been made public is curious to say the least since one would expect that Mr. Obama would be eager to show the flashes of brilliance that have mad him “the smartest guy ever to be elected President.” There’s something there that nobody wants to talk about just like the extremely odd fact that Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review but could never get an article published.
He undoubtedly remains a radical thinker but he is an inept executive. If he had the organizational brilliance of say, Josef Stalin, we would probably be cooked but Obama isn’t that “good.” If I were a radical leftist I would be furious with the way he has picked his battles and at his general ineptitude as a policy maker. Only the fact that he holds the so-called “elite” media in his thrall has prevented him from sliding further. Whoever emerges as the GOP candidate can expect to have his/her life examined, analyzed and dissected (in the most unflatttering light possible) from the time they were in nappies by the establishment press. Obama will still be enveloped in the “kultursmog” that protected him in 2008.
I think it is more than just “marinated” in the ’60s. Too much of his bio simply doesn’t fit the social norms of the ’60s. I’ve run an investigation or two in my day and here’s the theory I would try to pursue: BHO’s maternal grandparents were reds, the real kind that followed the CPUSA or Comintern dicta. By the time we know anything of them, being “card carrying” members was unsafe if you needed to make a living, so they were loyal fellow travellers. Only committed “progressives,” in those days a code-word for communist, would have allowed their daughter to live the way she did. No matter how much they loved their daughter, most Amerian parents in the ’50s and early ’60s would have disowned BHO’s mother, so one must ask why she wasn’t. The lived in two hotbeds of communist organization, Seattle and Hawaii. It is not coincidence the Harry Bridges’ Longshoremen ran both SEA and Honolulu and Harry wound up standing with his fellow communists watching the May Day parade from the Kremlin balcony. The family lived well above the means their putative employment and personal wealth situation would have permitted. His g/father was nominally a furniture salesman; furniture salesmen don’t send their daughter to exclusive, expensive schools. In the late ’50s, it was no cheap, easy thing to move to Hawaii and set up a “middle class” life. Grandma worked at a bank, which is a suitably capitalist job, but there are lots of banks that employ lots of people because that is the price of getting a particular account. Getting a big union’s trust accounts will make a bank do all sorts of things and in the unionized West, lots of banks and credit unions are union owned or controlled. It has become pretty hippy-trippy these days, but in the ’60s, Hawaii was as segregated as the rural South, so, again, mom’s lifestyle was extreme. Indonesia was a hotbed of communist revolution in the mid-’60s so there’s another connection. There is no ready explanation for how BHO got into the expensive schools he went to, and even affirmative action isn’t a satisfactory explanation; he had connections and sponsorship of some sort. I think it likely that he did his college work as some sort of foreign student and the money came from foreign sources, though perhaps laundered enough to withstand superficial scrutiny. That’s why he and his string-pullers have gone to so much trouble to hide his past and especially his school records. In sum, BHO is a “Red Diaper Baby” groomed and cultivated by communists then backed by powerful people to get into political office in the most corrupt and machine controlled city in America. He is about as close to the Manchurian Candidate as you can get in real life. And frankly, I’m not at all certain that his makers will accept an election defeat in ’12. We’re headed for interesting times.
Yes, I’ve said similar things numerous times. There is a very good chance that the family was deeply communist. It makes perfect sense.
One key thing you didn’t mention is that shortly after the mysterious move to Seattle in the 50′s (who did such a thing in the 50′s without a compelling economic reason?), Obama’s mother, surprise, ended up attending the most radical high school in the country. The school was famous then and now. The family also attended the Little Red Church that was one of the more active participants in radical activities of the era.
There is certainly a books’ worth of material in that vein but nobody has the guts to publish it.
Another thing that is interesting but impossible to verify (so far) is a computer system’s analyst who says that he was told by a KGB agent in Moscow around 1991 that they had a mixed race mole in the US, and they were training him to be president. It sounds fanciful, but you know, Little Lenin’s and his family’s lives are so incredibly strange, something like that is impossible to completely discount.
Like homosexuals using style and success to compensate for their unacceptance in society, conservatives use authoritative tones and intellectual sounding commentaries to counter their opponents on the left.
But for all the expert conservative analysis we are enlightened with from the likes of George Will and the late William F. Buckley, the conservative movement is still paying catch-up on defense. Conservative candidates today always seem to be back on their heels, apologizing for their mission of conservativism.
And what is the reason for their appearance of fighting from a weak position? I believe it’s that very conservative analysis they are relying on from their strategists. The chink in the armour of any so-called expert is their reputation which translates into ego. To admit being wrong admits in a need to change course.
When Lenin returned to Russia with the aid of Germany, he had a plan that he wished to implement to bring Russia to Communism. But those plans disn’t work out as he thought. So instead of turning tail and running, Lenin used the circumstances as they played out. This is the lessons learnt by all leftist progressives. In the words of Rahm Emanuel; “never let a crisis go by…” without using it for your opportunitiy. It’s the reason the left succeed, they aren’t tied down by rules, convictions, or ethos. Winning is the only thing.
The first conservative Republican to realize this will be able to exploit it to their advantage and it will start to turn the tide on liberals.
You don’t see many of them stupid enough to go bragging on Lenin.
Little Lenin should be proud.
It was a great piece
We wanted a king and we elected one … we have been taught a valuable lesson and I hope we’ve learned it well, because there’s so much at stake. I’m tired of hearing apologists for Obama; tired of the lies and obfuscations; tired of the rapidly expanding regulatory state being instituted “behind the scenes” by radical wackos in the WH and beyond…and the list is endless.
“War is deceit” – this path has been taken by Obama; hence the myriad streams of lies emanating from his lips on a daily basis … and reinforced by the MSM and of course, the Quran.
“The END justifies the means” – we see this on full display; it’s immoral, period.
That is NOT the kind of POTUS that I want. Today; ALL the Leftists have joined forces it seems, thereby making it harder to single out specific strains of the disease. Obama is Fascist, Socialist, Communist, all rolled into one entity. So let’s knock off the tiptoeing around with our panties at half-mast and get with the program to oust this activist moron from office.
Yes; Obama “charmed” people into submission … now, the very real charming spirit has been exorcised so we can see what he’s really like. THis is why he will appear less and less in the public eye. The way to get Obama is to take him head-on … he would get annihilated in a debate, even by a 12 year old.
In short … we’re still recovering from being duped … the real Obama couldn’t tie his own shoelaces. The one thing that ALL the forces arrayed against Amùerica fail to comprehend, is the spirit of the American people and the extent to which God loves America. “Do not fear” – heard that before? Fear is what the Left rely upon to beat us down … enough is enough.
I it may be hard to know what Obama believes but it isn’t hard to know what he doesn’t believe.
He doesn’t believe in the Constitution.
He doesn’t believe in the Judeo-Christian tradition which inspired it, and is the basis of virtually every functioning democracy in the history of the world.
He doesn’t believe that Muslims living in America have a responsibility to America. He relentlessly refers to the “Holy” Quran and mocks the Bible while touting Islam’s non-existent “contributions” to America and the world. Never have I heard him tell Muslims living in America to respect America and American values.
He doesn’t believe in supporting our friends and putting pressure on our adversaries. He insults Britain and endlessly pressures Israel, but sucks up to every enemy of America.
He clearly thinks that being President of a diminished America doesn’t matter to him or diminish him because as a citizen of the world he is above all that and perhaps he even thinks having brought down America will give him added credibility in the rest of the world.
The mystery is why any is surprised. In the 2008 campaign he told us he didn’t like the constitution, he told us how much he liked Islam, and he told us he wanted to FUNDAMENTALLY transform America.
We have known all along that Obama doesn’t believe in anything that made America great, because he told us so.
Why is anyone surprised?
I think Norman is a very powerful voice and an extremely important leader in bringing truth to the distortion farm that is our mass media landscape.
I have been saying almost precisely to the word what Ron quoted Norman as saying, right here on these pages. Of course, my impact vs. his impact is a grain of sand vs. the entirety of both coastlines.
Obama is a radical extremist,has been surrounded by radical extremists, has nominated, appointed and implanted radical extremists. Yet, there are a couple of regular feature writers here who criticized me rather harshly for taking this position.
Norman calls Obama’s instincts Euro-Socialism. I respectfully disagree. He has a much stronger brand, cloaked in a “soothe the fears and slow cook ‘em” style. Black “reparations” nationalism and small c communist deconstruction of capitalism formulate a much more aggressive and harder edged, far reaching assault on the free market, our Judeo-Christian heritage and a particular antipathy toward white Christian males and pro-Israel Jews.
Obama barely conceals his contempt for Middle America, his wife needing to be muzzled lest they let the cat out of the bag, her dislike is palpable and overt.
Jeremiah Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, George Soros, Van Jones, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, Ali Abuminah, the radical professors in college, Don Warden, Carl Davidson, Sam Graham Felsen, Danny Davis, Barack Obama Sr., ACORN, SEIU, UNO, Heather Bloom, the Midwest Academy…all sharing an open hostility toward capitalism and Middle America…and all combining to form the sum total of Obama’s cemented ideology.
If one pieces together the above jigsaw puzzle, putting ALL the pieces in their proper place to form the picture, one should come away with a much more virulent strain of leftism than the rather soft and squishy Euro-Social democrat.
It is Obama’s style “soothe them with centrist words, while ripping and shredding the Constitution” that belies the harder core of his radical far left ideology. In fact, his “slow cook ‘em” style fools BOTH the left AND the non-left. The left is furious with him, because when they had the White House, the Senate and the Congress…they wanted him to seize more, confiscate more, shred the Constitution more. “Elections have consequences”. “We won”.
Obama believes that you get pushback if you scare the other side. He wants to play a confidence game on them. Soros believed the bank could have been broken. So does Krugman. They had the Cloward-Piven gambit right there on the chessboard. And Obama hesitated, according to the Communist professional left.
His “slow cook ‘em and sooth ‘em” style was not “courageous” enough. They had “won” the government, now they wanted him to seize it. To break it. To overthrow it. He didn’t think the time was right. It wouldn’t stick. They would get thrown out, and all their work undone…instead of making it permanent and irreversible.
I call Obama a small c communist for three reasons. One, that’s what Bill Ayers calls himself and it can’t be denied. Two, it’s a much more virulent brand of leftism than the softer Euro-Socialism. And three, because upper case Communism is much more revolutionary and Obama’s style is more of a virus than a kick in the groin.
Obama isn’t dithering…he’s plotting. He’s soothing. He’s play acting. He’s keeping his hands clean, so that you can never pin anything on him directly. His ideology and long term plan is as hard left as they come. He just doesn’t want you to see it coming.
Small c communism is the ideology of today’s Democratic Party. NOT Euro-Socialism. They just can’t run on that platform. They would get annihilated. So, they disguise themselves as something else…and their propaganda machine in the media, entertainment and academia lay down the cover fire for them.
I have been jumping up and down pointing at Stanley Kurtz’ work and shouting for everyone to pay attention, to combine that with David Horowitz’ Shadow Party and to piece this together. My voice is tiny and insignificant in the scheme of things. Maybe Norman’s and Ron’s will have a greater impact. Even if only on a couple of feature writers here.
One can only hope.
Who says things like: “How much money do you need?” and “Healthcare is a right”? These telling statements should have sent shivers down the legs of us all, not just Matthews’.
Thanks, cfbleachers. I have had several articles published in PJM, but when I recently submitted an article on this very point — Obama’s small c communism — it was rejected. But you are exactly right. Why don’t you expand and polish your comment a bit and submit it as an article? I think you make the case better than I did, and it might be accepted.
Thank you for articulating so well how I feel. The “slow cook ‘em” metaphor is on point, but his teleprompter gaffes and unscripted petulance have put a dent in the “smooth talk them – soothe ‘em” effectiveness as of late. Hopefully people will wake up before the pot they’re in boils…
Again, cfbleachers, you are dead on.
We are most impressed and ask you again for your permission to reprint
this “comment” at “Robbing America” with the credit of your preference.
You can contact us directly at the site – if you prefer – and give us a more direct contact access.
Feel free to use whatever I write in the comments section. Please also credit the author of the piece and PJM, if you would be so kind. They deserve the lion’s share of any credit.
Exactly. Saying he has a stronger brand than European Socialism is an understatement for the reasons you state and more.
And it’s a good insight that he hasn’t backed off breaking the bank because of weakness but because he prefers to play the con rather than pulling out the shotgun. He’s cooking the country on low heat, and it’s working real good, thankyewverymuch.
The only thing I disagree with is the small c communism description. It’s a bit bland. I like Stage 1 Communism, or stealth marxism better. There’s nothing small about this guy. If you condsider the good that the United States has done in the world for the last 100 years, and the 6 billion people currently on the planet, he is already the biggest criminal to walk on earth. His body count doesn’t yet match the big 4 Communists, but he has already set the table for far greater destruction than they were able to accomplish. If the US goes down, as he intends to make happen, their crimes will pale in comparison.
Obama’s remarks at a fundraiser, comparing himself to MLK, “And now that King has his own memorial on the Mall I think that we forget when he was alive there was nobody who was more vilified, nobody who was more controversial, nobody who was more despairing at times. There was a decade that followed the great successes of Birmingham and Selma in which he was just struggling, fighting the good fight, and scorned, and many folks angry. But what he understood, what kept him going, was that the arc of moral universe is long but it bends towards justice. But it doesn’t bend on its own. It bends because all of us are putting our hand on the arc and we are bending it in that direction. And it takes time. And it’s hard work. And there are frustrations.”
This is the kind of shameless crap that comes out of his mouth; portraying himself as a victim (which is the campaign theme) and a tireless worker (backed by everything morally good) for social “justice”. Using MLK in this way is the antithesis of honor … again, Obama is lying in order to deceive. The “end” justifies the “means” – it’s never-ending!!! There will be vindication for the honorable MLK.
BHO and MLK have more than just a little in common. MLK was just as radical and just as leftist, he just knew how to hide it behind the appearance of a Christian minister. Look a little harder at MLK’s background and education, likewise Rosa Parks was no poor, shy Black woman who just happened to be too tired to get out of her seat that day.
It would seem that we have Obama nailed for what he is and isn’t…however, during all of the rhetoric, complaining and trying to get a handle on him, our country has been undergoing a radical change from other sources beginning in 1992. Search the following:
Michael Shaw
UN Agenda 21
CAFTA
ICLEI
Communiterian Law
Cmmuniterianism
Obama’s 2008 campaign was nothing more than slick marketing. They sold us a radical leftist as some new kind of politican. But, the clues were there if people chose to look at them. He told Joe the Plumber that he was going to spread the wealth around! So in plain language he told us that he believed in Marxism and the redistribution on wealth. He told us that he was necessarily going to make our electricity rates skyrocket. He told us he had distain for people who cling to guns and God. So now the farmers in the Central Valley are shutdown due to an imposed lack of water. He’s shutting down fishermen and miners, especially the coal miners. He is proposing regulations out the wazoo; tying up the whole economy in red tape.
And, Obama’s mentor in high school was no other than Frank Marshall Davis, the communist with a folder a mile thick. So in his impressionable teen years, he was marinated in marvels of communism while Frank plied him with whiskey.
1. Add to Obama’s wrongs: (1) His (Attorney General Holder’s) dismissal of the charges against the New Black Panthers for trying to intimidate voters at a polling place in Philadelphia, and his having these people as guests as the White House; (2) His attacks on Israel, following the old Soviet Communist line and following the line of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright
2. How old was President Obama when Martin Luther King, Jr. was active? He was born in 1960 – so he was 8 years old in 1968!
3. Obama’s maternal family, Dunham, was an important one much involved in politics.
That picture is something of a slander on George McGovern, who was a decorated bomber pilot in WWII and who served two full terms in the US Senate before running for president.
McGovern also did not cavort with terrorists and did not compare himself to the messiah, etc.
He is an intelligence asset, a partly unwitting agent of influence launched by the KGB during the late 50s-early 1960s global offensive they launched as a substitute for the world war strategy pursued by Lenin and Stalin. I have been saying this for 3 years. One day, you idiots will believe me.
I find it oddly irritating that folks like Lizza are given any credibility whatsoever as they start to vet the Republican candidates for President, when they intentionally refused to do so with Obama when he was running. Most liberals in media still won’t honestly report nor scrutinize Obama’s actions nor policies and damn sure not his anti-American character flaws. Why should anyone ascribe any credibility to most of main-stream media reporting? I surely will not.
Obama spent most of his formative years in Hawaii. After living in Hawaii for 5 years, I came to know the intense rascism and anti-white hate that exists there. And many people who had lived there a long time related that the hatred of whites, especially white mainlanders, was much worse 30-40 years ago.
So in order for Obama to fit in, he must have had to go along to get along. Especially since blacks were and are detested as much as whites by the locals, he would have had to try and fit in as much as possible.
In my view Obama has a deep seated hatred of the “haole” or as is most commonly said the “f&%$*#% haole”.
I can say with pride but disillusion that at Robbing America we raised our voices of alarm and warning to the hypothesis that Obama was a true leftist in the worst European social-democratic model. We agreed as far back as 2008 that Americans were giving him a pass because he was black in which sense Mr. Podhoretz is absolutely right.
Today we have expressed our wish that “in 2008 Americans proved that they were not racist, and that in 2012 they have to prove that they are not stupid”.
The facts speak loudly; D’Sousa’s book “The Roots of Obama’s Rage”, as well as others who provided Glenn Beck’s research, point to willful destruction as a motive for the president. To those who read “Dupes” (translation of the Verona Papers), Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” or those who follow climate news via such blogs as Climate Depot and Delingpole’s “Watermelons”, along with “Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout”, see the current regime as the culminaiton of years of effort by the radicals. However, this group would have no power, would have remained on the fringes of society, without MSM and academic support. (Pelosi and Reid are fellow travelers, as well, and without them, Obama would have been limited in his destruction.)
Over decades, politicians enlarged the powers of the presidency via adding agencies that make up new rules every 4 or 8 years and by simply issuing Executive Orders (public unions were created by JFK by this). How is this any different from Latin American dictatorships?
First of all;
ObamaCare is the label, but, Obama had NOTHING to do with it’s construction. It only has his autograph signing it into law.
ObamaCare is a conglomeration of oppressive and over-reaching taxation legislation conjured up by the Democrat Party over the last 35 years, and stuck on the top shelf of their Congressional vault waiting for a tool, precisely like Obama, to sign it into law.
The Obama’s are seriously determined to exact their retribution on America through their autocratic powers, which they are unashamed to brandish.
And for a real life perspective of WHO THE OBAMA’S REALLY ARE,
see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5INFAuM1xI
Obama wants ‘voters’ to “scold their Congressmen”?
You’d think he really means it, until you take a look at HIS record for dealing with the Legislative Branch:
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/06/29/morning-bell-five-ways-obama-is-circumventing-the-legislative-branch/
Who actually needs the ‘scolding’?
“He is still the same anti-American leftist he was before becoming our president, and it is this rather than inexperience or incompetence or weakness or stupidity that accounts for the richly deserved failure both at home and abroad of the policies stemming from that reprehensible cast of mind.”
No one else has said it this well regarding the reasons for Barack Obama’s utter failure as president.
ETAB: your comments are spot on.
I might also add that, not only was Obama in a cocoon, but that he was likely deeply affected by the abandonment by his parents. This required his grandparents to make him feel “special,” and created the narcissism we see, “I am the one.” Obama was sent to the best schools on scholarship; no doubt his grandparents wanted the best for him and over-compensated for their daughter’s failings.
I also agree he seems bored and not much of a thinker. He seems largely incurious about history; sends back a bust of Churchill, goes to the UN to talk about rights versus freedom, tells veterans the US liberated Auschwitz, etc, etc. It’s as if time began with him.
I agree with Podheretz that the left gave him a complete pass because he was electable and Black! It was clearly racism on display.
I am concerned however, that Americans, independents will not warm to Perry and see him as “another Texan.’ The forty percent who support Obama are lost.
Unseating Obama’s is the right’s MAIN PRIORITY, nothing is more important. Eyes on the prize; the Presidency, absolutely.
In this regard Krauthammer is right; the House can slow Obama down but without the Senate and, G-d willing, the Presidency, we cannot turn this ship around.
Yes, Obama is operationally a hardcore socialist, a leftist of the most anti-American, anti-capitalist mode, anti-individual, anti-freedom…etc etc.
But he is all of this, not because he intellectually has explored and analyzed and supports the political theories of socialism. He is a psychological socialist. That’s completely, totally different. And I think we have to be aware of the difference.
Obama doesn’t believe in the theories to enable a ‘better world’. He is embedded in these theories, certainly, by his upbringing which from his mother, father, grandmother etc – was nothing but anti-American socialism. But my view is that Obama, as a young boy, moved into a psychological cocoon, alienated from facts, from reality, from theory…a psychological cocoon of pathological narcissism. This means that his interactions with others are reduced to a singular need to CONTROL others.
And, if you move into the political realm, and have a dominant need to control others, then, you are a socialist. Socialism sets up Rulers..and the Ruled. It sets up the Wise…and the Ignorant. It sets up Those Who Must Be Obeyed…and the Submissive Powerless.
The people whom Obama has surrounded himself with, both elected and unelected, are in the Socialist Camp because it gives them Power. Pelosi, Reid, Frank..all of them, are focused only on power and their own gain. Obama himself is focused only on Himself, and his feeling of supremacy over, and control over, Others.
If he had been left as an irrelevant community organizer, the harm he effects would have been confined to a local domain. But put someone as pathological as he is, into a position of power-over-many, and his need to assert this power, to reduce the freedom and independent strength of others explodes.
Obama needs to control Americans..more and more and more. More regulations, more centralist policies. Congress? His disdain for, his contempt for, his ignoring of its rules and due process is obvious.
Note – Obama is even now blaming Congress for all the economic ills of the nation. Yes, he also blames the Japanese earthquake and the Arabs and the GOP and Bush and…. But, Obama, with this pathological need to assert his supremacy cannot, psychologically, accept blame. So, he’s moved Himself into a detached Role; he’s ‘above it all’, above the debates and arguments (heh)…Has he forgotten that he threatened to veto Cut,Cap and Trade as well as Boehner’s bill?
But – again, the problem with Obama is not the intellectual content of socialism; I maintain Obama has no intellectual content…theories and policies bore him. The problem is his pathological need to disempower others and reduce the ability to be free, the capacity for freedom, the capacity to work, produce wealth..in this nation.
How does one deal with this? Constantly attack his failures; be specific about them, provide data and facts; laugh at his blaming others – publicly belittle him for blaming others. Ignore the ad hominem attacks..and attack him for allowing his administration to carry out such smears.
ETAB: your comments are spot on.
I might also add that, not only was Obama in a cocoon, but that he was likely deeply affected by the abandonment by his parents. This required his grandparents to make him feel “special,” and created the narcissism we see, “I am the one.” Obama was sent to the best schools on scholarship; no doubt his grandparents wanted the best for him and over-compensated for their daughter’s failings.
I also agree he seems bored and not much of a thinker. He seems largely incurious about history; sends back a bust of Churchill, goes to the UN to talk about rights versus freedom, tells veterans the US liberated Auschwitz, etc, etc. It’s as if time began with him.
I agree with Podheretz that the left gave him a complete pass because he was electable and Black! It was clearly racism on display.
I am concerned however, that Americans, independents will not warm to Perry and see him as “another Texan.’ The forty percent who support Obama are lost.
Unseating Obama’s is the right’s MAIN PRIORITY, nothing is more important. Eyes on the prize; the Presidency, absolutely.
In this regard Krauthammer is right; the House can slow Obama down but without the Senate and, G-d willing, the Presidency, we cannot turn this ship around.
The problem with Obama goes back before he was born. Obama’s flagrantly irresponsible and grotesquely uncivilized (not to mention Muslim polygamist) father should never have been allowed to visit the US, where he took advantage of the opportunity to impregnate the mentally unstable Stanley Ann Dunham.
I must repeat the warning that we need to vet the people who enter the US much more thoroughly – not merely immigrants, but also students and tourists – even though that is tantamount to locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen.
Barack Hussein Obama had a truly evil upbringing, and instead of trying to overcome those limitations, he grew up to impose them by force on all of us.
And yes, for all intents and purposes, Obama is a Muslim.
I don’t think leftists are anti-America. They’re anti-America-as-it-is. They see the country as fundamentally flawed and in need of a makeover. Only when the Progressive program has been fully implemented will they be able, in good conscience, to admit that their country is at least “ok.” So they “love” America – but only for its future potential as a socialist utopia, not for what it is right now.
The thing about Michele Bachmann is that you don’t have to dig into her past to find out what she believes. She says and does what she believes. Obama, on the other hand, is an expert at hiding what he really believes. He has been taught by the masters (Community Organizers, who knew?) Obama has no problem going before the nation and saying one thing and then secretly doing the exact opposite. Many of us knew about Obama before he was elected, but I, for one, did not know about Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, etc. and that the democrat party had been hijacked by Marxists who openly admit their admiration for despots like Che, Castro, Mao. The best thing Obama has done for our country is to open the eyes of the people to the corruption in Washington.
I am the author of The Obama Timeline. (Part I is in paperback; Part II can be freely read at my web site.) I have spent thousands of hours researching Obama’s history, and few know his past more than me. Messrs. Radosh and Podhoretz are spot-on. Obama has not changed. What he was in 1981 he was in 1991 and 2001 and remains in 2011.
Obama is a greater danger to the future of the United States of America than any foreign power or domestic terrorist, and the sooner he is removed from office the better. The worst of the GOP candidates would be a significant improvement over Obama, because the goal is not simply removing him from office, it is removing his czars, appointees, advisers, and regulators, and insuring that he is unable to appoint more judges and sign more executive orders.
Amen, brother, Amen
It is too late to make Obama’s far leftism an issue. The time for that was 2008 and McCain failed to do it. Obama can be defeated. He has a horrible record. As low as his ratings are the public has forgotten the many disasters of the last 2.5 years. The people who remember are the Pajamas Media people – maybe 35% of the electorate. You cannot build your campaign on what the Pajamas Media people failed to bring to the public’s attention 3 years ago but we can campaign against the disasters of Obama’s presidency – disasters that we Pajamas Media people remember but the general public forgets. The sycophantic MSM would be happy if we all forgot but a strong Republican campaign can rehash this record endlessly. Obama’s ratings can only go down.
It is too late to make Obama’s far leftism an issue. The time for that was 2008 and McCain failed to do it.
Yes, McCain should have done so and failed to do it. But the ship has not necessarily sailed on raising the issue. Obama should be held to his record, but it would be useful to discuss that record in the course of the campaign by putting it into the context of his far-leftism.
It will not necessarily be easy to do this, since Obama does his very good best to ensure that he is never before a hostile or penetrating questioner for more than a nanosecond. But to the extent possible, he should be hit on his far-left views and then asked how one or another of his actions while in office, or his choice of appointees (and the actions of those who have remained) are not in keeping with his radical leftist ideology.
Merely hitting Obama for raising the deficits and the debt, for profligate spending, for failure at job creation, etc., permits him and his supporters to weasel over how “these things haven’t been allowed to work yet,” or some such. But attacking these things in the context of their being in the service of a leftist ideology opposed to the beliefs of most Americans puts them in perspective, and shows that the misery he has visited on the nation is a feature, not a bug. That will kill his election chances far more than simply pretending he has been well-meaning but unsuccessful.
I dont know whether to laugh or cry! Maybe tea partiers could believe that Barack Obama is a Moslem or a radical leftist but I thought right-wing intellectuals were intelligent, rational people. I dont know what Obama’s
connections were with leftists in the past but he doesnt represent them.
If he was one of them, he sold them out for political power. Leftists far to the right of Bill Ayers consider Obama a centrist.
His health plan is to right of Hillary Clinton’s and will profit private insurance companies, he bailed out the banks and Wall Street with public money
he didnt close Guantanamo, he supported one (too small) stimulus (not communism
but Keynsian economics) and now talks about deficits. Before we know it he will
be cutting Social Security and Medicare – hurting the very middle and working class tea partiers trying to understand whats going on.
One thing I always admired about dedicated communists was their willingness and ability to learn from their defeats. The Clintons were every bit as radical as BHO and they overplayed their hand leading to the Counter-revolution of ’94. BHO is boiling frogs, and doing so fairly successfully.
The Fantastical Wonderland of Barack Hussein Obama
. . . Adeptly executing the blame game approach to governing, two weeks after he signed onto the bi-partisan debt ceiling agreement, Obama now calls the pact “a debacle” and blames “partisan brinkmanship” and plain old bad luck from overseas for his abject failures. (http://bit.ly/oexCxK)
A reality check: America’s economy was in the pits long before Europe’s upheavals, long before Japan’s tsunami and earthquake, long before the Mideast exploded, and long before Republicans made a half-hearted effort to effect fiscal sanity.
Next thing you know, our leader will be saying he really did close Gitmo, that he hasn’t really raised taxes, that Obamacare is constitutional, and that his bride has always been proud of her country.
Far more critical than any of those developments is a valid concern as to whether Obama is in his right mind when he contends he “reversed the recession.” That distorted thinking is contrary to all perceived reality and could be emblematic of an unbalanced mind which is significantly more dangerous than economies in upheaval, tsunamis, crazed Arabs, or angry Republicans!
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5219)