It's All About the "O"
Who would have thought it could ever happen in our generation? The Founding Fathers probably never imagined it. Certainly our own parents never thought it possible in the near or far future. And now that day is here: the first Socialist/Marxist radical has been installed in the White House to rule the free world. (I bet you thought I was talking about his race, just like all the rest of the "colorblind" media.)Dear readers, please forgive my curmudgenous posting. I guess I'm the turd in the Waterford punch bowl, here to rob the nation of its joy at Obama's coronation, I mean inauguration. USA Today described a humble scene: "For all the comparisons to Lincoln and Roosevelt and Kennedy this inauguration day, there was just Barack Obama, a slender black man in a dark overcoat." An ordinary man, humbly accepting the "hosannas to the king" of some 2 million fans as he made his grand entrance into Jerusalem, I mean D.C.. A donkey and palm fronds spread on the way would have made the scene complete.
Obama is the New Messiah for millions, perhaps billions, around the world. The Palestinians in Gaza believe Obama will bring lasting peace to the Middle East despite repeated failures since 1948. All of Europe thinks Obama will bring the dream of financial "equality" to the masses. The "human rights" crowd expect Obama to sign on to prophylactic abortion-on-demand, banish the idea of traditional marriage from the radar screen of civilization, and allow Auschwitz like experimentation on the stem cells of newly conceived babies. The "green" group hopes for the worship of their nature goddess. And the UN expects the USA will submit its sovereignty to UN rule under an Obama administration in the name of global cooperation.
Yet the new president has been sounding rather centrist since winning the nomination, even to the point of irritating his Bolshevik backers. So is he a radical idealogue or a political opportunist? I think leopards don't drop their spots. Melanie Philips of The Spectator (UK) summarized the phenomenon well: 'You have to pinch yourself - a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so.'
Except for the probing of the vast right wing conspiracy, no mainstream media has examined his life. There has been no scrutiny on things like how he got into Harvard, what his birth certificate actually says, how he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review without having written a single article that anyone knows about, or especially how his voting record revealed his political philosophy. If the media had been doing its job instead of carrying on a long distance love affair with the man, the voting public may have seen that there was little in his life as an Illinois state senator or congressional member that would indicate he had any propensity for "change" much less action at all. He stands for the basics of Democratic Party left: robbing the productive to reward the unproductive for an ever increasing cycle of government dependence, the most radical ideas in the culture in death and subservience of American sovereignty to a global world order.
One thing we do know--he is a "brilliant orator." (Or if you're a brilliant orator who is a Republican out to deceive the masses, you're a "great communicator.") Obama's campaign of "hope and change" was absolute genius. He has made no promises, except to "spread the wealth." He has only remarked how bad things became under Bush despite such assertions not being believable under the blazing glare of the facts. The hope/change message means nothing except where the listener will fill in the blanks--or worse. Obama is really the Genie in the Lamp. And foolish people are going to be in for some bitter surprises.
Obama's inaugural address sounded downright right, even Reaganesque in its tone. But on second look, it was filled with chained-together bromides and platitudes more suitable for a Hallmark card. If you're a more suspicious person, you might not see a cute card but some dark meaning hidden in his cliches.
For example, in a recent pre-inauguration speech, Obama decried Bush's mishandling of the economy and how his new administration will inherit a trillion dollar deficit. That said, Obama went on to sell the idea of another trillion dollars to stimulate the economy. Somehow, the first stimulus passed under President Bush (by a Democratic Congress) was evil, only feeding the recessionary fires. But the next one under his watch is good, a solution not to be confused with throwing good money after bad.
Obama has also complained that Bush has made the US less safe. He will fix that with conditionless dialogue with our enemies who will sit across the table from our diplomats, wishing our death. Obama has complained about our bad standing in the world and our ruined relations with our allies. He will fix those with a new cooperation. That sounds like he will be giving away our sovereignty to his European lefty brothers.
I also fear Obama's "bringing Americans together" rhetoric. The entire basis of representative self-government is rigorous debate and disagreement. First, debate keeps the government too preoccupied to interfere with the citizens' pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Second, rigorous debate hones solutions, even if one side loses its cause. This is not division; it is the American form of governance that has served us well since the Constitution was ratified--itself a "victim" of divisive politics. Does Obama really think he will get overarching agreement between lefty Democrats and what's left of traditional conservative Republicans to agree on diametrically opposed ideologic policy solutions? Does he think that half of the American people will stand silently by while the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumverate smash the vestigial remains of the republic the Founders envisioned? If so, he is either counting on an impotent GOP to go along to get along--the beginning of a one-party system--or Obama will work closely with media, government agencies and education to suppress any dissenting opinion. The attack machine of the Left over the past eight years will look like a comedy routine compared to what Obama's media machine will do.
Obama has already betrayed his Socialist propensities when he told "Joe the Plumber" that he wanted to spread the wealth. This "new era of responsibility" simply means that the responsible wage earner will pay the bills of the non-earner, just like we are doing with the endless bailouts of everything under the sun. And the wage earner will pay through higher taxes and inflation, as his government continues to print the money necessary to pay for all this CRAP (Capital Rehabilitation Asset Program). True to the Socialist credo of a centralized economy, Obama's government will take over much more of the financial markets--all in the name of saving the economy--and severely diminishing its ability to create wealth. Obama and the Congress will regulate and tax businesses in the name of "green" and "transparency" to the point of paralzying entrepreneurship, invention, and job growth.
I paint a bleak picture. If all this is true, then why on earth did he win the election? Like I said before, he's the Genie in the Lamp. With all the promises of endless handouts and about 84% of the American people already on the mooch (analysis to come in the next installment), why wouldn't people vote for a Socialist? Having their lives regulated a la "Brave New World" is a small price to pay in their minds. Most will gladly sell their birthrights to freedom for a bowl of stew. What foolish people don't know, because most have probably not read the book, is that society became stratified, with only the wealthiest minority occupying the privileged top rung of society. The rest wallowed in increasingly subservient and degrading social positions with no hope of escape. So much for social and economic equality. But at least the government took care of the lower strata.
I'm not hoping Obama's presidency will fail. Conservatives do not seek failure like the lefties had done in their undermining of everything President Bush did to strengthen the economy, win in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to protect the homeland from another vicious attack. On the contrary, if Obama succeeds, we all do. But as a Socialist/Marxist radical, bastardizing the ideas of freedom and "human rights" to expand abortion on demand, the destruction of families and the next generation, creating an ever-expanding dependency on the government, and the depression of a vibrant economy through excessive taxation and money-printing, will cause his failure and ours.
Given some of his idealogic flip-flops, at least in speeches, I'm not really sure what to ultimately expect from President Obama. He has a long record of "present but not voting," a stern support for the abandonment of important moral issues, a healthy list of who's who in the Marxist crowd, a rhetoric for truth, justice and the American way, and an ability to backpeddle and keep his balance that would make circus performers jealous. He may be just as likely to betray his Bolshevik supporters as traditional American values. If the American people wise up and elect a dominant Republican/Independent Congress next time around, maybe we'll get more of the former. That's the kind of change I'm looking for.
Here's to hope.
posted by Lisa @ 6:03 PM
1 comments
