Something Wicked This Way Comes

A Socialist Agenda of Saul Alinsky Is Being Waged by Obama and the Democrats

“We are the hungry ones. Your torments call us like dogs in the night, and we’re to feed and feed well.  We stuff ourselves on other people’s nightmares and butter our plain bread with delicious pain…We suck that misery and find it sweet.  We search for more, always” – Mr. Dark,   Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes

 

We are moving so fast towards a Marxist tyranny, we cannot keep up with everything that is happening and being proposed and imposed.

Just today, during the signing of Porkulus in Denver – Obama stated that we will have “smart meters” put on all our homes – to ‘monitor’ our energy use, in which he lied boldfaced about the intent of such a device.  It is NOT to cut our energy costs or cut down on power outages – but it is a device to meter and document WHEN and HOW you use that energy, and to report it to the government for taxation.

Obama said that he will be launching “other” aspects of an ambitious plan to ‘change’ the country.

Roger King from the Canada Free Press documents the Marxist agenda of the first few weeks of this regime we will suffer under.

 

Something Wicked This Way Comes

By Roger King  Tuesday, February 17, 2009 

Barack Obama’s has been in power for about a month but his promise of “change” appears to be more than just a liberal agenda. Not only is it becoming apparent that the economic crisis is being used to push a socialist agenda that would make Sol Alinsky proud but there are some very disturbing signs how the Democratic plan to win subsequent elections.

Bailout Bill

Obama campaigned on a message of “hope over fear” but his current rhetoric talks about a crisis of catastrophic scope if the bailout bill isn’t passed immediately. What makes this suspicious is the fact CBO states most of the bill will only take effect at the end of 2010 and will actually hurt our gross national product over the following 10 years. Its apparent president Obama used this bill to accomplish things that would have been much harder to pass on their own merit.

 

Religious discrimination: Buried in the bill is a section that bans religious activities in many public education buildings. Further, there are upgrades to the national school systems but they are prohibited where religious activates may occur. Democrats voted 43-54 against an amendment to strike from the economic stimulus bill language that discriminates against people of faith.

Universal Health Care: The outline for Universal Health care will be put in place through this bill. In mandating a computer system for all medical records, every person will be mandated to have their records recorded in Federal DB. 
A National Coordinator of Health Information Technology is going to be created to monitor this system. This outline will likely be used to track treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties.

ACORN: Potentially up to $4 billion for radical groups like ACORN will be dispersed. ACORN is a radical socialist group that helped the housing bust by pushing banks into making bad loans and is accused of voter fraud in over 6 states. This group openly supports the Democrats and their tactics were learned through Sol Alinsky teachings. Obama even taught these classes to ACORN in his Chicago days.

Open Ended Welfare Returns: The bill sets in motion another $523 billion in new welfare spending that is hidden by budgetary gimmicks. Although this bill pretends that most of its welfare benefit increases will lapse after two years, the intend for most of these increases to become permanent. Instead of Welfare ending for recipients in 5 years that was done during the Clinton administration, now welfare entitlements will be open ended.

 

TARP Funds to Control Business

TARP funds have been used to buy stock in banks and financial institutions which essentially is the government buying ownership stakes in these companies. The question is will the government keep this ownership and for how long. President Obama has also decided to limit the executive pay to no more than $500, 000 per year for those companies that receive the bailouts. Of course they say these are only temporary measures but no end date has been given. To top it off Barney Frank is proposing that the government regulate the pay for all executives but for some reason not for lawyers or the Hollywood elite.

Gun Control

In the first session of Congress the liberals introduced H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009). This bill targets anyone who owns a gun by requiring them to register all guns within 2 years. Every 5 years the gun owners much go through a renewal process for each gun they own. Failure to comply with these rules carry heavy penalties jail time and loosing your guns. Probably the worst provision authorizes government searches without warrants. A new federal bureaucracy will be created to monitor this process. Do you really expect the liberal elites to allow automatic gun renewal?

Silencing The Media

To anyone but the most ardent liberal, its quite apparent that the majority of the media is blatantly supporting Obama’s ever action. The revelation that for 17 years Rahm Emmanuel (Obama’s Chief of Staff), George Stephanopoulos (ABC News), James Carville and Paul Begala (CNN) have had daily hour long calls that have continued into the Obama administration is but one example. Even though CNN is selling Obama shirts they will tell you they are not bias. Actions by the Obama administration have made it quite apparent to the media you are either with Obama or you will systematically be silenced.

For those that don’t follow “the program”, you will be punished. For example, during the election the Washington Times, Fox News, N.Y. Post and Dallas Morning News got kicked off the Obama’s plane. It wasn’t lost on the press that all these groups were McCain supporters. During press conferences Obama preselects who will be called to ask questions. Ask the wrong questions and you won’t get picked again. Again this isn’t lost on the adoring press.

Using one of Sol Alinsky’s sayings “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”, President Obama told Republican’s “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” Although so far President Obama has claimed he doesn’t want a fairness doctrine, there is a growing push to bring back some form of the “Fairness Doctrine”.

Obama has already talked about wanting more minority ownership and requiring broadcasters to operate “in the public interest” which will be over see by government or community groups. To add to the pressure shortening licensing terms will make it more likely owner will just abandon talk radio. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is also looking into policies that would allow it greater internet oversight.

Census

The census taking is supposed to be ruled in a bipartisan manner. However, the Obama administration is attempting to move the execution of the U.S. Census from the Department of Commerce to the White House under Rob Emanuel’s control. This is totally unprecedented and against federal law. Sen. Judd Gregg withdrew his name from consideration as Sec. of Commerce in large part because of this action.

So what is the problem with having the White House running the Census? The census results drive how welfare and aid to states is distributed. Further congressional seats per state and the electoral college changes with these results.

Instead of having the normal direct count, Robe Emanuel wants to estimate numbers instead of an actual count for minority groups. To make matters even more interesting, under the White House direction there would be less requirements for openness as to the process that was used to arrive at the census results. Talk about the potential for major gerrymandering that could bring a windfall of new Democrat votes.

Illegal Immigrates Getting Amnesty

Once again there is an immigration bill working its way through Congress. It would give Illegal Aliens 24 hour to get access with their lawyers paid with tax payer dollars. Temporary Visa can be renewed indefinitely. Tax payer money would also go to Mexico to have their . Illegal Aliens won’t have to pay back taxes but will get tax credits. North American Union will be fast tracked. In state tuition to college will always apply.

When our country is in such a bad recession, why would you want new citizens that inherently use over twice tax money than they play? Why would we want more workers in our country when unemployment is over 7%? Again they overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

District of Columbia to have Congressional Votes

Democrats want to give full representative to District of Columbia thereby giving them two senators and a representative for the House of Representatives. Since only states have this ability, Congress will pass a law giving the District of Columbia “the functional equivalent of a state”. On February 11, 2009 a senate committee passed this very bill and will be voted on by all members in the coming weeks. You would be right if you guessed that the District of Columbia would vote Democratic?

Civilian Expeditionary Workforce

While on the campaign trail Barack Obama said “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” You Tube Link

Now, the Defense Department has established just such a “Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” (Defense Department Directive 1404.10) that will see American civilians trained and equipped to deploy overseas in support of worldwide military missions.Link According to a Defense Department report the intent of this program “is to maximize the use of the civilian workforce to allow military personnel to be fully utilized for operational requirements,”

Is this an initial step towards fulfilling president Obama’s promise to form a civilian national security force as powerful as the U.S. military? Will this “Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” ever be used in the US? Will we see “youth brigades” roaming the streets to protect us? We will have to keep a close eye on this.

 

 

How America Becomes A Tyranny

“Justice and happiness in a community rests upon the moral condition of its citizens.. without proper moral conditioning, a nation’s “defining principle” will be the source of its ultimate destruction. “

This essay in the American Thinker is a great read, and undoubtedly one the Founder’s themselves had read, studied and which motivated many of their warnings to us, regarding the safeguards of liberty:

The only foundation for… a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments. – Founder and Signer, Dr. Benjamin Rush

There is a huge difference between freedom and liberty.

Today in America, we define liberty as being able to do whatever one feels like without regard to consequences or responsibility.  But this is not liberty – it is in fact slavery.  Slavery to ideas anathema to liberty and slavery to the vices of both flesh and tyrants.

Liberty as intended for us in this country, can only be preserved by a state of religious biblical morality.  Without it, we see the results in both the culture and now in our political landscape: chaos, anarchy, corruption, deceit, abomination, violence and debauchery celebrated as goodness, while the righteous are silenced and persecuted by a new morality that will usher in tyranny.

 

How Democracies Become Tyrannies

By Ed Kaitz

Back in 1959 the philosopher Eric Hoffer had this to say about Americans and America:

“For those who want to be left alone to realize their capacities and talents this is an ideal country”. 

That was then. This is now. Flash forward fifty years to the election of Barack Obama and a hard left leaning Democrat Congress. What Americans want today, apparently, is a government that has no intention of leaving any of us alone. 

How could Hoffer have been so wrong about America? Why did America change so quickly? Can a free people willingly choose servitude?  Is it possible for democracies to become tyrannies? How?

The answers to these questions were famously addressed in a few pages tucked within the greatest masterpiece of the classical world: Plato’s Republic.  On the surface, and to most reviewers of Plato’s writings, the Republic is a dialogue on justice and on what constitutes the just society.  But to careful readers the deeper theme of the Republic is the nature of education and the relationship between education and the survival of the state.  In fact, the Republic is essentially the story of how a man (Socrates) condemned to death for “corrupting” the youth of Athens gives to posterity the most precious gift of all: the love of wisdom.

In the Republic, two young men, Glaucon and Adeimantus, accompany the much older Socrates on a journey of discovery into the nature of the individual soul and its connection to the harmony of the state.  During the course of their adventure, as the two disciples demonstrate greater maturity and self-control, they are gradually exposed to deeper and more complex teachings regarding the relationship between virtue, self-sufficiency, and happiness. In short, the boys begin to realize that justice and happiness in a community rests upon the moral condition of its citizens.  This is what Socrates meant when he said: “The state is man writ large.”

Near the end of the Republic Socrates decides to drive this point home by showing Adeimantus what happens to a regime when its parents and educators neglect the proper moral education of its children.  In the course of this chilling illustration Adeimantus comes to discover a dark and ominous secret: without proper moral conditioning a regime’s “defining principle” will be the source of its ultimate destruction.  For democracy, that defining principle is freedom. According to Socrates, freedom makes a democracy but freedom also eventually breaks a democracy.

For Socrates, democracy’s “insatiable desire for freedom and neglect of other things” end up putting it “in need of a dictatorship.”  The short version of his theory is that the combination of freedom and poor education in a democracy render the citizens incapable of mastering their impulses and deferring gratification.  The reckless pursuit of freedom leads the citizens to raze moral barriers, deny traditional authority, and abandon established methods of education.  Eventually, this uninhibited quest for personal freedom forces the public to welcome the tyrant.  Says Socrates: “Extreme freedom can’t be expected to lead to anything but a change to extreme slavery, whether for a private individual or for a city.”

Adeimantus wants Socrates to explain what kind of man resembles the democratic city.  In other words, he wants to know how “democratic man” comes to be and what happens to make this freedom loving man eventually beg for a tyrant.  Socrates clarifies that the democratic man starts out as the son of an “oligarchic” father — a father who is thrifty and self-disciplined.  The father’s generation is more concerned with wealth than freedom. This first generation saves, invests, and rarely goes in for conspicuous consumption.[i]

The father’s pursuit of wealth leaves him unwilling and unable to give attention to his son’s moral development. The father focuses on business and finance and ignores the business of family. The son then begins to associate with “wild and dangerous creatures who can provide every variety of multicolored pleasure in every sort of way.”  These Athenian precursors of the hippies begin to transform the son’s oligarchic nature into a democratic one.  Because the young man has had no moral guidance, his excessive desire for “unnecessary pleasures” undermines “the citadel” of his soul.  Because the “guardians” of the son’s inner citadel — truth, restraint, wisdom — are absent, there is nothing within him to defend against the “false and boastful words and beliefs that rush up and occupy this part of him.”

A 1960s revolution in the son’s soul purges the last remaining guardians of moderation and supplants new meanings to old virtues:  “anarchy” replaces freedom, “extravagance” replaces magnificence, and “shamelessness” replaces courage.  The young man surrenders rule over himself “to whichever desire comes along, as if it were chosen by lot.”  Here Socrates notes the essential problem when a free society becomes detached from any notions of moral virtue or truth: desires are chosen by “lot” instead of by “merit” or “priority.”

For the son the democratic revolution in his soul is complete.  In this stage “there is neither order nor necessity in his life, but he calls it pleasant, free, blessedly happy, and he follows it for as long as he lives.”  Socrates gives a brief illustration of the young man’s new democratic life:

Sometimes he drinks heavily while listening to the flute; at other times he drinks only water and is on a diet; sometimes he goes in for physical training; at other times, he’s idle and neglects everything; and sometimes he even occupies himself with what he takes to be philosophy.  He often engages in politics, leaping up from his seat and saying and doing whatever comes into his mind.  If he happens to admire soldiers, he’s carried in that direction, if money-makers, in that one.

In short, the young man has no anchor, no set of guiding principles or convictions other than his thirst for freedom.  His life is aimless, superficial, and gratuitous. The spoiled lotus-eaters of his generation have defined themselves simply by mocking all forms of propriety and prudence.  What’s worse, as these Athenian baby-boomers exercise their right to vote, they elect “bad cupbearers” as their leaders.  The new cupbearers want to stay in office so they give the voters whatever they desire.  The public, according to Socrates, “gets drunk by drinking more than it should of the unmixed wine of freedom.”  Conservative politicians who attempt to mix the wine of freedom with calls for self-restraint “are punished by the city and accused of being accursed oligarchs.”

As conservative politicians court suspicion so do conservative teachers and academics who stubbornly hold on to objective measurements of performance: “A teacher in such a community is afraid of his students and flatters them, while the students despise their teachers or tutors.”  Conservatism becomes unpopular just about everywhere, to a point at which even the elderly “stoop to the level of the young and are full of play and pleasantry, imitating the young for fear of appearing disagreeable and authoritarian.”

The explosion of boundaries and limits extends even to national identity itself, so that resident aliens and foreigners “are made equal to a citizen.”

The citizens’ souls become so infected with freedom that they become excessively paranoid about any hint of slavery.  But slavery comes to mean being under any kind of master or limit including the law itself.  Says Socrates: “They take no notice of the laws, whether written or unwritten, in order to avoid having any master at all.” That is, any kind of “hierarchy” in a democracy is rejected as “authoritarian.”  But this extreme freedom, according to Socrates, eventually enslaves democracy.

As the progressive politicians and intellectuals come to dominate the democratic city, its “fiercest members do all the talking and acting, while the rest settle near the speakers platform and buzz and refuse to tolerate the opposition of another speaker.”  There are “impeachments, judgments and trials on both sides.”  The politicians heat up the crowds by vilifying business and wealth and by promising to spread the wealth around.  The people then “set up one man as their special champion” and begin “nurturing him and making him great.” 

The people’s “special champion” however transforms from leader to tyrant.  He “drops hints about the cancellation of debts and the redistribution of land” and continues to “stir up civil wars against the rich.”  All who have reached this stage, says Socrates, “soon discover the famous request of a tyrant, namely, that the people give him a bodyguard to keep their defender safe for them.”  The people give him this new security force, “because they are afraid for his safety but aren’t worried at all about their own.”

Socrates describes the early weeks of the new leader’s reign:

“Won’t he smile in welcome at anyone he meets, saying that he’s no tyrant, making all sorts of promises both in public and in private, freeing the people from debt, redistributing land to them, and to his followers, and pretending to be gracious and gentle to all?”

After a series of unpopular actions, including stirring up a war in order to generate popular support, the leader begins to alienate some of his closest and most ardent advisers who begin to voice their misgivings in private.  Following a purge of these advisors the tyrant attracts some of the worst elements of the city to help him rule.  As the citizens grow weary of his tenure the tyrant chooses to attract foreigners to resupply his dwindling national bodyguard.  The citizens finally decide they’ve had enough and begin to discuss rebellion. 

At this point in the dialogue Adeimantus asks Socrates incredulously: “What do you mean?  Will the tyrant dare to use violence against [the people] or to hit [them] if [they] don’t obey?  Socrates answers:

“Yes – once he’s taken away [the people’s] weapons.”

Thus ends Book VIII of Plato’s Republic.  I won’t spoil the marvelous ending (Books IX and X) but I would like to spend a few moments drawing some conclusions about the overall message of this fascinating text and its relevance for 21^st century Americans.

First, those of us who are incapable of self-mastery will always shamefully prostrate ourselves before messianic political leaders.  The progressive left in America has spent countless generations destroying the guardians of our inner citadel: religion, family, parents, and tradition – in short, conservatism and limits.  When we exhaust the financial and moral capital of previous generations (and future ones, as with the current stimulus bill) we will dutifully line up at the public trough, on our knees.  Citizens capable of self-mastery will always choose to be left alone.  In other words, they’ll always choose limited government.

Second, freedom without limits paves the way to tyranny by undermining respect for the law.  When politicians play fast and loose with the law it becomes easier for them and for the people to see special champions as alternative sources of rule.  Today in America the objective basis for law is being attacked on campuses and even in law schools as too authoritarian and too insensitive to the subjective experiences and personal narratives of criminals.  The SAT exam has also been under assault for the same reasons.  As Socrates warned: extreme freedom will instill a paranoia about any kind of “master” including objective measurements of right and wrong, and of merit based forms of achievement.  But when the citizens become enslaved to their vices they’ll dutifully cry out for another kind of master.

Third, is the crucial role of education, which is the underlying theme of Plato’s Republic.  The ethos of American education has been for many decades saturated with a simple mantra: choice.  What’s worse, those few remaining educators who chant the old, Socratic mantra of “judgment” are vilified and harassed by the modern day lotus-eaters as hateful conservatives.  Socrates predicted that all of this would happen in a democracy.  But it is judgment not choice that enables a young person to erect a citadel in the soul.  This eliminates the need for tyrants, and for bailouts too.

Finally, there is a question on the minds of many conservatives today:  How does one convince the younger generations of Americans to distrust the growth of the State?  Is it possible for Americans to recover the desire to be left alone in order “to realize our capacities and talents” as Eric Hoffer says? 

I’ve read that in Iran, many young people chafe at the pervasive despotism there, but when the burning desire for freedom threatens to boil over, the government in Tehran eases its restrictions on the use of personal satellite dishes.  Electronic Soma for the digital age.

Obama’s Inner Demons, Unleashed On Us All

As I post this essay by Joan Swirsky, I have read headlines today that Obama plans to drop sanctions against Iranian WMD Companies and that the Trojan Horse President also plans to massively reduce our nuclear arms.

One would not think someone the media says is so smart and intelligent would be so stupid and naive.  So we must then assume that this is deliberate.  Of course we tried to warn the American people what his real plans were, despite the bold-faced lies Obama told to the general public during the campaign.

We face an American Antichrist to our liberties, and quite possibly, to our very lives.

Obama, like all despotic narcissists, hold in disdain entire populations and classses of people that they blame for their own damaged pasts. Like Hitler, who was abandoned by his father and was left searching to find himself in a cocoon of hatred, Obama has followed the same path – now to the most powerful office on earth.

 

 

Obama’s Revenge

Joan Swirsky

Once upon a time, a white teenager from Kansas got pregnant by her black Kenyan boyfriend, Barack Obama Sr., or was it her husband? Whatever. (I say whatever because we’ve never seen either marriage or divorce certificates). Some say the couple was in Kenya visiting relatives when the birth of their son, Barack Obama Jr., occurred. No matter. (I say no matter because we’ve never seen an authentic birth certificate). By the time the baby was two years old his father abandoned him for his other wife and child in Kenya.

I wonder how toddler Barry felt when his father left him, and never reappeared until a single time when the boy was 10. Bewildered? Sad? Lonely? Angry? What do two-year-olds do with those feelings? 

It didn’t take long for Barry’s mother to meet and marry an Indonesian native named Lolo Soetoro. They moved to Indonesia, where her child became Barry Soetoro, took on Indonesian citizenship, and was presumably schooled in public, Christian, and Muslim schools. (I say presumably because we’ve never seen those school records). But when Barry was 10 years old, his mother sent him back to the U.S. to be raised by her parents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, although she kept her baby daughter Maya Soetoro with her. 

I wonder how the by-now fully-sentient young Barry felt when his mother sent him packing. Sad? Jealous of the baby who remained behind with mommy? Confused and dizzy by the disparate cultures – languages, customs, foods, sights, sounds, schooling – he had experienced? Resentful? What did Barry do with those feelings? 

By the time he was 10, the boy had been abandoned three times – by his father, stepfather, and mother. And although he was raised by his white grandparents in Hawaii – where “people of color” were not his color – he found out soon enough that his mixed-race background rendered him, in effect, an outsider. Did that make him feel self-conscious, indignant, victimized? 

But he wasn’t altogether an outsider. In Hawaii, young Barry met Frank Marshall Davis, his first and perhaps most influential mentor. The infamous Marshall, a Communist activist (and self-confessed pedophile) taught Barry – was it Obama, Soetero, Dunham? – that white people were the devil incarnate and that blacks were the most “victimized” people on earth. 

Yet the abandoned and rejected child was lucky. His white-devil grandparents gave him a comfortable life in Hawaii, and an education that apparently qualified him to attend several prestigious schools – Occidental College in CA, Columbia Univ. in NY City, and Harvard Law School in Cambridge, MA.(I say apparently qualified because we’ve never seen any of his college transcripts). 

BARRY MORPHS INTO BARACK

After his undergraduate days at Columbia, Obama chose not to go to graduate school, but instead held various jobs in the Big Apple and then moved to Chicago to become a community organizer. Although he had been exposed to American exceptionalism through his life in the United States and his privileged education, it is clear that his experiences in impoverished Kenya and totalitarian Indonesia, as well as his exposure to Marshall and the other radicals he had met during his years in New York – among them the unrepentant domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn of Weather Underground infamy – made the deepest and most lasting impressions. 

Their messages of American imperialism and its white-devil culture clearly resonated in the thrice-abandoned boy. In his young-adult and adult years, free to choose his friends and pursuits, he opted exclusively for far-left socialists and Marxists, and activities aimed at relieving the suffering of people he perceived to be as victimized as apparently he felt he had been. He understood their feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and impotent rage, as well as the pain of fatherlessness. After all, his Harvard-educated father consciously chose to leave him. And his mother gave him away. Was that depressing to Barry? Infuriating? 

When given the opportunity to join one of dozens of churches in Chicago, Barry – who had morphed into Barack – opted for the Trinity United Church of Christ, which was led by the fire-breathing Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose decades-long anti-American and anti-Semitic rants apparently resonated in Obama’s rejected and abandoned heart and soul. (I say apparently resonated because in over 20 years of regular attendance, Obama said he heard nothing inflammatory or anti-American, and we’ve never seen the videotapes of any sermon, although each one was unfailingly recorded). 

“God damn America,” Wright raged. “The chickens have come home to roost,” he “preached” to his whooping and hollering congregation after 9/11. Obama heard nothing. 

But it wasn’t only Wright who Obama was attracted to in Chicago. He was also drawn to another hate-spewing radical, Rev. Louis Farrakhan, as well as to the raving Father Michael Phleger, the radical Islamist Khalid Rashidi, his friends and neighbors the Ayers, and to equally-close friends “Tony” and Rita Rezko – Tony being the notorious “fixer” and now-convicted-and-imprisoned felon for fraud, bribery, and money laundering. What did the seemingly mild-mannered Obama find so irresistible in these angry and/or crooked people and others like them? Was it the same thing that a shy man finds in his attraction to a flamboyant girlfriend – and alter-ego, a person who expresses what he really feels but is unable to give voice to?  

In these relationships and in community organizing – which offers inner-city mostly-black residents job training, tutoring, and methods to organize tenants’-rights groups and voter-registration drives, etc. – the twenty-something Obama apparently found his calling, and also a renewed and burning ambition. 

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE

While his community-organizing job paid a paltry $12,000 or so per year, Obama somehow managed to pay his way through one of the priciest graduate schools in the world, Harvard Law School. (I say somehow managed because we have no record of his tuition payments). Even more amazing, he became the first black president of the Harvard Law Review without ever producing a written paper – or at least a paper that the public has ever read.

There is a good deal of evidence that Obama’s acceptance at Harvard Law – and his tuition – were facilitated by friends who had a vested interest in the community organizer. Among them was Percy Sutton, a former Manhattan borough president and ardent leftist, who was also Malcolm X’s lawyer. In an interview last year, the octogenarian Sutton stated: “I was introduced to [Obama] by a friend. The friend’s name was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and the introduction took place about 20 years ago.” Sutton described al-Mansour as “the principle adviser to one of the world’s richest men” and suggested that al-Mansour was raising money for Obama. Knowing that Sutton had friends at Harvard, al-Mansour asked him if he would write a letter to Harvard recommending Obama, which Sutton did most agreeably. This took place about 1988 when 27-year-old Obama was applying to Harvard Law.

Journalist Jack Cashill has credibly speculated that Obama’s two memoirs were actually written by his pal Bill Ayers, who was and is a University of Illinois at Chicago English professor, having escaped life in prison on a technicality. Two years [after he was admitted to law school], Cashill writes, “while still a law student, Obama improbably received an advance to write a memoir that would be called `Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,’ which was published in 1995.” His second memoir, published in 2006, was “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.” (I suspect Cashill said “improbably received an advance” because, as stated earlier, Obama had not produced even one paper or distinguished himself in any way to have inspired a major publishing company to approach him).

Al this begs the question: Who writes two memoirs about himself before the age of 45? My own speculation is that it could be no one but a narcissist.  As most people know in this age of pop psychology, the psychiatric disorder of narcissism derives from the Greek myth in which Narcissus, a handsome young man, became obsessed with himself and fell in love with his own image as he gazed into a pool of water. A lot of people have some degree of narcissism, which is characterized by grandiosity, an unquenchable need for admiration, unhealthy self-absorption, dependence on the affirmation of others, and also a lack of empathy, which is hidden by both personal charm and the kind of earnest language that pretends to “feel your pain.”

Or he could be a malignant narcissist., which psychiatrist Dr. Otto Kernberg, a legendary leader in thought disorders, compares to a narcissist on steroids. This variety involves paranoid traits (think of Obama’s thin-skinned, quasi-hysterical reactions to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin), and ego-syntonic aggression, which means the person is perfectly in-sync with people who have the courage he lacks to lash out.

But consider the source! Obama’s father was a self-aggrandizing narcissist who thought nothing of throwing his son away to fulfill his own ambitions and his mother also threw him away for the same reason. Talk about DNA, which Obama perfectly exhibited when, during his campaign, he unflinchingly dispensed with both his white grandmother and his black “mentor” Rev. Wright for his personal ambition.

GROOMING THE PERFECT MARXIST CANDIDATE

This leads me to only one conclusion, which I wrote about in a former article: “Obama: The Trojan Horse.” My theory is that President Obama’s narcissistic charm, even temperament, skill with words (teleprompter included), hunger to please, radical agenda, and subterranean rage at the “unfair” American system have been brilliantly exploited by powerful leftist radicals and Marxists in the United States, who for decades have plotted America’s path to socialism. He is their pawn, totally dispensable but handy while the “aura” lasts.

These “handlers” saw in Obama the ideal blank slate on which to actualize their agenda, and they made sure the slate remained blank by concealing (or destroying) any evidence of his past, including his birth certificate, Selective Service record, visa(s), school transcripts, and other vital documents. All of which is costing his moneyed backers – including America-loathing billionaire George Soros – multimillions in lawyers’ fees to fight the proliferating lawsuits that seek the truth about this stealth president.

In fact, former ambassador Alan Keyes, one of the many plaintiffs seeking proof of Obama’s American citizenship, has reported that Obama’s lawyers have now filed a motion “to quash our effort to obtain the relevant documents…[which] confirms Obama’s ruthless determination to destroy anyone who continues to seek the information the Constitution requires. Obama thus signals his intent to bring financial ruin on those who won’t accept his cover-up of the circumstances of his birth is a tactical escalation. It confirms the common sense suspicion that he won’t act forthrightly in this matter because he has something to hide.”

It is clear that Obama and his fellow radicals are restive. In the less-than four weeks of his presidency, the new president has taken volumes from the Marxian handbook, which dictates that the stupid masses be blitzed with an overload of information, hollow press conferences, appointments, dismantling of formerly effective national-security programs, et al., in order to set the stage for a massive, Soviet-style takeover of our government, including a civilian national security force that Obama has said should be “just as powerful, strong and well-funded as the U.S. military.” Echoes of Nazi Germany in 1938, anyone?

According to writer Kyle-Anne Shrive, in Obama’s ascendance:

“We have yet to see a more perfect collision of Murphy’s Law with the Peter Principle. In only three weeks’ time, [he] has signaled to every terrorist on the planet that we are a sorry, groveling, ashamed nation ready to come to the diplomatic confessional. He is closing Gitmo within one year, has suspended trials there, and dismissed the charges against the U.S.S. Cole plotter. [He] has just put our money where his mouth is and is using $20.3 million to bring in Palestinian refugees from Gaza…[he] had the gall to pronounce the so-called economic stimulus bill absolutely free of `earmarks’ and `make-do work’…but according to the Congressional Budget Office [this bill] will do worse to our overall economy than no government action whatsoever.”

And Obama has done all this with the predictable double-speak that characterizes malevolent intention, i.e., touting transparency while concealing everything, speaking of integrity while appointing crooks and incompetents riddled with conflicts-of-interest, supporting energy independence while killing off-shore and domestic oil-drilling and nuclear power, and feigning optimism while he speaks of impending “catastrophe” in order to push through a pork-laden, trillion-dollar-plus Stimulus plan that rewards the corrupt voter-fraud organization Acorn with billions and unions with discriminatory union-only labor agreements, paves the way for socialized medicine, and threatens to take away the most cherished rights of We The People.

As blogger Eric Gurr has said: “We still talk about the health care crisis, the environmental crisis, the oil crisis, the banking crisis. Let me tell you my friends you are about to learn the meaning of the only crisis that matters, the survival crisis.”

You can be sure that the sad-lonely-angry two-year-old, the jealous-confused-resentful 10-year-old, the self-conscious- cheated-victimized adolescent, and the man who found solace in and identified with his hate-America mentors is now determined to redeem all of his demons.

Unfortunately, he is acting out his rage on free-market capitalism, a free press, property and gun rights, a limited constitutional government, protection of the unborn, and everything else that is good and great about our country.