What do we really know about Barack Obama, the throwback to the 1930s who truly hearts the ever expanding state?
Well, we learned from Barack Obama himself that he’d been mentored in high school by the communist poet Frank Marshall Davis, he’d sought out Marxist professors at college, he’d spent his off-hours attending socialist conferences and listening to the leftist sermons of a “liberation” preacher, and he’d eventually enlisted as a foot soldier in Saul Alinsky’s army.
But Obama didn’t tell us everything. He didn’t tell us that the people who raised him — his mother and grandparents — attended “The Little Red Church on The Hill”. And he didn’t tell us what those dreams were that he’d derived from his father, not really. We didn’t learn the truth about that until my Mises Econ Blog expose’ of Barack Obama’s socialist dreams from his socialist father.
And now, there’s this.
What more do we need to know?
{ 6 comments }
I second Michael Graham’s obesrvation that he couldn’t vote for a 20-year member of Rev. Wright’s church.
http://www.michaelgraham.com/post/2008/04/30/The-Press-And-Obama253a-They-Still-Dont-Get-It.aspx
It is that simple. There is no need to carefully analyze Obama’s childhood. Obama’s obvious adult choices are enough. If that doesn’t demonstrate Obama’s character to someone, then no historic analysis will.
I will add these two interesting windows into Obama’s character.
Richard Epstein discusses Barack Obama
http://easyopinions.blogspot.com/2009/04/richard-epstein-discusses-barack-obama.html
Richard Epstein is the James Parker Hall Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1972. He was a colleague of Barack Obama when Obama taught as an instructor. Epstein had mutual friends with Obama, and talked to Obama about some issues. His main description is that Obama is under complete self-control
Obama worked as a community organizer and was in many cases very constructive. He organized public/private partnerships to help the homeless and downtrodden.
But, the difficulty you get, for someone who has only worked in that situation, is that he believes the creation of private wealth is something the government cannot influence or destroy. He has many fancy redistribution schemes, in addition to his health plan and new labor laws, which are all wealth killers.
He is about to engage in a series of proposals to redistribute wealth that we do not have.
———–
Obama and God
http://easyopinions.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-and-god.html
When God talks to you through your inner voice, it is even better than prayer. Obama experiences this every day, in his own words, revealed in a March 2004 interview with a reporter on religious issues.
This is truly revelatory but depressingly predictable. In the 41 years since second grade I personally have observed presidial campaigns I have since the stars fells from my eyes in 1984 noted how the winning candidates then more of the candidates over all were ever more resolute statists, almost as if a politico-ideologic distillation process were occurring; contrarians who stoutly resisted the statist trend were either ignored or regarded as oafs too obtuse to realize their messages had been superseded by notional “progress”. Only in the new millennium has being a presidial candidate seriously opposed to statism been used to justify tarring him as positively dangerous to the polity. Before the 1988 presidial campaigns I anticipated some thing of this sort as well as “acceptable” candidates so fully statist they would dogmatically push collectivist nostrums in the face of a disastrous economic predicament itself of course caused by statism. Now about the only way things can worsen is for Obama in 2012 to declare the situation so grave he can not afford to stand re-election as the people may, in their habitual dearth of appreciation of what is good for themselves, reject him in favor of some “extremist” who would if elected try to apply “simplistic”, “reactionary”, “punitive”, “demagogic” or other wise “unacceptable” merely “notional” remedies to revive prosperity. Then even the msot purblind will know we are subject to tyranny, the aim & object all along of the statists.
Obama was very straight forward about supporting the patriot act, the trillion dollar bailout, taxes on the “rich”, and nationalized health care before he even became president. The events of today, nor our economic future, should be a surprise to anyone.
At this point, my concern isn’t Obama, it is how do I escape from the 100 million idiots who elected him with any semblance of liberty. It’s clear new strategies are required.
This is truly revelatory but depressingly predictable. In the 41 years since second grade I personally have observed presidial campaigns I have since the stars fells from my eyes in 1984 noted how the winning candidates then more of the candidates over all were ever more resolute statists, almost as if a politico-ideologic distillation process were occurring; contrarians who stoutly resisted the statist trend were either ignored or regarded as oafs too obtuse to realize their messages had been superseded by notional “progress”. Only in the new millennium has being a presidial candidate seriously opposed to statism been used to justify tarring him as positively dangerous to the polity. Before the 1988 presidial campaigns I anticipated some thing of this sort as well as “acceptable” candidates so fully statist they would dogmatically push collectivist nostrums in the face of a disastrous economic predicament itself of course caused by statism. Now about the only way things can worsen is for Obama in 2012 to declare the situation so grave he can not afford to stand re-election as the people may, in their habitual dearth of appreciation of what is good for themselves, reject him in favor of some “extremist” who would if elected try to apply “simplistic”, “reactionary”, “punitive”, “demagogic” or other wise “unacceptable” merely “notional” remedies to revive prosperity. Then even the msot purblind will know we are subject to tyranny, the aim & object all along of the statists
We have our first president who was the victim of systematic child abuse. Barak often tells us that his mother would wake him at 4:00 in the morning to drill him on his “lessons.” Would you pull your children our of bed an 4:00 in the morning to indoctrinate them.
The Obama administration is not so surprising. It is his mother’s administration. Barak is still seeking his mother’s approval and working to implement her 4:00 lessons.
By chance I came upon this quote today, from Lenin.
“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”
I must confess, I thought of Obama and his current plans for America when I saw this.
Comments on this entry are closed.