Barack Fidel Che Obama, the Bolivarian Revolution's useful idiot, reverses the Monroe Doctrine

Telegraph Blogs (U.K.) ^ | July 6, 2009 | Gerald Warner

[Schnucki]

Barack Obama has now made a statement far more significant than any of the stale rhetoric of his Inauguration Address. It is both a major upheaval in US foreign policy and a frightening insight into Obama’s total incapacity for office. If you are American, read it and weep. If you are not an American, but have concerns about freedom, be very afraid.

In response to the crisis in Honduras and the growing turmoil in Latin America, the President of the United States has now said: “The United States has not always stood as it should with some of these fledgling democracies. But over the last several years I think both Republicans and Democrats in the United States have recognized that we always want to stand with democracy, even if the results don’t always mean that the leaders of those countries are favorable towards the United States.”

My emphasis, as the convention phrases it. And it deserves emphasis because, in that brief statement, Obama has just reversed the Monroe Doctrine, dating from 1823, and the later Roosevelt Corollary. The principle that European influence would not be permitted in Latin America gradually translated into a recognition that Latin America was a US sphere of influence. Since Marxism is a European influence, surely it is important to exclude that poison, so far as is practicable, from Latin America.

Yet Obama has aligned himself with the so-called Bolivarian Alliance of Marxist fruitcakes, led by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua. To both men “democracy” is a useful slogan while they pursue its elimination in their own back yards. Ortega, now the chief backer of ousted president Manual Zelaya of Honduras, is the old Sandinista tyrant who only escaped prosecution for child abuse of his adopted stepdaughter from age 11 due

[Welcome2thejungle]

Meanwhile here at home, he’s implementing the Communist Manifesto.

[Captain Kirk]

That “progressive” welfare statist T.R. betrayed the anti-imperialist tradition of the founders, including Monroe, through his “sphere of influences” amendment to the Monroe Doctrine.

[marron]

Marxists believe in anything that advances marxism. If democracy gives them a momentary advantage, then for the moment they are for democracy, at least until they take power. If packed ballot boxes gives them the advantage, if no ballot box at all gives them the advantage, then that is what they favor.

Just remember that for a marxist any tool that works is a good tool, and that whatever happens its a one-way ratchet. There is no give and take; once its theirs it is theirs permanently. There will never be any voluntary give-back.

That is why you must never, ever, get into a democratic contest with a marxist. They don’t believe in democracy except as a ploy. They are now and forever enemies of freedom. You don’t risk your freedom in a contest with someone who, if he wins, will take your freedom. You declare war on such a creature, you declare war on him and drive him out.

[agere_contra]

Warner describes Obama’s philosophy as “Neo-Masochism”

[rockinqsranch]

You need to repeat your well written post as often as you can. It takes that repetition to get the point across.

There are various stages of winning in some things, actually all things, but blatantly so in some, and not so noticeably in others. Preparation for winning, each step towards the ultimate win etc.

As you say once the Marxist wins, there is no dealing with them, but also each phase of the route to the ultimate win there is no dealing anymore with them should they win, or have the upper hand in that particular phase of the trail towards the ultimate win.

I have stated seemingly forever your point, but in my World it was always “there is no negotiating with a Leftist”, “there is no such thing as negotiating with a Democrat”, “there is no such thing as negotiation with a Liberal”, “there is no such thing as negotiation with a Socialist”, “there is no such thing as reaching across the aisle”.

There isn’t anyway to deal with a Dem, Lib, Socialist other than to outright, and totally defeat the bastard.

[andy58-in-nh]

Excellent observations.

American liberals, as presently radicalized, have come to operate on the same terms as their Marxist cousins. Washington Republicans utterly fail to understand this or to ever learn from past experience.

The GOP seeks "compromise" with Democrats in good faith, figuring a half a loaf (or 40% of a loaf) is better than none. The Democrats gladly take what they are given, and immediately begin plotting to take the rest. Meanwhile, Beltway Republicans blithely congratulate themselves for having kept a small piece of whatever it was they were fighting about.

[justa-hairyape]

Honduras has given us proof that Marxist such as Obama are incompatible with representative republics. Iran has given us proof that Marxist such as Obama are incompatible with democracy.

[TigersEye]

bttt