ping
Half white / half Arab / no slave blood /a fraud.
This is a terrific, thought-provoking article.
I think it is fair to say that the Illinois senator puts the same passion in his speeches that Hitler used to put in his, and he evokes similar raw emotions in his audience.
You hit the nail on the head. He is a cult leader. And a communists to boot. It is so disturbing to see the mass of people that are so brain dead follow this insane nitwit. Eloquent speaker he is, able to lie and be believed by those that are hypnotized. Sad and an extremely dangerous day for America.
Awesome article.
He doesn't want to serve his country - he wants the country and it's resources to serve his purposes.
"It is surreal to see the level of hysteria in his admirers. This phenomenon is unprecedented in American politics. Women scream and swoon during his speeches. They yell and shout to Obama, 'I love you.' Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It’s only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar.And so will we."When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult. The cult of personality is often created when the general population is discontent. A charismatic leader can seize the opportunity and project himself as an agent of change and a revolutionary leader. Often, people, tired of the status quo, do not have the patience to examine the nature of the proposed change. All they want is change. During 1979, when the Iranians were tired of the dictatorial regime of the late Shah, they embraced Khomeini, not because they wanted Islam, but because he promised them change. The word in the street was, 'anything is better than the Shah.'
"They found their error when it was too late."
Hmmm.
Fuehrer? I can just about promise it will never get that far.
Folks:
One of the little news items that has been largely overlooked lately, was the comment by Senator Obama that he might manage a bail-out or subsidy for the ailing old line media, being damaged by competition from the internet. This should, of course, have become an issue. Have we really declined to a point where anyone would confuse the concept of a free press--and free broadcast media (at least as to non-obscene comment--with a subsidized media?
The Founding Fathers considered Freedom of the Press, sacred. It was seen, among other uses, as a way to challenge a Government gone astray. Now a candidate for Office, for whom much of the media has been running effective interference--blocking subjects that might embarrass, while focusing on subjects that might embarrass his foes--can offer a giant payoff, a bribe, to that ideologically friendly media, and almost no one raises an eye brow.
Look! This writer is not even backing Senator McCain. But it is foolish to ignore all of the signs that Senator Obama does not believe in the free America that most of us consider important. It is not just his association with Marxists such as William Ayers. (And no, we are not talking about Ayers' blowing up buildings, when Obama was eight, but his mentoring the grown up Obama in Leftwing social theory.) It is not just Obama's campaign style, getting huge crowds to chant hypnotically in sloganized refrains that reminds one of the most effective Totalitarian Socialist politician of the last Century. It is not just the way Obama, like that previous exemplar of Leftist mesmerizing techniques, tends to personalize what he would do in power, in his speaking. (Pay attention to his phraseology, if you haven't noticed. It is different than most other American office seekers.)
It is not even the "class warfare" concepts embedded in his every comment on tax policy--although that too is an essential part of the whole picture;--nor his disdain of Rev. Wright for proposing "self-help" (individual responsibility) as a means to improve one's lot, without "changing America", as significant as that is.
No, it is incredibly arrogant suggestions such as this overture to the mainstream media that is icing on his cake. (Arrogant, because it is clearly intended to reward supporters out of public funds, even more blatantly than the Welfare State has been doing for the Left, since the 1930s.)
Those who care about a future where such concepts as free will, free discussion, academic freedom, etc., may still have some validity, will avoid jumping on this man's bandwagon.
See Obama: Community Organizer
William Flax October 31, 2008
