The Chosen One (Who is Obama Really?) - Must Read

Claremont Review of Books ^ | July 1, 2011 | Angello M. Codevilla

[mojito]

...But there was never anything silly, nor light-hearted, nor casual, about Barack Obama's efforts to keep the public's eyes from the basic facts of his life, from birth to his candidacy for president. On the contrary, this opacity is a deliberate policy. Why? The presumptive answer, absent testimony from those involved, is to ensure that real facts interfere as little as possible with the image and narrative that he and his associates have carefully crafted for him. Distinguishing between reality and that narrative would require above all a skeptical attitude, sure to be characterized by Democrats and the media in the most derogatory terms.

According to hagiography, Barack Obama was born to a hippy girl from an insignificant family and raised in poor circumstances, out of which he rose through brilliance. Yet his haughty demeanor, his stilted language when off the teleprompter, his cultural likes and dislikes, bespeak an upbringing in an environment at once so upscale and so leftist that it makes him almost a foreigner to ordinary Americans....

Consistent with the Barack Obama we know, however, are his real family, his real upbringing, and his real choices of profession and associates. His mother's parents, who raised him, seem to have been cogs in the U.S. government's well-heeled, well-connected machine for influencing the world, whether openly ("gray influence") or covertly ("black operations"). His mother spent her life and marriages, and birthed her children, working in that machine. For paradigms of young Barack's demeanor, proclivities, opinions, language, and attitudes one need look no further than the persons who ran the institutions that his mother and grandparents served—e.g., the Ford Foundation, the United States Information Agency, and the Central Intelligence Agency—....It is here, with these people and institutions, that one should begin to unravel the unknowns surrounding him.

[combat_boots]

“All of which leads to a brilliant summation in which Obama is confirmed to be that which many of us have long known: an artificial man of rootless parentage, radical influences, and intellectual pretension; one whose emotional attachment to the country he now leads is as superficial as the campaign that helped elect him.”

Well done. The man’s ego is a meringue of Marxist utopia and imperious conceit. And he believes in this creation unconditionally. Caligula in “The Robe”: http://www.thecolumnists.com/miller/miller291art6.jpg

[GGMac]

McCain fulfilled his RINO assignment in 2008. He performed very well as Obama’s running-mate.

I think McCain was angling to be Obie’s secretary of Defense.

[Jedidah]

I noticed that “W” during the press conference Monday — and commented on it.

Creepy.

[GGMac]

Thanks for the ping, Lucy. This article looks fascinating, and I’m eager to delve into it. There is so much of Barry’s family and personal history having connections to the web of black - and some white - communists in Chicago, and the tentacles they spread out - such as Frank Marshall Davis into the coccoon of communists in Hawaii. Those connections go back into his childhood in hidden ways - hints here and there, so that we need a microscope when reading any of his history. It’s horrifying how many of those communists’ progeny are imbedded now in our government - Axelrod, Jarrett, Ayers, etc., and Obama himself. It’s SO frustrating that so many people are content to glide along thinking a “whatever” is all that matters of their citizenship while our country is circling the drain.

FRee Republic is such a GOOD place!

[Art in Idaho]

Fantastic article. Creepy and scary at the same time. The most powerful man in the world wants to destroy America as we know it and we have to wait until November 6, 2012 to depose him.

This man is dangerous to our sacred republic. The depth of his narcissistic rage may in the end destroy us. I hope there are many "sane elites" - and I really mean that - that are keeping a very close eye on this guy who happens to be our president. In psychiatry we say you can't predict dangerousness. Usually, it was because the topic came up. . . I don't know, all I can say is I'll breathe a big sigh of relief on January 20, 2013. .

If I'm overly concerned and history show that, I'll apologize on January 21, 2013. My gut tells me I won't have to. . .

[rintense]

Bookmarking... fascinating.

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

I did. And it took a good while. And it was worth every single mindblowing second. The “blowback” candidate. Words fail.

[DJ MacWoW]

You’re welcome! :-)

[opentalk]

Read your link, what does the W mean? Thanks

[visualops]

very insightful.

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

Excellent question. Unfortunately, it would appear that there are deals, within deals, within deals going on here. Who can say, and live to tell about it? Mr. Petraeus is a master at counter-insurgency. Now heading the CIA. Bearing? Again, who can say? I can say however, that my gruntle is once again thinking of dis-ing me and leaving me disgruntled, so I’ll just close this comment before

[andy58-in-nh]

Thanks. But all I could think of when I saw that picture was Naughtius Maximus and Incontinentia Buttocks (M/P's Life of Brian).

[expatguy]

George W Bush

[opentalk]

Thanks, weird. Obama is weird, maybe better word misfit.

[Spunky]

LucyT, see what I meant when I said they both had the same hate in their eyes, and the same mouth.

[itsahoot]

Well we should all no why the sky is blue, but the question asked is much simpler. The president would be pretty stupid to appoint any one to head the CIA, if he felt in any way that person could be a threat to him.

I contend that that man certainly would have access to information that undoubtably could be a threat, so why does the president not fear him?

I would guess that feels certain that he has nothing to fear from him. Degenerate power-hungry narcissists don’t often make that kind of mistake.

[freebird5850]

Yes, very interesting.

[ml/nj]

acceptance into Harvard Law School, and editorship of its law review

Sloppiness like this disturbs me. Obama was not the editor of the Law Review. He was its president which is decidedly of less importance.

ML/NJ

[STARWISE]

[Kenny Bunk]

We (i.e., perhaps about 25% of the voter base) on the righter sides of the political spectrum are all mired in the stage at which we are swapping war stories that we that we all already know.

While comforting, this hardly answers, or even asks, the basic question:
"So what do we do about this man, his administration, and those who would vote for him again?"

And there's another question:
"What will those with whom we might replace him do to repair the massive damage done to our system of government and its constitution?"