President Obama's Osawatomie Speech was a Marxist Attack on America

RUSH: Ah, you know, you people are so lucky. All you have to do is listen to this. I have to be the one to actually do it. And that's okay. This is Wednesday. Right. Okay. Pearl Harbor Day. A day that will live in infamy, absolutely right, Pearl Harbor Day. Of course yesterday was Pearl Harbor Day number two: The attack on the country by the president of the United States in that speech in Osawatomie, Kansas. As I promised yesterday, we have the audio sound bites from that speech. I've studied it. It's depressing to actually have the most powerful man in the country aligned against it. To have the most powerful man in the country seeing this country through crosshairs. I run the gamut of emotions. I mean it's anger, frustration, sadness, it's just amazing.

Ladies and gentlemen, this speech, we've got the sound bites coming up, but I want to do a little analysis of it even before we get to it. And, by the way, welcome. It's Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network. Here's the telephone number if you want to be on the program: 800-282-2882.

Look, let me just give you a sample summary of Obama's speech yesterday. The president of the United States, not Fidel Castro, not Kim Jong-il, not Mao Tse-tung, not Lenin, not Stalin, not Gorbachev, not Saddam Hussein, not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not Hugo Chavez, but the president of the United States said that while a limited government that preserves free markets speaks to our rugged individualism as Americans, such a system doesn't work and has never worked. The president of the United States said that the United States of America, as founded, "has never worked." Stop and think of that. Ponder that for a moment. The president. Not the head of the SEIU. Not the chairman of some congressional committee. Not a Democrat presidential hopeful. The elected president of the United States said in Osawatomie, Kansas, trying to be Teddy Roosevelt, that the United States of America has never worked. That is a quote, "has never worked."

Really? What was the first Thanksgiving all about? What was George Washington's first Thanksgiving proclamation all about? What was 250 years of the greatest prosperity and standard of living known to exist in all of humanity?

The president of the United States said yesterday that it has never worked. But he didn't stop there. He said that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more, and regulates more if the middle class is to be preserved. I can't get my mind around this. This is antithetical to me. This is foreign. This is what we have faced from our enemies since our founding, this characterization of our country. If you just substitute the word "proletariat" for every time he said "worker" or "middle class" in his speech, if you subject "bourgeois" or "capitalists" for the rich, this same speech could have been given by Lenin a hundred years ago.

In fact, it is, my friend, and don't doubt me, the same speech that Stalin always gave, that Mao Tse-tung always gave, that Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong-il still give. Communist leaders around the world give this speech constantly. We've heard it all before, because class warfare is the fundamental principle of Marxism. Class warfare is how Marx explained economics and explained history. In fact, class warfare is how Marx explained everything. Now, oddly enough it's how Obama explains everything now. He blames all of the current problems on the rich. And to think some people still say Obama's not a Marxist. They won't even call him a socialist. It's willful blindness on the part of people who, I don't know what kind of state of denial you have to be in to have heard this speech yesterday or to have read this speech and to have not heard a call to arms.

This is how Barack Obama plans to win the future. Remember, that's the slogan for his reelection campaign, gonna win the future by channeling a president from a hundred years ago. Teddy Roosevelt, he gave this speech in 1910, the same place, Osawatomie, Kansas. He then went on to lose at the head of the Bull Moose Party ticket the presidential race in 1912. I don't know if he got the moderates or not. Teddy Roosevelt, I don't know. All I know is that Obama refuses to be himself. He's gotta channel Lincoln and he's gotta channel FDR. He's gotta channel Reagan at times, even tries to be Reagan. Tried to be Teddy Roosevelt yesterday. This is winning the future. Everything Barack Obama said he was for yesterday has been tried throughout history over and over again, the same Marxism has been tried, and it's failed everywhere. It's led to nothing but untold millions of dead people and incalculable misery and suffering.

Now, who wants a future like that? He said some things yesterday that I don't know if he's really that dumb or if it was just written for him and he said it, but sitting there and blaming economic woes on the Internet and the fact that there aren't any more travel agents or telephone operators, it's not hard to look at the Internet and see how many jobs have been created, how much wealth has been created, how much growth in the economy has been created by the Internet. The Internet is an enemy as far as Obama is concerned. He recycled this ATM business again as being indicative of lost American promise. All this automation, all this efficiency, all of this that has led to increased productivity, this guy finds to be the enemy, to be a problem. So what we have is Barack Obama, president of the United States, announcing yesterday in full voice that he is running for reelection as a socialist.

Do you remember how in 2008 he scoffed at anyone who called him a socialist? Do you remember how the media went after Joe the Plumber for reporting Obama told him he just wanted to "spread the wealth around"? Remember how we were mocked for calling Obama a "socialist" during the campaign? Well, yesterday Obama announced to the world in no uncertain terms that he is a socialist if not a Marxist. The news media won't notice. Ron Fournier, who used to write for the AP and who now writes for the National Journal, wrote a piece and said that it was the best speech Obama has ever given. That's not surprising, but still depressing. It's depressing. (interruption)

Snerdley is shouting at me that he's elated over this speech. You are elated over this speech because you think... (interruption) Snerdley is elated over this because he thinks it means that we have finally flushed Obama out. No question now who the guy is. No question now what he's always been. Obama is running against me for reelection, but he's not running against me. If he were just running against me, that'd be fine. Barack Obama is running against the United States of America. This is what gave birth to Ronaldus Magnus. I mean, I have quotes I could give you from Reagan: I'm not gonna stand by and watch a cabal of people like this single-handedly destroy the country. That's a paraphrase but Reagan said it, and he said it back in the sixties.

He said it in the seventies. He said it in the eighties as well. But wherever you go in the Drive-By Media, Ron Fournier's opinion of this speech is repeated: Best speech he's ever given! Yeah, did you hear how Obama talked about college degrees? Did you hear what he said? He said (paraphrased), "College ought not cost a hundred thousand dollars. Everybody ought to be able to go there. Everybody ought to be able to go to college; it ought not cost anything." Fine. Mr. President! Then tell all your friends in academia to start working for free. Tell the professors to start working for free. Tell the universities to start working for nothing. Show us how this is done!

Well, it's not how it's done. How it's done is to take as much money from "the rich," quote, unquote, as he can and redistribute it. Barack Obama wants everybody poor, but there's a sad little reality: The only people who are gonna end up poor if Obama succeeds, the middle class. The rich are not gonna get dinged. You're gonna be told... Have they ever been? I mean, all of this talk. We've had all this "income gap" crap my whole life. I've been hearing about it my whole life. I've been hearing a Democrat Party targeting the rich my whole life. "We're gonna cut 'em down! We're gonna get 'em," and all the while they continue to complain about the widening gap.

"The rich are getting richer!" How do you think that happens? It's much like the Democrat Party promising black America, "You vote for us and we're gonna make sure you're never discriminated against -- and if you are, we're gonna punish those who do it, and we're gonna make sure that you're prosperous, and we're gonna take care of you. We're gonna make sure you're okay," and after 50 years of supposed stewardship and love, compassion, the black family's been destroyed! Blacks are angrier than ever, unhappier than ever.

After all this compassion, concern, attention offered them by the Democrat Party -- after all this help, after all these decades of attacking the rich -- who is it that feels like they're losing everything? It's the middle class! How does that happen? Do you ever stop to think about this? The rich are not gonna get dinged. The middle class is gonna be wiped out. The little guy, the supposed beneficiary of all this Marxism. I want you people who believe Obama to go around the world for me. I want you to find any socialist, Marxist, communist country and I want you to find for me a prosperous, thriving, happy middle class. I want you to find for me a country where a wall has not been built to keep them in. Boone Pickens was on MSNBC this morning. He admitted that he paid over $685 million in income taxes since he was 70. He's in his eighties. Mika Brzezinski told him it wasn't enough.

RUSH: Barack Obama yesterday said that the free market is "a license to steal." A license to steal! A license to steal. This from the guy who has stolen as much wealth from the private sector as he can under the guise of "stimulus spending." No, not personally. I don't mean he's enriched himself. I mean he's enriched his ideology, the Democrat Party. He has grown government. He is stealing from you and from me each and every day. Being president is what's a license to steal. Being a committee chairman is what's a license to steal. You really want to start comparing corruption at the highest levels of government to the private sector? Have the people of this country decided that they all of a sudden now want to give up on their dreams of wealth and prosperity for themselves and their kids?

A majority of Americans now just want to sit around and wait for whatever crumbs are redistributed from Barack Obama and his compassionate band of bureaucrats? Government has the license to steal. Government gets to steal, and it's not even called a crime. It's called liberalism, communism, socialism, Marxism; and they don't want any competition. They don't want anybody able to steal the money but themselves. Obama's people, the Occupy Wall Street crowd, heard his clarion call. Yesterday all across the country and decided to start moving into houses, just taking them over, giving these foreclosed houses to their leaders. "Just take it! You're entitled! You're entitled. You're an American and you don't have anything. That's not fair! So if you see something you want, go take it. It's unfair somebody else has it and you don't. If you want it, go take it."

We have a president of the United States who now endorses that very way of thinking.

This new line about the "free market" being a "license to steal" is just more semantic dishonesty used by Obama and the so-called "progressives" to obscure the Founders' admonition that their "People's" limited government would not be "licensed" to do that which, for individuals, is considered a crime. That is what "redistribution" is--theft made legal by man-made laws which are not in accord with the Ten Commandment's admonition against stealing.

From the RNC Convention remarks by elected leaders from various so-called "minority" groups, one can assume that their families' hopes and dreams rely on the same solid foundation as did those of every previous generation of immigrants to America--the Creator-endowed and unalienable right to be free, to work and earn, and the right to ownership of private property, not a false "common ownership" of the earnings of someone else.

Now, however, the Democrats' "media" strategy toward their targeted groups (Hispanic, African-American, women, elderly, etc.) turns such understanding upside-down. They present "regressive" ideas as "progressive," "backward" policies as "forward," and "down" as "up." On and on it goes.

It's a strategy which goes deep into the decades-long effort to "fundamentally change" America from its new and revolutionary foundations in Creator-endowed liberty backward into the Old World and later Marxian ideas of control by imaginary human grantors and protectors.

Perhaps an answer to the once-asked question here on FR: "Why does Christianity 'scare' . . . ?" may lie in the degree to which the foundation ideas upon which America's Declaration of Independence were laid and from which the concept of Creator-endowed individual liberty and the Source from which that liberty is derived have been removed from "the American mind" (Jefferson).

Perhaps the so-called "progressive" enemies of freedom understand better than those who fancy themselves as "conservatives" that in order to reverse the Founders' ideas of "People over government," and institute "government over People," they must first marginalize and destroy the ideas from which liberty is derived.

The writings of America's Founders are replete with references which rebuke would-be tyrants and cite a Higher Source for life, liberty and rights. Early histories confirm those facts.

As so-called "progressives" have led a movement in forsaking the Founders' "reliance on Divine Providence," and belief that individuals are "endowed by their Creator," they also have forsaken the principles underlying America's Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and are systematically dismantling the greatest protections for liberty ever established for a people.

"Ideas have consequences"(Weaver).

The ideas of 1776 came out of a set of ideas consistent with liberty.

We tend to forget, or have never considered, that other world views existed then, as now.

Unless today's citizens rediscover the ideas of liberty existing in what Jefferson called "the American mind" of 1776, we risk going back to the "Old World" ideas which preceded the "Miracle of America."

There are those who call themselves "progressives," when, in fact, their ideas are regressive and enslaving, and as old as the history of civilization.

Would suggest to any who wish an authentic history of the ideas underlying American's founding a visit to this web site, at which Richard Frothingham's outstanding 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States" can be read on line.

This 600+-page history traces the ideas which gave birth to the American founding. Throughout, Richard Frothingham, the historian, develops the idea that it is "the Christian idea of man" which allowed the philosophy underlying the Declaration of Independence and Constitution to become a reality--an idea which recognizes the individual and the Source of his/her "Creator"-endowed life, liberty and law.

Is there any wonder that the enemies of freedom, the so-called "progressives," do not promote such authentic histories of America? Their philosophy puts something called "the state," or "global interests" as being superior to individuals and requires a political elitist group to decide what role individuals are to play.

In other words, they must turn the Founders' ideas upside-down in order to achieve a common mediocrity for individuals and power for themselves.

So, the still-revolutionary idea stated by both Ryan and Romney last week about the Source of our rights became fodder for the current President's disdain this weekend, when he declared that they were "reruns" from the 20th Century and better suited for "black and white" television. (Actually, Mr. President, they are from a time much earlier than that.)

As Jefferson wisely observed:

"History, by apprising the people of the past, will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views."

All of which reinforces our conviction that the ideas of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are as revolutionary and objectionable to tyrants as they were in 1776 and 1787!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.