No offense intended to New York Post reporter Charles Hurt, but the behavior of Barack Obama is not showing us a "new side" of him. This is who he's always been. You don't sit in the "church" of Jeremiah Wright for two decades and not be angry and resentful toward America. You do not write books with Bill Ayers and learn how to love America. Trashing America in nearly every speech isn't anything new for Obama.
This is who he is and who he's always been. Bitter, angry and resentful.
Nothing new about this at all. We were never dazzled by his "soaring oratory" or seduced by Hopenchange. Now, it seems, we're in the majority.
Those of you who were taken in by the "soaring oratory" or who thought this insider Chicago politician, who's never done anything in the business world, would "reach across the aisle" and be a "transformative" or a "post-racial" president--well, accept that you were fooled, and vow not to make that mistake again. Don't cling to your clearly wrong beliefs out of embarrassment or stubbornness.
More reasons why we're in trouble:
Recent headlines seem lifted directly out of an Ayn Rand novel. President Obama decries the “fat cat bankers on Wall Street”. Harry Reid attacks insurance companies for making too much profit. House Democrat leaders call Tea Partiers “Racist, Nazi, Gun Nuts”. How about this nauseating statement made by Army General George Casey after the Muslim terrorist attack on Ft. Hood?As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well
Each of these headlines might well have been uttered by an Ayn Rand character. Rand, whose father’s pharmacy was confiscated by the Soviets during the communist revolution of 1917, and who came to America in 1926, seems uniquely able to speak to us about the inverted morality of our times. Virtue is to be apologized for. Depravity commands respect. Success is cast as evil and punished while failure is blamed on others and rewarded. Rand’s insights into the psychological state of collectivists—those who demand that we sacrifice our individual freedom and happiness for the sake of the state—explain what often seems incomprehensible to thinking people.
We're not in trouble because people believe these things. We're in trouble because they're true.
Our only hope is for conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) to make headway in next November's elections, and for our rookie President to be shown the door two years after that.
Great post! However, if we're going to take back ANY seats in Congress in 2010, we are going to have to be vigilant about watching out for voter fraud and intimidation. I believe the writing is on the wall and these idiots who voted for this "health care bill" know that, unless they get some "help" their days are numbered. Would all of them really fall on their sword for something so outlandish and unpopular if they weren't promised something? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteThe true Barack Hussein Obama - Friend of the Unrepentant Cop Killer (I'll ya'll form the acronym). Hiding in plain sight the whole time.
ReplyDeleteAll you have to do is follow the money. Go to Muckety, see who supported his campaign, then go and see where their personal ethics lie. Every program has bought support by paying off key personnel, just like Freddie and Fannie heads are getting seven figure bonuses despite their abysmal handling of the situation thanks to their good buddy Barney Franks. Consider how the healthcare bill will allow the government to collect ten percent of working peoples' paychecks and hold it in reserve for their own programs while those same working schmucks have to buy insurance ON TOP OF THAT TAX LEVIED. Anyone who thinks this administration is a friend of the middle class has no idea of what programs are in the pipeline. You have to look no further than Soros and his continued funding of disinformation campaigns and the strange Obama Hawaiian vacation during a time of economic meltdown to get a gut feeling that something sneaky is going on and that it will not benefit middle class Americans of any color.
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand? On morality? Blimey!
ReplyDeleteI think the "big trouble" part happened because people KNEW who he was and voted for him anyway.
ReplyDeleteNot that I'd be all giddy about McCain if he won... lesser of two evils and all that. :/
Anonymous, you have a legitimate reason Rand should not address the morality of socialism?
ReplyDeleteWell, no.. she can address anything she likes. But if you ask me, she was a vile, hateful woman with a vile, hateful morality of her own. Objectivism is spoilt teenager selfishness writ large and pretending to be a philosophy:
ReplyDelete"My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty." - Ayn Rand
http://authormichaelprescott.blogspot.com/2005/03/was-ayn-rand-evil.html
ReplyDelete