Date: Thursday, February 28, 2013, 1:30 PM
Finally, the Washington Post
speaks out on Obama! This is very brutal, timely though. As I'm sure you
know, the Washington Post newspaper has a reputation for being extremely
liberal. So the fact that its editor saw fit to print the following
article about Obama in its newspaper makes this a truly amazing event and
a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and
his obvious socialist agenda are starting to trickle through the
protective wall built around him by our liberal
media.
I too have become
disillusioned. A brilliant
commentary out of none other than the Washington Post.
18 Jan 2013
By Matt Patterson -
columnist
Washington Post; New York Post;
San Francisco ExaminerYears
from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an
inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of
mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How,
they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment
beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy,
direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most
consequential job? Imagine a future historian examining Obama's
pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite
unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a
"community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of
legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so
often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in
the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his
presidential ambitions.He left no academic legacy
in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then
there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating,
America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual
mentor;" a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and
political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it
all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected
president?Not content to wait for history, the
incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in
the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close
associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and
an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day.
But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of
liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American
injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that
sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of
the color of his skin.Podhoretz continues: And
in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so
articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all
of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president
and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the
Obama phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course.
But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action
laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people,
and especially white liberals, feel good about
themselves.Unfortunately, minorities often
suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely
admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no
responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates
which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail;
liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated
self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action.
Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the
color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that
isn't racism, then nothing is.And that is what
America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack
of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told
he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at
Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a
mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be
president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step
of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite
of ample evidence to the contrary.What could
this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama
speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications
nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool
character. Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply
embarrassed.
The
man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has
his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can
barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from
his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over
and over again for 100 years.
And
what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and
everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I
inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to
advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.
But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for
anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with
neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you
understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current
erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone
otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.Please pass this on after you read this one. Suddenly people are
getting wise to this enemy of our USA . . . . maybe too late.
|
In God We Still Trust
No comments:
Post a Comment