The Obama Dilemma

The Obama Dilemma

Bill O'Reilly
Thursday, Aug 18, 2011

Coming soon to a bus stop near you may be the President of the United States. Faced with growing criticism of his economic leadership, Barack Obama is following the lead of Willie Nelson and traveling by bus to selected parts of the USA. Mr. Obama wants to calm the folks and show them that he is in high spirits. That is a bit different than Willie, who usually leaves off the word "spirits."

Anyway, what the president will likely encounter on his road trip is confusion. After more than two and a half years in office, many Americans simply do not understand exactly who he is. Even pundits, paid to analyze him, see him in drastically different ways.

For example, writing in Time magazine, columnist Fareed Zakaria calls Mr. Obama a "centrist and a pragmatist." But in the Wall Street Journal, Norman Podhoretz describes him as "the same anti-American leftist he was before becoming our president." Two guys, two views—not even close.

The problem with Barack Obama is that he is not forthcoming about what he is really thinking. Therefore, it is difficult to assign him a category. On economics, his actions portray a screaming big government liberal who gambled heavily that the feds could jump-start the economy by redistributing wealth. He lost his shirt and so did many of his constituents.

But as far as the war on terror goes, Mr. Obama is General William Sherman, scorching the earth with Predator Drone missiles. A true liberal like George McGovern must be wondering what the deuce is going on.

If you listen to conservative talk radio, the president is an ardent socialist, and perhaps even a communist. But you don't allow real estate sharks like Tony Rezko to set up land deals for you if you're channeling Karl Marx. Yes, Obama-care is a quasi-socialistic program that, I believe, the Supreme Court will rule unconstitutional, but the true intent of national health care is to create more dependence on Washington, not to pay homage to Fidel Castro.

If you pay close attention to Barack Obama, he emerges as a man of contradiction. Surely, he is a devoted left-wing guy who believes the private marketplace favors the rich and government power must temper that, providing perks for the have-nots. But he's also a man who understands that America is still a traditional country that believes in God and the flag. The president does not often mess with that, angering many far-left zealots who supported him big in 2008.

Going forward, it is clear the president's base is shrinking while his opposition is mobilizing. George Soros and his band of wealthy ideologues are on record: they believe he has let the radical left down by not seizing IBM or something. The right-wing is simply crazed. They see Mr. Obama as a combination of James Buchanan and Che Guevarra. There is nothing good about him.

So, in order to win reelection, Mr. Obama must count on the non-ideological folks who are getting hammered by the awful economy.

At this point, there are not enough buses in the world to drive home a happy ending to that scenario.

As usual, O'Reilly is just too full of himself to see the simple truth of Obama.

He is no more a "man of contradiction" than I am a Catholic saint.

Obama is a dedicated leftist, a firm believer in statism, and a foe of free market capitalism.

This should come as little surprise to anyone since his mother was a socialist, his father was a noted socialist, his boyhood mentor (Frank Marshall Davis) was a card-carrying Communist, his university associations were with socialists/Communists/Marxists and he attended socialist conferences (by his own admission btw). After college he worked with the Developing Communities Project and the Gamaliel Foundation – both inspired by Saul Alinsky’s tactics and socialist philosophy (Alinksy's own son, Lee David Alinsky, praised Obama on his ability to perform Saul’s tactics, saying that Barack “learned his lesson well”). He launched his political career in the living room of Bill Ayers - a domestic terrorist, former leader of the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society, a spin off of the Weather Underground) and socialist who has praised Hugo Chavez's regime. He received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat and later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. He was a 20-year member of Rev Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ based on James Cone’s black liberation theology (which Cone admitted was a mix of “black religion and Marxist philosophy”). He also campaigned for openly socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont (who had nothing but praise for Obama).

And this is just a partial list of his radical/socialist/Communist/Marxist associations. I could go on for some time listing them all.

Since being inaugurated as President, Obama has pursued a an anti-free-market, anti-capitalist, anti-constitutional, agenda with all the fervor that a blindly obedient Democratic leadership and mainstream media would allow and the only backstop to this agenda has been the rise of the new media (blogs and talk radio) and the rise of the Tea Party (thanks to Obama's jamming ObamaCare down our throats despite widespread opposition to it).

The only reason Obama has not pursued an even more leftist agenda is because he lost the House of Representatives last year and he sincerely wishes to win another term as President and knows that he can only push the people so far. But, he is doing his very best to pursue cap-and-trade, card-check and other far-left, anti-business measures out of sight of the people through executive fiat.

Obviously O'Reilly has his head in the sand (or perhaps in a certain, select, bodily orifice).

Among Obama's associations above, a few more that should further illustrate just who Obama identifies with.

Bernardine Dohrn (neighbor and anti-american terrorist who helped launch his career, leader of a group which bombed the pentagon – Marxist sympathizer); Larry Walsh (neighbor and criminal under investigation by the FBI); Louis Farrakhan (neighbor and race baiting leader of the nation of Islam); Tony Rezko (neighbor and Criminal under investigation); The Rathke brothers, founders of ACORN (Anti-American group which funded his community organizing); Saul Alinsky (mentor, author of Rules for Radicals, an anti-American instruction book in which he dedicated to satan - a dedicated Marxist); Khalid Al-Mansour (Radical who advocated the murder of white people repeatedly, helped Obama gain admission into Harvard); Percy Sutton (Malcolm X's lawyer); Penny Pritzker(Pro-Iranian Supporter); Susan L. Rosenberg (WeatherUnderground Terrorist); Mike Klonsky (WeatherUnderground Terrorist); Father Flagler (Radical racist advocating black liberation theology); Rashid Khalidi (Founder of AAAN and Radical Racist Muslim); Ali Abunimah (Serves On The Board Of Directors For AAAN); Aiham Alsammarae (Conficted Felon [corruption] Obama tried to keep out of jail).

Clearly O'Reilly failed to do his homework if he is confused as to where Obama stands.

Not only that, if a GOP candidate had similar associations but from the radical right, it'd be dissected immediately.

One can say what they want about Bama's associations, but these associations are fact.

TexasBlue wrote:Not only that, if a GOP candidate had similar associations but from the radical right, it'd be dissected immediately.

One can say what they want about Bama's associations, but these associations are fact.

That really is the long and short of it. If a Republican had had such radical connections, the mainstream media would have hounded that person to death. The articles and TV coverage would have been nonstop for months.

With Obama, they're not even mentioned; despite the fact that these are irrefutable connections - and these don't even include the radicals and dedicated socialists/Marxists he appointed to his cabinet. Obama, if he were a civilian, couldn't even get a job sweeping the floors on the Hill given his connections. Of course, this matters not because Obama is a Democrat... and Democrats are given a complete pass by the mainstream media.

Are you sure all these connections are "irrefutable?"

I just chose one of the names you mentioned at random: Khalid Al-Mansour. Seems pretty refutable to me. Based on the say-so of one old man who recanted the statement.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Sutton_family_retracts_Obama_story.html?showall

Will this happen again if I choose another name at random?

Your list seems to be one not of confirmed connections, but of every rumor that has ever been floated about Obama.

Are you really vouching for the accuracy of all these claims? If not, which ones?

kronos wrote:Are you sure all these connections are "irrefutable?"

I just chose one of the names you mentioned at random: Khalid Al-Mansour. Seems pretty refutable to me. Based on the say-so of one old man who recanted the statement.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Sutton_family_retracts_Obama_story.html?showall

Will this happen again if I choose another name at random?

Your list seems to be one not of confirmed connections, but of every rumor that has ever been floated about Obama.

Are you really vouching for the accuracy of all these claims? If not, which ones?

I am busted. It would appear that complete accuracy was sacrificed by enthusiastic hyperbole. Of those on the second list (I stand by the first), I’d say that in addition to Al-Mansour, probably Penny Pritzker’s alleged support of Iran is shaky at best. And it is obviously unlikely that Obama had an actual relationship with Saul Alinsky, since he died in 1972 (when Obama was 11-years-old), though there is no question that Obama fully embraced and adopted Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and there is also no question that Alinsky’s son praised Obama’s use of and adherence to the teachings of his late father.

Obama’s ties to Louis Farrakhan aren’t extensive, but they do exist. We know that he marched with Farrakhan in the “Million Man March” and actually helped to organize it. And it’s no secret that his minister, Rev Wright, is a close friend of Farrakhan’s. Such is the same for the Father Flagler connection, which appears to be circumstantial at best through Rev Wright. Likewise, I could find no ties to Rosenberg beyond the fact that she was a member of the same radical group as Ayers and Dohrn – so I’d say this one is effectively non-existent.

However, his connections to Dohrn, Rezko, Walsh, Rathke, Klonsky, Sutton, Khalidi (and another I did not include, his professor at Columbia and PLO apologist, Edward Said), Abunimah and Alsammarae are fairly well documented.

Needless to say, the connections in my first response above should have been enough to send the mainstream media on a full scale investigation of Obama’s ties to these people. When you compare the nuclear colonic that the mainstream media gave Sarah Palin to the utter lack of any critical examination of Obama’s background, it becomes obvious just how pathetically biased they are.

There is a single Republican on the national level that would survive even ONE of Obama’s many questionable connections to radicals/socialists/Communists/Marxists.

So, yeah, a few on the list above are questionable at best (completely unwarranted at worst), but that is just distracting from the obvious truth about Obama and his associations.