Friday, March 14, 2008

Obama - A Racist Wolf in a Sheep's Costume

"All that Glitters is Not Gold" is an old saying. I was of the hope that the truth about this demagogue, populist and deep down racist and his racist wife would not be brought to the forefront until after he had become the the Democrat nominee. I believed that when the true character of this man and wife started being exposed by a fawning liberal media (The JSEB said that "what impresses us now is the intellect, balance, SEEMING sincerity and self confidence; the courage to invite challenges to his ideas, the desire to seek solutions no matter who gets the credit"), that the chances of getting a person of the caliber of John McCain elected would be greatly improved.

On 2/13 on this site I compared Obama to Hugo Chavez. I was partly wrong. Chavez never tried to cover up who he was; Obama did try and has been exposed to be envious of European descendants and a player of God to all who believe they are victims of American society. In fact, Obama was earlier exposed by millions like myself but he continued to be the great minority hope of the liberal media and their chattering followers. Many of his follower are good people just taken in by all his charm, his attractive wife and their elite school manners.

On February 21, I continued to expose him for what he really was. On February 27,I blogged that his wife stated that "she never felt like she was part of this country until her husband ran for the presidency". I was never fooled by the Obamas, no more than I was fooled by George Ryan, Alan Keyes and our current embarrassing governor. (I was originally fooled by Kay Royster, I admit.)

The political game is really on now and Hillary is stuck with all her statements about how she as President and he as VP would be a dream ticket. Some dream ticket. She must be more confused than she is excited about her increasing opportunity to be the Democrat nominee.

A growing number of voters in this country have gone completely socialist and pacifist. If they become a majority, I fear the decline of this great nation will be accelerated.

I believe that angry black and white men and women; angry about the way many Republicans and Democrats have treated this country as their own private country clubs will see John McCain as the only active candidate who can possibly start to bring this country out of the grips of the arrogance of power and the grip of radical minorities of which there are legion.

As long as those in poverty, for whatever reason including the lack of taking advantage of education offered them free, or for any cause, to be unable to hold a job are encouraged by socialists like Obama and many Berkeley and Harvard graduates to continue to feel that they are victims of our Democratic capitalist and compassionate way of American society, will the pendulum of reason swing back from the left to the center.

Angry white men and women? Count my family in and most of my relatives.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

So we will be stuck with Mccain and his amnesty and war mongering. Is that the option you prefer? We will direct all of the illegal immigrants to your back yard, where they can set up tents and live off your largesses.

Joekoz

Merle Widmer said...

Joe,

I suspect that you don't care for McCain. No problem, the United States of America is still the safest capitalist democracy in the FREE world.

It will remain the FREEIST under the leadership of John McCain and the cabinet he will rely on for advise. I suspect he will and indeed, already has, altered some of his views (including immigration) as president.

Thanks for your comments.

Anonymous said...

Actually I am a long time Republican who is absolutely fed up with Wars. I like McCain, but abhor his war policy and immigration policy. He has not submitted a plan to resolve Social Security or Medicare funding either. I simply do not want more of the same. We need to change our present path dramatically. If McCain does not offer that, he will lose big.

postsimian said...

Meh. I'm not at all surprised nor ashamed of the Obamas. I think his preacher is a bit "out there", but not entirely. As for Michelle, I can't say I blame her for her statements. Reagan was able to make us feel good about being Americans at the height of the Cold War, but he enacted a devastating brand of class warfare and phony number-crunching with his "Reaganomics." Bush Sr. was a realist, but got us into a war with Panama, of all places, that led to the senseless deaths of over 5000 innocent civilians while claiming to be after one man--Manuel Noriega--when the USG was actually incensed that the Panamanians had been talking to Japanese interests over control of the Canal. Then we had Clinton, who had a decent enough foreign policy, but brought embarrassment to the Office of the Presidency and the Democratic Party with his sexual escapades.

Now, we've suffered under one of the most hard-line authoritarian administrations in this country's history for the past seven years, completely discrediting us in the world arena--something increasingly important in a global economy--while facing draconian cuts to our civil liberties, cross-governmental oversight and environmental policies while bailing out banks and corporations before putting forth the needs of the people. Is it any wonder that for the first time in that woman's life she's felt truly proud to be an American, and truly involved in the process as a black man is now a leading contender for the Presidency, when people of her race have been marginalized and cast aside for centuries? I don't think that's extreme, and I certainly wouldn't call it hateful or racist. It is merely the product of our culture thus far.

Brad Carter said...

Merle said: "the United States of America is still the safest capitalist democracy in the FREE world."

Should have read: "...capitolist republic in the FREE world."

Those two words have very different meanings. Although, you will probably have your democracy by the end of the year.

AdamB said...

The "FREEIST", huh? So much for free education.

You are always bitching about the "decline of our still great nation." I wonder what you would consider the high point.

Here's a quick proof that your saying "All that glitters is not gold" is inherently false.
1. Gold glitters.
2. Gold is gold.
3. Something that glitters is gold.

What you probably mean is "Not all that glitters is gold." That would just be too logical, though.

postsimianproduct said...

Adam, that was just funny.