UPDATE: Here’s a post I wrote in 2009, and then decided not to publish. I supposed it was the “Oz” factor – this idea that our current president was larger than life, and that I would be scoffed at because I suspected something funny was going on behind the curtain. Now that we are less than a month before the potential re-election of our emperor (that’s a future blog post), the WSJ has prompted me to pull this post out. It seems, according to William McGurn, that the curtain has been pulled back. In fact, Ozbama the Magnificent is not actually who he appeared to be.
After months of pondering and prayer, I finally have what I need to write this post. Here’s a longer piece of the quote from the title:
Those of us who consider ourselves moderates moderate-conservative, in my case are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice.
David Brooks, writing in this article in the NY Times (the near bankrupt mothership of liberal thought) lists 4 salient points in reference to the proposed 2010 budget which have caused him to change his mind on BHO. For those of my readers who follow politics, you may know that Brooks is the token “conservative” on the NYT staff. At times I agree with him; at other times, I wonder if he checked any conservative principles at the door long ago. In any case, his discovery of transformational liberalism in the BHO budget I find to be … interesting.
First, why is Mr. Brooks, or any centrist of whatever stripe, surprised by this? When has BHO ever made the convincing argument that he is anything but a committed, hard-left liberal? Yes, I am told he has an inspiring demeanor, and his statements of generalized hope and optimism are easy to rejoice over, but have his actions ever set him apart as a moderate? After all, who had , until Jan. 21, the most liberal voting record of any U.S. Senator??
Second, did Mr. Brooks notice that, whenever past associations became politically difficult, BHO quickly and effortlessly threw his old mentors/fellow workers/whatever under the proverbial bus? Does he remember that BHO did this with his own grandmother?? Now that the centrists who so conveniently and hopefully elected him are having 2nd thoughts, why does Mr. Brooks think our “pragmatic” president won’t quickly throw them right under there with Ayers the Terrorist and Rev. Wright, to suffer their same fate? Our president would, in fact, not be acting consistently if he did not do this.
Thirdly, did all the centrists out there, who voted for “anyone but Bush”, notice that Barak Hussein Obama is a white man, and those aren’t even the most important things about him?
- Yes, he is white… look at his mother. If this distinction seems irritating, my purpose is to point out it’s lack of importance compared to other issues pertaining to BHO’s choices and background. In fact, he is a mulatto, which appears to be very politically incorrect this days, and thereby avoided.
- That is his name [with a slight spelling change]. No, it’s not his last name, but my choice of his middle name is for a reason. BHO’s Islamic upbringing is something he has never denied or renounced, and to millions of Muslims around the world, he is a Muslim. He claims Christ, but he doesn’t act like it. Instead, he acts like a Muslim… more on that later.
Our country has not elected a man; we have elected an idea. It’s name is Change. It is personified by Pres. Barack Hussein. Based on the following facts (not my opinion- facts), it is an idea I find troubling and worthy of great concern:
- Mr. Hussein has accomplished very little in his entire political career. He can speak well, he has run a disciplined campaign, and he has raised $650 million dollars using a variety of means, including untraceable, pre-paid credit cards through his website (an apparent violation of election law, unless his campaign does a massive amount of research & gives all the money from Donald Duck and Superman to charity, since it can’t be traced back to the original giver).
- While in the Senate, he sponsored a law pertaining to the regulation of the element mercury, plus a minor clarification of some foreign policy matters. That’s it. No other US president has accomplished so little by the eve of his election to office.
- Tony Rezko (slumlord, convicted swindler) was Hussein’s chief fund raiser in both his Ill. and his U.S. Senate campaigns. Rezko also has deep connections with the impeached and indicted ex-governor of Ill., Rod Blagojevich. It remains to be seen what else Patrick Fitzgerald (the US attorney who attempted to bring down the Bush White House) may dig up.
- [stopped at this point, but there were many more…]
I think you get the idea. May God help us and impress this same idea on enough voters by Nov. 6th…