Zinn And The Art Of Obama's Marxism

http://grasstopsusa.com ^ | 07/24/2012 | Don Feder

[massmike]

Obama’s musings on the way the economy works come from a man who never invented anything, never built anything, never took a chance by sinking every cent he had into a start-up company, never had to beg for a loan based on a hunch, never had to put in 16-hour days, never had to meet a payroll or agonize over the effects of government regulation. Then again, Marx wrote volumes about what was wrong with capitalism without every setting foot on a factory floor.

I know where Obamaism began — with ‘60s whack-jobs like Barack’s buddy Bill Ayers. And I know where it leads. In 1998, I spent a week in Havana.

When I was in Havana, food rations included six eggs and two pounds of fish — per person, per month.

Doctors bicycled to and from work. I spoke to a neurosurgeon who was fired from the hospital she founded for refusing to treat more medical tourists at the expense of ordinary Cubans. The doorman at my hotel was a civil engineer who could earn more in tips in a day than working at his profession for a month. That's the genius of collectivism — turning engineers into doormen.

In 2008, Obama was going to bring us all together, heal our racial wounds, give us an economy that really worked and get the world to love us. He was the harbinger of hope and change.

After 3 ½ years of trillion-dollar deficits, the highest sustained unemployment since the Great Depression, the GM-takeover, nationalized health care, spreading the wealth around, and class-warfare rhetoric, we won’t be able to say we didn’t know this time around.

[Rapscallion]

Obama: making the country founder in economic depression; making the world unsafe for moral democracies; punishing successful Americans every day; resurrecting racism in America.

Other than that, he has still done more poorly than any (real) American president before him.

I never believed the Book of Revelations until I lived under Obama.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

This is a great piece. Thanks for posting. He hits the nail on the head about academic elitists who know little, and do little, but think they are the ultimate in wisdom and have the right to tell the rest of us how to live.

Ultimately almost all who gravitate toward big government, while in its employ as ‘leaders’, are egoists who are consciously or unconsciously attempting to increase their own ‘importance’ in the world. They seek to feature themselves as world saviors, while at the same time trying to meld the rest of us into a dependent mass of indistinguishable homogeneous drones. This is the formula of communist ‘leaders’, and is the same formula of most leftists in this country. They are jealous of the successful, because the successful take away from the glory they seek. They have no desire to be ‘public servants’. They need to be adored. It is an incredibly immature and destructive personality type, but is rampant on the left.

One of the most important weapons when dealing with these people is to ridicule their knowledge. It is very important to them that they feature themselves as being wise and knowledgeable. This is partially why they hate Limbaugh so much. He is bright, and he points out how wrong and lacking in knowledge they are, and the absurdity of their positioning of themselves as ‘geniuses’.

[WashingtonSource]

bump

[vanilla swirl]

Had some interesting exchanges with a “Zinn-head” on facebook. You have it correct. Can’t burst their bubble that you might have more knowledge than them.

[nathanbedford]

This morning I posted on a companion thread these thoughts which anticipate much of this very good opinion piece:

I am concerned but not shaken by the stubbornness with which Obama retains his hold on those segments of the demographic which should be winnable for a Republican contender, especially single women. Romney has money with which to tell the story and he has a good story to tell. Obama has enough money to tell his lies but still he must construct a house of cards and when one strut in such an edifice gives way the whole implodes. We have enjoyed a taste of that in the reaction to Obama's gaffe in Roanoke in which he proclaimed that entrepreneurs did not build their own businesses. That gaffe approaches game breaker status because it crystallizes the subconscious understanding of much of the electorate about Obama's radicalism. These gaffes change elections when Joe sixpack reacts, "yes, that's the way he is." And Obama ceases to be the Messiah, or even cool, and becomes the author of our economic misery because of his radicalism. He loses his cool and becomes an enemy.

We have seen time and again in politics the phenomenon of politician being defined and electorate's mind is ever after closed. Thereafter, the electorate views the candidate through a different lens. Once the electorate sees Obama as a radical, they will understand that his goal has always been redistribution rather than recovery. The electorate will have an epiphany and see Obamacare as one more piece of the socialist puzzle. The indictment of Obama will ring true and his house of cards will implode. His likability quotient will plummet because he will be recognized as a very unlikable person, indeed the enemy of prosperity. He will get the blame he richly deserves for the failed recovery. Voters in the coal belt will understand why they are losing their jobs and see themselves as victims of Obama's radical ideology.