Obama Troubling

In politics, as in most other things, the truth is important. However, in political campaigns, the truth is often a very elusive object. This is because political campaigns are, essentially, little more than the construction of an image which, most importantly, is an image of what the campaign thinks is what the people want to see.

For this reason, political rhetoric and campaign promises are, at best, unreliable indicators of who a candidate is. Talk is cheap. Image is illusory and you cannot measure a politician by his words. Certainly not by his campaign words.

Actions are the only means by which a politician may truly (or at least reasonably) be measured. Actions such as what this politician has actually done in his political career. What things has he voted for and against. What bills has he, himself, proposed. Who are the people and organizations to whom he has aligned himself. These are the things that tell who the candidate actually is rather than the superficial image that is constructed by a campaign.

The Obama campaign is unique in that it is constructed entirely of rhetoric aimed at the future while completely avoiding the candidate's political past.

Although this emphasis on the future may seem appealing and forward-looking, it serves two other purposes:

So, particularly in the case of the Barack Obama Campaign, we have to ask ourselves, "Who is Barack Obama?"

For some people, it's enough for them to know that he's a Democrat. To others it's enough that he is black. Technically, he may only be as little as 1/8 or 1/16 black - but he still looks black. (There's that image thing again.) To still others, it's enough that he presents himself as a sophisticated intellectual. (Image again?)

The trouble is, there are millions of people in the U.S. that can match any and all of these few `qualifications'. If that's the level of your political sophistication, then perhaps you shouldn't read any further because you literally don't care who the candidate is, only what.

Assuming that you at least have the sense to want to know who Barack Obama is before voting for him, you have to set aside the political rhetoric, campaign promises and manufactured images. You must take a look at what he has actually done in his political career. The choices and judgements that he has made.

Barack Obama has had a relatively short (four year) history in national politics. His senate career began in January, 2005. He began his presidential campaign in Jan, 2007. As a result, we only have two non-campaign years with which to evaluate Obama's national political record and eighteen years before that for his involvement in local and state politics.

Perhaps most troubling feature of Obama's past and present political record is the pattern of thuggery, intimidation and attempts to silence the opposition.

For example, Obama won his first political victory by being the only candidate on the ballot. That situation was accomplished by his hiring of a political consultant firm that specializes in disqualifying the signers of opposing candidates' petitions. That operation left Obama as the only candidate on the ballot. (Sort of reminds one of the Michigan Primary Ballot.)

In Chicago, reform candidates appeared, challenging the status quo of the corrupt machine politics in Chicago. Obama was not one of the reformers. He was a supporter of the Daley machine (now under Federal investigation), against the reform and he also rose very quickly in the environment of corrupt Chicago politics. This doesn't prove anything, but it should give one pause.

In the current presidential race, the Obama Campaign has filed lawsuits, urged prosecutions and enlisted the help of elected officials to threaten and intimidate Obama's political foes. The Campaign has also organized operations to silence Internet bloggers and radio talk shows which are unfriendly to Obama.

For example, in Missouri, The Obama Campaign organized something called The Barack Obama Truth Squad which included a senator and several prosecutors and sheriffs across the state. Together on television, they threatened criminal proceedings against individuals, organizations and TV/radio stations that would air anti-Obama political speech. The governor of Missouri had to step in and charge the Obama Campaign with "abusing the justice system and offices of the public trust to silence political criticism."

The Obama Campaign employed similar strategies in Ohio and Pennsylvania. There, the Obama Campaign attorney, Bob Bauer, threatened cable and television stations to "immediately cease" airing the NRA's ads, because the Campaign had determined they were "false, misleading and deceptive" He threatened that the stations could lose their broadcast license.

Additionally, Bauer has pressured the U.S. Justice Department to prosecute the non-profit American Issues Project and one of its donors over an advertising campaign which exposed Obama's alliances with domestic terrorist William Ayers.

A Sheriff in Lee County, Fl is currently under Federal investigation because he referred to Obama by his full name Barack Hussein Obama. The ACLU and NAACP are calling his statement racist.(?)

The Obama campaign has also engineered tactics for silencing their political opponents on the Internet and radio. These tactics include the enlistment of Obama supporters (via email alerts) to post massive amounts of ``spam'' complaints against unfriendly blogs. When these complaints reach a threshold, hosting software automatically renders the blog inoperable until a case-by-case investigation and determination can be made.

On the radio, instances occurred in which the Obama Campaign was invited to participate and present their side during interviews with Obama critics. In each case, the Obama campaign declined to participate and instead launched an email alert, instructing their supporters to keep calling in and jamming the switchboard and email to render the broadcast ineffective.

Along similar lines, Obama supports something called "card check" legislation. This is legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections for determining whether employees want to be represented by unions or not. Instead, the unions can send a few thugs over to employees' homes -- showing that they know where you live -- and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union representation. No secret ballot, no debate, no opportunity for employers to be heard.

These are not the ways of a free people, using state power and political thuggery to silence the opposition. These tactics belong in Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany.

Perhaps more frightening is the shocking willingness of the Obama Campaign to use such tactics to censor dissent, even before Mr. Obama holds the actual power he seeks. This, alone, should be extremely troubling to any freedom-loving person, regardless of party affiliation.

Alliances are not simply people who happen to be where you happen to be. Alliances are chosen deliberately and the kind of allies a person chooses says something about that person.

Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger, William Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and Antoin Rezko...these are not just people who happened to be at the same place at the same time as Barack Obama. They are people with whom he has chosen to align himself with for years and in some cases they are people with whom serious money has been exchanged.

Let's start with the pastor of Obama's church of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The racist, America hating, "God Damn America", "United States of AmeriKKKa" preacher who was Obama's chief spiritual advisor for at least 20 years. What does it say about Obama's judgement or his judgement of character to align himself with this America-hating preacher? For twenty years, no less!

Either Obama shares Rev. Wright's views or he doesn't. If he shares them, then the prospect of an American president who shares such anti-American views should be very troubling. If he doesn't share the Reverend's views, then what does it say about Obama's judgement to maintain an association or alliance for so many years? Obama claims he was unaware of the Reverand's views. So we are to believe that, for 20 years, Obama could not see what was so plainly apparent. Again, what does that say about Obama's judgement or his judgement of character. Either way, his long-time association with Wright is indefensible.

Barack Obama’s first known meetings with William Ayers occurred in 1987. At this time, Ayers was an activist in the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools (ABCS) and Obama was chairman of the Developing Communities Project (DCP) which was a member of the Ayers' Alliance. However, this was only two or three years after Ayers' involvement in a string of bombings in the mid-80's which included, the National War College, the Washington Navy Yard Computing Center, the Washington Navy Yard Officers’ Club, New York City’s Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association, the Israeli Aircraft Industries Building, New York City’s South African Consulate, and the United States Capitol Building.

Why was Obama involved with this well-known domestic terrorist only a few years from his latest string of bombings? Did Obama believe in Ayres' goals and his hatred of America? Or was Obama's judgement and perception again so poor that he couldn't see what was plainly visible?

In 1995, Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn (another violent, anti-American, domestic terrorist and principal signatory of a Declaration of War against “AmeriKKKa” ) played host and hostess to Barack Obama’s political “coming out” at their home. Outgoing State Senator Alice Palmer tapped Barack Obama to be her handpicked successor.

Why are these AmeriKKKa-hating domestic terrorists guiding Obama's new political career? Do they share the same views or must we keep believing that Obama's judgement of character is poor that he couldn't see what was plainly visible?

The Obama Campaign refers to the domestic terrorists activities of Ayers and Dohrn as having occured in 1969, the founding date of the Weathermen and when Obama was 8 years old. However, that would be like arguing that everything the United States has ever done occurred in 1776. Meanwhile, Ayers' and the Weathermen were responsible for several bombings in the mid-80's when Obama was 24 years old, politically active and only two years before he became chairman of one of the activist organizations, founded by Ayres.

Obama’s ties to the Weathermen are not 40 years removed from a child’s experience. They were the conscious decision of a young, informed radical, establishing a relationship with an infamous domestic terrorist. Again, we must ask. Did Obama share Ayers' beliefs or was Obama's judgement and perception too poor to see what was plainly visible?

The Obama campaign has also tried to dismiss Obama's `association' with Ayers as, “Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school. … They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”

This is obviously not true because Obama's children are presently in elementary school, while Ayers’ children are all grown adults. Their kids did not go to school together.

Plainly, Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he choose to align himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America.

Obama has not demonstrated a capacity for bipartisanship or for mending the political polarization in Washington. He has a rigid party-line voting record and is regarded as the most left-wing member of the Senate. Republicans account for only 13 percent of the co-sponsors of Obama's bills during his's entire time in the Senate

By contrast, McCain has actually been more likely to team with Democrats than with members of his own party. Democrats have made up 55 percent of his political partners and co-sponsors over the last two Congresses.

Obama's foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power, has recently recommended sending a massive invading force into Israel. She says the force has to be “massive”, in order to neutralize the Israeli Defense Force, and protect the forces of Fatah and Hamas.

Since Obama began chairing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs in January 2007, not a single policy hearing has been conducted on anything, Afghanistan or otherwise. Nor has Obama convened a single meeting.

U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis recently participated in a "highly classified, national security simulation" with Senator Obama. "I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button," Davis said. "He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."

It is clear that Obama has accomplished very little during his time in the Senate.

During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama has laid out his economic plan. Of course, these are just words, but when the campaign promises themselves are troubling, one should take notice.

It turns out that a number of very distinguished economists, have also taken notice.

A statement signed by nearly 100 distinguished and experienced economists from major American universities and research organizations, including five Nobel Prize winners (Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith), concludes that "Barack Obama's economic proposals are wrong for the American economy" and that his proposals "defy both economic reason and economic experience."

During the 2nd debate, Obama spent some time explaining that we spend "$10 billion a month" in Iraq that should be spent here in the U.S. But a short time later he was promoting what sounded like a surge in Afghanistan, and vowing to spend even more money to assist "the economies" of Eastern Europe. He also proposes to provide free health care while claiming he'd cut more spending from the overall budget than his new ideas would cost.

It's also somewhat troubling that Barack Obama chose Franklin Raines (now under Federal investigation for corruption) as one of his financial advisors. Furthermore, the tie between Obama and Raines is not just one-way. Obama has been the second-largest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae's financial contributions, right after Senator Christopher Dodd.

So let’s sum up: Obama's chief financial supporter was Tony Rezko, now on his way to prison. His spiritual adviser was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, of “God damn America” fame. And the guy who got him his only administrative job is former, unrepentant terrorist William Ayers.

Thanks for pulling information together. It all helps.

I think you should check your dates on the Weathermen bombings, which took place in the first half of the 1970s:
United States Capitol - March 1, 1971
Pentagon - May 19, 1972
Harry S Truman Building - January 29, 1975

By the end of 1976, the Weather Underground had substantially collapsed. Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers turned themselves in on December 3, 1980.

I think you should check your dates on the Weathermen bombings, which took place in the first half of the 1970s...

By the end of 1976, the Weather Underground had substantially collapsed. Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers turned themselves in on December 3, 1980.

I don't doubt what you're saying. The dates I used came from an Oct. 6 article at pajamasmedia.com by Bob Owens, which included:

Barack Obama was not eight, but a 24-year-old community organizer in Chicago at the time of the Weathermen’s last attacks, and 29 when many of the last remnants of the Underground in the offshoot May 19th Communist Organization were sentenced to prison in 1990...the last of the Weathermen were sentenced for their role in a string of bombings in the mid-1980s.

I don't know exactly what this "string of bombings in the mid-1080s" were. I'm trying to track them down, if they exist.

I may have to write to Bob Owens to get the details. If the bombings aren't real or missdated, the my article has errors.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.