Posted on 10/16/2009 11:24:19 PM PDT by Brown Deer
Thanks, I missed that, I need glasses and coffee!
The Keynote Speech Before The Democratic National Convention That Made Him A Star
http://www.2004dnc.com/barackobamaspeech/index.html
There is much insight into this characters words: Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake: One of her characters asks, “As a species we're doomed by hope, then?” By hope? Well, yes. Hope drives us to invent new fixes for old messes, which in turn create ever more dangerous messes. Hope elects the politician with the biggest empty promise; and as any stockbroker or lottery seller knows, most of us will take a slim hope over prudent and predictable frugality.
The truth is there were many who did wave their hands and dismiss the dangers of this man. Even many wise folks here dismissed him, until it was too late. We often say that they “drank the koolaid.” I have often contemplated what is that drink? We know it is empty calories, a sweetened poison that murders many. And yet the masses drink it, willingly. I submit it is the “greed” of hope, not the audacity of hope. Atwood's character goes on to conclude, “Hope, like greed, fuels the engine of capitalism.” While I don't agree with the conclusion of what the fuel of capitalism is, I do agree with the manner in which Hope has been facilitated as a form of greed.
Liberals, socialists, marxists know how to make and take the precious gift of Hope and use it to answer people's greeds. Hope coupled with greed, as an answer to the poor and middle class, is the kool-aid put these people in office. So if we understand what is in the kool-aid we can begin to find the antidote.
“the people of the United States should be able to elect a president of their choosing, even if that candidate is not a natural-born citizen.”
Quite an admission!
A very long time indeed. I remember my father complaining about it 40 years ago when it became very apparent to him.
We all laughed at him. Well it is no joke now.
We should be able to elect a President-for-life, if “we” so choose! It’s just so unfair, what they’ve done to Zelaya. < /sarc>
“Attention... Will a copy editor please pick up the nearest white page phone...”
I'm not convinced there are any copy editors left in the world of the MSM, especially the online part of it.
“(ironically by having his divorce records unsealed by “someone” in the Chicago Machine)”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/soros_obama_and_the_millionair.html
April 30, 2007
Soros, Obama, and the Millionaires Exception
By Ed Lasky
It is well-known that George Soros, the hedge-fund manager, major Democratic Party donor and anti-Israel crusader, has been a generous contributor to Barack Obama. But relatively few people realize that a loophole in McCain-Feingold allowed Soros his family members to be particularly generous in support of Obama’s Senatorial campaign.
Because Obama was running against Blair Hull in the primary and then Jack Ryan in the general (both multi-millionaires), Obama could, and did, receive especially large donations from individuals, to so-called “millionaires exception.” Normally individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but when candidates are running against millionaires, these limits are lifted and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not include money that Soros was able to funnel to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros was able to raise from tapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.
After taking advantage of the special freedom to raise large amounts of money from influential individuals, and as the campaigns entered their closing rounds, news was leaked to media outlets that both Hull and Ryan had personal scandals associated with them. The release of this news devastated both of their campaigns, leading to an easy run to victory for Obama in the primary and then in the general election. The New York Times Magazine revealed earlier in the year that David Axelrod, Obama’s chief political and media adviser, may well have been behind the leak of the story that doomed the Hull candidacy as the primary reached its home stretch.
(snip)
Axelrod is known for operating in this gray area, part idealist, part hired muscle. It is difficult to discuss Axelrod in certain circles in Chicago without the matter of the Blair Hull divorce papers coming up. As the 2004 Senate primary neared, it was clear that it was a contest between two people: the millionaire liberal, Hull, who was leading in the polls, and Obama, who had built an impressive grass-roots campaign. About a month before the vote, The Chicago Tribune revealed, near the bottom of a long profile of Hull, that during a divorce proceeding, Hull’s second wife filed for an order of protection. In the following few days, the matter erupted into a full-fledged scandal that ended up destroying the Hull campaign and handing Obama an easy primary victory. The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had ‘’worked aggressively behind the scenes’’ to push the story. But there are those in Chicago who believe that Axelrod had an even more significant role — that he leaked the initial story. They note that before signing on with Obama, Axelrod interviewed with Hull. They also point out that Obama’s TV ad campaign started at almost the same time. Axelrod swears up and down that ‘’we had nothing to do with it’’ and that the campaign’s television ad schedule was long planned. ‘’An aura grows up around you, and people assume everything emanates from you,’’ he told me.
The blogosphere is buzzing about this video posted on YouTube Sunday night. It’s Barack Obama musing about how best to redistribute wealth in America in a Chicago Public Radio interview in 2001. Not whether, but how: Through the courts or through legislation? A caller asks The One to explain how he would do “reparative economic work.” Obama gives the legislative route two thumbs up as his preferred method of “breaking free of the constraints” placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution and then burbles about cobbling together the “actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”
googled: Obama constitution fundamentally flawed
“And in that sense,” Obama continued, “I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. I don’t think the two views are contradictory, to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now, and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.” Obama did not elaborate on the “fundamental flaw” that persists. Conservative talk host Rush Limbaugh pounced on Obama’s remarks during his Monday radio program. “Good Lord, ladies and gentlemen! I don’t see how he can take the oath of office, which is this: ‘I do solemly swear, or affirm, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Said Limbaugh, “He has rejected the Constitution.”
"...To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf. ...
You tube, radio interview from 2001
Thanks for copying and pasting my post WORD for WORD without even acknowledging it....
It’s time to have another committee on ‘Unamerican Activities’ again. Obama and the democrats are overflowing with radicals,marxists and communists. Enough is enough!
Barney “was” a Marine?
Your link goes to an undeveloped site.
Thanks for the post.
Obama had the Divorce records unsealed of his opponents. It proved embarasing enough to cause his opponents to drop out of the race, leaving Barry in the position of running a race in which there were no serious adversaries or contenders.
You will find that he remained above the fray, if you google, but the organizations that petitioned the courts for breaking a sealed file most deginitely worked on behalf of Barry O., as he had worked with or for those very organizations and had strong ties to key people who could drive a an action that would be favorable to Barry O..
Their chosen one.
They duped the voters by having Marxist Ohaha say, "I want to be another Ronald Reagan." Liberal aethist Dems ran in Repub districts as fake "fervent believers."
Rahm/Axelrod use Obama as a steppingstone to more power and money. They already have total access to the Federal treasury, the banks, the auto companies and, health care (which will make Rahm and his brother billionaires).
Obama is a clueless puppet, a cheap prop, and the big loser here, left with a legacy of failure while Rahm/Axelrod, and the rest, move on to the next puppet.
Is that you’re blog? Saw your comments to starwise thanking her for giving you credit. (welcome to FR)
“We should be able to elect a President-for-life”
O.K.! Can it be Sarah Palin?
“Is that you’re blog” meant to say “your”.
The only thing I might disagree with is that Obama is a ‘clueless puppet’. I believe he is a dedicated marxist to the core. He is also just as ruthless,money grubbing and power hungry as Axelrod and Rahm. The sad part is that he will ultimately prove to be the worst President in US history and by extention, bring disgrace and shame to his race as the ‘first black american president’.
Of course, it does not matter(and never did) to most of us what his race is, but the democrats and media have made such a big issue of his race, that it is bound to bring unwarranted shame to an entire race of people in the end. The fact that they don’t care about that sad reality speaks volumes of the modern ‘progressive’(communist).
I am not perfect in spelling or grammar, but I do expect it in professional publications. I think it is a result of the ‘dumbing-down’ in public schools. Very often, I find errors in newspapers, menus and even in the writings of a person I know who is a graduate with an English degree. It is one of my pet peeves.
The democrat voters I know allllll believe that Republicans are the party of wealth and corporate greed. The deception has been planted so deep and wide in spite of the abundance of FACTS to the contrary. And some on the Republican side will still claim that the ‘wall street’ players are capitalists.... joke is on them long term.
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.