The chickens are coming home to roost as reality strikes at the Obama mythical crackpot history. All that ‘I was six years old abroad so I am an expert in international relations and foreign policy is my strong suit so don’t argue with me and call my “no preconditions” stance with regards to Iran “naive” (I’ll meet with Ahmadinejad any time, any place, any where he wants in the first year)’ has now collapsed.
Instead of “no preconditions” meetings with crackpots and Tin Pot Dictators, after “open hands” “clenched fists” words, after insulting American allies like Britain and Israel, Obama has to face the fact that he is in a one man fools paradise. After appeasing Iranian leaders and jutting his jaw at protesters challenging the Tin Pot Dictator and the entire Iranian regime, Obama says “Oops”. It turns out, as the knowledgeable were aware: Iran has “a secret underground plant to manufacture nuclear fuel”.
You just can’t trust a Tin Pot Dictator – like Ahmadinejad.
* * * * *
When, a few weeks ago, we described Obama as The Tin Pot Dictator little did we know that shortly a YouTube video would emerge to confirm our description.
YouTube videos and events aplenty already existed on which we based our article but the latest YouTube now threatens a firestorm.
There was some discussion of the Tucker Carlson public admission that Obama’s campaign did indeed proposition reporters with scurrilous assertions, lies and false narratives to portray the Clintons as “racists”. D.K. Jamaal wrote:
Carlson admission finally confirms that Obama’s campaign was as divisive, vituperative, heartless, scheming, unethical, malevolent, destructive, and manipulative as many Americans have long believed.
The evidence has long been there – Jesse Jackson’s Kanye-like implication that Hillary did not care about Katrina victims, the campaign’s infamous South Carolina race memo, rumors of how the Obama camp threatened black superdelegates, and the odious “Hillary wants Obama assassinated” story they tried to sell.
But Carlson becomes the first corporate media journalist to actually say, yes, the Obama campaign tried to use me to sell the Hillary-is-racist crap.
D.K. Jamaal bears witness that there was much evidence to the Obama race-baiting history. D.K. Jamaal then asks the vital question:
Carlson is brave for finally telling it like it is, beyond any doubt, that the corporate media has long known Obama to be a race-baiter from day one.
Will any other reporter be honest enough to second what Tucker Carlson revealed?
It will take a while but the truth shall rise. Eventually reporters will report events from the primary and the secret history we have outlined will be filled with stark colors. Eventually even Obama campaign thugs and operatives will turn on each other or demand credit and the secret history of the Obama race-baiting will emerge full-born.
For now, we have to rely on the facts few want to discuss, and sharp analytical minds to put into context events as they unfold. For instance, in Obama The Tin Pot Dictator we wrote:
Time was when Americans could laugh at leaders from other nations who tried to create a cheesy cult of personality. Now we have our own cheesy tin pot rattling “leader”.
That Tin pot dictator mentality is what has raised alarms about Obama’s speech next week aimed at schoolchildren. President John F. Kennedy was a popular president who started a presidential effort aimed at schoolchildren. But the Kennedy efforts were aimed at physical fitness and physical fitness programs not at creation of a cult of personality akin to North Korean “Dear Leader” rallies.
There were no “let’s get physically fit for the glory of the Dear Leader” components from John F. Kennedy. Attempts to link physical fitness or sound educational goals to the greater glory of “Dear Leader” abound in world history. Hitler youth programs, Leninist state glorification camps, Maoist “Red Book” wavers, dozens of African leadership cults, Red Kerchief programs from the socialist world, all are examples of the glorification of the state and the “Leader” via school children programs.
Americans are waking up to their own “cheesy cult of personality” for Dear Leader. The evidence was always there but few wanted to open their eyes and see. Few wanted to see the Obama cult of personality we have written about for so long. There was evidence during the campaign:
Perhaps because it was a political campaign some dismissed it as wise politics. To us it reeked of Nike sneakers and comet tails and Marshall Appelwhite. It reeked of Susan Atkins. It reeked of dangerous leader cult in national government.
To us it is time to look at that old man who bristles at the cult and time to put aside Godwin’s law lest we forget.
At B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, New Jersey the indoctrination has begun.
The song is a dark reference to “Jesus Loves The Little Children”. The video was posted by Charisse Carney-Nunes the author of “I Am Barack Obama”. Some liberals who should know better, who would scream if George W. Bush was the object of adoration (we would certainly object too) prefer to say “nothing new”, “this is fine”. No, this is not fine. This is indoctrination and it is ugly.
There’s a reason why Americans posthumously honor presidents by naming ships or buildings in their honor. Americans do not engage in monument building for living leaders. We are not a nation of Tin Pot Dictator worshipers.
Or at least we used to not be a nation of Tin Pot Dictator worshipers.
In February of 2008 we quoted from the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel:
The rise of democratic frontrunner Barack Obama signifies an alarming victory of style over substance. Not unlike the dot-com hype, his campaign promises more than he can deliver. The one thing his voters can count on is that they will ultimately be disappointed.
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama reminds many people of former President John F. Kennedy or civil rights leader Martin Luther King. But when I hear him speak, I have to think of the crazy days of the New Economy.
It was a magical time, even for the most levelheaded of business executives. For several years, wild promises seemed to be the most valuable currency in circulation. Profits? No big deal! Experience? Unnecessary! Realism? More of an obstacle than anything else. While some entrepreneurs undoubtedly had realistic business models and administrative talent, most of them were simply peddling ideas.
Der Spiegel wrote along with us, in February 2008, the truth about Obama and an Obama presidency:
Nevertheless, if Obama is elected he will eventually be forced to disappoint his voters. Politics in a democratic society is a balancing of interests, not a revivalist meeting. It takes finesse, experience and power to transform ideas into reality. Hope and optimism can enhance these qualities, but they cannot replace them. Obama’s message is more of a promise to heal the nation than a campaign platform.
The future Obama is promising seems foggy and indistinct. He wants to change the rules of engagement in politics, but he neglects to explain how and in what direction. He wants to write a new page in the history books, but what handwriting does he plan to use to make his entry? He wants to drive out lobbyists, but if he does, who will champion the interests of union members, war veterans and chemical corporations? He wants to negotiate with the world’s dictators, but to what end, exactly?
In fact, Obama’s most dangerous land mines are hidden in foreign policy. [snip]
And Osama bin Laden and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be the real winners of the 2008 American presidential election.
On top of all that, Obama, in an effort to show strength, has come up with a new, and in some ways exclusive, theater for the US armed forces. He talks about military operations in the nuclear power Pakistan, operations that he, as commander-in-chief, would order even without the approval of the United Nations. That is “the war we need to win,” he says again and again.
But in reality a military campaign in Pakistan would be lunacy, even if many in the American media have chosen to studiously ignore Obama’s comments. A comparison with President John F. Kennedy, who was 43 when he was elected, reveals that Kennedy was in fact unenthusiastic about going to war in Vietnam. It was a war the inexperienced President slid into, and if he was a war president, it was by accident and not design.
Der Spiegel, a German magazine, has special insight into the politics of despair:
But there is no room for thoughtfulness in the turbulent world of Obamania. Hillary Clinton, his rival in the fight for the Democratic nomination, suffers from the same problems as traditional companies in the automotive and engineering industries did when confronted with the hype of the New Economy. She is out of touch with his supporters. She uses language to explain, while Obama uses rhetoric to intoxicate. She tells voters what she is bringing to the table. He tells them what they can become. If Clinton is a solid stock, Obama is an option. If she’s a secure investment, he is speculation.
When the New Economy reached its conclusion, people suddenly realized that their hopes were dashed and their cravings for quick riches left unfulfilled. In 2002, Worldcom’s stock price fell to less than 10 cents.
If democracy functions only half as well as the market economy, the Obama bubble will burst. The burning question is: When? Will it happen before the Democratic nomination this August — or not until afterwards?
The Obama bubble is bursting much too late. But the truth about Obama continues to emerge. The Obama Race-baiting history and other truths continue to emerge.
Those truths are getting more and more dangerous, not less.