An American President not interested in defeating an enemy, and who attacks fellow countrymen for simply disagreeing with him, with more of a vigor than he is willing to attack radical Islamists (for which he refuses to name).
But the same Obama is willing to rush to the microphone to condemn gun violence, the police, any other "oppressed" group. But to do his job that he swore an oath twice to uphold? Forget about it!
Remember when he told David Letterman that he learned a President represents the entire nation?
Well, that was good rhetoric to use as a comeback to attack his opponent in an election. But we see again, in the last few days, how Obama is unwilling to defend and protect all Americans.
He has more concern for the plight of illegal aliens, Islamists, gang-bangers, and so-called Syrian "refugees" but displays a condescending, haughty attitude toward those of us who say no to this misguided plan with "Show me your plan."
I'll show you my plan...protect Americans first!
This is what got us to 9/11. A disconnect from reality. Liberals spent eight years after 9/11 complaining and attacking the war. Well, against our better judgement, we gave Obama and his Leftist Democrats their chance at power, and the problem didn't go away with the Kumbaya, hippie peace chants and the Grateful Dead music.
Instead, it only got worse.
The Little Rock recruiting center, Ft. Hood, Boston Marathon, Benghazi, Chattanooga, the Oklahoma City beheader, and now the growth of ISIS, with Obama wanting to welcome them into the country.
Now, what do we have today? Instead of a President unifying this nation, he and his party and their zombie-like followers pit us against each other, all for the sake of making some people who are looking for meaning in their lives feel better about themselves, which is why I say Liberalism is the philosophy of the selfish. It is all based on emotion...logic or common sense cannot factor into liberalism.
Every evil known to mankind was done for the sake of "good intentions." One such evil took place 37 years ago today in a South American jungle, after being aided and abetted by the liberal community in the San Francisco Bay Area. No one would listen until it was too late.
I thought about this again after hearing quotes of Obama over the last couple of days. One man who first tried to warn people in the Bay Area about this Cult of Personality that led a cult following to their "Kool-Aid" laced deaths wrote the following in 2008.
What do we have, then, if we were to lay out a comprehensive analysis of the Jim Jones history? An exciting and charismatic preacher comes out to California and is welcomed by his liberal compadres in a leftwing denomination fraught with theological deviancies so bizarre that it would shock Hollywood’s spicier icons. He claims to have been active in community organizing back in Richmond, Indiana. And he knows how to raise much money. He is clean, exemplary even. He professes a morality based in compassion for the underprivileged. With all that, he easily ingratiates himself with the far left politicians of San Francisco. Cecil Williams, pastor of the socialist oriented Glide Memorial Methodist Church, brought Jones on his TV show and plainly could not keep his hugging hands off the sleek and dazzling Jones.
The Bay Area elites saw Jones’ energy and how they could use it. The inner city crowd thought he was the answer to all problems, seen or unseen. Jones had invaded Bay Area ecclesiastical sanctuaries as well as political arenas throughout the State of California. Jerry Brown spoke from his pulpit, as did President Carter’s wife, Rosalynn. The Lieutenant Governor and Jones scratched each other’s backs to the bone, and even went to the Caribbean together. Indeed, this “Marxist Messiah” had managed more than ten years, scheming in and out and through the back alleys of California’s darkest political regions.
Jones succeeded because California was infested with liberals who laughed proudly at anyone to their right. They even scoffed at a couple of conservatives who shouted warnings into the deaf skulls of scoundrels unable to see past the glowing tips of their marijuana stogies.
...But, with all the failings and subterfuge I confronted throughout my long investigation of Jim Jones, certain questions have never left my conscious mind: Why did conservatives, alone, see Jones for what he was, a hazard to humanity? Why was it that only liberals fell for his charisma, his rhetoric, his deceit?
But now we come to my main point signaled by the title of this article: “Jonestown, Its Portent Has Arrived." You see, after my having warned fellow workers, two journalists, a couple of attorneys and a family member, that Congressman Leo Ryan would not leave Jonestown alive—and after having this worst fear turn to reality—I was stunned to the point where I was barely able to accept the apologies that poured forth from my liberal minister friends. Then soon came the inquiries from people needing to know how such a horror could have happened. Some, however, asked the heavier question: “What is the meaning of it?”
These kinds of questions began only after people got their bellies full of the gorier details. The scapegoating was rampant, to be sure. But gradually a pursuit of meaning began. My response was something that I knew intuitively. And I would tell people, either directly or in letters, that we must look upon it as a portent, a mini-example, a kind of metaphor for where our country is heading. Jones was the hint of some more grotesque leader waiting on the dark horizon of a festering America.I've quoted this section before, and after just reading it again, given the events of the last few days, it brings goosebumps to my arms.
Keep in mind, this was written in 2008.
Here it is, then, the manifestation of the portent. A young and charismatic black lawyer comes almost out of nowhere to work the hopes and weaknesses of a naïve citizenry. He molds them into an image of his Marxist-socialist vision. And, just as it was with Jones (where people, politicians, and radical activists flocked to him, believing he was just what they wanted and needed), it is now with Barack Obama who is looked upon as a saint of sorts—just as people told me Jones was a saint and a leader the world desperately needed. And just as I was forced to go up to Jones’ cult and study him close up (since one of my close friends said he was a tower of compassion and understanding, while another of my friends, within two weeks of the first friend, told me that “Jim Jones is doing weird things with my ex-wife and my kids”), I now had no choice but to study Obama. Why? Because, again, people had given me polar opposite assessments. So once again I was impelled to look heavily into the matter.
I have done so. But in this case, and unlike with Jim Jones where I had no real bias, I was right at the start predisposed against Obama, for economic and political reasons. He was a far left extremist, documented to be the most liberal man in the Senate. So I observed him and his wife (just as I did Jim Jones and his wife). I studied their rhetoric. And I can now assure you that there is no significant difference between Obama’s rhetoric and that of Jim Jones. As with Jones, I saw the clever fashioning of an out-group in order to solidify the loyalty of the in-group. I saw straw man fallacies, and the lack of moments wherein a truth is uttered strictly for the sake of truth. Obama lacked authenticity, the character that puts national stability ahead of self-achievement. I saw in Obama a sense of entitlement, a belief that he should have what he wants, meaning that he does not consider those deeper elements of his desires, the whys and wherefore of them. He desires being the nation’s president much more than the well-being of the nation. He, as did Jones, wants and needs to change the external world, not for the sake of the world, but for the sake of himself. That is to say: Though he thinks he is dynamic, he is in fact static. So he needs to change the world into a wild entity that tolerates almost everything, and enslaves the minds of its denizens. That is the world that will tolerate the Obama who is death-oriented, un-alive, hopelessly static. He is a statue molded by the dull artisans of socialism. He is hopelessly ignorant of inner change, the “new creation” heralded two eons ago. I tell you an irony: Jim Jones sensed that he was un-alive. It accounts for his preoccupation with death, from childhood up to the moment he gasped his last breath. But Obama, with his static mind, has not a clue that he got it all backward, that he is a lost artificiality. My fear is that he might well see the Light only after some cataclysmic event of his own making. Because, you see, unlike Jones who had his own little cult, Obama leads a gigantic cult. He leads it disguised as an outsider. The cult is Islam. And Obama leads it by way of being its great Western Defender. In the most insidious fashion he has become the energizer of Islam’s massive incursion, from East to West. As President, he would be the principal driver of Islam’s invasion, and therefore the ultimate manifestation of the Jonestown portent.
Obama is merely a purveyor of other peoples’ ideas. He fears scrutiny. He thrives only in company with fellow radicals. It’s a cult-like characteristic used metaphorically in several theater and literary classics such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Night of the Living Dead, Bram Stoker’s novel, Dracula, and Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
In other words Barack Obama is not a genuine thinker. He therefore disallows the tough questions. There is, then, but a bare chance that he, by way of powerful questions, would ever be drawn to those dungeons of his own absurdities. (I do not say this glibly. For my specialty over the years has been in questioning the cult-like thinking within the radical minds that have pushed America to the edge of chaos. My assessment of Obama comes without any doubts. It could easily be proven, were he to allow a confrontation with the truth. (But, of course he would never allow it.) Truth demands certain questions. Obama fears those questions. He fears truth even though he is not cognizant of it. It has been said other ways: “The light shone in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not.”
Do you have doubts? Does he have doubts? Well, then, let him answer the questions that have not thus far been put to him.
Politically correct, spiritually incorrect: that was the Jim Jones cult.
And now comes its portent: the immensely more dangerous Barack Obama.
Dangerous and evil, because he is emboldening evil, while all our lives and civilization hang in the balance.