Topic: Barack Obama
Barack Obama - America's Half-Blood Prince A comment on Steve Sailer's new book on Barack Obamaby Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution
(libertarian)
Saturday, November 1, 2008
A scant three days remain until Election Day 2008, but there is still time for everyone to check out an upcoming book from Steve Sailer. Mr. Sailor’s book "America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s Story of Race and Inheritance" is a worthy investigative report into the mind of Barack Obama. Mr. Sailer has made his book temporarily available here in PDF format, but plans to close the link shortly and publish the book later this month.
Mr. Sailer delves into Obama’s psyche. And it’s not that of a confident, benevolent hero or "The One" or the messiah as many of Obama’s supporters believe him to be. It is not even that of "the Barackcuda," my own personal label for the junior Senator from Illinois. In fact, I have a queasy feeling that Sailer’s version is wildly different than that of just about any of Tuesday’s voters’.
Sailer’s version is of a boy wracked by an identity crisis of a double abandonment; his father’s abandonment of his mother and him at age two so he could attend Harvard (little Barack would just see his dad once more at age 10), his mother’s abandonment of him in Hawaii to pursue academic studies in Indonesia. America’s Half-Blood Prince’s version is of a man who grew up not knowing who he is, whether he is "black enough," and whose main skill in life seems to be finding a way to "fail upwards." The picture is painted of a child and man who self-torments himself with an identity crisis, and creates racial identity delusions that he then proceeds to bludgeon his sophisticated mind with. Sailer suggests that in a way, even his wife may just be a psychological and political salve for this grievous self-inflicted wound. It is ironic that the "abandoned" Barack then chose to disown the only pseudo-paternal relationship it seems he ever had, with the now infamous Reverend Wright.
So how can Sailer claim to have insight into Obama’s mind? Well, he did a lot of research, but what makes it so compelling is that his main piece of evidence is Obama’s self-written 1995 autobiography, Dreams of My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. He writes that "fundamentally [the] book consists of a debate between Obama and Obama’s own autobiography" and that he is merely the "emcee."
I agree with this assessment. I’ve read the book and welcome it as a solid piece of research presenting an alternative view of Obama, far more logical and empathetic than the typical streams of soundbites and blabberings from the remainder of our corporate-run state media. Here are a few teasers from the book:
Learn where the phrase "The Audacity of Hope" really came from. (Not to be confused with Vaughn’s recent cool article "The Absurdity of Hope.") Find out on page 108!
Hint: it came from this fellow. Sailer covers why and how this person looks very similar to the Libertarian presidential candidate, Bob Barr. See page 169.
Can anyone pick out little Barack in his 5th grade class photo from Hawaii? Sailer covers Barack’s education in depth.
What is Black Liberation Theory? Does Barack believe in it?
How is Barack’s life similar to Major League Baseball? Check out his great analogy on pages 95 and 229, although the rest of the book is needed to put this in full context.
Did you know Obama vacation for a summer in Pakistan while a college student in 1981? Hope he didn’t visit any "camps." See page 155.
Note Michelle Obama’s collegiate racial views in her 1985 Princeton senior thesis, "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community." She lamented that white professors and classmates always saw her as "Black first and a student second." She was frightful of her future, writing that "further integration and/or assimilation into a White cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant." And that her "experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my ‘Blackness’ than ever before. I have found that at Princeton no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my White professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don’t belong."
I will close with a sentiment from Sailer that I strongly agree with. After he paints a fairly critical picture of the Obamas’ racial beliefs, he notes "that doesn’t necessarily mean Mr. and Mrs. Obama still feel the way about race as they did when they wrote about the topic at length. Maybe they’ve changed their minds over the years. But shouldn’t somebody ask them about it? I realize a lot of people think it would be an invasion of their privacy, but they are running for the White House."
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
As always, unlike the NFL, the author grants full permission to allow any accounts of, rebroadcasts, retransmissions, repostings in part or full of this article to your blog or anywhere else in order to promote the Restoration of our Republic.
Veritas numquam perit. Veritas odit moras. Veritas vincit. Truth never perishes. Truth hates delay. Truth conquers.
Police State Stomps on Iraq Veteran's Face as McBama Sanctions Attack on Freedom of Speech: The Story of the Hempstead 15 (Part 1/3) Published: October 25, 2008 What? Yet another event the media completely missed? After multiple attempts to engage McBama to answer their questions, the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) led a peaceful march on the last McCain-Obama Presidential Debate and were met with 30 mounted police and a horde of others in riot gear. The mounted police stamped on an Iraq war veteran's face and attacked the crowd. Ron Paul supporter and veteran Adam Kokesh was arrested as well.
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jake Towne, the Champion of the Constitution is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I've got 8 LETTERS for you ~ G-U-L-L-I-B-L-E ~ and a share of interest in a BRIDGE TO NOWHERE. I'm sure you will gobble them BOTH up like a FAT MAN devours a plate full of CAKE!
NO ONE can "delve" into the "psyche" of another ~ not even a psychologist who is treating someone knows their motivations and secret urges. You think anyone can unravel GW Bush? How about Hitler? Or, Reagan? Or even MURRAY ROTHBARD! Ha! Ha!
Jake, you're just number ONE on that list of gullibles because you seem to ENJOY taking the meagerest of information from the most obscure places and spreading it around as flagrantly as POLITICAL ADVERTISING.
Just because something is obscure and dubious DOESN'T mean that it should be spread around like it's TRUE. You just really want to believe in fairy tales, don't you? Just so that you can be the FIRST to step up and get a PIE IN THE FACE for being WRONG.
I cannot believe someone has wasted precious segments of their life, and not to mention trees for paper, to smear Obama with the tragic mulatto tag. How very 19th century.
So Obama once had anxieties about his self-identity as a youth? All teenagers do, it's a biological rite of passage. Once you realise the utter unimportance, and dare I say, how fabricated concepts of race and ethnicity are- you focus (as with Obama) on being a more patient and empathetic person.
For anyone who still believes in the nonsense of race as a necessity to a decent identity, I say, *get a grip*
Well Jake, I for one do recognize the importance of scrutinizing candidates for public office. Reviewing and evaluating a variety of information (and sources) are necessary to the development of informed choices, and I appreciate your efforts to that end. The vast majority of voters are uninformed, misinformed, or so steadfast in their political leanings that they refuse to be informed, and simply turn a deaf ear to any negative reference to the candidate of their personal choice. And some of them are the same sheeple who delight in heaping scorn and belittlement on those with whom they cannot conduct philosophical debate within the context of civil discourse.
Also, I didn't see the word "mulatto" in your article. A possible oversight, but more likely someone is attempting to put the racist tag on something they haven't the intellect to refute. And what's "tragic" about being half negroid and half caucasian? Some of historys greatest figures (George Washington Carver, Booker T. Washington, to name a couple) were of that ilk.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-11-01 16:59:16
Dear Master C -
Thanks, as usual, for your comment. I suppose you didn't actually try to read the book or my comments. In Sailer's book he tends to use large swaths of text from Dreams of My Father.
Yes, you can't really go into the psyche of another, but if the subject writes a 500-page book about themselves, it's interesting to try. Its incredibly rare that a president has written their autobiography themselves BEFORE taking office, usually they just have campaign books. For instance McCain has written a lot, but only sort of - a professional writer did it for him. Other candidates normally just have books about their ideas written by this time - like Obamas Audacity, Ron Paul's Revolution, Hitler's Mein Kampf, etc.
Master C, you are quite exasperating and abusive, I do admit wondering if you are instead an adolescent yourself. The point of the article is to share the source and encourage debate on it. I not being "GULLIBLE" just because I present an alternative viewpoint. Get real. Treat this as a book review. Look at what I agree with in the article
1) The book is a debate between Obama's writings and reality/what Obama says right now
2) I do wish the media would bring up more questions for him.
You wrote before that you are very much in favor of Mr. Obama becoming president. There is nothing wrong with that. This is just a source that you could read, that is, if you want to try to learn something new.
Dear mello_yello -
You wrote: "For anyone who still believes in the nonsense of race as a necessity to a decent identity"
If the book is correct, the next POTUS might believe this. And not just as a teenager (which as you note is can be understandable) but 13 years ago in his mid-thirties while writing "Dreams of My Father" I suppose you also did not try to read the book. Oh well, no worries!
Another note:
On the subject of Obama's race, I personally do not believe this is much of a factor. As a matter of fact, I rather like the idea that Obama has traveled quite a bit (4+ years in Indonesia), many years attending prep schools and college in Hawaii, LA, and Chicago. He's also gone to Kenya, Pakistan, etc. This type of diversity I believe is useful in a candidate for president. However, this diversity:
1) has nothing to do with the color of his skin
2) is actually a faily minor factor.
The key factor is whether the candidate can execute Article 2 of the US constitution and live by these words:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
I do not believe both Barack Obama nor John McCain can faithfully execute the office of President, and I did not vote for either of them.
Back to race, I said it doesnt matter to me,but if the candidate themselves has the potential to judge others by the color of their skin, then I am interested since it means they also cannot faithfully execute the presidential oath.
mello_yello, Master C, try the book yourself, I certainly do not want to change your mind, but shutting your mind like a clam is your own private act. And feel free to send me evidence to the contrary!
It's the TOTALITY of your writings that leads me to conclude your gullibility, not your deep and earnest reporting. You're looking for offbeat stuff, controversial ~ much of it unchecked and unsubstantiated.
You may say that it's cutting edge, but it's more like banging with a shovel. The reason "the media" doesn't report this stuff is because IT'S GARBAGE!
Do you actually think that there's ONE SINGLE PIECE of information about Obama that Hannity and Limbaugh ~ and McCain and Palin! ~ haven't already gone over and disclosed? Hannity is like a FOAMING FOUNTAIN of VENOM! I would love nothing more than to investigate HIS life and spread around the kinds of half-truths, implications, and accusations that he uses on his adversaries. THAT MAN is a VERBAL criminal in every way I can think of.
Not only that, but do you think that every SINGLE PIECE of information about Obama's PRIVATE LIFE needs to be explained? What do we know about the antics of GW Bush and the Bilderbergers, the Skull and Bones, Halliburton, and his OIL constituents? And, HE'S already the PRESIDENT!
In my opinion, you aren't looking to advance any new information, you're just PASSING IT ON without even verifying or substantiating it. RUMORS, INNUENDO, DISTORTIONS, and PSYCHIC PROBES do not uncover TRUTH, all they do is LINE THE POT with more useless crap.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-11-01 19:55:32
MC -
You are entitled to your opinion, thanks for sharing it.
As far as whether the stuff is unsubstantiated or not, I have linked to the evidence. You are very welcome to demonstrate where these are incorrect.
Do you actually want to discuss the topic or not?
While you were teaching, did you ever teach that its better to educate rather than scream and rant? You do seem to have abusive tendencies, and perhaps you just don't get me - I am not interested in you trying to beat label, epithets, etc into my skull. You are wasting your time. Demonstrate how my writings are wrong or lacking.
Ranting and raving may have done you good in your classroom, but it won't get anywhere with me. I would certainly appreciate if you would correspond more respectfully in the future. If you want to talk about venom, you seem to forgotten that recently you have written that
'If you think writing like THIS is funny, you probably laugh uproariously while watching your kids bounce off the walls when you kick them around, don't you?"
You also wrote you dislike reading my articles, that they are too long, I am too gullible, etc so my suggestion to you is to not read them. You do realize you don't have to do so right? :) Or perhaps I am just sucking in another 'gullible' reader. Even though I do not write here for $$, I suppose some thanks are in order for adding to my readership!
Your greatest deficiency is your inability to see the truth of what someone is saying through the examples they offer. I realize that my metaphors are perhaps waaaaay beyond your ability to grasp, but when I was referring to you bouncing your kids off the wall, I was using as LUDICROUS an example as I could to make my point that if you thought writing in a fictionalized way to insinuate lies was comical ~ then you probably enjoyed watching your kids bounce off the walls. I realize that it's a stretch for you to "get it", but I thought it would actually HELP you to see how this "new writing style" of yours was wrong, was not funny, and ~ as you experienced it yourself ~ was poorly conceived.
Rarely do I "rant" about things. I love to use my verbal skills to dig and poke at those who are pompous, presumptuous, and painfully off base. This website is LOADED with those who are like that. The pure ignorance of the obvious and the desperate attribution of things people don't say as accusations of things they meant is APPALLING.
Your insinuations about my teaching style or the content of my teaching is so shallow that I know how little formal education you've actually had. Even if you have some inexplicable credentials of some kind, I can see the lack of depth and the obsession with pandering that characterizes your associations and comments.
My interest in this website is merely to offer some of my writings for criticism and comment. I don't mind the banging and the clanging because I can see the desperation and limited skills behind it. However, for the deliberate mischaracterization and attempted abuse of my credentials, abilities, and status by those like Walt and Republicae are, in my opinion, REPREHENSIBLE. They come from men who should KNOW BETTER, but who insist upon IGNORING it.
I've only meant to offer you some suggestions to make better contact with readers ~ shorten, sharpen, evaluate, and (in your case) EDIT. You just spray this stuff out here like a page from an encyclopedia yet it has as much veracity as a tabloid.
I don't like your attacks on Obama, and I don't like your insistence that the news media is hiding things or that those who disagree with you don't respect the Constitution. If a few aggressive metaphors ruffle your feathers, then maybe you should change your tune.
I don't expect you to change your tune, because I think you've only got ONE NOTE to play.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-11-01 22:38:34
Dear MC -
As you like it. I understand you use your wit and ability to poke at others. I don't mind, and believe it or not I appreciate criticism. I would appreciate it if you backed up your assumptions and document with the facts as you see them. Your return comments have a point, but they do lack substance.
As far as my education, I barely managed to pass grade school, my IQ is less than 100, and obviously you agree my writings skills are crap. (In Feb/Mar they were far worse!) So could you please focus on the how-do-I-educate-this-misled-person part and spare me the personal slander and barbs?
I do realize I presume a little on your education, but you do claim to be an economics professor. It is hard to imagine someone with your writing style teaching others any other way.
Also you do not need to use capital letters when writing back to me, I am capable of reading the entire sentence. Go easy on that CAPS LOCK, YOU MIGHT NEED IT LATER. :)
I happen to like my "ONE NOTE". Its my personal version of freedom. Do you want to take that away from me? Do you want to take away my freedom of speech? How about you explain why.
If you actually read the book, its not nearly as much of an attack on Barack as you might think. Like, its surely not going to influence the election either way, as well as my article on the Berg lawsuit. Its more of a velvet glove on an iron fist directed at the media. I look forward to your future articles in defense of Senator Obama. Even though I somewhat mock the terms, if he is your "One", your "Messiah" that's for you to decide, not I sir.
The 'Baloney much?' comment was not directed at you, but at the premise of the book you wrote your article on. I agree that it is healthy to have alternative p.o.v's published within the media; it is a freedom that some in the world are still in a position to envy.
To address your comment that my mind is 'shutting like a clam' I am not, by believing that Obama displays traits of someone who has creamed off the best of the multicultural experience- an Obamamaniac. I am a European, who during the primaries became fascinated by all the key players in the US election, I loved Obama, Clinton and McCain as I had read a lot about all the candidates. I only, as many Europeans have done, became allergic to the McCain/Palin ticket, due to McCain abadoning ship on his apparant principles, and the poor early performance of Palin, her poisonous rhetoric and her not-so-subtle instinct to desecularise the constitution if she gets her mitts on it. The thought of her as being the leader of a super power is frightful.
I can see Obama is not perfect, I doubt he will do half of what he says on the tin- all politicians promise what they will never fulfill purely to get votes in their hats. But I do like the guy, he is calm and intelligent. As an atheist I have only frowned upon his involvement with Wright.
I have not read the book by Sailor, I am repelled by the contentious and course title and your review indicates that the author has taken a mostly negative tact towards Obama's racial identity. I also looked at the website it can be found on - Vdare. Many of the articles on Vdare seem to represent the intellectual heart of the American far-right.
More so, many of Steven Sailors vdare articles go beyond the grain on conservativism, and many have a real anti-black, and also an anti-immigration agenda. Purely from what I read, his articles are the sort of thing I would only take seriously if I was a Galtonian racialist, which I am not. He is very taken with the differences and measurements of the 'races.'
Why would I purchase a book from such an evidentally biased source?
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-11-02 07:31:43
Dear mello_yello -
My fault, that clam comment should not have been directed at you. I hope you accept my apologies. I did misread your "baloney much" comment.
"Why would I purchase a book from such an evidentally biased source?"
Umm right now its a free download, and I am not promoting the book, just letting people know it exists and I deem it worthwhile, especially at the cost of zero Euros. As far as "evidentially biased" Sailer actually does not take too much of a political bent but he is quite critical - in all honesty, I would reserve your judgement unless you read the book. FYI my views are not far right or far left (if you equate that to Demo/Rep), to label them with a word, they are libertarian, which is not on the current "mainstream" US political map.
"I have not read the book by Sailor, I am repelled by the contentious and course title and your review indicates that the author has taken a mostly negative tact towards Obama's racial identity."
Coarse title perhaps, but half-blood is an accurate description between an American and African. Note that Sailer's second half of the title (Story of Race and Inheritance) is the same as Barack own chosen name for his 1995 book Dreams of My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. What is highly irregular is that Barack really did not know his father - he abandoned his wife and child to go off to Harvard, and had a pretty self-destructive life, which included lots of drunk driving and involvement in the socialist movement in Kenya. Barack since his 20s has had what appears to be a very disciplined life - no womanizing outside of his marraige, no boozing, very focused, with very polished public speaking skills.
I did enjoy learning some things about Barack that I found to be quite positive - I am sorry since my article does focus on the negative perhaps, but look at his 5th grade photo! How could a kid with that cute of a smile turn out to be a bad person? :) And it seems he has really found a kindred spirit in his wife.
My conclusion for now is he is certainly not a morally evil person, he does want what he sees as best for America, but his failure (already) to heed the Constitution on subjects like preemptive war have made me his political opponent, not to mention my disagreements with what I perceive to be his vision. Oh well :)
I appreciate your comments, thanks for writing back!
The biggest delusion you, and many of your cohorts have on this website, is that anyone wants to take things AWAY from you. You plaintively asked: "Do you want to take that (your one note tune) away from me?"
What we want (at least, I want) is for you to ADD TO your viewpoint, to OPEN IT UP. No one wants to take anything except that bitterness, anger, and resentment away from you. You are such a narrow tunnel, such a dead end road, such an obstinate objection that people (like me, anyway) just walk away from you. It's like a rabid dog. If you can't HELP the dog, then you just might as well get away from him before he infects you!
The capital letters I use, and boldface, are as much a part of my writing style as my metaphors. I am emphasizing points that I don't want people to miss, AND I am providing placeholders for ease in reading my articles. If you look at a looooooong page of unembellished print, it fatigues you in just thinking about reading through it. But, if it has places where you can pause to think, or refer to later, it makes the piece more approachable.
You hear the shrill sound of emphasis as criticism or exasperation, but that's because what you're reading digs and pokes at you because you are often on the WRONG side of what I'm saying. In fact, it's the emphasis that someone like you should be paying attention to!
If nothing else, I would like to OPEN the eyes of you hostile, anti-government, tax-resenting, politically-bigotted, and intolerant (so-called) Libertarians so that you could JOIN the rest of the world. But, you're so SELFISH, RESENTFUL, BELLIGERENT, and UNCOMPROMISING that people (like me) just turn away from you. So, instead of REACHING out to persuade and influence people with whom you disagree, you're just pushing YOURSELVES farther into the fringe.
I realize that many on this website are LONERS anyway. They have no interest in being MAINSTREAM, and enjoy the cloak of rejection that society imposes on them anyway. Probably were that way in school, and are that way in business or their homes as well. Irrascible, constantly bickering ~ out of step with friends, neighbors, and co-workers.
But, we each choose our own path. You can go alone, or you can go with others.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-11-02 23:00:30
Dear MC –
Well, what if the path is to go over the CLIFF with the rest of the LEMMINGS? For instance, I know we disagree on fiat currency, and you brush all contrary evidence aside, but if you can for a moment suppose the Austrian side is correct, well that puts my side in a difference perspective. As for me, I am admittedly a bit of a LOOSE CANNON. Professionally, it has worked well for me. I’ve solved problems that were deemed unsolvable and had failed the efforts of people who were, quite frankly, far more intelligent than I. Perhaps what you would find even stranger is that I somehow managed to work with others without a whole lot of bickering, although I have to say if my colleagues were ALL like YOU I would probably have a problem. (that was a joke)
I do appreciate your comments, give them some thought, and I especially admire your literary talent for metaphors, and see your point on using Caps for emphasis like THIS. I suppose with the Caps Lock thing, it just doesn’t have much effect on me, probably since I read a lot.
Feel free to keep writing back to me but if you don’t MIND, please attach your wonderful metaphors to well, some FACTS. It’s unfortunate, but I do typically want as many facts as possible before making decisions.
I see you’ve also fallen into another misinterpretation, but to really understand me you have to know me in person. I realize that some of my writings sound quite militant/angry, or as you note BELLIGERENT and UNCOMPROMISING. (I disagree with the other 2 adjectives you used.) However, I myself am not. I simply write in a voice designed to illustrate my POINT in what is sometimes a FORCEFUL manner. I sometimes even try to ENTERTAIN. However, I do put forth my LOGIC and I do LINK to my EVIDENCE, so one has all they need to rip it apart. And to do so, metaphors by THEMSELVES just DON’T work, try reading Mao’s Little Red Book, that’s chock full of metaphors, but doesn’t sway me or most others who have read it. Also, the comments/metaphors that you write that have the end effect of insulting typically BACKFIRE, and cause me to not treat your comments as very MATURE or CONSTRUCTIVE. I suspect some other columnists experience the same issues with your comments.
So if you WANT and have a couple SPARE hours, try taking even a brief BROWSE through the book, and then tell me what you THINK. If not, then go ahead and treat me like, as you wrote, a “RABID DOG” – stay away so you don’t catch my rabies! {ruff ruff ruff} (another joke, hope you dont mind)
I support Barack, but you can delve into an individuals mind and be able to predict a person's actions and thoughts. Psychology has progressed to the point to where this is absolutely possible. There's evidence -Google it, that the US government did a psych. profile on Hitler, they were able to determine that if the war started to tilt in the favour of the allies, basically, Hitler would kill himself. They also revealed that he was a sexual deviant who had a relationship with his -I think, cousin or niece. Anyway, my point is that it is absolutely possible to delve into peoples' heads but I doubt that mister, what is it? Sailers or something? Is qualified to come to any conclusions about Obama's psychology and be taken seriously. It's pretty ridiculous actually, that's why he was giving the book away free!!!
Name three credible Obama supporters who believe he is, as you put it, "The Messiah." The accusation is laughable were you not so serious. Sorry to wake you, but all that jibberish comes from the other side, your side, who cling religiously to the notion Obama is really the anti-Christ. For Christ's sake, put away childish things.
This isn't important, but I had edited my opinion, yet the original, unedited version got printed. How so? Here is my rewrite, which aimed to tone down my original a notch, not that it matters:
Dear Jake,
Name a credible Obama supporter who believes he is, so you say, "The Messiah." The accusation is laughable were its fans not so serious. Sorry, but all that jibberish comes from the side who cling religiously to the notion Obama is really the anti-Christ. For Christ's sake, put away childish things.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-12-07 22:33:54
Dear Freel -
Thanks for your comment. I note I used lowercase-m messiah in my article (not Messiah, which you I suppose you mean a God or Jesus Christ.) By this, I mean that many of his supporters believe he will solve everything - the economy, their jobs, their education, our wars, etc etc. Or that he will just help everyone. I do have friends who are otherwise very lucid people that believe this. Try reading my article above titled "Is Barack Obama the One?"
Whatever happened to "God helps those who help themselves" ??
Keep in mind this article (and the title) is basically my review of Sailor's book. I actually believe that Obama is a good man who truly means to do well. Perhaps we agree on this? Unfortunately, that has no bearing whatsoever on my requirement for a president - that they abide by their presidential oath to obey and protect the Constitution. And good intentions do not necessarily mean good consequences.
As far as Barack being the anti-Christ, I am not religious so I do not believe in such "childish things" anyways.
Jake
PS I mean you no offense, really thanks for your comment. I still hold that you would probably learn a lot from reading Sailor's book. He is no Obama fan, but he is fairly evenhanded for much of the book.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
Sailer’s version is of a boy wracked by an identity crisis of a double abandonment; his father’s abandonment of his mother and him at age two so he could attend Harvard (little Barack would just see his dad once more at age 10), his mother’s abandonment of him in Hawaii to pursue academic studies in Indonesia. America’s Half-Blood Prince’s version is of a man who grew up not knowing who he is, whether he is "black enough," and whose main skill in life seems to be finding a way to "fail upwards." The picture is painted of a child and man who self-torments himself with an identity crisis, and creates racial identity delusions that he then proceeds to bludgeon his sophisticated mind with. Sailer suggests that in a way, even his wife may just be a psychological and political salve for this grievous self-inflicted wound. It is ironic that the "abandoned" Barack then chose to disown the only pseudo-paternal relationship it seems he ever had, with the now infamous Reverend Wright.