printGood column from Phyllis Schlafly dealing with Obama’s autobiography, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. In it:
Obama describes how he deliberately separated himself from his multiracial heritage in order to give himself a 100 percent black persona, different and alienated from the white world around him. Obama writes that the book is “a record of a personal, interior journey” to establish himself as “a black American.”
With his new all-black identity, Obama stews about injustices that he never personally experienced and feeds his warped worldview by withdrawing into a “smaller and smaller coil of rage.” He lives with a “nightmare vision” of black powerlessness.
Obama says that the hate doesn’t go away. “It formed a counter-narrative buried deep within each person and at the center of which stood white people – some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives.”
Obama’s worldview sees U.S. history as a consistent tale of oppressors and oppressed. He objects to the public schools because black kids are learning “someone else’s history. Someone else’s culture.”
He even criticizes his white grandparents, who worked hard to give him a privileged life. Their motives are a mystery to Obama because they came from the “landlocked center” of the United States, which, he asserts, is full of “suspicion and the potential for unblinking cruelty.”
Obama grew up in Hawaii, the exemplar of a melting pot of races, yet he sees it as a place of “aborted treaties and crippling diseases brought by the missionaries.” Although his mixed race was not a handicap in Hawaii, he whined that “we were always playing on the white man’s court … by the white man’s rules.”
More about the man who would be president in our Obama Archives.
I wonder if other countries that did not “need” an extremely destructive civil war to end slavery have such poisoned race relations. I doubt it. Chalk it up to the worst president and first dictator of the US, Abe Lincoln.
I’m with him on the no public schools thing (though he’s off base in his dislike for them, as they are the most effective tool of the left). I just happen to find everything else about him despicable. Even so, I can’t bring myself to vote McCain. After four years of an Obama idiocracy America may decide it is finished with the left for a good long while. A McCain presidency will banish freedom loving Americans to the provierbial wilderness for a decade-plus at least.
Speaking of audacity, it is audacious to have hope in failed socialist policies. Will a change in skin color make a difference?
Since Austrian Economics is continuing to be vindicated, people can start having real hope in Ron Paul for President in 2012. He knows what made this country great and can make it greater still.
My friends (including my very best friend) are left-liberals that support Obama. Truth is stranger than fiction, indeed.
(1) I agree with Jamie and Joseph Farah on the urgent need to defeat McCain and the remnants of “big government conservatism”. I will assuage my conscience by voting for Obama but pairing off with a “Blue State” Obama backer who will vote for Baldwin (endorsed by Ron Paul). (2) Funny thing that at least 50% of the history my daughter is learning in the government school from her black teacher and textbook is Afro-American history. (3) On Hawaii, I agree with Grover Cleveland’s anti-imperialistic stance and against the imperialistic, moralistic Republicans. Still – how did the imperialism have anything to do with his Kenyan bigamist dad and his white Kansas mom or the Messiah Himself?
About the Messiah, if Obama was ANY kind of Christian, he would vigorously denounce any such comparison. If he has done so, I have not heard it. Has he done so? It’s no laughing matter. Messiah in the Christian faith IS God.
Andrew,
I find it easy to be polite to social democrats, but impossible to be friends with them.
It has to do with political theory, of course, that bastardized system of state power that gets still more control over our lives.
Conservatives irk me less, because they have, on average, sounder morals and economic ideas than liberals. Of course, conservatives are blind in that they seek to conserve liberal institutions.
Liberals can be kind (sometimes; other times they are hostile to viewpoints that are not their own) to others, but they are, in the end, barbarians. I think that people would do well to be friendly to social democrats, but leery and cautious of them, and openly disapproving.
Social democrats seek the empowerment of the State to continue to further regulate our lives. They seek more control over us in order to achieve their egalitarian ideology, either it be something along the lines of socialism in the market sphere, or socialism in the private one, such as hiring policies and restrictions on gun ownership.
I don’t know if it is good to be friends with someone who would not hesitate to force you to become his subject in his political game, or his idea of what constitutes a just society. Would your friend just grit his teeth if you were persecuted in any way over the institutions that he voted for over you? Probably not.
The funny thing is that social democrats have recently said the same about me, calling me a ‘philosopher king’, something that is nonsensical. I seek to abolish political power over the individual, to ‘roll back’ the State. I don’t want to tell people what to do; I want to stop them from telling me what to do.
You can’t be a king without giving orders, and only a callous person sees people as subjects in the ideal world that he envisions.
Anyone whose politics favor theft or restriction of liberty through force cannot be trusted on a personal level. No matter what they call themselves.
In normal, peaceful times, they might seem quite civilized. When crisis hits, they will betray you.
Maybe it isn’t their fault that they were raised in an atmosphere where they never had to think about such things. Still doesn’t mean I should trust them or respect them. After all, once they know there is an alternative, and they choose evil, even if because of intellectual laziness, the end result is the same — they will betray you when the chips are down.
Took me a long time to find that out.
–John Danforth–
I grew up in rual Hawaii.
My best friend was of Puerto Rican descent. I now understand that he was also of African decent.
At the time all anyone cared about was if you were “local”.
I was born and raised there, but since I had white skin I was not welcome.
White people are not in power in Hawaiii and haven’t been for 50 years.
Thats because we’re evil, Jerry.
As I understand Obama also says he is against racial integration because it is a one-way street wherein blacks are taken up in the dominant culture (in the USA being that of whites).
Now this makes me wonder about his principles. Is his objection based on the rights of minorities per se, or is his objection based simply on the fact that blacks are expected to integrate in a white culture (in other words he would not have an objection if it was whites who were expected to itegrate in a black culture). If it is the latter he is simply a racist. If it is the former I would be justified in expecting him to voice, once he becomes the next USA president, his concerns about the Afrikaner minority in SA whose culture is being decimated and who is expected to integrate in a black culture.
Personal suspicion: Obama is so demonstrably red that most people just can’t believe it, can’t believe that even the Dems are quite that far gone.