Do you remember when Pastor Rick Warren asked Barack Obama in a
2008 interview what his position was on same-sex marriage? Obama, with a
straight face, answered, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man
and a woman. For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God is in the
mix.”
Today, of course, he says simply that he’s “evolved on the
issue” — again, with a straight face. But his longtime aide David Axelrod
explains it quite differently in his book,Believer: My Forty Years in Politics, when he
writes that Obama “misled Americans for his own political benefit when he
claimed in the 2008 election to oppose same-sex marriage for religious
reasons.”
Then, alluding to another interview in which Obama reiterated
his opposition to same-sex marriage, Axelrod says that “Obama … admitted
privately that he was not very good at bullshitting.” It’s hard to believe that
the most egomaniacal person ever to occupy the Oval Office underestimated his
own ability to deceive people, given that today he is the undisputed bullshit
champion of the world.
This kind of lying and deception is the key to the stealth approach
to revolution. Self-proclaimed communist Van Jones explained the stealth
approach to revolution candidly when he said, in a 2005 interview, that he made
the decision to stop openly pursuing his Marxist agenda and pursue it by being
“willing to forego the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the deep
satisfaction of radical ends.”
Jones’s choice was a rational
one because lying about your true beliefs and intentions is much easier and
much more efficient than scaring people with talk of violent revolution.
Vladimir Lenin was clear about this when he said, “To tell the truth is a petty
bourgeois habit, whereas for us to lie is justified by our objectives.” In
other words, if your objectives are noble (by your standards), then any and all
methods are morally justified — including violence.
Night after night we hear
dolts like Bill O’Reilly and Greta Van Susteren appear totally perplexed when they
ask questions like, “Why in the world would President Obama do something like
that if it’s so obvious to everyone that it’s harmful to America?” or “Is he
clueless, or does he simply believe that Americans can’t handle the truth?” or
“What in the world was the president thinking?”
The reason for such dopey comments is that they do
not understand that lies and deception are normal, everyday tools for those on
the radical left. Violence, of course, is their number-one tool of choice, but
they realize that too much overt violence can blow their stealth cover.
Dr. John Drew, who taught political science and economics at
Williams College, was a classmate of Barack Obama’s during his years at
Occidental College. Drew has written and spoken extensively about Obama from a
firsthand perspective, though the media has virtually ignored his words.
In a 2012 interview, Drew told columnist Leon Puissegur, “I
perceive Obama as being an out and out liar, hiding his real views from the
American people. I think those views are deeply objectionable to most people
and I am shocked that more media attention hasn’t been focused on vetting Obama
and getting down to brass tacks about how he really is.”
Drew, who himself belonged to a Marxist organization at
Occidental College, a group that included Barack Obama, has said that Obama
made it clear that he was looking forward to “an imminent social revolution,
literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class
and institute a socialist utopia in the United States.”
When others in the group concluded that a stealth approach was
more likely to succeed, Obama became angry and continued to insist that violent
revolution was necessary. Sorry about that Bill … Greta … Geraldo … and a
majority of other media people, even at Fox News.
Clearly, at some juncture along his angry path, Obama finally became
convinced, as Van Jones did, that the most practical approach to fundamentally
changing the United States of America was a stealth revolution. Where and how
this conversion to “forego the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the
deep satisfaction of radical ends” came about I have no way of knowing, because
Obama’s past is so well hidden.
But in his autobiography, Obama makes his conversion clear when
he says that he “felt like a spy behind enemy lines” when he worked a low-level
corporate job for a short time. Since then, by developing a remarkable ability
to turn white guilt to his advantage, Obama has managed to go from community
organizer (i.e., unemployed rabble-rouser) to Illinois state senator, to United
States senator, to the president of the United States.
The result is that after seven-and-a-half years in office, 99
percent of the media continue to ignore his nonstop anti-capitalist,
anti-American, anti-white, anti-constitutional, anti-police, anti-military,
anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-Marxist words and actions — both past and
present. It is truly a phenomenon never before seen in American politics.
The reason I’ve brought all this to the forefront once again is
because Obama’s third term (euphemistically referred to as Hillary Clinton’s
first term) is rapidly going down the drain. That was made even more evident by
the electricity in the air at the Republican National Convention.
Is Obama so egomaniacally delusional that he does not realize
this (just as he was not able to see that his campaigning for many Democratic
candidates in 2014 would cause them to lose), or is he going to pull another
rabbit out of his Marxist hat in an effort to derail Trump’s inevitable
victory?
I thought about this when for the first time I
can recall, he gave an unequivocal condolence speech about the Baton Rouge
police killings. It’s worth noting that Hillary gave pretty much the same
speech to the NAACP, but pivoted after a few minutes and, flinging her grimy
little fists in the air, shrieked pandering remarks to the audience about
blacks being victims … victims … victims.
If Obama and Hillary can mask their hatred and drop the radical
pose — if they can B.S. the public into believing they are, at heart, American
flag pin wearers, that they love the police, that they intend to crack down
on radical Islamic terrorism (yes, actually say the
words), that they intend to finally put a stop to illegal immigration, that
they are pro-life (sort of), and more — they could conceivably stealth their
way into an Obama third term.
It’s a scary thought, but I’m counting on
Obama’s incredible hubris, which makes it almost impossible for him to admit
that he’s ever been wrong about anything. But even if Obama and Hillary did the
most masterful job imaginable in lying to, and deceiving, much of the American
public, the polls would probably still show they are going to lose the
election.
In which case, my one concern would be that
Obama might, in desperation, resort to the number-one weapon of the radical
left: violence. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen, but with all the violent upheaval
already taking place cities throughout America, it’s certainly something to
think about.
