Thursday, September 24, 2009

Michael Ledeen on Obama: Likes Tyrants, Dislikes America

Michael Ledeen at National Review Online notes that Obama follows a pattern of elites. Who dislike freedom for the masses, and worship foreign tyrants.

I think that he rather likes tyrants and dislikes America. I think he'd like to be more powerful, I think he is trying to get control over as much of our lives as he can, so that he can put an end to the annoying tumult of our public life. As when he said (about health care) to the Congress, "Okay, you've talked enough, now it's time to do the right thing (my thing)." And he's trying to end American power in the outside world. He's saying "I'm going to stop us, before we kill again."


This is not surprising. The American Thinker has a post noting that celebrity journalist/author Christopher Anderson, in his book "Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage," confirms that Bill Ayers essentially wrote "Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance." Due largely, as an anonymous reader e-mailed me, to Obama's laziness and procrastination (the deadline was looming).

Obama indeed loves Tyrants, as his speech to the UN apologizing for the Nation he leads, even existing, makes clear. He also wants to be one of the tyrants himself. His protege, ousted would-be Honduran dictator Manuel Zelaya is claiming that "Israelis" are torturing him with mind-control rays and toxic gases. This is the man that Obama (and his fellow Democrats) are pressing to be restored as proto-Dictator in Honduras.

Even a hard-left traditional Communist, if suddenly vaulted to the Presidency, would pursue a military build up. Neither Stalin, nor Mao, nor the Kims, Jong-Il and Il-Sung, were known for their pacifism and disarmament. Obama fears the American people, particularly the White Majority population whom he instinctively hates and loathes (made clear in both his books where he writes about his innate dislike of most Whites). Obama notes (in the highly liberal and leftist academic settings that was Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard) in "Dreams From My Father" that if he "made no sudden moves White people would not be alarmed." He writes of being interviewed by a fat, middle aged White guy for a position and his internal loathing of the man which he admits was based entirely on his race. Or rather, Ayers wrote those passages for him, and Obama did not object. Ayers wrote, and Obama accepted, the passage where he dumps a White girl he is in love with because he did not want "any more White blood in his family." All passages in a book he released under his own name, he can hardly claim he was misquoted.

Even more intriguing, Obama notes with approval his father's desire for radical wealth redistribution, particularly from Indian entrepreneurs in East Africa who ran restaurants and so on in Nairobi. He reacts with rage when eating at one of them with a half sister, noting the absences of native Kenyans of African descent, and mostly White tourists and Indian-extraction businessmen. His solution which he mentions during this passage was permanent wealth transfer to make Black Kenyans the permanent "aristocracy." That this could only be done with all levers of power in society belonging to a benevolent dictator. This, then is the debased "Volk Marxism" of Obama, aiming not at a classic Communist Dictatorship but rather one of race and ethnicity similar to the Assad dictatorship in Syria, based on the Alawite clans.

This has profound implications for America. The Alawis were never more than 20% of the Syrian population, and are widely believed by Sunnis (and some Shia) to be heretics or non-Muslims. The Assad regime rules by military power, and nothing else. The Alwawis being very well represented in the military. Obama's power centers are in the Black Community (about 12.5-12.8% of the population), the SWPL subgroup, wealthy elites, Hispanics, and Single Women (who voted for Obama 70-29).

Obama clearly would like to be America's Vizier, ruling as a tyrant over the messy American people who prefer their freedom, the majority of whom he actively hates based on their race, but he faces two key obstacles.

The first, as the American Thinker post notes (and as an exceptionally astute reader e-mailed me last night), is that Obama is lazy. Obama's laziness has led him to outsource most everything in the White House. Health Care, economic, "Green" policy, and more are being led by Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, who have different objectives than Obama, and don't care about his popularity as much as they do feathering their own nests in corrupt bargains with insider power-brokers. This laziness extends to Obama's failure to check the credentials of lunatics like Van Jones, a 9/11 Truther who believes "White People cause pollution" and avowed Communist, or Cass Sunstein, Obama's Regulatory Czar who wants to turn Americans into Vegans and allow rats to sue homeowners to prevent them from trapping them in their houses. Sunstein even believes cows, horses, and pigs have more legal rights than human babies and toddlers.

Obama, through laziness, has failed to produce results favorable to the vast middle class of America, almost all of it White. He was elected in part in reaction to the economic melt-down and the inability of the Bush Administration or McCain to promise anything that even seemed like it would work. Obama asked for and got a huge stimulus bill that only propped up State and local government employment, temporarily, and a slight increase in federal employment. Meanwhile mass layoffs have increased 25% from July alone and unemployment still increasing, Obama's laziness has had a price. He's not only failed to deliver anything to the Middle Class, he's been seen as both lazy and arrogant in focusing on things Americans view as low-priority: healthcare, and "Green" Cap and Trade. Allowing the National Organization of Women and other groups to refashion the stimulus bill to simply prop up female employment in health care, welfare, education, and the like did him no favors. Obama, and Obama alone, single-handedly, has created a backlash consisting of outraged Middle Class White Americans, who represent about 70% or so of the country, enraged by his policies. Which they view, quite accurately, as a means of permanent wealth transfer to connected elites and non-White groups. Wealth transfers of course, that promise to make them poor. Machiavelli advised in the Prince to kill enemies rather than make them poor, and that a man would forgive the murder of his father sooner than the theft of his wealth.

Obama's laziness, in failing to produce anything of value to the White Middle Class, and threatening to make them considerably poorer, has produced permanent enemies. Meanwhile, Obama repeats the things he enjoys, giving campaign speeches full of hot air and empty promises, and "being important" in various meetings with various leaders.

Obama's other weakness is the core of his support. While the combined total of Blacks, Hispanics, SWPL, elites, and Single Women (plus a considerable amount of married women, who voted 50-47 for Obama) means Obama is unlikely to poll below 40%, no matter how bad he performs as President, this is a group by and large that lacks the ability to create a military dictatorship like the Alawite Sect in Syria. America is a very large country, both physically and population-wise. Single women, SWPL folks out of LATFH.com, and even paramilitary groups such as the New Black Panther Party or Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam (Farrakhan is a Chicago neighbor of Obama) are unlikely to create a military junta using mass-force to kill or imprison lots of Americans to make Obama a tyrant. Clearly, Obama wishes to become a tyrant, one ruling America on behalf of its enemies. But America is not Syria, nor Argentina, nor Spain, nor Italy, nor Germany (Obama's models of "ideal societies" particularly Iran, Syria and Italy under Mussolini). [Note his chin always juts out like Il Duce's, and the stylization of his posters echoes Mussolinis in eerie similarity.] Obama lacks the number of men under arms willing to kill fellow Americans to make him dicatator, in sufficient numbers in a vast, sprawling nation, to be effective.

The US military generally loathes Obama, though they will obey all lawful orders from the Commander in Chief, even those they despise. Obama, giving a lawful order to surrender or retreat in Afghanistan, will be obeyed. Though bitterly. Obama, giving a lawful order to destroy all nuclear weapons or follow policies that render them useless in the case of an attack, will be obeyed. Though many officers will resign and Obama will face a huge political firestorm, with a middle class fearing that they are being set up for attack. Much of the White middle class does not reside in major cities like New York City but does work there during the day. The much derided by hipsters "bridge and tunnel crowd" who made up most of the victims in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Obama CAN get all lawful, legitimate orders obeyed.

However, his obvious desire to "never let a crisis go to waste" and create himself as America's Vizier in the aftermath of a nuclear attack by non-state actors on America (or even perhaps an attack by Iran or Pakistan or North Korea) has a serious problem. The US military will NOT obey unlawful, unconstitutional orders. Such as making "insulting Islam illegal," or outlawing Christian and Jewish worship, or making Islam the official state religion, or any number of things Obama would propose as America's Vizier in time of crisis, as opposed to retaliating for a nuclear attack. With an enraged US military, highly regarded by most Americans as the only institution that is effective and relatively uncorrupt, it is likely that Obama, given clear unconstitutional orders (such as interment of White middle class people in Concentration Camps per Bill Ayers, his ghostwriter and close friend), would be removed. To acclaim from the White Middle Class, much of the non-Washington political class, small businesses, and others not aligned with Obama's power base. This was the problem for Obama's protege Manuel Zelaya, who proposed to make Honduras a Venezuelan satellite and thus alienated even his own party, and got himself removed from office for clearly unconstitutional orders.

Obama, not being American (culturally), raised outside the US during his character forming years, knowing only wealthy White radicals as non-Black associates, has no idea of the depth and breadth of his support. While Blacks, Hispanics, SWPL folks, and Single Women have passionate support for him, his opponents have evenly matched passionate opposition to him (largely self-created by his economic proposals). Obama does have the ability to make much of White America significantly poorer, and uncertain about their incomes. He has the ability to disarm the US, with lawful orders under the Constitution, though it will create an even bigger fight. Already, Petraeus has reacted to Obama's dithering on Afghanistan (in advance of a surrender/retreat there) by demanding more troops, backing McChrystal's demand for a surge in Afghanistan. Despite Obama's orders to keep quiet about troop requests.

Obama, because of a fawning media that does not report bad news (and is largely ignored by most Americans because of the failure to report actual news), a circle that has nothing but contempt for the White Middle Class majority (one Obama himself shares), and a profound overestimation of his political and military strength, is on a collision course. His reflexive desire to back America's enemies and punish its friends, and weaken America's defenses and military can get millions of Americans killed. Indeed, Obama not being stupid, hopes generally for that to happen, though he has no specific plan in mind just the general hope that inevitably, it will materialize. Thus providing him the "crisis" he wants to fundamentally reshape America into a variation of his father's dreams for Kenya.

However that "crisis" will not be enough for Obama to get his way. America is too divided, his forces not strong enough, and the anger of the populace against the elites growing not subsiding. America's "tyranny of distance" will hurt Obama in the way that the vast space of Russia neutralized the Wehrmacht's superiority in tanks, artillery, men, and airplanes.


As Ledeen notes, this is not merely Obama's failing. This is the failing of the entire elite, frustrated that their enormous amounts of money and fame don't translate into total control over every aspect of people's lives. Hotair reports that environmentalists (and the Washington Post) are on a campaign to force toilet paper manufacturers to use only recycled paper, which has the general consistency of sandpaper. This is the attribute of a degraded, debased, and debauched elite which wishes to reduce the people to the position of serfdom. After all, many of these elites are "famous." Laurie David, ex-wife of Seinfeld and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" creator/producer/star Larry David, tours the nation with Sheryl Crow lecturing college students on environmentalism. Jetting from city to city, when not living in one of her two mansions. [She was recently fined for Wetlands violations in construction in her Martha's Vineyard mansion.] Why shouldn't they control every aspect of ordinary people's lives? They're famous! Which means they are providence's elect, since only worthless people lack fame and fortune.

If Obama wants to be America's Vizier, the Sheryl Crows and Laurie Davids are right behind him in the pursuit of that goal. Tragically, all he will do is get a lot of Americans killed, for his own vanity and hatred. And that of his backers. All for nothing.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

There is nothing in the world more annoying than having to listen to what some dumb bitch thinks just because she married a rich guy. Especially when she isn't even married to that guy any more. Arianna Huffington comes to mind.

Grim said...

Great post. I agree anon, all these people who love to tell us how to live our lives are worse than 16 century french aristocrats. I hope they all burn.

Talleyrand said...

Grim,

I suspect you're going to get your wish. It is only a matter of time.

It amazes me how complacent some people are. They don't realize what's coming.

Hell_Is_Like_Newark said...

Over the years confronting, tolerating, and observing the Statist inclined, I find they fall under 3 groups:

1. Those who think they will be in charge (the elites described in Whiskey's post).
2. Those who are lazy, vapid, stupid and want someone to take care of them and make all their decisions for them. Liberty is of little value compared to security and sloth.
3. Those who want to see the world burn.

I have noticed a disturbing number of people who fall into category 1 and 3. Heaven help us if those types ever gain total power.

A.J. Travis said...

I have said it before and I'll say it again:

When I enlisted in the military, I took an oath to, "Support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic."

It does not say protect the President or Bill Ayres, or Reverend Wright. And it is quite possible that Obama and his minions, may well be Domestic Enemies.

When I left the military, nobody released me from my oath. So I (and every other veteran) am still bound under sacred oath to the US Constitution.

We all need to remember that, as I feel our oaths may soon be put to the test.

A.J. Travis said...

BTW- Swearing an oath to the Constitution, NOT the President, is the very thing that compels the US military members to disobey unlawful orders.

This is one of the many great things that differentiate the US military from other inferior armies.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

Whiskey,

Even the SWPL's single women executive professionals are having Democrat's economic policies hit them hard.

See:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1005/taxes-financial-aid-college-roughing-up-middle-class.html


When Work Doesn't Pay For The Middle Class

Janet Novack and Stephane Fitch, 09.16.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Forbes Magazine dated October 05, 2009

Middle-class folks are finding that a raise or second paycheck doesn't always mean living better. Time to work less?

Eighteen months after being laid off, Judith Lederman, a 50-year-old divorcee who lives in Scarsdale, N.Y., is ready to consider jobs paying half the $120,000 she earned as a publicity manager at Lord & Taylor. That's mostly because she's desperate, but it also makes sense when you consider how this country punishes work effort. While the first $60,000 of her income would be lightly taxed, the next $60,000 would be hit with what is in effect a 79% tax rate. Given a choice between a part-time or easy job paying $60,000 and a demanding, stress-ridden job paying $120,000, Lederman would be wise to take the former. In the tougher job she would be contributing twice as much to the economy. But she wouldn't be doing herself much good. It would make more sense to take it easy and spend more time with her high school senior daughter, Casey.

How did a middle-class single mom wind up with a 79% marginal tax rate? At $120,000 she would pay $16,500 a year more in federal and state taxes, wouldn't qualify for the five-year $12,000-a-year cut in her mortgage payments she's applying for and would be eligible for $19,000 a year less in need-based college financial aid.


>snip<

Anonymous said...

Guys,
While Whiskey's writing is very thought provoking, I just just hope you're wrong.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

Whiskey,

Repeat after me:

"Nutball Regime Becomes More So Under Pressure‏."

Iran's current Mullah regime is a perfect example of this.

Iranian president's wild rhetoric was and is addressed to a domestic audience, i.e., that it concerned domestic dominance games, and that the actors do not conceive of the outside world as real, let alone able to influence events inside Iran.

Similarly Pres. Obama's inner circle cannot see the the rest of America or the outside world as anything other than the Democratic power machine that is Hyde Park/Chicago politics.

Neither America nor the outside world are Hyde Park, but no one will tell the King that he is without a real robe and naked.

I had expected that by 2012 the Democrats would be pandering to the life-style police as a means of appealing to their base. As in, again, Nutso regimes become more so under pressure like:

1) "Mommy, a Democrat stole my corn-dog!"

2) "We're supposed to use what instead of toilet-paper?"

The speed at which they have already gotten there with soft toilet paper is down right scary.

What the Obama Administration and the Leftie Democrats in Congress are planning to do via using executive EPA environmental regulation for CO2 emissions is far worse than sand paper like toilet paper.

If the EPA creates and applies CO2 regulations via a superfund toxic waste style litigation system based on CO2 emissions. The economic impact will be thermonuclear.

For instance, if a Federal judge agrees that CO2 emissions are making polar bears an endangered species, EVERY CONSTRUCTION, BUSINESS OR MANUFACTURING PROJECT EVERYWHERE will have to go through the an EPA endangered species evaluation.

Regulatory uncertainty combined with unlimited economic damages will drive the price of any land to zero, no matter how much people want to use it.

California and some other Blue states will of course, add more CO2regulatory over burden on to what the Feds do.

This would tube land values nation wide as no one could effectively value anything with both economic uncertainty and unlimited economic damages.

The upshot of such a economic regime would kill the Endangered Species act in the long term, but would feed Democratic interest groups in the short term prior to elections.

Such is the nature of nutball regimes under pressure.

njartist said...

re H_I_L_N's 1. Those who think they will be in charge (the elites described in Whiskey's post).

This rule should be expanded to include their servants (employees)who think that they will be included in the spoils.

Anonymous said...

Shocker of the century!!

Mr. "Tel-Aviv Scotch-Irish" himself reads neocon Jew Michael Ledeen and warns that Obama would outlaw "Jewish worship" (!) in addition to Christian worship and institute Islam as America's official state religion in a time of crisis.

How is the salary & benefits over at Mossad's cyber psyops unit? Decent pension?

Anonymous said...

To be honest though, the US government supporting dictators isn't a new concept.

Grim said...

I really wish the jew hating tin foil boys would die in a fire.

Anonymous said...

The problem with depending on the military keeping their oaths is the proportion that actually think about it and understand what it means.

I grant you that a majority of the white males in the military will have that attitude. A lot of others won't. I know several ex-military personnel who are all big Obama supporters, including at least one white male.

Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...

Anon-
My brother's a Navy guy who supports Obama. Because he doesn't bother to research anything. My husband saw the same thing when he was down in Mississippi for school with the AF last year-- lots of folks who supported Obama, but it was the Obama that does the Clinton thing and smiles, says whatever you want to hear, is generally totally agreeable. When his prior actions were pointed out... well, _none_ of the kids in his class liked Obama anymore.

Unlawful orders tend to do the research for you.

josh said...

Re Grim: "wish the jew hating tinfoil boys would die in a fire." We have good reason to hate jews.Sorry,Mr. Mazeltov,for now you'll have to settle for reading accounts of Palestinian babies being burned by the brave boys of the IDF. Should at least provide good masturbatory material for ya!!

Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...

Idiot troll.

Anonymous said...

"My brother's a Navy guy who supports Obama. Because he doesn't bother to research anything."

Of course he doesn't. Why bother?

Anonymous said...

Does it matter though?

Obama is just a symptom, not the cause.

How can anybody be surprised when a system as fundamentally broken as the US's 2-party state churns out yet another imbecile to ruin the country?

To get far enough to become a candidate for president of the US, you have to bend over for a few lobbies and special interest groups. So no matter how idealistic you start out, by the time you're ready a bunch of rich people who care nothing for the country or anything outside of their little group and their opinions have put a leash on you.

The US had a great political system going, but more and more it has moved towards post-Stalin Soviet Russia. We're not quite there yet, but the slowly emerging similarities are uncanny.

A small circle of politically connected elites control almost everything and give each other reach-arounds while impoverishing the people for the sake of their own ideology and in the name of the people.

And it doesn't matter whether the republicans or democrats are on top, they're just different flavors of the same crap sandwich we all have to take a bite of (this process we call "election").

So I really can't blame Obama for being a self-absorbed quasi-tyrant who spouts idealistic nonsense while one of his hands is in the average Joe's pocket and the other is covering the average Joe's mouth.

He just does what politicians nowadays do. Tigers attack and maul things, politicians ruin the country. It's the state of nature. But considering how many people were shocked and surprised after the whole Sigfried and Roy incident, what we need is just some common sense.

Anonymous said...

"Eighteen months after being laid off, Judith Lederman, a 50-year-old divorcee who lives in Scarsdale, N.Y., is ready to consider jobs paying half the $120,000 she earned as a publicity manager at Lord & Taylor."

Forbes need to get a grip. At Lord & Taylor, Lederman earned the equivalent of a new home every 18 months. There is no way that is middle class.

Rezzo said...

Dude, you risk your credibility by referencing Michael Ledeen without disclaimers or a mocking tone. Ledeen has been pretty much exposed as a fraud or a lunatic, depending on your theory as to how someone can be so outrageously wrong and stupid so consistently.