• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Note: This is Part 2 of a three-part series entitled “The justification for lying.” Read Part 1, “Obama’s tip from Vladimir Lenin.”

As I said in Part 1 of this article, I can think of at least three ways that the Obama presidency might play out. Let’s examine them one at a time.

The Clinton Option

When the HillBillies made it to the White House – by proving to be the most adept politicians in U.S. history when it came to playing the Lenin card (i.e., lying as a justifiable means to achieving their ends) – everyone thought communism was just around the corner for the U.S. It didn’t happen … not while they were in office.

Why? Because the Clintons surprised even their most ardent supporters – especially their most ardent supporters – by shunning left-wing revolutionary ideas in favor of hobnobbing with the rich and famous. In a very short period of time, they went from middle-aged flower children to Mr. and Mrs. Cosmopolitan.

To be sure, the Clintons paid token homage to America’s relentless march toward socialism, but, once in office, they quickly abandoned their radical teenybopper supporters. They also managed to forget about their “deeply felt” concern for those at the low end of the income spectrum once they realized that great wealth awaited them on the other side of the presidency. And they were right … to the tune of more than $100 million to date, and they’ve barely gotten started.

I guess it’s possible that Obama could take the Clinton route, but it’s highly doubtful. For one thing, I’m convinced that Michelle the Malicious wears the pants in the Obama family, and she clearly is overwhelmed with anger and envy.

I can’t see her allowing hubby to abandon their dreams of overthrowing the white establishment, even while she dines on caviar and lobster. And Obama himself has said that he was warned, at a very young age, not to be tempted to “sell out” once he made it to the upper echelons of power.

I guess anything is possible, but the Clinton Option is longest of long shots for the Obama presidency.

The Pelosi-Reid Facilitator Option

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have spent their entire careers dreaming of this moment in time. They have their own agenda for moving the country from its current position of center-right or center-left (depending upon whom you believe) to far left. I don’t see them as part of a worldwide conspiracy, but merely as mentally challenged, power-hungry socialists.

Do they understand that their vote-buying policies necessitate a never-ending need for taxing, borrowing and printing “money”? Do they understand that, ultimately, these policies will impoverish most Americans and lead to anarchy? Do they understand that the only way to deal with anarchy is to impose a dictatorship?

In all honesty, I don’t know what Pelosi, Reid and their left-wing cohorts understand or don’t understand. Sometimes they appear to be smart but malevolent. At other times they appear to be stupid but well-meaning. And there are those times when they appear to be both stupid and malevolent. But one combination they never display is being both smart and benevolent.

Having said this, there is at least one thing about left-wing radicals that I am certain of: They care nothing about the masses – particularly the poorest of the masses. If they did, they would not use them as pawns and props to achieve their political ends. (Think Jimmy Carter and John Edwards.)

In any event, what Obama will come to realize very quickly is that without Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the left-wing power structure behind him, he has no power. So, even if he wanted to move to the center, he would find it almost impossible to do so. Regardless of who the real Barack Obama turns out to be, he will have to be satisfied, at best, with a delicate balance of power shared with his left-wing supporters in Congress.

The True-Believer Option

The True-Believer Option is the most likely way the Obama presidency will unfold. Obama played the Lenin card almost perfectly throughout his campaign, lying about virtually everything – so much so that one could justifiably argue that he deserves to replace the HillBillies in “The Guinness Book of World Records” as No. 1 in this highly skilled art.

Unlike the Clintons, however, I believe Obama is a true believer when it comes to overthrowing the aristocracy (i.e., everyone who makes over $42,000 a year) and feeding cake to those he deems to be poor. And should he ever start getting delusions about becoming beloved by all and thinking about becoming a centrist, as I said earlier, he most assuredly will be kept on his revolutionary toes by his perpetually angry wife. Her share-the-pie remark was not a gaffe; it was pure, unadulterated GAVEC (guiltism, angerism, villainism, envyism, covetism) welling up inside her.

But even without his malevolent mate, I see Obama cut from the same revolutionary cloth as Fidel Castro. He is, of course, the newer, slicker model – coat and tie instead of fatigues, soft-spoken rather than hysterical screaming, and a master at faking patriotism with a twisted grin on his face. He would have made Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky proud.

In describing what has happened to apathetic Americans in recent decades, people often use a rather gruesome analogy: If you boil a frog slowly, he won’t realize his demise is near until it’s too late. To advance his Marxist agenda, Obama probably would prefer the frog-boiling approach. Nevertheless, I think he’ll opt for moving forward quickly – and in Part 3 of this series, I’ll tell you why.

Read Part 1, “Obama’s tip from Vladimir Lenin”


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.