Have any but a few of us caught on that trashing a nation’s economy might be a Marxist’s key objective in edging that nation toward totalitarian communism?

Let us be clear: In the case of the insane and impracticable paradigm of Marxism and the undeveloped thinking of those who follow it (for reasons other than acquiring power), it has been proven again and again that its adherents never believe they might be the ones who wind up in the “have nots” column – or worse. They believe either that they will be among the elite unassailable, or that this abortion of a political philosophy will somehow prove to be equitable and effective this time around.

In his first press conference, on Feb 9, President Barack Obama was of somewhat different deportment than we’ve seen in the past, despite remaining the consummate rhetorical smoothie.

Though certain members of the press corps are obviously abject devotees of this president, there were some forward if not critical questions as regards the Democrat Congress’ economic stimulus package. Here, Obama’s tone became curt if not harsh; if one studies the video and stills available, there was a great deal more brow-furrowing than we’ve ever seen from Obama.

The term that came to this columnist’s mind was – dare I say it? – uppity.

It must be difficult to attempt to speak with authority on any subject when one possesses no legitimacy or substantiation to speak of. The truth is that Obama was probably quite tense from the pressure and the gravity of the situation. After all, when you’re trying to sell The Biggest Lie Ever Told to millions of people, there’s got to be some stress.

I think that what I’ve said is what other economists have said across the political spectrum, which is that, if you delay acting on an economy of this severity, then you potentially create a negative spiral that becomes much more difficult for us to get out of. We saw this happen in Japan in the 1990s, where they did not act boldly and swiftly enough and, as a consequence, they suffered what was called the lost decade.

– President Obama, Feb. 9, 2009

It’s very interesting that here, Obama cites “other economists” (which almost suggests that he is one), and then refers to Japan’s economic woes of the 1990s. It’s a wonderful spin; the economists who wouldn’t agree with Obama contend that it was government interference that prolonged Japan’s economic malaise, rather than government not acting “boldly and swiftly enough.”

The Orwellian aspects of this president’s machinations cannot be understated. While campaigning, Obama spoke against fear and imprudence. Now, he’s pushing the same dire scenarios used when it was predicted that the Earth would spin off into the cold void of space if banks and the Big Three automakers didn’t receive a bailout. With that good money already thrown after bad, the idea that we might not accept Obama’s sense of urgency with blind faith is still unthinkable to fools giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Obama flatly denies the suggestion that the economic stimulus package is a spending bill, despite the fact that it has gained such monikers as “Spendulus” and “Porkulus,” and that the earmark-laden and Orwellian provisions sequestered therein are there for any who can read to see.

It is only government that can break the vicious cycle, where lost jobs lead to people spending less money, which leads to even more layoffs.

– President Obama, Feb. 9, 2009

Really?

Barack Hussein Obama is a Marxist. In the context of his career, he has always been a Marxist. The alarm amongst those people who only now think he is taking things too far or in the wrong direction would be amusing were circumstances not so grave. The only surprise on this end is that Obama has initiated the wholesale thievery and wanton curtailment of our liberties this soon.

It isn’t like America wasn’t warned.

He was brought up with Marxists.

He studied Marxist “theology” for 20 years.

He deliberately sought Marxists to fraternize with throughout college – by his own admission.

He worked with Marxists and anti-American elements during his tenure in Chicago and Illinois state politics – which counts as very recently.

Obama oozes arrogance; this was evidenced more so than we have seen to date during the press conference on Monday. He knows, of course, better than any of us, what is best for America. While this is typical for a liberal politician, somehow it wears particularly badly on Obama – especially if you’re aware that he has only slightly more political experience than Yours Truly.

Like so many of the walking mediocrities who have promoted Marxism since Lenin, for our affirmative-action president, it’s all about power. For those who could not achieve via industry and diligence, capriciousness works just fine.

 


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.