Wednesday, April 10, 2013

The Perfect Storm for America's Death

"Barack Obama, as did Mussolini, Lenin, Mao and Hitler before him, has the ability to visibly remain above the fray, appear as the champion of the people and manipulate the emotions of an ill-educated populace.  In the case of Obama he has the further benefit of being able to exploit the racial guilt embedded in the American society."


  1. The comparisons made this article are laughable. Not that Obama does not deserve criticism, far from it. And not that he is helping in the demise of this country. But to compare him with Hitler is to mock the horror he caused. BTW, I would love for you to prove this comparison to my one colleague and good friend who is from Germany. The same goes for Mao and Mussolini. These comparisons are made for striking a negative emotional note in the hearts of the audience. Besides, Obama has remained above the fray only to his loyal supporters, just like Bush did.

    Perhaps the reason why people compare Obama to the worst is to hide the fact that he is nothing more than a continuation of the Republicans and Democrats who preceded him. BTW, the real test of any successful politician is whether they can appear to remain above the fray regardless of the catastrophes that happen around them. So it is not a special skill mastered by the worst. It is a skill not mastered by those who lose the next election

    In addition, the legalization of elective abortion was absolutely a blow the intrinsic value of human life. But so was our systematic discrimination against Blacks prior to the abortion ruling. So also was the Vietnam War and the different coups, which we participated in, with the proxy leaders that followed. We have been establishing and running an empire since immediately after the Revolutionary war. And it is the hope of each generation of Americans that their generation will not be the generation that sees the inevitable collapse. After all, collapse of empire is the inevitable result that follows the start of empire.

    1. "The comparisons made this article are laughable."
      You're gullibility is laughable. And scary.

      "Perhaps the reason why people compare Obama to the worst is to hide the fact that he is nothing more than a continuation of the Republicans and Democrats who preceded him."

      What does that have to do with whether his policies are Constitutional or ethical? What point are you trying to make? Can a criminal justify his crimes by pointing to a "predecessor"? Can you give an actual example of any predecessor engaging in something as radical as, say, Obamacare, or his recent tax plan, in which he *rewards* those who do not save for their retirement with tax breaks?

      "So it is not a special skill mastered by the worst."

      So you think Obama should be excused because he is a successful sleaze? What is your point? You seem to be shifting from the issue of what Obama supports to the issue of "is Obama a skillful politician"? Is the latter really important, except in that it causes more concern about what he can get away with?

      So if Obama is a "continuation", that's not an excuse. That's all the more reason to reverse the trend. Obama's taken it further, faster than his predecessors, and his gambit seems to be working.

      "We have been establishing and running an empire since immediately after the Revolutionary war."

      What do you mean by "empire"? Do you mean that right after the Revolutionary War we were a superpower that controlled the world?

      Or do you mean that all POTUS's have been "emperors"? Do you think that human society is condemned to be ruled by "emperors" and so we should just accept that fact and support what you think would be a benevolent "emperor" instead?

      But that makes no sense. Emperors rule without constraint. How would you control them once you elect them to be an emperor? How would they be accountable to your socialist ideals?

      Wouldn't it all just degenerate back to Stalinism? Isn't it all just a con? Playing on your idealism to trick you into opting for an easy solution. Just "empower" the right group of people, and they'll bring about utopia! Yeah, that's the ticket! I guess as long as an emperor calls himself leader of the People's Republic of Whatever, and dresses in military garb to show solidarity with the masses, you'll give him a pass. Is that what you're saying?

    2. C.Andiron,
      I remember your name from a comment you made on my blog (See comment #3 at You insulted me and I suppose you have a Reformed justification for that.

      Any comparison between one of today's world leaders with Hitler just does not stand up to the facts and statistics of History. Please don't think I am defending Obama, I am a Leftist and I would love to see him be impeached for war crimes. I voted for Jill Stein from the Green Party for President.

      But using hyperbole to make one's point simply destroys one's credibility.

      BTW, perhaps you should read some history especially what George Washington said about this country at its start. He called America a "baby empire." Why? It was on the verge of conquering a number of nations with an extensive land mass. Those nations were the Indian nations. And after we reached California, we continued by claiming the Philippines, Guam, Cuba, and Haiti. Then Hawaii might have been claimed after that and the beat went on as the list of subjugated nations grew.

      Your mistake with regards to your definition of empire is that you assume that there is only one kind of empire and that definition is based on a stereotype. In contrast to that, we could read Sheldon Wolin's "Democracy Incorporated." He can give you a picture of another kind of empire. And when you rule by proxies, you have an empire. There are also economic empires. So your disagreement is based on not enough information.

  2. real quick correction the last note. The third sentence should read:

    And not that he is not helping in the demise of this country

  3. "If [my daughters] make a mistake, I wouldn’t want them punished with a baby." —B.O.

  4. Posts like this certainly do not belong on a blog that purports to present the Christian religion.