However, you go on in your email, to finger the new President as a "Marxist" and a possible illegal alien. As a Democrat who supported Ramos and Compean, I find this hard to take.My first reaction: What does supporting Ramos and Compean have to do with one's views about the new President? Do most Democrats prefer that Ramos and Compean stay railroaded?
My second reaction: Let's review the public record on Obama.
He certainly talks like a Marxist. Perhaps Don Collins is unaware, as so many of our fellow citizens are unaware, of voluminous material that came out during the campaign — in late October — but that the in-the-tank mainstream press wouldn't touch. (Recall that when Joseph ["Joe the Plumber"] Wurzelbacher got Obama's mask to slip just a bit during a campaign stop in Ohio, the press went all out investigating Wurzelbacher, leaving Obama as pristinely unexamined as before.)
You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, Iâ€™d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.Whittle didn't make that up. I've heard the recorded conversation myself, as anyone can. It's Obama talking. And there's a lot of additional explication in Whittle's article, linked above. (The recording of the full ~50-minute radio program on Chicago's station WBEZ on January 18, 2001 can be heard here. So if you're worried that the YouTube clip is missing important context — it's not — go to about the 70% point of the full recording to hear the smoking howitzer. Or listen to the whole, revealing program from its start.)
And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasnâ€™t that radical. It didnâ€™t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution â€” at least as itâ€™s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states canâ€™t do to you, says what the federal government canâ€™t do to you, but it doesnâ€™t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.
And that hasnâ€™t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil-rights movement was because the civil-rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
Regarding Obama's status, I, too, find it far-fetched that he was born in Kenya, considering all the difficulties that would have been involved with third-world travel in 1961. But if he's legitimate, why didn't he simply release his claimed Hawaiian birth records to prove it and end the hassle, for surely he was aware of the controversy? The natural conclusion, employing Occam's razor, is that he is, indeed, an illegal alien, or otherwise ineligible to be President.
Neither Jorge nor Collins referred to Obama's Muslim background, but I might as well go for the trifecta. The important thing is that, as Daniel Pipes writes in Barack Obama's Muslim Childhood, Obama was a Muslim as a child. And he has lied about it. This is really incontrovertible.
As an adult, he joined that infamous Christian church in Chicago, but judging from Obama's denials that he ever heard Pastor Wright say the things that Wright so flagrantly said, it's hard to credit Obama with really being of that church. His is, we can conclude, a Christianity of political convenience.
And Pipes had another article, Obama Would Fail Security Clearance, showing that Obama wouldn't ordinarily qualify for a security clearance. A President obviously needs clearances at the highest level, and the issuing agencies will have to wink at all their rules to give this President such clearances.
I don't mean in any of what's above to suggest the slightest enthusiasm or respect for John McCain. I could vote for neither of these two horrors our system served up.
I predict, however, that many who voted for Obama will wind up wishing, as a matter of pride and guilt, that they hadn't.