I can’t take credit for coining these terms. A person at another website I frequent did.
What is Obommunism? Barack Obama led communism, of course. Who are obommunists? Followers of Barack Obama of course.
Update: I wanted to add this yesterday, but the source for the comments was blogger at the Huffington Post. I wanted to wait until this stuff was carried by a real news organization before I put it up here. Here is the original source.
Newsbusters puts it into perspective better than I can:
Religion is the opiate of the masses. — Karl Marx, 1843
It’s not surprising that they get bitter, they cling to . . . religion . . . as a way to explain their frustrations. — Barack Obama, 2008
Has anyone else pointed out the striking similarity between Barack Obama’s recent statement about tough economic times driving people to religion and that of another person who preached change: Karl Marx?
Obama added guns and xenophobia to his list of proletarian elixirs for bitterness. But the fundamental point remains: Barack apparently doesn’t take religion, his own or anyone else’s, too seriously. It’s not a search for truth or an attempt to live in accordance with God’s word. It’s just a way to get by, a stupefacient that helps proles endure the pain of living in an economy unfairly dominated by the “haves.” Karl would concur.
So there you have it. The newsbusters link has another bit about one of BO’s mentors being a “noted member of the Communist Party USA.”
Michelle Obama said the other day about universal healthcare:
“If we don’t wake up as a nation with a new kind of leadership…for how we want this country to work, then we won’t get universal health care,” she said.
“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
Things like the above just scratch the surface of not only what Obomunism is all about, but the Democratic party as well. It all boils down to, “The government (Democrat controlled that is) knows what is best for you.”
Don’t be fooled by a liberal telling you otherwise. Actions speak louder than words and liberals talk out of both sides of their mouths. From one side they will say they are about personal freedoms, civil rights, and equality for all. Out of the other side they support policies and policy makers that seek to control how you live your life and squash opposing opinions (Fairness doctrine).
Another example is liberals talking out of both sides of their mouths when it comes to “fear mongering.” They will denounce the Bush Administration for using fear mongering to get support for Operation Iraqi freedom, but out of the other side of their mouths they talk about the despair brought about by “Climate Change” or “Global Warming.”
My solution, short of voting for the candidate that opposes these ideals (notice I didn’t say McCain), is to reject liberal principles at every turn.
Tags: Barack, Communism, Obama, Obommunism, Obommunist
Although I share Bo’s opposition to Senator Obama’s far left ideas, until recently I thought he might have a role in improving race relations. Back on 03/28/08, I wrote the following on another blog:
Barack Obama is unique in American politics, not only because he is bi-racial but also bi-cultural, having been raised predominantly in white communities and later, as an adult, joining the black community of Chicago. As such, his perspective on both communities is as both as an insider and an outsider. His intelligence and ability to clearly articulate both points of view give him the potential of being a bridge between both cultures, something that’s sorely needed in this country. Whether he can pull this off will be determined by how much either culture demands that he take sides.[Emphasis added.]
I based my opinion on something he said about us “European-Americans” in his now famous “race speech” that led me to believe that he just might get it:
So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African-American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
But his recent “bitterness” comments regarding small-town Pennsylvanians have forced me to reaccess my initial hope.
Here’s the whole quote:
And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Having grown up in a small town in neighboring upstate New York, I could have told the the junior senator from Illinois that we hayseeds aren’t nearly as one-dimensional as he seems to think we are.
We cling to our faith not out of bitterness but rather out of gratitude to Someone who’s greater than ourselves – Someone who loves us in spite of our shortcomings and calls us to love others here on earth to lift their spirits, just as our spirits have been lifted by Him.
Some of us cling to our guns not out of bitterness, but out of the fact that it’s an inalienable right that the Founding Fathers thought important enough to enshrine in the Bill of Rights. I doubt if the good senator clings to his First Amendment rights out of bitterness; why would he think that those who cling to their Second Amendment rights do so for that reason?
As far as “antipathy to people who aren’t like them,” I think Senator Obama might be surprised to find out that we got along pretty well in my old hometown, even though we weren’t nearly as homogenous as he seems to think. Heck, we even tolerated Democrats!
And as for “anti-immigrant sentiment,” being the grandchild of immigrants, as were many of the kids I knew growing up in upstate New York, we understood first hand that immigration is what made America great. But being anti-illegal immigration is based on a concern for national security, not bitterness. Similarly, being for a rational trade policy is no more the same as “anti-trade sentiment” than being for a rational immigration policy is the same as being “anti-immigrant.”
I never considered Barack Obama serious presidential material because of his lack of experience and his left-wing policies, but I mentioned above, I thought he might have some kind of role in bringing the races together. After getting it so wrong about what motivates those of us from “fly over country,” I’m beginning to reassess his ability to even do that.
There’s still much we don’t know about Senator Obama, and that’s part of his appeal. He’s sort of a political Rorschach test; people see in him what they want to see. He’s much more likeable than Hillary Clinton and still strikes me as a decent, sincere person. I just happen to think he’s sincerely wrong most of the time.
His attitudes reflect his own church. And those of wright, Malcolm x, and Farrakhan. And his communist interests and pursuits. Is it any wonder he would think the same of White communities and churches etc.
Bit by bit the real Obama is beginning to show. A masquerade can only go on so long.
A masquerade can only go on so long.
Slightly off topic, but this is as true about dating relationships as it is about politicians. I used to say that you can’t really know a person until you’ve been dating for at least a year. You need to see that person in all four seasons before you know what makes him or her tick.
Returning to the topic, it’s been almost exactly one year since I wrote this tongue-in-cheek post:
http://www.ivorydome.us/2007/04/05/coincidence-i-think-not/
It remains to be seen whether this recent gaffe by Obama will prove to be the first major chink in his armor, like Hillary’s driver’s licenses for illegal aliens gaffe. But once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it’s pretty hard to get it back in.
I used to say that you can’t really know a person until you’ve been dating for at least a year.
Well in my case its been until u marry. LOL I knew one of my wives for 5 years before marriage, was divorced a year later.
celtictexan,
I came dangerously close to making a similar mistake. I was engaged to a woman I had known for nearly 7 years when I called it off 7 weeks before the wedding (the invitations were to go out the next week).
My epiphany came when I was talking to my brother on the phone and told him that I figured the first year of our marriage was going to be hell, but hopefully we’d work things out after that. (My fiancée suffered from clinical depression and wouldn’t stay on her meds.) I can still hear my brother saying, “Listen to what you’re saying! The first year is supposed to be the best year!”
After realizing how much in denial I had been, I sought the good counsel of a family law attorney friend of mine and a clergyman whose wife also suffered from depression. When both of them recommended against me getting married to this woman, I knew I had to do something quickly.
I cried my eyes out on the day we were to have been married, but I eventually got over it and about a year later met the woman who’s been my wife for nearly 15 years now. I also found out that my ex-fiancée got married about 10 years ago. Obviously, I wish her well.
I don’t know exactly why I’m sharing all these personal details in a post about Barack Obama, except to say that voters can find themselves in denial sometimes, too. The only difference is that once you’ve “tied the knot” with a president, you’re stuck with him (or her) for a lot longer than a year!
A few more things to consider when choosing the next leader of the free world:
July 23, 2007: the CNN/YouTube Democratic Presidential Debate
QUESTION: In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?
Senator Obama?
OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous. [Emphasis added]
April 11, 2008: Obama declines to criticize Carter on Hamas
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Friday it was not his place to criticize former President Jimmy Carter if he were to meet with Hamas, although Obama said he would not meet with the militant Palestinian group. [Emphasis added]
April 16, 2008: Obama criticizes ex-President Carter’s Hamas meeting
Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama on Wednesday disagreed with former President Jimmy Carter’s overtures toward Hamas, saying he would not talk to the Islamist group until it recognized Israel and renounced terrorism. [Emphasis added; NOTE: Hamas currently holds a majority in the Palestinian parliament]
Which is it, Senator Obama: Preconditions or no preconditions?