The Adulation of a Leader: a Cautionary Tale

This is frightening. Obama and his crew are manipulating American voters in such a shameful way. This is like a Hollywood extravaganza like Ben Hur. Honestly where is the reality?

Excellent work, Medusa. Very effective and I like the image of Invesco there at the end.

I made a video, “The Obama Cult,” which intersplices images of the Nuremberg Rallies with images of Ofraudma at his gatherings of bused-in supporters.

Many are picking up on the extremely conscious and cynical cult of personality tactics being employed by BaJoke and his posse. Excellent.

The sooner we can expose this pretender for what he is, the sooner we can ship his bony behind back to corrupt Chi-town.

My first thought when I heard of the stadium rally was: “Will it be proceeded by a torchlight parade?”

Can’t anything be done about all this? Does Senator Clinton know what is going on really? Does Pres Bill Clinton?

We really really need them to speak up and take back democracy in America. This is not a time to stand back and look on, this is a time to stand up and fight….

I am afraid for America.

This man (Obama) will try to channel the persons of the past to gain power, and will push himself though at any cost, Why doses nothing stick to him ? Why doses the media choose not to report on anything? we can see, we can read, we have learned and still he gets a pass, who is really running this show?, and was this planned years ago? I have many question and no answers.

In the 19th century the French theorist Le Bon wrote about “The Psychology of Crowds.” Despots, czars, tyrants, dictators, and politicians have been applying his theories ever since. But nowhere was it more studied and practiced than in Germany in the 1930′s. The country was in a deep state of financial depression, many citizens, like the people commenting here, saw what was coming and spoke out and or emigrated to other countries but many succumbed to the unconscious forces at work in crowds not dependent on age, class or education but rather on an appeal to feelings, passions and aversions. Le Bon stated that “suggestibility is more acute in a crowd and a contagion of ideas ensue.”
It is indeed ‘creepy’ that first Obama must always take on the image of other leaders from Lincoln to Kennedy to MLK and secondly that his strategy, though not original, is to speak before enormous crowds without any leadership qualities, decision making skills, experience, political record, military experience(even Hitler served in WW I). This is definitely bizarre for Americans and for the Democratic Party to allow this to happen. I agree there is no more Democratic party as we knew it, it is now the ‘Obama party’ and he would have it no other way. But this is not 1933 Germany, we are not used to this kind of grandiosity in political leaders, Americans may love personality and celebrity but they don’t like over the top antics in their politics. So perhaps this stadium idea may be the best thing yet, when the people get a load of such craziness they’ll see him for the magalomaniac he is.

Karl Rove Sen. Barack Obama Sen. Hillary Clinton

Bamboozling the American electorate again
Strategy has involved G.O.P. crossover voting to take out Clinton, marketing newcomer Obama, stripping battleground delegates, threatening violence at the convention, and (if necessary) declaring martial law to prevent November’s general election. Meanwhile, revelations about the Illinois senator’s ties to Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko and two Iraqi agents are downplayed by the press. For their part, Democratic Party leaders have circumvented the official nominating process, declaring Obama the nominee by breaking their own rules and allowing superdelegates to “vote” before the convention.
Revised and updated July 6, 2008

(Note: Printing out in PDF format is recommended.)

Evidence of a covert campaign to undermine the presidential primaries is rife, so it’s curious that many within both the Democratic and Republican parties have ignored the actual elephant in the room in 2008. That would be Karl Rove, the G.O.P.’s longtime political strategist and a man many politicos still refer to as “The Architect”. Accused of rigging the two previous presidential elections, this master of deceit would have us believe he’s gone off to write op-eds and armchair quarterback this year’s coverage for Fox News Channel.

Not so. According to an article in Time magazine last November, Republicans were organized in several states to throw their weight behind frontrunner Senator Hillary Clinton’s principle rival for the Democratic nomination, Senator Barack Obama. While Rove’s name isn’t mentioned in the story, several former fundraisers and strategists for President Bush are identified. With the help of Wall Street investment firms, these gentlemen helped flush Obama’s coffers with cash early on in the race, something the conservative deep pockets had not done for any candidate in their own party. With receipts topping $100 million in 2007, the freshman senator achieved a remarkable feat, given he only first appeared on the national scene in 2004. In fact, the vast majority of Americans did not even hear of him until 2006.

To expedite the Rove strategy, a website and discussion forum called Republicans for Obama formed in 2006. The executive director of New Hampshire’s Republican Party, Stephen DeMaura, later established “Stop Hillary Clinton (One Million Strong AGAINST Hillary)” on Facebook. At the same time, the Obama camp launched its own initiative targeted at Republican primary voters called “Be a Democrat For a Day”. The campaign included a video that was circulated in Florida, Nevada, Vermont and elsewhere explaining the process of switching parties for the election. In addition, many states nowadays hold open primaries, allowing citizens to vote for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation. In Nebraska, the mayor of Omaha publicly rallied Republicans and Independents to caucus for Obama on February 9th. In Pennsylvania, Time reported on March 19th that Obama was running radio ads in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia asking Republicans to register as Democrats and then vote for him in the state’s April 22nd primary.

The tactic, called crossover voting, allowed Obama to open up an unsurmountable lead in pledged delegates. Republicans for Obama was certainly not bashful in making its case in an email appeal linked to its home page before the March 4th contests. “Since Texas has an open primary,” the appeal read, “Republicans and Independents should sign in at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama… Just think, no more Clintons in the White House.” Then there was Iowa, which held the nation’s first caucus on January 3rd. Here G.O.P. winner Mike Huckabee received just half as many votes as Clinton, who finished third behind Obama and John Edwards.

Of the 17 states holding open primaries, Obama won 13 of them. And an analysis of the caucus results to date shows that a disproportionate sum of delegates has been awarded to Obama, apparently by design of the Democratic National Committee. Thousands of irregularities and formal complaints of cheating have yet to be investigated by the the DNC. Oddly, red states – i.e. those who normally vote Republican in the general election – have been allowed to exercise undue influence on the process, a quirk that dovetailed nicely with G.O.P. strategy to knock Clinton out of the running before November. Obama’s 13,700 vote margin in the Nebraska caucus, for instance, resutled in a net gain of 8 pledged delegates, whereas Clinton accumulated only 9 more delegates from her whopping 204,000 vote victory in Ohio’s primary. In Texas, which holds both a primary and caucus, Obama gained 5 more pledged delegates than Clinton, despite the fact that she won the primary by a 100,000 vote margin. (Her campaign received over 2,000 complaints from supporters who were deterred from voting or told their caucus had been cancelled.) And although Clinton won the Nevada caucus, the Obama camp managed to finagle more pledged delegates at the state convention held after the vote.

Such discrepancies certainly bring into context what Time meant when it titled its November story “Obama’s red state appeal.” Even with the full compliment of election-scamming tools available to them – phone bank sabotage, fake polling data, swiftboating, waitlisting, electronic voting equipment, Norman Hsu, etc. – G.O.P. operatives would be hard pressed to eclipse Clinton in a general election. By the end of 2007, she held a commanding lead in public opinion polls and boasted a large campaign war chest of her own. Thus, all the vote-rigging tricks known to man wouldn’t make much difference if the contest in November weren’t close, and in her case, it likely wouldn’t be. Several influential Republicans admitted as much in a February 11th story for Politico. At the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, also held in February, a single banner strung over the exhibits hall seemed to encapsulate the strategy of the Republican Party for the 2008 primaries . It read “Anybody but Hillary”.

On June 4th, that sentiment became reality when Clinton acquiesced to pressure her own party and announced she would both supsend her campaign and endorse Obama. Her supporters angrily denounced the strong-arm tactics, claiming the DNC was conspiring with the Obama campaign to subvert the nominating process. The New York senator had surged towards the end of the primary season, winning 9 out of 13 states, and looked to have a real chance of victory at the convention in Denver. By contrast, Obama’s support was teetering in the wake of revelations about his long relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright of Trinity Church, as well as his connection to convicted Chicago political fixer Tony Rezko and the Abramoff-like circle of influence peddlers that seemed to surround the Illinois senator.

Yet the issue of electability appeared to be the last thing on the minds of Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and other Democratic Party leaders. Citing the need for unity, DNC Chairman Dean declared Obama the official nominee on June 3rd based on the input of superdelegates, a group of nearly 800 elected leaders and party officials who normally don’t vote until the convention. (That’s why they’re called delegates.) Beginning on June 4th, the Obama campaign assumed control over the party apparatus and treasury, and much to the chagrin of Clinton activists, began contacting her donors for contributions and other support.

For the first time in U.S. history, a winning candidate had been forced out of the race by means other than a bullet to the head.

And this movie: Clear and Present Danger

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_HX6vbhAYaU

Special credit to George Soros and Saul Alinsky

The lead up to the news in Pueblo, CO tonight is that Barack Obama is proposing what would be an illegal lottery in Colorado offering a chance for one of ten “backstage passes” to meet Obama at Invesco in exchange for donations.

Can’t do that in Colorado.

Very interesting post, Medusa. The ability of some leaders to bring their followers to ecstatic levels of emotion is truly frightening.

Just because Obama co-opts anniversaries of other’s great events in history like MLK’s “I have a dream speech” and JFK’s accepting the nomination in a stadium of supporters doesn’t make him a great leader. It makes him shallow and a phoney because he hasn’t earned the greatness or done the work of these great men in history. He just wants to be compared to them. He’s all marketing and propaganda. The scheduling of the speech and convention on the anniversary of MLK’s memory truly demonstrates to me that the DNC fix for Obama has been in the tank for a long time. Long before anybody cast a vote.