Cain’t wait to hear what the excuse is, then, for this Homage to President Obama at the Sands Hill Elementary School in Asheville, NC:

Are you ready for this? That performance was for the P.T.A. Yeppers, it sure enough was.

Unfortunately, that was not the only NC school that had a “Glory And Honor To The ONE” performance planned. Check out what a teacher had prepared the students to do at the Jamestown Elementary School in Jamestown, NC:

Dear Obama

(Solo – spoken)
This is a letter to Barack Obama…it’s our way of saying thank you.
(Solo – spoken)
Thank you for showing me that no doors are closed.
I have the power to control my own future.
(Solo – spoken)
Thank you for showing me that I can stand tall and be proud of who I am.
(Solo – spoken)
You have given us strength, courage and hope.
And for that we all say Thank You!
(Verse 1)
Dear Obama, Hear us sing
We’re ready for the change that you will bring.
Going to shine the light for the world to see, to spread peace hope and democracy.
The time is now bring our troops home. Iraq can stand strong on its own.
And fight for healthcare for the young so that coverage is available for everyone.
And it’s time to find renewable ways to fuel our needs, so we don’t depend on Chavez and the Middle East. We’ve got to stand up tall for the middle class and regulate the businesses that in the past got away with no oversight.
Doing things that were not right.
Giving loans and bad advice, expecting us to pay the price.
The change we need should begin today and Barack we stand behind you as you lead the way.
(Chorus)
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
You’ve broken down doors
No limits anymore
We all agree that Yes We Can
Dear Obama we must unite and pull together members of the left and the right
With terror threats bringing fear we hope our world you will soon hear
Diplomacy in Islaamabaad and please control Ahmidinejad. With Hillary Clinton as your Secretary of State, your team has the opportunity to make.
The world will see us with adoring eyes. And our popularity will rise. Please pay off all our debts to China, and strengthen our forces against Al-qaeda. You have the power to change education, giving our public schools some dedication.
Raising up teacher pay
Improving Schools in every state
So every child can truly make it, in the steps that you have created.
(Chorus)
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
You’ve broken down doors
No limits anymore
We all agree that Yes We Can
(Solo – spoken)
And today is a new day where we can all see a new hope for our country.
And we know that all along your journey, people say mean things to you and about you. But you never gave up and that gives us strength to never give up. You are more than a President. You are a role model, a father figure, and a man we can all look up to, and for that we say Thank You.
(Chorus)
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
Dear Obama – ba, ba, ba – Obama.
You’ve broken down doors
No limits anymore
We all agree that Yes We Can
(Solo – spoken)
Sincerely, every child, every family, everyone…
Barack Obama – We Thank You!

Oh. My. Goddess. Are you BELIEVING THIS?? Please, please explain to me how this is NOT indoctrination, because it sure as hell looks like it to me. It was only because concerned parents spoke out that there was intervention:

Concerned parents brought the song to the attention of Marcus Kindley, former Chairman of the Guilford Co., NC Republican Party and candidate for North Carolina Republican Party Chairman.

In a statement on ncgopchairman.com Kindley wrote, “This information was brought to my attention by a parent of a child attending this school. Such indoctrination of our children is reminiscent of totalitarian regimes marching their children out in praise of the esteemed leader.”

Kindley and parents of students attending Jamestown Elementary began an email campaign to voice their concerns over the song, which persuaded the principal of the school, and Paul Daniels, a member of the District 5 Board of Education in Guilford Co., NC, to order the teacher who planned the performance to cancel the song. It was not sung at the graduation ceremony.

I would not have thought this was a Republican v. Democrat kind of thing. It seems to me to be an AMERICAN thing.

You know, Hillary Clinton’s presidency would have been even more historic, no matter how hard David Axelrove and Co. tried to play that down. We have NEVER Had a WOMAN of any color serve as president. Do you honestly think this would have been happening had she not had the nomination stolen from her? Honestly?? No. Nor would she have WANTED something like this.

This Obama worship is cultish – there is no other way to look at it. And there is no other way to look at it but worship. This is, frankly, some scary, scary shit…

If this isn’t indoctrination, I don’t know what is:

Here are the words, in case you can’t understand them:

Barack Hussein Obama
He said that all must lend a hand [?]
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!

Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be clear today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!

Barack Hussein Obama
He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!

Barack Hussein Obama
He said Red, Yellow, Black or White
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!

Barack Hussein Obama
Yes
Mmm, mmm, mm!

Barack Hussein Obama

Second Song:

Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all [do? doth??] say “hooray!”
Hooray Mr. President! You’re number one!
The first Black American to lead this great na-TION!
Hooray, Mr. President something-something-some
A-something-something-something-some economy is number one again!
Hooray Mr. President, we’re really proud of you!
And the same for all Americans [in?] the great Red White and Blue!
So something Mr. President we all just something-some,
So here’s a hearty hip-hooray a-something-something-some!
Hip, hip hooray! (3x)

HOLY SHIT. Can you believe this? Just insert “George Walker Bush” in there instead of “Barack Hussein Obama” to get a full sense of how disturbing this is. Hell, insert any president’s name, it doesn’t matter. I imagine most parents would object to their children, their SMALL children especially, being taught to sing the praises of “Dear Leader” – WOW. That’s not how Americans roll.

Or wasn’t, until now.

Someone NOT singing the praises of Barack Hussein Obama is Michelle Paterson, wife of embattled New York Governor, David Paterson. She is mighty upset that Obama wants to push out the first African American governor in NY. So is her husband:

Paterson added, “I never heard of a president asking a governor not to run … so I thought it was very unusual that this would be asked of David and I don’t think it’s right.”

Obama aides have asked the embattled Democratic governor, who has done poorly in recent polls, not to run for governor in 2010.

Paterson said her husband was shocked at the request.

“I think he was stunned. Like I said this is very unusual,” she said.

And Ms. Paterson revealed what Obama whispered into Gov. Paterson’s ear when they met the other day. Are you ready? According to First Lady:

Ms. Paterson also said that Obama told the governor during a trip to upstate New York on Monday that he was “a little chagrined about how the White House handled the message.”

He was not chagrined at the MESSAGE to the governor, mind you, not at the backstabbing of Gov. Paterson, but the way it was HANDLED. Oh, I am sure The One made it ALL better with that admission.

I wonder if THAT is going to make it into the elementary school song of praise to Obama? I’m guessing not…

What a difference a month makes! When my last controversial column posted on Salon in the second week of August, most Democrats seemed frozen in suspended animation, not daring to criticize the Obama administration’s bungling of healthcare reform lest it give aid and comfort to the GOP. Well, that ice dam sure broke with a roar. Dissident Democrats found their voices, and by late August even the liberal lemmings of the mainstream media, from CBS to CNN, had drastically altered their tone of reportage, from priggish disdain of the town hall insurgency to frank admission of serious problems in the healthcare bills as well as of Obama’s declining national support.

…As an Obama supporter and contributor, I am outraged at the slowness with which the standing army of Democratic consultants and commentators publicly expressed discontent with the administration’s strategic missteps this year. … from week one after the inauguration, when Obama went flat as a rug in letting Congress pass that obscenely bloated stimulus package. Had more Democrats protested, the administration would have felt less arrogantly emboldened to jam through a cap-and-trade bill whose costs have made it virtually impossible for an alarmed public to accept the gargantuan expenses of national healthcare reform. (Who is naive enough to believe that Obama’s plan would be deficit-neutral? Or that major cuts could be achieved without drastic rationing?)

Due respect to Ms. Paglia, she might ask herself why she bought into any of this before the election. We did not. Their disastrous spending plans: using the cover of the economic crisis to push through pet projects under the phony label of stimulus, offering bailouts of Wall St., not Main Street. People are without jobs, losing their homes and they are playing games with our money? Most readers at NQ sensed where Obama’s allegiance would be 18 months ago. I find precious little satisfaction in yet another prominent Obama supporter expressing disgust. The stakes are too high and we are now stuck.

I am grateful, however, that a respected voice is calling the arrogant Dem leadership out on its despicable characterizations of American citizens, who are rightfully outraged at this mess:

By foolishly trying to reduce all objections to healthcare reform to the malevolence of obstructionist Republicans, Democrats have managed to destroy the national coalition that elected Obama and that is unlikely to be repaired. If Obama fails to win reelection, let the blame be first laid at the door of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who at a pivotal point threw gasoline on the flames by comparing angry American citizens to Nazis.

Pelosi needs to lose her seat for that one. Disgraceful.

Paglia seems to think Obama might turn it around with a great speech, but wonders if too much damage has already been done. She has written the Dems off is 2012, unless Republicans nominate someone dead from the neck up – entirely possible. Paglia says she “has been calling for heads to roll at the White House from the get-go”:

…Thankfully, they do seem to be falling faster — as witness the middle-of-the-night bum’s rush given to “green jobs” czar Van Jones last week — but there’s a long way to go. An example of the provincial amateurism of current White House operations was the way the president’s innocuous back-to-school pep talk got sandbagged by imbecilic support materials soliciting students to write fantasy letters to “help” the president (a coercive directive quickly withdrawn under pressure). Even worse, the entire project was stupidly scheduled to conflict with the busy opening days of class this week, when harried teachers already have their hands full. Comically, some major school districts, including New York City, were not even open yet. And this is the gang who wants to revamp national healthcare?

Why did it take so long for Democrats to realize that this year’s tea party and town hall uprisings were a genuine barometer of widespread public discontent and not simply a staged scenario by kooks and conspirators?

Ms. Paglia still betrays a trusting naiveté here, thinking that Democrats were too insulated to know the protests were genuine. Not so. The Obama Administration simply continued the same techniques of the Obama campaign – demonize any opponents in order to silence them. She acknowledges that network and cable TV are not the central forums for debate any longer. They just play out more junk politics, backing their respective brands. Ms. Paglia notes…

…the truly transformative political energy is coming from talk radio and the Web — both of which Democrat-sponsored proposals have threatened to stifle, in defiance of freedom of speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights. …[O]n talk radio, which I have resumed monitoring around the clock because of the healthcare fiasco … I heard the passionate voices of callers coming directly from the town hall meetings. Hence I was alerted to the depth and intensity of national sentiment long before others who were simply watching staged, manipulated TV shows.

While she concludes her column giving the Republicans some well deserved slaps as well (and I encourage you to read the rest of her piece for yourself), most of it is devoted to pointing out Democratic Party arrogance. This is what the Clinton wing of the party, cruelly cast aside along with Hillary after the primaries, have noted as well. Ms. Paglia asks questions many here would find familiar:

Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy. This is, I submit, a stunning turn away from the anti-authority and anti-establishment principles of authentic 1960s leftism.

But affluent middle-class Democrats now seem to be complacently servile toward authority and automatically believe everything party leaders tell them. …Independent thought and logical analysis of argument are no longer taught. Elite education in the U.S. has become a frenetic assembly line of competitive college application to schools where ideological brainwashing is so pandemic that it’s invisible.

If any of Obama’s supporters had been capable of critical thought last year, they would have seen through his ridiculous promises and contradictory policy statements and had the sense to turn away. As this article is a prelude to President Obama’s big speech on healthcare this evening, Ms. Paglia’s next comments reveal the shortcomings of a compliant media and congress…

Throughout this fractious summer, I was dismayed not just at the self-defeating silence of Democrats at the gaping holes or evasions in the healthcare bills but also at the fogginess or insipidity of articles and Op-Eds about the controversy emanating from liberal mainstream media and Web sources. By a proportion of something like 10-to-1, negative articles by conservatives were vastly more detailed, specific and practical about the proposals than were supportive articles by Democrats, which often made gestures rather than arguments and brimmed with emotion and sneers. There was a glaring inability in most Democratic commentary to think ahead and forecast what would or could be the actual snarled consequences — in terms of delays, denial of services, errors, miscommunications and gross invasions of privacy — of a massive single-payer overhaul of the healthcare system in a nation as large and populous as ours. It was as if Democrats live in a utopian dream world, divorced from the daily demands and realities of organization and management.

Yes, the party in power does seem oddly divorced from reality as if wishing at the foot of President Obama’s HOPE poster would make their rosy predictions about the effects of their reckless leglislation come true. This past week, other columnists have pointed out that dissent and disagreement are a value to any President. Blank stares and idol worship will not make this Administration better. For the sake of our country, it would be refreshing change indeed if someone in the White House showed actual concern for the needs of Americans and went back to doing the people’s business. I think that may only happen if left, right and center keep speaking out and keep the pressure on. Only fear of the voters might have any effect whatsoever. And I’m not even sure of that.

Ms. Paglia, for one, worries it’s too late for Obama to turn it around…

Oh boy, here we go. The name-calling and fear-inducing tactics used by Obama’s campaign team against anyone at odds with its lock-step ideas are at it again. This time it’s much, much worse.

It was bad enough being called a “racist” for supporting Hillary Clinton. And one who has problems with the current hastily-thought out health care plan is now referred to as a “deather” or part of a “right-wing, organized conspiracy” or a “lobbyist for the insurance companies.” But the next perilous step has just been taken—each of us is supposed to report anything “fishy” about what people are saying about health care directly to the White House.

The term “fishy” was not explicitly defined, but it can be reasonably assumed that it means anything that opposed the Obama/Congressional health care plan. See for yourselves here.

The most frightening book I ever read was George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (first published in 1949). This best-seller portrayed the oppressiveness of a regime defined by constant surveillance and consistent withdrawal of individuals’ rights. I had nightmares about “Big Brother” watching, hovering over my every move, pressing down on my daily life, forcing me to become a cog in a wheel not of my own design or influence. This book more than any other–even more so than Brave New World or We or Fahrenheit 451—haunted me.

When the year 1984 came and went, I felt relief. We were safe. It was just a book of fiction. I didn’t then realize that a time would come when technology could make this all readily possible, that privacy would be something I only used to experience, and that we are now supposed to turn in those who do not agree with The One.

We do need health care reform. We need to bring the insurance companies and Big Pharma into the realm of compassion for sick people. But, remember, I have read every page of this monstrosity now under consideration. This proposed bill is a mess—and I worry more about the devil I don’t know, especially when it wants my email address.

End Note: As this story spreads, I expect the White House will be scared back behind its dark curtain and change the message. But just know it IS true.

Good news for Michigan and Florida Democrats. You might not get cut out of the party’s messy primary voting process again in 2012.

Of course, with an incumbent Barack Obama, the Democrats’ presidential-candidate-picking process may be moot:

Assuming the rookie Great Change Agent quickly fills five dozen empty slots at Treasury, fixes the nation’s economy, creates multiple millions of jobs, reforms the country’s entire education system, makes it affordable to ever Missouri Democratic Senator Claire McCaskilly American, creates a thriving green economy, reduces dependence on foreign oil, solves the housing crisis, keeps interest rates low, prevents inflation, avoids an Afghan quagmire, cuts taxes for 95% of Americans, screws over the other 5% and halves the national debt.

Oh, and cleanses the culture of greed and entitlement on every U.S. street including the one named Wall.

Last year’s Democratic primaries were hardfought even bitter affairs, not helped by the initial banning of the results of those important twin states, which denied Hillary Clinton two crucial albeit sneaky victories.

What the hell does THAT mean?? The only one who was SNEAKY in this process was OBAMA!! He’s the one who took his name taken off the ballot, and encouraged others to do so as well, to try and embarrass Clinton out of the win! He’s the ONLY one who campaigned in Florida, and Clinton still won in a landslide. And SHE’S the one who is sneaky? Okay – I see how they are revising history on this one. Because we can’t have anyone better than Precious, can we? Ah, yes, because EVERYONE wanted Obama, apparently – except for the majority who voted for Clinton, but let’s not allow facts to influence the storyline. Ahem.

Back to the article:

And all presided over by another former unsuccessful Democratic presidential candidate, Howard Dean.

Dean is gone now, unceremoniously dumped and denied a Cabinet job by the Obama camp, in favor of parttime chair, Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia. He”ll take over fulltime next year to earn his D.C. chops and, come 2012, probably replace aging Joe Biden as Obama’s VP who, you may remember, was a senator way back when Obama was a sixth grader. (Although keep your eyes on Missouri’s most Twittering senator.)

But watch out. CNBC announced today that Dean has signed on there as a commentator. Now, all that cable channel needs is some viewers and Dean can be heard to get even on-air.

Oh, yippee. But this is where is gets good:

The 37-member Democratic Change Commission will be headed by Sen. Claire McCaskill (who likes to Twitter) and Rep. James Clyburn, both ardent Obama backers. And Obama’s ex-campaign manager David Plouffe is also on.

The goal, Kaine says, is “to put voters first and ensure that as many people as possible can participate.” A complete list of commission members is below; scroll down or click on the “Read more” line.

The commission, which grows from a convention resolution by Obama last August, will have three goals: chop the number of superdelegates, reform the caucus system and change “the window of time” for caucuses and primaries. Should Iowa and New Hampshire be worried?

The commission’s report is due by next New Years Day.

I’m sorry, but how are the same people who created the problems we had this past Primary going to REFORM it?? You have my back-stabbing, lying, conniving representative, James Clyburn in there, the one who pushed the meme that the Clinton’s were racist. And DAVID PLOUFFE!!!! The man who orchestrated Obama’s campaign, the one in which he engaged massive caucus fraud, and the above mentioned shenanigans.

This is just great. I wonder how they are going to reform it, exactly? Abolish it completely so Precious can forever on out be the Democratic Nominee?? Having these folks on this committee is a whole lot like having the foxes guard the chicken coop. I am not expecting a whole lot of protecting our votes here since this was the tack Plouffe took during the vote controversy: What we’re interested in is a fair resolution; we don’t think it’s fair to seat them fully,” Plouffe said.

“We’re not going to support something that gives her too many delegates. We all last year played by the rules. It was only after the fact when they needed the delegates that they tried to change the rules. I don’t think you can at the 11th hour change the rules that you try to live by because it benefits you.” But Obama’s stance on the issue, like his opponent’s, has just as much to do with politics as principle; the Obama campaign clearly doesn’t want Clinton to close the delegate gap enough that she can possibly convince enough superdelegates to throw their support her way, or give her a chance to claim a victory in the popular vote.

The One was the one who was trying to change things, but the key statement is the first one, “We’re not going to support something that gives her too many delegates.” Never mind that she WON those delegates with OUR votes. And taking lawfully cast and certified votes from one candidate to give to another is so far from any sense of fairness and decency, that I cannot imagine how someone like David Plouffe is going to “reform” the nominating process. All primaries will now be caucuses with ACORN running them? All voting precincts will be staffed with ACORN members, or Obama Army personnel? Only people whose last name beings with “O” and end in “a” can run? Whatever it it, I think they just may have to remove that pesky word from title – you know the one, “Democratic.”

Here’s the rest of the gang:

Membership of the 2009 Democratic Party Commission on Change:

Co-Chairs: Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri, and Rep. James Clyburn, South Carolina.

Members: Jeremy Alters, Florida; Jeff Berman, Washington, D.C; Ashley Bliss, Georgia; State Rep. Dan Blue, North Carolina; Bill Carrick, Los Angeles; Mayor Michael Coleman, Columbus, Ohio; Jeff Forbes, Washington; Joan Garry, New Jersey; Kansas state chairman Larry Gates; Adelita Grijalva, Arizona; Rob Hampshire, Pennsylvania; Ned Helms, New Hampshire.

Also on the commission: Alexis Herman, Virginia; Tribal Chairman Ron His Horse Is Thunder, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe; Teamsters Pres. James Hoffa, Michigan; Roseanne Hope, Minnesota; Nevada state senator Steven Horsford; Suzie LeVine, Seattle; UAW CAP Director Dick Long, Michigan; Andres Lopez, Puerto Rico; Patricia Madrid, New Mexico; Debbie Marquez, Colorado; Illinois state senator Iris Martinez; Jennifer McClellan, Virginia; Montana secretary of State Linda McCulloch.

Also: Iowa attorney general Tim Miller; Minyon Moore, Washington; Sunah Park, Pennsylvania; Plouffe, Washington; Rebecca Prozan, California; James Roosevelt, Jr., Massachusetts; Rep. Linda Sanchez, California; Randi Weingarten, New York; Oregon state chair Meredith Wood Smith; Martin Yeung, South Dakota.

“(T)his is the moment that the world is waiting for.”

And Obama’s OWN claim that:

“I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.”

Wowie zowie. So, since it is pertinent, and I am sick as a dog, as we say down here in the South, I am reprinting the majority of that piece from back in July with a few slight changes. It is below.

So, YEAH, Obama is “what the world has been waiting for,” and what represents America returning to its “best Traditions” if that means an arrogant, narcissistic, sexist, thuggish, unethical, pandering, coercing, power-hungry Messiah-wannabe, then, yes – Obama is our guy!!! I must be some kind of heathen, though, because I just don’t buy it. Obama has made the classic mistake – he now believes his own Axelrovian hype. He really DOES think he is The One For Whom We Have Been Waiting!

Not long ago, I was reading a book by Kathy Reichs, a professor at UNC-Charlotte. Her books are the basis for the show, “Bones.” In this particular book, Death Du Jour, the question of cults comes up. Now her main character, Tempe Brennan, is also a professor art UNCC, a forensic anthropologist. Because of a case on which she is working, she goes to a sociology professor at UNCC (and the information in this books on cults is legitimate – it comes from another UNCC professor of Religious Studies, James Tabor). Once you read it, you will see why. Dr. Brennan’s comments will be in italics. Red, the Sociology professor’s, will be in regular typeface. Okey dokey – ready? Here we go:

“All right. What’s a cult?”

“Cults are not just groups of crazies who follow weird leaders. At least the way I use the term, they are organizations with a set of common features.” (On age 295, Red makes the point that cults can also be political parties.)

“Yes.” I leaned back in my chair.

“A cult forms around a charismatic individual who promises something. This individual professes some special knowledge. Sometimes the claim is access to ancient secrets, sometimes it’s an entirely new discovery to which he or she alone is privy. Sometimes it’s a combination of both. The leader offers to share the information with those who follow. Some leaders offer utopia. Or a way out. Just come along, follow me. I’ll make the decisions. All will be fine.”

“How does that differ from a priest or rabbi?”

“In a cult it’s this charismatic leader who eventually becomes the object of devotion; in some cases he’s actually deified. And as that happens, the leader comes to hold extraordinary control over the lives of his followers.

“Cults are totalistic, authoritarian. The leader is supreme and delegates power to very few. The leader’s morality becomes the only acceptable theology. The only acceptable behavior. And, as I said, veneration is eventually centered on him, not on supreme beings or abstract principles.

“And often there is a double set of ethics. Members are urged to be honest and loving to each other but to deceive and shun outsiders. (Emphasis mine.) Established religions tend to follow one set of rules for everybody.”

“How does a leader gain such control?”

“That’s another important element. Thought reform. Cult leaders use a variety of psychological processes to manipulate their members. Some leaders are fairly benign, but others are not and really exploit the idealism of their followers.

“The way I see it, there are two broad types of cults, both of which use thought reform. The commercially packaged ‘awareness programs’” – he gestured quotation marks – “use very intense persuasion techniques. These groups keep members by getting them to buy more and more courses.

“Then there are the cults that recruit followers for life. These groups use organized psychological and social persuasion to produce extreme attitudinal changes. As a result they come to exert enormous control over the lives of their members. They are manipulative, deceptive, and highly exploitative.”

Amy here – hmmm, let’s just guess which one I think Obama is?!?! Ahem. The discussion continues, but I thought this was significant:

“I still don’t see why anyone but a nutcase would fall for such crap.”

“Not at all.” He shook his head. “It’s not just marginal people who get sucked in. In some studies approximately two thirds of the respondents come from normal families and were demonstrating age-appropriate behavior when they entered a cult.”

“Has your research shed light on why people seek out these movements?”

“Often they don’t. These groups seek you. And as I’ve said, these leaders can be incredibly charming and persuasive.”

AMY here – the discussion continues, and then this question: “I just don’t get it, Red. How can people be so gullible?”

“It’s seductive to think that you’re elite. Chosen. Most cults teach their members that only they are enlightened and everyone else in the world is left out. Lesser in some way. It’s powerful stuff.” (Kathy Reichs, Death Du Jour, 1999, pp 295 – 300)

See what I mean?? Do you see it?!? To me it has been crystal clear. Obama has been engaging in “thought reform,” as discussed in this book, and has taken it to a massive level. For him to go to the House of Representatives as The Anointed One, elevating himself to a height neither deserved or REAL, says a lot. And it says just as much about all of the House members who clapped themselves silly. They wanted to bask in the glow of The One, they wanted to show they, too, are in his employ.

This is frightening stuff. I thought Bush was bad, but I fear Obama more. He has demonstrated time and time again that he is beholden to no person, and no position. He can dismiss even relatives with seeming ease, and change positions as quickly as the wind blows. He is a dangerous man, and his followers likewise. Not all of them, mind you, but enough of them seem to have this mentality, which is mighty scary, indeed.

What next? The Empire State Building renamed, “The Barack Obama Building?” The Rocky Mountains renamed, like they want to do in Antigua (see article about schools changing their names)? All because this man is half-African? When this becomes the standard by which we elevate people, we are starting a dangerous, dangerous precedent indeed. After the election, I wrote a piece entitled, “Judging A Man” on this very issue (I was not alone – many better writers had pieces on this topic, too). But when you have mayors claiming that Obama’s singular achievement is being bi-racial, you know we are losing the edge as a nation. Add that to the rampant level of cheating and general dishonesty by our young people, sanctioned by their parents and, too often, their teachers (the latter often take a great deal of abuse if they try to maintain standards of decency), and I despair for this country and what we are becoming.

A number of videos and comments on Youtube and elsewhere have compared the personality cult surrounding Barack Obama with Adolph Hitler, drawing parallels among other things with the way that thuggish supporters have tried to silence Obama’s opponents, the way people like the Black Panthers – in a manner similar to Hitler’s Brownshirts – tried to stop people voting, and the way the media has been manipulated in his favor, just as it was in Hitler’s day.

There have been further parallels drawn with the way Obama has got support from leading businessmen like George Soros, Warren Buffett, the owners of Google and Youtube among others, while Hitler too had support from top industrialists – like steel tycoons Alfred Krupp and Fritz Thyssen – who contributed huge amounts to Hitler’s funds and mistakenly believed that they could make Hitler dance to their tune.

Some have also drawn parallels between Obama and other charismatic leaders who led their followers to oblivion, including David Koresh of the Branch Davidian and Jim Jones of the Jonestown mass suicide. Saddam Hussein is another that springs to mind.

One thing that all these people had in common, apart from being the center of charismatic personality cults, was that they all became recklessly suicidal when things began to go wrong, and took as many people down with them as they could.

This is a prospect that I find even more disturbing than talk of Obama’s socialist leanings and his connection with unsavory people like Jeremiah Wright and terrorists like Bill Ayres.

What led to the downfall of these charismatic leaders and their followers was the idolatry surrounding them and the huge weight of expectations that rested on them.

The pressures of such idolatry and expectations can unhinge even the most well balanced and well-intentioned people. But most if not all of these people were not exactly well balanced, however persuasive they might have been with their followers.

Most if not all suffered problems of self esteem following traumatic childhoods, like Obama’s father abandoning his family, and being moved around from place to place as a child and not being able to settle.

A common result of such childhood trauma and the low self esteem it generates is a deep-seated need for approval and acclamation, and in this Obama has probably exceeded his wildest dreams. He has become an idol to millions and millions.

One of the big dangers is that the objects of such idolatry begin to believe their own hype. Even if they don’t, they almost inevitably begin to lose touch with reality.

It’s what killed Elvis Presley in the end. He became an object of worship and he couldn’t cope with it. He was after all just a simple country boy and this idolatry pushed him increasingly into a world in which he no longer had any idea of where reality began or ended.

Nobody can cope with the pressure of such idolatry, and nobody can cope with the kind of expectations Obama’s followers have heaped upon his shoulders. Like the expectations of the woman who expected Obama to pay her mortgage and her gas bills.

Now she was not alone in this. It is obvious that there are many, many people who believe that Obama is going to be the answer to all their problems. And the sad, the tragic thing is, he is not.

In a way the whole situation reminds me of the time in 1960 when the Congo region of Africa gained its independence from Belgium. The people of the Congo thought this was going to be the end of hunger and the start of prosperity for all. People teemed into the city from the countryside carrying buckets and baskets and anything else they could find to hold all the good things they expected to be given as a result of national independence. And of course they were sadly disappointed.

The totally unrealistic expectations surrounding Obama are not too far removed from the expectations ifrom the the Congo during that time, and it these unrealistic expectations that have led to some vomit-inducing hymns of praise for a man who has proved nothing so far except that he is a very skillful talker and a great manipulator of people, just as Hitler was.

Now one can understand and sympathize to some extent with the fact that to many people he represents a triumph over racism, even though some might argue that there has been reverse racism with the vast majority of black Americans voting for him even though he was the least qualified of all the candidates.

But the feelings of many Obama supporters have gone far beyond the realms of sanity or reality. For many people Obama has become a cult figure, and the history of cult figures shows they are extremely vulnerable to self-destruction.

In the past, when expectations have exceeded the reality of what is possible, the tendency has been for those in power to take reckless measures, and this is one of the dangers we face with Obama. Added to this is the fact that with no experience of government, he has no solid foundation on which to base any decisions.

I suspect that Obama may already be increasingly disturbed by the idolatry and expectations surrounding him. I wouldn’t be surprised if he holds many of his followers in contempt for the impossible things they expect of him, a man with no real training or experience to govern the most powerful nation in the world.

But there are many signs that Obama actually believes in his own hype, and that is the most frightening thing of all.

Yes, that’s right, someone is actually working on a Barack Obama National Holiday, as was done for several other of Achievement and Greatness.

Let’s examine with what Barack Obama has in common with other people we name National Holidays after.

They were all long gone before we made a holiday in their names and they all achieved great things. They were honored with a National Holiday in their names AFTER they actually DID something for America.

George Washington was the first President of the United States. Barack obama hasn’t even served a term yet.

Abraham Lincoln still ranks Number One amongst greatest presidents in popularity polls. He presided over a civil war that freed the slaves. He is also well known for his Gettysburg Address. Barack Obama is known for his Typical White Woman Address. However, the plans for Barack’s National Holiday on his Inauguration Day will include celebration of Abe Lincoln’s birthday. It sure is nice of them to include Abe in Barack Obama Day.

Perhaps we could declare every Inauguration Day from this day forward as Barack Obama Day. Of course, in order to do that, we would have to imagine that nobody else will ever be inaugurated as President. Perhaps Barack can just be a permanent President. Cool huh? I think some other countries do it like that too…..

Both George and Abe already share a day named President’s Day. Perhaps Obama would like to hop on as America’s first living great man who fancies himself comparable to George and Abe. We could call the day Presidents and Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh Baaaaaaaaaa Maaaaaaaaaa Day.

Martin Luther King died for the cause of equal rights. We have a National Holiday in his name. He made the “I have a dream” speech. Deval Patrick Barack Obama made the “Yes We Can” speech.

Let’s see, I can’t think of any other individuals we have actually ever honored with a National Holiday. But we do have other National Holidays with reason:

New Year’s Day: In celebration of the start of a New Year. Generally people celebrate on the night before in places where people with no class get fall-down drunk, throw-up and then try to kiss someone at midnight. Hopefully they make it home without killing someone. In the USA, New Year’s Eve is lauded as the single most lucrative night for police departments seeking steep fines from drivers with high blood-alcohol counts.

Easter: In honor of the rising of Jesus on the third day, celebrated by Christians but everybody gets the day off whether they believe or not.

Memorial Day: In honor of people who have died, including those who died in service to our country. One Memorial Day, cemeteries become a kind of meeting place where everyone goes to pretty up the graves of their relatives and compare who spent more on the headstones. Most of them rarely return until the same time next year.

Independence Day is our celebration of America’s independence. Ironically, Taxation Without Representation seems to have returned to our shores, though.

Labor Day: I really have no idea how this one got started. I would imagine it was a successful attempt by unions to get another day off during the long haul between Independence Day and Veteran’s Day. Coincidentally, it is always celebrated on a Monday so that everybody can get that long weekend. I also know that Labor Day was formerly used as a measuring device for white shoes, as in “You don’t wear white after Labor Day”.

Columbus Day: To honor the man who managed to discover America when there were already people here who discovered it first. No easy feat. That must be why they named the place after Amerigo Vespucci. Beats me. All I know is I had an Italian Aunt who died not talking to me because i told her you can’t discover a place if somebody already discovered it first.

Veterans Day: To honor the people who put their lives on the line in order to retain what now appears to be a precarious Democracy in America. Many of them have limbs missing. Some of them were Prisoners of War. All of them risked their lives to serve America. Many of them died doing just that.

Thanksgiving: The very first Thanksgiving occurred when the settlers in America celebrated the bounty they had received thanks to the Native Americans, who taught the starving settlers how to hunt and fish. The settlers invited the Native Americans to join them in a three day celebration of the bounty. This, of course, was well before we annihilated them. Later, the 13 colonies each celebrated specific days of bounty Thanksgiving. It was Abe Lincoln who finally led the charge to make Thanksgiving for everyone fall on the third Thursday in November.

Christmas: In honor of the birth of Jesus. Perhaps Obama would like to hop on to this one as well.

As you can see, our very few National Holidays that are actually assigned to people, are attributed to people who actually lived and died and did some miraculous and noteworthy things for humanity in between.

Can anybody list the miraculous and noteworthy things for humanity Barack Obama has done yet? I’ll wait….

As far as I know, there are no people we have ever named National Holidays for who were alive when we declared the holiday. And we certainly never declared a National Holiday in someone’s name before he did much of anything. At least not in American Democracy. However, there are people in the past who ruled other countries and were celebrated that way while they were still living. They were kind of what you called “works in progress”. Usually, there were posters of their images on the outside and inside of every building. People had their pictures in their homes. There were statues built in their likenesses. People worshipped them out of fear and neediness– and some even had special salutes and parades in their honor.

Stalin, Mussolini, Napoleon and Hitler come to mind. In a more contemporary vein, Saddam Hussein also comes to mind. North Korea’s Dear Leader, however, is an example of a living person who is worshipped that way as well. And let us not forget Fidel.

So you might say the precedent has been set for Barack, although I am not so sure it would be a source of pride for America to follow these examples. Now, let’s see: What do all these Leaders have in common, living and dead? I know! They ruled/rule over heartless dictatorships, kept/keep their people suppressed and hungry, stifled/stifle free speech and tended/tend to get rid of anybody who irritated/irritates them or spoke/speaks out against them.

So you see, Barack Obama just doesn’t fill the bill, unless he wants to become America’s Fidel Castro or Dear Leader. This, of course, would require the removal of Democracy and Capitalism from our country. I know some folks seem rather interested in that concept, but, you see, most of us aren’t– and history tells us that most of us would be willing to fight vehemently in order to protect our Democracy. This is especially so for those Americans who came here to get away from that kind of rule.

But hey, we do understand Obama’s Narcissism and need for adulation. After all, who ever heard of “The Office of The President-Elect” until now? And with him comes many of his Narcissistic followers in tow, also known as Blood Sucking Dependents in most Baby Boomer homes. So I have an even better idea that might placate his nearly insatiable need to be worshipped:

Why don’t we just plaster his face on ALL of our currency? Take those other guys off and just put his face on all of our money, just like Saddam Hussein did. Is that cool or what? I mean, who needs old dead people like George Washington or Abe Lincoln when we have a Barack Obama? This would also make it much easier for children in our dumbed-down schools to answer questions like, “Who is on the twenty dollar bill?”. The answer would always be the same no matter which bill the teacher asks about: Barack Obama!

Guess what else? We already have a coin! No sense of leaving coins out. We already have the basic design.

We might as well put his face on all our coins too! That way, when the next Great Depression hits us, right after Barack redistributes incomes and most of the rich people move to another country to get away from here, we can all beg on the street and say, “Hey Buddy, can you spare a Barack dime? How about a Barack nickel, then?”

Also, since we will all be dependent on our government for survival during the Great Obama Depression, right after the top 20% move to their villas in other countries, we could put his name on a stamp. But not a USPS stamp, since nobody will be able to afford those. I’m thinking a more functional stamp:

And then there’s also that Mount Rushmore idea……

Giving him his due, Charlie Rose’s show last night (damn, the video isn’t up yet!) is very interesting — David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, has particularly insightful remarks. Michael Beschloss, the presidential historian, is also on, and I always get the giggles when I see him because I recall how the great Yale Shakespearean scholar Harold Bloom verbally condemned Beschloss and his books to the ash heap of history, as only the acerbic Professor Bloom can.

Charlie’s show last night includes a segment aired in June 2008 with the three Emanuel brothers. You’ve probably heard the remark that his mother said that Rahm is the least successful of her three sons, one being a renowned physician and the other being such a great Hollywood agent that HBO’s “Entourage” character Ari was inspired by the real Ari Emanuel. Perhaps NOW Rahm’s mom will grant Rahm equal status! I write that with affection, all the politics aside. Ah! I found the video of the three brothers last June, in full. Now, POLITICS ASIDE, this should be a fascinating show to listen to (Charlie’s videos rarely require that one also watch, so you can browse our blog and the Web while listening) + I found the YouTube snippet of the show:

In fact, I INSIST that you watch this entire show because Ezekiel Emanuel, M.D. has written what the famed economist Larry Summers (now an Obama economic adviser) calls the most important book on health care — and his ideas may well contribute substantively to the new health care systems for this nation! (I SO HOPE that that plan will be called the Clinton Plan, since it must be HILLARY CLINTON who introduces and succeeds in getting a health care plan for ALL Americans! She deserves nothing less.)

That was the more positive, interesting and forward-looking side of politics at present. Then there’s this: Someone sent me this comment that was posted at Atlas Shrugs. Okay, I’m scratching my head. We get this kind of sociopathic and sometimes psychopathic behavior here too. What happened in four years to change “Democrats” (I use the term advisedly) from civilized people into monstrous thugs?

In 2004, which I recall vividly, we sort of glared at the Kerry supporters at the county convention, and they sort of glared at us, but that was it! In the end — it took a while — we joined in supporting Kerry because at least he had SOME qualifications. When Kerry lost, we were grief-stricken, but soldiered on. Together. But now? Whatever happened to far too many of you?

You people are pathetic!

Your racist fear mongering will not go unchallenged! Soon we will shut down your hate spewing web sites. We will confiscate your firearms. In prison, you will get an education on the error of your ways. We will take your children and raise them as our own and instill in them the values of social justice. We will have a new American Republic of justice and order for all!

You time is almost up! Prepare for the dung heap of history!

Of note, Atlas Shrugs — whose writers would not probably want much to do with me because I’m too liberal for their tastes, but who cares — has a couple articles worth perusing, described below:

SCOTUS SOUTER TELLS OBAMA TO PRODUCE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DECEMBER 1 UPDATED: /OR NOT

– I hope this is entirely true and thoroughly fact-checked. We haven’t taken the considerable days (not hours) it would require to even begin to study this, and we’d need the expertise of many attorneys. So, all i hope is that this story has merit.

PERHAPS IT WAS AHMAD NIHAD’S APARTMENT….

Snippet:

How gruesome. Terrible. Imagine they planning that goes into such a thing. Planning by what was arguably the most modern, cultured state in Europe. So close at our backs, the damaged still walk among us with vacant eyes.

   
Report: Plans for Auschwitz found in Berlin apartment

Those so odious, and sociopathic and psychopathic would find much in common with some people in the U.S. who despise and wish to destroy all who disagree with them: the THUGS who are so mentally ill that, in the midst of a historic victory, they cannot stop hating for one second.

:::::::

* Footnote: Casey Anthony is charged with first-degree murder, based on state-of-the-art forensics, although the body of her three-year-old Kaylee hasn’t been found yet. (I am adding this because one of our writers, who doesn’t watch cable news, didn’t know who Casey Anthony is, and asked me to explain.)

This is one of those cases that has seized the attention of all the cable news networks. This is, and it makes me so upset, yet another instance in which a missing WHITE child or woman gets all the attention and resources of cable news outlets, whereas a missing BLACK or BROWN child rarely gets any attention. And it shames CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News that they go overboard on missing WHITE children or women — particularly if they’re pretty — but so rarely focus on children or women who are not white.

It must outrage people of color everywhere. And they deserve to be outraged.

Why didn’t they say this in their magazine BEFORE the election?

Yesterday I shared with you the audio of Tom Brokaw being interviewed by Charlie Rose where both men admit they don’t know who Obama really is or what he intends to do in office. Now, a post election admission from Jon Meacham and Evan Thomas of Newsweek; also interviewed by Charlie Rose. Audio is provided with commentary by Rush Limbaugh (transcript):

MEACHAM: You know, they don’t let him out. And have you ever seen a victory speech where there was no one else on stage?

ROSE: Mmm.

MEACHAM: No adoring wife, no cute kid. He is the messenger.

THOMAS: There is a slightly creepy cult of personality about all this. I mean, he’s such an admirable –

ROSE: Slightly. Creepy. Cult of personality.

THOMAS: Yes.

ROSE: What’s slightly creepy about it?

THOMAS: It — it — it just makes me a little uneasy that he’s so singular. He’s clearly managing his own spectacle. He’s a deeply manipulative guy.

RUSH: Now, let me tell you what they’re saying that they’re not saying. We’ve seen this before. We have seen this creepy cult of personality. We have seen this singular, managing his own spectacle. We’ve seen this deeply manipulative guy. We saw this before. They are scared. They are not saying that, but I hear fear. Here’s the next bite. Charlie Rose continues here with a question.

ROSE: Watching him last night in that speech, he finishes –

MEACHAM: Yeah.

ROSE: — and he sort of — it’s almost like he then ascends to look at the circumstance.

MEACHAM: He watches us watching him.

THOMAS: Watching him!

ROSE: Exactly!

THOMAS: He does –

MEACHAM: It’s amazing.

ROSE: It is amazing.

THOMAS: He writes about this metaphor being a screen upon which Americans will project. He said they want of Barack Obama; I’m not sure I am Barack Obama.

ROSE: Mmm!

THOMAS: He had — he has the self-awareness to know that this creature he’s designed isn’t necessarily a real person, and he’s self-aware enough –

ROSE: Ahhhhhh!

RUSH: Ahhhh. Charlie Rose, light goes on, ahhhh. Self-aware enough to know that this creature he’s designed isn’t necessarily a real person.

That is fear. These guys are looking at Obama and they’ve seen him the exact way we have, all of this time. They only now after they think they got him into office are now starting to talk about their fears about how nobody knows anything about him, his resume is thin, he’s only written two books, and they’re autobiographies, we don’t know what other books he’s read. Yes, we do.

We don’t know anything about him. It’s creepy, never seen a victory speech with nobody on stage — what is this making fun of Biden, by the way?

Locking Biden in the bar so he doesn’t come out? Look at all they hid. Look at all that they refused to report.

They had plenty of chances to write editorials at Newsweek magazine, and they didn’t write one reflective of what they really saw and know and fear about Obama.

At what point will Meacham and Thomas, along with Brokaw and so many others face the fact that they committed journalistic malpractice by hiding the character concerns they are only now sharing about Obama?

Were they just tooooo busy digging dirt on Sarah Palin’s children and Joe the Plumber to tell the American people what a “creepy,” “manipulative,” “creature” Obama is?

…………..

Read the original post and comments at Flopping Aces’ “Newsweek Editors: Obama a “Creepy,” “Deeply Manipulative,” “Creature”.

Don’t think for a moment that just because the election is over, that President-elect Obama’s Kool-Aid drunk hordes of internet volunteer/bots/thugs are going to fade away and go back to playing Doom, Sims, Dungeons and Dragons or trolling for dates on Facebook.

In fact, one of the netroots’ great gurus, none other than Joe Trippi believes the Community Organizer in Chief will harness the power of his millions of devoted on-line minions to create one of the most powerful lobbying forces ever. Frank Greve of the McClatchy newspapers writes about that here.

Oppose the President at your own peril.

Joe Trippi, the Internet politics guru whose computer geeks made Howard Dean a contender in 2004 and who went on to design Obama’s socially networked campaign machine, offers a provocative and educated guess.

Trippi predicted that Obama would use his forces, first and foremost, to intimidate congressional foes of his agenda, rally his allies and forge “one of the most powerful presidencies in American history.”

Certainly, Obama reaches the White House with the biggest, best organized, fastest-acting grass-roots army in the history of presidential campaigning.

Moreover, because his Internet operation was miles ahead of Republican John McCain’s, Obama’s liberal-to-libertarian electronic activists are in a position to dominate the new political medium much as conservative Republicans dominate talk radio.

As for political utility, many thousands of volunteers such as Hood will be deployable within hours, with great precision and at almost no cost, thanks to the campaign’s state-of-the-art information-management systems.

The president-elect’s political operatives know, for example, the ZIP codes and hence the congressional districts of each of Obama’s million most active campaigners, those who volunteered via his Web site mybarackobama.com. It’s a social network that the campaign set up to communicate needs, events and assignments to volunteers.

We have already witnessed the power of his online intimidation network. Pro-Hillary websites shut down after thousands of false spam reports from Obots, personal e-mails of bloggers reported for spam and turned off as well and of course those lovely trolls who invade every site to hijack any discussion that deviates from the Obama party line.

Several media outlets were bombarded with harassing phone calls, e-mails and protestors minutes after the devoted received “Obama action alerts” letting them know that opposition voices were soon to appear on certain programs.

Those who read here are already well aware that the candidate who promised a new kind of politics also approves of a new kind of political dissent. That is of course, no dissent at all.

It really is scary to think of how he might use that power to pursue his agenda. All the more reason that we at No Quarter must begin to organize ourselves and grow our ranks. It will be the only way to combat the power of the mob.

It’s clear to many Democrats that a radical clique has taken control of the Party. Democratic ideals once held to be sacrosanct, including freedom of speech, one person one vote, and an intolerance of sexism have been violently pushed aside for the benefit of Obama. The media drumbeat for Obama is incessant; the media has even stopped pretending to be neutral. We’re seeing the country through Alice’s Looking Glass now and everything is upside-down and backwards. In an effort to save our Party and country, many Democrats are actively working to defeat Obama.

In 1980, the last Japanese soldier of World War Two, Captain Fumio Nakahira, was discovered on Mt. Halcon, Mindoro Island, Philippines. During the previous 35 years, Captain Nakahira had survived alone, serving his Emperor and believing that the War had not yet ended. (This was 15 years after the Gilligan’s Island episode).

Captain Nakahira comes to mind when I think about the thousands of disaffected and disillusioned Democrats across the country who will not be voting for Obama. If Obama is elected despite our efforts to defeat him, it will codify for a generation the Chicago corruption, race-baiting, and misogyny practiced by Obama and his minions; tactics which caused many of to leave the Party. And Obama’s race-baiting, misogynistic thugs will say: Good riddance!

Camping out on our own private Mt. Halcons, many thousands of men and women will remain committed to the causes which brought us to the Democratic Party in the first place. We won’t stop being concerned about sexism, race relations, economic opportunity, and national security.

It’s now dawning on Republicans and independents that a creeping totalitarianism is sweeping the country. Obama’s Truth Squads use the power of the state to stifle free expression, McCain supporters are jeered in public, and Obama’s shock troops — in a form of hate speech so ugly that it can only be described as a pogrom against women — wear clothing which declares that the Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, is a “cunt.” Sexual terrorism is the new form of Left-wing Kristallnacht.

Where did this come from?

The ecstatic mania of Obama’s supporters comes from many places, and I don’t pretend to understand all of the sources. Many who support Obama are low-information liberals, do-good progressives, proud African Americans, and fed-up independents. I can’t blame these groups; the Bush Administration has been a disaster. There is, however, a core group of Obama supporters who believe that the Senator from Illinois will bring revolutionary change. And their desire for the revolution is all-consuming and any tactic is considered fair game: caucus fraud, sexism, race-baiting, voter intimidation, online smear campaigns, sexual terrorism, and voter fraud. Anything to win.

I hold Obama accountable for the tone of this campaign and the actions of his supporters. From “hoodwink and bamboozled” to his “lipstick on a pig,” Obama’s sexist double-speak and race-baiting innuendos have unleashed something very ugly into the ether. Obama has given his supporters the tacit encouragement to cross lines of acceptable discourse in order to destroy his political opponents. In the Obama world, Bill Clinton is a racist, Hillary is a bitch, Sarah Palin is a cunt, and John McCain is erratic and senile. I fully expect that an Obama Administration, like all recent Administrations, will continue in campaign mode and I expect these tactics to continue. This was the reason, to borrow a phrase, that we sought to fumigate our Party.

Like many of you, I won’t have anything to do with Obama or his party. Obama’s tactics go against the reason I was a Democrat and no pleas and no threats will force me to give up my principles. Above my computer I have postcards with the images of Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy; my Hillary poster is in the corner and remains unframed.

started running the “stages of grief” trope on Hillary supporters way back in February—you know, from anger, through denial, bargaining, depression, to acceptance. It’s an easy riff to run, even for bad writers, so it’s been all over the Obama blogs

Of course this “stages of grief” narrative oozed with sexism and condescension. The subtext implied that Hillary’s female supporters, emotional at the loss, had to be given post-partum recovery time, but then they would come around and, for those hold-outs, a few reminders about Roe v. Wade would get them in line. That was the strategy throughout the summer.

McCain’s selection of Palin as vice president, exquisitely timed to halt Obama’s bounce, has dominated the news for more than two weeks. It has also radically re-shaped the race. By most reports, Obama is slightly behind McCain in national polls and, more importantly, McCain has taken the lead in the electoral college.

The panic from the Obamabots in palpable.

Let me suggest that there are 3 levels of panic.

1. Wunderwaffen.

During World War Two, Hitler forced his beleaguered arms manufacturers to produce “miracle weapons,” strange armaments which he believed would turn the war in Germany’s favor.

Like armchair generals in a losing battle, losing political campaigns have supporters who desire the Wunderwaffen, a magical weapon which can sink the other side or a proven winner who can take the reins of the campaign and guide it to victory. In 2004, while Kerry was being hammered by Bush, many pleaded for James Carville to take over Kerry’s war room and provide the message discipline from 1992. From the Democratic Underground, August 27, 2004:

I have been saying this for over a month now…I wrote Mr Carville the following email:

Mr. Carville, please save the Kerry campaign!
He is throwing out sound bites that are perfect ammo for Rove and his evil crew. You can train this man.You can save this campaign and this country. We need you Mr. Carville.

In 2008, as victory becomes increasingly uncertain, Obama supporters are banking on voter registration and the belief that cell phone users are not accounted for in national polls. The same theories were trotted out in 2004 but the polls then fairly predicted the actual vote. However, there are even stranger ideas floating around Obama-land. At TalkLeft, there’s an armchair general named mmc9431 who believes that Obama should announce part of his cabinet now and turn them into roving ambassadors for the campaign:

Obama needs to come out with something very bold on his own if he’s going to have any chance of regaining the advantage.
Maybe he should announce ahead of time, 3 of his cabinet choices that would motivate his base. Sec of State, Attorney General and Sec of Treasury. These 3 could then go out and campaign of their platform. We’d have three people out there constantly pounding on issues rather than personalities.

Likewise, over at Daily Kos, Ursa Majority’s Wunderwaffen is one good television ad that will convince all the “low information” rubes to vote for Obama:

Yes, you heard it right. We need a killer ad (radio and TV) to get back onto message while shrinking McCain. And, with middle and low information swing voters, you’ve got to try to tie it all together in one digestible message. So, let’s get back to our effective messages of the post “Obama as Britney” era (i.e., McCain isn’t taking the issues seriously) and use McCain’s words and actions against him.

2. Denial

Obama supporters are now somewhere between searching for the magic bullet and denying that anything is wrong. The Kerry campaign is also rich with similar examples at a similar time in the campaign.

On September 17, 2004, almost exactly four years ago, Cartooner, at Democratic Underground, predicted that John Kerry would win in a landslide:

Call it an epiphany; call it crazy, and it’s just a hunch; but hey, A HUNCH made Quasi Modo famous…

~snip~

The economy, health care, jobs, LIES,

the messages are FINALLY STARTING TO RESONATE …

Ok… Maybe I’m an optimist; but I think Kerry will win on a
LANDSLIDE …

This campaign is also filled with delusion. A poster on Craig’s List gives Obama odds I’d like to take to Las Vegas:

Date: 2008-09-12, 12:32AM EDT
Location: new haven

He’s definitely going to win. No question.

What chances would you give him? I’d give him 100%.

3. Acceptance

The last stage is filled with sadness and recriminations.

Lentinel writes:

my heart sinks.
I lay some of the blame at Obama’s door.
As soon as he was assured of the nomination he turned South, figuratively speaking.
He voted for FISA.
He disowned public financing.
He went on preaching to evangelicals.
He waffled on his commitment to withdraw troops from Iraq.
He waffled on his commitment to the right of women to an abortion.
And, of course, he went on to treat Hillary Clinton and her supporters like dirt.

And Daily Kos’ DaveinSiliconValley has a diary titled: “Why (Sadly) Obama Will Probably Lose”

A few days ago I had a conversation with a mid-fifties nonreligious, pro-choice, Caucasian, suburban mother who thinks the Iraq war was a terrible mistake, that Bush was a terrible president, and is concerned that McCain may get us into another war, but she is “seriously thinking” about voting for McCain. I will give you a clue. She is absolutely going to vote for McCain.

I asked, given the way she feels on the issues, why isn’t she voting for Obama? She said “I don’t know.” I pressed her. She said, “I don’t trust him.” I asked why and she said “I don’t know.”

Obama can hit this lady with a thousand commercials explaining his stand on the issues and why his plans for the country are better than McCain’s plans and it will have no effect whatsoever on her vote. Zero. She is issue-proof.

What’s going on? Is it just subliminal racism? It’s not that simple.

After the 2004 election, Democrats became obsessed with psychoanalyzing the electorate. I engaged in some of this myself. Searching for answers, we read What’s the Matter with Kansas? but failed to find the answer. Believing, like DaveinSiliconvalley, that Republicans controlled the electorate with subliminal powers, we read George Lakoff’s Don’t think of an Elephant, but we found that framing issues is only one small part of winning elections. Framing can come across as patronizing, e.g., you’re pushing your agenda on the electorate instead of listening to their needs.

In 2006, as I began thinking about the next presidential cycle, I finally got around to reading Hillary’s Living History and President Clinton’s My Life. The Clintons, both policy wonks, believe that winning campaigns put forward good policies which appeal to the electorate’s aspirations. The voters do not need to be cajoled or hypnotized into voting for a candidate. The voters decide the issues and the politicians offer solutions.

The Clintons taught Democrats how to win elections. Remember, Bill Clinton was the first Democrat elected to a second term since 1936. Also, let’s not forget the magnitude of Hillary’s victories; she won Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky; she won West Virginia by 40%. A few caucus states and Obama’s delegate stealing in Michigan made the difference. Let’s not pretend that Obama was the people’s choice. The primary campaign was not a decisive win by either candidate, and millions of Hillary supporters will never forgive the way she was treated by those within the Party, to say nothing of the media.

The Clintons win by offering proposals to make people’s lives better. On the campaign trail, they talk incessantly about helping working people, and they both have an unwavering commitment to the nation’s defense. The Clintons reject flowery rhetoric and use a clear communication strategy. Their strategy is effective; they know how to build winning coalitions. I have no doubt that Hillary would now be locking down battleground states on her march to the White House.

Hillary won the popular vote and nearly all the important states. She was positioned to win the General Election. Hillary, like President Clinton, built a coalition based on economic opportunity and national renewal. Obama took the nomination because he controlled much of the Party’s infrastructure: his supporters controlled the hierarchy of the Democratic Party, specifically the Rules and Bylaws Committee, and he was funded and fueled by the activist base, by groups like MoveOn.org, and he was supported by the netroots and the media.

Now that the General Election is in peril, these groups, who failed to provide the base of the Party with any reason to vote for Obama other than habit, scramble to connect with the very voters they demonized during the primary as “low information” and hopelessly bitter. No one television ad or high paid adviser can turn the tide. Let them panic.

My oldest brother sent me the piece Gloria Steinem wrote on Gov. Palin, an elitist, patronizing piece in which she diminishes people who hunt (not understanding, I guess, that many people hunt to put FOOD on the table, especially in these difficult economic times), among other smears. So, I felt compelled to write him back. A lot of this is information those who have been paying attention already know:

I am not an apologist for Sarah Palin, but I find the argument that SHE is inexperienced as Steinem said to be laughable. The DNC selected the least experienced candidate ever, one who refuses to make available ANY paper trail at all – no college or law school transcripts, no medical records, no passports, no birth certificates, and claims he had NOT ONE PAPER or DATE BOOK available from his time in the IL Senate (which is part-time service, btw). One who has no legislative accomplishments of note to his name. Never mind the LONG list of his sordid associates which throw his whole “good judgment” stance out the window.

Or his lack of chairing ONE meeting of the European Affairs Subcommittee, which oversees Afghanistan, and now claims that we need to do more abt Afghanistan,and who wants to return to the foreign policy of DONALD RUMSFELD…If this was BUSH, the Progressives would be going batshit crazy screaming our fool heads off.


But for some reason, this is all fine and dandy. Never mind all of the university professors who are now shrugging off his constant plagiarizing (and his picking a running mate who is also a plagiarizer), an act that can get students thrown OUT of universities. Why? I really don’t get this infatuation with this man! Without a teleprompter, he can barely even talk!! But he is “eloquent,” and has “good judgm ent.” Um, no. And he is sexist as all hell, to boot.

And for some reason, Obama is constantly comparing himself to the VP pick, not the presidential nominee. Much easier for him to pick on a woman than a man, as he demonstrated time and again during this campaign. Flipping Hillary off, brushing her off his shoulder and his shoe, having “99 Problems BUt a Bitch Ain’t One” playing when he won Iowa. Class act this guy. Oh, and for what it’s worth – he lives 1 1/2 blocks away from Bill Ayers, who lives right down the street from the Farrakhan Compound. What a coincidence.

Oh – is now when I tell you that my brother has a PhD., and developed some major software, whose clients include NASA? Yeah. He’s supposed to be smart (my younger brother and his wife – both PhDs – also are big Obama supporters, at least my brother is. My sis-in-law is a “Vote Democrat” no matter what more than anything.). Just goes to show that there is a difference between being educated and having common sense. I can say that because I have BOTH!!! Ahem.

Here’s what he wrote back:

These are interesting accusations. Do you know these things for a fact? What is your source of information? Is there some doubt about the fact that Obama was elected president of the Harvard Law Review? You don’t get to that place by being a flaky biscuit. Is there any doubt about the fact that McCain was at the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy?

I don’t follow you with the Donald Rumsfield foreign policy thing. What do you mean?

One thing I can say for sure. I have seen Obama in many interviews and town hall type conversations, besides the podium speeches. He has always impressed me with his speaking ability in off the cuff situations. This is a sharp dude.

I also like Joe Biden very much. He is a solid, decent, knowledgeable person.

At the end of the day, this is about policies, not personalities. Who do you think is going to best implement the objectives of Hillary Clinton? If you say McCain-Palin, then I don’t see how you get there.

Oh, boy. Evidently, he does not have the same desire for sources when others are “accused,” but whatever. And yes, he DID go there about the personalities. Here’s my response:

Yes, I know these things for a fact. This is what I do every day, all day long.

I don’t know if I will even vote this year, so don’t assume I am voting for McCain/Palin. I can say that McCain is an honorable man, and has given his entire life i n service to this country. That means something. He is also moderate, and a reformer, something Obama will NEVER be (oh – today’s BIG report is about Obama raging on Palin, particularly about the Bridge to Nowhere, which she did get rid of afterall – and which HE VOTED FOR TWICE!!! He claimed, “Palin Can’t Just Make Stuff Up!” No, that purview belongs to Obama alone.). But Obama will never get my vote. He should never have assumed he would.

So that’s how my morning started – not at ALL about what I was going to write today. But you never know what is going to come up, I reckon. And I know there is evern more about Obama, but I figured I was pushing my luck with him actually reading it this far.

Ah, families…

I stole this brilliant image from Not Your Sweetie blog, illustrating a story on the smear campaign currently being waged against Palin by the Stupid Media, Obama’s surrogates, the so-called “progressives,” the Bots, and the regressive morons who compose the political party formerly known as Democrats.

They first launched baby-gate, a carnival of misogyny celebrated by world-class misogynists accusing Sarah Palin of being her son, Trig’s, grandmother. Then they trotted out Dan Quayle-gate, Barbie-gate, go go boots-gate, trooper-gate, polar bear-gate, pipeline-gate, vindictive bitch-gate, book banning-gate, racist-gate and on and on it goes. And now the Obamacans are using faux personal emails to smear Palin. Here’s the beginning of one that I received from a friend, who received it from a friend, who also received it from a friend:

This is from a Bryn Mawr college grad to her fellow alums

Dear classmates -

As an Alaskan, I am writing to give all of you some information on Sarah Palin, Senator McCain’s choice for VP. As an Alaska voter, I now more than most of you about her and, frankly, I am horrified that he picked her. The most accurate description of her is red neck….

This email is allegedly from a former Bryn Mawr graduate (read, she’s no one’s fool) sent as a heads-up to her fellow alums. In the many paragraphs that follow, the email leaves no stone unturned in its attack against Palin. The biggest giveaway that it’s a fake, besides the relentless savaging of Palin, is the claim that Biden will make a much better VP, followed by the assertion that anyone who supported Hillary should now support Barky. But this is line that cracks me up:

Palin isn’t “squeaky clean” and causes me to think there may be more issues that could come to light.

I have a few names for that light:

William Ayers, Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, Khalid al-Mansour, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jesse Jackson Jr.

This email was followed by another:

Books Sarah Palin wanted banned in Wasilla

This was the subject line of an email from my worried sister-in-law. Based on a Time Magazine article, the email includes a list of dozens of books that Palin is said to have wanted banned from the Wasilla library:

[Former Wasilla mayor] Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. “She asked the library how she could go about banning books,” he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. “The librarian was aghast.” The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn’t be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving “full support” to the mayor.” Mary Ellen Baker resigned from her library director job in 1999.

I found a rebuttal to this smear from the comments to Conflucian garychapelhill’s very fine post “Sometimes They Write (Fake) Letters.

SimoFish, on September 5th, 2008 at 12:41 pm Said:

BTW —- the smear campaign is saying the Gov Palin wanted to ban books — but my girlfriend did all the research and guess what — IT’s NOT TRUE.

HERE’S THE RESEARCH AND e-mail she sent back to her friend.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/03/republican-vp-choice-sarah-palin-tried-ban-books

http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136

hey, so i researched the link you sent me about banning books. i researched this further since I am skeptic about Time.
Time mag had BO on several covers, more than any other candidate. almost monthly. i subscribed to Time and then cancelled after seeing BO on the cover for the 10th time. and was sick of the biased reporting.

check out the first link: i found the article on gamepolitics that reports the story a whole less explosive. no details on books were ever discussed.

i went on line to the Frontiersman and other local papers in Wasilla and Alaska — no such story is depicted. I researched archives 1995- 1999. nothing in the four local and state papers.

which took me to the local board, city council post their records on their local website.
Apparently there are many inquiries, and you will see the link from the City of Wasilla, who has received several inquiries and the Mayor herself says there was no banning.

If she ever made the comment, she didn’t do anything, didn’t pursue, and not a matter of public record. if she ever made more than one comment, it would have made the papers, an ‘letter to the editor’, something. NOTHING is there.

So i don’t buy much into this story line. these are the stories that I call the “sound bites” that feed fear into people who wont’ do the research.

footnote: she is not in support of same sex marriage YET, her first Gubernatorial veto supported securing benefits for same sex partnerships for state employees

I really appreciate SimoFish’s corrective to this smear but, like me, you probably don’t have time to research and debunk each and every attack. As I was writing this, I received two more emails: one citing all the damage Palin will do to women and including the full text of Gloria Steinem’s article in the LATimes. Funny how the same people sending this email called Steinem an old hag when she wrote in favor of Hillary. And the second email contains an article by Charley James entitled “Alaskans Speak (In A Frightened Whisper): Palin Is “Racist, Sexist, Vindictive, And Mean.” Damn she’s scary! No doubt these emails will worsen and continue until Obama’s surrogates have filled every inbox in America. So, I’ve come up with the following response. Feel free to copy it and use it as your own and please include your additions in your comments:

BTW: This looks like a good clearing house on Palin rumors.

Dear friend,

I received your email with the attachment about Sarah Palin. While this report might be scary and threatening to some, to me it sounds like the same the kind of trash written about Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and even Barack Obama. However, since the Clintons are no longer in the race we can leave them out. But what I wonder is why it’s okay to say that Palin is a fundamentalist Christian but not okay to ask why Obama spent twenty years in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s intolerant church? And why is it okay to allege that Palin wants to destroy Alaska’s wildlife but not okay to ask if Obama plans to support Hamas instead of Israel? And people can can accuse Palin of racism based on rumor and hearsay but not hold Obama accountable for playing the race card, quoting Malcolm X and accusing good people, particularly the Clintons, of racism. While I may not agree with Palin’s politics, I am unmoved by the smear campaign launched against her. Please do not send me any more political emails. While this e-mail goes to great lengths to appear to be politically correct and to be doing me a favor, it’s actually savaging someone’s reputation based on shoddy evidence or outright lies. After forty years of voting for the Democratic candidate for president, I want you to know that these sexist and hateful lies against Sarah Palin you forwarded go against the reason I am a Democrat. Therefore, under no circumstance will I be voting for Obama.

Best Regards,