The Shotgun Blog
« One Question for Dona Cadman | Main | An Absurd Fabrication »
Friday, February 29, 2008
Should We Question Obama’s Patriotism?
The conduct and background of Barack Hussein Obama, over a period of years, raise alarming doubts as to the nature of the man and his loyalty to the United States and, more broadly, to Western Civilization. His thin paper trail suggests that he is either a real-life incarnation of Chauncey Gardener – or that he is someone with an agenda playing a very long game. Some of his associations and actions suggest the latter – with all of the danger that implies.
It’s not merely Obama’s refusal to wear an American flag pin. Nor is it his wife’s ridiculous comments that the success of her husband’s campaign allowed her to be proud of America for the first time in her life. The questions which quietly swirl around Obama run deeper – and are far more disturbing – than a few ostentatiously post-nationalist gestures from two confirmed members of the New Class.
These are the fundamental questions of the day:
Who is Barack Hussein Obama?
How was Barack Hussein Obama raised?
What does Barack Hussein Obama believe today?
Barack Hussein Obama was born in 1961. His mother was white and his father was black. That’s about as far as you’ll get in most biographical sketches. But that omits some critical details. In particular, his father was a Kenyan. To some degree or another, he was a Moslem. His family today is Islamic. Given the short time that Obama Sr. was involved in the life of Obama Jr., it’s fair to say that his religion is probably immaterial to any discussion of how Obama was raised. What is more significant is that he was connected to the Kenyan Mau-Mau terrorist group. A group which, I might add, also had notable communist ties. Obama’s mother becoming involved with a man connected to a foreign, communist-inspired terrorist group is very suggestive, especially when we step back further.
Obama’s grandparents, even in the 1950’s, attended what the church’s current pastor describes as, “the little red church on the hill.” One of his mother’s high school friends, speaking today, describes her as a, “fellow traveller” – a phrase pregnant with meaning.
To hammer home the point even further – after her first husband left her, Obama’s mother married Lolo Soetero, another man with connections to the far-left, in this case Indonesia’s crypto-communist government.
This is very significant. In a recent interview, Obama said of his mother that, “(t)he values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics." If Obama’s mother was a communist or fellow traveller, that means something. This is especially true given that Obama’s mother would appear to be the primary direct influence on him – his father having left at such an early age and his stepfather being barely mentioned by the Senator.
A recent column by Cliff Kincaid revealed another alarming connection. The “Frank” who Obama repeatedly refers to as a mentor in his first biography was, in fact, Frank Marshall Davis – a member of the Communist Party. When you add to this Obama’s own admission of having attended “socialist conferences” a disturbing picture begins to emerge.
Connect the dots. A woman raised as a Red Diaper baby has a child with a member of a communist-related group. She raises a son who is mentored by communists and attends “socialist conferences.” What sort of individual is that background likely to produce?
Remember, all of this occurred in the contest of the Great War between communism and the West. Communism isn’t merely a matter of political disagreement; it’s a matter of loyalty.
But, it gets worse.
After his father left, Obama’s mother married another Moslem. Again, this is a suggestive fact. Obviously, we can’t choose who we fall in love with – but Obama’s mother appears to have had, especially for the day, rather exotic taste. It makes one wonder what circles she was running with.
Obama says that he’s no longer a Moslem. Fine. I can accept that. But what of his background? Being raised as a Moslem – and having attended an Islamic school – would seem to make him more likely to be sympathetic towards our enemies in the present war. And, given the impossibility of auditing the contents of the human heart, it opens up all sorts of other, even more disturbing, prospects.
Everything which I’ve just stated would be academic – a matter for curiosity – if Obama’s conduct as a man was beyond reproach. We don’t get to choose who our parents are or what they believe. We don’t get to choose what religions we are inducted or not inducted into as children. We don’t get to choose where we are born. These are all matters in which the individual is blameless. We don’t live in a society which subscribes to the idea that he sins of the fathers must be visited upon the sons.
I do not care – nor should any other person – about the nature of Obama’s ancestors, except to the degree that they have plainly shaped the man that we must contend with today. If Obama rejected his ideological heritage – if he were so firmly and absolutely indentified in the public mind as a fervent patriot – there would be no questions to be asked. But that is not the case.
Obama had a choice.
It was Barack Hussein Obama, the man, who chose to serve on the board of a group which calls the creation of the State of Israel a “catastrophe.”
It was Barack Hussein Obama, the man, who chose to associate himself with a known supporter of Jihadist terror.
It was Barack Hussein Obama, the man, who struck up a friendship with another terrorist who plotted to blow up an Army dance and later lamented that he, “hadn’t done enough.”
Some people berate me for calling leftists “traitors” on a regular basis. I say: if the shoe fits…
After all, can it really be simply a coincidence that, in every major war over a span of decades, the majority of the left has been on the side of our enemies? Can we truly call those who, as Barack Obama does, claim that opposing a nation’s war effort and supporting the victory of its enemies a form of patriotism patriotic?
If Barack Hussein Obama, the man, rejected his background – if he denounced those who tried to murder Americans and those who backed them, if he fanatically opposed our enemies, if he worked to defend the West at every turn, then there would be no reason to examine what he was taught as a child. But, since he does not, we have cause for concern. We are now faced with the very real prospect of a President whose worldview has been shaped by some kind of bizarre Islamo-Communist perspective so bizarre and parodic that, under ordinary circumstances, Michael Savage would reject it as extreme.
Posted by Adam T. Yoshida on February 29, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e550a026f98834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Should We Question Obama’s Patriotism?:
Comments
Obama has a video on youtube in which he states quite emphatically that he doesn't believe in the America that stood up against oppression and fought for universal human rights and individual freedoms. He throws his hat in the ring with people who believe America has been wrong all these years. If individual rights and freedoms are wrong then all we're left with is the politics of powerful groups - that may work for elites like Obama, but it sucks for the rest of us in the back of the herd.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2008-02-29 1:04:31 AM
Does Adam Teiichi Yoshida ever stop to wonder if Adam Teiichi Yoshida is over using Obama's middle name, and starting to look as if Adam Teiichi Yoshida can't stop Adam Teiichi Yoshida from riding the wave stirred by self-styled pundits who think they can derail a political campaign simply because someone has a middle-eastern middle name?
(In case Adam Teiichi Yoshida is wondering, William Jefferson Clinton's middle name didn't win or lose him the office by evoking memories of Thomas Jefferson. Neither did Ronald Wilson Reagan's middle name stir memories of Democrat president Woodrow Wilson. It's just a name Adam Teiichi Yoshida. I'm sure no one here will stop to wonder the significance of your being middle-named after Teiichi Suzuki the Japanese WW2 war criminal.)
Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 2008-02-29 10:15:21 AM
No matter how hard the liberal msm propaganda machine tries to paint Barack Hussein Obama as the shoe in candidate for the presidency of the United States, in the real world he has the proverbial snowball's chance in hell.
Americans will never elect an ex(?)muslim communist for president. Ever.
The die hard lefties and the sheeple that buy into the socialist dogma and claptrap that oozes from their mouths to the front page are a minority, thank god, and the average American worker/taxpayer sees them for what they really are. Useful idiots for global communism.
The fact that he'll get any votes at all is the saddest and most disheartening aspect of the whole thing.
Posted by: robert | 2008-02-29 10:50:00 AM
Playing devil's advocate for a moment here, it would be a wonderful thing for America and the world if Obama were elected, then if he didn't do too badly and made everyone including American blacks think, hey, this democracy thing works and Americans aren't such bad people ... the flip side is, what if he's a disaster and raises expectations that can't be met, then there's a political crisis and people around the world in their usual paranoid way blame middle-class American whites for creating the problem when actually the problem was Obama wasn't suited to be president (of the United States at least).
It may be a moot point, because I suspect John McCain is going to beat him like a rented mule.
Posted by: Peter O'Donnell | 2008-03-01 4:36:00 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.