Posts Tagged ‘Brandenburg Gate’

Obama Suffers From Kennedy-Confusion Syndrome

July 25, 2008

If you start thinking you’re John Kennedy, take two of these and then check yourself into a rubber room.”

There’s little question that Obama seeks to be viewed as the next Kennedy:

Even before Obama clinched the nomination, Germans viewed him as “the new Kennedy.” Over the next few days, that notion is likely to get conveyed to American voters, which is precisely what Obama wants.

His speech in Berlin is being compared to President John F. Kennedy‘s appearance in the divided city, at the height of the Cold War, which drew ecstatic crowds and became the stuff of legend. (Another part of Obama’s effort to model himself after Kennedy: giving his convention acceptance speech before a large crowd at a nearby stadium, as JFK did in 1960.)

Obama spoke to a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin – his greatest turn-out ever. But It’s frankly rather hilarious how the event has unfolded.

Obama originally wanted to insert himself into the Brandenburg Gate scenery of Kennedy’s “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech and Reagan’s “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” speech. But that was just a bit too much of a brazen display of ostentatious arrogance for German Chancellor Angela Merkel. So Obama had to find another location for his Obamessianic rally so he could show just how much Europeans love him.

So he picked the Victory Tower, another historic landmark.

This one was made famous by Adolf Hitler, who used it as the phallic-symbol backdrop for his own political rallies. Maybe great messiahs think alike. From Uber-messiah to Oba-messiah. And the same people that cheered the first one are now equally enthusiastic about the second one.

One can only go so far in any Hitler-Obama comparison, obviously; for one thing, nobody really knows just WHAT Obama stands for, do they? But like Obama, Hitler spoke also spoke in broad generalities to paint beautiful images, and used his personal cult of charisma and his power as a speaker to rally the people to himself.

But Obama doesn’t want to identify himself with Hitler, but with Kennedy. So let’s look at that relationship instead.

When President Kennedy came to Brandenburg Gate and spoke on June 26, 1963, he said:

There are some who say that Communism is the wave of the future. Let them come to Berlin.

And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere we can work with the Communists. Let them come to Berlin.

And there are even a few who say that it is true that Communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress. Lass’ sie nach Berlin kommen. Let them come to Berlin…

Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free…

All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words “Ich bin ein Berliner”.

Kennedy presented a vision of freedom from tyranny, and Reagan’s speech anticipated his fulfillment of that vision a short time after he delivered it on June 12, 1987:

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

And just how is Barack Obama in any way part of that vision? How is the man who said that liberating 25 million Iraqis from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein – from rape rooms, from being taken away by secret police and never seen again, from mass graves – was a bad idea? How does that deserve to share the stage with Kennedy’s vision of freedom and his willingness to stand up and fight tyrants to secure that freedom?

Barack Obama is a guy who didn’t even bother to waste his time going to see some of the injured American heroes recovering from wounds sustained fighting for the freedom of human beings in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But there’s another thing.

Given that Kennedy and Reagan both stood up against communism (and in Reagan’s case, stood against it over and against the continual opposition of Democrats in Congress), it is pertinent to ask: what really is the difference between the Communist Party that Kennedy and Reagan fought to defeat and The Democratic Party of Barack Obama today, anyway?

Let’s see, Karl Marx’s proletariat and bourgeoisie; the Democrat’s “two Americas.” Check.

The belief that the evil wealthy proletariat enslave the poor by seizing and hoarding the means of production. Check.

The demand to seize the assets of the evil proletariat in the name of the people. Check.

The liberal-Democrat ideology of a “separation of church and state,” which does not exist in our founding documents but is very much a part of the Constitution of the U.S.S.R. Check.

The theology of Barack Obama’s long-time spiritual mentor – black liberation theology – comes right out of Marxism and does little more than view Christianity through Marxist eyes toward a Marxist end. Check.

President Kennedy had the vision to realize the need to cut taxes to stimulate economic growth.  But Barack Obama clearly doesn’t share the same principles.

Pardon me for having a really, REEAAAALLLLYYY hard time seeing John Kennedy in Barack Obama.

As Dennis Prager has put it many times, “A 1960s Kennedy liberal is a conservative today.”  It is most definitely NOT Barack Obama.

Where’s that guy who said, “Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy: I knew Jack Kennedy; Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy“? I think we can use him now.

Obama Arrogance Keeps Getting Creepier and Creepier

July 24, 2008

I had to laugh when I heard the following:

AMMAN, Jordan – Democrat Barack Obama’s entire traveling campaign apparatus is in place. He will speak Thursday at an historic site in Berlin that could draw tens of thousands of spectators. And chief campaign strategist David Axelrod might even assemble film crews to gather footage of it, possibly for a TV commercial.

But senior aides engaged in a bit of rhetorical gymnastics Tuesday as they faced reporters who questioned their resistance to acknowledging the political aspects of Obama’s week-long, high-profile tour against the backdrop of an intense American presidential campaign.

At a morning background briefing, reporters parried with senior advisers on the characterization of Obama’s speech Thursday in Berlin as a campaign rally. The outdoor speech at the Victory Column could draw thousands of people, similar to the size of Obama events in the United States.

“It is not going to be a political speech,” said a senior foreign policy adviser, who spoke to reporters on background. “When the president of the United States goes and gives a speech, it is not a political speech or a political rally.”

“But he is not president of the United States,” a reporter reminded the adviser.

It’s one thing for politicians to speak of what they will do as president before they are actually elected to such. They need to present that image of confidence. They all do it.

But, goodness gracious, it pretty much takes arrogant chutzpah, puts it on a rocket ship, and launches it straight up into the stratosphere, to make the claim that Barack Obama is actually the president right now.

There’s a level of arrogance about the Obama campaign that simply goes well beyond creepy.

Obama didn’t say the above gaffe; an aide did. But it continues a definite Obamamessiah trend.

Stuff like this has been coming out of the Obama campaign for quite a while. Froma Harrop noted in a story that appeared back in February:

Sophisticated commentary now notes the growing creepiness of the Obama campaign: Its aversion to substantive policy discussions. The sermonizing — “In the face of despair, we believe there can be hope.” And the messianic bit — “At this moment in the election there is something happening in America.” (That would be he.)

Volunteer trainees at Camp Obama are told not to talk issues with voters, but to offer personal testimony about how they “came” to Obama. Makes the skin crawl.

Centrists generally do not find cults of personality entertaining. The mass hypnosis reminds them of the mortgage frenzy — all these people buying into a dream and not caring about the fine print.

It does make the skin crawl. People talk about how they “came to Christ.” There’s something eerie about borrowing this particular metaphor and applying it to a liberal politician.

I’d like to tell you that Froma Harrop was just making stuff up. But the story of the Obama campaign instruction “how I came to Obama” stuff is genuine. And really, really creepy.

It’s relevant that most of the liberals who are viewing Obama in such inspiring – and irrational – religious terms are secular humanists. As G.K. Chesterton put it, “When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything.” That’s why they believe so passionately in Obama in spite of every evidence to the contrary.

I stumbled across this pro-Obama article that radiated all of the creepiness of one who has place personal faith in Obama the way I placed mine in Jesus of Nazareth.

Apparently, the only reason that Obama used a plane to embark on his foreign trip rather than walking across the Atlantic ocean to get there was because the latter course would have taken too long (that, and how would he have brought his massive media entourage with him?).

That level of arrogance comes straight down from the mountain top:

Today on CBS’s Face the Nation, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., in Afghanistan, told the paparazzi-pursued correspondent Lara Logan that “the objective of this trip was to have substantive discussions with people like President Karzai or Prime Minister Maliki or President Sarkozy or others who I expect to be dealing with over the next eight to 10 years.

“And it’s important for me to have a relationship with them early, that I start listening to them now, getting a sense of what their interests and concerns are.”

We’re talking about a man who not only assumes that he will be elected and then re-elected, but that he will be so completely adored that a grateful and worshipful nation will repeal the 22nd Amendment for him so he can continue to lord it over us beyond the eight-year limit that would apply to other, lesser figures.

So it’s understandable that one of his worshipping aides would say something like, “When the president of the United States goes and gives a speech, it is not a political speech or a political rally.”

After all, how could the Obamamessiah NOT be the president? Why are you not bowing down before him even as we speak?

I’ve written about the sheer arrogance of both the man and his campaign in an article titled “Brandenburg Gate: Pseudo-Candidates Need Pseudo Credibility.” In short, I ridiculed his presumptiveness over his seeking to place himself at the site of Kennedy’s “Ich Bin Ein Berliner” speech and Reagan’s “Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down this Wall” speech, and over his “Great Obama Seal.”

Like ANWR and oil, there’s a lot of productive drilling that can be done with Obama and arrogance.

One day, the Bible says that a great world leader will emerge who will literally be worshiped in place of God (Revelation 13:4). I sure do hope we’re not there already.

Brandenburg Gate: Pseudo-Candidates Need Pseudo-Credibility

July 12, 2008

When I heard about the flare-up over Barack Obama seeking to use the famous Brandenburg Gate in Germany for a political rally, I remembered this story:

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year-old Texas rancher whose hand was caught in a gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Obama and his bid to be our President.

The old rancher said, “Well, ya know, Obama is a “post turtle.”

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a “post turtle” was.

The old rancher said, “When you’re driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that’s a “post turtle”.

The old rancher saw a puzzled look on the doctor’s face, so he continued to explain. “You know he didn’t get up there by himself, he doesn’t belong up there, he doesn’t know what to do while he is up there, and you just wonder what kind of a dumb ass put him up there.”

Barack Obama wouldn’t have been a state senator had Barack Obama not been able to nullify the signatures of voters to keep Alice Parker – who had won the district with 87% of the vote – off the ballot. He very probably would not have become a U.S. Senator had his opponent (Jack Ryan) not destroyed himself with a sex scandal and a messy divorce before dropping out of a race for a seat previously held by a Republican. He had a total of 149 (or by some counts 218) days of Senate experience before believing himself qualified to be President of the United States. He believes a speech about race ought to trump his 23 years spent in a racist church. He says he can no more disown his racist Marxist pastor than he can disown his own grandmother before throwing his grandmother under the bus for political expediency and then disowning his pastor. He has already compiled more gaffes in his short political career than most seasoned politicians accumulate during a lengthy career. And Luke Boggs of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has compiled a whopping list of things that Barack Obama has come to regret (“Obama’s frequent regrets may make us sorry“).

I don’t know how Barack Obama got on top of the post to begin with, but it sure seems something strange is going on to keep him up there.

A guy like this needs some credibility.

By many accounts, Obama began to attend the radical Trinity United Church in order to obtain “street cred” with the mostly black voters in his district (and, you know, try to convince folk that he really wasn’t the arrogant elitist which he all-too-frequently comes across as being).

When you have no credibility of your own, you have to parasitically derive it from something else.

So you can understand why Barack Obama would want to stand in front of the famous pillars of the Brandenburg Gate where President John F. Kennedy in 1963 delivered his famous “Ich Bin Ein Berliner” address, and where President Ronald Reagan delivered his equally famous 1987 “Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall” address.

What’s that you say? They were American Presidents confronting historic moments, and Barack Obama is a President wannabe trying to garner some pseudo credibility? Yeah. I agree with you.

So did German leader, Chancellor Angela Merkel:

Mrs. Merkel has made clear she disapproves of having this potent symbol of German division and reunification pulled into the American election fight. “To use the Brandenburg Gate in some ways as a campaign backdrop, she has a limited sympathy for this and expresses her skepticism over pursuing such plans,” said a spokesman, Thomas Steg, at a news conference Wednesday.

Mrs. Merkel was in Japan for the G-8 meeting with President Bush and other leaders of the industrialized nations Wednesday, when her spokesman made the statements against using the Brandenburg Gate site.

“No German candidate for high office would think to use the National Mall or Red Square in Moscow for a rally, because it would be seen as inappropriate,” Mr. Steg said, though he added that Mrs. Merkel welcomed Mr. Obama’s visit.

You just don’t get it, Chancellor Merkel: Barack Obama NEEDS to stand in front of the Brandenburg Gate and connect himself to the powerful images of the past. Otherwise, people might start evaluating him on his own pathetic merits rather than view him through the prism of all the wonderful images he can connect himself to.

Where’s he supposed to go now? Go to the Trinity United Church of Christ? The New York Police Headquarters, where his professor, board-of-directors, and lecturer pal William Ayers blew up when he was a terrorist with the Weathermen? Come on, Angela: Barack needs a cool image to associate himself with!

What’s that you say? Barack Obama doesn’t have a dang thing to do with the Brandenburg Gate, and if anything his policies are in direct opposition with the reasons that Reagan and Kennedy went there? It doesn’t matter. Image is everything now, buddy. When you can put yourself in the picture, the thousand words are nothing more than so much blah, blah, blah.

This isn’t the first time Barack Obama has got caught trying to give himself some pseudo credibility.

You remember “The Great Seal of Obamaland?”

It was actually a pretty darn cool seal, being emblazoned with a fierce-looking eagle clutching an olive branch in one claw and arrows in the other.

The only problem was that it was deliberately reminiscent of the official seal of the president of the United States.

What’s that you say? Yeah, I knew I’d seen it somewhere before too.

Did I hear you say that Obama actually broke the law ripping off the presidential seal?  I didn’t know that!  You’d have thought the elite media would have pointed something like that out, wouldn’t you?

What’s that you say?  Yes, it was very funny when ABC News referred to it as “the Audacity of Hype.”

That’s the problem with Barack Obama.  All hype, no substance.  All parasitically derived credibility, no genuine credibility of his own.

Why don’t you see John McCain pulling these shenanigans?

Because he doesn’t need to.