Tag Archives: Chicago

by Barry Kelly | March 7, 2013 · 6:46 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 39

OBAMA’S FLAWS

After winning the last election with a brilliant, if ugly, campaign and besting the House Republican leadership at nearly every encounter, President Obama is looking invincible. If he had ten percent of the wisdom of Saul Alinsky, his radical political guide and now deceased Chicago community organizer, he would be. But he doesn’t. I doubt that Mr. Alinsky would have selected Barack Obama from the ranks of his followers

AMERICA: HE THINKS YOUR STUPID AND HE’S GONNA PLAY YOU ‘TILL THE BITTER END (Photo credit: SS&SS)

to be his standard bearer. Obama doesn’t have the right experience, a strong enough intellect, or the tough courage that a true revolutionary needs. He would be a better leader and manager if he did. The Obama flaw that will in the end thwart his socialistic transformation of America lies in his personality traits. Before going further in our look into President Obama’s basic flaws, though, we need to look at ourselves.

The American people are not imbued with the same cultural traits as the pre WWII Germans, Japanese, Russians, or Chinese, all who fell captive to attractive ideologies and charismatic leaders. We distrust too much government, at least in the center/right of our people. We have a personal and national belief in the power of the individual. We can name individual Americans who built our nation and protected our freedom. Our first (or for the record our second president) George Washington walked away from becoming a president/king. While our past leaders have had personal political ambitions, they managed to serve the nation in times of crisis rather than self or party. With them the issue was always the issue, unlike President Obama where the issue is never the issue. Saul Alinksy taught the Progressives to use every issue in any way to destroy the existing form of government to prepare the way for a more just society.

This is where President Obama’s flaws are exposed by his slavish adherence to Alinky’s teaching. The American people do not respect those whose word cannot be trusted. Obama is not subtle enough to jump to opposite sides of issues in his zeal to use all issues to destroy the opposition party. First he was for sequestration and then he was against it. No reason or rationale for the switch. We would have accepted good explanations for shifting. Instead he denies, or, more accurately, pretends he made no change. It is, was, and always will be the fault of someone else. When your word is no good, you cannot fool the people by always blaming someone else. He plays the tough guy president worse than Nixon did. Personally I believe Obama is the wimpier of the two. If you don’t respect the people enough to treat them with respect, do not expect them to respect you, Mr. President. When the people lose their respect for a president, they also distrust said president. From distrust it is an almost inevitable step to being embarrassed by the president’s words, demeanor and actions. Who is this person? After embarrassment come the jokes. That is the point of no return. Game over.

The president’s arrogance, narcissistic behavior, disdain for any opposition, willingness to make wild and scary claims, and his general dislike of Americans and our national history and culture all make it almost a certainty he will never transform America in his image. Thank God. But keep your guard up.

By the author of the Jack Brandon thriller series.

Eight Decades of Insights 37 (factsandfictions.com)
The Real Barack Obama (nationalreview.com)
Obama Prepares to Community-Organize America (frontpagemag.com)
Barack Obama: The Naked Emperor (seniorcitizenspublicsquare.com)

4 Comments

Filed under Intelligence & Politics

Tagged as acorn, Barack Obama, Chicago, George Washington, Obama, President, Republican, Saul Alinsky, United States

by Barry Kelly | December 5, 2012 · 11:36 pm

EIGHT DECADES OF INSIGHTS 29

President George W. Bush signs the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004 on October 1, 2003. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

UTOPIA VS REALITY

Some things we can control for the better. Some we can’t. Deciding which we can and can not do is the essence of the struggle between liberals and conservatives.

Both sides want to improve the condition of the people. Neither faction is evil; it’s just that the fundamental belief system is different. The roots of liberal philosophy are imports from foreign thinkers. Utopian communes, kibbutzes, socialism, communism (to each according to need, from each according to capability), interpretations of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism, ancient and modern age totalitarianism all emphasized the good of society over the individual.

Efforts to achieve these goals all had to, or strived to, centralize power. Centralized power is always required to channel and control individualism for the good of the whole society. The problem has been that those who end up in charge of centralized power are not capable of deciding or managing how to balance their judgement of the needs of the masses with the needs of the individual. Instead, centralized power, especially in totalitarian governments, is used to perpetuate the rule of the elite. And there is always an elite. Nowhere in the history of the known world has unfettered centralization been successful. Yet some humans still try to improve life by centralization in spite of the clear historical record of total failure.

As an example of this innate drive for people to see centralized control over every real or imagined problem is the liberal position on global warming. Is the Earth warming? Maybe, probably, absolutely, positively not. All those answers are possible. The record of the Earth is that it has warmed and cooled. Surely it is a question science can answer, if they avoid cherry picking data to prove strongly held environmental beliefs. At one time, I’m told, Chicago was covered by two miles of ice and much later, Vikings cultivated Greenland for a period of one hundred years or so until the Earth cooled. Surely Chicagoans did not cause Chicago to freeze over nor did Vikings cause Greenland to warm. Just maybe our heat source, the sun’s output, or slight changes in the Earth’s orbit are the cause. These are causes humans cannot control or change. Certainly prehistoric carbon emissions from man-made industries were not responsible.

Centralization has been used by both parties to “fix” problems. The conservatives tried with the organization of the Department of Homeland Security. But do you feel safer now that effective organizations have all been dumbed down to fit the limited scope of human management? Or how about the Director of National Intelligence‘s bloated staff? Do you feel like our president is better informed? I think, in fact I know, he is not. Benghazi talking points come to mind.

Utopia is not to be found in liberalism or conservatism. (See blog 6 for more on centralization.) Both parties have worshipped at the altar of centralization. Humans and our complex civilization need regulation. But it has to be as little as possible. Centralization is the fuel for the growth of government which is, then, itself a motivator of more centralization. (In blog 3 I state we are a great nation not because of what immigrants brought with them but what they left behind.) We did have some experiments with European utopian settlements in America. They all failed. Unfortunately, the roots of socialism and totalitarianism have now come again in the name of progressivism and have largely taken over the leadership of the Democratic Party. We now have a government trying to centralize and manage all aspects of life, individual and national.

http://www.factsandfictions.com By the author of the Jack Brandon thriller series.

2 Comments

Filed under centralization, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, global warming, Intelligence & Politics, political solutions, Politics, Progressives, totalitarianism

Tagged as big government, Buddhism, Chicago, Christianity, Climate change, Earth, Greenland

by Barry Kelly | July 13, 2012 · 1:12 pm

Eight Decades of Insights – 12

Every civilization is built on a foundation of words. Words are (or were) the measure of a person. As I was growing up in small mill town in Western Pennsylvania, I learned you judged people by how good their “word” was. Wealth, talent, strength, the car you drove, and the girls you dated were important, but nothing was as valuable as the reliability of your word. Your reputation in all fields depended upon the integrity of your word. Once that was gone, it was nearly impossible to get it back. I submit that it is the same with nations, political parties, politicians, and leaders.

I don’t believe that modern-day politicians value the integrity of the words they speak and print. This is dangerous; without truth and honesty, our freedom is at risk. The end does not justify the means. Administrations based on the principles espoused by Lenin, Goebbels, or Alinsky have not lasted. On the extreme right, we find dictatorship of the oligarchies; on the extreme left we find equally ugly dictatorships. Both use words or propaganda to further their goals. The truth does not matter to them. It is good to distort the truth as long as the lies promote the end. The end in political terms is the goal of creating a just and fair society where the rulers know what the people need and use whatever means are necessary to achieve and protect their utopia.

History has seen many examples of a few believing they – not the people – know best. How did that work for the Nazis, the various communist regimes, experiments in socialism and Islam, and for several other ancient empires? They did not leave much behind, except fading memories of ugly repression. None of them could stand the truth. They all used words to further their causes and beliefs. The theory that “the end justifies the means” reigned supreme. Freedom is the final casualty when words are only a means to an end. How can you believe anyone, especially a politician struggling to hold on to power, who doesn’t care or even think about the consistency of his word?

The word of the leaders of a great nation, like the United States, both in domestic areas and foreign affairs must carry the weight of truth and conviction. When leaders change positions, not because of a changed conviction, but merely to support a more expedient political policy, the power of their word is lost. Their conviction is suspect. Foreign powers study the words of our leaders. When they see no consistency or willingness to back words and convictions with action, they will disregard the words of our leaders. Our friends will no longer trust us. The possible examples are nearly unlimited but here are a few.

Remember our secretary of state saving she viewed Assad of Syria as a reformer and only months later was calling for him to abdicate? Remember the president changing words, without a believable change in conviction, over tax issues, war strategy, medical care, and budget issues?

The end justifying the means is the most probable explanation. What does their word mean? Can you trust it? Reading the words of Saul Alinsky, a radical revolutionary writer and former Community Organizer in Chicago, will help you understand. Both our president and secretary of state are familiar with Mr. Alinsksy’s writing. Maybe you should be also.