Obama Nods to Putin

The pundits have expressed shock, dismay, disgust, and embarrassment concerning Obama's apparent hapless handling of the Syrian situation.  There appears to be widespread astonishment that an American president would permit a Russian ex-KGB leader to take charge of the volatile situation in the Middle East.  George Will has stated that "[r]egarding institutional derangements, [Obama] is the infection against which he pretends to be an immunization."  Charles Krauthammer maintains that "President Barack Obama's Tuesday night Syria address was 'one of the most odd presidential speeches ever delivered.'"

In fact, conventional wisdom seems to be stipulating that Obama is "in way over his head," has no sensible foreign policy, and is unaware of how he is diminishing the credibility of the United States.

But let's consider some facts about Obama and his communist leanings, which have been well-documented.  In The Communist by Paul Kengor, one learns of the tremendous influence Frank Marshall Davis had on Obama.  Davis was a "pro-Soviet, pro-Red China communist.  Davis opposed U.S. attempts to slow Stalin and Mao and he favored Red Army takeovers of Central and Eastern Europe."  Obama was quite susceptible to Davis's worldview; this has been repeatedly demonstrated by his disdain for capitalism, his ideas on redistribution, and his outright contempt for American values.

Davis, who was considered a security threat, mentored Obama, and "that's quite unprecedented for a presidential mentor. With a mentor like that, Barack Obama should have [had] trouble getting a security clearance for a standard, entry-level government job. Instead, Americans elected him right into the Oval Office."  In fact, "never before in the entire 200-plus year [presidential] history of this country, have we had a president with a mentor who was a card carrying member of the Communist Party."

Thus, Obama has been "influenced, surrounded, and backed by communists, socialists, and those sympathetic to the Arab/Palestinian cause in the Middle East," as well as being involved in the "middle of two international communist networks -- one in Hawaii and one in Chicago."

John C. Drew, an "Occidental College graduate who knew Obama personally in the early 1980s, reports that the young Obama of that period was 'already an ardent socialist Marxist revolutionary'; was highly 'passionate' about 'Marxist theory'; embraced an 'uncompromising, Marxist socialist ideology'; harbored a 'sincere commitment to Marxist revolutionary thought'; and was, in the final analysis, a 'pure Marxist socialist' who 'sincerely believed a Marxist socialist revolution was coming to turn everything around and to create a new, fairer and more just world.'"

What would a good Communist do but diminish the world's capitalist superpower and accede power to a ruling Communist leader, all the while claiming that "America doesn't do pinpricks" -- whatever that is supposed to mean?

Is it possible that Obama, during his open microphone comment that "after his election he would have greater flexibility," meant that he would arrange world events that would ultimately strengthen communism in the world?  Obama steadily erodes American business, stymies the opening of new energy sources, and continues to decimate the U.S. military.  With ObamaCare poised to begin shortly, he will have complete control in the new tyranny currently gripping the country. 

With Obama realizing his dreams of total control, what better gift could one communist-inspired individual give to the leader of communist-controlled Russia?  This is not feckless; this is part of the overweening worldview of socialist/communist Obama.  Together, he and Putin will have complete mastery of their respective hemispheres.  And by placing Israel in grave danger, Obama will have proven the most able of students for his jihadist and communist mentors, for whom the tiny state of Israel has always been a contemptible piece of real estate that has no right to exist, notwithstanding Putin's visit to there.

Can we extrapolate that Obama, as he continues his incremental destruction of "unexceptional" America, is deliberately aligning with the leader of the communist world in a bid to further destroy American influence and standing?  Thus, in fact, what has happened in Syria is not an example of a feckless president, but is instead, another example of Obama's overarching desire to diminish America vis-à-vis communist domination coupled with a Muslim global caliphate.  Whichever system wins out is irrelevant for this president.  His sole aim is to weaken America in whatever form possible. 

Those who would argue that Putin certainly does not share Obama's affection for Islamists might be reminded that even avowed enemies share the same bed when attempting to wrest power -- e.g., consider that terrorist groups who hold nothing but contempt for each other will work together if it means the ultimate destruction of Israel and America.  After all, Hitler's Nazi connection to Islamic terrorism has a long history, even though the Muslim world clearly didn't fit the Aryan master race paradigm!

That one should posit the theory that an American president is working in tandem with a communist leader is a scary proposition.  But if people keep scratching their heads in amazement at the president's alleged incompetence, or supposed ineffectiveness, isn't it time to turn to another perspective and examine it -- warts and all?  In fact, Obama's alleged capitulation to Putin may be the frosting on the cake for the Manchurian president.  While ostensibly it appears that Obama has relinquished his power as president, could one consider that he has actually strengthened it if the demise of America is the ultimate endgame?

Kris Zane, in commenting on Aaron Klein's book The Manchurian President, asserted in March of 2013 that "[i]f Barack Obama is in fact a Marxist plant, then his actions since coming to power make complete sense."  A review of these actions include:

  • creating a massive welfare state
  • pushing the national debt to $20 trillion by the end of his term
  • shoving socialized health care down the throat of America
  • pushing for a national gun registry -- something the communist Russian government did in October of 1918, six months before they confiscated all guns
  • ordering a fleet of drones with the ability to vaporize Americans
  • building a one-million-square-foot mega-database facility to spy on Americans

And constantly bypassing the U.S. Constitution to accomplish his designs.

When someone who is supposed to defend his country turns on it at every conceivable opportunity, shouldn't we consider another perspective that would shed light on seemingly inexplicable actions?

Is it legitimate for one to assert that "[i]t would be a conspiracy theory not to think Obama is a Manchurian President"?

What say you?

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

The pundits have expressed shock, dismay, disgust, and embarrassment concerning Obama's apparent hapless handling of the Syrian situation.  There appears to be widespread astonishment that an American president would permit a Russian ex-KGB leader to take charge of the volatile situation in the Middle East.  George Will has stated that "[r]egarding institutional derangements, [Obama] is the infection against which he pretends to be an immunization."  Charles Krauthammer maintains that "President Barack Obama's Tuesday night Syria address was 'one of the most odd presidential speeches ever delivered.'"

In fact, conventional wisdom seems to be stipulating that Obama is "in way over his head," has no sensible foreign policy, and is unaware of how he is diminishing the credibility of the United States.

But let's consider some facts about Obama and his communist leanings, which have been well-documented.  In The Communist by Paul Kengor, one learns of the tremendous influence Frank Marshall Davis had on Obama.  Davis was a "pro-Soviet, pro-Red China communist.  Davis opposed U.S. attempts to slow Stalin and Mao and he favored Red Army takeovers of Central and Eastern Europe."  Obama was quite susceptible to Davis's worldview; this has been repeatedly demonstrated by his disdain for capitalism, his ideas on redistribution, and his outright contempt for American values.

Davis, who was considered a security threat, mentored Obama, and "that's quite unprecedented for a presidential mentor. With a mentor like that, Barack Obama should have [had] trouble getting a security clearance for a standard, entry-level government job. Instead, Americans elected him right into the Oval Office."  In fact, "never before in the entire 200-plus year [presidential] history of this country, have we had a president with a mentor who was a card carrying member of the Communist Party."

Thus, Obama has been "influenced, surrounded, and backed by communists, socialists, and those sympathetic to the Arab/Palestinian cause in the Middle East," as well as being involved in the "middle of two international communist networks -- one in Hawaii and one in Chicago."

John C. Drew, an "Occidental College graduate who knew Obama personally in the early 1980s, reports that the young Obama of that period was 'already an ardent socialist Marxist revolutionary'; was highly 'passionate' about 'Marxist theory'; embraced an 'uncompromising, Marxist socialist ideology'; harbored a 'sincere commitment to Marxist revolutionary thought'; and was, in the final analysis, a 'pure Marxist socialist' who 'sincerely believed a Marxist socialist revolution was coming to turn everything around and to create a new, fairer and more just world.'"

What would a good Communist do but diminish the world's capitalist superpower and accede power to a ruling Communist leader, all the while claiming that "America doesn't do pinpricks" -- whatever that is supposed to mean?

Is it possible that Obama, during his open microphone comment that "after his election he would have greater flexibility," meant that he would arrange world events that would ultimately strengthen communism in the world?  Obama steadily erodes American business, stymies the opening of new energy sources, and continues to decimate the U.S. military.  With ObamaCare poised to begin shortly, he will have complete control in the new tyranny currently gripping the country. 

With Obama realizing his dreams of total control, what better gift could one communist-inspired individual give to the leader of communist-controlled Russia?  This is not feckless; this is part of the overweening worldview of socialist/communist Obama.  Together, he and Putin will have complete mastery of their respective hemispheres.  And by placing Israel in grave danger, Obama will have proven the most able of students for his jihadist and communist mentors, for whom the tiny state of Israel has always been a contemptible piece of real estate that has no right to exist, notwithstanding Putin's visit to there.

Can we extrapolate that Obama, as he continues his incremental destruction of "unexceptional" America, is deliberately aligning with the leader of the communist world in a bid to further destroy American influence and standing?  Thus, in fact, what has happened in Syria is not an example of a feckless president, but is instead, another example of Obama's overarching desire to diminish America vis-à-vis communist domination coupled with a Muslim global caliphate.  Whichever system wins out is irrelevant for this president.  His sole aim is to weaken America in whatever form possible. 

Those who would argue that Putin certainly does not share Obama's affection for Islamists might be reminded that even avowed enemies share the same bed when attempting to wrest power -- e.g., consider that terrorist groups who hold nothing but contempt for each other will work together if it means the ultimate destruction of Israel and America.  After all, Hitler's Nazi connection to Islamic terrorism has a long history, even though the Muslim world clearly didn't fit the Aryan master race paradigm!

That one should posit the theory that an American president is working in tandem with a communist leader is a scary proposition.  But if people keep scratching their heads in amazement at the president's alleged incompetence, or supposed ineffectiveness, isn't it time to turn to another perspective and examine it -- warts and all?  In fact, Obama's alleged capitulation to Putin may be the frosting on the cake for the Manchurian president.  While ostensibly it appears that Obama has relinquished his power as president, could one consider that he has actually strengthened it if the demise of America is the ultimate endgame?

Kris Zane, in commenting on Aaron Klein's book The Manchurian President, asserted in March of 2013 that "[i]f Barack Obama is in fact a Marxist plant, then his actions since coming to power make complete sense."  A review of these actions include:

  • creating a massive welfare state
  • pushing the national debt to $20 trillion by the end of his term
  • shoving socialized health care down the throat of America
  • pushing for a national gun registry -- something the communist Russian government did in October of 1918, six months before they confiscated all guns
  • ordering a fleet of drones with the ability to vaporize Americans
  • building a one-million-square-foot mega-database facility to spy on Americans

And constantly bypassing the U.S. Constitution to accomplish his designs.

When someone who is supposed to defend his country turns on it at every conceivable opportunity, shouldn't we consider another perspective that would shed light on seemingly inexplicable actions?

Is it legitimate for one to assert that "[i]t would be a conspiracy theory not to think Obama is a Manchurian President"?

What say you?

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.