Skip to content

Obama the Stealth Candidate

November 3, 2008

Stanley Kurtz argues that Obama is the “stealth” candidate, meaning that his longterm agenda is far more radical than he admits. And indeed, you don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to look at Obama’s connections to Ayers, Wright, Pfleger, the New Party, Acorn, the Woods Foundation, the Alinsky philosophy, the Gamaliel Foundation, etc. and to connect the dots. The resulting picture isn’t pretty.

Obama’s comments on how he will “bankrupt” the coal industry, his prediction of making energy costs “skyrocket” with his policies, his call for a “civilian national security force” to be at least as well funded as the military, his philosophy of “spreading the wealth around”, the regret over a constitution of negative rights only, etc. and, of course, his far-left voting record fit well into the overall picture of a Senator Obama who is far more left-wing than a majority of Americans would want him to be or indeed believe him to be.

It is normal for a candidate to somewhat slide towards the middle, after he has won the nomination of his own party, in order to win the median voter in the general population. But M. Obama proved to be way too flexible than to be taken seriously. (And yes, I just called a majority of Obama voters naive.)

He started out naming his childhood years in Indonesia as a credential for the presidency. (Wonder why he didn’t bring this up anymore.) Then, when only Clinton was left with him in the race for the nomination, he had virtually no policy differences with her until she began to shift to his right on foreign policy. Obama invited her to do so with his promise to meet leaders of enemy nations unconditionally.

After Obama got the nomination he tried to wriggle his way out of this promise with fake distinguishments between “preconditions” and “preparations” (and this is after he made fun of Hillary distinguishing “denunciation” from “rejection”) and the hilarious argument that Ahmadinejad wasn’t really the man in charge in Iran. Eventually, Obama switched even to the right of McCain on Pakistan.

And while all those transformations are taking place, time and time again embarrassing relations from the past (and present, until they get thrown under the bus) show up on the scene and M. Obama has to deny their relevance. Yet those connections all point back to the far-left place Obama comes from.

Obama has used questionable methods like legal threats and “Obama Truth Squads” to silence people like Kurtz and David Freddoso who have dugged up some facts about M. Obama’s past. The irony is that his anti-first-amendment strategy to fight critics only confirms what those critics have to say about M. Obama.

Let’s hope that enough voters take this into consideration when they decide for whom to cast their vote tomorrow.

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: