Understanding Obama

I really didn't want to write more on this guy, but he is always being talked about on the news and radio, and I can't help myself. So I will write some thoughts on things I've been hearing as we learn more about the man behind the myth. I really think Obama would mean a change for America, but a kind of change, I'm beginning to think, that is different from that found in his soaring speech. The change is one that is actually craved for by a some in this country and would mean a radical departure from much of our current ways.

I again think of Rev. Wright. I know, Obama lovers are sick of hearing it, sick of guilt by association, etc. Tonight the Rev. can be seen in an interview on PBS with Bill Moyers for his first big public appearance since his infamy began. Moyers, probably just as in love with Obama as the standard media personality, doesn't challenge the Rev. at all, but sits through Wright's soft spoken explanations like Oprah listening to some poor woman's story. I had to keep looking down at the bottom of the screen to see if they were holding hands. They seemed to thoroughly enjoy each other's company, it was tender. One small thing that the Rev. said was interesting to me, regarding everything that's been going on with Obama: "He's a politician, I'm a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor..." What do we typically mean when we think, 'it's politics' or 'I can't stand politicians'?? Is it that politicians are usually associated with honesty and trustworthiness? or are these common phrases instead coming from the idea that politicians tend to say what is safest, what the people want to hear and not necessarily the truth and facts? Obama has tried to say things to keep himself safe, first it was that he didn't think his church was particularly controversial, then it was that he never heard such things in the pews, then finally he had to come out and say he completely disavowed himself from the pastors comments. I think Rev. Wright has it right. Obama is doing what politicians do.

What does he really believe about things? It's very hard to tell and that has worked well for him thus far. Obama seems to be struggling to keep it that way, since he isn't a fan of debates or interviews or questions about these things anymore. Recently, when Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground came up, you could tell Obama was quite annoyed that he had another problem to deal with. What happened to the good ole days of everyone throwing themselves at his feet and cheering when he so much as sneezed? But Ayres is another interesting insight into Obama's world and into the group of people that have been around him while Obama was being reared and groomed to be an instrument for 'change'.

Ayre and his wife and their radical group in the 60s-70s bombed various sites in the U.S., including the pentagon, the capital and other government buildings. They were and probably still are anti-capitalist and more for a communist or socialist form of government. On September 11, 2001, Ayres said he wished they had done more back in the day against the government. He never apologized for any of these domestic attacks and now has joined many other radical left academics as a professor, teaching at a university in Chicago. A recent audio clip of him showed Ayres continues to harbor hatred for America, saying that 'we're in the belly of the beast' and 'in the heart of the monster' here in this country. People like him see America as basically evil and in need of drastic change. The left's utter hatred of Bush has created a climate where radicals like Ayres are not criminals, but patriots, and the things Ayres did and stood for and now glossed over. And Obama knows Ayres well enough to know he still hold radical views and distaste for our country, but as his weak response in the debate showed, he doesn't want to deal with it, but wants you to think it is trivial and should be ignored.

Lately, when we get to dig at who he is and ask about things he says or people he hangs with, things don't go too well for Barack. Prepared speeches where his eloquence and inspiration can shine are much safer. So he tries to deflect all the questions and concerns we have about his character with irritated answers like, 'this happened 40 years ago when I was 8' and other things to make it seem unreasonable to look at who he associates as an indicator of his own character. But Ayers has never admitted guilt or shame about what they did as domestic terrorists, and continues to say he wishes they did more and hasn't left his anti-american thought in the past. So if Obama has a relationship with him, does that mean anything or not? When there isn't much to gather as far as an understanding of who Obama, I will stash this little nugget into my satchel.

My man John Gibson, dealing with Obama supporters calling and complaining that too much focus is put on Obama's associates and not on the issues, put it like this: We've had plenty of debates and time to know all of their policies, we already know what he and Hillary say they will do. They are basically the same or similar on most every issue. What we want to know is about Obama's character and what he will do when he is in office. We know Hillary, not much more dirt can be brought out on her, we know it all. We do not know Obama.

I think there are two main groups of people who pretty much blindly follow Obama (it must be blindly, because no one can profess to know much about him, really).
- One is comprised of many left leaning and most far-left leaning people. Many of this group are educated (by people like Noam Chomsky), and believe the country is flawed. And not just from Bush doing a bad job- this has sure fueled their fire- but more than that. They call for a complete changing of our country, where income is re-distributed, our borders are torn down, our military is eliminated, and basically all laws are done away with because of the belief that laws discriminate, infringe, offend or something like that. They often think people that disagree are uneducated or less then they are. I thought Obama speaking to a group of wealthy liberals in San Francisco was quite telling, if for no other reason, because it sounded so different from his prepared inspirational speeches he knows will be made public. I thought his commentary on working class whites in rural America illustrated well the snobbish attitudes people in this liberal group hold. They dream of (and hold as an actually reachable goal) an earth where everyone around the world holds hands, all religions other than Christianity thrive and the temperature ceases to rise, where cars no longer exist, but people ride around on magic unicorns.

- The other group are those poor people who don't know and don't want to know who Obama is, or how liberal he really is. They see a man who is young and exciting. They love his being different from the norm in his racial makeup and background. They like that he says he's going to make their life great and give them lots of stuff. They like that he says 'hope' alot and makes them feel good inside when he speaks. For these reasons they will vote for him. When asked what they like about him, they will probably answer because he is young and different, that he is inspirational, or even that he is black. They like the idea of change, but don't care to know exactly what type of change it will be.

- There is probably a third group, with people who have bits of themselves described in the above two groups.

Thinking about it all makes me worried. I'm scared by the thinking of both groups.
An argument often made by Obama supporters regarding his ability to change America is that he a diplomat, that he will talk and work with other people to get things done. But this is not based on the reality of his past. Looking at those that have helped him get to where he is now is a who's who list of radical thinking people in this country. They are people that seem to foster hatred of others and hold quite extreme views that do not lend themselves to negotiation or reaching across party lines. He speaks of unifying America, of overcoming all differences, but the groups he has associated with for his adult life represent division and outright enmity toward others. Obama is the most liberal senator we have right now. And as far as reaching across the isle and working together to pass laws, McCain and Hillary have him beat. However, a group we can count on him working with for sure is Hamas, who has already given Obama their endorsement.

What I can gather as I try to understand Obama is that he associates with people of extreme views and positions. His character is pretty much unknown still, so I will look at the character of those he hangs out with. It has become clear that he is a politician, saying things that sound good but isn't necessarily truth. I think it will be difficult for him to become president as moderately thinking people look past his inspirational speeches and realize who he is.