In an interview with Piers Morgan the television journalist and personality Barbara Walters recently stated this about President Barack Hussein Obama:
We thought he was going to be — I shouldn’t say this at Christmas time — but the next Messiah.
This is an astonishing admission and not just because of the use of the term ‘messiah’ to a political figure. The telltale pronoun ‘we’ reveals that the great majority of the journalistic fraternity failed to see through Mr Obama’s false promises and lies. Groupthink and naivete gripped those on the left who longed for a fundamental transformation of American society and government, not to speak of healing the planet wounded by the misdeeds of the Great Satan.
Evan Thomas, an editor of the once important magazine Newsweek, made a similar comment in 2009 on the television program Hardball during a discussion of President Obama’s celebrated Cairo speech, ‘A new beginning:’
I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God.
Clearly Mr Obama is above it all, no mere mortal, at least a demiurge.
This worshipping of Obama is not confined to journalists. It is rampant in the education establishment. As pointed out by scholar Mary Grabar, the Cairo speech with its vapid multiculturalism and distortions is included in the new edition of the Norton Reader and so will find its way into many thousands of college classrooms.
Beyond mass gullibility based on self deception and wish fulfillment, we see something much more sinister: the increasing possibility of the subversion of democracy in favor of rule by authoritarian decree made possible by the worshipful attitude of Mr Obama’s acolytes. We will hear the excuse that these decrees are necessary, because government must step in and act to ward off catastrophe, such as global warming, or simply because ‘people are hurting.’ Obama worshippers and leftists cheer these developments. Will this lead to an even more authoritarian Federal government?
The history of the early twentieth century is instructive. In the chaos of Europe after World War I – the Great War – many were sick and tired of parliamentary democracy. It simply did not work, they thought . It exacerbated national problems. Process and procedure got in the way of real problem solving. The answer lay in authoritarian movements, or perhaps a strong man with messiah-like qualities, who would possess the force needed to transform a reluctant body politic and eliminate the messiness of constitutional democracy. Religion and family were the main obstacles, to be supplanted by government. “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” (B. Mussolini) Thus the provision in many constitutions for suspension of constitutional rule during a national emergency. In 1933 the German chancellor, A. Hitler, like his predecessor, invoked the emergency clause to assume constitutional dictatorial powers. The United States Constitution does not have this provision, but it might as well have one, given the wide contemporary acceptance of the Obama administration’s lawless disregard of constitutional procedures and protections in favor of the spurious pragmatism of ‘what works.’ There is early precedent – no matter one’s evaluation of A. Lincoln – in his assumption of quasi-dictatorial powers during the War of 1861-65.
Now let us be clear: we do not believe Mr Obama is a satanic figure ready to assume dictatorial powers at any moment. But the Obama administration has given many examples of rule by decree, with the willing cooperation of the Democrat party. We recall Obama intimate Rahm Emmanuel’s dictum: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility,” said Mr Obama, unaware he was being picked up by a live microphone, to Russian President Medvedev. With a now packed D.C. appellate court ready to declare Obama administration actions constitutional and future control of schooling via the insidious Common Core in hand, he has the necessary ‘flexibility’ for the remaining three years of his presidency. We find these developments extremely dangerous. Our continuing cultural shift can ease the transition to an authoritarian government under a different President-Messiah. The slope may not be disastrously slippery now, but it is best to get off it immediately. Will the next Federal government have to undo Obama’s damage by decree? After all, how could this otherwise be accomplished given a strong representation of Democrats in the legislature? “The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it.” (A. Hitler)
In our view the truth and authority of the U.S. Constitution lie in the genius with which it distilled the best of Anglo-American culture in the creation of a new kind of government. This culture, originally Anglo-Saxon, goes back to pre-Norman England, with its respect for the rule of law, property rights, individual liberty, representative democracy, and limited powers of the sovereign. It is different from any other culture in the world and, we believe, superior to all. Our constitutional government is built on the culture of the people and is not simply a mechanism erected on abstract or historical principle. This is its great strength. But if the underlying culture changes, there will be reinterpretation or disregard of the written document, as we have seen. What courts determine or decree to be constitutional or unconstitutional changes by the week. With control of the courts, not to speak of the school systems, the path towards authoritarian rule is furthered. Resistance to this cultural change will then be determined to be a threat, to be crushed by state power.
In our view the struggle to preserve and strengthen the culture we have inherited is of the highest importance. The threat is that authoritarian government can be very effective in accelerating existing tendencies towards change, or even radically altering a culture very quickly. The best examples are the Nazis in Germany and Communists worldwide. Their barbaric murders and crimes could not have occurred without the willing participation or acquiescence of millions of people – people fundamentally transformed in their moral beliefs. It took less than 10 years of Nazi indoctrination and propaganda to turn large numbers of ordinary people into human monsters. The open wounds and scars of communism are still visible in the former Soviet satellite countries. The examples of Cambodia and North Korea give eloquent testimony to how government can become thoroughly evil. It has been reliably estimated by political scientist R. J. Rummel that in the twentieth century well over 150 million people were murdered by their government. Prof. Rummel believes that this barbarism stems from totalitarianism; it is not found in democracies. (See note 1 below) A saying attributed to Stalin is that while a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is just a statistic. Let us conclude by transitioning from millions of deaths to single, tragic ones, to a very disturbing story about what indoctrinated mothers like Erna Petri were capable of doing in Nazi-occupied territory. (See note 2 below.) Yes, the Nazis started out with legalized abortion and euthanasia too.
Note 1. From 1900 to 1987 state, quasi-state, and stateless groups have killed in democide (genocide, massacres, extrajudicial executions, and the like) near 170,000,000 people. Case studies and quantitative analysis show that ethnic, racial, and religious diversity, economic development, levels of education, and cultural differences do not account for this killing. Rather, democide is best explained by the degree to which a regime is empowered along a democratic to totalitarian dimension and secondarily the extent to which it is characteristically involved in war or rebellion. Combining these results with those that show that democracies don’t make war on each other, the more democratic two nations are the less foreign violence between them, and that the more democratic a regime the less internal violence, strongly suggests that democracy is a general method of nonviolence. See this for more.
Note 2. Blonde German housewife Erna Petri was returning home after a shopping trip in town when something caught her eye: six small, nearly naked boys huddled in terror by the side of the country road. Married to a senior SS officer, the 23-year-old knew instantly who they were. They must be the Jews she’d heard about — the ones who’d escaped from a train taking them to an extermination camp. But she was a mother herself, with two children of her own. So she humanely took the starving, whimpering youngsters home, calmed them down and gave them food to eat. Then she led the six of them — the youngest aged six, the oldest 12 — into the woods, lined them up on the edge of a pit and shot them methodically one by one with a pistol in the back of the neck. This schizophrenic combination of warm-hearted mother one minute and cold-blooded killer the next is an enigma and one that — now revealed in a new book based on years of trawling through remote archives — puts a crueller than ever spin on the Third Reich. Click here for more.
Addendum 27-Dec-2013. For a quick overview of the Obama administration’s unconstitutional actions, click here. This article underscores the importance of Mr Obama’s capture of the D.C. Court of Appeals and of preventing him from sending another radical to the Supreme Court in the remaining three years of his term. The best way to accomplish this is to return control of the U.S. Senate to Republicans.