Political Review - realoutlook.com

Barack Obama’s call for change has inspired millions across America, particularly the young, but has never included much substance about where this change would take us or where his notion of change was born. Now with the outbursts of his minister of 20 years, those of his wife, the depth of his relationship with a Chicago operative recently indicted for corruption, his association with an unrepentant terrorist and his elitist statements recorded at a gathering with San Francisco progressives, an unflattering picture has emerged of the candidate. While his campaign has still managed to advance absent any real details of his agenda, we are learning more than many cared to know about his lack of judgment if not his character.

The charisma of Barack Obama helped project a glowing image of a candidate that transcended race and partisan politics. The results of the Iowa Caucuses demonstrated that the nation might be ready to embrace the idea across racial and even party lines. Nationwide poles confirmed his acceptance eventually showing a double digit lead over the once favored Hillary Clinton. The lead has now disappeared with Monday’s USA Today / Gallop Poll showing Clinton back in the lead 51 to 44 percent over Obama among Democrats and Independents. While this lead doesn’t appear to be holding true in early returns from Indiana and North Carolina, exit polls are showing voters more and more divided along racial lines.

Back in January of this year it appeared the Clinton campaign would try to frame Obama as the Black Candidate ala Jessie Jackson to combat his wider appeal. But it would be Obama’s ties to Reverend Jeremiah Wright of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ would deliver this image with a greater impact than the Clinton camp could ever have imagined. During the late 1960’s and early 70’s Trinity Church became less a representation of traditional Christianity than the political interests aligned with the Black Power movement. As Vallmer E. Jordan, a church leader during this era would reflect,

“… for years we had prided ourselves on being a middle-class congregation within a mainline denomination, but suddenly the values within the black community had shifted. Aspirations for integration and assimilation were being replaced by those of black pride and separation.”

Many saw “Black” and Christianity as incongruous and would join the ranks of Chicago’s growing black militants that were leaving the church for The Nation of Islam and the inflammatory rhetoric of Louis Farrakan. The motto of Trinity became “Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian.” It was during this era that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright would become pastor of Trinity and remain so from 1972 to early 2008. His racist anti-American rhetoric has dominated the news for several weeks now. Somehow the nature of it has escaped Obama for the past 20 years. His friend Oprah joined Trinity in 1984 and left for reasons Obama should have in 1986; the inflammatory statements of the Reverends sermons didn’t escape her attention.

The bitterness displayed by the Reverend Wright is no less evident in the wife of the candidate, Michelle Obama. Born in Chicago’s south side she attended America’s finest educational institutions and found employment most Americans, regardless of race, never dreamed of. After Attending Princeton University, Michelle went on to Harvard Law School. She would work with a prominent Chicago law firm, then the University of Chicago Hospitals where she receives $273,000 per annum while working on her husbands campaign. Blessed with all this opportunity she couldn’t find anything to be proud of about her county, stating in Milwaukee on February 18th that

“… for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”

A similar affliction found its way into the life of William Ayers. Son of the former Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison, Ayers became involved with the radical left group Students for a Democratic Society while attending the University of Michigan. In 1969 he would join the violent Weatherman group. Ayers went underground after some of his associates died accidentally while they were constructing a nail bomb in their Greenwich Village townhouse. He would turn himself in to face Federal charges in 1981. All charges would eventually be dropped. In an interview with the New York Times on the eve of the publication of his memoirs Ayers would state

“I don’t regret setting bombs… I feel we didn’t do enough…”

He would continue that he wouldn’t discount that he would do it all again. Ayers is among the Obama associates who would hold fund raisers for the candidate in his bid for the U.S. Senate which the candidate himself would attend.

Other funds for Obama came from indicted influence peddler Tony Rezko. Obama originally tried to dismiss Rezko as an acquaintance and donate contributions from Rezko to charity. Details would later emerge showing it was Rezko financing that allowed the Obamas to acquire the mansion where they now live. The transaction required the purchase of an adjacent lot which Rezko was apparently happy to accommodate purchasing the lot in the name of his wife. Obama had actually represented Rezko’s interests on behalf of a law firm where he was employed. The real estate agent stated Rezko was with Obama when he showed the property.

Leading up to the Pennsylvania primary, the progressive Huffington Post captured comments by Obama about disgruntled Pennsyvanians at a gathering of progressives in San Francisco which read in part

“And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

The comment is reflective of observations by New York Times Magazine contributer Matt Bai in his book The Argument which tracks the movement of progressives desperate to find the formula to defeat Republicans in their bid to gain control of the White House. He relates how Hungarian born billionaire activist George Soros came up with the idea that their failure wasn’t because of George Bush but because of the people. He writes

“A lot of Democrats agreed. The real problem, they concluded in those days after the election [2004], was that all these church-going gun owners in so-called red states just weren’t all that bright to begin with.”

While Obama acts indignant at the suggestion he is an elitist he has a history with these wealthy progressives as well. In a July 27, 2004 article in the Cybercast News Service, Robert B. Bluey writes

“Obama, however, is different from most Democrats because of his willingness to embrace the controversial Soros. Shortly after Soros equated the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Obama joined him for a New York fund-raiser June7.”

Obama was campaigning against Republican Jack Ryan at the time for the Illinois Senate seat. Ryan would eventually be forced out of the race after court records of his divorce were released. Obama obtained the seat virtually unopposed. Soros and his family members were all contributors to this campaign. The Bluey article would further note

“Obama is one of only a handful of candidates to get a personal contribution from George Soros. The others include Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, Sens. Barbara Boxer, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Bob Graham, John Kerry, Patrick Leahy, U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, and former Vermont governor Howard Dean.”

So what “Change” are we to embrace? What will replace the “business as usual in Washington” Obama repeatedly condemns? Are we to embrace the racist anti-American teachings of the man Obama calls his spiritual leader, the Reverend Wright. This is the man who performed his marriage, baptized his children and the man he claims inspired the title of his book “The Audacity of Hope” and claimed 911 was an inside job, that whites developed AIDS to decimate black populations, that 911 was the wages of America’s sins; “America’s chickens have come home to roost.” Yet Obama claims he was not present during Wright’s bitter rants. A CD of the Reverends inflammatory sermons were available in the lobby of the church. If he wasn’t listening it’s becoming more and more evident his wife was and embraced this bitterness despite the benefits she has reaped from American society.

Will education in America take direction form the likes of William Ayers, the one time terrorist who is now Distinguished Professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education. The man who Obama served with on the board of directors of the philanthropic Woods Fund of Chicago and hosted a fund raiser attended by Obama. Do we educate children to learn the transgressions of America in our schools as well as our churches?

We know receiving campaign contributions and personal favors from shady characters such as Syrian born Tony Rezko is anything but change. Rezko got the funds for the Obama transaction through Iraqi-born billionaire Nadjmi Auchi, one of Britain’s richest men. Rezko’s indictment derives in part from an undeclared $3.5 million payment from Auchi to Rezko. Prosecution documents show Rezko tried to persuade Illinois officials to assist Auchi in obtaining a U.S. visa. The names of the officials were undisclosed.

Will progressive billionaires like George Soros, the financier who brought down the British Pound in the 1980s and decimated financial markets in Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Seoul during the Asian Crisis of the late 1990s, replace “Washington as usual?” We hear Obama criticize Republican policy, even make up non-existent policy to criticize them for, but never explain how this would be any different than Liberal Democratic policy past and present. Perhaps, and more probable, he is pandering to the mindless throngs of MoveOn.org who make up the small donations he receives and for whom “Change” without substance is enough as long as it’s other than George Bush.

When will we see evidence of post partisan politics from Obama? Weather he speaks of race, partisanship, change in Washington, we see no substance to any of his claims. What we do see is he has taken every opportunity to further his cause from whatever sources were convenient at the time. And while he has been treated as the media darling even the most liberal have been forced to attend to these news items and give them some exposure. Obama may be able to hold onto those who are in denial after investing hundreds of thousands of hours of their time and nearly a quarter billion of their money but he will not be able to dismiss these issues through to the general election in November. It is Obama’s chickens that have come home to roost?

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 6th, 2008 at 5:53 pm and is filed under Election, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.