|
| |
|
Frank Salvato,
Managing Editor
Who Did You Know, Sen. Obama,
and When Did You Know Them?
October 8, 2008
There has been much talk, both pro and
con, about whether Sen. Barack Obama’s “associations” matter with regard
to his qualifications to hold the office of President of the United
States. This argument, this avenue of political discourse, misses the
point. Whether or not Sen. Obama has associations with criminals,
terrorists and other nefarious and infamous individuals pales in
comparison as to whether he has been influenced by them.
We have heard the names of the people on the list of radicals and
ne’er-do-wells that Barack Obama says he knows but doesn’t know; has
worked with but hasn’t worked with; has taken money from but hasn’t
taken money from. They include but are not limited to:
Williams Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Don Warden (aka Dr. Khalid Al-Mansour),
Frank Marshall Davis, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Fr. Michael Pfleger, Rashid
Khalidi, Tony Rezko, Franklin Raines, James Johnson, Nadhmi Auchi,
Joseph Aramanda, Louis Farrahkan, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Kevin
Wardally.
While it is legitimate to question whether it demonstrates good judgment
to associate with such decidedly radical ideologues, it is more
important to understand whether or not Sen. Obama has been influenced –
at any point in his life – by any of these people.
The argument can be made that Sen. Obama has most certainly been
influenced by the teachings of self-proclaimed socialist
Saul Alinsky. In,
Saul Alinsky’s best known and final work,
Rules for Radicals, he mapped out a course of action for the
counter-culture movement of the 1960s. It is in Rules for Radicals
that Barack Obama found his model for his community organizing
activities.
In the opening paragraph of the first chapter of Rules for Radicals,
Alinsky writes:
"What follows is for
those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe
it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how
to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to
take it away."
This opening sentiment lends
itself to the socialist penchant for redistribution of wealth and
creating a false equality among “the masses.” It certainly accounts for
Sen. Obama’s belief that taking from those who earn, only to give it to
those he would define as more deserving, is justified.
It can be argued that Sen. Obama was influenced by
William Ayers, unrepentant terrorist and bomber of the US Capitol
Building, free today only due to an evidence gathering technicality (it
should be noted here that no trial is needed to determine Ayers guilt in
his terrorism...he has admitted to the acts).
It is becoming more evident as each day passes that Ayers met a young
Barack Obama on the Columbia University campus, or at least at common
ground near the campus, where a plethora of anti-American and socialist
and Marxist-leaning rallies took place. Both admit to attending these
rallies and both were enrolled at Columbia; Ayers studying for his M.Ed
in Early Childhood Education and Obama his B.A. in political science
with a specialization in international relations.
While this supposition alone doesn’t prove any ideological symbiosis
between Ayers and Obama, the fact that Obama channeled millions of
dollars to Ayers’ “educational projects” when chairing the Chicago
Annenberg Challenge, does.
In the person of Rev.
Jeremiah Wright, we most certainly see someone who held influence
with Barack Obama, so much so that Obama titled his second book, The
Audacity of Hope, after one of the reverend’s sermons. To believe
that Sen. Obama would be able to listen attentively enough to draw
“wisdom” from one of Wright’s sermons so to include in a book while
sitting in the pews of Trinity United Church of Christ for twenty years
but not understand that Wright was a racist is to believe that the
American public is completely devoid of intelligence.
These are only three of at least fifteen people of questionable
character that Sen. Obama says he knows but doesn’t know; has worked
with but hasn’t worked with; has taken money from but hasn’t taken money
from, and the list gets more contentious as it goes on.
A person’s associations matter when one is running for the most
important position in the United States, especially when there is no
notable record to back-up one’s promises. Barack Obama’s legislative
resume is paper-thin, consisting of an overwhelming number of
politically calculated “present” votes which achieved nothing for his
constituents, his bosses. This alone should negate his assertion that he
is an agent of change; he is nothing of the sort and his voting record
proves it.
But more important is the level of influence that some of the more
radical of these associations had on Sen. Obama.
I don’t know too many people who spend a great amount of time among
alcoholics who don’t drink and I don’t know of too many people who hang
around drug addicts who don’t use drugs. Employing that logic, to have
acquired so many associations to so many radical ideologues over such an
extended period of time – a lifetime – it is impossible to believe that
Barack Obama has not been influenced by their ideology.
Associations do matter. Influences matter even more. |
Social Bookmarking
 |
|
