The Road to Fascism One of the primary “raps” against George W. Bush has always been his “halting” speaking style... his words pouring out in four and five-word bursts, followed by momentary pauses to allow him to collect his thoughts. It was a maddening affectation, to say the least, and did little to inspire confidence. His enemies used this peculiarity as proof of a lack of intellect, while his supporters sat on the edge of their chairs, shouting, “C’mon, George... spit it out!”
On the other hand, watching Barack Obama campaign one wondered when and where we’d ever seen such madness, such mindless emotional frenzy. Who did he remind us of? Roosevelt? Kennedy? FDR reminded us that all we had to fear was “fear itself,” while Obama gave us Frank Marshall Davis, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers... much to fear. And it couldn’t be Jack Kennedy. Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you... ask what you can do for your country.” Obama would have us ask only what our country can do for us.” He would “spread the wealth” and make everyone happy... especially those on the receiving end.
No, Obama was much more than FDR or JFK. His ability to inspire with words promised not only a new era of eloquence in presidential speechmaking; people came to believe that he would usher in a new era of change and national renewal. But that expectation presupposes that his actions as president will be as noble and as uplifting as his rhetoric. Consider some of the rather benign things that were said about a past national leader that might also be said of Obama:
“He was so convincing on the speaker's platform and appeared to be so sincere in what he said that the majority of his listeners were ready to believe almost anything good about him because they wanted to believe it.”
“The more secrecy he maintained about his personal life the more curious his followers became. This was fertile ground on which to build a myth or legend. .. Every attempt is made to present him as extremely human, with a deep feeling for the problems of ordinary people.”
“His power and fascination in speaking lay almost wholly in his ability to sense what a given audience wanted to hear and then to manipulate his theme in such a way that he would arouse the emotions of the crowd.”
“It was not long before the... people were prepared to take the short step of seeing (him), not as a man, but as a Messiah. Public meetings... took on a religious atmosphere. All the stagings were designed to create a supernatural and religious attitude and (his) entry was more befitting a god than a man.”
Barack Obama? No, all of these quotations were taken from a Jewish Virtual Library article describing Adolph Hitler’s emotional hold over his audiences. It should serve as a warning to all Americans that it is not Obama’s soaring rhetoric we should be concentrating on, but the manner in which he and his lieutenants deal with dissent and the means and methods they propose to maintain themselves in power. For example:
▪ In the closing days of the campaign, reporters for three news organizations that had endorsed John McCain were banned from Obama’s campaign plane.
▪ An unknown Toledo plumber, Joe Wurzelbacher, was savaged by Obama and his people for asking a question that the mainstream media should have been asking. After Obama was overheard suggesting that, if we were to “spread the wealth” a bit, everyone would benefit, his supporters in Ohio used state computers to dig up dirt on Wurzelbacher, looking for any bit of information that could be used to discredit or destroy him.
▪ Across the country, Obama supporters salivate over the prospect of reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine. With Obama in the White House, with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, and with the mainstream media in their pocket, they look forward to the day when they can stifle most political dissent by silencing conservative talk radio.
▪ In a speech at Colorado Springs on July 2, 2008, Obama said, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded...” as the U.S. military.
▪ And now, just weeks after taking office, Obama has announced plans to strip the U.S. Commerce Department of its historic responsibility for conducting the 2010 decennial census, bringing that critically important responsibility directly into the White House under the supervision of his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.
For many years, Democrats have insisted that, because many of their constituents in urban areas have reason to fear being interviewed by the census takers... presumably because many receive government benefits under two or more identities, many are registered to vote in two or more jurisdictions, many are in the country illegally, etc., etc... they should be allowed to multiply the headcount\in Democratic strongholds by a factor in order to achieve a “virtual” population count.
One wonders what sort of “virtual” population counts would be produced, and how many new Democratic congressional seats would suddenly materialize if Obama and Emanuel are allowed to conduct the census, not by actually counting noses, but by “statistical probability” estimates.
Taken together, all of this makes Obama’s call for a civilian national security force chillingly reminiscent. It smacks of fascism. Perhaps Obama will explain exactly what “national security objectives” he has set and what the purpose of his “civilian national security force” might be. For example, what happens to their role and function when Obama and a Democrat-controlled Congress institute gun control and have confiscated all privately-owned firearms? What controls would be placed on his civilian security force to prevent it from becoming another SS, another Stalinist NKVD, or another Maoist Red Guards?
In his article, “Obama, Crowds, and Power,” author Jim Sleeper tells us, “Outraged Germans had legitimate grievances in the early 1930s, but those grievances were rebuffed by the powers of the time, then stoked and perverted by a movement that became irresistible but was doomed because it subordinated its affirmations to its fears and rage.” Does that sound familiar?
We cannot allow it to happen in America. Those on the political left who do not believe that we have a special role to play in the world community, those who remain convinced by the race hustlers and propagandists of the left that they are somehow victims of all the rest of us, those who get their “jollies” by venting their furies on left wing blogs... it is they who subordinate their affirmations to their fears and their rage... mostly their rage. Such men, and those who stoke their anger and their frustrations for political purposes, are very, very dangerous people.
And now that Obama sits in the Oval Office, we find that he is not the “silver-tongued” orator he appeared to be on the campaign trail where every word and every thought was written for him by others and flashed before him on a Teleprompter. Now when we see Obama, unsupported by speechwriters and Teleprompters, we find a man who cannot compete even with George W. Bush as an extemporaneous speaker. We find an Obama who speaks in two and three word bursts, pausing momentarily between utterances to decide how to verbalize his next thought without enraging his radical left supporters... trying very hard to be all things to all men.
But far worse, we find a man who unashamedly promotes policies and programs that appear much like the policies and programs that put Germany on the road to fascism some seventy-five years ago. And we haven’t even touched on the mischief he will create and the loyalties he will purchase with his economic stimulus plan. |
