Newsweek Is Now History > The > liberal Newsweek Magazine is going out of business but not > before this wonderful story! This is quite an > article, even more so when you consider that NEWSWEEK > finally had the guts to admit it. > Finally, Matt > Patterson and Newsweek speak out about Obama. This is timely > and tough. As many of you know, Newsweek has a reputation > for being extremely liberal. The fact that their editor saw > fit to print the following article about Obama and the one > that appears in the latest Newsweek, makes this a truly > amazing event, and a news story in and of itself. At last, > the truth about our President and his agenda are starting to > trickle through the protective wall built around him by the > liberal media... By Matt Patterson (Newsweek Columnist - Opinion Writer) > > Years > from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack > Obama as an inscrutable and phenomenon, the result of a > baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch > craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man > so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many > into thinking he could manage the worlds largest > economy, direct the worlds most powerful military, > execute the worlds most consequential job? > Imagine a future > historian examining Obamas pre-presidential life: > ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite > unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy > non-job as a community organizer; a brief career > as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and > in fact nearly devoid of his attention, less often did he > vote present); and finally an unaccomplished > single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of > which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. > He left no academic > legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a > legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling > associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher > who for decades served as Obamas spiritual > mentor; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as > Obamas colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to > imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how > on Earth was such a man elected president? There is no > evidence that he ever attended or worked for any university > or that he ever sat for the Illinois bar. We have no > documentation for any of his claims. He may well be the > greatest hoax in history. > Not content to wait > for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the > question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no > white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken > hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant > terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. > But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in > the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with > protesters against various American injustices, even if they > were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that > sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard > because of the color of his skin. > Podhoretz continues: > And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when > he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had > said) non-threatening, all of which gave him a > fighting chance to become the first black president and > thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest? Podhoretz puts > his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama > phenomenon - affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of > course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all > affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed > primarily to make white people, and especially white > liberals, feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, > minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on > the back. > Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which > they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the > inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which > follow. Liberals dont care if these minority students > fail; liberals arent around to witness the emotional > devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the > racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. > Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the > color of his skin - thats affirmative action in a > nutshell, and if that isnt racism, then nothing is. > And that is what > America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled > by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many > have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia > despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he > was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record > in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president > despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every > step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the > next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. > What could this breed > if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time > Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked > executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obamas > oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people > - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply > embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of > clichés, and thats when he has his Teleprompters in > front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely > think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued > from his mouth - its all warmed-over Marxism of the > kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years. (An > example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word > for word his 2008 speeches) And what about his character? > Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for > his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this > mess. > > Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. > It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to > advertise his own powerless-ness, so comfortable with his > own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and > said no one could have done anything to get our economy and > country back on track). But really, what were we to expect? > The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do > we expect him to act responsibly? In short: our president is > a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the > intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and > only when you understand that, will the current erosion of > liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone > otherwise with such an impostor in the Oval Office. >
Posted on: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:20:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015