Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Fireball

Obama is an Intellectual Midget

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Barack Obama is an intellectual lightweight, a puny mind indeed. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger said Obama needs to put some meat on his ideas -- and on his arms & legs.

You might say Obama graduated from Harvard, yet Bush graduated from Harvard & Yale. You might say Bush's daddy got him into Harvard & Yale, but Obama's daddy's skin color got him into Harvard via affirmative action.

Anyone can read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto and then pit the bourgeoisie (business-owning class) against the proletariat (working class) as a way to rise to power. Very little minds have done this throughout history: Obama's relative Odinga in Kenya, Chavez in Venezuela, Castro in Cuba, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, Mao in China, Lenin in Russia.

Barack Obama is a media-created phony, a power-luster who would call his own grandmother a white racist if that would help him gain power. He is a non-entity, an anti-American cipher whose mentors are intellectually bereft:

* Frank Marshall Davis (Communist Party USA member)

* Saul Alinsky (radical socialist)

* Jeremiah Wright (religious Marxist)

* William Ayers (Marxist/Leninist)

* Bernardine Dohrn (Marxist/Leninist)

Obama wrote in his autobiography that he sought out his friends and Marxist professors carefully. His father Barack Hussein Obama Sr. was an Islamic socialist. His brother is an Islamic socialist. His relative Odinga is an Islamic socialist.

In fact, Obama is the first anti-American presidential candidate in American history. He despises America and wants to change it to the small-minded socio-fascism of his mentors.

But all is not lost. Obama can leave Plato's cave of shadowy illusions to enter the real world of reality, honesty, productivity, individual liberty and happiness that America's Founding Fathers established. Then Obama can grow into full human stature with a mature mind and someday perhaps become a great statesman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack Obama is a media-created phony, a power-luster

I think I may disagree with you. I think he is the real deal. What is suppressed in the popular media is just how radical he is. He is an idealist. He has a vision (very much integrated vision which goes beyond American borders - this collective vision is global) - a goal bigger than just getting into the White House. There are men who seek such office because it is an accomplishment and once they get there - they have pretty much achieved their goal. And then there are men who seek such power as means to a greater goal. That is Obama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See.

The criticisms against Obama don't focus on his words or his policies. They instead focus on things like, who was in the same room as Obama at one point in time and what they said during another point in time. Even when his words are used to criticize him, they are taken out of context or entirely made up by the pundits. Like the "redistribution" comment. Everyone took that and put their own spin on what Obama meant by it. And it obviously had to be something horriable.

Fireball's post is a good example. Place Obama in a sentence with History's Most Notorious Dictators and *PRESTO*, you have a criticism of Obama. How does Obama compare to these men?

Blank.

Uhhh.... Some people Obama knows said similiar things. Therefore, Obama says those things. Barak Obama is not a man, he is whatever the media you use tells you he is.

But, that's the conseratives entire approach. Don't talk of substances and issues instead, smear and scare. Make people afraid of the other guy, make him out to be this evil radical who stands against everything good and holy in the universe. If he is a war hero, say he didn't really fight. If he doesn't speak on certain issues, put words in his mouth. If he criticizes the status quo at all, say he is anti-Country and out to hurt it.

Smear. Scare. Smear. Scare.

The bottom line is I see people make these claims about Obama being more Marxist then Karl Marx, and no one provides any evidence for it. I see people comparing Obama to a moderate Republican as well, but there is evidence for that because he supports tax breaks for people. If the man was a radical as the men people compare him too, he would be talking about nationalizing industries and actually pitting the rich and poor against each other. "Actually" as in actually saying such things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See.

The criticisms against Obama don't focus on his words or his policies.

Oh please, give me a break. There has been plenty of criticism of his words and his proposed policies. Where the hell have you been?The substance of what this guy proposes is horrible, but you cut him slack at every chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your posts are insulting, Mammon and add nothing of substance in terms of arguments. They just empty accusations.

The criticisms against Obama don't focus on his words or his policies.

This is false. Personally, I went extensively through this proposals.

Like the "redistribution" comment. Everyone took that and put their own spin on what Obama meant by it.

People have already responded to you on this topic.

But, that's the conseratives entire approach.

I am not an American. I don't have a personal stake in this election (well not directly - because what happens tends to affect the rest of the world. And I care about the last bastion of freedom in the world). I certainly don't have an allegiance to the Republican Party. I look at things from a perspective of an outsider (not attached to any of the political parties) and someone who had experienced communism. I did not see previous Democratic candidates in the same light, as radical, as I see Obama. What I see in this election seems almost unbelievable to me.

Make people afraid of the other guy, make him out to be this evil radical who stands against everything good and holy in the universe.

This is one of those things on which I want to be wrong. Very much so.

Edited by ~Sophia~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the man was a radical as the men people compare him too, he would be talking about nationalizing industries and actually pitting the rich and poor against each other. "Actually" as in actually saying such things.

Are you trying to suggest that taking wealth from the top 5% of wage earners and 'spreading it around' to the bottom 95% is not pitting rich against the poor? As for Obama's past associations, I wonder if you would be as forgiving if it was learned that McCain frequented a church for 20 years that blatantly preached racism against blacks or Jews, or that he palled around with Tim McVey, or regularly dined with David Duke. What is telling about Obama's circle of friends is not that he necessarily believes what they believe, but that he is not offended by what they believe--at least not offended enough to find a new group of friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the man was a radical as the men people compare him too, he would be talking about nationalizing industries and actually pitting the rich and poor against each other. "Actually" as in actually saying such things.

He is pitting the poor against the rich - actually saying such things. In terms of nationalizing industries. Did you forget how in Atlas they wanted to prohibit people from disappearing? Every parasite needs a host. Socialism evolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bottom line is I see people make these claims about Obama being more Marxist then Karl Marx, and no one provides any evidence for it.
You're not looking very hard then, Mammon. You seem to focus on the posts that confirm your view: i.e. the posts that accept a more GOP line, and ignore the posts that present facts about Obama. You end up painting this picture of forum members here as being cheerleaders for the GOP, which is simply not true. It does seem that your own fear of the GOP is blinding you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sophia, I think you're right. This article from News Busters (I've never heard of the site) quotes Obama as saying that he will bankrupt the coal industry during an interview with the San Fransisco Chronicle.

Good of the media to keep that little gem out of circulation. Wouldnt want the public to view Obama as some sort of extremist. Makes you wonder what else is out there. Apparently there is some video that the LA Times has but wont release of Obama heaping praise on some PLO spokesman. I heard it was given to the Times on the condition that it never be shown in public. I wonder what it is we are not supposed to see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, Mammon, he didn't just spend some time in a room with Ayers and Wright, they were his *close* associates. He went to Wright's church for twenty years, for chrissakes, and he expects us to believe he never knew what a nutball Wright was. Ayers and he worked closely on all that community organizing.

Quit shoveling soundbites off the Obama webpage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we know Obama well enogh to make a decision on wether he's a real radical, or just someone who spent his life telling people what they wanted to hear, and the reason for that is that the actual media, the people who have the training and means to really investigate him did not do their jobs: not just because they are left leaning, but also because they are more scared than ever of the GOP.

What we do know, however, is that the people around President Obama, who are going to be part of his cabinet (Biden, Kerry, probably Powell + a bunch of Clinton people), and the leaders of the Democratic Party (Pelosi, Read), are all career politicians. I think it's safe to say there won't be any radical changes, that would not be popular with americans. The main areas of concern will be the healthcare system and the financial industry: I think they have popular suport to do a lot of damage there, even more than there's already been done.

The only sweet part, for me, of a McCain victory, would be watching the truth, after all this hype, on the news: there wouldn't be millions marching on the White House, there wouldn't be riots or massive protests, just the same few hippies that boo when Bush is in town, or try to arrest Karl Rove. No one would really care that he lost, because the only people buying into this hype are the ones creating it: he's not charismatic, or brilliant. He just looks OK reading a teleprompter, because he's standing next to McCain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The criticisms against Obama don't focus on his words or his policies. They instead focus on things like, who was in the same room as Obama at one point in time and what they said during another point in time. Even when his words are used to criticize him, they are taken out of context or entirely made up by the pundits.
I think that some criticisms of Obama are certainly relevant, but I do agree that the political campaign against Obama has been pretty cheesy as of late.

"Obama is an Intellectual Midget?" C'mon. What does that make McCain, a dwarf?

There has been plenty of criticism of [Obama's] words and his proposed policies.
True, but at the point Mammon posted, nothing substantial was said in this thread with the exception of
This article from News Busters (I've never heard of the site) quotes Obama as saying that he will bankrupt the coal industry during an interview with the San Fransisco Chronicle.
I didn't hear of that until now. If McCain wasn't pro-environmentalist, that could hold more sway with me.

Apparently there is some video that the LA Times has but wont release of Obama heaping praise on some PLO spokesman. I heard it was given to the Times on the condition that it never be shown in public.
Apparently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama's public persona isnt remotely Marxist and anyone who thinks it is has a superficial understanding of Marx and probably hasnt read more than the Communist Manifesto (if even that).

Regarding Obama's intelligence, you cant really judge him on his public persona because his speeches exist in a political climate which is geared towards soundbites and anti-intellectualism. No mainstream American politician is going to come across as being intelligent, because intelligence isnt a value which is currently respected in mainstream American politics. I remember reading some accounts of Obama written by his former students though, and they pretty much all agreed that he came across as extremely intelligent while working in academia, and they felt that his political speeches were very dumbed down (which is to be expected).

Edited by eriatarka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama's public persona isnt remotely Marxist and anyone who thinks it is has a superficial understanding of Marx and probably hasnt read more than the Communist Manifesto (if even that).

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -BHO

If you think that fascist is more semantically accurate, I think I'd be fine with that term. I haven't looked it up to be certain, but he may have actually plagiarized the communist manifesto here.

Regarding Obama's intelligence, you cant really judge him on his public persona because his speeches exist in a political climate which is geared towards soundbites and anti-intellectualism.

Here you have a point. 'Intellectual midget' is probably not a correct assessment. After all, he did ostensibly graduate from Harvard(don't know what his grades were, but, maybe that's not important). What I think can be said with a good degree of certainty, however, is that he has a somewhat slow brain. In my observations, when he speaks without his beloved teleprompter, I have enough time during his "ah's" and "um's" to have an entire conversation with whomever is watching with me, without interrupting him. What is fortunate is that, because he is slow, he is also more prone to say what he really believes...return to his basics, as it were. Fortunate only in the sense that it tells a truer picture of what he wishes to ram down our throats once he is in office. Helps me prepare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -BHO
The radicalness of Marx often gets underestimated - he didnt support really the sort of things which Obama is proposing. Obama's position is fairly straightforward social democracy, as implemented in pretty much every Western country. It has little to do with socialism/communism/Marx, all of whcih involve a radical transformation of society rather than just raising tax by another few percent and having a couple more social programs. Remember that Obama is still to the right economically of every European country including the UK, and none of them could reasonably be described socialist under its proper definition.

Also Marxists tend to be ambivalent towards the welfare state rather than enthusiastic supporters, since they often see it as propping up a fundamentally broken system (a fairly standard Marxian analysis of the 20th century is that programs like the New Deal and various welfare states in other countries were necessary to prevent the working classes revolting against the capitalist system and bringing it down entirely). Obama wants a largely market-based economy with a social welfare net, which has little in common with what socialists/communists are after. Obama's America will still have a lot more in common with an idealist Objectivist society that it will have with either Soviet Russia or a theoretical anarchist/communist state.

Here you have a point. 'Intellectual midget' is probably not a correct assessment. After all, he did ostensibly graduate from Harvard(don't know what his grades were, but, maybe that's not important)
Its not too important, but he graduated magna cum laude,

What I think can be said with a good degree of certainty, however, is that he has a somewhat slow brain. In my observations, when he speaks without his beloved teleprompter, I have enough time during his "ah's" and "um's" to have an entire conversation with whomever is watching with me
I'd disagree with this - first, there isnt a direct connection between intelligence and being a good public speaker (although with Obama's legal background I'd expect him to be quick on his feet in debates), and secondly Im not sure I agree with your assessment. I havent watched Obama speak many times, but on the few occasions that I have, I've thought that he comes across as fairly intelligent (for a politician) - he handled the Joe the Plumber incident well, and made his point with more clarity than I'd expect from people like Bush/McCain (its not a case of whether you agree with his position, its how lucidly he managed to present it).

I find his pre-written speeches genuinelly painful to listen to due to all the banality and cliches that he uses, but again I think that's more of a reflection of the political system as a whole, and the audience he's addressing, that it is of him personally. The only politicians who are interesting to listen to are those who have no chance of being elected and so are free to say whatever they like rather than pandering to populism (Ron Paul for example), but I dont think this makes them any more intelligent than Obama.

Edited by eriatarka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Mammon.

Also, ""Obama is an Intellectual Midget?" C'mon. What does that make McCain, a dwarf?" LOL! I think it makes McCain about 3 inches tall.

Now, I'm not saying that Obama is NOT a Marxist, but he is way too clever to be obvious about it, and all the efforts to smear him through "guilt by association" are just going to backfire. We'll find out once he takes office, but I'm hoping he won't be much worse than Bill Clinton. His health care and environmental policies are very worrisome to me, though.

Also, on the "spread the wealth around" comment - we've been redistributing wealth in this country through progressive taxation for decades! There are very few politicians who object to the progressive income tax. I object to it, of course, and it was nice of McCain to pick up on this comment, but he certainly hasn't come out against the progressive income tax. My point is, "spread the wealth around" is evidence that Obama's a Democrat, that's all it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The number of Obama-apologeticists on this board amazes me.

It could be because we are just so desperate for any sign of intelligence, that even when we see it in someone as wrong-headed as Obama, we still derive some hope from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could be because we are just so desperate for any sign of intelligence, that even when we see it in someone as wrong-headed as Obama, we still derive some hope from it.

That desperation is the reason why he's going to be elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The number of Obama-apologeticists on this board amazes me.

I'm with you. I'm starting to wonder if this board has been hijacked by his supporters posing as Objectivists. This guy's paper thin and translucent anyways. I realize that he has some charm, but I'm having difficulty believing that even a neophyte Objectivist that just finished atlas shrugged can't see through him.

I'm not talking about guilt by association. Every word that comes out of his mouth is anti freedom and anti business.

"So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted."-BHO

I mean seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with you. I'm starting to wonder if this board has been hijacked by his supporters posing as Objectivists. This guy's paper thin and translucent anyways. I realize that he has some charm, but I'm having difficulty believing that even a neophyte Objectivist that just finished atlas shrugged can't see through him.

I'm not talking about guilt by association. Every word that comes out of his mouth is anti freedom and anti business.

This is what I find so depressing - that putative Students of Objectivism (a philosophy founded on the ideals of reason and freedom), could find a way to rationalize support (or at the very least a "moral equivalency" argument for) one of the most blatantly irrational and anti-freedom candidates since Huey Long. When alleged defenders of freedom decide to "sit this one out", what message does that send to anybody listening?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with you. I'm starting to wonder if this board has been hijacked by his supporters posing as Objectivists. This guy's paper thin and translucent anyways. I realize that he has some charm, but I'm having difficulty believing that even a neophyte Objectivist that just finished atlas shrugged can't see through him.

I'm not talking about guilt by association. Every word that comes out of his mouth is anti freedom and anti business.

"So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted."-BHO

I mean seriously?

Except for sen. Inhofe and a few others, republicans feel the same way about global warming.

Recognizing that the Republican Party is embracing environmentalism and the welfare-state, driven by religious altruism does not mean someone is an Obama supporter: we just want the republicans to lose, because they are far more dangerous than some junior senator raising taxes a little for a few years.

I don't understand why McCain would be a better president:

Is he prepared to defeat Iran? (by defeat I don't mean a few bombs dropped in the desert, for show)

Is he going to take the government oyt of the economy, or at least take steps in that direction?

Is he going to lower taxes for those who produce wealth in this country?

Is he going to abolish the FCC or restrict it's powers?

Is he going to end the war on drugs?

Is he going to go into Pakistan, and kill the leadership of al-Qaeda?

Please, answer yes to any of those questions, produce some evidence, and I'll be the first one to encourage everyone I know to vote for him. Until then, I think throwing the ball around in the back yard, or having a barbecue would make a perfect tuesday afternoon.

Edited by Jake_Ellison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...