“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Now this interesting little movement, as reported by the AP: Utah Governor Gary Herbert on Saturday authorized the use of eminent domain to take some of the U.S. government’s most valuable parcels.
Yes, LBers, you’ve read that correctly: a state has invoked eminent domain in order to take back land from the feds.
According to the AP, Herbert signed a pair of bills into law that supporters hope will spark similar legislation throughout the West. Many contend that federal ownership of wide parcels of land restricts economic development in an energy-rich part of the country. Many people in Utah are still angry that President Clinton designated a large area in Utah as a national monument in 1996, a move that stopped development on the land.
More than 60 percent of Utah is owned by the U.S. government, and policy makers here have long complained that federal ownership hinders their ability to generate tax revenue and adequately fund public schools.
The fed have pushed the boundaries.
And states, evidently, are starting to push back. States in recent months have signed sovereignty statements, reminders of sorts that the 9th and 10th Amendments imbue the states with certain powers.
I submit: there is precedent for this.
Newton’s Third Law of Motion? “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”?
The turmoil in this country has reached a fevered pitch.
I thought, mistakenly, that somehow I might be able to avoid the more unpleasant portions of the strife inside my glorious country. But clearly I cannot.
It distresses me horribly to have to enable Comment Moderation for now and into the immediate and foreseeable future.
But Comment Moderation is now in effect, because something I thought would not happen — has happened.
I value the ability of people to disagree with each other. I value free speech and the First Amendment. I have let everyone, everyone, comment here unimpeded since my blog’s inception in 2004. Personal attacks persuade no one. Logic and facts and history hold sway here. I have, please believe me, done my level best to ensure no one was censored at this blog since 2004.
However: an individual whom I believed had a good grounding in reality, and with whom I disagreed — yet thought I could trust to write and comment here in good faith — has betrayed my trust in him. His name is now immaterial and shall not be mentioned.
But when, in my Tuesday, March 30th post, he compared me — in my own comments section — to the recently-arrested militia members seeking to kill law enforcement officers, I drew a line.
And that’s enough. That’s simply enough. I do not and have never gone to his blog to insult him and denigrate his worth not only to the country but accuse him of allegiances with outlaw groups. He felt it was acceptable to make this comparison with me. And I fervently disagree. And I drew the line: that’s just enough.
In truth, he’s but one insignificant fly in an atmosphere of defeatists.
Defeatists and obscurists and rationalists in my nation. In my country. Who seem to think that the wholesale takeover of my country by its federal government is not only acceptable but to be expected.
People who cannot do what I call the “Logical Extension,” and people who seem to completely disregard history — those who possess what I term “Historical Alzheimers” — are doomed to repeat history. George Santayana is absolutely correct.
In my past two posts I deigned to compare Mr Obaka to Adolph Hiter — though I did not state that I believed Mr Obaka was Hitler. The title of my post was regarding history repeating itself. Comparisons were made in the times and situations in which a narcissist was placed into a position of remarkable power. The times which led to Hitler appear to be very similar to the times where Mr Obaka is now in power.
[A brief aside: perhaps some of you have noticed that never have I placed the word President and the name Obama together. There is a reason for this. In the way that Leftists feel Bush “stole” elections, I feel that Obama acquired a position for which he was minimally qualified — aided and abetted by our national media. Second: some may wonder about my recent spelling of Obama as Obaka. One week ago it was a typo in a single post. It worked for me then, it works for me now. And yes, it has to do with respect and, specifically, the lack thereof.]
I believe Mr Obaka to be an overbearing narcissist and megalomaniac who possesses uncanny timing in concert with perfect promises and a background, education, experience and a Pied Piper Cult of Personality that trumps all logic, common sense. His timing couldn’t have been better. His surrounding sycophants couldn’t have been more perfect, fawning, and opportunistic. To include, of course, the national media.
I have been accused of displaying a lack of respect towards Mr Obaka and, to that, I plead nolo contendere. Quite simply: yes. In my aged prime I have determined that persons shall earn my respect; I will not blindly proffer it due to position or rank. Another reason I am merely a Sergeant in my current organization. I am not a departmental nor a political Ass Kisser. Much to my remunerative displeasure. It is a fate with which I must live. I, however, sleep well at night after a hearty dinner.
Let there be no mistake, here at my blog: I view these times as not only tumultuous but potentially transformative. I perceive threats to my country. I see a federal government which is not only out of control but on a path to national doom.
I see a federal government — and state governments to a degree — who have no concept of definitions or lines or borders or perimeters or proportion or rationality. I see governments with no sense of finite. I see governments with no sense of limits.
Lines have to be drawn now.
You, dear readers, are simply with me or against me.
You either continue reading or you discard me in disgust.
If you discard me, then, quite frankly, I don’t want you in the first place. Judgmental, discriminating, I am.
I have to be, now. My entire country and the future of it and the planet is in question.
Lines have to be drawn now.
You, dear readers, are simply with me or against me.
The Comment Moderation pains me but, at this date, it is apparently necessary.
Let there be no mistake: I am not going away. And I would ask that all of you continue to post comments as you see fit. I will ship them into each post as quickly as I possibly can!
I believe that now would be the perfect time for a review of the “rules” in Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules For Radicals,” under the topic of Tactics:
Tactics
“Tactics are those conscious deliberate acts by which human beings live with each other and deal with the world around them. … Here our concern is with the tactic of taking; how the Have-Nots can take power away from the Haves.” p.126 Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”
8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…
“…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’
“One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)
If I might suggest, examine these rules and then note their applicability to the strategy and tactics in evidence being utilized by the Obaka Administration.
The Cloward/Piven Strategy is named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Their goal was to overthrow capitalism by overwhelming the government bureaucracy with entitlement demands. The created crisis provides the impetus to bring about radical political change.
Cloward and Piven published an article in the May 2nd, 1966 issue of The Nation, entitled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty.” A PDF version of that specific article is here. And from there an entirely new concept for the destruction of this country was born. For a detailed explanation, you must read this article.
Both Cloward and Piven cited Mr Alinsky as inspiration for their works.
Make absolutely no mistake whatsoever, America. The logical End Game of Mr Obaka is to completely restructure your country so that capitalism is ended and Socialism enacted, wealth re-distribution enacted — with Your Federal Government as Final Beatific Arbiter of what you think, say and write, and when, where and how you live.
States rights? The 10th Amendment (“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”)? [Go here for more.]
Seldom do I find it important to, essentially, duplicate an entire article or post from another source. In fact, now, I find it remarkably important to do just that.
TexasFred’s recent post about Mr Obaka’s recess appointments — and examination of the similarity of circumstances between the rise to power of both Obama and Adoph Hitler — deserve scrutiny. While easy to simply dismiss this contrast as bigoted pap, I engaged the reference article. I found the mindsets, background, core philosophies, formative years and goals shockingly similar in many ways.
As such, I present this article in whole. Please read it completely and then think: is history repeating itself?
I submit: there is much to recommend this argument.
“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” -George Santayana
The Hitler Factor: Is It Fair To Compare?
By Roberts, Matthew Edward
Since World War II there have been many political candidates who have been compared to the likeness of Adolph Hitler. This was the case for George Bush, Al Gore, and both Bill and Hillary Clinton; to name a few. Try as we might to modify graphic images to resemble the physical appearance of Hitler, any attempt to make a genuine comparison using these pictures crumbles when we face the ugly truth about Adolph Hitler’s personality and actions.
Some have attempted to make the comparison of Barack Obama to Adolph Hitler. This kind of thing has been done so many times before that people no longer think it credible. The shock value is gone and people almost expect such comparisons to be made during the election campaigns. The smear attempt which aims to anger supporters hardly gives them cause to raise an eyebrow.
This situation of being resistant to the “Hitler Factor” could eventually become a dangerous thing for the voting public of any country. How would citizens recognize another Hitler-type politician in the future if they have become resistant to the idea of making the comparison? If citizens are accustomed to instantly rejecting any comparison of a candidate to Hitler, will they be able to apply the lessons of history in order to prevent electing another one like him in the future?
What is it about Hitler we should remember so as to prevent electing another similar candidate who appears to be following in his footsteps? Many believe Adolph Hitler had Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), which is a documented mental disorder. People who have NPD have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. They believe that they’re superior to others and have little regard for other people’s feelings.1 It is not hard to see these traits when we view images or videos of Adolph Hitler.
In the general population only 0.5-1% of people are thought to have NPD2, although many will remain undiagnosed and untreated for their entire lives. People may interpret lower levels of expressed narcissism as mere conceitedness, selfishness, or arrogance. Given narcissism is centered around the idea of self-importance and the need for adoration from others, it should be no surprise to find narcissists are often attracted to those things which feed their emotional needs for recognition and adoration. They may, for example, pursue careers as movie stars or politicians in order to gain elevated social status and popularity. Nothing screams “elite” and “fame” like celebrities and politicians attending red carpet events.
Rarely do the minor expression of narcissism cause any real damage to anyone, but in a position of influence things can go awry very quickly for someone with a severe case of NPD. Adolph Hitler showed us just how bad things can get under that kind of leadership.
What exactly causes NPD? One expert and author by the name of Dr. Shmuel Vaknin offers the following explanation, “The onset of pathological narcissism is in infancy, childhood and early adolescence. It is commonly attributed to childhood abuse and trauma inflicted by parents, authority figures, or even peers. Pathological narcissism is a defense mechanism intended to deflect hurt and trauma from the victim’s “True Self” into a “False Self” which is omnipotent, invulnerable, and omniscient.”3
It must be said here nearly all children are born with narcissist traits and Sigmund Freud believed that to be normal.4 However, the development of NPD as a pathological disorder is thought to be rooted in childhood neglect and abuse. Adolph Hitler certainly had a qualifying childhood which would have contributed to the development of NPD.
Adolph Hitler was born to a communist father who worked as a government employee who had several other children with multiple women. His father was considerably older than his mother and they conceived their famous son prior to getting married. His father was not interested in child-rearing, abused alcohol, and the future German leader would reside in several different residences in his early years. The young boy felt alienated from his father. He would attend several different schools, including a catholic school run by strict priests and nuns.
A teacher would later describe Adolph using these words, “… reacted with ill-concealed hostility to advice or reproof; at the same time, he demanded of his fellow pupils their unqualified subservience, fancying himself in the role of leader, at the same time indulging in many a less innocuous prank of a kind not uncommon among immature youths.”5
If there were no bias against the name “Adolph Hitler” one might actually feel sorry for this young boy who grew up in such a dysfunctional family and knew so much instability, turmoil, and sorrow. It should come as no surprise how someone like Adolph could develop pathological NPD as a means of deflecting years of emotional trauma. He clearly had a childhood which could have contributed to the development of NPD. Given the comment of his teacher in later years it is clear Adolph was exhibiting signs of having NPD (see definition in the last paragraph of page one).
As a self-defense mechanism, Adolph imagined himself to be all-powerful and invincible, but that was contrary to his true personality as “nervous and awkward”.6 The fantasy aspect of his invincible “False Self” was becoming deeply rooted in his mind and even overshadowing the personality traits of Hitler’s “True Self”. Eventually, Hitler wouldn’t be able to separate fantasy from reality and Hitler’s “False Self” would totally convince him that he could conquer the world.
So, in getting back to the comparison of Barack Obama to Adolph Hitler, one could say there are some similarities. However, there are perhaps hundreds of thousands of children who share some of these similarities. Having a childhood similar to Hitler does not mean a person will grow up to develop NPD, as only 1% of the general population would do so.
Like Adolph Hitler, Barack Obama was born to a communist father who worked as a government employee who had several other children with multiple women. His father was considerably older than his mother and they conceived their famous son prior to getting married. His father was not interested in child-rearing, abused alcohol, and the future leader would reside in several different residences in his early years. The young boy felt alienated from his father. He would attend several different schools, including a catholic school run by strict priests and nuns.
He was described by peers who would later say, “He used to be a naughty boy particularly among his female seniors. Once he destroyed the school’s fence which made from bamboos.’ ‘In a creative writing lesson, other students said that they wanted to be a doctor or pilot, but Barry claimed that he wanted to be a president.”7 His childhood friend, Keith Kakugawa said, “He is such a people person now, it’s really amazing because he was a very, very shy — I wouldn’t say introverted — but he was just a very shy, cautious kid”.8
Unlike Hitler, Obama did not experience the death of his father at the age of thirteen. However, Barack Obama did see his father alive for the final time at the young age of only ten. It does seem many things about Obama’s early years are quite similar to those found in Hitler’s childhood. Barack Obama had no control over these matters so there is not a single person who would dare hold these things against him. However, we must also understand that Obama was affected by these experiences. It is, therefore, possible that Barack Obama, like 1% of the general population, could have dealt with those emotional issues by developing NPD. According to the comment of his teacher and childhood friend, it appears he was expressing signs which are associated with NPD. Both Hitler and Obama were considered to be shy/awkward while also desiring power.
However, it must be clarified at this point that neither Hitler nor Obama were officially diagnosed as having NPD. Suspicions can arise as a result of observing their behavior, but conclusions would nevertheless remain inconclusive. The best we can do is to compare the history, behavior, and interests of Hitler to see if a political candidate followed a similar path. Merely having a childhood which is similar to that of Hitler is not sufficient to make a comparison. We all know how Hitler turned out, so we should be wary of someone who had similar childhood experiences, seems to show signs of having NPD, has similar interests and ideas, and appears to be retracing Hitler’s footsteps.
So what are Adolph Hitler’s historical footsteps?
At the age of 35 Adolph Hitler would write a book called, “Mein Kampf” (translated as “My Struggle”). It would be an autobiography containing insights pertaining to his early years, political ideas, and thoughts on race.
At the age of 34 Barack Obama would write a book called, “Dreams of my Father”, also an autobiography highlighting his early years, political ideas, and thoughts on race.
Hitler’s “Zweites Buch” (translated as “Second Book”) contains a deeper understanding of his political ideas. The same can also be said about Obama’s second book, “The Audacity of Hope”.
Both Hitler and Obama used their books as a springboard to further their political careers. The title of Obama’s second book was based on a sermon of Reverend Wright and was the foundational basis of the speech he gave at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. It was that speech which caught the attention of the media and the public, both of whom propelled him to political stardom. He further expounded on those ideas to publish his second book in 2006, just before announcing his run for the Presidency. The book was on the New York Times best-seller list for 30 weeks.
Ok, so they have a similar childhood and they both wrote two books around similar themes. So what? Well, we suspected both might have had NPD too. Let’s talk a little more about NPD to see if there is really a connection to be concerned about here. Criteria for narcissistic personality disorder to be diagnosed include9:
Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance
Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power or beauty
Believing that you are special and can associate only with equally special people
Requiring constant admiration
Having a sense of entitlement
Taking advantage of others
Inability to recognize needs and feelings of others
Being envious of others
Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner
I would be willing to speculate that a person who feels the need to write an autobiography in their mid-thirties might be entertaining an exaggerated sense of self-importance. Both Hitler and Obama felt their life was worth documenting for the public even before either had started their political careers.
As mentioned earlier, both Hitler and Obama were described by others as being shy or awkward children with dreams of being in powerful positions of leadership. Both followed that dream, perhaps because they were preoccupied with fantasies about success and power?
As I go down the list of nine NPD criteria I can see a number of them which could be applied to both Obama and Hitler. This should be a concern because we know the outcome in Hitler’s case, but we don’t really know all that much about Barack Obama. He hasn’t released the vault copy of his birth certificate, records of his activity logs while in the Illinois State Senate, SAT scores, college transcripts, thesis paper, medical records, tax returns, list of clients he worked for as a lawyer, etc. Like Hitler, Obama has distanced himself even from childhood friends10 (see below right), not to mention other controversial associates such as William Ayers, Reverend Wright, Tony Rezko, Frank Marshall Davis, etc.
Without full transparency people must look at documented history and recorded actions to learn what this man is all about. Does Obama hold the same or similar convictions and/or associations as Hitler? Abortion (Infanticide)…Yes
Ok, so they have a similar childhood, show some signs of having NPD, wrote similar books at the same age, pursued a career in politics, respect many of the same radical political ideas, have similar associations in their relationships; but we are talking about two totally different time periods in history. Yes, that is true, but you may be surprised to know the signs of the times today are very similar to those in Hitler’s era.
At the time Hitler was rising to power after WWI, Germany had a bad reputation in the eyes of the world. The actions of the country were seen as an act of dishonesty, betrayal, treachery and a war crime. Hitler promised to correct this. Americans are also seen in similar ways for the way we justified and proceeded with an invasion of Iraq. Barack Obama has promised to correct this.
The Germans felt deceived and humiliated after WWI and had just entered into the Great Depression. Hitler capitalized on this feeling by offering hope and change. Americans also feel deceived and humiliated by their own government which allowed the current financial crisis to happen, followed by their passage of a $700 billion bailout plan. Americans have just experienced the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and Obama is also capitalizing on this feeling by offering hope and change.
There was weakness in the ineffective German Constitution which angered many German citizens while few freedom-fighters remained to resist change. Hitler was seen as one who would resolve Constitutional issues while being capable of dealing with resistance. Many Americans have a few problems with the U.S. Constitution, namely the Second Amendment. Obama offers a solution which claims to respect tradition while also allowing for gun-control laws. He will have to deal with those who resist infringement on Second Amendment rights.
The financial contributions of private supporters enabled Hitler to fund his campaign. The same can be said of Obama, for he has collected record-breaking funds from private donors.
Hitler promised something to everyone, just as Obama is doing today.
The Nazi propaganda machine convinced people Hitler was their last hope. In a similar way, the media is supporting the idea Obama represents the only hope for change from the policies of President Bush.
Hitler was an excellent orator, community organizer, and politician who could motivate and inspire huge crowds. His self-confidence was instrumental in convincing voters to elect him. The public viewed him as their savior. The same can be said of Obama11. Hitler realized there was strength to be found in the young. Hitler Youth were extremely dedicated and instrumental to his success. I am sure we have all heard about the Obama Kids singing songs of praise to their leader. Obama’s own website offers the following encouragement for youngsters to get involved in his campaign:
“Do you feel like you want to get involved in the political process but you don’t know how? Do you feel like there’s something important coming up in the Presidential elections? Get involved in KIDS FOR OBAMA! Studies have shown that kids can affect their parents and their siblings’ opinions and even change the opinions of older family members . . . including those of voting age. Are you still with me? Great, Let’s get started!” (http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/kidskit)
Beyond children, Obama is receiving an incredible amount of support from college students and young adults.
Hitler held extremely leftist ideals. Barack Obama has been called one of the most liberal Senators in Congress12.
Obama and Hitler can even be compared on having similar preferences, such as their desire to give their major speeches against a backdrop of Greek-style temples.
Where Hitler gave a speech in Vienna, Austria, March 1938 (above left) Hitler giving a speech, date unknown (above right) Where Obama accepted the nomination in Denver, Colorado, August 2008 (below left) Where Obama announced Biden as his running mate in Springfield, IL (below right)
“Obama is the hope of the entire world.” – Louis Farrakhan “Hitler was a very great man.” – Louis Farrakhan
Barack Obama is fully aware the nation’s problems are helping pave the way for him to be President. His poll ratings went through the roof during the bailout mess, so he obviously wants to talk more about the economy to make even more political gains. On October 22, 2008, Obama gave a speech in Virginia which included the statement, “I feel like we got a righteous wind at our backs here.” He may not be able to fully explain why he is having such great success in his campaign, but I’m not entirely convinced “righteous” was the appropriate word to use since it taps into religious overtones. Like Obama, Hitler claimed to be a Christian too, but I doubt anyone would believe his election success was a result of divine influence or intervention. The fact of the matter is both Obama and Hitler have the right qualities and message which influenced the right people in just the right way at just the right time. The question is: What will they do when elected?
We need to be cautious when we see historical experiences, thought processes, behavior patterns, courses of action, belief structures, personality traits, and career goals in a candidate which are found to be strikingly similar to those of Hitler. Combined with lack of transparency we have a serious red flag waving before us. We absolutely cannot afford to be wrong about this. With 12 million total deaths, the holocaust was simply too tragic for anyone to allow it to happen again. It might hurt our pride to vote for another candidate, any other candidate, when we want to pull that lever for our beloved candidate so badly. He seems so promising! Yet, so did Hitler. We would suffer much worse if that candidate proved to be something we never anticipated. I can only imagine how many Germans eventually came to regret casting a vote for Hitler.
This article was written as a reminder we need to continue being wise in judgment and unafraid to make comparisons when necessary. Turning a blind eye and responding with anger in defense of our preferred candidate can be quite dangerous. Some might choose to insist Obama would not be one who would take us through another holocaust. Indeed, they may be right, but few can deny the many similarities between Obama and Hitler. I would rather not take the chance of being proven wrong later on in life. I, for one, will always consider “The Hitler Factor” when choosing which candidate will receive my vote and hope others will do the same so we may always learn from our past mistakes.
