Excerpts from CHAPTER 6 OBAMA CONFESSES TO HIS CAINITE MARXISM The Unrepentant Marxist Before we get to Obama’s prayer breakfast speech, we need to delve more deeply into Obama’s history as a Marxist. John Drew, a contemporary of his at Occidental College, wrote in a February, 2011 piece for American Thinker: Since I was a Marxist myself at the time, and had studied variations in Marxist theory, I can state that everything I heard Obama argue that evening was consistent with Marxist philosophy, including the ideas that class struggle was leading to an inevitable revolution and that an elite group of revolutionaries was needed to lead the effort. If he had not been a true Marxist-Leninist, I would have noticed and remembered. I can still, with some degree of ideological precision, identify which students at Occidental College were radicals and which ones were not. I can do the same thing for the Occidental College professors at that time. As a guest host on the Glen Meakem show, Paul Kengor interviewed John Drew on October 16, 2010. Here are some excerpts from that interview: [Occidental College] was considered the Moscow of southern California when I was there. There were a lot of Marxist professors, many of whom I got to know pretty well. What I know absolutely for sure—and this is where I really sought you out and I really wanted to be helpful in terms of the historic record—was to verify that Barack Obama was definitely a Marxist and that it was very unusual for a sophomore at Occidental to be as radical or as ideologically attuned as young Barack Obama was. Young Obama was looking forward to an imminent social revolution—literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class and institute a kind of socialist utopia in the United States. I mean, that’s how extreme his views were his sophomore year of college . . . [Barack Obama] was full-bore, one hundred percent into that simpleminded Marxist, revolutionary mental framework. I can definitely kick down some doors here intellectually by nailing down that he had a very consistent ideology, probably from the time that he was [in Hawaii] until he was there with Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers in Chicago. I think his current behavior demonstrates that he does still have these ideological convictions. Whenever he talks about taxing the richest two percent, I think even though he knows that will harm the economy—to him, that redistribution of wealth is still extremely important. And I think the problem here is that he never studied political science or economics the way I did. He just went straight to law school. [Obama] never had any real business experience, never had a payroll to meet, and I think he still is locked in a very dangerous mindset where I think if he didn’t fight to redistribute the wealth, he would feel guilty—as if he were violating a John Rawls’ Theory of Justice ideology. . . . I think whenever he talks about people clinging to their guns and their religion due to economic stress, that’s just the standard Marxist argument. In fact, that’s the argument of alienation and class-consciousness that [Marxists believe that people] hold to, the superficial religious and cultural ideals of the capitalist culture. [Marxists believe that people hold to that] instead of paying attention to the root economic changes, which are supposedly controlling their thoughts and their behavior. So he’s still using the Marxist mental architecture in the way he talks about things, and I really think he’s surrounded by people that share that mental architecture. Selwyn Duke observed in his American Thinker article “The Missing Link in the Evolution of Barack Obama”: We have not heard about any soul-changing conversion in [Obama's] life . . . Nothing that could reconcile the flat-out Marxist-Leninist Obama was in his college days with the man he supposedly is today . . . There are no stories about a great epiphany . . . There’s nothing to explain how a radical Marxist became a reasonable politician. And if there is such an explanation, it’s the most elusive of missing links. Instead of renouncing and abandoning his Marxism, Obama made it manifest when he began his political career in the home of Marxist and domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers; and when he joined the church of Marxist Jeremiah Wright and spent twenty years there. In his book, Deconstructing Obama, Jack Cashill makes a most convincing case that Marxist Ayers is the one who actually wrote Obama’s acclaimed Dreams From My Father. As for Jeremiah Wright: In 2008, Obama abandoned him, pretending not to have heard any of his vitriolic anti-American rants. The multimillionaire retired preacher no longer finds it necessary to disguise his Marxism. In his September 17, 2009 speech before an anniversary celebration of the magazine Monthly Review, Wright praised the publication for presenting in its pages “no-nonsense Marxism.” Wright gushed to the assembled Marxist dignitaries: “You dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word socialism or Marxism,” and concluded his speech by referring to America as “the land of the greed and home of the slave.” To any one with a sense of history or a love of liberty, negative images of Marxism do, indeed, persist: Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, North Korea. That’s why the Darwinist/Marxist Obama, in his prayer breakfast speech, unlike Wright in his speech, had to maintain his Christian charade . . . Idealizing the Idolater Plato What should we expect an unrepentant Marxist to say, speaking from his own notes and not a teleprompter, at a prayer breakfast? To the discerning listener, Obama’s devotion to Marxism should stand out like a fake, toothy grin. To conceal this truth about himself, we should expect him to lie and say he is a Christian, and to try to integrate his Marxism into a Christian context, but fail miserably at it. The lie of Marxism and the truth of the Scriptures do not mix, period. So we should expect outright duplicity: contradictory doubleness of thought and speech, especially the belying of his true beliefs and intentions by deceptive words. With the duplicity will come confusion. And finally, his pathological narcissism should demand that his speech be, essentially, about himself and how great he is. He gave us all this and more in his February 2, 2012 “religious” talk . . . Read Excerpts from Chapter 7

Outing the

MORONOCRACY

ENDING THE RULE OF THE BLIND, THE STUPID, AND

THE DISGRACEFUL IN AMERICAN SOCIETY

Obama confuses the Golden Rule with totalitarian Platonic thought control.

Obama pins his economic policies to a Scripture verse that has nothing to do with economics.

Obama admits outright that his faith is not in God, or in Christ, or in the Word of God, but rather, like Socrates, in his own reasonings, and therefore, in himself.

In his speech, Obama paints a picture of himself hypocritical enough to put the most corrupt Pharisee to shame, revealing himself as the kind of person the Scriptures tell us we do not want to be.

Obama walks in the way of atheists Karl Marx and Charles Darwin, and yet he claims in his speech that he has a “Christian walk.”

Excerpts from

CHAPTER 6

OBAMA CONFESSES TO HIS CAINITE MARXISM

The Unrepentant Marxist

Before we get to Obama’s prayer breakfast speech, we need to delve more deeply into Obama’s history as a Marxist. John Drew, a contemporary of his at Occidental College, wrote in a February, 2011 piece for American Thinker:

Since I was a Marxist myself at the time, and had studied variations in Marxist theory, I can state that everything I heard Obama argue that evening was consistent with Marxist philosophy, including the ideas that class struggle was leading to an inevitable revolution and that an elite group of revolutionaries was needed to lead the effort. If he had not been a true Marxist-Leninist, I would have noticed and remembered. I can still, with some degree of ideological precision, identify which students at Occidental College were radicals and which ones were not. I can do the same thing for the Occidental College professors at that time.

As a guest host on the Glen Meakem show, Paul Kengor interviewed John Drew on October 16, 2010. Here are some excerpts from that interview:

[Occidental College] was considered the Moscow of southern California when I was there. There were a lot of Marxist professors, many of whom I got to know pretty well. What I know absolutely for sure—and this is where I really sought you out and I really wanted to be helpful in terms of the historic record—was to verify that Barack Obama was definitely a Marxist and that it was very unusual for a sophomore at Occidental to be as radical or as ideologically attuned as young Barack Obama was.

Young Obama was looking forward to an imminent social revolution—literally a movement where the working classes would overthrow the ruling class and institute a kind of socialist utopia in the United States. I mean, that’s how extreme his views were his sophomore year of college . . . [Barack Obama] was full-bore, one hundred percent into that simpleminded Marxist, revolutionary mental framework.

I can definitely kick down some doors here intellectually by nailing down that he had a very consistent ideology, probably from the time that he was [in Hawaii] until he was there with Alice Palmer and Bill Ayers in Chicago. I think his current behavior demonstrates that he does still have these ideological convictions. Whenever he talks about taxing the richest two percent, I think even though he knows that will harm the economy—to him, that redistribution of wealth is still extremely important. And I think the problem here is that he never studied political science or economics the way I did. He just went straight to law school.

[Obama] never had any real business experience, never had a payroll to meet, and I think he still is locked in a very dangerous mindset where I think if he didn’t fight to redistribute the wealth, he would feel guilty—as if he were violating a John Rawls’ Theory of Justice ideology.

. . . I think whenever he talks about people clinging to their guns and their religion due to economic stress, that’s just the standard Marxist argument. In fact, that’s the argument of alienation and class-consciousness that [Marxists believe that people] hold to, the superficial religious and cultural ideals of the capitalist culture. [Marxists believe that people hold to that] instead of paying attention to the root economic changes, which are supposedly controlling their thoughts and their behavior. So he’s still using the Marxist mental architecture in the way he talks about things, and I really think he’s surrounded by people that share that mental architecture.

Selwyn Duke observed in his American Thinker article “The Missing Link in the Evolution of Barack Obama”:

We have not heard about any soul-changing conversion in [Obama's] life . . . Nothing that could reconcile the flat-out Marxist-Leninist Obama was in his college days with the man he supposedly is today . . . There are no stories about a great epiphany . . . There’s nothing to explain how a radical Marxist became a reasonable politician. And if there is such an explanation, it’s the most elusive of missing links.

Instead of renouncing and abandoning his Marxism, Obama made it manifest when he began his political career in the home of Marxist and domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers; and when he joined the church of Marxist Jeremiah Wright and spent twenty years there.

In his book, Deconstructing Obama, Jack Cashill makes a most convincing case that Marxist Ayers is the one who actually wrote Obama’s acclaimed Dreams From My Father. As for Jeremiah Wright: In 2008, Obama abandoned him, pretending not to have heard any of his vitriolic anti-American rants. The multimillionaire retired preacher no longer finds it necessary to disguise his Marxism. In his September 17, 2009 speech before an anniversary celebration of the magazine Monthly Review, Wright praised the publication for presenting in its pages “no-nonsense Marxism.” Wright gushed to the assembled Marxist dignitaries: “You dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word socialism or Marxism,” and concluded his speech by referring to America as “the land of the greed and home of the slave.”

To any one with a sense of history or a love of liberty, negative images of Marxism do, indeed, persist: Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, North Korea. That’s why the Darwinist/Marxist Obama, in his prayer breakfast speech, unlike Wright in his speech, had to maintain his Christian charade . . .

Idealizing the Idolater Plato

What should we expect an unrepentant Marxist to say, speaking from his own notes and not a teleprompter, at a prayer breakfast? To the discerning listener, Obama’s devotion to Marxism should stand out like a fake, toothy grin. To conceal this truth about himself, we should expect him to lie and say he is a Christian, and to try to integrate his Marxism into a Christian context, but fail miserably at it. The lie of Marxism and the truth of the Scriptures do not mix, period. So we should expect outright duplicity: contradictory doubleness of thought and speech, especially the belying of his true beliefs and intentions by deceptive words. With the duplicity will come confusion. And finally, his pathological narcissism should demand that his speech be, essentially, about himself and how great he is. He gave us all this and more in his February 2, 2012 “religious” talk . . .

Read Excerpts from Chapter 7