The Audacity of Stupidity
Posted by wordforit on April 4, 2008
Brian Cherry, Associate Editor
Anybody watching the Obama campaign can’t help but be amazed by what they are seeing. We have a completely inexperienced, inadequate candidate actively running on the idea that he is going to raise everyone’s taxes while promoting the fact that he is going to be a foreign relations disaster. After saying he would bomb our ally, Pakistan, he stated he would legitimize leaders like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by engaging in unconditional diplomacy. For those who have forgotten, Mahmoud is a person who not only has stated that Israel should be wiped off the map, but honestly believes himself to be the harbinger of Muslim doom for the western world at the hands of the 12th Imam.
Intelligent people should be concerned at Obama’s eagerness to drop a daisy cutter on countries who are helping us in the war on terror while offering to spoon with leaders of belligerent nations where the words “Death to America” are printed on everything from tea cozies to those big foam fingers people wave about at sporting events. Based on recent statements from both Barack and his fishwife, we know the Obamas are not proud of the a nation that has provided them with Ivy League educations, unbounded opportunity, and a legitimate shot at the American Dream of becoming President, but there should be limits on the number of naïve statements and outright stupid proposals that the word “hope” is allowed to cover like a media deodorant.
If the Democrats want to be intellectually honest and put forth a minority candidate who inspires legitimate hope in their voters, they should make Flavor Flav their nominee. Hey, any ex-con crack addict who can make millions of dollars while dozens of strippers fight for the right to treat him like a Bill Clinton Cohiba cigar should be a beacon of overachieving hope to the liberal core constituency of underachieving losers.
When you get past all the fluffy rhetoric that is supposed to make Barack Hussein Obama look like the political version of Barney the Dinosaur, and actually do some research on the guy, you find that he is the most far left senator in Congress today. The National Review took a look at all the votes cast by the candidate for change, and found that the only one left of him was Karl Marx, and even that was a very close race. So, besides offering to split his 72 virgins with Ahmadinejad as a gesture of healing, and telling the Canadians that he was just kidding about opposing NAFTA, what else has the Democrat’s most cuddly Senator have planned for America?
One of the most common anecdotes that both Obama’s cite as proof that America is unfair, is the fact that they had to pay back their student loans. First of all, this very complaint is ridiculous on its face. Michelle Obama went to Princeton while Barack Hussein Obama went to Columbia. Both of them did their post graduate study and earned degrees from Harvard as well. These are some of the most insanely expensive schools on the planet. The cost of being educated at these three institutions is roughly equal to the price of a really nice, suburban house that is not unlike the one that crime lord Tony Rezko helped set Barack and his wife up in.
Nobody forced either Barack or his wife to choose Ivy League educations. If money was an issue, Community Colleges, State Universities, and waiting tables could have been part of the equation. These are options that a lot of very successful people have chosen instead of going to schools that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Living in the United States has given the Obamas the opportunity to choose those prestigious institutions, find employment, and pay off the debt that their choice of schools has left them with. Living in a free country also gives them the right to publicly complain about having to pay the bill that was the consequence of their choices. Regardless of what not wanting to live up to their commitment says about the character of Michelle and Barack, it also is launching pad for one of their more insidious plans.
Barack wants to give away money to kids who have college aspirations. His plan includes a $4000 tax credit, expanded grants, as well as the elimination of subsidies and guarantees for loans from private banks; providing a disincentive for banks to stay in the college loan business. In other words, by expanding government handouts for college while limiting private sector funding options, the government becomes a major source of college funding. This all sounds good on the surface, but when somebody is coming from the far left, there is a rather large problem with this idea. It is one that stabs directly at the Evangelicals that the liberals loath so much.
In his keynote address at the Call for Renewal, Barack said the following:
“[Conservative leaders] need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn’t the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland…It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religion, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith.”
Apparently that Harvard education didn’t do him much good when it comes to matters of the Constitution. Like most liberal Constitutional lawyers he misses the fact that the words “Separation of Church and State” are not found in the First Amendment. It simply states that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion”.
I will assume that history was not his strong suit either. If it was he would know that those words were included in our founding document not as a way to discourage people from putting up a Christmas nativity scene in view of their atheist neighbor’s front window, but as a response to the persecution that occurred under the Church of England. Once England broke from the Catholics and established their own Church, people who didn’t see things their way were subject to fines, torture, and execution. In other words that statement in the first amendment means the United States will never have a law like England’s Uniformity Act of 1559; a decree that made it illegal not to attend sanctioned Church of England services.
Considering the atmosphere and blatant liberal conditioning that occurs on the campuses of most State Colleges and Universities, there has been a significant exodus from these institutions to private colleges; a large chunk of them are religious in nature. What does Barack’s program say about Federal grant money going to kids whose parents don’t want to send them to a school where Ward Churchill can blame George W. Bush for everything from 9-11 to the cancellation of Baywatch?
We already know the answer to this one. There is absolutely no chance that Barack will appoint judges who adhere to the Constitution. Like his Democrat brethren, he prefers people in tasteless black robes who want to make law, not uphold it. This means that tuition to private Colleges and Universities that expose evolution correctly as “the science of things that sort of look alike” will be branded as a separation of church conflict and probably won’t be eligible for payment with Federal grants and loans.
Those who doubt this need look no further then May 22nd of 2007 when a Federal Court ruled in Colorado Christian University v. Baker that a tuition assistance program for low-income students violated the separation of Church and State. In a nutshell, public money could only go to schools that manage to link the combustion engine to our planets “Snowball Earth” phase, teach that Jesus is just a myth, and pretend that the questions raised regarding the Pre-Cambrian layer don’t give aneurisms to uninformed, dogmatic evolutionists.
It is hard to believe that the effects of the above mentioned lawsuit, and other ones like it would not be a consideration for somebody as far left as Obama when coming up with his proposals. The argument could even be made that since his ideas discourage private funding that he is counting on it. The Barack plan would take many of the private loan programs out of the mix (because technically that would not be federal money and could be used at just about any school) and give a huge competitive, state sponsored advantage to Schools and Universities that tow the “progressive” line; forcing many students away from colleges that uphold traditional values and true diversity of thought and into to a “place of learning” that is more interested in turning them into a liberal convert then teaching them to think for themselves.
This is consistent with “Pro-Choice” liberals who want public funding for in utero murders but don’t believe in options when it conflicts with their message. By channeling kids away from many private institutions and into the classrooms of Ward Churchill clones they will help create a generation that believes capitalism is unfair, socialism is good, competition is for warmongering Nazis, God is dead, and the Government should take care of you from birth until that fateful “progressive” day that Washington has the power to decide when your number is up. In other words they will come out more dim-witted then when they went in. Being the advocate for this sort of stupidity is audacious indeed.
Brian Cherry is an Associate Editor for The New Media Journal. He was born, raised and lives in the state of MI and from his home in the far north pursues the two passions that have driven him since his high school days, writing and the study of Scandinavian history…