So, how do you think this piece is going to play in the general election?Before you start slobbering and fuming and clobbering your keyboard, let me quickly say: Yes, I know.
Yes, I know that the "Barak H. Obama" listed as the author of this 1965 article is not the guy running for president. We're talking about his dad.
Yes, I know that the words "socialism" and "communism" meant something different in the context of Africa in 1965 than they mean today.
Yes, I know that we cannot fairly use the father as a cudgel against the son.
Yes, I know that Obama's somewhat romanticized view of his father (as expressed in his book) is perfectly natural.
Yes, I know that Obama is no socialist. Would that he were a bit more of one! I started turning against him when the truth about Goolsbee and Liebman came out
In other words -- yes, I know and concede all of the things that you are dying to say. (And yes, I know that you will say them anyways, because my beloved readers are as predictable as sunrise.)
Still, we must ask: How is this going to play in the general?
Please note that I did not ask how this new controversy will affect my vote or your vote or the voting habits of your little prog friends and all the other people who think just like you in your insular progworld. I asked: How's this going to play in the general? In November? In Kansas, Tennessee, Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, Florida?
If you are honest, you will admit that -- for many people in the must-win purple states -- that headline hovering over that byline will come as quite a shock. Better the shock should hit now than in, say, October.
A short time out for paranoia: Did the elder Obama ever come to the attention of the CIA?
Frankly, I don't see how he could have avoided it. Look at the resume: Links to the Kennedys. An interracial marriage to an American woman. A son growing up stateside. A published endorsement of (a form of) Marxism. All of these factors would have set off alarm bells in a cold war context, with both the U.S. and the USSR vying for influence in developing African nations.
Most important of all: He was the economist for Jomo Kenyatta, leader of Kenya. Let's hear what former CIA guy Victor Marchetti has to say about that:
The CIA paid the late Jomo Kenyatta, ruler of Kenya, fifty or a hundred thousand dollars a year, which he'd spend on drink and women. Therefore we ended up paying Kenyatta twice as much, telling him: "This is for you and this is for your party."And now we know how young Barry's travels were paid for.
By the way: Yes, I know that Marchetti's words were published on a vile site. But he offered his revelations long before Obama the younger entered our view. Marchetti's CIA expose was highly regarded back in the 1970s, before he went off the political deep end. At any rate, he is hardly the only source for the claim that Kenyatta and his party received Agency lucre. (Didn't Agee say something about this? Stockwell...? Damn, I wish I had not lost my library...)
Note here: Both Kenyatta and his rival Tom Mboya got CIA pay-offs. Kenyatta was later accused of murdering Mboya. Wonder if the elder Obama could have offered confirmation of those rumors?
Would the Agency have allowed the elder Obama to travel to America if they didn't know that he was "all right," despite his published endorsement of Marxism? I honestly don't know. I'd wager the rent money, though, that American intelligence kept a close watch on the father of the Savior, and that his file would make for some fascinating reading.Kenyan politics are a fairly new area for me. I have formulated no conclusions -- not even the most tentative of theories. Who knows where research into these areas will lead? But you must admit: This stuff looks interesting. On first glance, I would say that the elder Obama seems like the kind of person the Company might want to recruit -- or terminate.
By the way: While writing the foregoing CIA-related paragraphs, I've been dying to use the word "spook." Is that term still permitted? We're all pretty hypersensitive now. Even Cecil Adams' site has labeled Cannonfire a hotbed of "racism," because I dared to question the Savior From Illinois. The Human Stain scenario could easily repeat itself.
18 comments:
first of all Thanks for your tireless investigations.
All that tasty bit or journalism was news to me and being a Obama enthusiast, here is my spin on his "upbringun".
If his father was as much of a left leaning advocate as it seems here, and if Obaama, the junior, is as idealistic and left leaning as his father, I say Hooray! because his political acumen and his talent and ability to "inspire" the masses could bring back to the lost and much needed values (golden feathers) of the entire left wing on our "great bird" the American Eagle, since it was clipped to the bloody bone by assassinations, blackmail, media slaughtering, academic impotence, and CIA plots and subplots up the yin yang.
As a result of the "conspiracy" to destroy our left wing, we have that otherwise wise and star spangled, once wonderful bird, circling overhead only in right wing circles, like a drunken buzzard, for the last sixty years or more.
Maybe Obama the junior, (if he can only survive assassination), will awaken the slumbering masses, to their political dynamism and their constitutional mandate of patriotic responsibility, to reshape and restore Liberty and Justice for all.
Is that a bad thing?
Gee anon. Maybe he should even use your words here as his ad copy. You know. When he runs in Ohio and Missouri and all those other states I mentioned. Yup. That'd get him in SOLID with the voters.
Maybe you should be his new campaign manager...?
Okay, we'll start the new O-man commercial with a shot of his Dad with Jomo. (Brief overlay of the CIA seal? Nah. Too confusing.) Then we see the words: "LEFT LEANING. SOCIALIST. IDEALISTIC. A HIGHER COMMUNISM. INSPIRE THE MASSES..."
Take it from there, buddy. Storyboard the rest of the ad.
Anon, I gotta hand it to you. You have your finger on the pulse of the electorate. I mean, an approach like that will SLAUGHTER McCain.
Back again. Have you noticed that in each and every post I now have to underline the topic -- because my "Duck Dodger" readers want to address every issue BUT?
Today's question, ducklings:
"How do you think this will play in the general?"
Gee. I asked it two times. Not enough for ya?
Did the Bush family's deal with the Third Reich effect either of the Presidents? Personally, I think it is all up to the spin doctors on either side.
kc
ps- did you see that Radar mag honored Daily Kos founder with "One of the most hated on the internet" awards?
And-
Thought you would like the news on Elizabeth Edwards endorsing the Hillary health insurance package.
That is one issue that Hillary does bring to the table and Obama fails on. take care joe........
It sounds like you put a rhetorical question, peppered with some sarcasm. Anyway, I wonder why you spell the name as 'Barack' in your title.
Nothing in Stockwell's index in The Praetorian Guard for Kenya, Kenyatta, Mboya, or Obama. But I found a bookmark deep inside - a mint-condition 1990 series NBA bubble gum card, #169, of Rony Seikaly, Miami Heat center, as the "Most Improved Player" card (I'm guessing there can be only one of those guys for 1990). I'll give it to my niece's husband, he buys/sells cards and prints for a living (they have a gorgeous collection of Chuck Avery originals on their living room wall), and if he says the card's worth plenty, I'll ask him to donate something to your cause here.
It will play fine in the general.
Normal people understand that one cannot be held liable for the views of a father who abandoned the family when you were age 4, nor could you have been much influenced by him.
Some will 'find this troubling,' and claim, although they really wanted to vote for the black man, they simply cannot, because of his father's communist tendencies.
Those people are morons or liars, and were not likely to vote for BHOJR in the first place.
On the McLaughlin scale, a 1 or a 2 impact (out of 10).
...sofla
sof, you may be right. But given the rather sentimental tone of Obama's book -- I just started listening to the audio version -- I'm wondering of the general public will agree with you.
And let me repeat -- *I'M* not saying that Barack Sr. was a bad guy. I am saying that lefties may not understand how this kind of thing will play in Kansas.
I AM now interested (as I never was before, frankly) in the history of Kenya. It is a little odd to think that the CIA has probably been tracking Barack Obama's family since before Obama was born. I'm not sure what that all really means, but I'll continue to research the matter. Until, y'know, I get bored.
Joseph,
The link you are looking for is quite likely between the African-American Students Foundation (which sponsored Obama, Sr.) and the National Student Association.
Thank you, Thelema. I'll be looking into it.
Hey -- was it my Crowley posts that prompted you to peruse this site?
If I'm correct in my characterization, that BHOJR's contact with this man essentially ended as of his FOURTH BIRTHDAY, there is no conceivable backlash to this on any rational basis.
As I say, for the irrationalists out there who will take an irrational position (naturally), he's probably further cemented a smallish segment against him, but one which would be found in the Venn diagram circle of those already opposing him.
(BTW, is it must me, or does BHOSR look a bit like Clarence Williams III of the old Mod Squad?)
...sofla
I imagine that anyone running for the presidency of the US is "vetted" by the CIA (and a whole bunch of people who aren't are probably tracked, investigated etc.). Obama more than anyone would be aware of this and would have contemplated negative backlash, as he had the Rev. Wright situation before he announced his candidacy.
And how many people do you think will actually read his book or any book in the US?
And since when do we need to have truth to smear someone in the media? Was Gore a BORE or Kerry a SELLOUT or Clinton a MURDERE? If a smear is planned for him, smeared he will be.
BUT, it seems to me that the crux of your tirade of the last few weeks has been the fact that you object and are revolted by alleged "Rovian" tactics used by Obama and KOS and PROGS....
Well Joe, if this game is played as you are proposing here (how will "this" or "that" can be played by MSM) then what choice one has but to play by the same rules? Or rather lose (like Gore or Kerry) by ignoring this repeated and obvious "TRUTH" about our politics. Let's not forget that Hillary early on her campaign kept mentioning that she was aware of this "TRUTH" and was ready to fight anywhichway to win and that Obama was too green to know this ( I guess she underestimated Obama to say the least). Are You?
One good way to learn more about Kenya is to do an advanced search at google at site schillerinstitute.org Like this:
Kenya site:schillerinstitute.org
Gary McGowan
Like anyone believes what the CIA has been telling us after they helped lie us into Iraq.
Obama has his Dad, Hillary has dirty ties in "spooked" up Arkansas, and McCain has his insanity.
JUST FUCKING PICK ONE
This won't hurt Obama. No one who is likely to vote for him will ever hear about it. I am standing by my prediction that Obama wins the Presidency.Of course, I could so be wrong.
The CIA's record on the run-up to Iraq was actually rather different than Anon 10:39 suggests.
The deleted post was by some kook who read a post that was different from what I wrote.
"No one who is likely to vote for him will ever hear about it."
After a series of national commercials around November 10?
Put yourself in the shoes of a McCain strategist. (Few visitors here seem to have that kind of imgaination, but I know you do, G.) What would YOU do?
Anon 9:53 :"One good way to learn more about Kenya .... schillerinstitute.org "
->"schillerinstitute=Larouche
Post a Comment