Below is an excerpt from a syndicated column written by Mychal Massie, November 16, 2004:
He is eloquent, well spoken, with a membrane-thin veiled socialist agenda cloaked in flowery speech. But unlike Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn. – who had to be reminded by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., that while congressional blacks were no longer relegated to ticket taker in a cloakroom, they had better not forget their place – Barack Obama, D-Ill., is just the kind of black man elite liberals can use.
But also unlike Ford, Barack Obama is much more appealing to blacks nationwide and thus much more formidable when you combine that with his ability to raise large contributions, his Muslim roots and education, his ability to rivet national audiences with his snake-charmer oratory skills and an appealing mien that connects well with liberal voters. Accordingly, Lord Obama could very easily morph into “Darth Democrat.”
It should be no surprise that he is from Illinois. Illinois has a long history (from Capone to Daley) of empowering the unsavory. This unsavory comes with a smooth veneer that reverberates a thirst for power.
He has presidential ambitions stitched into the very fabric of his being, and as a student of history he understands the danger of remaining a senator if he is to be successful with his ambitions.
Granted there are worse things than a black uber-liberal socialist Muslim, supposedly now Christian Democrat in the White House (unless your name happens to be Clinton). The question is: Who would want them visited upon this generation?
America is more ready than ever before to elect a black president, but this is not the one we want to break that unprecedented historical ground.
In a speech at his party’s national convention, he spoke of “work” that could be successfully completed through socialistic intervention and programming. He also bares the stripes of most uber liberals, i.e., the willingness to make it up as he goes along.
Speaking in a U.S. Senate debate (Oct. 26, 2004), Obama emphatically claimed responsibility for Illinois’ successful welfare reform. The truth – as written by Steve Stanek a year earlier – finds no relationship with his on the record accounts. With minimal investigation one finds he not only played no role in the Illinois reforms, but he was not even in office at the time. (Illinois leads the nation in welfare reform; Illinois Leader, Sept. 10 2003).
He is gifted at twisting his verbiage in such a way as to deform the truth. In his speech at the Democratic National Convention, he spoke of “… measuring up to the legacy of our forbearers.” While that may sound good, there is a discernable difference between “forbearers” and the Founding Fathers of our country.
Obama’s forbearers are Kenyan, and it is alleged his grandfather was a slave owner. His reference to “forbearers” had nothing to do with those who sacrificed their lives life to establish a free society based on equality.
His statements were code omitting same, referencing instead an Afro-centrism and Pan Africanism. It was a deliberate attack against the foundation of our country and what we represent.