Barack Obama Thanks Himself In Teleprompt Misstep

Barack Obama Thanks Himself In Teleprompt Misstep.  And you won’t believe it [NOT!], but no mainstream, American media outlet except FoxNews reported it.

Now, my liberal readers are saying to themselves at this point, “Hey!  Give me a break!  This is just a normal mistake, and the Irish PM was guilty of the same blunder.”  And, of course, in a vacuum this would all be just another silly story.  But it takes on a much more serious tone when The Teleprompted One screws up like this.

The ever-present, presidential teleprompter is quickly becoming an albatross for Obama.  One can’t help thinking of allusions to a Manchurian Candidate being directed by a force outside himself  by means of an internal and undetected psychological programming.

Of course, such a thought is pure fantasy.  Obama’s plans are not at all directed by some faceless demon controlling him like a robot.  He actually believes everything he says.  And he seems to harbor a visceral hatred of things like individual liberty, free-markets and big corporations.  His entire political and community organizing career is an example his fight against institutions.

I am drawn to a voice from the past who seems to clarify Obama’s motivations for me.   The Community Organizer in Chief was a devotee of the philosophy of political action espoused by Saul Alinsky.   In his book, Rules for Radicals (dedicated to Satan I might add), Alinsky introduces his plan for social change this way:

What follows is for those who want to change the world. . . .  The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power.  Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

This anti-corporate, aAnti-government establishment thinking pervades Alinsky’s life and career.  Alinsky doesn’t ever explain what form of government would replace the current one or if, when replaced, the new leaders would be “the establishment.”  He has no concern for this.  But he does explain more clearly what he intends to accomplish through radical action:

This is not an ideological book except insofar as argument for change, rather than the satus quo, can be called an ideology.

[Emphasis mine]

Change, huh?  Have we heard that before?  With Alinsky’s stated “ideology,” we understand more clearly why Obama seems to have no plan except to do that which reverses the policies which have come before.  And his intransigent disregard of Republican ideas and general criticisms of his programs–even from liberals in the media–is better understood in light of his place as a disciple of Saul Alinsky.

Which brings me back to the question of what controls Obama’s thoughts and motives.  As much as we all want to run away from wondering out loud who or what pulls Obama’s strings, one has to wonder how Obama can so cavalierly move forward with this unprecedented expansion of government.  I can only conclude that Alinsky’s words speak from the grave as an explanation of Obama’s strategy.  Is this evidence he is a Manchurian Candidate?  Hardly.  But it does argue for the energy behind not only his policies but his seeming lack of consistency as well.

In the meantime, the Teleprompted One holds court and is bringing quite a bit more change than I think any of us bargained for.