I’ve never quite made myself think that I could possibly change anything with my weblog. At the very least whatever it is I change I never thought make a mind feel better and inform them of a candidate to the point where it would turn them away from a vile candidate.

Back in 2007 when it was down to Token Black and Hillary the Deserved President Imminent I always assumed that Senator Barack Obama was a benign creature, merely incompetent, inexperienced, and undeserving of a role of true leadership.

I was wrong.

Back then I thought that he was merely dragged through a rigmarole of the ideologies of the far Left. He was taken on the backs and under the drubbing of folk like William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Ted Kennedy. I assumed that Saul Alinsky was truly a mild tactical approach to leftism, activism. I thought the socialist training and upbringing was an unfortunate side effect and Barack Obama was a merely a leftist of the normal variety.

What a fool I was.

William Ayers is an unreprentent domestic terrorist. Everything Timothy McVeigh was, so was Willaim Ayers. The difference is that we caught that wretched filth McVeigh and dealt him the cold hand of justice. William Ayers never met justice. He remains unrepentent. In a true civilization this man would have been publically hanged, or drawn and quartered. I remain surprised that a vigilante has not beheaded this human beast.

Like many a fallen angel William Ayers has a his disguise and poses as one of the normal folk. Normal folk normally do not question a demon for his own contents. The contents of William Ayers is in fact such of anti-Life. His spouse called on their follower-children to murder the children’s parents. The Weather Underground literally declared war on the United State of America. They set bombs. They plotted to murder servicemen and their loved ones. These evil men and women plotted death and harm as grievous as any of what I call “Evil Muslims”, what the press call “Islamic Radicals”. William Ayers went on to write books. Barack Obama endorsed one of these books. His living goal was to indoctrinate students into his own deadly ideology. He became a teacher and a Chicago bureacrat set to write the books and curricula of students. Barack Obama was a willing partner in this endeavor. When Barack Obama was eight years old William Ayers was a violent terrorist in action. Soon after William Ayers stopped setting bombs yet remained the same man deep at heart. His tactics changed; he never repentented. When they were both older men they befriended one another. Barack Obama sought out William Ayers to aid his political ascension through Chicago politics.

William Ayers gave Barack Obama his start in Chicago politics. Barack Obama has lied about the nature of this relationship.

Conservatives and critics of Barack Obama have claimed rightfully that he is a friend of a domestic terrorist.

That reminds me of a joke: what do Barack Obama and Osama bin Liden have in common? They both have friends who tried to blow up the Pentagon!!!

William Ayers committed violent acts and planned those acts when Barack Obama was eight years old. The fact of Mr. Ayers’ history is a matter of his character, not whether or not Senator Obama was involved with Mr. Ayers’ terrorism. However, every time someone mentions that Barack Obama’s judgment is lacking in that he was/is political allies of a man of horrific/murderous character he deflects the accusation by claiming that his detractors are accusing him of being with the terrorist as a co-terrorist and then asserts he was too young to be a peer with the mad bomber.

Sometimes a history of violence does not have a statute of limitations.

Barack Obama has been deliberately and particularly deceptive about his relationship with William Ayers. He is not an incompetent as opposed to Hillary the Lying Fiend. He is a fiend.

Jeremiah Wright is a pastor at a church in Chicago. When crafting an identity, the sort of political and racial identity a man with white (socialist) nurture and brown skin (from the African descent of his Kenyan father) needs in order to be elected within the ranks of Chicago Democrats is very particular. There are areas and walks of life where one must fulfill expectations of others and live an indentity. That sort of identity, in certain walks of life, includes the racial identity. Ideally in America we are free to live as we want to live as individuals, to be a who. In certain kinds of politics or even commercial arts, and I will be vague as to which kinds, the what is more important than the who. So despite being raised as Barry Obama and living a life as the child/offspring of his mother, his absent father-figures, and his doting grandparents, when Barack Obama sought to be a man of his own design, he sought to be a what, not a who.

It is funny. John Forbes Kerry sought to be John Fitzergerald Kennedy, Jr and modeled his life after our man of Camelot. That is why he became a Swiftboat commander, and why he ran for President. It is hard to say if he was trying to be a what or a different who, but he certainly aspired more than he lived. But he was a self-designed man rather than a self-made man. He lost in 2004. The parallel can be made to Barack Obama in that rather than become a man he became a type of man – a thing, reflection of vision. The question can be asked whose vision is he a reflection of. What sort of man did John McCain try to be between 2001 and 2008? Let us leave that aside; John Kerry shaped his life artificially and in the end failed to live up to his template. But his lifestyle choices were deliberate.

Barack Obama chose his friends deliberately.He did not happen to grow up in a certain environment, naturally evolving into those with whom he coexisted.

I am not a fan of the man who shapes his own destiny and his own character so deliberately. That sort of self-creation seems to me to be godless, and more urgently faithless!

So as it is those who would give Barack Hussein Obama his education were those he sought out, and he sought out those of the Far Left. His ideology was shaped from his early youth as his adopted father (or was it his biological one?) was a socialist, and the friends of his grandfather were radical leftists.

I think the important point of Barack Obama’s guiding ideological lights is that he sought to associate himself with these people, learn from them, pattern himself after their beliefs in a fashion. He would fashion himself from their ideas, notions, and superficial effects. He did this because these sorts of beliefs and ideological trappings prove themselves to be the fashionable ones in the right places.

Every person who suspects Barack Hussein Obama to be a Muslim, let alone a “Radical Muslim” or a bomb-blasting Evil Muslim is a fool. These sorts of socialism, Marxists, and sociopolitical activists that the individual in question patterned himself after were all in a sort of American vein, or at least a Western Countercultural mold. They could be called European. None of these ideologies matches the ideas of the dark sect of Islam that calls forth the followers and believers to kill people for jihad. In fact his western cultural education belies the trappings of any peaceful Islam. If anything his education demands a Leftwing almost-communist line of Christianity, and in the external situation Barack Obama has clearly embraced a cultural Christianity.

The sort of church that Barack Obama chose reflected the kind of man he sought to be seen as (as opposed to the sort of man he is). The Trinity United Church of Christ was/is(?) the sort of place where the sort of man that Barack Obama wanted to be seen as… went.

That’s interesting, isn’t it? I am assuming the contents of a man’s heart. I do not believe I am judging him yet somehow I am certain that I am crossing a line by guessing a man’s spiritual commitment to God’s word. I judge no one as a sinner or a saint. No man is sufficient for Heaven by his works or character. Given that high standard I cannot judge a man good enough for heaven, certainly I can accede that any man without Christ is destined for hell.

Whether or not the image of a church on the South Side of Chicago was something wielded for personal or political gain, it is important to note what Black Liberation Theology is. I refuse to go into great details and at time I will confess my own ignorance. Here is what Pastor Rick Warren says about it

Well, I totally disavow liberation theology and black liberation theology. I think they’re both wrong. I think they are radical. I think they’re Marxism in Christian terms and I think they’re dead wrong.

To that end I think we can assert and assume that it is not merely a different denomination, a different application of what we are supposed to assume is my shared belief(s) with this man, these men.

I regret not taking time months ago to draw out my own beliefs of Christian worldview, complete with Scriptural citations, and its contrast to Marxism or even the New Deal/Great Society/Nanny State visions of the Liberal Democrats. It would help immensely at this point. I wish I could draw a convincing contrast between (my beliefs of) what the mainstream Christian theology is and the theology often floated on television and taught to certain children in certain places. My ultimate view on it is that Christ taught us to act in His name, as he would, personally. We love personally. We show our love through action. We love because He loves. That makes perfect sense! Attempting to eliminate poverty is not an act of love. Helping an impoverished man is an act of love. Eliminating the deficits in his life without his own application of will is a violation of the natural order that God set down. Some violations of the natural order can be seen as good. But removing negative consequences to negative actions can be seen as an act of love if done by an individual man to man. A large corporate effort to eliminate the deficit is akin to removing one’s sins, and that is playing God. The aspiration to remove differences between God’s creations is an aspiration to play God. Sometimes our differences are manifestations of human will, free will. How can strive to arm ourselves, better prepare ourselves to serve the Lord if these efforts are stifled and stymied by attempts to make helping the poor unnecessary?

I think… I’ve run out of time to finish this.

The questions are two. Does Barack Obama really have the judgment to perform adequately as President. The argument of the Democrats is that his superb judgment compensates for his lack of experience. That argument of the Republicans supporting Governor Bush to become President Bush set up a Republican Presidency that bent for any Democrat legislative initiative and never issued a single veto until the second term. Barack Obama teamed with nasty, vicious people for political advantage… these sorts of relationships would have prevented any normal non-elected individual from getting security clearance… yet this guy who traded decency for expediency and coalition could be elected to the top civilian clearance and be our Commander-In-Chief.

When it began I thought he was simply young and naive. Now I believe he was deliberately diving into alliances of…. I’ll say these folk were evil. We were decieved. We deceived ourselves. I can only spell deception.

So the second question is… will he govern as President from the middle or the Far Left? Will he pursue power or a radical agenda?
Did he gather all of this leftist background to grow through Chicago just to govern as a centrist as President? Will he play it safe to stay President for two terms?

Vote on what you know… because of what you don’t know may be friends with villains.