In an article titled "Perception vs. reality" Bill Sammon examines the appeal of one Osama, er, Barack Osama, er, Obama bin Laden, er Barack Obama (as Ted Kennedy likes to call him) and how his voting record is different than his rhetoric.
Obama writes in his book that “The arguments of liberals are more often grounded in reason and fact.” By liberals I assume he means the Collectivist hand ringers like his mom, but putting aside the semantics of what constitutes true liberalism vs. 20th century Progressive and Socialist ideology, I think Obama is wrong. As proof read another quote directly from Obama's book:
“I agree with George W. Bush when in his second inaugural address he proclaimed a universal desire to be free,” Obama wrote. “But there are few examples in history in which the freedom men and women crave is delivered through outside intervention.”
Barack must not have read about how the French helped the Colonies defeat the British in the American Revolutionary War, or how the North freed the black slaves from the Confederacy in the US Civil War, or how the US liberated France from German Imperialism in WWI and National Socialism in WWII, or of the MANY (not few) examples over the last 200 years when freedom was delivered, was forced upon tyrants against their will, through the outside intervention of just and good societies.
Or we might say that Obama believes that there is, in the heart of man, a universal desire to be free, but he's not willing to risk anything to help them realize it. If that's called being grounded in reason and fact you can have it - I'll take the apocalyptic daydreams of George Bush and his unreasonable desire to liberate people from "leaders" like Barack Osama
Obama writes in his book that “The arguments of liberals are more often grounded in reason and fact.” By liberals I assume he means the Collectivist hand ringers like his mom, but putting aside the semantics of what constitutes true liberalism vs. 20th century Progressive and Socialist ideology, I think Obama is wrong. As proof read another quote directly from Obama's book:
“I agree with George W. Bush when in his second inaugural address he proclaimed a universal desire to be free,” Obama wrote. “But there are few examples in history in which the freedom men and women crave is delivered through outside intervention.”
Barack must not have read about how the French helped the Colonies defeat the British in the American Revolutionary War, or how the North freed the black slaves from the Confederacy in the US Civil War, or how the US liberated France from German Imperialism in WWI and National Socialism in WWII, or of the MANY (not few) examples over the last 200 years when freedom was delivered, was forced upon tyrants against their will, through the outside intervention of just and good societies.
Or we might say that Obama believes that there is, in the heart of man, a universal desire to be free, but he's not willing to risk anything to help them realize it. If that's called being grounded in reason and fact you can have it - I'll take the apocalyptic daydreams of George Bush and his unreasonable desire to liberate people from "leaders" like Barack Osama
Comments