"Obama and his supporters brusquely dismiss the drawing of sensible
inferences from these gestures of admiration as guilt by association. In
point of fact, though, the Obamas didnt just associate with Wright. They
subsidized him..."

"Obama falsely conflates `democracy' with `the republican form of
government' that the Founders preferred as an effective barrier to their
ultimate nightmare - popular democracy. He appears not to understand that
the nation's constitutional fathers saw republican governance as a bulwark
against democracy and a more reliable protector of `property rights' and
class privilege than monarchical absolutism. He misses and misrepresents
the main reason that James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and other Founders
argued for a geographically extensive nation-state: to more effectively
preserve the tyranny of the propertied few and keep the threat of popular
democracy at bay (pp. 87-94)." (Street)

There is a lot that could be said here, like why didn't Obama leave his
church during the 20 years he went there? Why did he subject his children
to listen to that hate speech? But, we already know the answer. Obama also
has an anti-progressive-regressive-admiration for Republican governance.
It is true Obama would be transformative - though the transformation would
be in the wrong direction.

Others are judged by the company they keep.
Why not Obama?

Continued at:
   --> http://pnews.org/ArT/ZuLu/TranS.shtml

Reply via email to