In light of the recent success of Barack Obama I thought I'd emphasize certain bits of some articles from around the net, which when taken together, categorically show Obama for what he is: A tool of the Zio-Nazi Fascists.
This first one show's Obama's pro-business 'free-trade' corporatism:
Why on Earth Are Hillary and Obama Supporting Pro-Corporate Trade Deals?
Tue, 13 Nov 2007
I asked Todd Tucker, research director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, who really stands to benefit from the deal. He didn't hesitate before rattling off a dozen multinationals including Citigroup, Occidental Petroleum and Wal-Mart, all of whom, according to Tucker, have "put their full might into getting the Peru deal passed, including showering millions in congressional campaign donations since January alone." Tucker told me their wish list includes "privatized social security systems for Citi, rainforest-destroying oil extraction for Occidental, and a push to Wal-Mart's efforts to buy out Peru's retail sector, just as they did in Central America just days after Bush signed [the Central American Free Trade Agreement]." In addition, General Mills, (and the Grocery Manufacturers Association PAC, which supports it) wants the deal to go through because it grows most of its canned veggies in Peru (decimating onion, asparagus and pea farmers in the United States) and is now moving its processing facilities down there. Citibank, along with other financial services firms, wants the deal because it would allow the firm to sue the Peruvian government for damages if progressive activists succeed in reversing a disastrous social security privatization scheme that's screwed over millions of Peruvian retirees.
Not very democratic is it? oh wait there's more:
Obama went on to insult the intelligence of a crowd of New Hampshire residents by explaining: "We cannot draw a moat around the U.S. economy because China is still trading, India is still trading." But objecting to these new NAFTA-style deals has nothing to do with moats. We already have a treaty with Peru, and 150 other countries, that established a rules-based trading system, complete with a dispute-resolution process. It's called the WTO, and fair trade activists -- many of whom also happen to make up a large chunk of the Democratic party's base -- already object to that institution's consistently giving too much to investors without paying more than lip service to protecting other stakeholders. No real Democrat should talk about "moats" when we have binding trade deals in place covering 98 percent of the planet.
The plain truth is that there's no half-way decent argument for supporting the Peru deal, and that may be the most offensive part of the whole thing: It shows that on a fundamental level, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and their respective campaign staff think that the American electorate -- you and I and all the people we know -- are stupid.
Obama and the Jews; Put on your "Obama '08' yarmulkes
Jewish Telegraph Agency
Mon, 07 Jan 2008
In his AIPAC speech, for example, Obama favored diplomacy as a means of confronting Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program. "While we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons," he said.
What kills me about this is that he's obvious pandering to the Zio-Nazi Agenda of expanded war in the middle east while at the same time touting the same propoganda that the Bush Administration puts forth. Unfortunately for him we all have (hopefully) heard about The National Intelligence Estimate Report that states Iran has no nuclear program, and likely hasn't since 2003.
Continuing on we see that he obvious is aware of the failures of the Israeli/Palestinian peace process and puts the blame squarely where it belongs, with the brown skins:
"It is in the interests of Israel to establish peace in the Middle East," he said. "It cannot be done at the price of compromising Israel's security, and the United States government and an Obama presidency cannot ask Israel to take risks with respect to its security. But it can ask Israel to say that it is still possible for us to allow more than just this status quo of fear, terror, division. That can't be our long-term aspiration."
Early in his campaign, he handily killed an Israel-related controversy in its early stages. At a chat he had said that "no one has suffered more than the Palestinians."
Blame the leadership was what he meant, he later explained: "What I said was, nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region," Obama said during an MSNBC debate.
Apparently Obama thinks us all the fool, falling back on the "blame the arabs for suicide bombings" bit when it's been shown time and time again that the Mossad is solely responsible for and Israel the sole beneficiary of The Suicide Bombing Cycle.
Oh I'm not done yet, there's also this article by Joe Quinn, it's not that long, go ahead take a quick gander. I'll wait.
So Obama and Zio-Nazi Bill Kristol have the same ideas about invading Pakistan in the name of 'fighting terror'... in typical Orwellian doublespeak read as inducing terror among native Pakistani's. So we see just as with Vietnam, Party lines here offer no distinction in The War of Terror.
Moving on there's a little bit on Obama and his lack of wearing a flag pin: Awwww he refuses to use the flag as a symbol! How Geniune of him! ....ugh please, I think I'm gonna be sick.
Obama Stops Wearing Flag Pin
Thu, 04 Oct 2007
On Thursday, his campaign issued a statement: "We all revere the flag, but Senator Obama believes that being a patriot is about more than a symbol. It's about fighting for our veterans when they get home and speaking honestly with the American people about this disastrous war."
"I will not be a president who extends tours for our Guard units overseas while Americans are stranded on rooftops right here at home," Obama said.
He said he would require "a period of rest and standard of readiness" before troops could be redeployed.
...did ya catch that last part? So he's not really for ending war, supporting peace processes, and diplomatic resolutions, he just wants to give lip serves to his democratic base and the veterans by letting us know he'd let the troops 'relax a bit' before sending them back to the meat grinder. Fucking Sick.
"We're not providing adequate treatment, screening and benefits," said Obama. "We need more mental health professionals and more training to recognize the signs."
No mention of how our army serves as a psychopath factory, that it's hard-wired into the brains of normal humans to not kill one another, that we should respect differences in culture and lifestyle and focus on education and healthcare in our own nation before 'liberating' (read as enslaving) other nations. All this is merely lip service and happy sounding words. He's blowing smoke up your ass so you can 'feel good' by supporting Obama.
Then there's this:
Obama would consider missile strikes on Iran and Pakistan
The Chicago Tribune
Fri, 29 Jun 2007
U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama suggested Friday that the United States one day might have to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs.
..again this sounds awfully similar to the Bush Regime's logic. Gee, Surprised I am not.
"The big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant to these pressures, including economic sanctions, which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate, at what point are we going to, if any, are we going to take military action?" Obama asked.
Given the continuing war in Iraq, the United States is not in a position to invade Iran, but missile strikes might be a viable option, he said. Obama conceded that such strikes might further strain relations between the U.S. and the Arab world.
"In light of the fact that we're now in Iraq, with all the problems in terms of perceptions about America that have been created, us launching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in," he said.
"On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess my instinct would be to err on not having those weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of Iran. ... And I hope it doesn't get to that point. But realistically, as I watch how this thing has evolved, I'd be surprised if Iran blinked at this point."
This story came out in June of 2007, which was before the NIE Report stating categorically that Iran has no nukes, and no ability to build them. So I can be forgiving here, but since it continues the trend of demonstrating his likeness to the Bush/Clinton Nazism it's relevant.
Obama said that his Christian faith dictates that marriage should be between a man and woman.
"I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman," Obama said.
Obama said he would not let his religious beliefs dictate the way he approaches public policy. He said he would supports civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.
"Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society."
Of course, we're all 'Christians', whatever the hell that means. I'd like to know how a 'Christian' can condone genocide(anyone who isn't labelling Bush and Clinton war criminals condones genocide).
I esp love how he walks the line on the gay issue. Personally, I don't want to get married. I don't want 'play breeder' or have a 'white wedding'. I think weddings are a self centered waste of money, especially considering how easily Americans 'fall in love'. I've also seen too many relationships, gay and straight, that are more codependencies then actual loving interactions, but that's me, the cynic.
Anyway I'm spent, but just incase you still have a twinkle in your eye for good ole' Barack Obama I have a few more articles ya may want to parouse:
Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski backs Obama - All ya need to know about Brzezinski is that he blocked publication of Political Ponerology. (About halfway down the page, or ctrl-f and type Brzezinski)
Obama says despite shortcomings of Bush administration, impeachment is not acceptable - Rrrrrright cuz Genocide, Starting a War, Illegal Wiretapping, Kidnapping, Outing a CIA Agent, etc etc etc aren't righteous enough for impeachment?
Obama Blames the Victim - highlighted this point earlier, but worth mentioning that Psychopaths often blames the victim for their behavior.