“I will change the world”
Bookworm on Nov 01 2008 at 6:29 pm | Filed under: Barack Obama
Obama said today, “I will change the world.” Cal Thomas reminds us that he means it:
Is socialism too strong a word [for Obama's end goal]? Consider one of its definitions from dictionary.com and tell me it is something other than Obama’s economic philosophy: “A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor.”
A complete restructuring of society is what Obama advocated in a 2001 interview on a Chicago public radio station. According to Politico.com, in that interview, Obama, “reflecting on the Warren Court’s successes and failures in helping to usher-in civil rights, said, “I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples.” He has it backward. The Creator already endowed African-American people with these rights, which is precisely the argument powerfully made by Martin Luther King Jr. Any rights that are “vested” in people by other people may be removed by the same or future people. Endowed rights are “unalienable” and what America did was to finally recognize those rights. The distinction is crucial because it also relates to abortion and many other social issues. If a court can take away the right to life, then no endowed right is safe.
Obama continues with a comment that the “Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of the redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.” Does he mean that for real “justice” to have been achieved, the Warren Court should have taken from the rich and given to the black poor? Obama never said what would happen once the redistributed money ran out. Perhaps this was not to be a one-time event, but a lifetime of “reparations” for slavery, as some other left-wing black leaders have proposed.
My question for you: Is the socialist dream really the world we want?
Victims of Nazi Germany would say no. Victims of Soviet Russia would say no. Victims of Communist Poland would say no. Victims of Communist Eastern Germany would say no. Victims of Communist Czechoslovakia would say no. Victims of North Korea would say no. Victims of Communist Bulgar would say no. Victims of every foul Marxist regime in Africa would say no. Victims of Communist China would say no. Victims of Castro Cuba would say no. Victims of Chavez’s Venezuela would say no. Those watching Europe turn into Eurabia as the socialist dream turns into zero population growth creating a vacuum filled by radical Islam would say no. Victims of Canadian socialized medicine would say no. Victims of British socialized medicine would say no.
Email This Post To A Friend
19 Responses to ““I will change the world””
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Book:
This is not a world I wish for. The problem for me is what happens when the non-producers are able to out vote the producers.
Obama and the Tax Tipping Point
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463231048556587.html
As a nation, we are on the precipice of disaster.
I am reminded of the lyrics of a song by Mike & The Mechanics, Silent Running.
I would hope to save my daughters from this destiny.
I guess I should have included the link to the video.
Ladies and Gentlemen, may I present Silent Running…….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KL_fgWgK40
For what its worth, Mike is, or was, a member of Genesis.
They changed the world too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE7aZd_6JCU
Luckily in the USA we get to vote every 4 years,
and I still maintain it isn’t over. Of course our biased media is telling us Obama has a landslide. They are trying to create one.
We have to hope that Americans remain centrist and sensible.
Reasons to vote for McCain; reasons to vote against Obama…
My reasons for voting, not just for McCain, but also against Obama, are almost all premised upon two basic belief systems I hold: (1) As a general matter, that federal government is best which governs least; and (2) that country……
Bookworm,
Am I missing something? I’ve read and re-read the Sky News article, and I cannot find the quote or the context of the quote where Obama actually SAID “I will change the world”.. I also googled it, but everybody is just reacting to the HEADLINE. Now believe me when I tell you that I DETEST Obama, but to be fair, did he REALLY say that? There are certainly enough horrifying things he HAS said that we don’t need to be reacting to an inflammatory headline. If so, then we are no better than the Obamatards that Howard Stern’s show interviewed.
A follow up on my last post. Here is a quote from the article that the Sky News headline was pointing to:
“A lone McCain supporter at the rally said she too was convinced that the Republican nominee was finished. “McCain has lost,” said Deborah Barnhart, 48, who runs a landscaping business.
“He’s lost because the Messiah has spoken and we’re going to change the world. That’s all people want to hear after eight years of Bush. Obama thinks he’s won. Everyone here thinks he’s won.”
The “change the world” comment was SARCASM, and it was said by a “McCain” supporter. Now the media is putting words in the mouth of Obama. Honestly, this is the worst sort of yellow journalism, and we need to be careful not to fall into the traps of their manipulations ourselves!
sillielizzie,
From a link through instapundit.
MORE: Reader Urania Mitchell says it’s probably a misquote of this statement:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_mccain_ma.html
Not speaking for Book, just a thought.
I realize I’m not going to change your mind that Obama’s healthcare plan is not really socialism.
But please, learn a little bit more about an important part of world history. The German National Socialists were hardly socialists, and persecuted communists and socialists.
How many Obama supporters are just like this? Pay attention to the words!
“I won’t have to work on putting gas in my car. I won’t have to work
on paying my mortgage. If I help him… he’s gonna help me.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8
Sheeee-eeeesh. Well, pardon me for living and breathing. I agree with her! Now, if Obama will take care of my food as well, I will never work again. Why bother?
There’s this one, tiny, nasty little problem though. That after four years of this, we will all be miserably poor, living in huts, and envious of any neighbor who has even one extra peanut butter biscuit or has a child with a toy that is shinier than my child’s. Spying on each other out of the corner of our eyes as we shuffle our feet to the soup lines; grim-faced the entire day, staring at the ground, never at the sky.
Our faces strangely lined, not from sun or toil, but lined due to the outward expression of some inward neurosis; our lips permanently downturned. An inner ugliness expressed outwardly in the classic look of one who is, not victimized, but lives a life filled with 24/7 *thoughts* of victimization. Take one look at Erica Jong these days.
Obama’s 4 year Plan, thanks to Norman Thomas, socialist of long ago:
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”
Remember Obama’s story about sharing a peanut butter sandwich in the second grade? See Barack Obama and Billy O’Grabba.
I think Book may have posted this in the past. Anyway, this would be a great refresher.
Make Mine Freedom (1948)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY
Sillielizzie: You have a good point. However, I’ve learned from reading a bunch of British papers that they often put a real quotation in the article caption or subheading, and then consider that part of the story. That is, they don’t repeat it in the story body. To the extent Sky News framed this as “Obama: I will change the world,’” I’m currently accepting that he did, in fact, use those words. (And they’re certainly in character with words he’s used before.)
zankervitch,
Nazis, or National-Socialists, were in fact socialists. Hitler insisted on it himself. My grandpa was telling me that Soviet papers were full of praises in 1939 after Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. They were all talking about how great it was that 2 SOCIALIST countries were friends.
Indeed, the similarities between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were numerous. I even saw some left-overs of it growing up. I remember reading in history books about Nazi Germany and them being amazed to see something similar in my everyday life.
You can read some more details here:
http://conservativlib.wordpress.com/why-conservative-liberal/
While you are at it, take a look at my grandpa’s story:
http://conservativlib.wordpress.com/my-grandpa-the-story-of-a-soviet-army-combat-medic/
There is also my grandpa’s diary.
I hope it will answer your questions about similarities between the Soviets and the Nazis.
Eric.
eric-odessit:
With all due respect, citing the jubilant press about the non-aggression pact doesn’t make a lot of sense. The pact reassured both sides that they weren’t going to fight each other — isn’t that enough cause for celebration?
The National Socialists certainly took parts of their ideology from socialism, such as centralization of national industries. However, their goals for doing so were not to help the worker (a core tenet of socialism and communism); instead, it was to further their racist ideas of a German national state. The Nazis also promoted the idea of private property, provided that the property was not being used against their racist and nationalist goals.
There are certainly thousands of parallels in daily life under the Nazis and Communism. Both ideologies were totalitarian and sought total control.
In sum: to say that the Nazis were socialists purely because of the way they reformed a failing German economy ignores the racist ideology at the center of the Nazi platform.
Considerable similarities between Nazi and Communist ideologies, but also considerable differences. For communists, economic matters were at the center of life; for Nazis, economic matters played only a supporting role. Communism was a bastard child of the Enlightenment; Naziism was counter-Enlightenment.
Aldous Huxley:
In the field of politics the equivalent of a theorem is a perfectly disciplined army; of a sonnet or picture, a police state under a dictatorship. The Marxist calls himself scientific and to this claim the Fascist adds another: he is the poet–the scientific poet–of a new mythology. Both are justified in their pretensions; for each applies to human situations the procedures which have proved effective in the laboratory and the ivory tower. They simplify, they abstract, they eliminate all that, for their purposes, is irrelevant and ignore whatever they choose to regard an inessential; they impose a style, they compel the facts to verify a favorite hypothesis, they consign to the waste paper basket all that, to their mind, falls short of perfection…the dream of Order begets tyranny, the dream of Beauty, monsters and violence.
Bookworm: Thanks, I guess the UK press is further downstream from any necessity to actually report facts than our own media which is just in the total spin zone.
To the rest: … socialist, communist, nazi, fascist, progressive, liberal, fabian, green. WHATEVER. I hate ‘em ALL!!!!! Depotic tyranny is one head wearing many masks.
sillielizzie:
Hate Fabian?
OK, he was a pure media creation, but the swarthy lunk did have a certain charm to him.
Now Bobby Vee. . .
Charles Martel,
Nice name. Hope you’re as good at repelling the barbarians at the gate the second time as you were the first time.
Re: Fabian. I was referring to the Fabian Socialists who derived their name from Fabius Maximus Cunctator, not Fabian the rock star. You must have gotten confused with Obama the Rock Star.
Anyway, Fabius Max was was a yellowbellied version of Joseph Stalin, eschewing violent revolution for social evolution – preferring to bring about “socialist” (i.e. marxism) through “education” with promises of “hope” and “change”. Sound familiar?
Not quite the stuff that Bobby Vee crooned about… anyway, I have much more to say about the socialist DemocRATS’ election tactics here:
Electile Dysfunction: 2000 Election was Practice, 2008 the Real Coup?”