Some see, few know, many choose to wander aimlessly in a fog, devoid of sunlight. I seek the light of day and leave the others to their chosen realm of ignorance. They are the ones who have brought this great nation down. I write only for the benefit of those who possess the courage required to restore our birthright.
Friday, November 22, 2013
OBAMA IS NO NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN
Lately I have been encountering a lot of sites expressing the concept that Obama could be the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st century. Rubbish!
I hate to say anything good about Adolph Hitler, but the fact of the matter is that he could be quite charming when he chose to be, and when it worked to his advantage. He chose to be charming with Neville Chamberlain because he had something to gain from the encounter, which was the annexation of part of Czechoslovakia, and avoiding war with England until he was more prepared to deal with them.
As to Hitler's charm, it worked equally well on Joseph Stalin, a ruthless hardened communist who trusted no one, and yet believed that he could trust Hitler. We all live and learn don't we Joe?
When it comes to comparing one person to another, Obama probably holds the record. We have all seen photoshopped images of him as Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao Se Tung, and others, and he likes to compare himself to Lincoln and FDR. The Barrack Obama/Neville Chamberlain concept, however, is a bit of a stretch of the imagination.
Chamberlain was gullible, hopeful, trusting, desperately wanting to avoid another long and bloody war for England. In short, the worst possible kind of leader to have when war is inevitable. His guarantee of "Peace in our time" steered England's fate into a long and desperate war.
Then we have Obama; lying, deceptive, traitorous, and desperately seeking total power over the unthinking masses. He has far more in common with Adolph than Neville, and so I had to find out where the concept of the Obama/Chamberlain similarity came from. Needless to say it originated with a well educated, gullible. unthinking liberal. In February of 2012 Newsmax interviewed Alan Dershowitz, who tells us that he knows Obama, likes Obama, and voted for Obama.
This from Newsmax...
Dershowitz to Newsmax: Obama Could Be 'Chamberlain of 21st Century
"I hope he is not remembered in history as the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st century, the person who didn't see the greatest evil, didn't recognize the greatest evil of the 20th century, as Chamberlain did not."
That statement exemplifies why I choose to regard Mister Dershowitz as a well educated, gullible, unthinking liberal, for Iran is not the greatest danger of the 21st century; progressivism is. Should responsible world leaders choose to deal with the mullahs of Iran, the problem would be over in but a few days. 'Responsible world leaders' is the Catch 22 of that sentence for world leaders today answer to the progressive agenda, and that agenda chooses to use a nuclear Iran to their benefit.
It would be so nice if I could simply point a finger at Obama and say
"Him, he is the world's greatest danger!", but that is not the case. Even one rung up the ladder we find the man that so many call the Emperor, George Soros, but not even he holds that distinction. Looking evermore deeply into the shadowy world behind Obama we find Valerie Jarrett, but even she is not the 'greatest danger'.
There is not one single person, nor one single nation, that can lay claim to that title, for if we take away any of these people the progressive movement continues on the slow relentless march that has now lasted a century, and we seem helpless to defend against it.
Why? I'll give you several reasons. Let us begin with an apathetic and uninformed electorate. Those two characteristics preclude any chance of an intelligent vote on election day. Move on to liberal 'Chamberlains' such as Mister Alan Dershowitz, mentioned above, who knows Obama and likes him anyway. He spoke of Chamberlain not identifying an evil. Perhaps he should gaze into a mirror and see Chamberlain's reflection. Obama, while not the greatest evil, is evil nonetheless, and Mister Dershowitz cannot see it.
Now factor in progressive traitors, two men who 'opposed' Obama, McCain and Romney. Neither would even identify Obama as a socialist, let alone address his background association with communism. McCain simply warned us that Obama lacked experience, while Mitt Romney expressed his opinion that Obama is a 'nice guy'.
A nice guy lacking experience is what many see in the man who courts the favor of Iran, but I assure you of one thing: If Iran does indeed get the bomb, it will not be due to the fact that a nice guy made a poor judgement call. It will be due to the fact that the progressives want Iran to possess that weapon.
Any who feel that Barrack Obama is incompetent is walking into a baited trap. Those who believe that his actions are due to a misplaced idealism and naivete are only clearing the path for the progressives he represents. Everyone who believes that he is an idealist should check the history of others who sought totalitarian authority over a nation. That history is bloody, and so too will be the future if people believe that Obama is simply repeating Neville Chamberlain's mistake.
Power does truly corrupt, and Obama pursues an unchecked power to serve his masters, while they seek the endgame they see as almost within their grasp. I cannot help but believe that Chamberlain was an honest, well intentioned fool, nor can I help but believe that Obama is anything but.
It is only fitting to fear Obama, Iran, George Soros, Islam, and Valerie Jarrett, but if you fear anything more than this onslaught of progressivism, then your attention is being successfully misdirected.
Introduction to Iran, Obama, And Nuclear War