If the 2013 Pulitzer Prize for Journalism does not go to a conservative in the media, a great injustice will have been committed. The amount of digging conservatives have been doing lately on the current occupant of the White House, to whom the media has given a free lifetime pass from investigation and criticism alike, is what true professional journalism is all about.
In addition to the other videos I briefly mentioned here and here, two more surfaced this week that are only further revelations of a wide discrepancy between the persona President Obama displays when he knows he is in the public eye and his true beliefs when he's speaking amongst those he considers his peers.
The first video was released by The Daily Caller Tuesday night. In it, Obama played that tired game of relating the Bush administration's treatment of Hurricane Katrina to racism. He also heaps praise upon Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who was sitting in the audience. This was when Obama and Wright were still very close from their more-than 20-year relationship, before Obama threw him under the bus for political expediency when he decided to run for president.
Conservatives have known for years that Obama viewed the openly anti-America, anti-Jew, anti-white reverend as his "spiritual mentor" (Obama's words), so it was not Obama's praise of him that struck me in this video. Rather, it was Obama's dialect du jour. When he spoke, he affected a traditionally black, deeply southern accent entirely different from the white-guy-named-Steve accent he used in the speeches he gave during his campaign and in the present day. He was playing to the largely black audience. He was trying to create a sense of brotherhood among them, united together against the other races. In short, the video revealed Obama to be a race-baiting phony, a mere actor on a stage.
The second video I find to be not only damning, but disturbing. It was uploaded yesterday on the YouTube account of someone with the username Morgenr. It takes place at Chicago University on Martin Luther King Day in 2002. The speech contains what has become Obama's modus operandi: bad-mouthing rich people.
The disturbing part comes when he begins to talk about how poor people are justified in being violent, and then mocking rich people for being non-violent: "I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but rich people are all for nonviolence. Why wouldn’t they be? They’ve got what they want. They want to make sure people don’t take their stuff."
Now, why does he view it as a bad thing that rich people don't want their stuff taken away? It's because he believes taking away rich people's possessions is justified; it is for the greater good.
And why does he complain that rich people are nonviolent? Because Obama is a classic radical leftist in the vain of the students of the 1973 riots. It's what he grew up believing, that the end justifies the means. It's what all far-leftists believe. And it fully explains Obama's support of the violent, rapacious Occupy Wall Street movement; the violent, radical Islamic uprisings in the Middle East; and his execution of the Fast and Furious gunrunning scheme. (So what if people die? At least assault weapons will be banned as a result of it.)
Bemoaning non-violence is something we will never, ever hear Obama do when he knows his words will be made public.
You see, it is not simply that Obama is an ineffective president or an inconsequential president; it is that he is an extremist, a radical. To believe that he has been ineffective is to believe that the effects of his presidency thus far have been unintentional--effects such as increased class division, pitting females against males, and the worst racial division since the Sixties. These have all been intentionally aggravated by Obama in close to every speech he has given.
Vote for Obama in November if division appeals to you as much as it appeals to him when he's in the private company of his fellow extremists.