America’s Choice – Huckster or Hero?

The 2008 presidential election will soon be upon us–an election of a lifetime. I realize that some of you have already voted, and many of you will see this as preaching to the choir. But some are still undecided, and others have friends that could benefit from this analysis. If the following thoughts speak to you, please forward it on to those whom you might influence.

Some definitions:

1. Huckster – n. 2. One who uses aggressive, showy, and sometimes devious methods to promote or sell a product.

2. Heron. 2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life.

The American Heritage High School Dictionary, 4th Edition

There is a fire burning inside that demands that I speak yet again about the choice Americans face in Tuesday’s election. I felt this burden one other time–in the fall of 1976 when America was facing the choice of a center-right ticket of Gerald Ford and Bob Dole against the far left combination of Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. I spent that summer writing a book called What About Jimmy Carter which was published two months prior to the election. I then watched in anguish as the electorate foolishly chose Carter whose lack of leadership and deceptive policies brought us four years of misery. That was bad enough. This year there is much more at stake.

America is at a point in history where we could substantially lose both our national strength and God-given destiny if we lose our biblical foundations. In this year’s presidential race, we face a stark choice, and it boils down to this: Will we choose a political huckster who could rip America from its moorings, or will we choose a true American hero who can help reform our floundering nation?

After years of scrutiny and giving him the benefit of the doubt, I have come to the conclusion that Barack Obama is not who he appears to be. Rather, he is an amazingly gifted but calculating politician who is a political huckster–a phony. Using the definition above from “America’s Favorite Dictionary” I will make my case. Barack Hussein Obama is:

  • Aggressive – There has never been a national politician so unwilling to build a resume and list of accomplishments than Barack Obama. He is in his forties. He’s never run a business–never authored significant legislation–really never done anything except run for office. Yet he has aggressively sought the presidency for nearly four years. That’s blind ambition.
  • Showy – This epitomizes the campaign style of Barack Obama. Remember the international preening in Berlin? The Greek columns at Qualcom Stadium? And most recently the “Presidential Infomercial” where he appears in a setting that’s remarkably similar to the White House or Camp David? Obama is the consumate flashy politician who is big on style but small on substance. He’s a showman–a very good one. Unfortunately, the show has been slick and convincing to many.
  • Devious methods to promote a product. This is the most suspect area of the Obama campaign. When he first burst on the scene, he appeared to be fresh and sincere, a new kind of politician that we could trust and believe in. But over the past few months, the real Barack Obama has emerged–and the picture is not pretty. The product he is peddling is himself–and here’s what we have learned about him:

1. He’s devious on moral issues. He says he is sympathetic about abortion, but defining when life begins is “above his paygrade,” he is the Senate’s biggest supporter of abortion on demand (100% Planned Parenthood voting record), and he even supported infanticide while in the Illinois State Senate. He says he supports traditional marriage, but he’s actually a champion for homosexuals forcing their morality upon this nation.

2. He’s devious on national security. He said he is for the troops and their mission, but he voted against funding their operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. He said in the Infomercial that he would “build up the American military” but in times of honesty he has stated that he will cut defense spending by 25%. He says he’s a strong supporter of Israel, but he embraced a PLO terrorist (Rashid Khalidi) who said that the creation of Israel was a “catastrophe.”

3. He’s devious on economic issues. He says he will give a tax cut to 95% of Americans. That’s a lie. First of all, 40% of Americans don’t pay any federal income taxes at all, so how can you give them a tax cut? Second, he will not restore the Bush tax cuts which are set to expire. That means everybody who pays federal taxes will see a tax increase. And we’ve recently learned through the “Joe the Plumber” incident that Obama is a quasi-Socialist. He believes in major government re-distribution of wealth–more in keeping with the principles of Cuba, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union–not the economic ideals that made America a model to the world.

4. He’s devious about his associates and friends. His youthful mentors were Marxists and radicals including Frank Marshall Davis and Saul Alinsky; He took a suspicious loan from convicted felon Tony Rezko; He sat for twenty years (twice a month according to his own words) at Trinity United Church hearing nearly 500 sermons from Pastor Jeremiah Wright but “never heard anything controversial”; He’s a close and present associate of unrepentant terrorist William Ayers. Obama said their kids went to school together (Ayers’ kids are adults and Obama’s are grade school age–go figure) and that he just “lived in the neighborhood.” Obama began his state legislature career at a fund-raiser at Ayers’ home. He also praised Rashid Khalidi in 2003 at a dinner party for the pro-PLO Columbia professor who hurled epithets at Israel (the LA Times is refusing to release the tape of the dinner). If Obama’s friends and associates give us a glimpse of who he really is, then Americans have reasons to be fearful.

5. He’s devious about his past. Why has Barack Obama, a man running for president of the United States, been unwilling to unlock his birth and educational records? What’s he trying to hide? There is a case winding through the courts that claims Obama has lied about his citizenship. This is not a Republican smear campaign–it was launched by a Democrat attorney who was once the deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania. Philip J. Berg claims there is reputable evidence that Barack Obama has lied about his birth and/or citizenship. To run for president there are three simple qualifications: 1) You have to be 35 years old (Obama qualifies), you have to have been a resident of America for 14 years (he has), and you have to be a natural born citizen. The last one is the question mark. Mr. Berg believes that Barack Obama was actually born in Mombasa, Kenya, and may have taken on Indonesian citizenship during his childhood years (in which he used the name Barry Sotoro). Either situation disqualifies from from running for president–just as Arnold Schwartzneggar could never run for president because he was born in Austria. The evidence is pretty strong: 1) an altered birth document that was recently sealed from public scrutiny when Obama visited his ill grandmother in Hawaii, 2) Two different names for the hospital he was supposed to have been born into in Honolulu, and 3) Obama’s Kenyan grandmother stating that she was there when he was born in Mombasa! If Berg eventually wins this case, and Obama is elected president, then he will have to resign and supporters will have spent $600 million dollars on a phony who caused a constitutional crisis. If you want to watch a video about this interesting case, please click here.

6. He’s devious about his faith. Obama calls himself a Christian and has actively courted the votes of evangelicals as Jimmy Carter did in 1976. But the more we learn about his faith, the clearer we see that it is a religious veneer that is anything but biblical. For twenty years he went to a liberation theology church in Chicago pastored by American-hater Jeremiah Wright. In a 2003 interview with his local Chicago newspaper, Obama admitted that he didn’t view heaven and hell as actual places, that there were many roads that lead to God, and when asked of his definition of sin, he gave this absurd and very revealing answer: “Sin is going against your own principles.” What? I know 2nd graders who understand that sin is breaking the commandments of God. Going against your own principles? Hey, Barack–Does it matter what your principles are? Does it matter if God shares those principles? According to Obama’s preposterous idea, Hitler would be sinning to decide not to kill Jews. In ’76 I did not question Jimmy’s Carter’s personal faith–just his worldview. I question many aspects of Barack Obama’s profession of faith.

On the other hand, though John McCain is not my first choice for president, I have grown to greatly appreciate him as a true American hero. He has consistent and principled character. You can trust his words. Even if you disagree with him on an issue (as he and Sarah Palin do on drilling in Anwar), you know where he stands and he doesn’t say one thing and do another. He has been noble in his legislative career, especially in crusading against wasteful government earmarks and spending. He has also authored many major pieces of legislation over the past twenty years. He has a record, principles, and a basic integrity and honesty that makes him a leader America can trust. And finally, there is probably no one in the entire nation who has risked or sacrificed his life more for his nation than John McCain did during his years as a POW in Viet Nam. That sacrifice and understanding of evil will make him an excellent Commander in Chief that will serve our nation well in a hostile world.

Barack Obama is a huckster. John McCain is a hero. It’s as simple as that.

Leave a Comment