Barack Hussein Obama is the Mau Mau candidate for president
Andy Martin
2008-03-22 16:49:07 - Martin says that Obama himself and his
sup****ters have adopted the 1960's radical chic approach of "mau
mauing" the Democratic Party into nominating him for president.
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com
=93Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct=94
BARACK OBAMA IS THE MAU MAU CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT
AND, ON GOOD FRIDAY, BILL RICHARDSON, AN OBAMA JUDAS, REAPPEARS
AFTERMATH OF THE SPEECH, PART ONE
(NEW YORK)(March 23, 2008) When I went to prep school in Britain fifty
years ago the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya was still very much in the
minds of
English schoolboys. Through arson, rape, plunder and murder the Mau
Mau movement had brought Britain's East African empire into a state of
eventual collapse. And killed schoolboys. I was not the only person
impressed and influenced by the Mau Mau. Barack Obama Senior was a
young Kenyan growing up in the thick of the rebellion.
Whether Barack Obama Senior was merely influenced by the Mau Mau (he
was of the wrong tribe to join) or actively sup****ted the movement is
a matter still under investigation. Nevertheless, the Mau Mau left an
indelible impression on the world. A few years latter the term "mau
mau" even entered the American vernacular. And Barack Senior entered
the United States. We are living with the aftermath.
In a classic book of social satire, Tom Wolfe in 1970 wrote "Radical
Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers," describing how the emerging
"militant movement" in America was trying to threaten government
agencies into capitulating to collectivist intimidation. Wolfe
borrowed the term "mau mau" and converted the phrase into a gentler
form of coercion, although many radicals in the 60's did use rape and
arson as weapons in their arsenal of social deconstruction.
Today, Barack Obama, Jr. has become the Mau Mau candidate for
president.
While on first glance that might seem an incendiary accusation, closer
examination of the Obama campaign's latest tactics and the entire
raison d'etre of Obama's candidacy confirm that Obama has successfully
mau maued the mainstream media and is well on his way to mau mauing
the Democratic Party into nominating him for president.
There is a certain amount of just desserts in having the Democrats
formally and openly fall to a mau mau candidate. For the past third of
a century Democrats have been moving steadily outside the mainstream
of American life. Yes, Democrats are our neighbors; and as Obama
reminds us we love them and work next to them at the office. But as
Obama also reminded us in his recent Philadelphia speech, everyone,
Blacks and Whites alike, are supposedly two-faced, and say one thing
in public and another a the barber shop. Yes, he said that.
So too it is with Democrats. We love them in public, as the second
major party, and deplore their surrender to collectivism and socialism
in private. Or not so private.
To be sure, the Republicans have helped open the way to a successful
mau mau insurgency by extreme elements in the Democratic Party.
Republicans have mismanaged the economy, leading our financial system
to the brink of collapse. We have mismanaged foreign policy, and
mangled relations with friend and foe alike. Whether trickle-down
economics really exists, many Americans who are struggling to survive
believe the federal government is raining cash on the rich, not on
struggling workers. The trickle is running backwards. Republican
incompetence has provided a golden op****tunity for the Democrats to
take over.
And, ironically, in their hour of maximum op****tunity the Democrats
face the prospect of being mau maued into nominating Obama, the least-
qualified and most radical candidate ever considered by a national
party.
Why? Well, Hillary Clinton is a tough fighter. Good for her. She
demands that her candidacy be taken all through the primary process
and maybe even to the convention. What's wrong with that? What's wrong
is that after two or three generations of anesthetizing American
children with Nanny State notions of "No fighting" and "Can't we just
learn to get along," culminating in the banning of dodge ball from
school playgrounds, we now have a Good Friday Judas, Bill Richardson,
demanding that Clinton stop fighting and surrender to Obama.
Or else.
The or else is that if African-Americans do not get "their" candidate,
they will walk away from the Democratic Party. Tom Wolfe: meet Barack
Obama. Blacks demand the nomination because they have been "loyal" to
the Democrats. But haven=92t the Democrats been equally loyal to African-
Americans over the past half-century? Haven=92t Americans as a whole
showered trillions of dollars on "affirmative action," "model cities"
and other give-away programs, none of which have done very much to
improve the quality of life for the underclass? What has improved
their quality of life is private industry and welfare reform. But
Blacks now threaten to bite the hands of their benefactors and reelect
a Republican in November. Well. The Democratic Party has become a
party of special interest scorpions in a bottle. Yes, this does look
like 1968 all over again.
Rather humorlessly, Richardson, who styled himself the first Hispanic
candidate for president and was soundly rejected by Hispanics, stabbed
the Clintons in the back on Good Friday. After they promoted
Richardson to the cabinet and made him a national figure. Richardson
enacted his own version of Passion by rejecting Clinton and endorsing
Obama. Judas Iscariot would be proud. Richardson tried to mau mau
Clinton into dropping out as a candidate. Brave man. Looking at Barry
Obama and Bill Richardson is enough to make you love Hillary.
Obama's current demand for the nomination, coupled with the implicit
threat that his sup****ters will walk if they are rejected, is a
classic mau mau tactic. After seeking to explain away the racist
rantings of his pastor Jeremiah Wright with the explanation that
Wright is so 1960's, it seems that 1960's Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing
are also back in style, courtesy of Obama and his sup****ters.
With their demand that Obama be nominated, or else, the Obama camp has
descended into a caricature of the racist Dixiecrats who sought to
intimidate the Democratic Party during the 1940's and 50's. Dixiecrats
were wrong then, and Obamacrats are wrong today. The Dixiecrats lost.
The Obamacrats will lose.
Politics is a contact s****t, or so goes the clich=E9. But even in
s****ts, there is something known as the good s****t. Mormons did not
threaten to bolt the Republican Party if Mitt Romney wasn't nominated.
Catholics stuck with Democrats for decades before a Catholic was
nominated after the Al Smith fiasco. But Blacks demand that the
"first" viable African-American for president walk off with the prize=97
or else.
Where is this taking the Democrats? Down the road to defeat.
Americans are going to reject the Democratic Party not because
Democrats are conducting a raucous primary process. No, truth be told
people love a brawl. Rather, Democrats are likely to pay a price when
they nominate a candidate who is never "in the room" when the real man
in his life stands up and spews forth his attacks on Ameirka (in
deference to Obama, we have renewed our use of the 1960's spelling as
well). Democrats are going to be rejected because a party too weak and
too militant to focus the mainstream is too weak to govern this
fractious nation.
Americans are going to reject Obama because the Democratic Party has
so marginalized the nominating process that Democrats rather rudely
and proudly tell Americans that "Clinton can't win" because the
party's nominating procedures make it impossible to defeat an early
frontrunner due to pro****tional representation and delegate
allocation, rigged caucuses, and manipulated primaries.
There is much to dislike in the Republicans' Darwinian presidential
selection system, where winner-take-all primaries kill off contenders
at a very rapid pace. But John McCain has acquired legitimacy, by
winning. Even if Clinton keeps winning primaries, Obama got almost as
many "net" delegates from Wyoming as Clinton got from winning Texas
and Ohio. Even if she wins Pennsylvania, Democrats cloyingly tell us
she won=92t "net" enough delegates to win. And so on. "Super delegates?"
They're not real delegates at all. Democrats now tell us super-
delegates are merely automatons who have to vote the way they are
told. Is that democracy? Is that a fair process?
And just in case Clinton wins, or comes close enough to take it to the
floor of the convention, where John Kennedy himself was nominated,
Obama has issued a diktat that she can=92t win because the nomination
"belongs" to him and his left-wing cohort.
Truly, Barack Obama Junior has become the Mau Mau candidate for
president. Barack Obama Senior must be smiling. And so are the 1960's.
NEXT: Aftermath of the Speech, Part Two
-
Chicago-based Internet journalist, broadcaster and media critic Andy
Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of
www.ContrarianCommentary.com=
..
=A9 Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and
world events with over forty years of experience. He has been a
candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com.
He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College
of Law. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com;
contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Comments? E-mail:
AndyMart20@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Media contact: (866) 706-2639.
|
