The AOC Parody Account Is Back From the Dead
House Freedom Caucus Gets Its Revenge for Debt Deal
Karine Jean-Pierre Ends White House Briefing After Question About Biden's Falls
Colorado Is Home to Probably the Most Unconstitutional Anti-Gun Push in Years
There Are New Details About the Plane Crash That Triggered a Military Response...
Trump Pollster Doesn't Have Great News for Trump
Video From FL's Migrant Flight to CA Pokes Holes in 'Kidnapping' Claims
Why One Democrat Says the Biden Admin Has Done a Good Job Preventing...
Shark Tank Star Explains How Target Saga Will Lead to a 'Complete Change'...
To Ronna, No Plan Is the Plan
Teachers Are Divided on Whether Arming Themselves Would Make Schools Safer: Poll
Human Rights Campaign Goes Even Further With Its New 'State of Emergency'
The Choice: Criminals Behind Bars or Laundry Detergent Behind Glass
MN School District Hosted ‘Gender Resource Fair’ Knowing It Would Cause Backlash, Document...
Annual LGBT Celebration at Disney World Helps Debunk 'Don't Say Gay' Lies About...

Dr. Frankenstein, Meet Barack Obama

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of

Whenever I write an attack piece about President Obama and his cronies on the Left, I invariably hear from a handful of barely literate dullards whose message is that Bush and the Republicans were pretty bad when they ran things from 2000-2006. Well, the fact is I don’t entirely disagree, although I prefer them to the gang currently in charge. But, truly, aside from the fact -- and it is a heck of a huge aside -- that they prevented a sequel of 9/11 for over seven years, I didn’t hold the Bush administration in terribly high regard. For one thing, they spent too much money. For another, they let Rumsfeld badly micromanage the Iraq War for far too long. For still another, in a futile attempt to garner Hispanic votes, they did next to nothing to close the border, and Bush shamelessly pandered to Vicente Fox.

*** Special Offer ***

Then for good measure, Bush showed that even a Republican president didn’t have to take a backseat to anyone when it came to expanding the federal government. I might even hold him slightly responsible for the financial crisis, but it wouldn’t be fair to deprive Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank of any of their well-deserved credit.

When, on top of all that you factor in my low opinion of John McCain, one might even wonder why I’m even a Republican. The easy answer is that, as bad as Republican politicians are, they’re better than the Democrats. But the biggest difference is between the two sets of voters. By and large, Republican voters are more patriotic, more mature, more logical and far more honorable. If only the politicians measured up to the civilians in the party, a lot of us could stop holding our noses when we entered the voting booth.

Recently, one of my angry left-wing readers wrote to let me know that in addition to all their other sins, Republicans are greedy. I’m afraid that’s a word I simply don’t understand. I’m not parroting Gordon Gekko, who announced in the movie “Wall Street” that greed is good. I think that greed is neither good nor bad. It always seems to be something we accuse other people of being, but never ourselves. We are merely prudent, thrifty, maybe even ambitious. We’re not money-mad, we’re merely concerned about those rainy days. We want to be good providers for our loved ones, but we are never, God forbid, greedy. My question is, whether you’re a rock star, a professional athlete, a school teacher or a guy on the assembly line, have you ever asked to be paid less? If you haven’t -- and God knows you haven’t -- I guess you’re as greedy as the next guy, even if you’re a Democrat.

Those on the Left actually believe that those of us who don’t see Barack Obama in the same flattering light they do must be racists. I’m certain they won’t believe me when I say I don’t know any Republicans who dislike or distrust him because of his race, but it happens to be the truth. How is it that liberals figure we’re racist for not adoring Obama, but don’t regard themselves as racists when they bellow their hatred of Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Condi Rice, Michael Steele and Ward Connerly?

On a personal level, the reason most Republicans dislike Obama is because they find him arrogant. The way he is constantly tilting his head, as if posing for a statue, reminds many of us of Mussolini in his heyday. He too, was forever jutting his jaw skyward.

Which reminds me, several centuries ago it is said that King Canute grew so weary of listening to his butt-kissing courtiers proclaiming his greatness that he went down to the ocean, sat in a chair, and commanded the tide to stop. He didn’t expect it to, and not only didn’t it stop, but it got his shoes wet. Being a religious man, it was his intention to prove that he was a mere mortal, and that although he was a king, he was not the King of Kings. On the other hand, one has the feeling that Obama would expect the earth to stop spinning if he simply sent a memo to Rahm Emanuel.

Arrogance aside, the guy is just plain scary. If you believe that, all in all, America is the best country the world has ever seen; the place where immigrants from all corners of the earth yearn to come; where the individual has the greatest opportunity to fulfill his aspirations and live out his dreams; it is terrifying to see the leader of the free world go to Turkey and Europe, and apologize, ironically, for America’s arrogance, while simultaneously embracing the likes of Ahmadinejad, Chavez and the Castro brothers.

It is scary that this former community organizer and leftist friend and ally of Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, the Chicago Machine and ACORN, has revised Bill Clinton’s 1992 Defense Department Directive 1404.10, which initially dealt with the overseas deployment of civilian personnel. In its current form, it states that the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce “shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations.”

A well-armed, highly trained group of Americans to deal with unspecified contingencies, emergencies, stability operations and the restoration of order? It would seem to me that between the Armed Forces, the National Guard, the FBI, the Coast Guard, the Red Cross, Homeland Security and the various police forces and sheriffs’ departments, we already have such things pretty well covered. What is Obama so worried about? That one of those future Tea Parties will get out of hand? That law-abiding citizens who take the Second Amendment seriously might not agree to surrender their firearms? That some conservative writers and commentators might not be willing to knuckle under to the Left? That Republicans will have the audacity to actually run against Democrats in the 2010 elections?

I think a reasonable person might ask one or two reasonable questions of President Obama. One: Who does he have in mind to run this paramilitary organization now that Hermann Goering is no longer available, and, two, what color shirts will they be wearing? Black or brown?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video