Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Obama, Osama? What’s the Difference?
John W. Lillpop
CNN made the mistake of televising a graphic that was supposed to read “Where is Osama?” but instead read “Where is Obama?”
Of course, the CNN crowd apologized profusely for the clerical error.
No report is available yet on whether or not Osama has accepted CNN’s apology—but perhaps OBL has switched to FOX now that the Murdock channel has taken a decided left turn, and thus did not catch the CNN mea culpa.
In any event, the CNN mistake was quite understandable. Both Osama and Obama are “men of color,” and both are audacious.
But whereas Osama’s behavior leads to jetliners being rammed into New York skyscrapers and the U.S. Pentagon, Obama’s damage is subtler, less obvious.
Obama is a hazard because of his extreme liberalism and the harm that an Obama administration could inflict on homeland security and economic stability in America.
He is a very charismatic figure in American politics right now, upstaging even luminaries likes Hillary Clinton. His low-key manner and comfortable ways make Obama charming and likeable—qualities not obvious in Senator Clinton.
Most importantly, Obama provides white liberal hypocrites with a black candidate they can comfortably support, thereby relieving some of their guilt over slavery and discrimination.
And that is the true danger of Barak Obama. He is such a compelling personality that people tend to overlook the fact that he comes up short on substance.
In fact, millions of Americans could end up voting for Obama just to feel better about themselves. That is nearly as dangerous as a 7-foot tall terrorist plotting 24/7 in a cave to destroy America!