I read Richard Condon’s novel by that title when I was still in high school. And I saw both films, the first one (1962) I thought much better than the more recent version.
The book was written in the Eisenhower years, the film during JFK’s reign, with a hint of the soft liberalism of that era injected into a really good mind-bending spy thriller. Knowing that Barry Goldwater was out there, I guess, the film painted the evil political family as New England right wing zealots who were actually working with the KGB and the Chicoms to perform a coup in the US, so as to root out creeping squishy liberalism. Yeah, figure that one out, but it does explain how, beginning 50 years ago, Hollywood & Co could indoctrinate successive generations to such an extent today they believe Tea Partiers have red tails and roast children over a spit.
(Sinatra was a pal of JFK in those days, and later, Nixon. Figure that one out, too.)
I’ve seen the term “Manchurian Candidate” used to describe Barack Obama on several occasions, and as a purist resent it, only because it was such a great book…sounding just like something the KGB and a powerful up-east Democrat family would put their heads together to pull off.
If you ever read the book, you know that Obama doesn’t fit the model of a Manchurian Candidate as Condon defined him. For one, Condon conjures up a confused, troubled man, a sad victim really, who was brainwashed in captivity, then marched into history, at the beck and call of his handlers, just by showing him his key card, the Queen of Diamonds.
No one had to brainwash Obama to get him to work for the Commies.
My son recently reminded me that having handlers does not a Manchurian Candidate make. In fact, virtually every candidate who ever came down the pike, from President, to governor, to congressman, has them.
And as often as not they found him first.
Most political careers are begun because someone noticed that person, then shaped, groomed him, then presented him to the public, and if that first public exhibition worked, then onto step number two, step number three, etc.
This is how both national parties have chosen their candidates for years, with a passel of success stories; Dole, McCain, Dukakis, Mondale, Kerry, and yes, Obama.
(We lose an awful lot of good candidates this way, as my son reminded me. Bobby Jindal’s bomb of a speech at the 2004 Republican Convention sent his handlers scurrying.)
Now that we agree to the ordinariness of handlers, onto to the important stuff.
What did Barack Obama’s handlers know, and when did they know it? And what did they do about it?
Consider this brief time-line:
1979-1981 Occidental College, CA (ERASED)
1981-1983 (Transferred to Columbia Univ, NY) BA Degree (ERASED)
1985-1988 (Community Organizing mostly with Gamaliel Funding, in Chicag0, a self-described Alinsky-organizing group (ERASED)
1988-1991 Harvard Law, President, Law Review and summa cum laude (ERASED)
1991 Works in Chicago law firm,, meets Michelle, marries in 1992 (ERASED)
Teaches Law (ERASED)
1992 Marries Michelle and is introduced to Valerie Jarrett (NO COMMENT)
1993 Michelle allows her law license to lapse, takes work at Public Allies as fundraiser
1995 Writes and publishes Dreams of My Father, ranks 2,321,792 on Amazon sales list.
1996 Michelle obtains six-figure sinecure at University of Chicago Hospitals, doing nothing but “making the rounds.”
1996 Runs for state senate in Illinois
Seeks support from and joins the New Party (Socialist) – (NOT ERASED- OOOPS!)
1996-2004 Votes “Present” in Illinois state senate
2004 Makes runs for US Senate in Illinois, breaks several laws to out and oust primary GOP rival, makes stunning keynote speech at 2004 Democrat Convention, sends Oprah into a swoon, who then pushes his 9 year old biography, it is reissued (Amazon list #1) and he and Michelle are instant millionaires, and Tony Rezco sells them a house.
Reading the timeline, at what time is it clear that Barack Obama was a “made” guy?
At what time did his handlers become erasers, and who were they?
My guess is that it was somewhere around the time he became friendly with the Jarretts, who, I think were friends with the Ayres, who were friends with the entire world of Commiedom in the midwest. That Michelle was the one to begin the relationship here is noteworthy.
Sometime after 1993.
At what time did these people decide to run Obama through the vetting process…you know sitting him down and asking all those tough questions about his past.
Understand, most handlers (99.9%) skedaddle when they find a candidate with a past like Obama’s. Instead, these simply set about cleaning it up. So we know it was their agenda being prosecuted, not his, at least in first order.
Unloading the drug history was easy. In fact it was an asset, making Barack a more sympathetic person. Democrats love blacks especially when they are they are reformed and repentant.
He (they) was able to do that in Dreams of my Fathers, which, considering recent revelations that virtually none of it is factually true…look it up…when married to a forgotten fact from 2008, an admission by Bill Ayres that he had ghosted the book, tells us the book was written specifically with the intent of sanitizing Obama’s past, and that Obama had virtually no part in writing it at all.
(This makes so-called birther claims of fraudulent documents, i.e, birth certificates, social security cards, all the more respectable, a matter which I’ll attend to at another time.)
The fabrications of Obama’s biography sets the time frame for his “new life” being created around 1995. But this does not necessarily set the time of the erasures. Not one journalist that I know has actually inquired as to when those erasures took place. Still, they should be apart of public record, and those dates alone, could tell a revealing story.
What kind of power could the Obama handlers have had to so totally erase the previous ten years of his life, in official records, in the mid-1990s? I understand the President of the United States wielding such power over records, but not a kid running for the senate in Illinois. Maybe in Chicago. But not in New York or Cambridge or Honolulu. Or even the State Department where records of his travel to Pakistan, Kenya and Indonesia are also sealed (erased), and yes, travel from Indonesia to Hawaii when he was still a child.
There’s much to be learned here, and as far as I can tell, no one is even asking the really tell-tale, circumstantial evidence in court like questions. And by asking, I mean going to the source.
I also wonder if Obama was fully on board when Ayres “helped him” with the big lie of “Dreams”? Or even knew that the presidency was the end game?
After all, he nearly chucked it all by joining that Socialist Party in 1996.
And what does that tell us?
Surely his handlers didn’t know? So, did Obama forget to tell them, or did he intentionally omit it?
If the latter, then we have some insights into the relationship between Barack and his handlers as it has developed over the last 15 years. I’ll bet he’s been a handful; narcissist, thumb-sucker, teat-fit thrower. A tough kid to manage. “Here, take two of these and you’ll feel better.”
Timelines don’t lie. I’ll bet there is much that can be learned, just by asking when those records were sealed. 1985? 2004? And who requested them sealed? We already know state senator Obama couldn’t have pulled that off.
I see a lot of Pavlov’s dog in the relationship between Obama and his handlers, which means he is playing a very dangerous game, as sometimes a snit-fit does not end a discussion.
Having handlers does not a Manchurian Candidate make, but having erasers very well might. Read the book, Barry.
