Though Clinton has pledged to “fight to the convention,” having pulled out all the stops she and hubby Bill could muster to sink Obama, the once seeming inevitability of her nomination has faded to black, and she may drop her bid by June.

So, that leaves us with Barack Hussein v. John McCain in the general election match-up.

McCain is a well-known political commodity with a long-established record, but who the heck is Barack Obama?

It’s hard to believe, given Obama’s exponential rate of poll climbing, that 18 months ago he was not a household brand.

Of course, for some, he was. Diehard Leftists became sycophantic Obamanites after his 2004 Demo Convention keynote speech. They, and Obama’s primary promoters, Jean-Francois Kerry and Teddy Kennedy, have been grooming him for this campaign since his Senate election in 2004.

Obama’s selection as the Demos’ 2004 keynote ensured his successful bid for the U.S. Senate, and a $1.9-million book deal to boot. The grooming exercise paid off for his true believers, though Obama is not much more than a lapdog for Kerry, who is, himself, just a lapdog for Kennedy.

This cadre of “useful idiots” comprised the sum total of those who took Obama seriously when he announced his candidacy in February, 2007.

How arrogant, Clintonistas thought, that this freshman senator from Illinois, whose credentials were little more than “community organizer” and state senator (oh, and “African-American”), would dare challenge the former co-president of the United States.


Asked about his qualifications to be president, Kerry said, “Because he’s African-American. Because he’s a black man, who has come from a place of oppression and repression through the years in our own country... President Obama [would be] a symbol of empowerment [who has] the ability to help us bridge the divide of religious extremism, to maybe even give power to moderate Islam... an important lesson for America to show Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, other places in the world where disenfranchised people don’t get anything.”

Of course, from Kerry’s “limo-liberal” perspective I suppose that a black guy who lives in a $2-million Georgian mansion on Chicago’s South Side (with a little help from Tony Rezko) appears to have been “oppressed and repressed through the years.”

Kerry’s cosmological assessment notwithstanding, it is time to ask, “Who is Barack Hussein Obama?”

Well, like so many Leftists, his roots are shallow and broken.

“Barry,” as he was called when a youngster, was born in 1961 in Hawaii. His mother, Stanley “Ann” Dunham (whose father wanted a boy and so named her Stanley) was an anthropologist from Kansas, known to her friends as “the original feminist.” According to Maxine Box, Dunham’s best friend, “She touted herself as an atheist, and it was something she’d read about and could argue.”

His father, Barack Obama, Sr. , was a Muslim from the Luo tribe in Kenya. Barack’s parents met in a Russian language class (somehow fitting) while students at the University of Hawaii.

When Obama was two, his parents separated and later divorced. His father had two children by a first marriage to a woman in Kenya whom he had never divorced, and after leaving Barack’s mother he returned to his former wife and had two more children, accounting for four of the candidate’s half-siblings.

Obama’s mother then married another Muslim, Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian national. Barack and his mother moved with Lolo to Jakarta, where he spent four years in local schools. Soetoro and Dunham had a daughter, Maya Soetoro-Ng, Barack’s fifth half-sibling. They would later divorce. Then Obama moved back to Hawaii to reside with his maternal grandparents and attend the exclusive Punahou School until his graduation in 1979.

After high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles and studied for two years at Occidental College, transferring to Columbia University and graduating with a BA in political science in 1983. In 1985, he moved to Chicago to become a “community organizer.”

In 1988, prior to entering Harvard Law School, Obama met another Chicago lawyer, Michelle Robinson. They dated through law school and were married in 1992, a year after Obama’s graduation, by Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the now-infamous “black liberation” heaver of hate rhetoric under the banner of “social justice.” They have remained active in Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ for 20 years, and their two daughters were baptized by Wright.

Michelle Obama attended elementary and high school in Chicago and then went to Princeton to major in African-American studies. After completing her senior thesis, “Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community,” she went on to Harvard Law School, where she received her J.D. in 1988.

Barack became an associate attorney with a law firm, and between 1993 and 2002 he represented mostly community organizers and discrimination claims. In 1996, he ran successfully for the Illinois State Senate and continued to work summers for his law firm. In 2000, he made an unsuccessful bid for the U.S. House, but in 2004, buoyed by his stardom at the Democrat Convention, he won his Senate bid.

Since that time, Obama has continued to burnish his extreme-Leftist credentials, having recently been listed by the non-partisan National Journal as the Senate’s most liberal member. Think about it: Obama’s voting record is to the left of every other senator, even that of Vermont Socialist Bernie Sanders.

All this may constitute Obama’s background but it is not who he is. To get at the real question of “Barack who?” one has to look beyond his bio.

Barack Hussein Obama is an archetypal liberal case study. Obama, William Jefferson Clinton, Albert Arnold Gore, John F. Kerry and, of course, Edward “Chappaquiddick” Kennedy, all share a common ailment—what I have aptly described in some detail as the Pathology of the Left.

Leftists are uniformly defined by their hypocrisy and dissociation from reality. They speak of unity, but they foment division, appealing to the worst in human nature by separating Americans into dependent constituencies. They support freedom of thought, unless those thoughts don’t comport with theirs. They feign tolerance while practicing intolerance. They resist open discussion and debate of their views, yet seek to silence dissenters. They protest for natural order while advocating for homosexuality and abortion. They assert their First Amendment rights, except, of course, when it comes to religion, whence they impose the doctrines of secular atheism on everyone else. They decry SUVs, except those that they own. They advocate mass transit but commute on private jets. They believe trial lawyers save lives and doctors kill people. They believe the solution to racism is to treat people differently on the basis of the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. They deride moral clarity because they can’t survive its scrutiny.

Ad infinitum...

Why do most liberals believe what they believe—and act the way they act?

Psychopathology dictates and frames worldview, and worldview manifests in such things as political affiliation.

Leftists politicos tend to be chronic overachievers because they have suffered significant loss—often the result of the disconnect with their earthly fathers. They subscribe to rigid doctrines and “nanny state” regimes to satiate their persistent insecurity, the result of low self-esteem and arrested emotional development associated, predominantly, with fatherless households or critically dysfunctional families in which they were not adequately affirmed.

Obama manifests all of these characteristics, and clinically speaking, there is a diagnosis. Leftists are pathological case studies of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—the standard reference used for psychiatric evaluation.

Of course, there are many conservatives who were raised by a single parent or in critically dysfunctional or impoverished homes. However, somewhere along the way, they were lifted out of their misery by the grace of God—often in the form of a significant mentor who modeled individual responsibility and character. As a result, they have the courage to internalize their locus of responsibility.

Leftists, on the other hand, externalize responsibility for problems and solutions by holding others (read: conservatives) to blame for their ills, and by bestowing upon the state the duty for arbitrating proper conduct—even proper thought.

A footnote: It’s no coincidence that conservative political bases tend to be suburban or rural, while liberal political bases tend to be urban. The social, cultural and economic blight in many urban settings are Leftist breeding grounds for legions of the disenfranchised, those who are largely dependent on the state for all manner of their welfare, protection and sustenance.

These legions identify with Barack Obama. That is the substance, the essence of Obama.

To be sure, all good-hearted Americans should feel a degree of compassion for Barack Obama, whose formative years were marked by complete familial disintegration. But that is not a reason to elect him president.

Let’s examine how Afrocentric Liberation Theology and its message of hate have wedded Obama’s anger and ambition and defined his worldview. This radical belief system is, after all, a hybrid of black supremacist doctrine and “social gospel” Marxism.

In advance of the Pennsylvania primary, Obama displayed his disdain for middle America’s faith and values at a closed-door San Francisco fundraiser: “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest... it’s not surprising they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

In other words, according to Obama, their faith is a byproduct of bitterness. While this sentiment might have been a hit with the chardonnay-sipping elite of Marin County, it hasn’t played well in Peoria. Or Indiana, which holds its presidential primary on May 6th.

In the parlance of psychology, this assessment would be classified as projection. Indeed, Obama’s “faith” does have bitter origins, and he assumes, errantly, that such bitterness is the root of all faith.

He also alluded to bitterness in mid-March: “We’ve got a tragic history when it comes to race in this country. We’ve got a lot of pent-up anger and bitterness... The anger is real. It is powerful, and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.”

To date, Obama has passed on charm alone, all fragrance, no substance. So little is known about Obama that when it was discovered that his mentor, the man he identifies as most influential in his life, has discipled him in Afrocentric Liberation Theology for more than 20 years, that presented an excellent opportunity to gain real insight into Barack Hussein Obama.

That mentor is Jeremiah Wright, just retired as head holy man of Trinity United Church (TUC) of radical black political theology. Wright officiated at Obama’s wedding, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, The Audacity of Hope.

So who is this mentor, this chief spiritual advisor to Obama?

Here is a portrait of Wright in his own words from the pulpit: “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government gives [black people] drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strikes law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, g*d d*** America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. G*d d*** America for treating our citizens as less than human. G*d d*** America for as long as she acts like she is god and she is supreme.”

Wright calls America “the US-KKK-A” and says the nation is “controlled by and run by rich white people. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in god. And. And-and! God! Has got! To be sick! Of this sh*t!”

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

Lest anyone mistake who he felt was to blame for 9/11, and who he felt deserved punishment, Wright elaborated in 2005: “White America got a wake-up call after 9/11. White America and the Western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just disappeared as the great white West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.”

How did Obama respond when asked about his pastor’s false and vicious tirade? “It sounds like he was trying to be provocative,” he said.

It worked.

On Israel, Wright claims: “The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism.”

Perhaps that explains Hamas’ endorsement of Obama?

In December 2007, Wright presented the TUC’s “Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award” to a man who “truly epitomized greatness,” Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam and a consummate anti-Semite. “When Minister Farrakhan speaks, Black America listens,” says Wright. “His depth on analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye opening. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest.”

Recently, Wright compared Obama to Jesus, saying, “Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger.”

TUC’s mission statement, since removed from its website, noted the congregation’s “Commitment to the black values system,” or as Wright notes, “Similar to the Gospel movement in Nicaragua during the whole liberation theology movement.” The statement continues, “Commitment to the black community... black family... adherence to the black work ethic... supporting black institutions... pledging allegiance to all black leadership who have embraced the black values system.”

That is a very dark mission statement.

A current mission statement notes, “Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain ‘true to our native land,’ the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.”

Wright was, himself, a disciple of James Cone, one of the original champions of Black Liberation Theology, who wrote the following in his seminal work, Black Theology and Black Power: “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”

Wright quotes Cone on TUC’s website: “The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people... All white men are responsible for white oppression... Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil’.”

When asked if he would leave TUC (as if that would make everything copacetic), Obama said, “This is somebody who I have known for 20 years [who] led me to Christ. He is a biblical scholar. He is a well regarded preacher and somebody who is known for talking about the social gospel.”

In other words, “No.”

But when pressed, Obama invoked his own version of Bill Clinton’s “I didn’t inhale” defense. Indeed, after 20 years of being fed the Wright stuff, Obama said, “I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally, either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.” Yeah, right.

Clinton’s disclaimer registers much higher on the truth meter.

A prominent member of Wright’s congregation says, “He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive.”

Wright himself told The New York Times a year ago, “If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me. I said it to Barack personally, and he said ‘yeah, that might have to happen’.”

Translation: Any distance between Obama and Wright is contrived purely for political expedience. All the bitterness and hatred is seething right under the surface.

Now that Obama’s wafer-thin layer of shellac is peeling away, some moderate Demos, and more than a few superdelegates—who hitched their wagon to this most Leftwing of Lefties—are concerned that Obama is leading their party into a black hole. As they learn more, however late, about Obama’s black-nationalist and Marxist roots, they correctly see his election prospects growing dimmer.

At this point, Hillary Clinton is looking better to moderates, but her only chance to become the Demos’ nominee is to turn almost all of the superdelegates at convention, and her campaign can do that only with a bombshell.

The Democrats are thus stuck with Obama, the handpicked protègè of UberLeftist Demo-gogues Jean-Francois Kerry and Teddy Kennedy.

Obama fever is now breaking among moderate Democrats, reducing the odds that he can beat John McCain in the general election, but if the Democrat National Committee takes action to derail his campaign, the party would implode.

At this point, the Demo elite are prepared to sacrifice the presidency knowing that their majorities in the House and Senate will still carry water for their constituencies of “useful idiots.” But given Obama’s mesmerizing effect on the proletariat, he may be down but certainly not out.

Let me provide further insight into Obama’s political mentors, all protagonists of Marxist-inspired anti-American movements. If a man can be judged by the company he keeps, Obama should be judged harshly. He may be a “closet smoker,” but as more of his mentors are smoked out of his closet, it becomes increasingly clear that Obama is just another traitorous Leftist posing as an all-American.

For starters, consider Obama’s friends and neighbors, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Ayers and Dohrn were leaders of the Weather Underground, a violent group of radical Leftovers from the Revolutionary Youth Movement, a wing of Students for a Democratic Society. Ayers and Dohrn split from the Maoist RYM, insisting that a revolution against the United States and capitalists everywhere should commence immediately.

In 1969, Ayers and Dohrn were founding signatories of the Weathermen’s declaration of unification with the “Black Liberation Movement” and other “anti-colonial” vanguards, to ensure “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world Communism.”

In 1970 the Weather Underground issued a “Declaration of a State of War” against the United States and commenced a campaign of terror including bombings, jailbreaks, and the instigation of riots. Between 1969 and 1975, they bombed the U.S. Capitol twice, the Pentagon, the Department of State and several federal courthouses. They also attacked state and local government buildings and “capitalist targets” such as banks. The terrorist organization began to disband after the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam and the fall of Saigon, though one of their last acts of violence was a Brinks robbery in 1981, in which two police officers and a security guard were murdered during that robbery.

Ayers and Dohrn scurried underground in 1970, after a bomb being constructed in New York to kill Army officers at Fort Dix detonated prematurely, killing three fellow Weathermen. (In the jargon of bomb technicians and investigators, this is known as “self solving.”)

They surrendered to authorities a decade later but were never prosecuted because of “improper” FBI surveillance methods. Ayers is now a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Dohrn is an associate professor of law at Northwestern University. Isn’t that special.

Asked about his association with Ayers, Obama said, “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood... who I know... He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” So, he only exchanges ideas with him on an irregular basis?

Obama added the disclaimer that he was only eight years old when Ayers was bombing buildings. However, Obama was 40 when an unrepentant Ayers told The New York Times, “I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.” (No small irony that interview was published on 11 September 2001.)

For her part, Dohrn once offered the following assessment of the Manson family murders: “Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into [pregnant actress Sharon Tate’s] stomach! Wild!”

Nonetheless, Obama has maintained his association with Ayers and Dohrn, and the connection goes quite a bit deeper than just neighborhood proximity.

Ayers and Dohrn actually hosted the party to launch Obama’s successful 1996 Illinois State Senate campaign at their fashionable Hyde Park home, a campaign endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America. Incidentally, the DSA would later note in a newsletter that State Senator Obama gave the eulogy for socialist Saul Mendelson, a “champion” of the “democratic left.”

Obama and Ayers also served together on the Woods Fund board, which, incidentally, awarded $6,000 to Obama’s “pastor,” Jeremiah Wright, noting the grant was “in recognition of Barack Obama’s contributions to Woods Fund as a director.” This is the same board that supports such anti-Semitic organizations as the Arab-American Action Network.

A more in-depth look at Obama reveals he may indeed be a “hard-core academic Marxist” as accused by his 2004 Senate campaign opponent, and sacrificial lamb, Alan Keyes.

Obama admits to having attended “socialist conferences” as a “community organizer” in Chicago in the late 1980s, where he broke bread with Democratic Socialists of America lefties—also with full-circle connections to William Ayers.

But that is hardly the extent of Obama’s fascination with Marxist ideology.

According to Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media editor and president of the UN watchdog group America’s Survival, Obama was mentored for most of his formative years by black radical Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA member. Obama had “a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis,” writes Kincaid.

In his book, Dreams from My Father, Obama refers to “Frank” repeatedly, and said that Davis “and his old Black Power dashiki self” was still mentoring him as late as 1979, when he was a student in California. Davis warned Obama that college would give him “an advanced degree in compromise” and not to “start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that s**t.”

Kincaid notes that a CPUSA devotee recently said of Obama’s political fortunes, “Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.”

Obama’s record speaks for itself. In 2006, Senator Obama campaigned for the re-election of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who openly lists his party affiliation as “Socialist.” Sanders applauded freshman Sen. Obama as “one of the great leaders of the United States Senate,” and understandably so. Last year, National Journal, which rates members of Congress strictly by their voting records, ranked Obama as the single most liberal member of the Senate—a remarkable “achievement,” given the Socialist bona fides of the aforementioned Sanders.

When questioned why he refuses to wear an American flag on his lapel, Obama said, “I won’t wear it on my chest. It’s a substitute for... true patriotism. You show your patriotism by being true to our values and ideals.”

No doubt, the true colors of Obama’s “values and ideals” are bright red.