VNAF  Cartoons Section's Design

VNAF CARTOONS section - vnafmamn.com

Back to VNAF CARTOONS (page#1)

"The political cartoon is not a news story and not an oil portrait. It's essentially a means for poking fun, for puncturing pomposity."      • Herbert Block, 1977

     OBAMA, the "Messiah", the One, the "Chosen One," the great orator of 21st century etc. has inspired a lot of American people. Me too! This cartoon page was created by the same "inspiration." Will post the next batch of cartoons whenever it's available!

OBAMA PHENOMENON'S CARTOONS
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon
Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon Obama Phenomenon

A DANGEROUS PRESIDENCY BEGINS

By Mac Johnson

By the time you read this, we will be well into the second month of historic celebrations of the historic election of our historic new leader President Barack Lincoln Kennedy Emmanuel (Hussein) Obama.

I hate to be a contrarian during the coronation of our Great Leader, but the sum of the facts compels the conclusion that we are today entering one of the most dangerous periods in our nation's history. The combination of the hype and propaganda surrounding the man and the hype and propaganda regarding the economic crisis we are in present a unique hazard for an unchecked, unexamined and unopposed expansion of government power and a radical shift in the foundations of our America's political culture.

This belief is not merely sour grapes in action, either. Anyone who reads my column regularly knows how little I think of John McCain. The dread I have when watching Obama is not reactionary. It is the result of a constellation of bad omens and unusual conditions that could dissolve and pass without incident, or they could mean long-term disaster.

First among these is that Barack Obama, more than any other politician in American history, is a product of, and partner with, the media. In this election, the mainstream media dispensed with all pretext of fairness and ran interference for Obama. It protected him from attack, examination, rumor, fact, his own positions, inexperience, and history, and gleefully promoted him as Hope Incarnate, a panacea for what ills all the world.

The media fancies itself a watchdog of politicians. For Obama it has been, by turns, a protective guard dog and an adoring poodle. The only threat the media ever presented to Obama is that lapdog Chris Matthews might knock him down and try to leg hump him, so great was his spastic, embarrassing adoration. One of the most disturbing things I have ever seen was the media, in the days after the election, marveling at how little they really knew about that enigma, Barack Obama. It was an admission of gross failure by a few honest members of the media. Whoever he is, he is now the most powerful man in the world.

Add to this that his party has been swept to large majorities in both the House and the Senate, where the leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, are both unilateralist partisans. Congress will be nothing more than a rubber stamp for President Obama, especially with the Republicans so demoralized and unconfident after Bush and McCain. The Democrats will back anything Obama offers and most Republicans will be too spineless to stand before the media and oppose Obama's mandate for unspecified "change."

Perhaps worst of all is that Obama is coming to power during a real and deep economic downturn. This already bad situation has then been exaggerated to gothic proportions by both Obama's supporters (who correctly saw it as a lever to dislodge Republicans from the White House) and also by a coalition of selfish, desperate Wall Street bankers and corporate CEOs who have used fear to get Uncle Sam to save their fortunes with your tax money.

It's a crisis! (In case you haven't heard). That means we can't think too long, we can even think at all. We have to throw money at Wall Street. We have to throw money at deadbeats. We have to throw money at infrastructure and energy and the internet and cities and towns and villages and individuals. We are now printing and spending money in chunks of trillions of dollars -- not even counting the entire regular federal budget. This is creating unimaginable debts and continuing obligations, and unprecedented new government powers.

Government now decides which corporations and ideas will not be allowed to fail. The free market that built America into the most prosperous nation on Earth is dead. We will, allegedly, borrow and spend our way to prosperity in a future in which government is the ultimate customer, owner, manager, planner, and investor. If you decide not to spend money, government will spend it for you. If you do not pay, government will pay for you. If you do not wish to invest, government will invest for you. It will take from whomever and give to whomever, for whatever reason it sees fit. Anything -- anything -- Obama proposes in his first 100 days and calls a "stimulus," will pass. There will be no limits.

Unexamined by the media, unopposed by Congress, unleashed from precedent by crisis, there is another wrinkle in the story to consider: the strange cult of personality that surrounds Obama.

This cult is nothing short of creepy and is distinctly un-American. Unlike many other nations, we have avoided the "leader as a movement" hazard in America. We have traditionally believed in institutions and mistrusted any individual who claimed to be "the solution" to all our problems.

Something has changed with the rise of Obama. His stylized image is slapped on posters, bumper stickers, chocolate bars, commemorative coins, cups, t-shirts and sold not just at political events but at grocery stores and retail shops. He has own symbols, seals, and flags. Glowering from within a Maoist sunburst. Beaming from a Warholish print. Pondering the skies from within his own "O", he has gone beyond what is appropriate and traditional for an American political candidate. He has become an infallible fetish object for some.

In the midst of a severe recession, Obama is throwing himself the most expensive inaugural celebrations in history, and his supporters can only call it "historic." His transition has been marked by missteps, cronyism and connections to corruption, and any notice of this is a simply a "distraction."

Then there is the issue of race. Obama is alleged to be an accomplishment for an entire people. How many will risk an accusation of racism by attempting to derail this accomplishment? Even when opposition to Obama is morally correct, many will be too scared to risk it. Who will mar the historic hype with mundane matters of fact or principle?

In short, America has an unknown leader that the media will not criticize and the Congress will not check, ruling during a crisis that has killed all restraint, at the head of a narcissistic cult of personality tied up in the untouchable subject of race.

And that's a frighteningly rich opportunity for some really bad, really big plans to be put in place without so much a passing debate. If that doesn't worry you just a little bit, then I can only assume you're one of the people buying all that weird "Obamabelia" to celebrate a politician that has already been sainted with the title "historic" before he has even taken office.

(Mr. Johnson, a writer and medical researcher in Cambridge, Mass., is a regular contributor to HUMAN EVENTS. His column generally appears on Tuesdays. Archives and additional material can be found at www.macjohnson.com.)

WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT OBAMA
The illusion of pragmatism advances far-left goals, in baby steps.

By Stanley Kurtz

Reflecting on all that I've written about Barack Obama over these past six months, four inter-related points stand out: Obama's radicalism, his stealthy incrementalism, his interest in funding and organization-building, and his willingness to use -- or quietly support -- Alinskyite intimidation tactics. Since we stand on the cusp of the election, I'll lay out the bottom line. For those who want to know more, go back and read the detailed studies on which I base these conclusions.

Obama's troubling associations are more than isolated friendships or instances of bad judgment. His ties to Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Rashid Khalidi, Michael Pfleger, James Meeks, ACORN, the New Party, and the Gamaliel Foundation all reflect Obama's sympathy with radical-left ideas and causes -- wealth redistribution prominent among them. At both the Woods Fund and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, for example, Obama and Ayers channeled money into ACORN's coffers. ACORN, a militant group pursuing economic redistribution, succeeded in undermining credit standards throughout the banking system, thereby modeling the New Party's plans to tame capitalism itself. So the association with Ayers is not an outlier issue, but part and parcel of a network of radical ties through which Obama's supported "major redistributive change." Via ACORN, that project has already nearly wrecked our economy. What will happen when it's generalized?

Similarly, Obama's "association" with Wright was far more than a mere pastor-parishioner -- or even mentor-protege-- relationship. Obama's work with the Gamaliel Foundation required him to "organize" left-leaning churches into a larger political force. His real interest in Wright, Pfleger, and Meeks was to turn them into the nucleus of a far broader politicized coalition of radical black churches -- as shown, for example, by his work with them on the Illinois racial-profiling bill. Again, we are not dealing with mere "associations," but with intentional political partnerships.

Although media malfeasance is at the heart of our ignorance about these broader patterns, Obama's absorption of Alinskyite strategies of stealthy incrementalism have helped to hide the truth. Following well-worn organizer strategies, Obama knows how to wrap ideological radicalism in the soothing rhetoric of "pragmatism" and classic American values. There is a kernel of truth to the pragmatism, however. Radical though his ultimate goals may be, Obama follows classic organizer strategy -- pursuing his ends in tiny, incremental, and cumulative baby-steps. The municipal "living wage" campaigns supported by Obama, Wright, and groups like ACORN and the New Party were never designed, in themselves, to bring fundamental economic change. These ordinances actually applied to only a very small number of companies. The broader purpose of these battles was to build coalitions for deeper structural change on the national level, when the moment was right. Obama would likely hew to this incrementalism in power, with the same radical long-term goals in mind.

Obama was a master at channeling funding to his organizer allies. He was the key force turning the Woods Fund toward a major increase in support for community organizers, at a moment when other foundations shied away from funding the militant and confrontational tactics of groups like ACORN. In his now infamous 2001 radio remarks, Obama's preferred strategy for promoting "major redistributive change" was through society-wide organizing from below. As president, Obama would connect his massive youth-volunteer program to his favorite community-organizer groups, thereby creating a political force for long-term restructuring of the American economy. This was the program of the New Party, and I believe it is still Obama's long-term goal.

In pursuit of his goals, Obama has shown himself willing to quietly support, and sometimes to openly use, radical Alinskyite tactics. At the Woods Fund, Obama's allies bragged about the way their "post-ideological" cover had allowed them to fund ACORN's confrontational tactics, while escaping public criticism. Obama has shamelessly used Alinskyite "direct action" to silence and intimidate political foes during the current campaign (a matter well-known to conservatives, yet little noted by the mainstream press). Victory would only cement the conviction in Obama and his allies that these tactics had "won," and therefore should be used again.

Has Obama changed? Was he merely using his radical Chicago allies to gain national renown, and thereby an opening for a more moderate political program? I find this view unconvincing. Obama has often claimed that his early community organizing, and his redistributive legislative work, were at the very core of his political identity. We've heard his radicalism on the radio in 2001. Does anyone really believe that he's changed in 2008? Obama's political radicalism consolidated his shaky personal identity. It formed him as an adult. He cannot abandon that inner stance without losing hold of an already precarious self. Obama chose to live in Hyde Park -- chose that radical setting as the site of his adult self-creation. Hyde Park was never the place Obama needed to conquer in order to escape. On the contrary, it was the personally chosen home he now hopes to nationalize by spreading his organizing gospel to America's youth.

Obama is clever and pragmatic, it's true. But his pragmatism is deployed on behalf of radical goals. Obama's heart is, and will remain, with the Far Left. Yet he will surely be cautious about grasping for more, at any given moment, than the political traffic will bear. That should not be mistaken for genuine moderation. It will merely be the beginning stages of a habitually incremental radicalism. In his heart and soul, Barack Obama was and remains a radical-stealthy, organizationally sophisticated, and -- when necessary -- tactically ruthless. The real Obama -- the man beyond the feel-good symbol -- is no mystery. He's there for anyone willing to look. Sad to say, few are.

-Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
(Source: National Review Online, Publication Date: November 3, 2008)

Back to VNAF CARTOONS (page#1)