There has been much discussion about Barrack Obama’s past and present associations with questionable people and organizations. Obama’s minimizing of these associations have always sounded very credible. However, there is one thing I have learned from life and from being in business about explanations — there is always the story that sounds good and then there is the real story.

We are only getting the story that sounds good from Barrack Obama. That would be normal for a politician, and if there were only one or maybe two questionable associations a person could believe that these were just random and unfortunate connections. But as more questionable associations come to light, it gets more difficult to ethically gloss over these associations. You start to connect the dots that reveal the hidden picture of the man and his ideas.

For instance, let’s take a look a few of the well know associations. First, Bill Ayers confessed terrorist and anti-American. Then, Jeremiah Wright, his pastor of 20 years with a racial, radical Christian message with anti-American sermons. As a lawyer for ACORN, a radical group that forced banks to lend sub prime loans and is under investigation for voter registration fraud. His early childhood (10-18) association with Frank Marshall Davis (you look that one up yourself). Tony Rezko, friend and neighbor. GLESN radical gay rights group. The list goes on and on. All these associations are telling us something, if we are willing to listen.

One of these revealing associations that we haven’t heard much about is Obama and the New Party in Chicago. The New Party was formed in the early 1990’s having as the stated goal to unite left leaning groups who had no voice in the Democratic Party, get representatives elected through a processes called “fusion” (please look up) and move the Democratic Party further to the left. The New Party helped many people get elected in Illinois and Barrack Obama was among them. As a side note, Barrack ran unopposed, because he had a lawsuit that removed his opponents from the ballot. Plus when he was elected as a U.S. Senator he ran virtually unopposed because his opponent was so discredited in the media, thanks to Barrack’s law connections.

There are more to discuss with limited space to explain. The point is, all these non random and conscious associations point to a far left leaning philosophy and “progressive” social agenda. The real story shows that Barrack Obama is not a moderate Democrat that can bring the nation together, but is so far on the left of the Democratic Party that Bill Clinton and Al Gore look like Republicans. The utopian vision of unity will not happen on his watch.

Many Americans would have never caught a glimpse of the real story, if Barrack hadn’t made one major error in his campaign. He talked to Joe the Plummer. What a mistake! Barrack stumbled and told the real story about “spreading the wealth”. This is the tip of the Obama iceberg the Titanic of America is blissfully headed for. Spreading the wealth has always been one of the tenets of a socialistic government—equality of goods and of wealth.

His associations and this statement begin to reveal the heart of the real story. This is not the American Dream and is certainly not the guiding principles of our constitution. We need change for sure, but going that far to the left will not bring our nation together but move us further apart .

Discover for yourself and go to the polls with your eyes wide open.

James Bennett
Livingston, Montana