Barack Obama: Another Grasp at the Crown?

by: paul a. ibbetson | published: 04 25, 2010

We here in the United States have long since separated ourselves from our former position as a colony of England. In doing so it would seem that our people’s direct interaction with a king as our designated sovereign would be forever over, but is it? It is painfully apparent that currently Barack Obama seems more accurately described as a king than a U.S. president.

First, and most painfully obvious, Barack Obama has recreated the “taxation without representation” scenario that led to the American Revolution as though he were rigidly following a historical script. Eliminating the Bush tax cuts, implementing a socialistic healthcare bill that will require higher taxes, and starting Cap & Tax in the wings have placed the colonial-style yoke of oppression on the American people. Equally as disheartening to the subjects of Obama, is that this president has the same royal disdain and mental detachment from the reality of the growing anger of his subjects as did King George III. From his perch within the walls of the White House, Barack Obama was reported to be “amused” by the millions of Americans protesting in Tea Parties around the country. His flippant attitude was much worse when he showed his complete break with reality by attacking Tea Party-goers saying that they should “thank him” for the dire economic situation in the country that the president has created.

Second, as was pondered during the times of the great Kings, Americans today argue amongst themselves as to whether our President is crazy, dangerously misguided, or just plain evil. Hereditary fits of insanity were shadows upon some of the royal bloodlines of the past. During the War of the Roses King Henry VI was periodically locked away with fits of insanity as was King George III while the colonists fought a revolution. Can we watch as our president drains the American coffers dry and then borrows from our competitors in China until the country is no longer economically viable, without asking where the sanity in this course of action is? Are we simply to smile politely as Obama tells the masses of unemployed that his reckless spending and government expansion can now be considered a historic success? In these dark days of American woe might we find it prudent to bring back bloodletting and exorcisms in the search of a cure for the mental disorder of liberalism that surely affects the king?

Third, what we do know is that Obama, like past Kings, has acted to amass power by bringing the competition (free market) under the royal tent. You can call it socialism, communism, or whatever term is still legal to utter within the realm, but they all include a powerful dictator with random arbitrary edicts flying left and right that benefit only those in power. They all include extended government control and loss of individual freedom. They all end in slavery, suffering, and death.

While the United States is quickly sinking under the weight of its growing debt, Obama is portrayed as a savior, not unlike the kings of the past that were seen as divine in nature. The Obama camp has simply replaced the term “divine” with “historical,” but the same projection of mystical power is still modeled, and it remains an act of heresy to question the validity of this title.   

Some in the country fear that the president will take one of the many momentous calamities that he has brought about and use it to seize permanent control of the country and avoid being removed from the throne in 2012. These ideas would seem far-fetched if it were not for the fact that we know kings actually do crazy things. The saving grace from our knowledge of the kings with their destructive nature and irresponsible ways is that they often underestimate their subjects. Americans have already shown one king that we will not be slaves, and it is time to show another.

add a comment