Now that Senator Barack Obama is discussing reparations for slavery, I recall something that my brilliant brother once said decades ago that is applicable to this issue. After the American Indians applied enough political and economic pressure to get American taxpayers to atone for injustices committed a century before they were born (thus setting a bizarre precedent that people can be financially penalized for misdeeds they did not commit), my brother remarked that the Indians, instead of endlessly bellyaching about the evil White Man, should instead THANK US for giving them the freedom to benefit from our superior technology. Without those advances, my brother noted, Indian mothers would still be living in wigwams and crying when their children died of appendicitis. Unless my many teachers were mistaken, American Indians were living in the Stone Age when European explorers first appeared on this continent.

The same is true of people who lived in Africa during the years that many of them were nabbed and put into slavery. Yes, that is a great moral injustice, but it is easy to see how we helped the descendants of those slaves by bringing them to the United States. African lives are often brutal and cut short by disease or violence. Many people in Africa still eat "bush meat" (e.g., gorillas, chimpanzees, monkeys, and other primates) instead of obtaining their food from nice restaurants or grocery stores, as African-Americans do. (Here's an insightful perspective that harmonizes with my stance.)

So should the United States government forcibly seize my money or property to give to African-Americans? There is no way to ethically justify such confiscation. The issue is incredibly divisive. Being forced to pay for a crime you did not commit is so infuriating that it has the potential to ignite a race war. Yet Senator Obama, with his silver tongue and dearth of common sense, is foolish enough to say that "words are not enough" -- implying that our past apologies and trillions of dollars transferred to African-Americans via myriad social welfare programs are not punitive enough; the evil White Man must pay, again.

Senator Obama, were you awake when your elementary school teachers were trying to teach you about the Civil War? Or were you just seething with racial hatred, biding your time until you gained the power that might enable you to use the US government to commit another atrocity by shaking down innocent people? American already paid an unimaginably high price for slavery: about 360,000 Union soldiers died in the Civil War. The blood they shed fighting to abolish slavery is sufficient punishment. Yet you salivate at the prospect of virtually enslaving white Americans to make them pay more in taxes to make amends for wrongs they did not commit. Senator Obama, you fancy yourself as a Messiah, but your endless greed and twisted morality make you a national disgrace.

Barack Obama's recent trip to Europe gave us a remarkable insight into his lopsided view of history. He obviously enjoys bashing the USA and belaboring our imperfections (even ancient ones). He wants us to repeatedly apologize to the world for those imperfections, yet he conveniently never asks Europeans to apologize for Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and the fact that the misdeeds committed in that part of the world fueled two world wars that led to the death of over 70 million people and inflicted years of suffering upon countless more. It is obviously absurd to ask today's Europeans to apologize or pay for what their fathers and grandfathers did, yet Obama cannot understand that it is equally preposterous and indefensible to demand that today's white Americans continue to apologize and pay for wrongs that were more limited in scope and further back in history. That's the point . . . a point that Obama doesn't get. A man whose intellect leads to such conclusions does not deserve to be President, and anyone who supports him is either ignorant or an unprincipled thug.

Based on his discussion of reparations for slavery, his description of his grandmother as a "typical white person," and many other comments, Obama obviously enjoys stewing about racism. The fact that Obama -- a man who is arguably the least experienced and qualified Presidential nominee in history -- might become our next President is unimpeachable evidence that our nation has largely overcome racism. Yet Obama behaves as if it were one of the dominant issues. Alarmingly, Obama treats this sensitive matter in a way that is bound to divide our nation, not unite it. That's probably not a coincidence. When Obama dwells on past imperfections of the US and proposes an escalation of confiscatory taxation as the remedy, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that his rage about the United States has kindled a desire to destroy it. If you read between the lines of what he says and does, it is clear that his primary motive to be President (other than self-aggrandizement) is to inflict a long overdue (in his mind) payback upon white Americans. The "sacrifices" he talks about and will demand of us are his code-talk for a transfer of wealth via higher taxes that is tantamount to reparations. Mark my words: reparations are coming.

Obama's only notable talent (other than his silver tongue that masks a second-rate mind) is in camouflaging his rage well enough so that millions of Americans with second-rate minds cheer him on. Obama doesn't have any good ideas for dealing with pressing issues such as the skyrocketing cost of energy. His response to that is to suggest that Americans tune-up their cars and ensure their tires are properly inflated. That flip response to such a serious matter illustrates just how vacuous he is.

In a recent speech, Senator Obama touched upon the fact that many Americans consider him to be a risky choice. Why might that be true?

• Because of his inexperience? He knows so little about business that almost no corporation would hire him to be their CEO. Why, then, is he qualified to assume the Presidency and thereby become the most economically influential person in the world?
• Because of gaffes such as his claim that he's visited 57 states, or "the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor"?
• Because he is married to a woman who seems to hate America as much as he does? While recently speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Michelle Obama said that "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country." How on Earth could someone live in the United States for 44 years and not feel proud before that day? When a 7-year-old girl asked Senator Obama why he wished to be President, he responded, "America, uh, is, is no longer, uh, what it, it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, 'I don't want that future for my children.'" Aside from the fact that he is imbued with negativity and sounds like he has a subnormal IQ, one must wonder how he and his wife developed such anti-American sentiments considering how blessed they've been. Michelle Obama graduated from Princeton University and Harvard Law School and reported earned almost $300,000 in 2006 working as a publicist for the University of Chicago Hospitals. Their total yearly income was $991,296. Yes, it is a terrible country in which a man who can't intelligently answer a question from a child can make so much money and become such a prominent political figure.
• Because he chose to attend a church that seems less interested in worshiping God than in wallowing in black resentment and spewing anti-American vitriol? His long-time pastor, the fiery Rev. Jeremiah Wright, says blacks should not sing "God bless America" but "God damn America." Even if you can ignore Wright's more infamous inflammatory statements, such as referring to the United States as the "US of KKK A," it is difficult to listen to Wright's diatribes for long without wondering about his sanity, or lack thereof. As a physician, I am legally entitled to make determinations of sanity. I've never treated Wright, but I have seen more than my share of people with a variety of mental problems. Interestingly, none of the patients that I involuntarily committed (i.e., I signed a paper to take them off the streets against their will for their own good, or for the good of society) exhibited anywhere near the level of incandescent rage that boils out of every bitter pore of Wright's body. Even when I disagree with another black political and civil rights activist, the Rev. Al Sharpton, he can still come across as charming and even huggable. In contrast, Wright seems downright kooky. Much of his fury apparently stems from the fact that there are still traces of racism in this country. Clear-cut evidence of this can be found in some revealing statistics: only about 7% of blacks say they'll vote for McCain, while almost half of whites are willing to vote for Obama. And whites are the racist ones?? For every vestige of anti-black racism in USA at present, I could mention two ways in which whites are racially victimized by blacks or people favoring blacks, such as when I discovered years ago that black students at Michigan State University could pass courses even if they got every question wrong on every test (** see the footnote at the end of this posting). Hence, Wright seems Wrong about racism, so his maniacal speeches make me wonder if he is living in a different world. Evidently Obama is living in that world, too, given that Wright was his pastor for 20 years. How could the Obamas cozy up to such a hatemonger for so long? The answer is obvious.
• Because Obama refuses to engage in town-hall meetings with McCain? Sans the teleprompters with carefully crafted words written by others, Obama is uh . . . um . . . ah . . . prone to awkwardly pause and stumble and uh . . . um . . . ah . . . say stupid things. Countless high school students could outshine McCain in a debate, so when Obama -- a Harvard Law grad -- runs away from debating such an intellectually unimpressive man, it's obvious that he probably has good reason for being so diffident.
• Because of his condescending attitude toward women? When a female television reporter in Michigan asked him,“Senator, how are you going to help the American autoworker?” he called her "sweetie" and said that he'd answer her question later. He never did, so she asked it again. Still no reply. Might this patronizing man not have all of the answers he claims to have? Might the change he promises be a step backward into the days when women were second-class citizens?
• Because he butchers the truth when he claims that McCain is focused on race, when McCain has made it clear that he will repudiate any attacks on his opponent that are even remotely racist? The truth is that Obama is the one playing the race card with comments such as, "And did I mention that I am black?" Yes, you did. Repeatedly. The Obama camp is so prone to level charges of racism that even Bill Clinton, the so-called "first black President," is now defending himself against their baseless allegations. Bill Clinton is many things, but he is obviously not a racist. This illustrates how desperate Obama is; unable to offer substantive arguments, he and his cronies sling mud.
• Because the supposedly anti-war Obama is already threatening to invade Pakistan if he becomes President? Pakistan is a nuclear power and an ally in our fight against terrorism. How would you characterize this? Irresponsible? Reckless? Foolhardy? Impulsive? Or all of the above?
• Because of his megalomania? His head is so big that even fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton mocked Obama's enormous ego by capsulizing his overly dramatic speech tinged with religious overtones, "Now I can stand up here and say: 'Let's just get everybody together, let's get unified, the sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing, and everyone will know we should do the right thing, and the world will be perfect.'" Have you noticed something about the audio quality of Obama's speeches? In October 2008 (and perhaps before), his voice has OBVIOUSLY added reverb to make him sound more God-like.
• Because Obama, despite having a huge ego, lacks confidence in his ability to handle tough situations, or even to answer questions from anyone who isn't one of his supporters. After "Joe The Plumber" Joe Wurzelbacher asked him about punitive taxation, Obama headed for safer territory for a meet and greet session: to a barber shop filled with black people.
• Because he repeatedly and intentionally sought to associate with some of the most intransigent left-wing radicals? Anyone who doubts the latter should read The Obama Nation by Dr. Jerome Corsi. Knee-jerk liberals might reflexively assume that book is biased, but it was exhaustively researched and every line in it was scrutinized by an eminent attorney hired by the publisher to verify that every statement in it was true and had evidence to support its validity.
• Because his political naiveté leads him to make simplistic statements such as urging both "Georgia and Russia to show restraint"? That's like a school principal urging both sides to show restraint when the captain of the senior high football team is beating the hell out of a kindergarten student. Russia has a long history of bullying others and brutally using its force in despicable ways, such as when it recently hinted at the possibility of nuking Poland. Russia attacked Georgia because it wanted to control its valuable gas and oil pipelines and because it wanted to test the waters, as it periodically does to gauge how willing the international community will be in resisting Russian aggression. Weak responses, such as Obama's childish one, merely embolden Russia. When bullies get away with bullying, they are more likely to terrorize others in the future. According to several sources, the leftist loon George Clooney is an unofficial advisor to Obama, perhaps explaining why Obama can sound so unintelligent. Obama later reversed his position and tried to emulate McCain's tough talk when it became clear to everyone with a room-temperature IQ or above that McCain's position was -- once again -- right on and Obama's position was the kind of nonsense that one would expect from a brash and clueless young man with no foreign policy experience but an ego that won't let him see how inept he really is. Do you think it is a coincidence that enemies of the United States are gleefully salivating at the prospect of an Obama presidency? BTW, if you don't know why they are so eager for Obama to win, you are simply too dumb to cast an intelligent vote this November. Obama supporters who don't have their heads buried in the sand have a difficult time reconciling the superficial luster of his recent excellent adventure to Europe and his repeatedly demonstrated ability to fumble even the most basic real-world foreign policy matters. Face it: Obama is an empty suit. Behind that 3000-Watt smile is a man who isn't qualified to run your city, let alone the United States.
• Because his judgment is so poor that he picked a running mate, Senator Joe Biden, who repeatedly said that Obama was not ready to serve as President? Biden stumbled and later apologized for describing Obama as "clean" (tacitly suggesting that most blacks are not), thus showing Biden's gift for sticking his foot in his mouth.
• Because he wants to raise your taxes to give to the United Nations and various foreign nations (as if we don't already give enough!) when Obama himself, despite being a multimillionaire, is so stingy that he doesn't give money to his half-brother who lives on less than $1/month in a Kenyan shantytown? Obama is an ardent supporter of redistributing wealth, as long as it's your wealth that is being redistributed: that is, taken from you. Obama isn't as friendly as he should be with his family, but he is friends with Antoin ''Tony'' Rezko, a convicted felon who helped Obama in a shady real estate deal a few years ago. Obama is also friends with Bill Ayers, an unrepentant terrorist and member of the notorious Weather Underground in the 1960s that made bombs to kill Americans. The antipathy of Ayers toward America evidently had not dissipated by 2001, when he was pictured stomping on an American flag for an article in a Chicago magazine. Obama's political career was launched at an event at Ayers’s home, yet Ayers thinks we're stupid enough to believe that Ayers is just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood."
• Because he seems constitutionally unable to answer tough questions without waffling? For example, when asked to define when a baby acquires human rights, he responded, "That's above my pay grade." That is a pathetic cop-out considering there is no pay grade above that of President of the United States. A President needs a backbone and thick skin, neither of which Obama possesses. Obama's sycophantic followers become apoplectic if anyone mentions his middle name, which is Hussein. They and the liberal "mainstream" media have bent over backward to coddle Obama because, however much they want him to be President, they know that he wouldn't stand a chance against McCain if the two candidates received equal, impartial treatment. Fortunately, some liberals are principled enough that they have distanced themselves from Obama now that he is, ah, um . . . stammering and stuttering and . . . uh . . . pausing so long to formulate answers to questions that an average junior high school student could answer with aplomb. In the process, Obama is showing us that his true gift is limited to a flair for reading a teleprompter; sans that crutch, he sounds like a complete idiot. His "That's above my pay grade" admission reveals that he agrees with millions of Americans who think that he is out of his league. Without his teleprompter or his carefully rehearsed answers, Obama is so intellectually unimpressive that I highly suspect that affirmative action played a role in his academic success. (See the footnote at the end of this posting if you haven't already read it.) As I discovered, affirmative action influences not just who gets in to what school, but how those students are subsequently coddled and even promoted via academic fraud.

I'll mention the following to answer in advance any allegations from pea-brains who might conclude from the above that I am racist: I am not. I would LOVE to have a black President, if that person were someone like Colin Powell, Larry Elder, Justice Clarence Thomas, Angela McGlowan, Dr. Thomas Sowell, Professor Walter Williams, or the gorgeous and brainy Michelle Bernard. Then there is Allen West, Lt. Col. U.S. Army (Ret.), who is now running for U.S. Congress in Florida, but a man that outstanding has the potential to be an exemplary President. Herman Cain is a highly impressive businessman whose brilliance and superb judgment made me stop in my tracks the first minute I heard him speak; I didn't want to miss a word of what he had to say. They and many other black Americans would be vastly superior to Senator John McCain, a man whose fondness for letting Mexicans flood into this country because "we're all God's children" is probably kindled by the fact that he is married to a stunningly beautiful woman with half a billion dollars and a big heart who looks young enough to be his daughter. When you look like a tired old grandfather and your rich foxy wife says "jump," you ask, "How high?"

I saw the response that Senator McCain gave several years ago when a reporter asked him about the child he and his wife adopted from Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh. I can't recall his exact words, but from what he said, and the expression on his face, it was clear to me that he wasn't crazy about the idea but, with an air of resignation in his voice, that he had to give his wife whatever she wanted. Fine, do that, Senator McCain . . . just don't force me and other Americans to pay (directly and indirectly) for your misguided immigration policy.

If McCain is elected, he might be the last Republican President because his open-door immigration policy will inundate the United States with millions of people who are more likely to vote for Democrats, given their affinity for redistributing wealth.

Why are Americans seemingly incapable of electing smarter politicians when clearly more intelligent people are relegated to obscurity? My guess is that too many people spend too much time watching American Idol or focusing on the antics of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears. A miniscule proportion of our population scrutinizes what our politicians are doing and how they are screwing us in so many ways that you couldn't keep track of half of them if you devoted your life to that undertaking.

-------------------------------------------

** When I was an undergraduate I worked for Michigan State University tutoring minorities and athletes. As a tutor, I was privy to some inside information. At that university, minorities could sign up for certain class sections that were reserved for minorities. "Students" in those sections were guaranteed a passing grade if they showed up for the exam and signed their name on the test. If they tried to answer any question, they received a "B," and if they got any question correct (even by random chance), they were given an "A." That policy was obviously intended as a crutch to give a degree to people who could never obtain one legitimately. I thought, "Why not dispense with this pretense of education and just give those folks their sheepskin the second they matriculate? After all, it'd save the taxpayers 4 years of tuition, room, and board." Unfortunately, the long-range consequences of these well-intended left-wing crutches are disastrous. People with those sham degrees are foisted upon the real world, where they give the rest of us heartburn.

By the way, most of my students never bothered to attend my tutoring sessions. Many of them evidently figured out that they were given a free ride through life, so why should they lift a finger and try?