Jon Voight's Obama Op-Ed: "[He] Falls Short In Every Way"

Jon Voight accused Barack Obama of "sowing socialist seeds in young people" for an op-ed published in the Washington Times on Monday.

Writing on behalf of "we, as parents," Voight blamed the Democrats for waging a propaganda campaign against America's youth and insisted Obama is weak on terror.

Here are some excerpts:

On Obama's ties to "militant white and black people":

Sen. Barack Obama has grown up with the teaching of very angry, militant white and black people: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers and Rev. Michael Pfleger. We cannot say we are not affected by teachers who are militant and angry. We know too well that we become like them, and Mr. Obama will run this country in their mindset.

On Obama's God-like stature:

The Democratic Party, in its quest for power, has managed a propaganda campaign with subliminal messages, creating a God-like figure in a man who falls short in every way. It seems to me that if Mr. Obama wins the presidential election, then Messrs. Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers and Pfleger will gain power for their need to demoralize this country and help create a socialist America.

On 1960s "hysteria":

The Democrats have targeted young people, knowing how easy it is to bring forth whatever is needed to program their minds. I know this process well. I was caught up in the hysteria during the Vietnam era, which was brought about through Marxist propaganda underlying the so-called peace movement. The radicals of that era were successful in giving the communists power to bring forth the killing fields and slaughter 2.5 million people in Cambodia and South Vietnam. Did they stop the war, or did they bring the war to those innocent people? In the end, they turned their backs on all the horror and suffering they helped create and walked away.

On Obama's homeland security credentials:

There's not a cell in my body that can accept the idea that Mr. Obama can keep us safe from the terrorists around the world, and from Iran, which is making great strides toward getting the atomic bomb.

Voight closes by warning Obama plans to usher in a "socialist era":

This is a perilous time, and more than ever, the world needs a united and strong America. If, God forbid, we live to see Mr. Obama president, we will live through a socialist era that America has not seen before, and our country will be weakened in every way.

Comments

[DianeCee]

I am so worried about the socialistic leanings of Obama that I am actually considering working under the table. I am forced to help those who dont contribute, but I am NOT going to continue. If Obama wants to help the unfortunate, then maybe he ought to go into his black community and teach them how to assimiate. Shame on anyone who thinks that anyone at all should get tax free money. I apprecate Jon Voight's stoic opinions, and I am in favor of keeping our country from becoming like those I witnessed in Europe. If Obama gets in the White House I suppose the revolution will occur sooner than I thought. (Maybe that is a good thing, eh?)

[klmebane]

the black community needs to assimilate?? please explain that opinion. i find that a little insulting. also, black people aren't the only unfortunate ones in this country.

there are people who contribute but still need help to make ends meet, what about them? are you against corporate welfare as well? tell me, do you support equality for the GLBT community, or should they just stop paying taxes too since they can't get equal representation?

[stryker]

Poor jon, a parent? As I recall Angelina Jolie, his daughter, does not speak to him, angry at him for cheating on her mother? Another fine example of republican family values.

[Rmchairphilo]

kind of hypocritical for someone who is fond of running off with other people's husbands, isn't it?

[Syco]

she learned from the best

[Barky]

And how would you know?...hobnob with that set do you? or read the Natl. Enquirer?

[joe757]

Before he decides to write on behalf of "we, as parents," he needs to clean his own house.

[lthuedk 1]

The Bushists were informed well in advance of 9-11. Cheney intentionally stood NORAD interceptors down. Not a big thing to an ideologue who outed a CIA operative and murdered 1.2 million innocents.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/prelude_to_disaster.html

Neo Cons couldn't find a willing host in Clinton, so they went to the Party of Corruption, where they were welcomed as a symbiont and a means to get at M.E. oil. There was little resistance from the short sighted and ethically challenged Republicans.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/senate_republicans_visit_iraq.html

This is why a real 9-ll Commission will be fought with tooth and nail by the Republicans.

[JKoos]

Paranoia runs deep.

[BillyShears]

All this articulated "vision" from someone who supported GWBoosh.
Twice

[Rickandanumber]

If he feels like that, then he'll really feel this one:

BOYCOTT his films and any other business he may have.

[cyndeewi]

He is a has-been, He really does not do films anymore. His daughter does a lot of films. Will someone tell the man that Obama did not meet these people growing up. Looking back at his record Voight is the last one to talk.

[Balloonman]

Jon Voight is no has been. He works constantly. He is considered by other actors as more than just a journeyman inventive, risk taking even. It is unfortunate though, for fans of a number of mighty fine role delineations thruout his caerer, that off stage in the analysis arena, he does not think straight, think logically. He blames what, the liberal/socialist point of view for corrupting our purpose in VIETNAM? Indo-China. CAMBODIA particularly, that sortie after sortie American bombing slaughter would not have happened had we dispensed with our domino theory that one country goes communist the one next to it falls. Moreover learned the lesson of FRANCE and left VIETNAM to its own CIVIL WAR.

Watching Jon Voight work, can you see his ignorant politic philosophy show thru? No, but there it is. Lurking behind his cleverly designed roles, his long study, and gift with the masques, is the fool. Likely a dangerous one were he in a position of power. Interesting that he misunderstands what is best for people on the whole yet turns out on occasion marvelous sympathetic individuals.

[bushlies]

Who turned Jon Voight into a rightwing nutcase? No wonder his daughter doesn't speak to him!

[rbrinega]

She also didn't speak to him because he abandoned her mother and her mother's family. But he is a nut job too.

[Rmchairphilo]

Hate to bust y'all's bubble but jolie is a republican too. She pro'lly agrees with his op-ed.

[JOHND777]

What a distorted scary view of reality by Voight!! Perhaps his role in Enemy of the State was too real for him!! Scary person!!!

[theistus]

Wow, hippies in the U.S. caused the Cambodian tragedy? What an utter distortion of history.

[Swift2]

You would think that the bombing of Cambodia by, oh, what's-his-name, played more of a part in the Cambodian tragedy than "the hippies."

[SZM]

LOL, interesting choice of words Jon used. I happen to think Jon Voight falls short of being a talented actor in every way. He also falls falls short in his understanding of history and politics. The only decent movie he ever did he plays a character victimized by the very people he now supports in "Deliverance". Terrible actor (.)

[ErnestineBass]

YO!, "Midnight Cowboy"...seen your grandkids lately?

Didn't think so.

[LibertarianDreams]

Republican or Democrat, the ideas that Obama has put forward for America are in fact leaining in a socialist direction. It is up to each individual to decide if that is a good or a bad thing, but let's try to address the issues raised, not the politicial affiliations. Do the readers and contributers to this post believe that this is not true? That would be an arguement I would be happy to hear. Now, if you think we need to do more redistribution of wealth, and that we should provide more entitlements to our citizens, that is a legitimate position to take. Not necessarily one I agree with, but I try hard to listen to all sides of issues like this and evolve. Why is it though, that many people who are progressives or liberals (in the new sense, not the original Libertarian sense) are hesitant to admit that they favor more socialist policies? Let's be honest!

[MacDaffy]

Do you really believe that we in this country owe each other no allegiance at all? Do you really believe that you have no responsibility to this land that makes it possible for you to espouse whatever views you please? Does citizenship mean nothing to you?

It is readily obvious to anyone with a rudimentary understanding of economics that the concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands is responsible for the alarming dislocations in our society today. Unfettered, unregulated capitalism DOES NOT WORK! Too few people benefit and too many suffer. The price the wealthy should pay for all that this country makes possible is--or should be--taxes. But the rules are so skewed in their favor that the due bill for their liberties has fallen to the poor and the shrinking middle class. The bailouts of banks and mortgage lenders heaps more debt on top of that created by the attempted oil robbery in Iraq.

Reality is bringing this whole "socialism-capitalism-fascism" question to a head. We're either going to find an equitable way to order our affairs or this nation becomes a hell.

Jon Voight's piece is just an opinion. It has no basis in fact, is an ad hominem attack on Barack Obama, and offers nothing in the way of solutions. A vote for McCain is a vote for four more years of doing nothing. If socialism will save this country, let's have it. Because neoliberal, laissez-faire policies are ruining us.

[LibertarianDreams]

To answer your first question, I absolutely believe we owe the country allegiance, but we also have to be sure we act responsibly in exercising that allegiance.

As for your comments about the economics involved, I think you are assuming things that are not supported by either economic theory or emperical evidence. There is no precident. We are the first real experiment that will take capitalism to its logical conclusion. You may be right. It may end up in revolt caused by the widening disparity you mention. But we just do not know that, and we also do not have a truely unencumbered capitalist economy.

I also take exception to the comments about the tax laws with respect to the wealthy. Currently the top 50% of income earners pay 97% of the total tax revenue. the top 1% contributes 40%, and the bottom 50% contributes 3%. We could argue legitimately about what the appropriate distribution should be, but we should be honest about what it is. (Source: IRS, Statistics of Income, 2008)

[pundit27]

Well put. Yes, we want to redistribute the wealth through changes in the tax code, in the social security system and in the health care system. If you want to call that a "socialist direction," fine with me. Democrats should use that supposed slur positively, to help define those differences with those whose decisions are based primarily on moving things in a "capitalistic direction." Unfortunately, we have been moving in that direction strongly since Reagan presided and had it accelerated by Clinton and, eventually totally corrupted by Bush & Co. Our brush with the neo-fascism of the Bush era, where corporate interests twisted regulatory and judicial competence and fairness to their liking, and the craven profiteering of defense, energy, insurance, pharma have substantially subverted the traditional , constitutionally driven, social contract we have between our government and governed, we truly need real change. With the cooption of the MSM, that social compact has broken down and, yes, we need to move in a socialist direction in certain areas of our society as we have in others -- education, national security, high finance -- to make this century see the continuation of the great American experiment in democracy and human rights.

[LibertarianDreams]

Thanks for the honest reply. I must say I agree with almost everything you say here, and most people consider me a conservative! One thing to keep in mind though is that conservative fascism is no worse than Liberal fascism. You might enjoy the book "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. It gives a pretty good history of the concept of fascism and its history... and yes, it is a bit slanted toward conservative audiences, but I would guess you are able to see past (theough) that.

[deminmo]

The police and fire departments are socialist
entities, so is that a bad thing? If entitlement
programs are what you are refering to, then yes I
want Social Security and Medicare to be available.
I have paid for my parents and many others, now
I expect them to be there for me. Welfare needs
to lose all the corruption and changed to prevent
fraud, but it has a purpose too.

[LibertarianDreams]

I do not disagree that there are many "socialist" ideas that are good. That is the basis of a civilized society. We should not lose track of the fact that we more or less voluntarily give up certain liberties to live in such a society. The question is one of degree, and one of legality. How much of which freedoms are we willing to give up for the greater good? Which ones are supported by the constitution, and which ones are not? Should we change this based on the differences in the world we live in vs. the one the Founding Fathers knew?
Oh, and I completely understand about SS and Medicare... I have also been paying in for quite sime time.

[radicalmoderate]

Call it socialism or call it liberal or whatever you want... the rich are the real whiners in this country. They take the big piece of cake and leave us who have made the cake for them the crumbs. Redistribution of wealth is not taking from the rich it is reinvesting in the people who made them that way. Jon Voight is sadly disillusioned from running with the sharks. He is sadly spewing the venom of the fear mongering money grubbers who want the working class to pay for everything double. He fears idealistic, good natured folks who wish to share the planet. It's the bunker mentality of a paranoid bunch of haters who need enemies and see Obama as a seeker and a naive charlatan of feel goodness. Why is that so bad to the fatalistic nay-sayer crowd? Hope and charity threatens their cynicism and imaginary perceived security from the evil doers they feed with their militarism.

[JKoos]

Socialism is a great idea if it was not so predatory. Look at Medicare. A simple idea of providing hospital care to old people has turned into an uncontrolled fiscal black hole. Unlimited healthcare for those who have unlimited need. Once it is brought under budgetary control, which is inevitable, it will become mean and arbitrary like all other forms of socialized medicine.

[blaising]

JEALOUS...

[ClydetheCat]

Oh well, at least he used to be a good actor.

[cheo]

"WE", as parents"? What WE would that be? He doesn't speak for THIS parent.

Whooa, The BIG BAD DEMS are a cult set on brainwashing your kids and the terrorists are out to get all of us......
No wonder he was Rudy '9/11' Giuliani's shadow during his short pathetic campaign of "be very afraid". Voight should speak only for himself, which he has a right to do, though he clearly hasn't a clue. I would suggest that he stick to acting--but since Midnight Cowboy and Coming Home his career could barely be called mediocre, so maybe that isn't even a good idea.