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

[jood42]

Accusations of propagandizing...published in the Washington Times?!?

HAHAHahahahahahaha! Thanks, Jon; that's the best laugh I've had all week.

[Ratso]

I am always amazed by the ultra leftists (aka NeoComs) as they NEVER accept any criticism. If you diaagree with their most extreme ideas, then you are wrong. With NeoComs, there is no compromise only staunch Marxist, socialist agendas. They were wrong in the 60's and they are wrong now. I knew Mark Rudd, Jerry Rubin, Roy Jones, Mike Edwards, Abbie Hoffman and all those dudes. We thought they (we) were right in our thinking. I have sen the light. I hope you young people can.

[rzan1]

I am 60 years old and remember the men of which you speak. I am still very left of center. By the way, I don't believe for a second that you knew any of these men.

[Outsideadog]

Looking on from here in Australia (a well established democracy...not perfect, no).

I think it's better to look at how democracy plays out over a longer period, when it's allowed to operate openly. You get a sway towards, shall we say, in contemporary terms, business interests, and the people who are skilled there get a chance to improve the wealth of the country. Then that trend plays out and there's a need to correct for the excesses that often take place in that business cycle. Then the people who are skilled in dealing with public well-being, like education, health care, roads, public transport, and today, the envronment, get their turn. In that cycle business might start to suffer a little with tax burdens etc, and the cycle changes again. In any of the established democracies you'll see that's the healthy pattern.

When ideologues, who, interestingly, can only speculate about whether their preferred anarchistic, libertarian, communistic, or fascistic system will actually work, get their way, you get societal breakdown. Thus, a Tsarist model begets a communist revolution. That's the lesson of history and as Churchill said, democracy is the 'least-worst' system.

I'd love to see the U.S. get back to being a healthy model of democracy once again.

I can remember when the U.S. elected a President and the whole country would drop its electoral differences and back the President, who would take an oath to serve the whole country.

Good luck to you guys.

[klmebane]

what light is that you have seen? please, explain to me how republicans will help the majority of people as opposed to the richest 1%?

[lthuedk 1]

"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."

What a staggeringly ignorant statement.

The Republican Party failed to protect us on 9-11. Instead of handling the attack with an efficient police action, like the '93 attack, it decided to milk our fear and create a giant protections racket and a gigantic corporate feeding frenzy. What, Voight missed blatant history?

The conspiracy to overthrow the United States is a Republican/Neo Con work product. The cowboy hat was pulled right over those once bright eyes. The U.S. is not on the Obama hit list, but on the corporate socialist's main menu.

How can Voight support such tyranny? http://www.light-to-dark.com/the_joy_of_a_dictatorship.html

Read the Constitution before engaging your keyboard, John. Obama is a Constitutionalist. And you've just been used as a fascist tool.

[LibertarianDreams]

Are you kidding? The Republican's failed to protect us from 9-11? The planning, preparation , and much of the execution took place during Clinton's years.
Oh, and as for Obama being a Constitutionalist, exactly what part of the constitution is it that gives the Federal government the right to force good, hard working Americans to pay for "universal healthcare"? I could go on, but I doubt you would listen.
BTW, I am not sure that McCain is any better, but let's be real.

[klmebane]

so you are of the school of thought that if someone is working 3 jobs to make ends meet and can't afford health care they should just die? the government forces us to pay for an overbloated defense industry. the billions we pay in tax money to build new bases submarines and pay private contractors (among other things) could pay for health care for every american and then some.

no, health care isn't mentioned in the constitution, but it didn't exist in the form it does now when the constitution was written. abortion isn't in the constitution either, but that doesn't seem to stop people from trying to make laws about it. what role do you think government should have in the lives of such a large society? making war and taxing and that's it?

[Classof89]

I used to have great respect for this man, as an actor ('Conrack' being my favorite), and as a humanitarian. Now it seems that he's gone the way of another one-time, equally-admired actor Michael Moriarty (formerly of 'Law & Order' and one of my favorite films 'Bang The Drum Slowly'). Truly sad.

And one poster got it right, that he needs to concentrate more on fixing his relationship with his kids and maintain it, also with his grandchildren, instead of writing some hypocritical piece to the Washington Times.

[Bluekarma]

what? A guy can't have family problems and a rational opinion about politics too? So that eliminates everyone on the planet from being able to speak about what concerns them just because they have marital or family issues???? That makes no sense! Then none of us would be able to talk here because no one has a perfect life! well, maybe Bill gates, but that is it!

[Classof89]

Did you not read the actual article from the Washington Times, dear? This was his statement:

"We, as parents, are well aware of the importance of our teachers who teach and program our children. We also know how important it is for our children to play with good-thinking children growing up.

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."

He's trying to tell folks about how parents should be and what they should teach their kids, when he in fact can't even get along with his own kids. Who here said that everyone has a perfect life? Where did that come from? I'm saying he is being very hypocritical in this case. If he wants to state his opinions, then fine, cool, no problem. All I'm saying is that he should take a look in the mirror first instead of telling people what they should and shouldn't do, and also get his facts straight before he spouts out his uninfomed beliefs.

[livesimply]

1. He is obviously not rational about politics.
2. How do you know Bill Gates has a perfect life?

[soupson52]

And Voight volunteered to fight where in Vietnam? Gee how convenient. He was against war when he was eligible to go. Must be a priority thing.

[Sandi7552]

So, has "The Right" denounced his opinion or made fun of his beliefs the way they do whenever an actor or actress speaks for Obama? I didn't think so.

[drgrph]

Of course not. We learned that from "The Left". And thank God for the diversity of opinion that America allows. Now if only left-learning Americans could learn to do the same.

[sistapolitica]

No! my friend. "The Right" gave free lessons for 8+ long years courtesy of the professor--or should I say the PhD--of anything goes politics, Karl Rove; the master of political ridicule to silence dissent and get the voters to vote against their own interests. Good 'ol boy politics at it's best.

[klmebane]

i don't care that other people have their opinions, they are entitled to them. but when they try to force me to think like them by making laws (which doesn't actually work) that is what i have a problem with.

[MyGuyO]

Jon Voight is a Republican. What did you expect?

[ltfcrazy]

"We as parents" ? isn't this the guy whose daughter saves poor children, but won't talk to him?

[BruntLIVE]

I don't care what you say, Jon Voit can make some pretty female babies. Look at the eyes of both......scary.

[jbs902]

It took two...her mom must be gorgeous.

[Bystander]

More succinctly, Obama is an empty suit.

[buddhistMonkey]

Succinct, but false.

[Ratso]

The problem with many young voters is that they know little if anything about the candidates. I challenge anyone to tell me 3 concrete core values that Senator Obama professes,and 3 of his significant accomplishments. His inexperience is a serious flaw.

[Bobbygoode]

I'd pay a LOT right now to see you debate him, or just hold a conversation with him. The guy in the White House right now - that would be an empty suit.

[Davwbaird]

ha ha hya you are jralous.

[cyndeewi]

Obama has more in his baby finger then you will learn in a lifetime.

[pundit27]

Better an empty suit than a full pair of Depends.

[okAcomputer]

if you want a measure of this man's judgement...why don't you ask him whom he voted for the past two elections.

[chirps]

"...why don't you ask him whom he voted for the past two elections."

Kucinich? Just a guess.

[noamjunior]

a crappy guess

more like W

[TRYKER]

Right..."I'm not a thinking person, but I play one on Op-Eds."

Good grief, what an embarrassment. Its small wonder his popularity is so limited.

[Bitsko]

Anti-war people helped create the "horror and suffering" the pro-war people created?

[RecessMonkeys]

"It's better to keep your mouth closed and be thought of as an idiot......

[Bitsko]

"published in the Washington Times" says it all. And he did such a great job for Guiliani!

[CeeDeeCee]

Just another blathering defender of the corporate socialsim now practiced by the rethugs. All profits must be private but all losses must be shared by the taxpayers, that is, the middle class and working class taxpayers.

Sadly it seems a lot of voters in these groups worry more about flag pins, gay marriage and fist bumps than a government that steals from the poor and gives to the rich. Not to mention sending our children half way around the world to die to protect the oil companies profits.

[livewire19]

Remember that stimulus check that went to everyone but the corporations, the rich and the upper middle class........... that is the socialism of the government stealing your children's future earnings. Your social security check, the deficits, the runaway spending at state and federal levels.... that is the bipartisan stealing your children's future earnings. These are things you should be really steamed about.

If you don't like "corporate socialism," fight to get Congress to stop adding earmarks to bills, oppose bills like the housing bailout and the guarantees for Fannie and Freddie. Fight government waste every way you can. This is a bipartisan problem.

[metalpipe]

Dude, I agree with exactly none of your post. I fail to see how the stimulus package was in any way an act of theft. Maybe an incompetent and incomplete response to a huge financial crisis in our midst, sure. I'm trying to figure out if you are upset that Corps and the wealthy were left out?

The money we hand over to the IRS is only ours in theory. It remains elusive until we take control of the politicians that spend it. There is no guarantee that our children will reap any benefit from todays tax collections if the current trend of reprehensible behavior in Washington continues.

FYI, congressional earmarks make up a very small potion of the country's spending problems, and unless you want an all out depression era crisis in this country, you better be glad we are finally helping home owners. By the way, what is your plan for all these 'earnings'? Are you a supporter of social security privatization?

[LesserFool2]

Fat cats already got their stimulus checks via Bush's first tax cut that favored the wealthy; the same wealthy that were asked to pay for the historic war on terror by accepting those tax reductions.

In any case, I think the working-class stimulus checks were bad for numerous reasons, not the least of which it steals from our children and grandchildren to keep the current monetary house-of-cards standing.

But, the stimulus checks pale in comparison to the billions upon billions given away to the already-weathly in the form of socialized losses (read: bailouts), tax-breaks, favors, war-profiteering, etc. And, in any case, two wrongs don't make a right. You're either for socialism for all -- or for none.

Voigt doesn't seem to get the fact that the GOP loves to help the already-wealthy as much as they can; and any time someone proposes helping any of the "have nots" they whine about socialism, government waste, handouts, tax increase. blah blah blah.