Holy Crap Babe, just when I'm beginning to think you're all right after all, you spout this kind of crap.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're just using hyperbole. You can't be serious right?
I'm curious what specifically Obama has done to demonstrate that he's an ideological Marxist.
I have read Marx, and can correctly identify an adherent to Marx.
Two of Obama's "mentors" were Marxists with strong Cuban ties. Cuba ranks as a "State Capitalist" sort of deranged or misguided "Marxist" variant, it is true.
Since "communist" is a name to avoid, and isn't a correct term anyway, and since Marx is a BS philosopher promoting an fairyland reality anyway, it is useless to argue about the ideological "purity" of anyone influenced by any of the themes promoted by Marx, which were not original with him anyway. We had a variant of "communists" or "communalists" from the outset of the English colonization of America. The Puritans believed in communal property so much they didn't allow, at first, private gardens and expected everyone to work together for the common good. Some early Christians had this notion in a variant of idealizing sharing this world's goods with the poor, voluntarily, sort of. But if you didn't you weren't a real Christian.
I had a good friend who was a devout "Marxist" in his view, an adherent of the principles Marx taught. He didn't believe in private property. He was a union organizer, and invited me to join a union that he believed had the right "principles" in advocating for workers. I met with his friends, and I stood around while he argued with Cuban "State Capitalists'.
In his view, a "State Capitalist" can be a Republican or a Fascist or a phony Marxist. He would consider Obama a phony Marxist. Obama's parents were communists, as well, though today they would claim to be "progressives" and scramble to claim the high ground as the most extreme advocates of the philosophically "pure" Marxism, in their view.
The problem with Marxism from the beginning was that it was a tool promoted by some particularly influential political manipulators, I think to counter the ideas of the American political system of our founders, where people had rights, including the right to "own" their government outright and select their representatives. The right to believe, speak, and act in their own judgment in life, according to their interests, inherent in the "right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness".
Marx taught that society must evolve or transform according to dialectic principles which at first stood in opposition but which would produce a ynthesis of higher organization. One of those stages would be a government, run by some ideologically-correct elites, that would in some manner "represent" the interests of the people while property rights dissolved away into a communal order, where everyone was essentially "equal". After that stage, the "State was supposed to "wither away" because it wouldn't be needed because people were all equal. Obama sees his mission as working in this way to "change" America. The "hope" he spoke of was that equality.
However, he is just another tool of fascist elites per the UN New World Order, which however idealized, will actually dissolve property rights world wide, and impose a totalitarian regime over the world where it will not matter what people "want" anymore.
The problem with that government is it will not "wither away", ever. Another problem is that it does not solve the problems of ambition, greed, fear, and lust for power, which will mean that such a monolithic government will break apart over differences of opinion and over competition for power. No one can "cure" human nature and make it "ideal".
Well, who knows, maybe there is something out in the Universe somewhere with a solution to those problems, but it's not David Rockefeller, or Karl Marx.
