They "feel" rather than "think" their way through political issues, and the consequences for future generations of Americans are dire.

In October 1939, a month after Great Britain declared war on Germany in that unpleasantry a few of us history buffs remember as "World War II," Winston Churchill said of communist Russia: "It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma..." In true Churchill form, he added wryly, "But perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."

In other words, if you want to decode "a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma," just consider the underlying "interest."

A year ago, Barack Hussein Obama was something of an enigma, but his interests are now clear—crystal clear.

I have written at length about Obama's worldview in a series of essays archived at No ObamaNation. These essays provide a foundational understanding of the danger Obama poses to American liberty (at least the vestigial remains of our Founders' legacy) based on his words and deeds.

Hundreds of other essays in The Patriot Archive are, likewise, devoted to individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. These compositions reflect a vision diametrically opposed to that espoused by Barack Obama.

The prospect of an Obama presidency, supported by a legislative branch controlled by like-minded liberals, and only the slightest conservative margin in the judicial branch, poses a greater risk to American liberty than any domestic enemy in our nation's great history.

Should Obama defeat John McCain in the only opinion poll that matters this election cycle, the poll on Tuesday, 4 November (merely 32 days from now), that would be a stunning offense of staggering proportions to our national heritage, an offense equaled only by the impending assault against the liberties set forth in our U.S. Constitution following an Obama inauguration.

Yes, Obama has the dubious distinction of being ranked the most liberal of the "useful idiots" in the Senate—apologist for socialist political and economic agendas. And it took him only half a term to achieve that ill repute. That puts him to the left of his primary benefactors, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. (By contrast, his running mate, Joe Biden, has taken 36 years to achieve his status as the Senate's third most liberal member.)

But Obama is entitled to his political views.

After all, our Constitution's Bill of Rights affirms every American's inherent right to liberty, not just in what we say and write, or how we worship, but also in what we believe and with whom we choose to associate.

And, we know plenty about what Obama believes and with whom he associates. Here is a partial list of key associates: There is his communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis, his terrorist friends William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, his religious mentor Jeremiah Wright, the ACORN crowd, Leftists Richard Daley, Michael Pfleger, Khalid al-Mansour, Kwame Kilpatrick, Rashid Khalidi and, well, you get the picture.

The problem is that Obama and his ilk believe they are not bound by the plain language of our Constitution, adhering instead to the errant notion of a "Living Constitution," which they have adulterated by judicial diktat to comport with their worldview. In his view, we should be "One nation under Obama."

What informs Barack Hussein Obama's worldview first and foremost?

Obama is the consummate "useful idiot," a socialist who believes not only that the will of the people should be subject to that of the state, but, likewise, the economy should be state controlled through taxation and regulation.

Obama insists that our economy is "out of balance," and our tax policies "badly skewed." To resolve this, he says we need a "tax policy making sure that everybody benefits, fair distribution, a restoration of balance in our tax code, money allocated fairly..."

"Fair distribution"? By this, of course, he means "redistribution."

Further, Obama asserts that free enterprise is nothing more than "Social Darwinism, every man or woman for him or herself... tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity."

Free enterprise "doesn't require much thought or ingenuity"? Only in the mind of a lifelong adherent of socialist doctrine could such an absurdly un-American assertion originate.

Obama's economic plan represents a maturation of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's class-warfare decree: "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle."

In fact, Roosevelt's "principle" was no more American than Obama's. Roosevelt was paraphrasing Karl Marx, whose maxim declared, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

English sociologist and historian H.G. Wells, whose last work, The Holy Terror, profiled the psychological development of a modern dictator based on the careers of Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler, said of Roosevelt's reign, "The great trouble with you Americans is that you are still under the influence of that second-rate—shall I say third-rate?—mind, Karl Marx."

That admonition is equally true today—even more so.

In 1987, Ronald Reagan commented on useful idiots: "How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

While Obama and his cadre of elitists both understand and advocate socialist doctrine, their populist support across the nation is not from academic, intellectual or philosophical equals. Their adoring masses can't begin to articulate why our nation was founded, what our Constitution sets forth, what citizenship entails, or why free enterprise is superior to socialism.

They are, by and large, good people who have been dumbed down by government schools and the Leftmedia. They are not in possession of an ethic that inspires them to put "Country First," as John McCain and a long list of American Patriots have done. Instead, they follow Obama's example, asking not what they can do for their country, but what their country can do for them.

Soviet despot Nikita Khrushchev observed that America's transition from liberty to serfdom would have to be incremental: "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.

Obama's constituents are checkers players being led by chess masters, and the Democrat brew they have been drinking has been incrementally spiked with socialist booze such that they are completely intoxicated, and don't know it. Will they sober up before the dawn

Thursday night, after Joe Biden demonstrated his outstanding credentials as a "useful idiot" while debating Sarah Palin, who demonstrated that she is a citizen, not a Beltway politico, Biden closed with this remark: "This election is the most important of your entire life.

On this point, and only this point, do I unreservedly concur with Joe.

theamericanjingoist.blogspot.com/2008/10/comrade-barack-hussein-obama.html