… On Barack Obama and the “A” word

The last time Lyndon Larouche poked his way into any public conciousness — in the US, some modest blips are abound in Great Britain, eh? — and this is a rather marginal definition of “public” here, Larouche spoke out about Barack Obama as being the product of “every monkey in every tree” and OH THE MISCEGENATION! It was a blip to be sure — a back page on daily kos, Wonkette, some blurbs for news aggregations to followers of cults and of news of particular interest to African Americans. A blip is what Larouche gets.

I had been wondering, though, when and how one item of Obama’s popular awareness with popular gray-area of public discourse would poke out of Leesburg. No self-respecting conspiracy theorist can possibly leave the topic of the Assassination of Barack Obama alone, right? Well, here we go:

But my view is, they’re still going to dump him. I see the signs of the readiness to dump him all over the world. And they get him in any way, they can assassinate him. I mean, a guy like this, with his—he comes in a sense, as long as he’s around, they’re stuck with him, but they don’t want him. What do they do with him? They kill him. And they try to kill him with the kind of effect would (sic) be most useful for their purposes.

You know, one of Molly Kronberg’s friends’ll probably kill him or something like that—and put the blame on us! [laughs]

That makes sense. [Sure it does.] It’s the way they do things.

Interesting, I believe. It’s a demented bit of sarcasm, and really is more a posit that Molly Kronberg is leading a troupe against Larouche and blaming Lyndon for killing Kenneth Kronberg. And that is where the demise of his organization comes from. Thus Lyndon Larouche manages to broach the provocative topic of Barack Obama’s assassination without saying anything about it, instead dwelling on intimately personal matters. Understand this falls into that weird realm of public / private consumption, as Lyndon Larouche has earlier gone on record declaring how pleased he is that every word he speaks is available to turn up for anyone’s reading pleasure — and I suppose I could go back and link to such, except I’m not terribly interested. Look on through this particular conversation, though, and you see Larouche once again reminiscing about the past Good old times — “We had fun” (and the authorities locked him up in prison because… they were having too much fun. Good one!) Appropriate enough for the Last Rites, I suppose, and here I can cue the following quote from an article rolling past defeated opponents of Oklahoma Senator James Inhoffe:

Inhofe has run against Republicans and he’s run against Democrats. He’s run against independents and Libertarians and a candidate from the Natural Law Party.
He even ran against one of the late Lyndon LaRouche’s minions.

And, naturally, a few days later in the Tulsa World.:

A Sunday Tulsa World story referred to the “late Lyndon Larouche.” LaRouche is not dead.

How would anyone know, really?

Sigh. I do have more cheeky bemusement. Maybe I’ll post it later in this very space. Have Fun, Everybody!

2 Responses to “… On Barack Obama and the “A” word”

  1. Rachel Holmes Says:

    I think it’s entirely possible that LaRouche, who is one of the least self-aware people on the planet, in any real psychoanalytical sense, doesn’t realize that he is telegraphing his fixations on Molly and Ken Kronberg, and on the fact that not only does Molly blame Lyn for Ken’s death, but she has convinced a whole of other people besides.

    Of course, it doesn’t take much convincing–all you have to do is read the horrible things Lyn wrote and said about Ken over the several years leading up to Ken’s death, culminating in the April 11, 2007 briefing, and you don’t have to be Albert Einstein to conclude that Lyn is to blame for Ken’s suicide.

    But Lyn is freaked out by the publication of the awful things he said (yeah, he’s delighted that all his words are made public. And I’m Santa Claus), and he’s enraged that Molly is somehow “getting away with this.” Plus there’s always the problem of the “Mollycoddlers,” as Lyn likes to call them–the people still in the org who in one way or another sympathize with her.

    His zombie legions (very, very tiny legions) concur with him, of course–and that includes a few poor, bare, forked leftovers from the Boomer Age. Maybe some day Molly Kronberg will give someone permission to publish some of the vile email she’s gotten from these poor schnooks, now entering their dotage, who still follow Lyn, now drowning in his dotage.

  2. Justin Says:

    I am going to state something. I was going to delve into the current World of Financing in relation to Larouche with this post, and perhaps I will. But I had a basic influx of “Why?”, Why Bother?

    I will note something about the presence of a couple of Larouchies in front of the mall with a “Stop the Bailout” sign hanging over their cardtable. The sign’s message carries with it more Popular support than normal, — which tends to range from a somewhat esoteric anti Zbrenski (SP?) message which has no popular conception to a mildly niche but popular “Impeach Cheney” message which is written in a manner that would turn more off than it would attract. This sign may show a seriousness in getting people onto lists for the organization’s finances, even if surely the presence of that Larouche pamphlet “One Year Later” would sober any wranglers (sympathetic with the cause at hand) away — even the part of the populace who veers into and around, say, the 9/11 Truth area. It is a gambit which if replicated in the financial sector would be even worse than what we’re experiencing now.

Leave a Reply