Nathan R. Jessup

Who Am I?

In not citizens, Socialism, War, World News on February 19, 2010 at 4:54 pm

Try and Guess WHO I AM?
I was born in one country, raised in another.  My father was born in another country.  I was not his only child.  He fathered several children with numerous women.
I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in me.  My mother died at an early age from cancer.
Later in life, questions arose over my real name.
My birth records were sketchy and no one was able to produce a
Legitimate, reliable birth certificate.
I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it was widely accepted in my country, but I practiced non-traditional beliefs and didn’t follow Christianity, except in the public eye under scrutiny.
I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult, disguising myself as someone who really cared about them..

That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life and I embarked on a new career.
I wrote a book about my struggles growing up.  It was clear to those who read my memoirs that I had difficulties accepting that my father abandoned me as a child.

I became active in local politics in my 30’s then with help behind the scenes, I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national office in my 40s.  They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.  That reinforced my conceit.

I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no experience in leading a single organization. Yet I was a powerful speaker and citizens were drawn to me as though I were a magnet and they were small roofing tacks.

I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances. This bolstered my   ego.

At first, my political campaign focused on my country’s foreign policy.   I was very critical of my country in the last war and seized every opportunity to bash my country.

But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country’s economy.  I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better and every poor person would be fed and housed for free.

I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess.  It was the free market, banks and corporations.  I decided to start making citizens hate them and if they were envious of others who did well, the plan was clinched tight.

I called mine “A People’s Campaign” and that sounded good to all people.
I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside the traditional path of politics and was able to gain widespread popular support.

I knew that, if I merely offered the people ‘hope’, together we
Could change our country and the world.
So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include “persecuted minorities” like the Jews.   My true views were not widely known and I needed to keep them unknown, until after I became my nation’s leader.

I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with.

I’m glad they didn’t.  Then I became the most powerful man in the world.  And the world learned the trut
Who am I? (scroll down)




Who were you thinking?

  1. Pure trash.

    • No sir, everything you read about the dictator’s life is completely accurate…

    • Oh, I should clarify. Pure trash…according to logic. A lot of this is arbitrary information (Hitler owned a dog, Ghandi didn’t: Dogs are bad) and a lot of it is putting words in Obama’s mouth that only work if these nut jobs’ conspircay theories are correct (I had to carefully guard the TRUTH so no one could find out what I REALLY believed). It’s kind of funny to me because it reminds me of a Glenn Beck style terrible argument, but it bothers me because there exist people dumb enough to believe whatever pays homage to their ideology.

      • Daniel,
        Just a reminder: I never mentioned Obama once, you did. Why do you think it was Obama of whom I was speaking? For argument’s sake, let’s say it is Obama; Obama has 35 major similarities to the dictator in his rise to power. If the only common ground was a dog I would say it’s ridiculous to compare the two. I have a dog. Many people have dogs. However, the argument that “nurture” has nothing to do with who one eventually becomes is foolish. A commonly known saying, “the person you become will ultimately be determined by the people you surround yourself with, the books you read and the places you travel.” Agree? -If not, I have nothing further to add.

        If you DO agree, then how can Obama’s personal connections, reading materials and travels not be considered a factor in understanding who he is? Look, this isn’t about trying to paint anyone in a bad light because I don’t “like” them, it’s about taking responsibility for who we allow to lead America. America is just as much mine as it is yours.

        If I asked you to tell me how many people you know with a dog, you could probably list quite a few; how many people could you tell me share all 35 [major] similarities to Hitler’s upbringing?

        Just give me one example, and we can move on and ignore the comparisons. Fair? Lastly, it’s important to realize the difference between owning a dog and say, being abused as a child (I am not suggesting Obama was abused, by the way-just making a point). You still haven’t made the argument for “pure trash”.

    • Good response, Nathan, but I still (as you might guess) have objections.

      So we can continue to have a real debate without these roundabout introductions, let’s be honest and say that this is obviously another Obama-Hitler comparison. It helps us have a more direct discussion.

      In regards to the nature-nurture point you raised, I think there is still discussion as to which affects the development of personality more, but I happen to lean more on the side of nurture, so let’s go with that. Obviously, biological factors involve themselves, but that discussion would be much more involved. Let’s just stick with our common assumption.

      I think you made a good point that I missed; some comparisons are more arbitrary than others. I really didn’t properly relate that to your article.

      I’m going to continue to deny that you have as many comparisons as you say, since some of them are these putting-words-in-peoples’-mouths type comparisons.

      “My birth records were sketchy and no one was able to produce a Legitimate, reliable birth certificate.”
      “That reinforced my conceit..”
      “I…seized every opportunity to bash my country.”
      “My true views were not widely known and I needed to keep them unknown, until after I became my nation’s leader.”
      “I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and examined those people I associated with.”

      These are all examples of (and just the most extreme examples) comparisons and statements that many reasonable, educated people would disagree with. I assume you know that the best way to create an argument is to defeat an entire idea, not a weak caricature of it. It’s like if I were to say that all the pro-life movement (which I generally agree with) wants to exercise control over us all and force us to obey their way of life (sound familiar?). Obviously, a pro-lifer would have much better reasons for wanting to legally restrict abortion rights, and objections like this are garbage. Similarly, it’s very easy to say that Obama is evil if we put words in his mouth and twist things to the point that they sound ridiculous, but to actually substantively discuss capitalism’s superiority to to socialism (down to how far either way we’re willing to go) is very difficult.

      That said, let’s discuss what it means that Obama and Hitler have several things in common. I can certainly agree that they are both good speakers, both were involved in their communities before getting into major leadership, both wrote books about their history, and both opposed an entirely free market. I’m not familiar with either of their family histories (although I have seen the Hawaiian birth certificate that the birthers reject as a fake so the history with fathers and step-siblings are true. I still have a problem seeing how these are enough distinct similarities to claim that they are anywhere near the same guy over 40+ years of life. There’s a lot that can happen in that time. Also, what about these similarities are bad? Are you suggesting that there is a “profile of evil” (patent pending:)) and these experiences and choices are what made Hitler into the Jew-killing world-dominating dictator we know and hate? I think there’s a decent argument for the childhood of Hitler being relevant, but if we look at the childhood of a man who was raised in Austria/Germany in the 1890s compared to a man who was raised in (I’ll say it!) Hawaii in the 1960s, I think we’ll find some major differences in the type of upbringing. You could say the absence of a father is the commonality, but Hitler’s father died when he was about 10, Obama was without a father-figure for about two years (ages 3-5). Hardly comparable, but once again, it would be difficult to include “didn’t have a daddy” as a deciding factor in our “profile of evil” (Patent pending).

      Let’s get to the good similarity-left leaning! That’s what this should really be about, right? Is it left-leaning political ideology that makes a person a potential new Hitler? I hope this is a big no, but if so, this is where we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Obama has proposed more progressive taxes, more federal money involved in health care (perhaps to the point of the dreaded UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!) and cap-and-trade (which I’m sure we both honestly oppose. That’s the wrong way to help the environment). Is this a manifestation of his destined-Hitlerness? Or perhaps these policies are his way of helping poor people enjoy the rights enjoyed by the rich, extending health benefits to those who (many for no good reason) don’t have decent access to them, and to create a better environment for us all to live in.
      There are many in America who think that he promotes some of the best ideas out there to deal with these pressing issues. That’s why we (or at least I) voted him into office. It’s very comforting to imagine that America votes in people we oppose because they had a lapse of judgement that year, but it’s usually hard to back up. I heard arguments to this effect about GWB as well, but that didn’t stop him from getting elected twice. He was what America wanted-twice. It’s hard to say that America voted in a democrat for president, senate super-majority, and congressional super-majority and don’t feel like some leftist policies would be a good idea.

      Finally, I think you’re right that “pure trash” was too strong. PURE trash is difficult to come across these days-lies strong up with obviously invalid logic. However, this is a great example of truth, twisted with poor logic, and peppered with controversial (if not obviously false) claims.

      • I commend you for a thorough response. Let me see if I can say what I’d like in a way that is simple, yet concise…

        The ONLY thing the post does (and I mean the ONLY thing) is describe many different facts about Hitler and his rise to power. As an author, I enjoy provoking thought amongst readers; clearly, I have achieved it here.

        If YOU thought it was Obama I was speaking about, so be it. If someone else thought Mussolini, Che, Simon Cowell or Randy Jackson, so be it. If you are upset that so many similarities exist between Hitler and Obama, I’m unable to help; furthermore, you are asking me to defend something I did not propose:

        “However, this is a great example of truth, twisted with poor logic, and peppered with controversial (if not obviously false) claims.”

        While I did indulge you with the Obama comparison, I never once said “Obama’s similarities to Hitler suggest he will eventually become Hitler” (nor would I ever).

        I am glad I was able to provoke some thought.

    • Thanks for the response, Nathan. I’ll try and follow your example and keep my response short. It can be difficult. By the way, I hope I don’t sound too heated on here, I really appreciate the author of a blog sticking up for his thoughts. I wish I could have this kind of back and forth with more people.

      Most of what I have to say boils down to this: if you’ve decided to switch from commentary on current events to historical figure guessing games, that’s fine with me, but in the context of your other articles (as well as the tone of many of the statements compared with many conservative opinions about Mr. Obama) I can’t shake the feeling that you meant for people to see Obama in those statements by the way you worded them. If you had different intentions, please let me know.

      If, however, you did mean to compare Obama to Hitler, I’m still unclear about what you intend readers to take away from this suggestion (since it would be silly to write with no purpose). I made an assumption (Obama’s similarities to Hitler suggest he will eventually become Hitler) which you disagree with. If this is not your intended message, please tell us (the readers) because I think that’s the message many other people would take away from your posting.

      Thanks again! I always appreciate your responses.

      • Daniel,
        I am happy to engage with anyone provided they are respectful, eager to learn, and are respectful of our Constitution; all of which, you seem to be.

        You are correct when you said it would silly to write without purpose. My sole purpose with this article was to cause people to think for themselves. Again, I am not suggesting that if Obama is similar to Hitler he will go on to murder millions.

        I will however suggest that the similarities in their backgrounds could possibly spell serious trouble for America. Here’s why: both Hitler and Obama share similar social ideologies; socialism, progressivism, and big government–all of which oppose our Constitution. Many times the promise of Government care for its citizens serves as a Trojan horse for greater control. Americans most precious gift is freedom.

        Traditionally, Americans have managed to care for themselves better than any government ever could or should. Hitler believed he was superior to the people he governed/controlled; he was wrong. He believed if he forced his ideas on his people, they would eventually see it was for their own good; he was wrong. Hitler also believed that government control over economic matters would simplify and ultimately streamline industry; again, he was wrong.

        To be quite honest, I see ALL the aforementioned ideologies in President Obama, and it scares me. The American people are a truly free people. Socialism has never and will never work (nor do we want it):

        America could use a good deal of fine-tuning, not the foundational overhaul Obama has promised. Do you find it somewhat curious that roughly 500 people should EVER have the right to determine the future of more than 300 million? I do.

        Finally, there has never been a Country like America-the reason? Our Constitution. Everything I see from Obama tells me he does not share the same belief. So far, Obama has tried to implement many of Hitler’s social and economic ideologies in America and they most likely came from everything he has learned/experienced.

      • Thanks for the reply, Nathan. Sorry it took me so long to respond.

        I think the big thing that I see in our discussion is a frustration with liberalism and big government. This is (as I’m sure you know) a big debate to have. I live in Utah, and often find myself arguing with conservatives (it’s all we have out here) but I fancy myself more of a moderate.

        When you talk about the health care bills as Trojan Horses for bigger government control, I think you articulate something that not everyone is able to say that clearly. This is a point on which we may have to disagree on. To me, this falls under the “slippery slope” category, which can be true, but rarely can be proven satisfactorily one way or the other.

        We could discuss the merits of liberalism and conservatism all day, but I would still like to get a handle on your argument. As I see it, the argument that this article tries to make goes something like this.

        1 Hitler and Obama are similar in # relevant ways.
        2 People who are similar to Obama in # relevant ways are _______.
        Therefore, Obama is _________.

        I’m still a bit in the dark as to what fills in those blanks. I think it has to do with being left-leaning, but surely there’s something about Hitler more fearsome than gun registries. I think there’s a connection or relevant detail that I’m missing. Thanks for your responses.


  2. I confess…. I didn’t read past the first line before I hit comments…. and deliberately so….. you know my answer…. begins with an O…

  3. Incidentally, I wrote a whole piece on the “The hypocracy of Hitler as the mirror of Voldemort – if you are a reader of JK Rowling, chew on that for 30 seconds and you have that down.

  4. AND Voldemort supports the public option! 🙂

  5. Daniel VanTassell
    20 February 2010 at 6pm

    You typed up all of that blah blah blah text but it doesn’t change the fact that you immediately thought of Obamao, even if it was in the context of yet another trashy comparison of him and Hitler.

  6. Snore.

    It’s time for republican internment camps.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: