Twitter and email info

Thursday, February 26, 2015

Rudy Giuliani's comments...too abrasive and disrespectful for a public leader?

Links: A. Giuliani's Comments About President Obama
           B. Opposition to Giuliani

Well, we should've seen this one coming.  From 2000 until 2008, politics in the United States suffered through an infusion of hatred and personal vitriol that was bound to set a precedent.
Its the same point I make to defender's of President Obama's use of Executive Authority:  if you let a poisonous snake loose in a small room with you and your enemy, chances are, if you handled the release properly, that your opponent is going to get bit.  But after he's finished with your enemy, then that same snake is coming for you.  The accusations hurled at president Bush before, during, and after Operation Enduring Freedom, sit clearly in my memory.  What is the worst accusation to toss at someone?  I think "babykiller, murderer" etc. rise to the top of the list, but some of the more traditional names, like "misongynist, homophobe, and racist" still pack a punch.  President George W. Bush was called these names on a regular basis, not to mention "despot, and election thief".  The comments that bothered me the most were the accusations of "murderer".  If President Bush was a murderer, then by proxy, so were our troops in the field.  Some of the comments made, in particular by members of the Black Congressional Caucus, crippled the tone of civility in Washington DC.  Four days ago, Rudy Giuliani, in a speech at a private fund-raiser, opined that President Barrack Obama did not love the United States.  When he was approached later and asked about his comments, he didn't hide or back away; he didn't use semantic games about the true meaning of certain words.  He frankly and honestly repeated his original opinion.  And since then, he has been castigated in a worthy example of typical liberal hypocrisy. 

When Howard Dean, or Bill Maher, or Debbie Schultz-Wasserman decide to spew personal insults, we must have thicker skin, and appreciate their candor.  Rudy Giuliani didn't insult anyone, unless you believe that saying someone doesn't love their country is an insult.  And that, my friends, is a matter of opinion.  I know Americans who are proud of their lack of love for the United States and its history and traditions.  During the Iraq War, we watched a decent-sized group of protesters set up shop outside of President Bush's Ranch, and chant all day long about the evilness of "imperialist Amerika".  And what about that nasty, filthy, lazy, stoned mobbed of freaks that called themselves the "Occupy Wall Street" movement; did you listen to their diatribe?  The United States was barely, just barely less offensive than Nazi Germany on their list of bad guys.  Lets not forget that many on the Left, including some members of Congress who are feigning "shock", supported this gathering of human filth.  Since we do live in a free society, and our young men and women continue to this very moment to put their lives at risk to defend our freedom to have differing opinions, its legal to hate the United States.  And that particular protection of the law extends to the protesters in New York City.  It extends to me, and to the office of the President as well.

Personally, I would not have made such a comment at an event with so much media coverage.  I understand that he's entitled to express his opinion, but why piss off people in that particular time?  I don't believe that the venue was an ideal place for someone of Giuliani's stature to make that controversial of a comment.  But I'm probably about to make the same mistake.  I agree with Giuliani; I don't believe that President Barrack Obama loves the United States of America, at least not the USA of which I am familiar.  I don't make that comment to piss off people, and I'm happy to explain myself (another problem of Giuliani's: for a former successful Prosecutor, his seems to have completely lost the ability to make a convincing argument).  I believe that when President Obama creates a mental image of the United States, it is dominated by visions of dead American-Indians and Reservations, unlimited and ecologically crippling industrial complexes, Japanese-Americans in camps during World War II, Africans being chained and inhumanely transported to North America to be slave labor, marches of the Civil Rights Era, and efforts by Segregationists to deny racial equality.  He would be correct to include these images, as long as he was also including the advances and discoveries in transportation and farming, the abolition of slavery, the Equal Rights Amendment, the sacrifices of U.S. soldiers in two costly World Wars, the inventions of the automobile, airplane, television, radio and incubator, Satellite technology, the creation of president Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations and the sponsorship of the United Nations, landing on the Moon, microchip research, the rebuilding of Europe and Asia following the World Wars, and the creation of a Constitution that still to this day, is the most important representative legislation that the world has yet seen.  No doubt, I've excluded many unpleasant and shameful events that were caused or defended by one U.S. government or another (the USS Maine comes to mind, as do the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments), just as I've skipped over the greater part of contributions to society that were delivered by the United States and U.S. citizens.  But its not my job to record either list; there are plenty of academics who never tire of just such work.

I believe that President Obama strongly supports monumental changes to our government, our social structure, and our foreign affairs.  In my opinion, President Obama sees the current status quo, the existing government structure, organizations, agencies, and our military history of intervention in support of Democracy, to be the reason why equality and racism still exist in the United States.  He believes that a wholesale change is needed, not just in attitude but in the way we go about our business.  Obama sees the United States as an international bully, determined to stamp our brand of political and social advancement onto the Third World.  This was the argument of the hippy, anti-war, counter-culture movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and also happens to be the environment in which Obama was raised.  His parents were both quite intelligent and dedicated; they were also proud Socialists.  As a teenager, when Obama wasn't getting stoned, he was exposed to a regular conveyor belt of academic, anti-American elitist types, including Assata Shakur and Bill Ayers.  No doubt he became familiar with his father's political manifesto, which reads like a guide to violent revolution like nobody's business.  I am mystified as to how this country twice elected to the Presidency someone with so many unanswered questions and affiliations.  To be frank, we also voted for someone whose only job experience was as a "community organizer", a lecturer, and a politicians.  The nation was suffering from serious Bush-fatigue.  Even the most hardened Red Stater was tired of looking at Bush's shit-eating grin. 

I use the words "shocked", and "mystified", and "surprised", but at the end of the day, it takes something special to really leave me scratching my head.  Reverend Jeremiah Wright was more than special.  Private citizen Obama was a member of Reverend Wright's Chicago congregation.  Illinois State Senator Obama was a member of Wright's congregation, as was Barrack Obama, father of two beautiful little girls, a member of Wright's church.  The Obama's had their children baptized by Reverend Wright.  We've all heard the sermons, including the "God Damn the United States" comment, which was repeated on a number of occasions.  During his tenure as Reverend, Wright regularly politicized the pulpit to a degree seldom seen in a basically secularized nation.  Every sermon was connected in some way to the idea that white people continued to enslave and brutalize the African American community.  The Police Department is racist, and the local, state and federal governments are all designed to keep the Black man without hope or opportunity.  I'm repeating some of the less-profane comments made by Reverend Wright.  And all the while, barrack Obama continued to attend service with his wife and two children.  I find it hard to believe that anyone would expose their children to such garbage, but they Obamas came back, almost regularly but often enough to be considered members of the congregation.  When the story broke in the media, all Obama had to say was that he didn't pay attention when Wright started preaching about race issues, and that either he respectfully disagreed with Wright, or that he didn't notice any of the offensive rhetoric.  All I wanted was for Obama to admit that he was present, but that he renounced Wright's inflammatory and racist comments.  I waited in vain.

Rudy Giuliani is being labeled a racist in many circles because of his comments.  In Europe in particular, one does not speak ill of Barrack Obama.  Any criticism is a clear indication of latent racist tendencies.  Rudy Giuliani's career is a clear indicator that the man does not differentiate by race.  But legitimate criticisms of the Obama Administration usually end up in this corner of the boxing ring; its the usual location for KOs.  If a criticism or an unfavorable portrayal of Obama survives the first few attempts by the sycophants and the main stream media to render them inert, then racist card is played.  Obama has encouraged this type of labeling, and the result is that race relations in the United States are at their worst point since the 1960s. 

In this post, I've dropped the gauntlet on the Obama Administration.  I really don't like to inject partisan politics into the blog.  No doubt, that is exactly what I have done with this post.  I avoid getting political because I've learned that my chance of changing someone's opinions regarding politics are basically zero-to-none.  This generation of Americans does not like to admit being wrong; a change in political perspective is exactly that.  An admission that you made a mistake, but that now you see things more clearly.  In my lifetime, people were more comfortable with accepting a mistake in the voting booth.  I remember once watching Reverend Pat Robertson on a news broadcast at McDonald's, waiting for my number to be called, when the stranger standing next to me said, "and to think I voted for that religious bigot.  I'm so glad he didn't win (the nomination)".  I know a number of folks who admit that their vote for Ross Perot, who never had a legitimate hope of winning, was a mistake.  And how many Jimmy Carter voters regret their decision? But in 2015, admitting that you made a bad political decision is considered an indication of ignorance. So people will stick to their choices until the bitter end, looking for any wild, hair-brained conspiracy theory to explain why their candidate was busted "in flagrante delicto" with a transsexual prostitute in the bushes of Central Park.  People don't want to admit that maybe Obama was not the best choice (in either instance).  Another huge issue is the concern regarding the legacy of the Office of the Presidency.  Almost every American, especially yours truly, wanted the first African-American President to be a success.  The reality is quite different, unfortunately.  Our economy is wheezing in fits and starts, our employment numbers are way past the point of alarm, we've doubled the national debt in six years and have nothing to show for it, who knows what will become of Obamacare, our veterans are treated disgracefully by their own government, and our foreign policy, on a good day, is rudderless.  The last six years have not been a success, but it has about as much to do with President Obama's skin color as it does with Rudy Giuliani's shiny bald head: not a damn thing.  Barrack Obama is an extremely intelligent, hard-working man who obviously adores his family.  I just believe, like Rudy Giuliani, that he doesn't love the United States as it is today.

No comments:

Post a Comment