In light of today's auspicious event, the final State of the Union address for President Barack Obama, I decided to save everyone some time, and help a few others from falling asleep as they sit in front of their televisions. I have written my own State of the Union address It is direct, to the point, brutally honest, and written in bullet-fashion to point out that it doesn't take two hours and pages of useless political obfuscation and subterfuge to deliver one of these addresses. Granted, a whole bunch of folks are going to be angry with my conclusions. But I stand by every point I make, and I can back it up with facts, baby. The failures of the Barack Obama Presidency were destined. Obama if anything is a dedicated ideologue whose enmity for our nation's history and traditions was evident from the start. Remember the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's comment, "America's chickens are coming home to roost"? They certainly have, Jeremiah.
State of the Union, 2016:
* In seven years, the National Debt has increased over 100 percent, to at least ten trillion dollars. What exactly have we purchased that came with such a high price tag?
* Persons who have been unemployed for more than two consecutive years and no longer look for work are not included on the monthly labor statistics released by the Obama Administration. Real job creation is anemic. Not once in seven years has this Administration told the American people the truth about our employment situation.
* Race relations in America are the worst that they have been in my lifetime. Our first black president has made no legislative or executive effort to address the problems in the black community, including failing schools, high dropout rates, teenage pregnancies, single parents, rampant crime, proliferation of gangs, etc. Black Americans deserve to live in peaceful communities just as much as the rest of us, but we have seen nothing from this White House in seven years. Interestingly enough, Obama has no trouble finding a cute little black kid to stand nearby while he signs some Executive Action overreach law.
* The Obama Administration has yet to meet a progressive special interest group that it didn't love. The last seven years has seen the authority of the Federal Government used to force Christian bakers to bake for lesbians, not to mention the non-stop attack on anything in school that might make mention of a Creator. Thank goodness Michelle Obama's public school lunch policy is in place, as are those tolerance classes on transgendered folks. By the way, how about the White House bathed in the colors of the Rainbow Flag on the night of the decision by the Supreme Court? That was the day I realized just how much trouble we are in.
* In seven years, we have evolved from the world's only superpower to an emasculated, internally confused, self-loathing mess. It started in 2010, with the disastrous precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, and Hillary Clinton's New Start Treaty with Vladimir Putin, which, for all practical purposes, eliminated our last ballistic deterrent/advantage against Russia. Since then, we've suffered through (stumbled through) the Arab Spring, Benghazi, the Iranian political takeover of Iraq, Russia's annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine, North Korea's never-ending nuclear research and provocations, China's ability to take unilateral action internationally with no repercussions, rampant terrorism all over the globe, Russia shoving us aside in Syria, and the sponsorship of the nuclear treaty with Iran, which is arguably the worst treaty this nation has ever signed.
The real problem, my friends, is not the list above. The real problem is, where do we go from here? First and foremost, we have to ensure that a Democrat does not return to the White House. Given the "State of the Union" in 2016, I am ASTOUNDED that a Democratic Administration in 2016 is even a possibility. And if we manage to get a Republican in the White House, who will it be? I would hope that the average American would recognize that the problems we face are much too dire to trust in the hands of a bullying, misogynist bigot like Donald Trump, but he seems determined to hang around for the long haul. I can imagine him deciding on whether or not to use our Armed Forces as if he were negotiating a deal on a block of Condos in West Palm Beach.
Addressing our serious problems will be a monumental task. I find myself wishing that we had Mitt Romney on contract, because his is the kind of honest business mind that we need to find a way out of this unfathomable national debt crisis. Truly, the debt and our need for real job growth and tax reform, have become issues of national security. As for ISIS and our international entanglements, I'm convinced that re-establishing our backbone is the best place to start. Tear-up that useless treaty with Iran (as if they were going to follow-through with their commitments), and welcome Ukraine into NATO. Flatten all North Korean nuclear research installations, and if you can find Kim Jon-un, drop a 500-lb. bomb in his lap as well. Those are just a few suggestions. Let us know how you feel.......
Showing posts with label Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
When Did Christianity Become So Unfashionable?
Link: Wikipedia on Religion in the United States.
(Before reading the post today, please keep in mind that what I write is solely my opinion. It is not my intention to inflame, or aggravate, any person who holds opposing viewpoints. If you have difficulty with the idea of a pluralistic society and freedom of expression for all, then maybe you should stop reading this and go pick up last month's issue of Mother Jones. Cheers.)
I have always been fascinated by the need to portray every U.S. presidential candidate as a "devout church-going Christian". When I was just a boy, I decided (a bit prematurely, it turns out) that as soon as I was an adult, I would quit going to church because it was so "boring". Then I see these guys, fighting tooth and nail to be president, making a show of their absolute thrill of being in church, at least as long as the camera was rolling. I have to give credit where its due: President Barrack Obama doesn't pretend to be a churchgoer. He is our first president to not attend church (except on those annoying important days, like Christmas and Easter). If there is one thing that really pisses me off, its affectation. I don't believe that people should do things just for appearances sake. If Obama doesn't agree or appreciate what is being expressed on the pulpit, then he should just head to a Golf Course somewhere (no reason to waste the day). I do have a bone to pick with the president when it comes to religion, though. As much as I appreciate his candidness today, where was that candor for the past twenty years? The Obamas were regular attendees at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, and they had the unique opportunity of hearing Reverend Jeremiah Wright speak every Sunday. In fact, Reverend Wright baptized both of Obama's daughters. I'm sure everyone remembers the controversy regarding Reverend Wright and his sermons, which regularly included hateful lectures directed at white people. And we're not referencing just a few sermons. Reverend Wright believes that white people purposely enslave blacks in America, and he considers the USA to be rotten at the core. President Obama claimed that during the almost two decades that he attended Rev. Wright's church, he couldn't recall ever hearing that kind of message. Interestingly enough, others who attended during the same time period, couldn't recall ever NOT hearing that kind of message. So this is my observation: President Obama does not feel the need to attend church regularly now that he's in the oval office. We can assume his daughters will receive whatever religious instruction the Obamas, as parents, believe is appropriate. Obama attended church in Chicago. He doesn't attend anymore, now that he lives in the White House. Let me explain the difference between Chicago and DC.
President Obama is not a closest Muslim, although many Red-Staters chose to believe otherwise. If Obama is a Muslim in hiding, he's in trouble. Remember, Muslims have five obligations that stick around for life. I have yet to see Obama pull out the prayer rug, and say a prayer in the direction of Mecca five times a day (Salat), and I think any diet choices because of Ramadan would have been detected. In fact, I don't believe that Obama is a Christian, either. He might be. Most self-identified Christians no longer attend services on Sunday, so its possible that the Obamas fit into that group. Personally, I don't buy it. If anything, Barrack Obama is religious about his politics. He wants badly to affect change in our society, because he views our country as terribly flawed. He continued to attend Rev. Wright's sermons because the good Rev. Wright wasn't actually preaching about religion. He was demagoguing about social justice and political action. Obama has no problem attending religious events and ceremonies as a speaker, because he can control the message he is delivering. And the line between religion and social justice is fine indeed......if it exists at all.
I have a number of great friends who are Mormon. I also have friends who are Methodists and others who are Lutheran. I recently met an amazing young man named Kevin who I'm convinced will one day be President himself, and Kevin is a regular, church-going Baptist. Just in regular conversation, I learned that each of these Christian denominations are active overseas, working to feed people, build homes and vaccinate children. And I don't believe for one second that their assistance is contingent upon a Baptism Ceremony. I am referring to people who have accepted the truly rewarding obligation of helping others. As a Roman Catholic who has spent a bit of time researching the Holy See, I am aware of the countless outreach efforts that the Catholic Church sponsors. You will find Priests feeding the hungry and treating the wounded in Syria, and you will find Nuns burying the deceased and treating the sick in Ebola-ravaged Sierra Leone. No one has a monopoly on philanthropy. But I find the approach from the U.S. government to be confusing. When George W. Bush was in office, the government went out of its way to assist private charities and aid organizations, regardless of religious affiliation (if any). Bush made it a hallmark of his presidency to encourage young people to return to volunteer work. I'm curious if Peace Corps numbers increased during the Bush years; I'll check and get back to you. In 2015, the Obama Administration continues to encourage people to volunteer resources and time, but anything with a religious tag needs to be avoided. I understand that it can be a slippery slope. If the US government works with one religious charity but choses not to work with another (possibly because it presented fraudulent documents, etc.), then Uncle Sam can be accused of playing "religious favorites". But the avoidance of all things religious goes way beyond charity or the First Amendment. I used to live in DC, and recently I returned to visit a friend. We set aside two days to visit the White House and the Capital Building. In fact, we did the loop; we started at the White House, walked to the Lincoln Memorial, around to the Washington Monument, hopped across 15th Street, up past the Smithsonian and on to the reflecting pool and the Capital Building. I love DC so much and I recommend it for tourists unreservedly. But something has changed about the Capital. Religion has disappeared completely. You won't see a mention anywhere. It was a Sunday, and I couldn't find anyone who appeared to be either on their way, or returning from, church services. I heard no bells ringing, and no historic tours with a religious theme at any of the museums.
I can't say, in good conscience, that religion has become unfashionable. Au Contraire. Its cool to pop into a Hindu Temple and educate yourself a bit, and Buddhism can be fascinating as well. Linguists teaching Arabic are a valuable commodity in DC, as young diplomats at Foggy Bottom and young diplomats in-training at Georgetown University buy up all the Barnes & Noble copies of "The Idiot's Guide to Islam". But Christianity is, like, yesterday's religion: a bit stale, old-fashioned, and boring. Please don't quote me. This is what I assume is going on in the minds of twenty-somethings nowadays. And our president manages to be the most uber-cool of all. he goes on Jimmy Kimmel, he makes out a NCAA basketball bracket, and he no longer goes to church. The truth is, America is changing, and its not Barrack Obama's fault In fact, if you're a Christian, you have to have faith that all of this scary, bad news fits into His plan somehow. Before 2008, the United States still seemed determined to find its own way, and let others follow. Now its 2015, and we are right in step behind Europe, which is exactly where the Progressives like Obama believe we should be -BEHIND Europe, not leading, but following. When I think of the fundamental changes that have occurred in the United States over the past six years, I almost lose my breath. The number of folks who are dependent on Washington DC for everything, from food to wiping their ass, has skyrocketed. And if you try and motivate people to do for themselves, you are a cruel, racist, hater. Our military is shrinking, and veterans continue to have trouble finding appropriate medical care. I have to say that the disappearance of Christianity from everyday life has coincided with a host of bad news. Its high-time we embrace the simple message in that statement, and turn this ship around.
(Before reading the post today, please keep in mind that what I write is solely my opinion. It is not my intention to inflame, or aggravate, any person who holds opposing viewpoints. If you have difficulty with the idea of a pluralistic society and freedom of expression for all, then maybe you should stop reading this and go pick up last month's issue of Mother Jones. Cheers.)
I have always been fascinated by the need to portray every U.S. presidential candidate as a "devout church-going Christian". When I was just a boy, I decided (a bit prematurely, it turns out) that as soon as I was an adult, I would quit going to church because it was so "boring". Then I see these guys, fighting tooth and nail to be president, making a show of their absolute thrill of being in church, at least as long as the camera was rolling. I have to give credit where its due: President Barrack Obama doesn't pretend to be a churchgoer. He is our first president to not attend church (except on those annoying important days, like Christmas and Easter). If there is one thing that really pisses me off, its affectation. I don't believe that people should do things just for appearances sake. If Obama doesn't agree or appreciate what is being expressed on the pulpit, then he should just head to a Golf Course somewhere (no reason to waste the day). I do have a bone to pick with the president when it comes to religion, though. As much as I appreciate his candidness today, where was that candor for the past twenty years? The Obamas were regular attendees at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, and they had the unique opportunity of hearing Reverend Jeremiah Wright speak every Sunday. In fact, Reverend Wright baptized both of Obama's daughters. I'm sure everyone remembers the controversy regarding Reverend Wright and his sermons, which regularly included hateful lectures directed at white people. And we're not referencing just a few sermons. Reverend Wright believes that white people purposely enslave blacks in America, and he considers the USA to be rotten at the core. President Obama claimed that during the almost two decades that he attended Rev. Wright's church, he couldn't recall ever hearing that kind of message. Interestingly enough, others who attended during the same time period, couldn't recall ever NOT hearing that kind of message. So this is my observation: President Obama does not feel the need to attend church regularly now that he's in the oval office. We can assume his daughters will receive whatever religious instruction the Obamas, as parents, believe is appropriate. Obama attended church in Chicago. He doesn't attend anymore, now that he lives in the White House. Let me explain the difference between Chicago and DC.
President Obama is not a closest Muslim, although many Red-Staters chose to believe otherwise. If Obama is a Muslim in hiding, he's in trouble. Remember, Muslims have five obligations that stick around for life. I have yet to see Obama pull out the prayer rug, and say a prayer in the direction of Mecca five times a day (Salat), and I think any diet choices because of Ramadan would have been detected. In fact, I don't believe that Obama is a Christian, either. He might be. Most self-identified Christians no longer attend services on Sunday, so its possible that the Obamas fit into that group. Personally, I don't buy it. If anything, Barrack Obama is religious about his politics. He wants badly to affect change in our society, because he views our country as terribly flawed. He continued to attend Rev. Wright's sermons because the good Rev. Wright wasn't actually preaching about religion. He was demagoguing about social justice and political action. Obama has no problem attending religious events and ceremonies as a speaker, because he can control the message he is delivering. And the line between religion and social justice is fine indeed......if it exists at all.
I have a number of great friends who are Mormon. I also have friends who are Methodists and others who are Lutheran. I recently met an amazing young man named Kevin who I'm convinced will one day be President himself, and Kevin is a regular, church-going Baptist. Just in regular conversation, I learned that each of these Christian denominations are active overseas, working to feed people, build homes and vaccinate children. And I don't believe for one second that their assistance is contingent upon a Baptism Ceremony. I am referring to people who have accepted the truly rewarding obligation of helping others. As a Roman Catholic who has spent a bit of time researching the Holy See, I am aware of the countless outreach efforts that the Catholic Church sponsors. You will find Priests feeding the hungry and treating the wounded in Syria, and you will find Nuns burying the deceased and treating the sick in Ebola-ravaged Sierra Leone. No one has a monopoly on philanthropy. But I find the approach from the U.S. government to be confusing. When George W. Bush was in office, the government went out of its way to assist private charities and aid organizations, regardless of religious affiliation (if any). Bush made it a hallmark of his presidency to encourage young people to return to volunteer work. I'm curious if Peace Corps numbers increased during the Bush years; I'll check and get back to you. In 2015, the Obama Administration continues to encourage people to volunteer resources and time, but anything with a religious tag needs to be avoided. I understand that it can be a slippery slope. If the US government works with one religious charity but choses not to work with another (possibly because it presented fraudulent documents, etc.), then Uncle Sam can be accused of playing "religious favorites". But the avoidance of all things religious goes way beyond charity or the First Amendment. I used to live in DC, and recently I returned to visit a friend. We set aside two days to visit the White House and the Capital Building. In fact, we did the loop; we started at the White House, walked to the Lincoln Memorial, around to the Washington Monument, hopped across 15th Street, up past the Smithsonian and on to the reflecting pool and the Capital Building. I love DC so much and I recommend it for tourists unreservedly. But something has changed about the Capital. Religion has disappeared completely. You won't see a mention anywhere. It was a Sunday, and I couldn't find anyone who appeared to be either on their way, or returning from, church services. I heard no bells ringing, and no historic tours with a religious theme at any of the museums.
I can't say, in good conscience, that religion has become unfashionable. Au Contraire. Its cool to pop into a Hindu Temple and educate yourself a bit, and Buddhism can be fascinating as well. Linguists teaching Arabic are a valuable commodity in DC, as young diplomats at Foggy Bottom and young diplomats in-training at Georgetown University buy up all the Barnes & Noble copies of "The Idiot's Guide to Islam". But Christianity is, like, yesterday's religion: a bit stale, old-fashioned, and boring. Please don't quote me. This is what I assume is going on in the minds of twenty-somethings nowadays. And our president manages to be the most uber-cool of all. he goes on Jimmy Kimmel, he makes out a NCAA basketball bracket, and he no longer goes to church. The truth is, America is changing, and its not Barrack Obama's fault In fact, if you're a Christian, you have to have faith that all of this scary, bad news fits into His plan somehow. Before 2008, the United States still seemed determined to find its own way, and let others follow. Now its 2015, and we are right in step behind Europe, which is exactly where the Progressives like Obama believe we should be -BEHIND Europe, not leading, but following. When I think of the fundamental changes that have occurred in the United States over the past six years, I almost lose my breath. The number of folks who are dependent on Washington DC for everything, from food to wiping their ass, has skyrocketed. And if you try and motivate people to do for themselves, you are a cruel, racist, hater. Our military is shrinking, and veterans continue to have trouble finding appropriate medical care. I have to say that the disappearance of Christianity from everyday life has coincided with a host of bad news. Its high-time we embrace the simple message in that statement, and turn this ship around.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)