The U.N. Talk and Obama's Vision

I listened to Obama talk at the U.N. on radio and T.V. And I was impressed with his commitment to serve and represent American interests. But, he called for all nations to step forward in helping America fulfill the responsibility toward many social issues. I was glad that we were not going to be footing the whole bill.

Although he gave a great speech and many were positive in their reviews, I am a little wary of Lybian and Iranian interests. They did not seem to be interested in applauding our president during his speech, although Kadafi did acknowledge Obama's speech when he took the "stage".

I just wonder how much power can be distributed to the likes of these and still hold to democratic ideals? It doesn't seem that those who do not give their own countries a democratic type of government would lend an ear to ideals of "life and liberty".

China seemed from some accounts of their people to be open to taking a center stage place in the power re-distribution. America isn't to be the super-power anymore? Is this because we owe so many people and are really a "slave nation" today? But, the rhetoric was strongly focused toward a unified "one world".

On NPR there was a program taking calls to get feed-back worldwide on the speeches. One lady asked who would be making the ultimate decisions concerning a nation if a "one world governemt came into being. This is an important question, as it reveals that power will not be broad-based. The commentator answered that, of course, the decisions would be made by the
monied". Will the "monied" be a nation, like China, or will the "monied" be a group of people? These are pertinent questions in understanding what we can expect in the future in regards to our very "way of life".

I imagine there is little we can do globally, but we can do something nationally and I hope we will. The "Tea Parties" are a start and I think that if enough people raise their voices, then certainly someone will hear. We must try and not give up hope for our nation's recovery.

I will wait now and see if Obama does what he says for Amercian interests. And how much he upholds the values of human freedom and dignity to choose our own destinies. This is mandantory if we are to live in the future as free people.

Bad Attitudes, Good Attitudes in the Media and Healthcare

I have to admit that I haven't been engaged with the discussion on healthcare, as I am not open to government taking over that part of my life, no matter what their "greater good" arguments are. I recognize that my husband's employer, as well as many other employer's are probably most interested in this discussion, as many foot much of the bill. But, I have listened to some of the discussion. What stikes me is the press!

We need a Free Press to remain a Free Society. Without a free press, we are headed for an authoritarianism that will subvert any choice that the individual may want. The taking over of our liberties is done incrementally and without much notice, unless one is aware. The press is aware of what is happening, if they will 'take a step back for ideological commitments and do their job responsibly. The government is held accountable by the press and is the greatest assest, if sometimes the only way "we, the people" are informed! I love to see a "critical press". But, most of the time the press holds a double standard when it comes to Republican and Democratic leaders.

I caught a glimpse of change when one of the press's most prestigous and well-known asked a question of Obama's press secretary. He tried to delay answering the question until the end of the press conference. Why? Was it because he hoped that the question would not be televised, or that he had time to "think" about how to finagle out of directly answering the question? Was the question so direct and critical that he was "taken aback"?

Whatever the reason of his request for delay, he was held accountable to the press! In fact, the press insisted that the question be answered, then and there. And it was suggested that the press was being controlled! I was very elated to see such courage, such critical thinking, such responsibility toward the American people and one's job!

Was this a bad and disrespectful attitude toward those in authority? Or was this a Good Attitude because the press was not being held hostage to the adminstration's desires about healthcare?

Is this adminstration having an open dialogue with the American people about the real problems, and allowing the population to engage, be informed and educated, as well, as being honest about the pros and cons of both sides of the issue? I don't think so.

I "ran upon" a town hall meeting when flipping through the channels last night, while babysitting. The moderator asserted that Obama had not been informed beforehand about any question that was forthcoming. He was answering honestly and directly. The first question was about why America wouldn't want a one payer insurance policy, meaning that the government underwrites all of everyone's healthcare. Obama did not answer with pros and cons, but only with the pros concerning government take-over of everyone's healthcare.It seemed to me that it was a 'prepared answer' to a specifically focused question. Obama didn't show any critical thinking skills at all.

Then, a woman stood up and said she hoped she could ask a question without crying...she gave her "story" and the public was moved, Obama gave her a hug and reassurance that "government would be there"! I was not moved and was incredulous at a Town Hall meeting of our president, the most powerful of the free world, having an"Oprah-like" "feel". I turned off the TV. I couldn't bear how manipulative the whole scene seemed.

I am not negating this woman's real crisis, if it is real. But, I am negating what seems to be a "play for reality TV" when it comes to our policy decisions. All it takes for authoritariansm to take hold of our government is for there to be no accountability. The "consent of the governed" is being taken incrementally, subtly, and without any critical thinking on the part of the American people!

Did the press have a "bad attitude" toward the press secretary by "not being nice" in his request of denying an anwer to a direct question? or was the press really in "good behavior" according to their responsibility toward the American people? I think it is obvious!

Just Thinking About....Torture

On Richard Beck's blog site, he is talking about tortue. Is torture right or wrong, and how do we understand our position?

Just recently it has been discussed whether the Bush adminstration should be held accountable to the torture of suspected criminals. The CIA was absolved, but certain lawyers who represented the Bush adminstration may be held accountable to providing a legal means to torture these suspects.

Again, the issue of sovereignty and law, is the "problem". Is our country a sovereign over its interests where it concerns national security? Or is universal human rights as defended by international interests of more importance? Where do self interests protect freedoms, and where do they deter international "peace"? Where do ignoring rights of individual suspects undermine human rights? And where does America have a right to defend its security and help the world defend freedom abroad, while sometimes furthering injustice in specific situations? This is certainly an imperfect and complex world.

Obama has released certain CIA tactics or torture, disregarding CIA concerns of releasing this "classifed" information. Obama is making a heroic attempt at internationalizing our coutnry.

But, what happens to the "law" if there is no balance of power? If Obama suceeds in prosecuting those who differ with him in interpreting the law, while keeping the "other voices' silent in the Congress and the media, suppressing information to the people. America will be changed without most of us even being aware!

I have written about my concerns of the U.N. before on this blog site. There is an attempt to give developing nations more of a voice. But, if these countries are barbaric in their understanding of government, then at what costs will our world pay? Those who think in terms of tribes, and people groups have not developed the individual's identity so that education and the market, and the econcomies can become what America's has been. Those who think in tribalistic ways are loyal to religious conviction. And when religious conviction is understood to be involved in the political realm, then, the world will be "at war" because politicized religion is a danger, as history has often illustrated!

I am afraid that just as in any organizational structure, there have to be those that are "foot soldiers" to carry out the vision or plan of the adminstration or leadership. If the world is one big organization, and everyone is to have equal opportunity, then who are the "foot soldiers" (nations that are to be the "underdogs")? And how is leadership to be decided upon and how are the laws against neopotism to be upheld? And how is leadership to be accountable? ETC. There are many kinks in the garment without us understanding the garments "wash and wear" directions. What if the garment "shrinks", or "becomes stretched beyond fitting for its purpose"? These are real economic, political, governmental, leadership questions.

Hopefully, most of us will not live in a tortuous situation without recourse, or resolution, while the ship is sailing on open waters, with little or no rudder and no map in view!

Connections That Make One Wonder....

We are here in D.C. again, and while driving back from work my husband heard on a local station that Obama was to appoint a man for "intelligence analyst" that had connections to Saudi Arabia. Intelligence, our intelligence, could be undermined, when conflicts of interest, such as this exists.

Maybe Obama doesn't think that these "new friends" pose a threat to our security, but how can there not be a conflict of interest, when it comes to "connections" ? Will Muslims who defend their own with their very lives, at the costs of the "infidel's life" to be trusted with our intelligence? Maybe this is the point, we should be making friends with those who have connections to our political "enemies". Then, our "new friends" can have the conflict, in choosing to support us, and not, them. And, perhaps, the hope is that these "new friends" can vouch for us, defend our reputation to the "enemy", so that we can live in peace and security and not fear the amassing of WMD. But, can we trust those whose vision, and purpose is political control of the whole earth, under Shairia law? I am glad that Gert Wilders was allowed to come to show his film about Islam to Congress just recently.

I am, of course, speculating, but when one looks at the Obama cabinet, it looks like a re-creation of the Clintion cabinet, minus Janet Reno. Remember Reno? What about Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill? I remember what was talked about in the Washington Times, when the Bush cabinet moved into the White House. The place was a disaster. There seemed to be little respect toward our government and its property.

Remember the Lincolm bedroom? And the pictures taken of Clinton with drug lords, criminals other questionables? What about the illegal immigrants that were hoarded into immigration offices to be "nationalized" before the election? Many were criminals.

It is so ironic that Obama can write a letter to Russia requesting their help with Iran, if we take out the missile defense in Poland and yet, Rush Limbaugh can make a statement about his disagreement with the philosophy of this adminstration and not hear the end of it from the media. Have we heard about the letter to Russia:? Fortunately, we were in the car, when the press conference with George Brown was given and the press questioned the president on the letter, and we heard a comment about it.

Today's speech talked about supporting small businesses, and checking over-spending in government contracts. This is a good idea. So, is he wanting the people who are contracted by government to cut their pay, and yet, the earmarks, which he promised to resist, are being approved for "Congress" and other special interests groups? I have a sick feeling that "change is happening" to our country and her people will be the last to know what that change really means until it is too late.

Why are there conference calls every morning with the media? Why has the census "headquarters' moved into the White House? Is the government to be run from the top down? Is this what Big Government means, that top down governing will distribute to community "improvements"?

The budget is "last year's business", we are told, but it still affects the American people, in the long run. And it affects them not when they are 'on top" but on the bottom". Perhaps this is to be a "lesson" of "compassion" for those less fortunate. But, lessons are hard to learn when the anger hinders the hearing. We are not used to being "told what to do", but "nanny state" will do so and gladly.

Fabian Socialism and the Fight for American Ideals

I was just looking up Fabian Socialism tonight. You should look it up, it is alarming! Fabian socialists believe in a "soft" revolution of our economic and political systems, which is happening right before our eyes. The FS mantra is "selflessness", in the name of social justice and for the 'common good". I agree that most of us in the West need to learn to defer, at times, but not lay over and die! Individuality, choice, freedom and justice are not just terms that have no meaning for the "common", but was used to protect the "common". That is the basis of our democracy. That concept of protection of the common is changing. Paternalism is alive and well. Welcome to the world of the Fabian socialist!

There was one commentary, when I googled, on Obama that was insightful and informative, of his tactics. This person was brought up by a grandfather who was a Fabian socialist. He will and is playing on propagandizing the "public good" . He inherited $700 billion in assests in our banks. And he wants to herald in health care, which he will not do outright, as that would be too blatant of the ultimate goal, complete and total take-over of the health care industry. It will be done by starving the private sector. No business can survive without incentives, which are benefits for staying in business. If government makes so many demands upon business, then motivation, morale, and money all suffer.

Healthcare is only one area of government control. We already have partial nationalization of our banking industry. They want to enlarge big government and make people dependent on government and not take self-responsibility.

I am gravely concerned, as many are not even aware of what is happening, but when they become aware, I am afraid it will be too late. Fabian Socialism is an elitist way of breeding co-operation of the peasant class.

Human rights will no longer be forefront and center, as it will be deemed special priviledge for those who are educated beyond the "common". And the dangerous aspect about all of it is that elitism was the rationale for Hitler to do "away" with the "inferior person". Inferior persons cease to have rights, because they don't measure up to the standard of elitism.

Fabian Socialist are the "Third Way" to attain approval from those whose lives will ultimately depend upon them. Fabian socialist are deemed to be the social engineers, the revolutionaries in reformer's clothing. Fabian Socialist will breed unity around our "common crisis", defend the need to do "major surgury" on our economy, then call for sacrifice for the "common good", while wielding the power of the media to control and educate the public "for their own sake" and for the interests of the nation. We see all of this happening before our eyes.

This is nothing other than public economic scourging. And the demise of our great nation will be the result.

Obama's Plan Is Surprised

Obama promised a more unified dialogue across party lines. But, this has not happened. In fact, today's resignation of the nominee of Department of Commerce, a Republican, I'm sure was a blow. He could not agree to the stimulus package, is what he said.

But, it was reported that the cenesus, which is supposed to be done by civil servants, to represent a "fair" representation of "reality" in America, has been moved to the White House! Is this a way to promote a Propagandized census, to justify spending in certain ways or areas? It does look suspcious, but should we be surprised?

Whether the census will be used for such purposes, the "low expectation" of the stumulus package and our economic recovery is being promoted by the media. Setting low expectations is a nice political move, as then we cannot be disappointed, no matter what. And the Mr. Nice Guys in Congress will come out looking like their stimulus package doled out the taxpayer money in "good order". And those who happened to benefit will be even more pleased...

Obama called for a cease fire to partisan rivalry, but how is this to be, unless he expects the Republicans to wholesale sacrifice all their scruples, values and "world-view" about economics? Politics rules the world in every area, so beware, you , naive.... And politics is about might, and fight and dirt.

Political Meets Moral

Political systems work in the real world where lives are really impacted for good or ill. In the past, much suffering has resulted from ethnocentrism. Ethnic cleansing has a rough history, but is real policy in some segments of political thinking...

Governments are ruled by an elite. Elitism is not meant as a derogatory label, unless the elite have a moral depravity that hinders their vision of inclusion. But, where elite meets power, with no accountablity, there is self-interest, at the costs of others and much damage to all. Our nation does not allow such power, at least in theory, and it has recently illustrated our ideals of inclusion in our president's election.

The Church has understood itself through an ethnocentric understanding. Besides understanding Jesus, as the Jewish Messiah, she has used other exclusive terms to bring about a "separatist" mentality, i.e. "the remnant", "the chosen", "the called", "the elect", "the Bride of Christ", "the Chosen Nation", "God's people", etc., etc.

This ethnocentric orientation has wrought on its heels many times, an attitude of priviledge, or superiority. I find that this is nothing less than ego managment, which is nothing more than self-agrandizement.

Obama's presidency means that we ALL are a people, which does not limit one's understanding to "saved and unsaved", but human. Morality means that all of us are chosen. All of us are important, and All of us need the right to be human, which is what human rights and international law is all about.

An Applause for America

John McCain lost last night and he, in characteristic fashion, graciously applauded Obama's presidency. In like matter, I would like to applaud our form of government and the ideals that our government represents.

Many across the world have watched to see if how America's ideals would play out in our presidental decision. The American ideal of equality has won the day with the election of the first African American. And I am proud that this ideal has won. It seemed to me that many African Americans were emotionally touched by this outcome. One does not have to question why this may be. Slavery is not representative of the American conviction of individual freedom or equality and choice. African Americans have lived with the stigma of slavery and discrimination, whether self-imposed or not, and it has affected their self-perception.

Now, the world knows that we mean business when it comes to our ideals of freedom and justice for all, at least within our own borders. Let's see how Obama and his cabinet envision these ideals on a global scale.

The Education My Daughter Gave Me On YouTube!

This afternoon my oldest son, his girlfriend, and my daughter sat around our table discussing the political decisions that are facing us on Tuesday. The coversation came around to Obama and what he stood for. My daughter had happened upon two YouTube videos of Obama at campaign rallies and was relaying the information to us at the table. I could not believe my ears, so I asked her to inform me through my eyes!

She immediately got our computor and pulled up a YouTube video of Obama making fun of a heckler and cutting his question of by saying "Blah, Blah Blah...""You can vote for someone else", etc. This was on the heels of my learning last week about Obama dismissing some of the media travelling with his campaign, as they were pro-McCain!!! And this is America?

Obama wants a civilian military police. And he is portraying what our America may become under his "dictatorship"(especially, if the Democrats hold the reigns of power in Congress). He has investigated Joe the Plumber, one newswoman's husband, and some others. No doubt there are those that we don't (and won't) know about. This is quite disturbing that the Democrats who were outraged over Guantanomo Bay situation, are looking the other way when it comes to the abuse of power on the campaign trail. Are they so afraid of Obama's power that they fear speaking out? Do none of them care enough about our freedoms? Do none have the courage to go against their party when principle is of primary importance?

John McCain took the high road when he could have gotten out of prison, by denying some of his basic commitments to his country. But, he did not. Which candidate do we really think has the country's best interest at heart? Obama certainly wants change, but it is systemic change of our cultural values of freedom. We must not be so blind and focused on temporary promises that we forget the future of American ideals!

A Lawsuit States That Obama Was Born in Kenya, Disqualifiying Him for President

Many of us are tired of the demonization in this presidential race. But, this was news that is not something that should be disregarded, as it concerns our Constitution. In light of other things said about change and bringing about a different type of governing, this is an important item of news...

It was reported in the Washington Times that a Pennsylvania lawyer and Democratic activist has filed a lawsuit against Obama, on September 15th and after the 30 day request of admissions either by objection or response, there has been no acknowledgment. Therefore, it is being released as an admittance that the lawsuit is true and requesting that Obama step down from seeking the presidency.

The lawsuit states that Obama was born in Kenya. A meeting was held to discuss who might replace the candidate if he is disqualified for president. Wouldn't that be interesting especially in light of A.C.O.R.N.

O.K., So I Am A Slow Learner About A.C.O.R.N.

Our "favorite" Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama, has long term ties to A.C.O.R.N.

Obama became affiliated with this community organization, which helps distribute federal funds and ransom monies from big corporations, to poorer communities. They bring relief to the poor in housing, educational material, minimum wage reform and welfare reform. But, they also priviledge themselves.

Obama pressured banks to loan at subprime rates and this was how we begun to slide into this mess of a bail-out. It was reported that until monies that were allocated to A.C.O.R.N. were taken out of the bill, Republicans resisted voting for the bail-out. More, I'm sure is to come.

Because there is no governmental oversight in the distribution of these federal monies, almost 1 million was pocketed by the brother of the founder in 1999 and 2000, but everyone looked the other way, until a whistleblower in 2008!

They have also been involved with voter fraud. In Washington, 1800 voters were registered and only 6 were valid registrations. A couple of the voter registrators said that they sat in the library looking over records and recording the names making up the social security numbers. One said he sat at home and smoked "pot", while he thought up names!!!

This organization has been defended as a defender of just communities!

Whoever might read this blog, please goggle A.C.O.R.N. and find out what type of person is running for the White House!

China and Wall Street

Tonight, as most of you have heard, Congress could not come to terms with an agreement on the bail-out of Wall Street.
It disturbs me that this crisis is being politicized. But, it is an election year...just a few days short of election day.
McCain intially bowed out of the debate Friday so that he could help with this crisis. Obama's camp claims that they were not fully informed of this matter and said they were going to be at the debate. Later, it was reported that McCain was having second thoughts and might show up after all.
I could see that the Democrats were playing alongside a president they have been highly criticizing, while the Republicans wouldn't touch this legislation with a ten foot pole. Isn't it hypocritcal of the Democrats to criticize the Republicans for being in the same party as Bush and go so far as to try to identify the party with Bush. And here they are playing along...what do they really think about Bush and his policies? Is it that the Democrats see a political advantage in painting a picture of cooperation with the president so that our economy will not "go under".
The Republicans may not know what to do, as if they go along and support the legislation, they will be painted as supporting big business. And if the plan fails for some reason then they will hold the bucket to mop it all up. The Republicans' resistance to come to an agreement could be painted as deadlock and they will be blamed. So, they will be damned if they do, and damned if they don't. I feel sorry that his has happened at a time when the election is so close.
The Republicans are being cautious, I believe. I agree that we should move very slowly before implementing a plan that is half shod and so expensive with no garuantees that the plan will be sufficient long term.

While our domestic world is struggling for a solution, the Chinese are now sending up space-craft with our technology. Many were on the news talking about the danger of their espionage to our country's security. Several have been convicted of selling or giving our secrets away. What will we be seeing in our near future? We are oblivious to our need to maintain secure borders, and ignore the the signs of domestic crisis. How much more do we need to experience before we understand the implications of our choices and our disregard and disrepect for our nation?

Obama's Economic Big Shots

Tonight, I heard that Obama's economic advisors were big whigs at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Obama gets second to Chris Dodd and Clinton with some of the big companies that just went bankrupt. What is that all about? The taxpayer will not only have to pay for the bail-outs, but also be taxed, as Joe Biden says to "be patriotic". Of course, the promise is that the tax will only apply to the wealthy. Does that mean them? Joe Biden himself made in the double digit millions and blessed charity with 3 thousand....

Is Obama Loosing It?

I have to admit that I admired Obama's style, his rhetoric at first, but recently, he has been loosing more than poll numbers. He seems defensive these days.



I watched O'Reily's interview with Obama tonight, after first viewing him last Thursday, right before McCain and Palin spoke.



First, I was upset by his interview being aired the day of McCain's acceptance of his party's nomination! I couldn't believe that he would stoop to such lengths to undermine McCain. But, I hadn't heard at first that it was O'Reily's political ploy. Okay, maybe I am reading into his motivation, but, it seems that O'Reily did not give Obama another option. Thursday was the only day available. This says two things to me, First, that Obama is desparate to get coverage after Palin's "stardom", even if it could 'look bad" by being aired the same day as McCain's speech.



Secondly, it says that O'Reily and the Republicans have more consideration for protocol than Obama. Why would I say this? Because, O'Reily respected the RNC by not airing the whole interview and undercutting coverage of the RNC....And, the Republicans had laid low the first part of their convention week because of the hurricane. Protocol is an important attribute of a president.



The interview itself revealed that Obama couldn't name one conservative "friend" that he had worked with...And it showed a video of Obama himself saying in 2004, that he would not have enough experience to run for the White House.



More coverage showed Obama's attacks and continual obessession with Palin. He made a joke about pigs wearing lipstick, which I thought was really beyond the pale. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems recently that Obama has lost his charisma.



By the way, where is Joe Biden? I haven't seen or heard from him since the DNC!

Obama, Foreign Policy, and Trust

I do like to trust people, but find it hard in this day and age. Last night's speech by Guilliani gave me food for thought concerning Obama's ability to meet presidential standards....in foreign policy. Guilliani said when Obama was asked about Russian invasion of Georgia, he said he'd appeal to the U.N. Russia has veto power in the U.N. Did Obama not know this?

While in D.C. this past year, we went to hear John Bolton at the American Enterprise Institute. No matter what you might think about Bolton, he does have foreign policy experience. He stated that there was no balance of power for the U.N. nor any power over non-profits (I'm probably summerizing him)...This is concerning for me, too. Because of the globalized market, many may take advantage of the protections to non-profits. Business interests disguised as charities is probably not new....

Based on what I learned from Bolton, I have two concerns and they play across both canidates. For Obama, his lack of expertise in foreign policy in a globalized world disconcerts me, especially when he wants to appeal to an outside authrity that has no "accountability" and is itself, at times, in disarray. Even while this is so, the Republicans have protected business interests at the costs of the American people, at times. And during the RNC there were many NPOs that were represented on their convention's stage...

So, I tend to lean toward McCain because I believe that until there is a balance of power in the UN that American freedoms are too precious to "give up" to an outside authority, who has its own interests...

The Republican National Convention

I was proud of Fred Thompson's speech, but most proud of Joe Libermann's. He was the 2000 Democratic VP nominee and has become an Independent. He called for American unity and for his past political affiliates to band together to elect someone with proven character in Washington politics. He identified this person as McCain.

A lot of the RNC was about the military. Many Christians believe that the military cannot be identified with Christian faith, because of a conflict of interest. I do not believe that this is so, because, Christians all believe in human rights as a fundamental right. That fundamental right cannot be protected unless it is protected by advancing the cause of freedom from a tyrannical government. Good government is protected by the principle of the balance of power and the police force. The balance of power in our branches of government and the police force protect our country from within, while the military protects from without. Surely, we would not do away with the police force....

America has also stood for the individual's freedom to choose the way he practices his faith. Faith and how that plays out in one's convictions in life is what our government protects. Although Obama promises "justice" , and many believe this is the government's "duty", what then is the Church's duty, since governmental "justice" will be limiting the freedom in which Christian "justice" can be defined and expressed....