So exactly what is the President of the United States saturating his mind with during his spare time?
Reading is apparently one of his continued disciplines, so he tells us. The seductive read "The Post-American World" was apparently a favorite of Obama's on the 2008 campaign trail as he machinated on clever ideas to defang American power that is projected across the globe.
At the 2009 "Summit of the Americas" where an alliance of South American and Central American nations had been formed to counter the economic and military strength of the United States, Socialist-types headlining the annual event included:
Daniel Noriega: former Communist Leader duly elected as President of Nicaragua
Evo Morales: leftist leaning Bolivian President incentivizing the manufacture of narcotics for distribution
Lulu: Brazilian Prime Minister who "blames the blond-haired blue-eyed caucausian" for the financial destruction across the globe.
Raul Castro: brother of Fidel, who enacted the Romantic Revolution of 1959 stomping out liberty and free market economics creating a 3rd world banana republic
Chavez: Venezuelan President who nationalized the oil industry and shut down opposition media outlets across the country
It is here that President Obama found his newest friends to play with. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, provided President Obama a copy of "The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent".
This same Venezuelan President scorned Americas's poliicies two years ago at the UN and lambasted President Bush as being the devil who left his sulfur smelling residue at the very lecturn Chavez was using.
President Obama proudly received his new friend's book. "With Great Affection", Chavez smiled with Obama for the cameras with book exchanging hands. Castigating America as a bully, the book accuses the United States of conspiring and destroying Latin American nations over the course of the 20th century.
The rest of the world has already received an apology for America's very existence by the President of the United States. How could President Obama leave Hugo Chavez without a personal apology for America's intrusive Latin America role? If not an apology, how about a kiss on the hand half-bowed to the ground exhibiting solace and humility for America's unkind role.
Chavez lectured UN officials two years ago to read Noam Chomsky's "Hegemony or Survival". Why not? Chomsky, famous for building a career on destroying American prestige, holds America culpable for imperial policies across the globe.
Foreign leaders blaming America for the domestic woes they encounter is good politics apparently.
Chavez might have good reason for hoping that President Obama will grovel once again toward the self-proclaimed leader of the Latin American nations. Has not Chavez watched the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, be summarily back-handed by the President of the United States, who we are told was overly exhausted to convene a meeting with America's closest overseas ally?
But Gordon Brown's problem may be more that he didn't wear a turbin, and of course, that his English roots are of course--too English?
Within 24 hours of President Obama gleefully receiving and affirming the leftist book from Chavez, the book shot to the #2 position on the NY Times Bestseller list.
Is this not the same Chavez who had two years earlier stood in the United Nations calling President Bush a devil while holding in his elevated hand before UN delegates one of Noam Chomsky's books about American neo-colonial power? It was Chomsky, the university professor, who has criticized America's constant war-mongering around the globe, as brutish force gone bad.
According to an AP report:
Not to be outdone by any Latin American writer, speculation has run deep that President Obama's two highly acclaimed memoirs have been written by none other Bill Ayers. Though Obama didn't write these books, he is central to the casting of these rambling pieces capturing snapshot images of the world in which he lives.
Of course, Senator Obama was sporting a copy of Fareed Zakaria's book in May 2008 during the presidential campaign called "The Post-American World".
Connecting the dots hardly poses any mystery. Early childhood influences including the Communist Marshall, who helped shape Obama's ocialist leanings upon entering college. We are left with none of Barack Obama's writings from his college days mysteriously. Is it not strange that we are given over to believe that Barack Obama before the age of 45 produced not just one, but two memoirs, about his life? Yet, do we find anything during his Harvard Law Review days showing any propensity whatsover toward the kind of writing that would attract audiences?
Didn't it take Churchill two world wars and grey hair to have anything worth writing about? Didn't Bill Clinton churn out 700 plus pages at least after he had accomplished something as the President?
What should we make of President Obama sitting under the teachings of Reverend Wright for twenty years, learning from the Communist Marshall, listening to Bill Ayers, and making nice with the Castro brothers, Chavez, parts of the Taliban, and paying homage to the Arab and Islamic world?
It would be rather surreal to find the current President actually defending the United States in front of world leaders. That's not his style. Kissing the hand of world leaders and promising to defang the United States is more President Obama's style.
Nonethless, wouldn't it have been nice to have seen President Obama hand Chavez "Wealth and Poverty" by Gilder? Or how about "The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek? Or Adam Smith's classic: "The Wealth of Nations"? ---
But then again, maybe President Obama should take to reading the literary works which have prospered the West and America in particular before handing them to a leftist?
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Thursday, October 20, 2011
What Does Libya Teach Us?
Ghadaffi is dead. Lybia is liberated. Or so they say?
With guns firing in the air, dancing in the streets, and Ghadaffi's body dragged through the streets, the world is looking on with jubilant horror at the unfolding drama and latest leg of the Arab Spring. What now for Libya? What now for the world?
With NATO and the rebel Libyan forces joining in tandem to take down Ghadaffi, the transition council, pre-established before the take down, must now act as the provisional government of the Libyan people. What can it do? With no time to waste, these men must chart the course that Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Monroe, Adams, and the other Declaration signers attempted successfully. How to build a nation from tyranny and oppression?
What lies ahead is as daunting as any task our American founders might have faced. Consider:
* Ghadaffi's 43 year reign emasculated any modern and progressive integration with the western world. The divide between older and younger citizens is: the older speak English; the younger speak far less English...not a good sign
* No reliable judicial and economic institutions, or democratic foundations exist.
* 200 tribal clans are more likely to fight and war than implement modern civil government...see Afghanistan and various African states
* Of note, hundreds of terrorists captured in Iraq by American forces.. 20% of these were Libyan.
Who else but the Al Quaeda types or the Muslim Brotherhood could lead the Libyan citizens out of civil war and the brink of chaos back to normality? Is there a George Washington among the 200 tribal clan factions who will rise out of the desert country respected enough to bring strength, peace, and constitutional democracy to a revolutionary people? Is there a Selassie of Ethiopia who will rise to the noble challenge of leading a backwards people through the maze of political chaos?
In a land where where bad guys like Mengistu and Mugabe types rule tribal lands of Africa with brute force crushing opposition, what do the citizens of Libya have to look forward to? . Will strong-men turn their guns toward justice instead of looting? Where autocratic rule and force have been the law of the land for 43 years, will the majority of this land will turn in their guns for a purple finger election? Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood chief design is the overthrow of the Jewish state in Israel rather than equal coexistence. Would not a Muslim Brotherhood rule be strikingly similar to Hezbollah in Lebanon?
Yet-the people will vote for sure. The modern political world demands ballot boxes. But the deep pockets of the Muslim Brotherhood combined with incessant canvassing and saturation of neighborhoods, towns, and cities makes this group a powerbroker and big player on the stage of Libyan politics.
There are no good or clear advisable options to lead the post Ghadaffi Libyan era. And there are no rules for the Arab Spring uprisings popping up across the Arab world. Complexity trumps simplicity. Democracy amongst a people unaccustomed to justice and liberty can be another system by which Mullahs, thugs, or deeply entrenched Brotherhood types gain access to power at the expense of the people. Democracy, like a knuckleball, is unpredictable where it lands though aimed well.
But a civilized Libya must crawl before she walks. Mistakes, and there will be many of them, will litter the Libyan landscape with the birth pains of judicial, economic, and political reform. The fight for freedom has only begun. Gadhaffi's death is but easy part. Its the creation of modern institutions of courts, constitution, democracy, and commerce that will defend the people's individual rights that will require the shedding of blood against tyrants sharpening their daggers in an all too familiar fight for power.
Jefferson staunchly defended France's Revolution in 1789 and the freedom of the people. He recanted later amidst the horrors of the guillotine, blood shed, and tyranny of Napoleon by declaring that not all peoples are ready for the responsibility of democratic governance. Was Jefferson wrong to pen his support for revolutionary France, even though it gave us Napoleon Bonaparte? Today we have a France which is at the heart of liberal democratic institutions in Western Europe.
Was America wrong in the Kennedy/Johnson era to support the South Vietnamese people against the Communists of the North? We lost 54,000 young soldiers as our nation swallowed the bitter pill of 20th century Asian adventurism in the early 1970's. Though the South fell to the North in Vietnam, do we not have a thriving and unified Vietnam?
What about Tojo's Japan? Does not the 3rd largest peaceful economy in the world have America's direct invasion and western institutions to thank for its prosperity and peaceful coexistence among nations? Who do the Russian people thank? Was it the Germans, Swiss, Chinese, or Americans who rolled back repression, tyranny, and Communist rule?
Did Kennedy's airlift, and Reagan's Brandenburg Gate speech of "Tear down this wall" not direct the hope of Berliners and the world toward constitutional democracy?
What about Saddam Hussein's reign of terror? Did American force not bring 24 million Iraqi citizens purple fingers?
The fate of Libya's future
With guns firing in the air, dancing in the streets, and Ghadaffi's body dragged through the streets, the world is looking on with jubilant horror at the unfolding drama and latest leg of the Arab Spring. What now for Libya? What now for the world?
With NATO and the rebel Libyan forces joining in tandem to take down Ghadaffi, the transition council, pre-established before the take down, must now act as the provisional government of the Libyan people. What can it do? With no time to waste, these men must chart the course that Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Monroe, Adams, and the other Declaration signers attempted successfully. How to build a nation from tyranny and oppression?
What lies ahead is as daunting as any task our American founders might have faced. Consider:
* Ghadaffi's 43 year reign emasculated any modern and progressive integration with the western world. The divide between older and younger citizens is: the older speak English; the younger speak far less English...not a good sign
* No reliable judicial and economic institutions, or democratic foundations exist.
* 200 tribal clans are more likely to fight and war than implement modern civil government...see Afghanistan and various African states
* Of note, hundreds of terrorists captured in Iraq by American forces.. 20% of these were Libyan.
Who else but the Al Quaeda types or the Muslim Brotherhood could lead the Libyan citizens out of civil war and the brink of chaos back to normality? Is there a George Washington among the 200 tribal clan factions who will rise out of the desert country respected enough to bring strength, peace, and constitutional democracy to a revolutionary people? Is there a Selassie of Ethiopia who will rise to the noble challenge of leading a backwards people through the maze of political chaos?
In a land where where bad guys like Mengistu and Mugabe types rule tribal lands of Africa with brute force crushing opposition, what do the citizens of Libya have to look forward to? . Will strong-men turn their guns toward justice instead of looting? Where autocratic rule and force have been the law of the land for 43 years, will the majority of this land will turn in their guns for a purple finger election? Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood chief design is the overthrow of the Jewish state in Israel rather than equal coexistence. Would not a Muslim Brotherhood rule be strikingly similar to Hezbollah in Lebanon?
Yet-the people will vote for sure. The modern political world demands ballot boxes. But the deep pockets of the Muslim Brotherhood combined with incessant canvassing and saturation of neighborhoods, towns, and cities makes this group a powerbroker and big player on the stage of Libyan politics.
There are no good or clear advisable options to lead the post Ghadaffi Libyan era. And there are no rules for the Arab Spring uprisings popping up across the Arab world. Complexity trumps simplicity. Democracy amongst a people unaccustomed to justice and liberty can be another system by which Mullahs, thugs, or deeply entrenched Brotherhood types gain access to power at the expense of the people. Democracy, like a knuckleball, is unpredictable where it lands though aimed well.
But a civilized Libya must crawl before she walks. Mistakes, and there will be many of them, will litter the Libyan landscape with the birth pains of judicial, economic, and political reform. The fight for freedom has only begun. Gadhaffi's death is but easy part. Its the creation of modern institutions of courts, constitution, democracy, and commerce that will defend the people's individual rights that will require the shedding of blood against tyrants sharpening their daggers in an all too familiar fight for power.
Jefferson staunchly defended France's Revolution in 1789 and the freedom of the people. He recanted later amidst the horrors of the guillotine, blood shed, and tyranny of Napoleon by declaring that not all peoples are ready for the responsibility of democratic governance. Was Jefferson wrong to pen his support for revolutionary France, even though it gave us Napoleon Bonaparte? Today we have a France which is at the heart of liberal democratic institutions in Western Europe.
Was America wrong in the Kennedy/Johnson era to support the South Vietnamese people against the Communists of the North? We lost 54,000 young soldiers as our nation swallowed the bitter pill of 20th century Asian adventurism in the early 1970's. Though the South fell to the North in Vietnam, do we not have a thriving and unified Vietnam?
What about Tojo's Japan? Does not the 3rd largest peaceful economy in the world have America's direct invasion and western institutions to thank for its prosperity and peaceful coexistence among nations? Who do the Russian people thank? Was it the Germans, Swiss, Chinese, or Americans who rolled back repression, tyranny, and Communist rule?
Did Kennedy's airlift, and Reagan's Brandenburg Gate speech of "Tear down this wall" not direct the hope of Berliners and the world toward constitutional democracy?
What about Saddam Hussein's reign of terror? Did American force not bring 24 million Iraqi citizens purple fingers?
The fate of Libya's future
Sunday, April 19, 2009
President Obama Transforming America
Only a few apt citizens saw Obama transforming the American nation into an experimental guinnea pig of sovereignty reduction. His penchant for global hob-nobbing comes naturally. Sniling and shaking hands with leftists, President Obama is bringing home to roost the convictions of his heart.
Harold Hongju Koh, Dean of Yale Law School, has been appointed as top legal adviser at The State Department. Koh is only one of dozens of new legal scholars chipping away at Americanism, American laws, jurisprudence, culutre, American legislation, and and the Consitition's legislative process.
What better way is there? Koh's legal theories are tied closely to the way of Europe's Democratic Socialists and America's left-wing tenured Pharisaical university professors across America.
Much like President Obama, Koh is a well spoken mild-mannered scholar. But beneath the surface appearance lays some of the outrageous designs that Koh and his early mentors have for America.
Just as Frank Marshall Davis, an outright and avowed Communist, was an early mentor to President Obama, Koh has Louis Sohn. Who exactly was Lewis Sohn?
Sohn was a world federalist. Sohn fought his entire career to subordinate America's legal system to international law. Lewis Sohn, an academic and international lawyer, taught Koh about international law. Sohn was a major figure in crafting global constitutions for international affairs.
http://www.worldviewtimes.com/article.php/articleid-4785/Brannon-Howse/Cliff-Kincaid
As Cliff Kincaid has noted in his relevant research, "World Peace through World Law" was the accumulation of Sohn's ideas about America and international laws. Sohn wanted to transform the UN into a world government with nuclear weapons, armed forces, etc..Sohn said the purpose was to disarm each and every nation and to repress world violence. In addition, this global dictatorship would formulate a UN Revenue System like the IRS to collect taxes from American citizens for global purposes.
Having come to pass, the Law of Sea Treaty, which binds Americans to international treaties instead of it's own interests, was a work of Sohn's in it's early days.
Koh's international legal mentor, included other American subservient propositions to a UN organized government.
UN Outer Space Authority to regulate outerspace
World Development Authority ie..Obama spending a trillion $$
International Judicial Tribunals to try citizens in the world
International Peace Force of 200 to 400 thousand forces and a reserve force of 300 to 600 thousand forces;
Sohn supported the UN having the globalized peace force that would have the most modern warfare capabilities. America was expected to hand over it's arsenal of weaponry to the UN so that the UN would manage the affairs of the world for the benefit of the global citizenry.
Kincaid said, "This is consistent with Obama's approach to subsume America's sovereignty for the greater good of the world to a world body."
America has a leading role in the international affairs of the 21st century. That role should be expressed as a beacon of light as a "shining city upon a hill".
The seductive attempt at forcefully gathering nations around a world camp fire to sing songs and hold hands as wealthy nations are looted and castrated from their wealth is a recipe for disaster.
The Realists of the globe are cognizant of the power structures globally that will fight the ultimate UN
Even so, only 2 Republicans voted against Hillary as Secretary of State. Only 21 votes against Eric Holder as Attorney General. Neither of whom see American sovereignty as clearly defined as most Americans do. This alone is not good news.
As the State Department fills with Obama's Dream Team of World Federation disciples, will the Constitution have any meaning when President Obama finishes with America?
Harold Hongju Koh, Dean of Yale Law School, has been appointed as top legal adviser at The State Department. Koh is only one of dozens of new legal scholars chipping away at Americanism, American laws, jurisprudence, culutre, American legislation, and and the Consitition's legislative process.
What better way is there? Koh's legal theories are tied closely to the way of Europe's Democratic Socialists and America's left-wing tenured Pharisaical university professors across America.
Much like President Obama, Koh is a well spoken mild-mannered scholar. But beneath the surface appearance lays some of the outrageous designs that Koh and his early mentors have for America.
Just as Frank Marshall Davis, an outright and avowed Communist, was an early mentor to President Obama, Koh has Louis Sohn. Who exactly was Lewis Sohn?
Sohn was a world federalist. Sohn fought his entire career to subordinate America's legal system to international law. Lewis Sohn, an academic and international lawyer, taught Koh about international law. Sohn was a major figure in crafting global constitutions for international affairs.
http://www.worldviewtimes.com/article.php/articleid-4785/Brannon-Howse/Cliff-Kincaid
As Cliff Kincaid has noted in his relevant research, "World Peace through World Law" was the accumulation of Sohn's ideas about America and international laws. Sohn wanted to transform the UN into a world government with nuclear weapons, armed forces, etc..Sohn said the purpose was to disarm each and every nation and to repress world violence. In addition, this global dictatorship would formulate a UN Revenue System like the IRS to collect taxes from American citizens for global purposes.
Having come to pass, the Law of Sea Treaty, which binds Americans to international treaties instead of it's own interests, was a work of Sohn's in it's early days.
Koh's international legal mentor, included other American subservient propositions to a UN organized government.
UN Outer Space Authority to regulate outerspace
World Development Authority ie..Obama spending a trillion $$
International Judicial Tribunals to try citizens in the world
International Peace Force of 200 to 400 thousand forces and a reserve force of 300 to 600 thousand forces;
Sohn supported the UN having the globalized peace force that would have the most modern warfare capabilities. America was expected to hand over it's arsenal of weaponry to the UN so that the UN would manage the affairs of the world for the benefit of the global citizenry.
Kincaid said, "This is consistent with Obama's approach to subsume America's sovereignty for the greater good of the world to a world body."
America has a leading role in the international affairs of the 21st century. That role should be expressed as a beacon of light as a "shining city upon a hill".
The seductive attempt at forcefully gathering nations around a world camp fire to sing songs and hold hands as wealthy nations are looted and castrated from their wealth is a recipe for disaster.
The Realists of the globe are cognizant of the power structures globally that will fight the ultimate UN
Even so, only 2 Republicans voted against Hillary as Secretary of State. Only 21 votes against Eric Holder as Attorney General. Neither of whom see American sovereignty as clearly defined as most Americans do. This alone is not good news.
As the State Department fills with Obama's Dream Team of World Federation disciples, will the Constitution have any meaning when President Obama finishes with America?
Saturday, April 18, 2009
What Do Americans Think?
Fort Lauderdale, not a bastion of conservative thought, had it's citizens speak out concerning the irresponsible spending, fiscal deficits, outrageous national debt, and the bail outs:
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Greatest Depression Fighter of All Time?
Which American President Was the Greatest Depression Fighter of All Time?
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWI2OWUyOWE2NmZjMmQ2ZTg5YzIzZjczY2I2Mzg2N2Q
by Jim Powell of CATO Institute
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWI2OWUyOWE2NmZjMmQ2ZTg5YzIzZjczY2I2Mzg2N2Q
by Jim Powell of CATO Institute
Campaigning or Governing?
Running a campaign is far different than governing a nation. Senator Hillary Clinton told Americans that on-the-job training was dangerous and unacceptable. Experience matters. Senator Obama rejected the "experience factor" and retorted that Americans wanted "good judgment" in their elected officials.
Within two weeks of being inaugurated Commander-in-Chief, President Obama is witnessing colossal blunders out of the gate. Dashcle, Killifer, Geithner, and Hilda Solis have embarassingly failed to pay back taxes in previous years. Bill Richardson bowed out of his nomination for Commerce Secretary. Serious conflict of interests in New Mexico as Governor have surfaced and an investigation is underway concerning his conduct. Erik Holder being America’s new Attorney General, admittedly goofed with the Marc Rich pardon, the poster child for hundreds of millions of dollars, being an absconding tax cheat. Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton, has her husband’s library being funded by invisible and silent characters in the Arab world. Of course, there won’t be any quid pro quo or altering American interests as a result of $900 million dollars being funneled to to the Clinton library, right?
So urgent is a stimulus package that President Obama allowed Nancy Pelosi to write the bill. The bill, so full of pork barrel spending and embarrassment, has President Obama putting his prestige on the line for a bill that Americans by the hour are repudiating. President Obama has stated “its time to stop talking and to start acting.”
Where is the full force of the President Obama’s moral persuasion at a time that he declares that without this bill, America will face “catastrophe”? Should not the President have had a much larger role in crafting this piece of legislation to ensure its vitality and passage? Did not the President state on numerous occasions that bipartisanship was necessary to move America forward?
So why remain so aloof and on the sidelines as the most important crafting of a bill is cobbled together overnight? President Obama stated “I won the election”. The people of America have chosen him to lead. So where is the leadership?
Is it possible that his team wasn’t capable of actually writing a stimulus package? It is unthinkable that this might the case. But seeing how the Obama team has transitioned toward governing the United States thus far, it might not be far from the truth.
Maybe experience does matter? Maybe judgment matters as well?
Within two weeks of being inaugurated Commander-in-Chief, President Obama is witnessing colossal blunders out of the gate. Dashcle, Killifer, Geithner, and Hilda Solis have embarassingly failed to pay back taxes in previous years. Bill Richardson bowed out of his nomination for Commerce Secretary. Serious conflict of interests in New Mexico as Governor have surfaced and an investigation is underway concerning his conduct. Erik Holder being America’s new Attorney General, admittedly goofed with the Marc Rich pardon, the poster child for hundreds of millions of dollars, being an absconding tax cheat. Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton, has her husband’s library being funded by invisible and silent characters in the Arab world. Of course, there won’t be any quid pro quo or altering American interests as a result of $900 million dollars being funneled to to the Clinton library, right?
So urgent is a stimulus package that President Obama allowed Nancy Pelosi to write the bill. The bill, so full of pork barrel spending and embarrassment, has President Obama putting his prestige on the line for a bill that Americans by the hour are repudiating. President Obama has stated “its time to stop talking and to start acting.”
Where is the full force of the President Obama’s moral persuasion at a time that he declares that without this bill, America will face “catastrophe”? Should not the President have had a much larger role in crafting this piece of legislation to ensure its vitality and passage? Did not the President state on numerous occasions that bipartisanship was necessary to move America forward?
So why remain so aloof and on the sidelines as the most important crafting of a bill is cobbled together overnight? President Obama stated “I won the election”. The people of America have chosen him to lead. So where is the leadership?
Is it possible that his team wasn’t capable of actually writing a stimulus package? It is unthinkable that this might the case. But seeing how the Obama team has transitioned toward governing the United States thus far, it might not be far from the truth.
Maybe experience does matter? Maybe judgment matters as well?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
