Let’s examine our political scenario. It is not a simple problem but we are in a pickle, as old-timers used to say. First, though, let’s see a few things we have with Obama.
People in the military can say with no hesitancy that they have ‘been there, done that’ but what is Obama able to say? That he’s a student/professor of Constitutional Law but that his license to practice law was rescinded, possibly for the simple reason that he apparently stated that he never used another name or alias.
What about States’ Rights? What about the concept of a state’s sovereignty provided by the Constitution? Obama apparently thinks along these lines: Forget what the Constitution says, that ancient document only says what people are “allowed” to do, not what they are “supposed” to do. And then Obama proceeds to “allow/direct” Holder’s Justice Department to go after those states that would dare do what the Federal Government is supposed to do: Protect our borders. He wants to forget that those states are directly involved with border issues, that those Border States are used as portals for the entrance of illegal aliens (“undocumented workers” = Potential Democrat Voters) and from there, the vast majority of those “illegals” end up in practically every other state of the United States. His long-term attitude is obviously one of, “If you stick your finger in my face and accuse me of not doing my job, I’m gonna get you!”
Obama cares little for the borders but it does not end there. He cares little for what happens abroad and this began to be evident with his Apology Tour immediately after he entered office. It also became more obvious when he snubbed Netanyahu of Israel while making sure that Hamas/those in Gaza received millions of taxpayer dollars while either ignoring or not caring that the modern-day Philistines are intent on the destruction of Israel and, coincidentally, the Great Satan. The Great Satan is what they call US, the United States. No wonder he said the call to prayer of the Muslims from their towers many times a day is the most beautiful sound he knows. And he calls himself a Christian? A Christian belief is: “…by their fruits ye shall know them.” Matthew 7:20
Would anyone wonder if Obama’s “fruits” (the evidence of his life) is Christian? If you ask a non-Christian, you will get several answers depending upon their mindset and societal orientation but true Christians will have but one answer: Just look at the man, by his “fruits” he is not a Christian.
Now, before saying that not being a Christian does not produce a good political or government servant, consider that the Constitution does not require one to be a Christian. However, the tone and tenor of the Constitution is Judeo-Christian. This is the core makeup of our country. It is so strong a concept that relatively little was said about it by the Founders and writers of the Constitution. However, an honest student of history will most probably conclude that those men were indeed Christian and Biblical in their lives and actions and to be otherwise was not even a consideration to them. Even in their midst, though, there were some few men who were not Christian, as we are quickly reminded by people who are adverse to Christianity or anything relating to God and religion. Even with this, however, one cannot see them as Atheists or that they were there in an adversarial way as they dealt with the other Founders. Their thoughts complimented the Constitution in a way that did not take away from the True-to-God tone and tenor of the Constitution and, I suspect, they realized that this was the better way. To argue that those very few men were not Christians is clutching at straws by those who begin and end with a weak, easily-refutable argument.
Back to the way Obama thinks, we find the military being decimated. The military is to protect us from foreign threat and not to be used on our shores unless that threat has been allowed to migrate here. Yet we see the military being trained here in our cities as if they are being taught to become accustomed to deal with a threat by the citizenry but the only real threat to Obama & Co. is the threat to their dictatorial bent to do whatever enters their minds with little or no regard to the Constitution. Executive Decision my eye! Executive Decision is a buzzword in the Obama Camp for “Watch me get away with it!”
One reason we have military abroad is in conformance with the philosophy of “It’s better to fight the threat over there than over here.” It reminds me of General Westmoreland, the leader of the war in Vietnam, who said in an interview at Fort Hood, TX: “We didn’t lose the war in Vietnam; we lost it here in America.” But that’s the way the Obamaroid government is fighting We the People now. By their attitude and actions, they are making us think more and more about how our first patriots had to deal with the threat of oppression and literal dictatorship from abroad but now we find it right here!
With such low regard for the military seen by this government, I also come to wonder about Ron Paul’s concept of government — that we need to bring the military home. Obama wanted to close Guantanamo, leave Iraq/Afghanistan and bring them home. (As an aside, though, if the troops are here, maybe their votes will be counted…) Anyway, even though leaving Iraq was an eventuality, bringing the troops back from Iraq and Afghanistan is also something to ponder. How does this stack up against the war in Kuwait in 1991 where we had the opportunity to quell Saddam Hussein’s terrorism but delayed it for a decade when we found that we had to go back and finish the job? Will we withdraw from Afghanistan and then have to go back some day in the future to “finish the job”? From my vantage-point, I cannot see any great improvement in that country; much like what we saw after Iraq was forced to withdraw from Kuwait. This scenario also brings me back to wonder also if Mac was right about Korea seeing how he was ready clean up that whole area but the war “over there” regarding North Korea was lost “over here.”
Do not think that I am advocating that Ron Paul is the answer to our political problems. There are too many things that We the People do not accept about Ron Paul. This was reflected in the overall voting for him in relation to the other candidates. What is not taken into account by the pundits is that there were many more votes against Ron Paul if you add up all the votes of the other candidates. While there was/is a constant barrage of insistence by the MSM (including Fox News) that against Obama, there is one person (Mitt Romney), it doesn’t add up to the great rejection by the voters of Ron Paul. Don’t give up the expectation, though, that Ron Paul won’t pull a Ross Perot but if he does, he will merely say, “I cannot tell my people what to do.”
The Media impresses people enormously in their way of presenting politics and how they show Obama to be direct and forceful, complete with those threateningly-gloomy, lowered eyebrows as if daring anyone to question him… What is needed to come off to the voter as impressive enough to beat Obama and be a good president is someone who can go toe-to-toe against him in a believable way and not let the discussion creep away from all things American and into the area of “it’s the economy, Stupid.” America is great in the world of Economy but she is great in many areas and not economy alone. I also remember that Donna Brazile, a Democrat political commentator, said once that the Democrats want Romney as their opponent because the Democrats think he will be the easiest candidate for them to beat. I wonder if this is not why the Media is all for Romney while remaining firmly in Obama’s pocket.
The Obama opponent, whoever that is, needs to stay on target and attack the Obama strategy on many fronts and not one only, as the Left apparently intends to do, apparently thinking to drive the election into one area only and not to focus on the Overall Obama. The big question now by the Obamaroids and the Media is that Romney has his money “hidden” in offshore banks and is a tax dodge; this is a distraction from the many true issues that must eventually be tackled and corrected.
As an aside, Romney’s simplest explanation of having money in overseas banks is that his money is in many banks and much of his money is spent overseas so an overseas bank is proper and advantageous.
The better argument, though, is that Obama & Co. has injured America’s banks and seeing some of them going belly-up is one indication of it. Also, good economists advise that vast amounts of money should be kept in many banks since, for one aspect, the money is guaranteed up to a specific limit if the bank fails or is closed and to put all the money in one bank is not wise. In fact, even big telephone or power enterprises do not keep all the money in one single bank. There is also a concept used by American corporations — that the money needs to be deposited in banks closer to the customer to avoid the loss of time in money transfers. This is why customers’ payments are deposited in banks in the customers’ area. Is this reaching for an explanation? Sure it is but with the intention to show that the “tax evasion” excuse used by the Tax-Payment Avoiding Democrats is a vacuous one when they try to mark the opposition.
With the above, it is easy to see that merely depositing money in an offshore bank is not merely for the purpose of avoiding taxes — unless it is something useful to those who deal in dirty politics. But, there is also a danger in this: What would those accusers on the Left say if some good GOP politicians suddenly said they would propose a bill to expose every politician’s offshore bank account and if they are found to be hiding that account, they will be expulsed from government service and/or brought up on charges of tax evasion a la Al Capone? Want to bet that the politicians on the Left would have a fit? The reaction would almost be as if they brought Obama up for impeachment.
Democrats love to divide people by class, by economic advantage/disadvantage, by locale (Southerners, Northerners and Mid/Westerners), and any other issue that can be made into an “issue.” This is mostly driven by the single-mindedness of the Socialist, Obama-supporting Media. Those same people hang all their futures on a single issue until someone comes along with either a better “issue” or when someone points the ugly finger at them and puts them back into their tiny place. Then they disappear for a while but then emerge later with a new “issue.”
In almost any conversation with a Liberal, a subject is not addressed subjectively or, heaven forbid, it is not addressed completely. The Liberal constantly shifts the subject but in the process they usually they reveal their mindset. They reveal that they really do not care about understanding a subject or presenting solutions. They only want to be the “moderator” and the one who leads the conversation.
Rules of debate are seldom if ever used by Liberals when on a panel with Conservatives. We see them constantly interrupting someone who is trying to present his/her views and when challenged about it, they stop for a few moments and then jump back into the conversation with their “intelligent” comment. Most on the Right will allow the Liberal to speak and finish his/her comments and do it out of politeness. However, the Liberal has the characteristic of making sure he/she gets in the first and last word and many also in the middle. They are also quick to say, when anyone dares to insert a word or two, “Let me finish!” but they do not practice what they preach.
In the days of Ronald Reagan, we saw a master at work when he had to handle a bona fide Liberal. His “There you go again!” is classic. He was able to do with humor what politicians today cannot do with their factual presentations of truth. As was famously said in the movie, applied to the Left, they cannot handle the truth. Not the truth of the real world, at least. They do have “truth” but it is their version of the truth. And with the help of the MSM, it is hammered into us until the resistance drops and it is either ignored or accepted. Pure Alinskyite Propaganda.
The media is now pummeling us with the idea that Romney is not Passionate. He lacks the vigor of politics we see in Obama but I must ask, is what we see really and truly Obama or is it some slick teleprompter script reader? I do not think the question is misplaced and the answer is obvious if you remember Obama’s consternation when his teleprompter was broken or off-cue on one occasion and he had to stop until it was fixed. He was an empty-suited although casually-dressed politician and then everyone got to see him fall back into his groove when the ‘prompter was fixed.
Does Romney have what it takes to win against Obama? With Obama’s team eager to load the ballot boxes with those of illegal voters, some bused in and some locals locking into a union-based mindset, Romney must get out of the Republican proclivity to be a gentleman “no matter what.” A mad dog does not care if a person is a gentleman; the man will be ravaged by the dog regardless. When in a fight where the opponent is determined to take you down, no matter what, it is better to have a person who is able to meet the opponent at all levels with the determination to win with an equally-forceful “no matter what” attitude. Otherwise, it will be one where historians will merely say, “He was a gentleman to the end.”
The Media will try to flavor the battle by saying that the Republican “no matter what” candidate was bitter and somehow indicate that he is a misfit of society or whatever else they can say in an attempt to destroy the opposition. Isn’t it high time to do a giant turn-off of the Media and let them know they have lost their traditionally expected respect in the journalistic world by not being impartial and unbiased?
Is Romney capable of winning against Obama? Does he have the “right stuff” to do the job of getting elected and being a good president? Is organizing an international sports meet enough to solve more than an economic problem and be a president that can protect America from enemies from without and from within? Or, is he going to take us farther down the road of Political Correctness and promote the entitlement mentality of those who have contributed little to the greatness of our country?
How many of us are of the “wait and see” mentality and forget that we have influence both with the politicians and others around us?
In the final analysis, it boils down to everyone asking him/herself if it matters enough to make it matter or will we just “go along for the ride” and, very possibly, live to regret inaction.
This is a serious question and must be addressed sooner more than later when it may well be too late.
