WITH FOXES, WE MUST PLAY THE FOX
Why Fox News Must be Taken Off the Air, And How it Can Be Done
by Johnny Strife
Part One: The Problem
In the midst of America’s Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus to shut down newspapers that were fueling insurrection by printing what he considered to be seditious material. He stated his rationale for such seemingly draconian measures by asking, “Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?” Today, another President from Illinois (kind of), Barack Obama, is the Commander-in-Chief of a nation at war on two fronts, Iraq and Afghanistan. He might also, one might argue, be presiding over a nascent civil war at home. Granted, this civil war is now only a war of words, but in history, words have often been the genesis of real battles.
Although Obama had grand hopes of unifying a country so endemically fractured by its ideological, religious, racial and sexual differences once he took office, we are now arguably more divided than ever before. Loud, toxic voices are stirring up winds of anger, hatred and fear. The most overbearing of these voices is that of the media leviathan Fox News Channel. In America, a land where pride and greed are tacitly considered virtues, he who speaks with the loudest voice is often considered the most righteous, which might be why Fox News Channel (FNC) garners more viewers than any other news provider.
For eight long years, FNC played the cheerleader to President George W. Bush and his administration, lauding his every action as heroic and unconditionally omitting all of his mistakes and crimes. But after Fox-endorsed Senator John McCain lost the 2008 election, FNC turned 180-degrees and became a 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week Obama-bashing marathon. Mere minutes after FNC aired the Presidential Inauguration on January 20, 2009, Glenn Beck, apocalyptic fear-monger and host of FNC’s Glenn Beck Program, came on the air and started to verbally tear the new President to shreds, invoking the name of the Christian God to do it. There was no grace period; the crucifixion began before the First Couple’s first dance, and it hasn’t stopped since.
From its humble beginnings in 1985 until now, FNC has promulgated a gospel of hatred and fear, degrading the level of mainstream American journalism to a nadir so abysmal and vile that it has made tabloid fluff like CNN look like a real news channel by comparison. You can usually spot a hardcore FNC viewer (and really, is there any other kind?) by their harried, distracted appearance and their almost palpable aura of barely suppressed hysteria. They have the demeanor of the doomed, as if America is on the brink of collapse. Out of nowhere, they’ll make bizarre statements with the conviction of a street preacher; stuff like: “Barack Obama said if he gets elected he’s going to throw out the Constitution.” (I actually heard that, more than twice.) Or, “Did you hear that Barack Obama promised all the black people that if they got him elected he’d give them $500 each?” And they usually have something bad to say about Oscar-winning actors and any musicians that don’t sing country or gospel.
This proposal isn’t for those people; they’re already lost. They wouldn’t read it anyway, even if they are semi-literate; they’d think it was a product of the “liberal media elite”. Fox Fans like their information disseminated with a fist and condensed to the simplest of sound bites; they don’t want to read something with a lot of big words in it. I used to have a modicum of pity for FNC viewers, akin to that which I hold for those simple folk who offed themselves back in 1938 because they believed Orson Welles’ “War of the Worlds” radio drama was an actual, live news broadcast. But now the hateful bile and deception spewed daily by their oracle into the national consciousness has reached a critical mass, and it’s time for those of us whose love for America isn’t limited to its straight, white, conservative, and evangelical citizens to start taking the future of our country a little more seriously. I know this is a case of preaching to the choir, but everyone else in the church seems to have fallen asleep.
FNC’s proponents vehemently deny that it is a conservative network, claiming their programming is “Fair and Balanced” (FNC’s trademark), that they show all sides of an issue, unlike all the other “media elite,” which have a hidden liberal agenda. But the fact is, FNC is the American version of Al Jazeera: a tool used by the conservative party to control the miniscule minds of the ignorant masses. The only substantive difference is that FNC isn’t motivated by religious fanaticism, but rather by greed: the more people it gets to watch its product, the more advertisers pay it to air their commercials. Rupert Murdoch, FNC’s owner, knows something about making money. He is a conservative Australian media tycoon with a Ronald Reagan infatuation and, apparently, a desire to own all media in the world. In 2004, he owned nine satellite television networks, 100 cable channels, 175 newspapers, 40 book imprints, 40 television stations, and a movie studio. His U.S. television network reached 180-million viewers, while his Asian satellite network reached 300-million. His cable channels reached 300-million homes. His magazines reached 28-milion readers. His total audience was 4.7 billion people, which is three-fourths of Earth’s population, and that was five years ago. He went on to buy MySpace in 2005.
Murdoch gave birth to Fox News when he bought Washington D.C.’s Metromedia News Channel WTTG in 1985. The man he chose to be FNC’s President, Roger Ailes, was a Republican media strategist employed by Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. His game plan for Bush Sr.’s campaign featured a preincarnation of the smear tactics of Karl Rove: he used the image of William Horton, a black convict serving a life sentence in Massachusetts for murder. While released from prison on a weekend furlough program – which Bush’s opponent, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, had supported – Horton raped a woman, pistol-whipped, stabbed and tied up her fiancé, and stole their car. Ailes used this tragic incident as the centerpiece of Bush’s campaign, painting Dukakis as a bleeding heart liberator of black rapist murderers. He said of his own strategy, “The only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it.”
John Moody, FNC Senior Vice President, is a stout conservative with a long career in journalism. Moody is the actual ideological force behind FNC; all of its shows and reports are basically a mouthpiece for his arch-conservative views. He controls the daily talking points that every FNC host, anchor, commentator and reporter will follow by disseminating daily memos. These memos are usually taken directly from the daily press releases of the Republican National Committee. These talking points are echoed, often verbatim, through every show in the course of a news day, beginning with the morning show, Fox Friends, and continuing through the news, punditry and business segments. There is a unity of purpose and message at FNC that exists nowhere else in American journalism, and it is a message that parallels, without the slightest deviance, that of the Republican Party. Like the Biblical demon that Jesus exorcised in The Gospel of Mark, one can almost imagine Moody intoning, “My name is Legion… for we are many.”
Tony Snow, who died of colon cancer in 2005, was the host of Fox News Sunday. Before that, he was a speechwriter for the first Bush administration. He actually left FNC to replace Scott McClellan as the Press Secretary for the second Bush administration. Brit Hume, Fox’s managing editor and anchor of Special Report, used to contribute to the conservative magazines American Spectator and the The Weekly Standard. Catherine Crier, anchor of Crier Report, used to be a Republican judge.
As the years passed, FNC gradually become more flagrant in their partisanship. In 2000, for instance, Carl Cameron was FNC’s Senior Political Correspondent, covering the presidential election. Meanwhile, his wife Pauline was working for then-Texas Governor Bush’s presidential campaign. FNC didn’t even blanch at this blatant conflict of interest, though even CNN had the journalistic integrity to pull one of its top reporters from the campaign trail when it was discovered her husband was one of Al Gore’s lawyers. In a videotaped interview he conducted on June 19, 2000, Cameron blushed like a ten-year-old girl with a backstage pass to a Hannah Montana concert as he told Bush that his wife was “hanging out” with Bush’s sister, and overcoming her fear of talking before crowds. “She’s a good soul,” said Bush, nodding sagely. “She’s a really good soul.”
As if that wasn’t bad enough, it got even worse five months later. In a diabolically cynical, blatantly political move that permanently obliterated any arguments FNC might ever raise about being a non-partisan news channel, the man FNC put in charge of its Election Analysis Division, stationed in Florida, on election night, was George W. Bush’s cousin, John Ellis. It was him who made the call to FNC headquarters reporting that Bush was the next President of the United States, even though the data from the exit polls hadn’t yet been crunched. (As is now public record, when the exit polls were finally counted, Al Gore had won, but who cares now, right?) Mere minutes after FNC joyfully and “officially” announced that their man had won, ABC, CBS and NBC, not wanting to appear sluggish at getting the news out, followed suit and echoed the same faulty information. The falsehood became fact in the public’s perception, and the Democrats, as is their wont, went down without a real fight. To put into perspective just how inconceivable this farce was: in 2000, there were roughly 281-million people living in America. Is it numerically possible that out of all those souls, the man who made the call that essentially elevated Bush to the office of the most powerful man on the planet was his cousin, and the governor of the state that helped him do it was his brother? If former Vice President Al Gore, Bush’s opponent, had pulled those kind of shenanigans, FNC would have torn him a new asshole. (Actually, FNC’s goons do, still, mostly because he believes in global warming, but perhaps also because they’re jealous of him: nobody at FNC will ever, ever win a Nobel Peace Prize.)
Since that victory, FNC’s reporting has gotten exponentially more partisan and divorced from reality. Its Vice President of News, Bill Sammon, said the 2005 Hurricane Katrina debacle wasn’t the Bush administration’s fault; rather, that it was the fault of local governments for not being able to take care of their constituents.
Scrutinizing this sampling of FNC’s leaders and “news” correspondents, one can see that there is not one liberal, or even a moderate, among them. In my next segment, some examples of FNC’s “commentary” people will be presented.
I am a conservative. I guess I've always been a conservative. I believe in balancing my checkbook. I believe in traditional family values. I believe in moral or faith-based imperatives. And I also believe in the enduring wisdom of our Constitution. I am American through and through.
By all these measures, it is absolutely necessary that we reform our health care system now.
I am tired of being hijacked by snake oil salesmen that paint themselves as conservative versus liberal, as right versus left, when they are really only shills for the privileged class. You cannot be a conservative and ignore that health care costs are wildly out of control. You cannot be a conservative and not see that health care is strangling our economy and our international competitiveness.
You may think that you are a liberal, or a leftist, but you've have been hijacked too.
To the Blue Dogs:
Conservatism resists radical change. Sounds good.
Why risk rocking the health care boat? Good question.
Well the boat is sinking so don't delay to stop the leaking.
The GOP: A 'Rush' to Obscurity
Those of us who pointed out that Michael Steele was elevated to Chairman of the Republican National Committee as both a token, and as attack-dog-in-chief against President Obama should feel completely vindicated. No further evidence need be presented than what recently took place when Mr. Steele had the audacity to say that he was the head of the Republican Party, not Rush Limbaugh. In response Limbaugh all but literally told him to stay in his place.
Limbaugh said, "Yes, said Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, I'm incendiary, and yes, it's ugly. Michael Steele, you are head of the RNC. You are not head of the Republican Party." Limbaugh went on to say, "Tens of millions of conservatives and Republicans have nothing to do with the RNC and right now they want nothing to do with it, and when you call them, asking them for money, they hang up on you."
Is the Talk Radio message reflecting the "conservative" political values that the Republicans have been using to block President Obama's Stimulus Bill? The President has been in office only four-weeks, and Talk Radio is already calling him a failure for not having more Republicans on board. In fact, the hosts on this venue brazenly proclaim their hopes for President Obama's failure. Americans are fortunate that the badly needed Stimulus Bill finally past into law; however, the political squabbling emanating from Right-Wing politicians have tried to taint President Obama's victory. Furthermore, it gave the impression that the Republican Party is trying undermine the political policies that America voted for on Nov. 4th.
Listening to “conservative" Talk Radio, it becomes apparent that the purpose of this venue is to “agitate” their audience and stir-up discontent by spreading disinformation. The Republican Party would have a great deal to gain by using Talk Radio as agitators. Under the pretense of entertainment, these radio hosts can use volatile language to validate the pernicious behavior of Republican politicians. Unfettered, these “conservative” hosts instigate undercurrents of superiority in their audience while inserting pejorative words and phrases to describe people with diverse social/ethnic backgrounds. Then to provoke hatred towards these targeted groups, the radio hosts identifies them as the principle cause of America's problems.
These agitprop tactics harkens back to McCarthyism or worse Hitler's Nazism; in Nazi Germany, the “conservative" agitprop accused Jews of causing the economic crisis and destroying their country. The similarities are surreal; Talk Radio is freely rewriting history to mirror their ideologies to facilitates the fear mongering agitprop that they bombard their audience with virtually every day all day long. In addition, there is the bizarre claim that “Liberal” media and the “Liberal” Democrats will soon eliminate their inalienable rights by eradicating “conservative” Talk Radio; evidently, the purpose of this bizarre claim is to induce paranoid delusions.
Conservative Talk Radio and the Republican Party are like minded - functioning in a group-think mode: They spread “disinformation” to confuse the public; they're ignoring the eight-years of George W. Bush’s governance that has nearly destroyed the America economy; and they continuing to blame the Democrats for our huge $10 trillion Outstanding National Debt ($10,024,724,896,912.49 in September 30, 2008). Conveniently forgetting that Clinton was the only Democratic President in office during the last twenty-eight-years and the amount he contributed to the National Debt was $1 trillion. This means that over the past twenty-eight-years, Republican Presidents are responsible for $8 trillion of the Outstanding National Debt.
Undaunted, President Obama is doing everything possible to quickly bring some relief to America's economic troubles with the $787 billion Stimulus Bill and other legislation in the works. However, Republicans are taking every opportunity to obstruct the President’s efforts, and expecting him to solve America's problems their way. Although looking back, these problems were created by the decades of "conservative" mayhem. Nevertheless, despite the Right-Wing political opposition and the "conservative" agitprop, Americans can be proud of our President's performance during his first four-weeks in office. With a steady hand, President Obama is successfully proving his metal by fulfilling a campaign promise to stand up for working class Americans.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREERepublicans: "Look Y'all–We Got Us One Too!"I hate to be cynical, and I certainly hate to drag the issue of race back into the public debate while President Obama and literally millions of Americans of good will are working so hard to put this ugly issue behind us, but where I come from we believe in calling a hat a hat. And the fact is, the Republican Party's selection of Michael Steele as the very first Black chairman of the Republican National Committee in its 153 year history, just reeks of political manipulation.But I'm virtually certain that my Republican friends are going to say, "We just can't win–first you criticize us for not being inclusive enough, now you're criticize us for electing a Black man as head of the party. Exactly what do we have to do to make you happy?"
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Is Rush Limbaugh on Drugs Again, or Simply the World's Biggest Ego Trip?
Ultra Conservative Political shock jock, Rush Limbaugh, seems to have finally slipped off the reservation. It is hard to know whether he's back on drugs, or if the recent election returns have caused him to lose his mind all together.
In his latest bloviation he's challenging President Obama to enter into negotiations with him on an "Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan," which would divide up a trillion dollars earmarked for stimulating the economy, according to the election returns. Limbaugh reasons that since the President has pledged to take a bipartisan approach to governing, in Limbaugh's view, that entails the president controlling only the percentage of the bailout funds that reflects his margin of victory in the election. In other words, since President Obama won the election by 53% of the vote, he should only control 53% of the bailout funds. The remainder of the funds, that percentage that reflects Sen. McCain's percentage of the vote, should be controlled by none other than Rush himself, to be applied to the economy as way he sees fit.
...Contact: Alex.Karoub@gmail.com
While campaigning before the election, I found in speaking with many fellow Americans that each had handfuls of reasons to vote for Barack Obama. Some had two or three major reasons to vote for him, while a few just did not like the condition of the economy or the Iraq war. By far the majority of Democrats had many reasons to vote for Obama; the number of people who were well versed on the many issues that Obama stood for surprised me. Nice to see how well educated the public became about the election and the candidates. It was a great election!Most Conservatives that I discussed the election choices with had a couple of common interests - 1) most had a fear of change and 2) self-preservation of greed, as their primary concerns. Although they did not initially express it in those terms, that is what further relaxed conversations revealed. In letting those to the right speak their minds, without worry of objection, they soon direct the conversation to money and their strong desires to control others/society by its use.
Many traditional Repulicans were embarrassed by Palin, some voted for Obama as a result. Shockingly, a few actually rallied for Palin; when asked why, their answers were often as empty as Palin's head. I think of those as 'Blind Followers' or 'Followers of Followers', people without substance. Some actually thought of it as a beauty contest, rather than taking the seriousness of her being a potential President in an emergency, shallow. You will enjoy my other blog that is light hearted titled: 'What is Palin?' Or, read my more serious blog: 'Libertarianism, a driving force at the top of the Republican Party'.
OLD APHORISMS THAT CHANGED IN THE LAST 8 YEARS
A few cliches seem to have taken a turn for the worse over the recent past, and have become more pretentious. Keep in mind, the majority of people use the first cliche in sincere and good meaning. The second never was very good, although some conservatives actually live by it. Below are just two which a few people have given new twists to in meaning:
'I give back to the community' - Well, if they didn't grab it so greedily in the first place, there wouldn't be such a need for them to give small token drops of it back. They think giving back makes them ‘absolved of their sins’. 'America, love it or leave it' - In looking at what the wealthiest and most conservative have done, we see some are actually leaving America. First we see a couple of decades back that many major portions of corporations have moved overseas, to now seeing billionaires grab their stashes and actually move completely to other countries. While others (pretending to be Democrats) have taken on second citizenship’s / bank accounts and remote fat legged residences for themselves. They hide from their realities and surround themselves with other fakes of the like, catered to in pretentious princess like surroundings, socially stuffing themselves with cerebral bon-bons and cream puffs.
I initially noticed those mentalities in my younger years as I describe further in my post titled “The Auto Industry, a few of my experiences”.
The Pickens Plan: For those who would like to become an active participant in a solution for our nations energy needs I urge you to join with T.Boone Pickens in his quest for a cleaner planet through alternative energy.
Also see Green Wave Energy: Green Wave was founded by Mark Holmes and was formulated for viable alternative energy solutions. Green Wave Energy is promoting state-of-the-art energy-saving products and services throughout the country.
Green Wave Energy understands alternative energy technology will become “main stream” when
Call 949.645.1701 for information on how Green Wave Energy can help you save the planet.
Alternative EnergySource: David Apperson
url: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/alternative-energy
My name is Susan Theophilopoulos I am a registered nurse working at Sarasota Memorial Hospital in Sarasota FL. I have listened with much interest to the pass year’s campaign promises, particularly those concerning health care. Working in the hospital as an acute care nurse I get to see first -hand the needs of the uninsured and the underinsured and the financial strain that their needs are placing on the hospital. This problem is only going to get worse as our economic problems worsen and the number of unemployed increases. This population usually does not have a primary care physician so they come to the emergency room for their health care needs, all too often they end up admitted to the hospital because lack of follow-up care has caused their condition to worsen. When they have to be admitted to the hospital their hospital stays turn into weeks, sometimes months to assure that they receive the full course of the antibiotic therapy required. Those patients covered by some form of health insurance are admitted, stabilized and then discharged with proper follow-up care; their discharge often takes place within three days. I have been discussing this growing problem with other health care workers, nurses, doctors, etc. and I have developed a plan, which if implemented with as little red tape as possible, just might help the situation. I propose that the government set up small health care clinics in residential neighborhoods, not unlike the old corner grocer. These neighborhood clinics should be able to provide basic medical care and minor emergency care. They would be able to triage the patients and send those in need of hospitalization on to the nearest emergency room, sending their paper work with them to streamline the admission process. These clinics should be within blocks, not miles from the population that they serve. They should be able to provide, child care for cold, flu, vaccinations and well child check. Prenatal care, EKGs, basic x-ray and wound care as well as daily IV antibiotic therapy if indicated. This sounds like a very lofty proposal and very expensive, but I propose that there are ways to contain the costs. First, the clinics can be small, housed in existing building, our banks are carrying many foreclosed houses on their books. They could be approached to sell some of these properties at a greatly reduced rate. Let’s face it, if one bank does not want to co operate then perhaps the one down the block would be interested in taking advantage of the offer. Second the government would provide the equipment and medications need to effectively run the clinics. Third it would become part of the licensure requirement, that if you are licensed to practice within the state, either as a doctor, nurse, respiratory therapist etc, then you are required to work free of charge at least one day each month in the clinic to which you have been assigned. These clinics need to be open 24 hours, and at least Monday thru Saturday, which is not difficult to accomplish, because health care professionals work days and nights, they would just be assigned their usual shift. Lastly the people who live in the community that the clinic serves will be responsible for maintaining it, like keeping the interior clean, maintaining the landscaping so that the building does not become an eye-sore in the neighborhood. That way the community assumes ownership of their clinic and takes pride in it. Perhaps this plan or something similar has been proposed in the past, and has fallen on deaf ears, but the time has come to put self serving greed behind us and reach out to our communities. Everyone who lives and works with in a community shares in this responsibility.
http://wethepeople-forthepeople.blogspot.com/
http://dream-weaverchildrenstory.blogspot.com/
The drug war has failed. It’s Victims come from all walks of life with one thing in common: the drugs they chose to use are illegal. We need to shift our "attack" from Persecution to Education & Treatment.
There has been NO Significant Decrease in drug use since this miserable program was enacted in 1971. And the cost… $50 billion a year (Prevention + Enforcement + Legal Adjudication + Correctional Facilities) For 36 year we have been punishing our citizens, sending them away from their loved ones; their families, their support groups. I ask to what end?
Law Enforcement’s View = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LayaGk0TMDc
We need to start an honest discussion with ourselves and most importantly the young people in this country. “If you do this drug, this will happen” “If you get behind the wheel when drunk/high, this will happen” “If you take too many prescription pills, this will happen” “If you drink too much, this will happen” and most importantly “Yes, marijuana is a drug, but it’s effect is much less that other
Is full decriminalization the answer? I’m not sure, but lumping marijuana in with Heroin and other harder drugs doesn’t make sense to me. Also, Mandatory Minimum sentencing has proved to be a bad policy… go ask any Judge.
Here is one idea of mine: Take the Hard drugs off the street and make them available at drug stores. In order to purchase you will have to take a course to educate yourself on the dangers of drug use. Once you have completed the course you will get a stamp on your driver license’s permitting you to purchase drugs. The license will only be valid for a set number of years at which time you must take a refresher course…. (Politicians; think of the Tax money you can make)
I ask you to please give this issue a new Fresh, Honest, Look.
..... Contact: http://Alex.Karoub@gmail.com
WHO IS THAT GUY BARACK OBAMA? HE IS US.We have made historic headway by together pointing our nation in the right directions. After decades, we have America focused on the issues of fundamental importance. Now, each of us acting in concert can together move our country to lead the world to the fruitfulness of moral goodness. I have no doubts about my abilities and the abilities of fellow Americans to work smart and hard to achieve these goals.Barack Obama has the visions, leadership, and integrity for us to correct and redirect our country to once again lead the world for the fruitions of good. Let's closely listen, learn, and move forward based on that which we know deep inside is good and which we can validate with our hearts. I hope that those who had but a few reasons to support Obama, look further into the other issues more deeply. I found the more I explored, studied, and listened to Obama the more I found us in agreement. The couple of issues that I did not have depth of knowledge of, quickly became obvious in need. This was unusual for me since I have always refused to be any kind of a follower, and still am not. I find Obama to be a deep thinker who is articulate and inspirational; and, of most fundamental importance, Obama makes excellent moral sense.Hopefully, our country has learned lessons from the past of mistakenly following leadership blindly, as was done with Nixon and Bush. There are leaders who are simply in it for themselves and will cater to individuals or groups in order to grab for their own benefit. Corrupt and bad leaders hide at all levels. This is especially true in city government as well as county and state government. The corrupt deals of politicians need to be exposed, and those responsible need to be weeded out in the coming local elections. Others need to be investigated by law enforcement and be prosecuted for illegal dealings; for deals they often make for their hidden personal agendas. Let’s look at the bad experiences of the past as bitter medicines, let’s eliminate the need for such bad medicine in the future. Let us use what we know is good to go forward.I believe we have chosen wisely, not by greed and not by misguided retaliatory anger. I believe this time our country has chosen with open eyes, with each of us listening and examining our choice of leadership closely, driven and validated by our hearts.I hope we can continue to make our efforts even more inclusive (in many more ways than I touch on here). Far right republicans will be stubborn to change, but we will need to include them to change if we are to succeed. Sure a few more will leave our country, but that is not the American way. No, we really don't need their false fronts of power, money, insider knowledge, or other trappings that they have taught many to 'respect?'. Let's recruit as many as we can, that's the American way, evolving and changing together as one nation. Try to be understanding as we move forward; by better understanding each as individuals and people with various desires and needs we will find ways to reach out with friendship and have them join our causes of good.Be on the lookout, and root out bad leadership in government and business. Do not be intimidated by those who use the false fronts of power and give a false sense of security in order to lead. Be extra leery of those who say or imply ‘Trust me’; those who give a sense that they somehow omnipotently know better. No longer will Americans be dazzled by phony displays of brilliance or baffled by baloney. There are government aristocrats and business leaders who still believe in the old adage of: “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle em with bullshit”. We can embrace complexity by demanding true, fundamental, and understandable explanations. We can root out falsehoods by not accepting double speak. We as Americans know how to grow ourselves by first believing in ourselves. Don’t be a follower. Don’t be a follower of followers.However, when we find leaders who are good; a leader that thinks, speaks, and acts from their heart; one that is honest, has integrity, and leads by sincere examples; then we need to in a big way, join them, support them, and promote their causes of good. From much research, investigation, and scrutiny, I believe Barack Obama is such a person. I hope we search for and find many more who are similar, who we can add to service at all levels of government. We need to add/replace leaders in business with ones that have honesty, integrity, and show quality in leadership. We need more people in leadership roles who are moral, like Barack Obama.Remember, we are not fighting a battle, we are the artisans and sculptors of the future for ourselves and generations to come. Rarely do societies have opportunities to make such dramatic moves forward as we now have in this opportunity of today. Take pride and practice in being inclusive as we stride forward. In moving forward, create opportunity not only for yourself, but also for all. Hope is a wonderful thing to behold; but without opportunity, hope can become but a dream never achievable. We can, will, and must, create opportunity.In the coming year I hope that we do not lose our spiritedness, but instead continue to build and make headway. I hope we all continue our campaign for change in government and business. We will succeed in moving forward once again, it will take much effort and good oversight on the part of each of us. We will make great strides in the months and years ahead in order to achieve the fruitions of good. Let's keep our enthusiasm progressing through these coming toughest of times. Let us use the light of goodness and love to motivate us with historic momentum.I have chosen Barack Obama because he best represents my deepest beliefs in America. Please take time to read the issues that Barack Obama has published on this website. Also, give your attention to see how he leads us to move our nation forward in the time ahead. Most importantly, be part of America's great future, participate in the greatness that together we will make. Participate!We will each and all flourish, if we think, speak, and act, by using the love in our hearts.
Your reply is welcome. Contact: Alex.Karoub@gmail.com
Dear Barack:
What a celebration it was the other night in Grant Park! I would guess that the celebration was matched in cities all over the country. It was a well-deserved celebration after a hard-fought election, but it was so much more than that. After hundreds of years of being on the outside looking in, people of color felt a victory they had never before experienced.
As someone who did not support your candidacy, I had a hard time getting excited about the party. I liked the idea of history being made, I really did. And I felt good about all the people who, for the first time, felt like one of their own had been elected to the highest office in the land. I had this strange feeling of being left out of the celebration. I know it was by my own choice and thanks to my own views, but I felt left out just the same.
Don’t get me wrong. It had nothing to do with the color of your skin or mine. I would have been happy to vote for you if we saw eye-to-eye on a few vital issues. You seem like a really good guy. You deliver a speech well. (Although the cadence can get tiresome. You should try to mix it up more. But I digress.) A lot of smart people want to follow you. You have a nice family – beautiful wife, great kids. And that makes it all the more difficult to be on the outside.
If you had one pro-life bone in your body, just maybe…
For a non-partisan friendly version to share with undecided or confused voters, please send this link: http://www.valuesandtruth.org
Sarah Palin is an attractive choice for Vice President on the surface, but then again George W. Bush seemed an attractive choice for President once upon a time. If Palin were to become President, do we really deserve four more years of someone in the George W. Bush mold?Let me explain. Sarah, like George W., is the life of the party (okay even more than George). She's the gal we'd all much rather hang out and have a drink with. She's fun, lively and looks great on TV. When I look at how we admire Gov. Sarah Palin, it reminds me of how we used to admire Gov. George W. Bush. Bush, the “outsider” was gonna fix Washington. Instead, Washington (and the entire American economy) are more broken than ever. (continues)
What is in a label?
Is this man a liberal, a conservative or neither? Some call him the father of conservatism. Some say, not at all, he is the father of liberalism. Some, like me, just like his approach-- maximize freedom, while protecting posterity and lives.
Of whom do I speak? Edmund Burke, (1729-1797).
What did he do?
Well, Edmund Burke was a member of the House of Commons in Britain during our Revolutionary War. He was a Commoner (had no title) and a great believer in English rights, freedoms and liberties.
He argued for us (the American colonists) and tried to persuade the Crown (King George III) to give us representatives at Parliament (taxation WITH representation). After the war begun, Mr. Burke tried to persuade the Crown to reach peace with us. He generally took our side in that particular "family" fued that ended in a spectacular public divorce (and the creation of the United States of America).
He also argued for Irish Home Rule, or at least a lessening of the restrictions on the Irish and Catholicism in Ireland. He may have lost his seat in the House of Commons for pushing for a lessening of trade restrictions on better trading rights for Catholic merchants.
He also advocated against the British slave trade and for freedom of the press.
So why would anyone call this man who so obviously pushed for things that were NOT part of anyone's status quo (at the time) the "hero of the modern conservative movement?" Indeed, at the time, most of what Edmund Burke argued FOR was considered radical (though today, most of us consider his arguments correct):
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/paletta200506160742.asp
Edmund Burke also advocated heatedly against the dangerous notion that England needed a revolution like the revolution that consumed France during his life-time.
He got into a famous spat with Thomas Paine (who in my opinion was a brilliant man, but also was flawed, almost blinded, by his great idealism which surfaces in his dispute with Edmund Burke). Thomas Paine was tried in England for his exceptionally good and well-written "Rights of Man" and its suggestion that even the King of England should be overthrown. He stood trial and argued for free speech, but was convicted. He fled to France.
Yet, before the trial of Tom Paine, there was his fight with Edmund Burke.
I side with Mr. Burke in this fight, so for years, I thought that meant I was a conservative (and I used to be a Republican).
Mr. Burke's point-- here it is in sum--
government becomes "a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead and those who are yet to be born." From Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France.
Mr. Paine said no, that the living owed nothing to the dead and those yet to be born should create their own government and in no way be bound by the present generation.
Those are lofty words of Mr. Paine's, but in my opinion, those words are beyond idealistic.
For in any age, war is brutal and it leaves a scar for future generations. War should only be undertaken if absolutely necessary. Our founding fathers attempted without success to resolve their differences with the Crown of England and only resorted to war when all else had failed. War is choatic and the many do not prosper-- and in the chaos of war, wisdom is often lost and sometimes it takes quite awhile to find wisdom again (think of the long Dark Ages in Europe after the Fall of Rome).
Our founding fathers made the fateful decision to fight for independence (knowing that if they lost, they would probably all hang as traitors) as John Adams explained this way:
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain. John Adams
Our founding fathers made this choice for the future, not in spite of it.The French Revolution haunted me the moment I read anything about it. The senseless slaughter, the mobs hungrily waiting for more blood, the tumbrils rolling endlessly in Paris-- all combined to make me shudder at what can happen when we decide that there are no boundaries to what we can do..... I agree with Mr. Burke. But, I also agree with Mr. Burke (and Senator Obama) that inside of democratic institutions you are always struggling to create more liberty and freedoms, to protect the freedoms that you have-- to paraphrase Senator Obama, you are attempting to create a more perfect union. Those approaches can be radical, slow, or in between-- and they can work without violating our pact to the past, or to the future so long as we respect our institutions and obey our Constitution.
Indeed, our Founding Fathers GAVE US THE TOOLS to do exactly this and if we but obey our Constitution, we can do what we need to do to get our Country back on the right track. We can fix this mess AND respect our Constitution and so honor those who came before us AND protect our blessings for future generations as Mr. Burke argued so eloquently that all men had an obligation to do.
Respecting our institutions is not something that the RNC has done at ALL lately. This is the lie, I think, in the current conservative movement in America's adoption of Mr. Burke. We have seen the RNC disrespect our most crucial institutions--
some in the RNC have disrespected the very medals our Country gives for courage on the field of battle (maligning Bronze and Silver Star recipient Senator John Kerry's courage by undermining his right to receive those marks of military courage),
our current Republican administration has abused our Constitution (suspending the Great Writ, Habeas Corpus, creating the imperil Presidency with the newly invented "unitary theory of the executive"),
many in the RNC have treated some of our Justices horrifically and even suggested that violence may be appropriate (most notably Senator Cornyn of Texas did this when he suggested that Judicial activism might be expected to result in violence in response to a bill seeking greater security for Judges after a Judge's mother and husband were murdered because she passed harsh sentences against organized crime),
our current Bush administration has hired "Bushies" to operate throughout our government even though in many cases these people do not have the requisite knowledge to do their jobs (loyalty over merit),
and how about the way in which many in the RNC speak in such ugly terms about a United States Senator? Yes, Senator Obama is the Democratic nominee for President-- but a United States Senator is surely owed SOME modicum of respect simply by virtue of his position in a very important American institution.
and the list could be endless so I will stop it there.
No matter WHAT insulting word Senator McCain, or anyone choose to throw at Senator Obama-- it does NOT matter. What does matter is simple--Our Country is in a ditch and we need to get out of that ditch --and we need to do this while respecting, and obeying our Constitution and our great American institutions.There is only ONE candidate in the race who can do this-- Senator Barack Obama.
The other candidate, Senator John McCain, is too tied up in his own ideological adherence-- indeed, I could argue (and probably would if I had half the mind of Edmund Burke) that Senator McCain has a blind-spot just like Tom Paine had all of those years ago.He is an idealist, is Senator McCain-- he blindly believes (even in the face of all of the recent facts to the contrary) that deregulation IS the answer to everything (from health care to education-- this is Senator McCain's solution), and in any instance where you cannot deregulate, you lower taxes no matter what the problem is.We cannot afford to continue this blindness. We have been blinded in this way for decades now.
It is time to SEE CLEARLY. It is time to elect Barack Obama.
Conservatism is the most Christian of movements. At its core is the belief in the better angels of our nature. It approaches society from an optimist's perspective. It believes that people do not need the government as an intercessor for their interactions. In it, we find all manner of personal freedoms and individual liberties. However, this is simply the ideal. Unfortunately, the movement has been hijacked by the tyranny of the wicked and corrupt; men and women who seek their own vainglory at the expense of those who they should sheperd.
Just today, Barack Obama said that he would work to end the mindless partisanship and divisiveness that plagues our nation. But he can't do it alone. He needs all of us. That's why I've started the New National Dialog Project, both here and on Facebook.
The New National Dialog Project is, at this point, just an idea. It is a recognition that Barack Obama's highly successful ground game in 50 states has helped turn this election around for him, and that it can just as easily help turn around the culture wars of this country. When people speak to people - their friends, neighbors, family members, people wherever they spend time, strangers on the street - they can begin to explore our differences and our similarities.
The idea behind this project comes from Barack Obama, but we have to make it real. Please join the New National Dialog Project and help build it, define it and make it real. You can find it on this site and on Facebook. Some day, I hope we'll have our own website and that a national campaign, and that Barack Obama will take the reigns of this idea and begin the healing that, over the next four or eight years of his presidency, can bring sanity and unity to this country and end the domination of fear and lies.
Please join us now.
Thank you,
Rusel DeMaria
