ObamaVets dot Com

On Patriotism

Patriotism is more than a lapel pin or waving the flag. It’s more than a platitude or proclamation. Patriotism is a word to describe the idea but is not the idea. To say Barak Obama is not a patriot when he is a fellow American serving his country in the halls of congress as a senator is in fact an unpatriotic attitude. Obama is demonstrating the idea and not just talking about it. Taking his wife’s comments completely out of context is not patriotic but rather an act of personal attack that is unjustified.

 Michelle Obama said while talking about the political aspects of America, “For the first time in my adult life, I’m proud of my country”. That statement does not imply a lack of patriotism but rather a reaffirmation of patriotism.

Much has been made of Rev. Wright’s comments and his church. Reverend Wright’s church did not in fact bestow an award upon Louis Farrakhan but rather a magazine that is a separate entity from the church bestowed the award. Patriotism involves the responsibility to protect the right of any citizen to express a dissenting opinion. Reverend Wright’s sermons may be distasteful and he may struggle with the facts or take things out of context, but they are guaranteed as his right under the constitution. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are bedrock of our nation’s strength. His sermons may seem to reflect dissent but was not this country founded on dissent? It could be argued that Reverend Write is living the idea of patriotism by publically and forcefully exercising his rights for the intended good of his community. 

Does it really matter what Obama knew or didn’t know in regards to Reverend Wright’s sermons? Has Obama’s professional accomplishments reflected any of the negative views of Reverend Wright? Has Obama introduced any bills in the State Senate or the US Senate that could be construed as unpatriotic or racist or hateful? Has he ever spoken words that reflected the values of Reverend Wright that might be considered in poor taste or unpatriotic? The answer my friend is simply “no”.

As to Obama’s awkward explanation of his grandmother’s struggle with racism, he inadvertently spoke a truth that every white American knows. We are all typically white in our racial insecurities. Think about how you make sure the locks on your car doors are locked when driving in a black community. Think about how you might avoid social or political events in black communities. Just look at your blind of acceptance of poverty and drugs in the black community because you think it normal somehow. Think of all of the stereotypes you blindly accept about black Americans. Yes, friends we are from the perspective of a black American, typical white Americans.

I have remained an American despite knowing my country’s sordid history of enslavement of blacks, genocide against the Native American peoples, suppression of women’s rights, internment of Japanese Americans, enforcement of Jim Crow, and now suppression of our civil rights through Presidential decree. Does my 57 year association signify a total acceptance of all that is wrong with this country and history? Am I less of a patriot? Hell no! I remained with my country because of its being “an imperfect union” and Obama has remained with his church in the same way. Although Reverend Wright, like George Bush, does not serve as the best leader, Obama chose to remain with the church which is a key to empowering the community with hope, love and salvation. No more a crime than remaining an American even though Bush has made that an embarrassment in the eyes of the world.

If you should doubt my credentials for critiquing your comments regarding patriotism, I should inform you that I served my country in uniform for twenty years. I am an old “typical white person” who has bothered to understand my fears and prejudice. As for you, what have you done for you country in your lifetime or lately?

A More Perfect Union

Obama’s Speech & Making Them Think

One of the best quotes I have ever heard regarding the depths of ignorance in our society was delivered by my Earth Science professor, “You can lead a people to knowledge but you can’t make them think”. That very accurately summarizes some of the reactions to Barak Obama’s speech on race in America today. He delivered perhaps one of the most significant speeches on race in 40 years and sadly was not able to lead a loud minority of knuckle-draggers to knowledge. Of course, I have to wonder how many of those jerks actually heard or read the speech before they launched their vitriol on the blogs.

I would like to think at 57 years of age, I have seen it all when it comes to blind stupidity but the scale of ignorance in some individuals still surprises me. Even in my 20 years in the Army, the typically moronic, nearly brain dead fools that I had met, had nothing on the more contemporary idiots of today. For example, Obama delivers a major address that clearly did not accuse one side over the other or criticize one race for its color and the virtual bottom feeders call him a racist. I can’t help but wonder if these people even have a clue as to just how stupid they are.

Now I know it’s bad to label these unfortunate cretins and that I should hearken back to my Christian values and express compassion for the less fortunate, but it’s not like these people were born without a brain. I mean if they were, it would be understandable. No, they were given a brain but obviously didn’t get the instructions for using it.

So, I can either try to educate and inform (something Obama attempted today) or I can just sit here and hope that our creator, in his or her wisdom, made enough “normal” people to offset the impact of the idiots that were given access to drool proof keyboards. I think for now, I’ll just sit here and remember what my professor said, “You can lead a people to knowledge but you can’t make them think”.

On Guilt By Association

Let’s look at guilt by association. The storyline is that somehow Barak Obama must suffer the sins of Reverend Wright. There is an assignment of guilt based on the words and deeds of someone else. Many say it’s politically justified in that one should not be associated with someone else whose values and beliefs are not the same as the mainstream. 

Okay, fine. Lets go with that. Lets extend that logic to all of us. The issue is a religious leader who has said reprehensible things. Now what he has said is offensive to many, crudely presented and hostile in its tenor but…not illegal. That person has a constitutional right to say what he said. That person speaks for a religious institution which represents a religion. That religion happens to be Christian. 

Lets look at our common association with religion. Generally speaking, America was founded on religious principals. We have God on our money, in our home and in our communities. The question to be asked is what does our association with religion mean? 

The following points are historical fact: 

Throughout the ages, wars have been fought, lands conquered, people subjugated, murdered, and oppressed all in the name of God. Whether you look at the inquisition, Catholic dominated political control of Central Europe, the doctrine of Manifest Destiny that justified the subjugation and genocide directed toward people of color and political difference, its all there. The Catholic church has decreed that gays and women are second class citizens, burned heretics at the stake and shuffled child molesters from Parrish to Parrish rather than subjecting them to the full force of the law. The Catholic and other Christian churches sat on the sidelines when Nazis marched into battle wearing belt buckles reading “God is with us” and proceeded to exterminate millions of Jews. The Christian religion stood mute during the era of slavery or in the south, delivered thunderous sermons exhorting slave holders to take up arms and secede from the Union. Those same churches supported segregation and Jim Crow. 

Throughout history, religion has played a nefarious role in the directing the course of history and we have been unwavering in our support of our churches. Should we not, using the concept of guilt by association, all be guilty of the sins of the church? Hasn’t our support given legitimacy to the despicable acts of religion’s history?

The Bible tells us, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Are you, the outraged inquisitors casting the first stone?  

“Just speeches”

How many times has Hillary pointed at Obama’s oratory and exclaimed, “Just speeches”as if to suggest that there was nothing valuable about giving speeches? We have heard it over and over from Clinton. We have also heard Hillary tout her 35 years of experience and how her time in the White House has prepared her to meet the threshold as Commander in Chief. So, lets look at her accomplishments as First Lady:

“When her husband was elected President in 1992, Hillary’s work as a champion for women was recognized and admired around the world. She traveled the globe speaking out against the degradation and abuse of women and standing up for the powerful idea that women’s rights are human rights.” Hillary Clinton’s official website

“Just speeches”

“In the White House, Hillary led efforts to make adoption easier, to expand early learning and child care, to increase funding for breast cancer research, and to help veterans suffering from Gulf War syndrome who had too often been ignored in the past. She helped launch a national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy and helped create the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, which moved children from foster care to adoption more quickly. Thanks in part to her efforts, the number of children who have moved out of foster care into adoption has increased dramatically.” Hillary Clinton’s official website

“Just speeches”

“She was instrumental in designing and championing the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which has provided millions of children with health insurance. She battled the big drug companies to force them to test their drugs for children and to make sure all kids get the immunizations they need through the Vaccines for Children Program. Immunization rates dramatically improved after the program launched.” Hillary Clinton’s official website

Based on the following-

“She wasn’t a legislator, she didn’t write the law, and she wasn’t the president, so she didn’t make the decisions,” says Nick Littlefield, then a senior health adviser to Kennedy. “But we relied on her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to do it.”

“Just speeches”

The same applies to her claims about Northern Ireland, Kosovo and China. In every case, she had no official diplomatic or political involvement and did not author or sign any treaties or serve in any official capacity. It was all “Just speeches”.

So Hillary, what’s it going to be? Does Obama’s oratory count or not? You can’t claim your qualifications based on “Just speeches” as being superior to Obama’s because he only gave “Just speeches”. You can’t have it both ways!

UPDATE: Here’s a link to a good article that points to Hillary’s myth: Article

Through the Looking Glass

Where do I start? I think it’s all about Clinton’s schizoid political views. On one hand, the election is about delegates and then it’s about big states, some votes count but not the ones from caucuses, small states or states with a large black vote. Hillary can get down in the gutter and throw all the filth she finds there but if Obama fires back, she insists that heads must roll. Hillary claims she is commander in chief material but she takes offense when its pointed out that diplomatic teas and speeches don’t count. Maybe because she says that speeches don’t count? Did she forget to take her meds? Seriously, that would be the only explanation for the incredulous idea she has to turn around and state that Obama would be an asset on her ticket.

Am I the only person in America that thinks this is just a little crazy? There are so many half-truths, twisted context and outright lies by the Clinton campaign, I have given up trying to argue against each one. There doesn’t seem to be a week that goes by where the same Hillary shows up. We have seen Hillary the anointed, Hillary the disappointed, Hillary the shrill, Hillary the drama queen, Hillary the victim and Hillary all of above. She has demonstrated so many personalities that the DNC ought to require her to register as seven different candidates.

It’s not only Hillary but the entire Clinton staff that seems just a little loony. Her surrogates seem just as deranged. Howard Wolfson compares Obama with the infamous Kenneth Starr. Did somebody open the doors of the asylum? Her staff has made other mind-boggling utterances that sound as though they were scripted by someone who used Babble fish to translate them from a long dead language.

As the battle moves forward, I can’t help but wonder if the Clinton circus can top the lunacy they have already perpetrated. Do you think the rest of us will need meds before its all over?

Spread the Word!

Go to the DNC website at  http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues

and tell them the following:

I want to express my desire that the DNC and Howard Dean not bend on the issue of Florida and Michigan. To accept anything less than not seating those delegates would be tacit support of Hillary Clinton and therefore undermining the integrity of the Democrat Party. To arbitrarily offer an unfair advantage to any campaign at this late date would disenfranchise more than the voters of Michigan and Florida. It would dilute the votes of the millions of people from across the nation, who have voted already.

Obama On Special Interests & Ethics

The Power of the Press

I need to carefully consider what I am about to write. I want to remain fair and objective as difficult as it is. I have come to the point where I believe the press is driving the primary contest. There are two ways to manipulate information if you want to manipulate people. One is by reporting only some of the facts and the other is reporting none of the facts. The press has managed to do both when it comes to their coverage of Hillary Clinton.

This campaign has been all about manipulation of the facts by the Clinton campaign and the press has let her get away with it. I can list all of the Clinton transgressions, but it serves no purpose at this point. It does little good to call on all Americans to condemn Hillary because my voice will not be heard. All I can do at this point is hope and HOPE is what Obama’s campaign is all about. My hope is that the press looks at themselves in the mirror and become as disgusted at what the rest of us see.

Empty Pants Suit?

Hillary was missing in action back on the eve of the Potomac elections when she FAILED to vote against giving the telecoms immunity for any lawsuits related to domestic spying by Bush administration. See the following link for details. Link