Tag: Speeches

Obama’s Patriotic Tour

Barely one month after sealing his victory in the primaries and with four months to go before the general election, the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama has embarked on a campaign swing that has the declared aim of proving his patriotism.

Obama kicked off his patriotism tour—set to run through the July 4th holiday—with a speech entitled “The America We Love,” delivered in Independence, Missouri. The site was chosen not merely for the town’s name, but to establish Obama’s connection with its most famous son—Harry Truman, the Democratic president who ordered atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Obama’s speech, ostensibly a reflection upon patriotism and “American values” in the run-up to July 4th, was a thoroughly reactionary address, in which words were carefully chosen to identify with themes generally associated with the Republican right and, at key points, to deliver a kick in the teeth to sections of left-liberal Democrats who have deluded themselves and sought to generate illusions in others about the real political character of his campaign.

Obama began his speech with a ritualistic reference to the “men of Lexington and Concord … our first patriots,” without a word to acknowledge that the democratic ideals embodied in the American Revolution and the guarantees of democratic rights written into the US Constitution have been subjected to a wholesale repudiation in practice by the current Republican administration in Washington.

Of course, the Democrats and Obama himself are fully complicit in this process. “How do we keep ourselves safe and secure while preserving our liberties?” the Democratic candidate asked rhetorically at one point in the speech. Obama offered no answer, but just the week before he announced his support for a bill legalizing the Bush administration’s domestic spying program, while offering blanket immunity to telecommunications companies that collaborated in the massive illegal warrantless wiretapping operation.

To me it is a little silly for anyone to have to prove their patriotism to anyone.  I guess this makes good copy for the 24 hour news stations.  It is either this or some car chase in Peoria.

Professor’s Political Classroom

I am really weary of the term being used…..just what is an elitist?

Elitist! Elitist? Who Is The Elitist? (A History Lesson)

Have you heard this term used recently? Oh yeah, Clinton and McCain have thrown it around like Mardi Gras beads. But what does it, the term, really mean? That will depend on who you are and where you are. Right now, the use of the term elitist is nothing more than a media buzzword or a political talking point. No where do any of these so-called people of the people bother to explain what they are talking about. I will attempt to give the reader a little background on the term, elitist.

Remember ancient Greece, the birthplace of democracy? Back in the early days of Greek political discussions, the Sophists, most notably Thrasymachus termed those who were the strongest in society as elitists—the rulers—who control education and socialization through legislation and enforcement. But, like everyone else, they are self-interested. Hence they make laws and conventions that are in their own interests, not those of their weaker subjects. It is these conventions that largely determine their subject’s conceptions of justice and other virtues. By being trained, through civics class, to follow and obey, subjects are unwittingly adopting an ideology, a code of values and behavior that serves not their own interests but rather those of their rulers.

To put this more simply, The state is nothing more than an organ of a ruling minority. That the majority (meaning you) is permanently incapable of governing themselves because they lack the capacity to govern. The masses are manipulated by the power elite, because they are passive. Why the people are considered passive? Easy one—1) they do not have a clear concept of what they want from the state, 2) the people are incapable of objectively assessing and interpreting facts, 3) the people are irrational in their reasoning process.

A political inequality is a mechanism by which society ensures that the important positions are filled by most qualified people. And those positions are filled by an uninformed public that votes these elitists into position of power, never to see them relinquish it. These people live by a code that says that their needs to be a certain amount of social, economic and political inequality for the society to function properly. These beliefs make truly participatory democracy impossibility. Why? Power should never be diffused to the will of the people.

Now, Clinton and McCain have called Obama an elitist……thinking……an elitist calling an elitist an elitist…how silly! Clinton is an elitist, after 35 years of power and control, she could be nothing else. McCain is the same story. Now for Obama, he cannot be considered an all out elitist but when a leader emerges from the masses, then he will do any and everything to avoid returning to that position. He will most likely, once transformed into an elitist, become transformed into a jealous guardian of his own privilege once he obtains power.

Someone once called this election season as “the silly season” and on that point I agree. I hope that this short history lesson helps you to understand what an elitist is and that everyone involved in politics is just that. They are from the get go or the morph into one after they attain power and influence. The American voter has no real choice when voting…..they vote for elitist A or elitist B…that is one reason that very little changes from one elected president to another.

I just wanted to let my readers know just what is meant by the use of the term elitist….I await your comments…..

Clinton’s Misspeak On Assassination

There has been a wealth of talk in the meid about the Clinton comment on the RFK assassination.  The following is a post by Guy T. Saperstein in the Huffington Post:

I am a close personal friend of Mark Penn and Harold Wolfson. Recently, I was permitted to read, but not copy, a secret campaign memo co-authored by Hillary and Bill Clinton addressed to their demoralized campaign staff. The memo lays out many possible paths to victory still remaining in the Democratic nomination process for Hillary. My best recollection of this memo is as follows:

1. Assassination is still on the table, but it is only one possibility out of many. In light of the public furor in response to Hillary’s assassination comments, for the time being this possibility will be de-emphasized.

2. Astrophysicists are predicting an increase of meteor showers between now and the Democratic Convention. It is possible that a small meteor could hit Barack Obama in the temple at any time.

3. The most common place where people suffer fatal injuries is in their bath tub and shower. Obama is rumored to bathe every day.

4. It has been reported that Obama likes tofu; it is a little-known fact but many people have died choking on tofu.

5. We are engaged in secret conversations with George Bush and Dick Cheney to encourage them to move up the Iran invasion date from mid-October to the first week in August. We will jump all over this issue in support of the invasion and our brave troops. America likes invading other countries. That peacenik wimp Obama won’t stand a chance.

6. Obama uses an airplane to fly to many of his campaign appearances. With the soaring price of jet fuel, there is a chance his plane will run out of fuel in-flight. It is not a glider.

7. Obama plays basketball every morning. It is possible, even likely, that he could suffer serious damage to his knees and not be able to walk between now and November without a walker or wheelchair. No one wants a President in a wheelchair. We know there is the precedent of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, but that was before TV.

The Obama campaign only appears to be strong. Obama actually is quite vulnerable, as this memo has made clear. This is no time to feel bad, be nice or stop attacking [pandering to voters is still OK]. We are in this to WIN so stop grousing about the crappy campaign you all think we have run, think like a pit bull, not a poodle, buck up your spirits and your rhetoric and continue to ATTACK!

According to this the reference to the assassination may not have been the fortunate accident that it is claimed to be.

What’s In A Word?

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton apologized Friday after she mentioned the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to remain in the race against Sen. Barack Obama.

In a taped meeting with the editorial board of the Argus-Leader newspaper in Sioux Falls, S.D., Clinton said: “My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.”

Clinton’s comment brought a swift rebuke from the Obama campaign. Obama, who’s likely to be the first African-American to be a major party’s presidential nominee, was given Secret Service protection early in the campaign season because of concerns for his safety.

So I ask, what’s in a word?  Let me see there was a week’s worth of crap from the media over Michelle Obama’s, “proud” comment, then there was the now famous bitter comment, so it will be interesting to see if the media is gonna play ball and let it go.  Personally, I think they will.  Why?  The media let Clinton tap dance on the “hard working wjite Americans” comment, so they will let her go with this most recent one.

Does Bush Really Know What He Says?

OMG!  Will someone, anyone, please have the decency to tell Pres. Bush  to shut up, that is embarrassing the country.

While in Israel Bush addressed the Jewish parliament and took a shot at Obama and his statement that he would talk with all countries, including Iran.  Of course, he had to bring up the Nazis and Hitler, which I thought was in bad taste, but that is me.  Bush basically said that it was foolish to engage other nations especially those that sponsor terrorism.

……Thinking…………

Did not Bush start and continue talking with Qadafi?  Did it not produce an agreement that Qadafi would give up his nukes?  And was not Libya considered a state that sponsored terrorism?

Bush continues to try and use his tired argument of FEAR on the US and now the rest of the world.  He was pandering to the Israelis and I do not think they will fall for it.  Bush is just tacky and tired.  He probably thought that there would be no bounce on the speech.  He is wrong..he will be seen for the idiot he really is…and by the whole world.  There are somethings you do not do and Bush broke that rule by his irresponsible statement.

Pres. Bush Addresses Gas Prices

Yesterday I wasted a chunk of time watching the president’s press conference on the raising gas prices.  I came away with just one question, does this guy have a clue of what he is saying?  He said the the high price was hurting Americans, which was a very observant of him.  As with most of his recent press conferences, it is the fault of the Democrats in Congress.

They are blocking the domestic oil exploration and blocking the building of refineries.  Basically, ANWR needs to be opened and environmental restrictions need to be eliminated so that refineries can be built.  Now, are nay of you buy this bovine fecal matter?  If so, that morphine drip you are on is doing its job.

Does anyone really think that if oil companies could explore in ANWR would bring the gas prices down?  These companies are making obscene profits, investors are happy, so where would the incentive be to lower gas prices?

So, to blame America’s dependence on gas on the Democrats, is just about one of the dumbest things this president has ever said and there have been many to choose from in the past.

Bill Clinton Finds His Groove

I have read where the MSM says he has returned to his past glory as a master campaigner.  His new roll in the campaign is to send him into the “sticks” where there is little major coverage so that he can place his foot in Hillary’s mouth and not much will be made out of it.

Bill is campaigning hard in the smaller towns and cities in Indiana and North Carolina, mostly white low income working people.  To me, it appears that the Clintons have written off black America for the white voter that blames Washington for all their ills.  Bubba can work his charm.

Bill toots his own horn about his presidency and then throws an oh yeah, vote for Hillary, in there.  He threatens the voters, he massages the voter, he makes light of Obama’s appeal, basically he is panering and pandering hard.

But it is a good plan for if there is anyone out there that will by his BS it will be rural whites.

Ever Hear Of Magnaquench?

The closing days of the Indiana primary, Clinton has used the loss of jobs from an Indiana company know as Magnaquench as a poster child for the ills of the trade system we have now.

Clinton also presented the loss of Magnaquench jobs in Valparaiso as a prime reason she has proposed a plan to make it tougher to move sensitive defense industry jobs out of the United States.

Joined onstage by former Magnaquench employees Teri Luna and Stanley Trout, Clinton said the loss of 225 jobs was only part of the travesty of Magnaquench.

The company made magnets used in “smart bomb” technology, but the plant was moved to China in 2004 after a Chinese consortium purchased it.

This is one of those Clinton mis-speaks, they are becoming famous for their verbal gymnastic, where the whole truth is not really given to the public.  Yes the company was moved to China in 2004, but it was actually bought under the rule of King Bill in 1995.  The high tech stuff that left this country for foreign soil, was not quite accurate–the technology was readily available on the open market from numerous sources.

One more thing, her best support in Indiana is Evan Bayh, he was on my short list as possible VP candidates for her if she gets the nomination, he is a co-conspirator with her from the DLC.  But beyond that, this is what ABC News uncovered:

What Clinton doesn’t tell voters is that Magnequench was originally sold to Chinese interests during her husband’s administration, which okayed the move despite concerns about national security and eventual job loss. Experts say the Chinese acquired the “technical sophistication” that created the magnets long before George W. Bush took office.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind,, Clinton’s top surrogate in the state, often joins her on the stump in bashing the president for allowing Magnequench to move abroad. What Bayh doesn’t tell voters these days is that he has blamed the company’s moving on a 1995 decision made by Clinton’s husband’s administration. …

A memo prepared for Bayh by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service earlier this year stated that the Clinton administration could have objected to the sale under CFIUS, but it did not, and that the consortium promised to keep those Anderson, Ind., jobs in the U.S. only until 2005.

An Oct. 6, 2005, press release from Bayh noted that he asked for the Government Accountability Office to study “concerns over foreign takeovers of American companies with national security implications … after an Indiana company called Magnequench closed thanks to a 1995 decision by CFIUS to approve a Chinese consortium’s takeover. At the time, Magnequench made 85 percent of the magnets used to guide U.S. smart bombs.”

As for the jobs issue, Shingleton says she’s “befuddled” because of the support for free trade and globalization seen in Bill Clinton’s administration, which resulted in much larger job losses in the region.

So Bayh is just as much a hypocrite as any politician, he will say what is most advantageous.

First the sniper thing, then the Ohio hospital thing and now this, someone on the Obama campaign please use this to their advantage.  If they truly want the White House, it is time to play the game.

McCain: The Crawfish

Repub, John McCain has had to step back and explain his statement on numerous occasions.  The latest was a comment he made in Denver.

“My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East,” McCain said.

The expected GOP nominee sought to clarify his comments later, after his campaign plane landed in Phoenix. He said he didn’t mean the U.S. went to war in Iraq five years ago over oil.

“No, no, I was talking about that we had fought the Gulf War for several reasons,” McCain told reporters.

One reason was Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, he said. “But also we didn’t want him to have control over the oil, and that part of the world is critical to us because of our dependency on foreign oil, and it’s more important than any other part of the world,” he said.

There have been other occasions where he had to explain himself.  It was the second time in as many days that McCain had to clarify his comments. On Thursday, he backed off his assertion that pork-barrel spending led to last year’s deadly bridge collapse in Minneapolis.

I think there will be much more he has to explain, but the problem is, will the Dems attack him for his screw ups?

It’s The Economy, Stupid–Part……?

Gee in the last week everybody and his brother has made a major speech on the economy.  Finally, they are noticing.  But one is a pep rally, with few specifics and the few that are given are so vague that they can be adjusted to anything and still be within the lame promises.  then there is another candidate that has the position of just wait and see what will happen.  Now there is a plan that we all can get behind.  And the last one was a pretty good speech that outlined several ways to try a repair a failing economy and it was about the first time that the word “recession” has been used in a major speech by a major candidate.  That part was refreshing.

Everyone still embraces the corporate line, where if business is doing good then the people will do good.  I am not going to say that.  If the consumer cannot buy then the economy will stay weak.  If they are only concerned with the investors and speculators then the economy will be good.  At least through their eyes, but the American taxpayer will remain in the crapper.

I want to hear specifics on how these candidates are going to put more money in the hands of consumers.  Until that happens nothing they do, promise or think will help this sagging economy.