Perusing the web, I can across a Newsweek article posted on MSNBC going gaga over Obama's selections of Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State, Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security Secretary, and Susan Rice as US Ambassador to the United Nations.
Why is it that Obama gets a nice puff piece for his cabinet selections? George Bush selects Colin Powell as Secretary of State and Condoleezza Rice as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State. But no, it's Obama who credited with blowing through "racial barriers." Give me a break. Are readers of Newsweek and MSNBC that tuned out? Hate or love Bush (probably hate), crediting Obama, a black man, with blowing through racial barriers in cabinet appointees is humorous, and not newsworthy. Obama himself has blown through a barrier thanks to the American people. I am not an Obama fan, but I can give him credit for what is simple history, and I recognize and applaud its significance. Give Bush the same credit for his achievements in this area.
It is officially time for the War on Christmas to begin. Schools will be forbidden to display anything in their buildings that highlight Christmas, Christmas Break has been renamed Winter Break, Santa Clause if off limits, and numerous guest speakers and displays of Ramadan, Kwanza, etc., will be presented to ensure students learn tolerance. Nativity displays from public parks, state buildings, etc will be removed and holiday phrases such as “Merry Christmas,” “God Bless You All,” “The Savoir is Born,” etc. will be removed and replaced my the more tolerant, “Happy Holidays,” and “Winter Blessings.”
In 2006, a passing Rabbi in Seattle-Tacoma International Airport decided that a display of Christmas trees was not tolerant of his religion. He therefore insisted an electric menorah also be added. He filed suit. The airport removed the trees. Christmas was over at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.
In retaliation, a Colorado-Springs Christian political action group is producing a campaign to boycott retailers who use secular phrases such as “Happy Holidays.” Although I can’t disagree with the strategy, I don’t fully support it either. I am a big believer that business does what is best for business. In other words, if Old Navy chooses to use the phrase “Happy Holidays,” or “Merry Christmas,” then their bean counters are telling them so because of YOU! In short, markets respond to the demands of the people.
Putting the end to the War on Christmas, or at least taking the high ground, involves the people, and it begins and ends in our legislature and courts. Liberals are all for “tolerance.” However, this means that everything is OK so long as it isn’t Christian or has anything to with Christmas. When law suits are filed by various religious sects and liberal organizations such as moveon.org, and the ACLU, displays of Christmas are quickly removed. Why? Because the cost of going to court simply isn’t worth it. In addition, they will probably lose!
Want your Christmas back? Look around the neighborhood. I can’t help but notice the number of displays decrease every year. Heck, buy a snowman for $10 at WalMart in the “Holiday Section,” and put him on your porch; do something! Say “Merry Christmas” to your co-workers instead of secular phrases. It’s OK; you’re allowed (1st Amendment). Do try to shop at stores that openly celebrate the “Christmas” season. This can help change marketing. But above of all, think about the people you are voting into office. Not that the secularization of Christmas should be the number one priority, but it will fit nicely into an overall evaluation of their character. For starters, stop voting in liberals!
Are you aware of the National Sex Offender Registry? Ever taken a peek? Why? Did it bother you to find a sex offender, or even more than one sex offender living virtually next door? Does it bother you that the next President of The United States enjoys friendship with an unrepentant terrorist?
Bill Ayers was and is a terrorist. He has openly admitted in his book Fugitive Days to bombing New York City police headquarters in 1970 and the Capitol building in 1971 as a member of the radical group, Weathermen. Incredibly disturbing, he told New York Times reporter Dinitia Smith that, “I don’t regret setting the bombs." Come on, this is all in the past. He is a washed up terrorist. Ok, does it make you sick to the stomach to learn that this article was published in 2001? How about if I told you September 11, 2001? Yes, this article was published in the New York Times on September 11, 2001.
It boggles my mind that anyone in this country who considers themselves reasonably intelligent could have possibly voted for Barrack Obama. Did you not know? If not, why? Put politics aside. Obama has a chummy relationship with this coward. Ayers helped launch Obama’s Illinois Senatorial campaign in the mid-90s and served with him on the board of the Woods fund through 2002 (Ayers still serves, having begun in 1999). If you are honest with yourself, then you know very well that your friends represent, although to a limit, your own beliefs and value system. I would never be associated with a person such as Bill Ayers. And you know equally well that anyone with such a relationship says a lot about them.
Let me leave you with this thought to fester. In the same 2001 New York Times Interview with Ayers, he was asked if he would do it again? His response…
Yesterday, a caller to Rush Limbaugh briefly discussed with him the history of the United States and the pirates off the Barbary Coast. Rush correctly identified these pirates as the first Muslim terrorists in American history. In brief, Barbary Pirates would seize merchant ships from all nations, requiring yearly tributes from their governments to gain immunity from such attacks. Even the most powerful naval force in the world, Britain, found it cheaper to pay the tributes than wage war. Once America gained its independence, the United States was no longer protected under Britain tributes. George Washington and John Adams, already struggling to keep a weak government alive, gave into the demands of tribute. Thinking began to change in Thomas Jefferson’s administration. However, I disagree with Rush’s account of Jefferson’s tact with the Barbary pirates.
Jefferson was weak, at best, in his resolve to eliminate tribute payments. Jefferson was a republican who believed in a weak central government. As such he resisted efforts to construct a military, including the build-up of a navy. Consequently, he had little to work with in sending a naval force to deal with the problem.
Real credit for creating a beginning to the end of the Barbary pirates belongs to William Eaton. Eaton, with his bombastic personality and stubborn will, led a mixed army of 500 marines, Greek, Arabs, and mercenaries in a successful attack against the Tripoli city of Derna. This is what set the stage for the incompetent Tobias Lear, Jefferson’s consul general, to negotiate a treaty with the Bashaw of Tripoli. Lear, not grasping the advantage Eaton had gained in his victory in Derna, enabling a possible assault on the Bashaw himself in Tripoli, negotiated a treaty with the Bashaw of Tripoli. Lear’s treaty included a ransom of $60,000 for American naval prisoners held by the Bashaw after the disgraceful capture of the naval frigate Philadelphia, due in large part to the incompetence of Captain William Bambridge. The Philadelphia was successfully destroyed in Tripoli Harbor in an attack led by the courageous Lieutenant Stephen Decatur. This is the origin of the Marine Hymn verse, “…to the shores of Tripoli.”
Despite Jefferson’s weak resolve to truly end the problem, he must be credited as the first President to take positive action towards a resolution. These events also serve as historical proof of the need to take serious and direct action against threats to the United States. Thanks to President George W. Bush for recognizing the extent of the terrorist threat and facing it head on. Since, we have not had a terrorist attack on United States soil. I hope President-Elect Barrack Obama recognizes that threats to the United States exist and must be dealt with directly. Friends can not be made with those who wish the destruction of America. Please Mr. Obama, learn from history rather than repeat it.
For great reading on the history of Jefferson’s dealings with the Barbary pirates and William Eaton’s exploits, I encourage you to read The Pirate Coast, by Richard Zachs.
It is time to dispel the myth that Barack Obama is inheriting an economic crisis. Inheriting implies that one receives something that was previously not theirs from another. Barrack Obama is as much to blame for the economic crisis and two wars as Bush. Bush did not decide to create an economic crisis, democrats did. Beginning in the Clinton years, democrats asserted their influence on creditors to hand out ill-advised sub-prime loans. This should not be surprising; democrats are all about giving the poor hand-outs they have not earned with no care for the aftereffects to those they are taking away from (you and me). Rush Limbaugh lays this out eloquently, as always, in the video below.
But….this is not my main point. I am going nuts over the media premise that Obama is inheriting this potential recession. No he is not. He is a democrat who supported the institution of the same policies that led to this crisis. Bush and the Republicans attempted to reform sub-prime mortgages, foreseeing the danger. Democrats blocked every attempt with fervor. The media is fond of giving Bill Clinton the credit for a boom in the economy during the 90s, giving no credit to the source, Ronald Reagan. Now they are propping Obama up to be the savior of the economy. In the media, he will not fail.
Allow me to educate you on the history of the ignorance of the American public in understanding cause and effect. For those of you who are already confused, cause is why something happens; effect is the result(s). John Adams, as the nation’s second President, resisted vehemently the call to war against France, as the French all but declared war by acting as pirates on the high seas. After the XYZ affair, the media had the United States in an uproar. Adams, understanding that the United States would not be able to survive a war, resisted popular opinion. Again, there was a major push in the media, driving public opinion. The people, as many are today, were far too ignorant to see their own manipulation. Who was behind this media push? Thomas Jefferson. Yes, Thomas Jefferson was the first American politician to recognize and use the power of the media to promote an agenda. He was successful; John Adams lost the 1800 election to him by a significant margin. However, Adams’ last envoy to France in 1799, which was abhorred by the media and Thomas Jefferson, resulted in peace between the two countries, saving the newborn United States from disaster. However, news of this success came after the ballots were cast. Many historians believe news of this success would have won Adams his second term.
And now, we arrive at the main connection and point. Thomas Jefferson ‘inherited” a peaceful United States. Consequently, America thrived and Jefferson received the credit. Even today, Jefferson receives much attention as one of the greatest of the founding fathers and Presidents, but few know he owes much of this to Adams.
Now, Obama is looking to withdrawal his original rants about letting the Bush tax cuts for Americans expire in 2009, opting to try again in 2012. Why, because the tax cuts are good for America. Does Bush get credit? No! The media continues to call it tax cuts for the rich and praise Obama and his dream team for fixing the economy before he is even the official president-elect. I implore all American to study history and learn what principles truly make this country great. Be on your guard for the ones that could very well destroy this great country, as a war with France in 1800 surly would have brought about.
I don’t particularly care for, or about, the placard. Sure, it’s slightly pretentious and adds fuel to an unnecessary fire. But come on, somebody took a lot of time to get that tie to match the color filling, “THE OFFICE of the.” Think of all the time and effort that went into making the design of this public appearance. The only tie I have that comes close to that color is a fish tie. Forget about the chicken and the egg. I want to know which came first…the placard or the tie?
