Ok, I accept your definition of what you consider neo-con to mean.
I am for small government, fiscal responsibility, and strict construction. The religious right and the moral majority have always belonged to the conservative Republican movement. They were a major force to be reckoned with long before they were given those names.
Bush isn’t really a conservative, but has some conservative values. He’s mainly big business.
I do not support ripping apart the notions of civil liberty, civil disobedience, privacy, and freedom. However, I do recognize the Constitutional authority granted to the President and used numerous times in the past to limit some civil liberties during times of war. I recognize the authority of the Executive Order, which has been used by all 43 Presidents. I believe that civil disobedience should remain legal, but if you break the law by disturbing the peace or resisting arrest then non-lethal force should be used against you. I support privacy until and unless you give law enforcement reason to give you a closer look. I believe that key phrases should (and are) be listened for and if heard then close attention will be paid to that conversation. If it turns out to be innocuous then our intelligence operatives can move on, but that way they have a much better chance of catching something sinister. I support freedom for everyone that has earned it. If you break the law then you give up your right to your freedom. If you are a foreign enemy then you do not have the protection of the laws that apply to United States citizens. Only the guilty fear getting caught.
The fact that someone has attained the position of Senator is not enough to give him or her a pass on loyalty to the United States. Many people have worked in public office with little to no loyalty to the government they work for. Sorry, I’m not going to blindly assume that someone is above board simply because they’ve been elected. If someone exhibits behavior that would give you reason to suspect his or her loyalty then it is only logical to question it. If they’re innocent then they have nothing to worry about, but if they’re guilty then you’ve found a rat in the cellar. Assassinating their character would require a desire to destroy them without cause. That is not the case here. Obama is running for the office of the President of the United States. As such, any question about his character is extremely relevant. As a patriotic American that cares about who is running the country it is my responsibility to reveal any and all discrepancies.
My use of the word “friendship” is used in the context of the word, as in they are his intimate friendly relations. He values their friendship. He understands how they think and feel and he shares their values.
I know that Obama is friendly enough with Rezko to enter a land deal with him that effectively allowed him to buy a house at a $300,000 discount. I know he’s friendly enough with him to help him launder money to Muammar al-Gaddafi. I know he’s friendly enough with Farrakhan to invite him over to his house for dinner numerous times along with Reverend Wright, Tony Rezko, and Allison Davis. I know that Obama is friendly enough with Farrakhan to accept his recommendation of members of the NOI for staff positions (Cynthia K. Miller, who served as Treasurer of his Senate campaign, Jennifer Mason who currently serves as Obama’s Director of Constituent Services and who oversees the hiring of interns for Obama) Rezko and Obama are business partners with Jabir Muhammad, who is Elijah Muhammad’s son. I know that Obama chose Rev. Wright as his spiritual advisor and has been extremely close friends for most of his adult life. Nobody ever chooses someone as their spiritual advisor unless they agree with them. It’s just not done. It’s against human nature.
I know what I’ve read from numerous sources, I know what I’ve been told from friends of the family that work in politics, and I know what the people themselves have said. I never accept the word of anyone, but rather listen to many different sources in order to get a much better understanding. I don’t read any one newspaper since 95% of what they type is bullshit. Please do not assume to know what I read.
Do you honestly believe that people are not judged by whom they keep as friends? Of course we are. We are judged by our chosen friendships all our lives because they are a reflection of who we are as a person. If all our friends are low-lifes then most people will assume that we are a low life, but if our friends are quality people then most people will assume that we are a quality person as well. People assume that if your friends are scum that you are ok with that and that you must think and act as they do. It’s called guilt by association and law school has nothing to do with public perception. This is especially true of public figures. We are always judged by our friends, family, and associations. Would you be ok with your son or daughter picking friends that were pimps, players, hustlers, ho’s, and addicts? I know I wouldn’t. Pointing out that a public figure has questionable friends is a civic responsibility.
Surely you must know that liberal Democrats that served in the Confederate Army formed the KKK? They were former slave owners or the sons of slaver owners and they were bitter over losing the war. As such they started a campaign of hate against blacks in the South. The South remained a firm Democratic block and the KKK remained firmly a part of the Democratic Party until 1964 when Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. He is well known to have remarked that he was signing the South over to the Republicans for a very long time. Sure enough the South didn’t elect a Democrat to the presidency until Clinton in 1992.
I mentioned the KKK because they’re analogous to the NOI, which are friends of Obama. McVeigh, like the KKK and the NOI, represent part of the lunatic fringe. He did not represent conservative Republican values just as Obama and his friends do not represent liberal Democratic values. We do not need to work all that hard to disconnect ourselves from our lunatic fringe. We scorn and dismiss them. They’re registered Republicans for the same reason your lunatic fringe are registered Democrats. They represent the extreme of our respective movements.
Your sarcasm is misplaced and diminishes the impact of your argument. You’re a good enough writer that you don’t need to resort to such amateurish tactics. You’re better than that.
Ayers was caught, convicted, and punished, but he has not changed how he feels. He simply found a different way to encourage the decay of American values. I do not support banishing him, exiling him, or prohibiting him from working and living within the liberties and freedoms guaranteed by our constitution. All I said was that he hasn’t changed and that it’s important to note that Obama keeps this type of person as a personal friend and supporter. I do not care enough about Ayers to hold a grudge against him, but I will never forget who and what he represents.
Everyone has the right to say whatever they want and I fully support their freedom of speech, unless what they’re saying is inciting others to riot and commit other crimes. These are things that Wright and Farrakhan have done numerous times.
I describe the guilt by very close association campaign as an attempt to get the truth out to as many people as possible. To me it is akin to calling out fire when a building is burning. You cannot assassinate someone’s character is what you’re saying is true.
People who do not believe in protecting themselves have historically been among the first to die. Sometimes it’s arrogance and other times it’s blindness, but when you have an enemy that says they want to kill you and all evidence points out that they have kept their word, it’s best to heed that warning and defend yourself. This is one of the basic beliefs of Wushu, and I follow it very closely.
Why would you feel afraid to voice your discontent with this administration? I believe they’ve made some monumental mistakes. I think Bush has been a terrible president at worst and an average president at best. I did not vote for him because I like him. I fear very few things in this world and voicing my opinion certainly isn’t one of them.
I agree, holding your tongue does suck. Why bother? Do you believe that not holding your tongue would inhibit your children’s chances?
I have been subjected to searches at domestic airports. Since I have nothing to hide and I would rather have the strict security measures in place I accept it. I would rather have to deal with the searches and give them a chance to find something than to get on the plane and have it get hijacked or blown up while I’m in it. This isn’t fear talking, but logic. To me the searches serve the same purpose as the security cameras and sensor towers in the stores. The innocent never really notice them, but the guilty sure do.
I’m hard to intimidate so some gorilla scowling at me doesn’t faze me. Maybe it’s the MA training. I don’t know.
You think I bully others with my intellect and positions. I believe you’re right, I do. I enjoy the argument. People come on here and try and push me around and I just laugh. Maybe it’s a character flaw, but it is fun as well. I never mean anything personal by it. I never take anything I read online seriously anyway. So if I ever offend you then I apologize, as that is never my intention.
I work at home and much of my time is spent waiting. I cant really leave my desk so I read online, which includes this website.
Thank you for your post,
Cassandra
