"Duty is ours; results are God's"- John Quincy Adams: REPRINT: WHO IS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

Monday, April 20, 2009

REPRINT: WHO IS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

(IN LIGHT OF THE WINING AND DINING OF MR. OBAMA BY THE LEFTIST LEADERS, I HUMBLY RESUBMIT THIS ARTCLE ORIGINALLY POSTED LAST JANUARY)

Obama revealed in 2007 that his favorite philosopher is Reinhold Niebuhr, a specialist in separating accountability from responsibility, and sees all individual actions as an outgrowth of society. Niebuhr believes a criminal act is not intended to be as consequential as it often is; that evil can be traced to collective behavior rather than the individual; that the spirit of love supersedes justice; and that the God revealed in nature cannot be a moral God. He actually is not a philosopher, but a theologian -- with some very contradictive concepts in great contrast to Black Theology. If Obama was being truthful with this pick as his favorite philosopher, I have to conclude he is far from a decisive thought process/philosophy, or he is in the midst of creating his own mix-and-match, succotash style of thinking.

And while we are thinking of Black Theology, if you do a little research on this subject you will find it to be far more politically/power-based rather than religious-based. Why do I reach that conclusion- because Black Theology cannot be construed to be religious dominant due to its fundamental belief that if the black race is not granted freedom and dominance by God, then God has to move out of the way – this core belief puts physicality and humanism ultimately above spirituality and the power of God. I might humbly suggest- if a god’s desires keep a (any) race of people subordinate to another race, that god is no god at all, but a figment of a self-imposed underclass’ imagination.

When we put all of this together, including Mr. Obama’s stated political concepts (including our so-stated flawed Constitution), we have a very complicated, very confused, very dangerous leader of the (formerly) free world. I could so appreciate someone who is filled with all of these conflicting precepts of philosophy and religion, who is still sitting on the side lines working through his or her own particular answers to life, as a senior in high school. I would love to sit down and discuss a variety of issues and philosophical concepts with someone as open and diverse as this person must be.

However, it is also clear this person has yet to come to any conclusive concepts and would be totally vulnerable to their immediate environment, completely unable to morally defend themselves –or justify any substantive conclusions. Thus, in simple terms, a fence sitter; a fence sitting, socialist-leaning, race-dominate hippie looking at love as the answer to a very volatile, dangerous, teetering world.

If the world was made up of one race, and we all were utopian-minded, love drunk hippies, Mr. Obama would probably fit the role he is in. But we aren’t, and he doesn’t. I fear he will hesitate when the 800 lbs. gorilla knocks down our front door. I fear he will collect a sizable following of love-deprived immature radicals, dissatisfied with their life, looking for Utopia, ala. Jiminy Cricket, and he will neuter America. No doubt, the socialist/fascist leaders of the world will wine-and-dine him – lull him into a comfort zone – then pounce with their thirst for cancerous, destructive power.

What a legacy for our (perceived) first Black President; America will someday regret not opening up to the profoundness of the message of Alan Keyes.

No comments:

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

America is in a very volatile position relative to its political and social history. And, even though the same could be said for many previous historical periods, I believe the foundation that makes America so unique among the world’s nations is coming under attack today like never before: Since the time of Governor Bradford, never has the family unit been under such an onslaught; most –even today—will agree one of the fundamental components of Americanism is the strength of the family unit, but today that unit is being, at best, redefined.

Many issues that once were understood to be a part of America’s social landscape, i.e., within the realm of our UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION, are coming under attack by neo-intellectuals and their cynicism; political correctness and other progressive tactics are bombarding us at every corner: Exuberant flag protection; spilled hot coffee; special “rights” for “special” people-- protections for deviant groups such as NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association), and the pompous ideals of egalitarian elitists, has given us more freedoms, but a lot less liberty.

Taxes on labor (compensable income), along with other questionable government plundering, has brought our tax rate far beyond those of the pre-pilgrim years of Europe, and government’s claws continue to dig deeper into our personal and private holdings/possessions, taking hold of our hearts and minds. “Natural rights” is actually a dirty word/concept in far too many socio, political, AND academic circles. The concept of Sovereignty and Natural Rights is losing its importance as conservative idealisms are overtaken by secularist relativistic humanism; their cynicism, screamed from the mountain tops, is shaming us into our own spiritual darkness.

“Separation of Church and State” has taken on a life of its own, all the while most of America has yet to even entertain the ramifications of such a radical concept, or even settle on some of the most basic definitions of what “church” and “state” includes, as well as the (necessary?) depth of this separation. Does “separation” mean a mere wall of separation between their respective leadership, or does it include removal of all the moral precepts from governmental function? If we do not answer these, and other related questions, political correctness will continue demoralizing America and eroding our republican form of government.

Previous understandings that clearly distinguished our governmental system, a republican form of government, from former and inferior democracies, are either being demonized or are simply left unused in hopes of their demise by a lack of collective knowledge. If “republican form of government” sounds partisan to you, then you are in the majority-and you are also the problem. (1)Being founded upon a creed – (2)being gathered together under the (then) brand new concept of federalism – and, (3)being directed to ensure each state provides a republican form of government, make up the Trinity of American Liberty.

Previously thought of as inalienable rights, so-called conservative groups are fighting against leftist groups, taking said rights to court, demanding rulings in hope of preserving them. But what this effectively does, ESPECIALLY in the case of a win, is increase the oversight authority of our courts, giving them powers that the greatest skeptics of Jefferson’s time could not have ever imagined.

The Separation of Powers concept has fallen victim to our own attempt to preserve it. Why- because the “Right” is playing ball using tools dictated to them by the “Left;” if we use their tools, the protracted finality will always result in their win. A win under these circumstances is a loss for our republic and a gain for THEIR democracy (i.e., socialism). Can we still decipher the differences between a democracy and a republic? Is it important for us to understand –and act/govern accordingly-- to these differences?

Is our Constitution adequate to govern a democracy? Was it meant to? What did Benjamin Franklin mean when he answered the governor’s wife, “A republic, if you can keep it?” And what is the significance of John Adams’ words “a republic is only adequate to govern a moral people?”

Have we reached the pinnacle in which Adams’ words will begin to show their meaning? I think so. Question is: is there anyone left who’s able to perceive it?

Can we distinguish between right and wrong by reviewing what is legal and illegal? Said another way, can we still hold each other to the age-old idea “ignorance of the law is no excuse?” In California alone, nearly 1000 laws are enacted every year. Back in the 1970’s when our fearless leaders were debating dropping the national speed limit to 55 mph, the dissenters made the case that if we pass unreasonable laws, the people will lose a degree of respect for the law generally; do you classify yourself as a criminal when you cruise above the marked speed limit? Today we see traffic signs in some special areas that read, “No Tolerance,” and “Special Enforcement Zone.” Does this mean in non-special areas it’s okay to exceed the marked limit? And, how does this affect our psyche in relation to what’s right and wrong? Isn’t this the Law itself teaching us some laws need less respect than others?

Today the idea of “gray” law permeates throughout our social and political system like a cancer. The concept of a “Country of Laws and not of Men” has been turned 180 degrees by secularist judicial activists and their Humanist supporters. Look at how we view illegal immigration today. Even our legislatures are impervious to this numbing affect. In fact, to complicate the issue, they - representatives of legally voting citizens- are passing laws that protect illegal immigrants as if they lawfully exist among us and have lawful legislative representation. As what, shadow citizens? Perhaps quasi-citizens? It’s only a matter of time before they begin to cry about equal actual representation, demanding a portion of legislative seats within our governing bodies. Sound ridiculous? – so did mandatory seatbelts to our grandparents.

"COMING EVENTS CAST THEIR SHADOWS BEFORE."

Speaking of judicial activism, let’s review one simple point: if you and I get together and draw up a charter defining and empowering a new organization, can that organization then act beyond its outlined authority? If not, then by what power are they controlled? Are they still acting with immunity? Discretion? Public discernment? What about their pledge to uphold that charter? What are the real differences between our two primary parties? Is there actually fundamental differences, or, rather; are the differences merely in how much and when, separated only by the details? The power to tax is equally accepted among the two parties with the only variation being “how much.” Abortion is acceptable to both with “when” being the only question. Life, liberty, and property –the most basic of inalienable rights— have all been attacked and penetrated by usurped authority. All that’s left is the question of “how much” and “when.” Can you extrapolate its inevitability? Tocqueville did.

The Stare Decisis Doctrine, while seemingly necessary for uniform laws, is used today to distort constitutional intent, furthering the flawed liberal concept of a “living” Constitution. Briefly, this doctrine is used by the courts for two reasons: 1) upon relying on it, the courts have full immunity from fraud, deceit, and injurious claims, and 2) this doctrine allows for a continued “flow” of kneaded and stretched interpretations giving the Constitution an “evolving” characteristic. Thus, original intent is no longer a necessary component of constitutional interpretation. What happens within this “flow” is that, as each court relies on a previous similar court decision (ala. stare decisis), it makes a ruling that much further removed from the original decision. Today, we have so-called constitutional rulings based on a string of decisions that are six – eight – even twenty times removed from the original ruling. To further the distortion this procedure causes, Black’s Law Dictionary regularly updates its definitions, based on court rulings, and each court then relies on the latest definition when making another decision/ruling. In the end we have results similar to a game of charades and it gives our judicial system the power to create law, with impunity!

The above is a sampling of what you can, or soon will, find here. You will also find a collective new way of looking at America’s political and social problems. Now, in short, why should you listen to me? I spent the first half of my life, until about age 20, as your worst nightmare; a lost, purposeless, disconnected soul. I am a 52 (in 1997) year old student of Political Science with lots of history behind me: My natural parents divorced when I was about 5 years old and the race was on; spent several years on the lam/run from the law while my father did his best, not to have me, but to keep the “the whore” from having me. Later, when she won the chase, she gave me up, telling my grandparents I reminded her too much of my father. I was a lost, betrayed and frightened child -- molested and betrayed by two daddies- the other was a self-indulging drunk. In my terrorizing, incorrigible, youthful years I was shot, stabbed, mauled and robbed, and did my share of the same to others.

I’ve been in jail in 8 states, declared as an adult at 16 in Atlanta, Georgia, and fought for my life –my virginity (successfully!) while doing time in Fulton County jail with the big boys. I did about nine months in drug rehab, The Village South in Miami, Florida, when I was 17/18, where I got set up by a fellow body builder druggy to take a fall for his drug stash, so I stole a counselor’s car—a drug dealing counselor-- and headed for California only to be nabbed in Las Cruces, N.M. (I soon learned about FBI interrogation techniques due to a shotgun that was in the trunk of the car which was apparently used in a murder/robbery a few weeks earlier). Eventually I was transferred to Albuquerque for court where I was caught up in the most dramatic jail break in their history (1975?) when my cell partner and a couple other inmates made good on their escape by killing a guard and stealing the cook’s pickup. In all, I did time in four prisons in two states plus federal time in Lompoc, Ca. totaling about 8 years behind bars by the time I was 25; I had no time to become cynical!

Then some remarkable things happened in my life, finding my way into the good graces of some wonderful people, eventually gaining entrance into the Navy in 1981. With a stellar Navy (Seabees) record I was able to transfer into the Marines in 1984, serving honorably, and proudly, until 1988. I’ve been attached now to a wonderful woman, my wife, for nearly 28 years, and, I am on a different kind of terror: the terror of original constitutional liberty, from a true patriot’s perspective. It is with that drive, and experience, that I bring this website to you.

I am constantly boning up on early American History and constitutional intent with constitutional republicanism being me forte. My purpose is to give back to that which made my adult life possible. I have my wife and my God to thank, but I also found a deep sense of patriotism in the process. That patriotism, and my deep sense of Christian-esc duty to others around me, commands that I find the “fixes” needed by society to make this a better America – a better world. Generally, I don’t cover current events; I believe part of our misguidedness comes from the distractions we encounter from being so engulfed in the daily details of trying to find band-aides to “fix” an already broken system.

What I do cover is the foundation of republican thought, i.e. constitutionalism. The Left is hoping their agenda can be advanced by cloak and darkness, brought on by the busy-ness of our daily lives and the chaos created by the entourage of political and social details. I believe I am able to “see” this advancement better than most because of my unique, isolated experiences in life and the unusual way in which I arrived at my current political and philosophical positions. I do my best, stepping back, looking at the forest in spite of the trees, to minimize the distractions. But why me? Why do I think I am more able to “see” these anomalies and maladies that stand in the way of original constitutional intent? What makes me so, so unique? I don’t consider myself special. (Unique? No doubt about it.) And I’m just one man; one person with all the failings of any other man. But I do believe I have some gift of additional insight into some significant issues that plague America, politically and socially. This “gift” is an accumulation of experiences and realizations based on the unusual order in which I gained my social and political conscience.

The cynicism of modern discourse never had a chance to rear its ugly head while I was being formed spiritually, morally, and politically.

Did I form a pessimistic attitude toward life in general? Yes, but my ego, fortunately, was never involved. Was I jaded with negativity? Yes, but it was the negativity of a small child. When I was somewhere around 4 or 5, I shut down inside; a failsafe of sorts took over and my early thoughts had nothing to do with the motives of other people. When my political eyes began opening, I already had real-world experience and examples of what NOT to do, and this is what cuts to my uniqueness: I had no time to become cynical.

Liberals cannot be liberal and be patriotic- they resent being American; how many times have we heard a Hollywood nut talk about how they bow in shame when the meet their international friends at their French villa by the sea? Their cynicism brings them to their need to share and impose their own cynicism upon those around them, and their own internal guilt is self-treated by announcing to their cynical little world all of their philanthropy.

Cynicism allows for limited/shallow personal interaction, giving a snob “room” to move without having to actually mingle. Ever been to a snobbish Champaign Party? If yes, then you know what I mean; buried, and protected within their own cynical snobbery. They’ve used cynicism in their prose, their songs, and in their personal descriptions of Americana. This self-serving attitude comes from an “I” centered position, and it is with that position neo-intellectuals perceive this nation. They refuse to see America in the vein of “In God We Trust.” Rather, they see our social and democratic ideals through the eyes of atheism. They look down on anyone who, in their cynical eyes, is superstitious (religious). They patronize you, tell you (in between the lines) that they want to take care of you – that they know what is best for you.

I’m here to tell you they don’t. Do I have all the answers? Of course not- that’s why I rely on men of old- men of renown. I learned how to read rather late in life (about 20) and I’ve been trying to make up for it ever since. I believe, with my continued reading, and my interesting past, I have discovered some truths we all need to revisit, and here is where we will do just that.

I am always open to new ideas and intellectual discussion and I hope for your input: Email me at:

sovereignslave@juno.com

Some Quotes Extracted from my Postings:

"Some say, 'If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.' I say, if you stand for something and don't know why, you never stood at all."

"Do not fear the enemy who can take your life. Rather, fear your media, for they can take your will."

"Rights come and go, either by hook or by crook, but mostly by the crooked hook."

"You have to imagine possibilities in order to measure probabilities.

"Relegated powers went up the democratic ladder ONLY because sovereignty flowed down the republican highway first."

“The uniqueness of America is that we were founded on a creed, a creed that recognizes the spirituality of life, i.e., the concept of life itself.”

"When a free society learns it can vote its pocketbook greed takes hold and liberty wanes."

"When distinction between 'life' and the 'concept of life' dwindles from our tounges, 'Liberty and rights' turn into 'freedoms and privileges.'"

"Rights are ordained; privileges are legislated."

“Our founders specifically and intentionally did not create a democracy. Rather, they created a republic. Then, and only then, in order to integrate a form of regulatory government, they came up with a brilliant plan (to read: separation of powers, etc.) to insert an encumbered and limited democratic public process within our republic; a democratic public process, and not a democracy.”

"We are much freer today than ever before, but with much less Liberty."

“There can be no judgment without critical analysis; critical analysis comes from wisdom; wisdom comes from knowledge and repentative boo-boos.”

"Conservatism is not about changing to meet the future; it is about growing from experience to affect the future."

"I've seen the best of worlds and the worst of worlds, and I know where real conservatism went wrong; using the rules set by progressivism."

"I believe absolute equality already exists among all people. And, since it exists, I needn’t (re)construct it, but seek it –strive for it-- for myself, with a natural duty to help others do the same."

SOME OF MY POEMS

THE CHARGE OF THE LIBERTY BRIGADE

Oh great thirst for power and glory,
The yearning blind trust in royalty.
Empires rise, kill, then fall.
Is there not an end to it all?

Aspirations of freedom arise,
But sovereign thoughts compromise.
Loyalty to another, no surprise,
What can one surmise?

We think, sweat, and struggle,
Of freedom and loyalty we juggle.
Oh home of the Hallowed Halls,
Isn’t their finally wisdom on your walls?

There’s been republics past,
Whose philanthropy didn’t last.
And Greek democracies of old,
Whose binders were forced to fold.

Oh those forms of gov’ment in antiquity,
Proved in time, shadows of impostured liberty.
Dangerous policies of mortal coercion,
Became great moral lessons in cohesion.

These lessons opened our hearts and minds,
There must be a glue that ties and binds.
Greek democracies and Roman republics, filled with despotism,
Promised scant hope and protection against allures of socialism.

But remembering the past, as our forefather’s did in procession,
They knew what came before guaranteed disastrous regression.
It taught them, man’s institutions, impious and futile,
Could only serve those who sought to be (brutile).

Respect the opinions of others, view with careful scrutiny.
Receive with caution the teachings of creeds with mutiny.
Liberty of the first German republics looked to be so pure.
Their promised freedoms, greed and power filled with allure.

The promise of liberty, we’ve learned, changes to libertinism.
This feeds the sorrowful soul, soon to evolve into fascism.
So what do we interject here to maintain liberty in perpetuity?
A republic in spirit, rejuvenating life, liberty and ingenuity.

No privileged class, no royalty or predestined authority,
Should be allowed to rule absolute, not even the majority.
And for this, a new element of vitality was integrated,
Of Nature! and Nature’s God! inalienable rights incorporated.

The prize was distinction throughout the world,
A new kind of republic, unfurled.
Reverence to the Creator is the key to good government.
Let’s put it right here for perpetual acknowledgement.

Thus, a republic, under God, one nation indivisible,
For putting Man in charge was totally impermissible.
“A government of laws and not of Men,” said John.
This New Republic, they finally agreed on!

WHAT IS IT, THEY SHOUTED!?

Tenscore 16 years ago
was a convention,
announcing to a confused world
a new, constitution-

Ratification wasn’t enough they said, edification is our goal.

They asked one another,
who came first,
Institutions, or man,
life, liberty,
rights or privileges?
With these questions,
they knew-

Ratification wasn’t enough they said, edification is our goal.

One said,
Didn’t God create man,
wouldn’t He be first?
YES, the Almighty is first,
and for that, they knew-

Ratification wasn’t enough they said, edification is our goal.

They burnt the midnight oil,
as they cried and toiled.
they fought,
squirmed, and broiled,
to form a republic.
And for that they knew-

Ratification wasn’t enough, they said, edification is our goal.

What they formed was,
the most Perfect Union.
But how to protect it?
Make it among Them!
But if that’s true-

Ratification wasn’t enough they said, edification is our goal.

Let’s put it in there too,
tell them what it is.
It ain’t no oligarchy or monarchy,
no open ended democracy.
Not communism or fascism,
tis God fearin’ republicanism.

Thank God that-
Ratification wasn’t enough they said, edification is our goal.

WHY DOES A WHITE GUY GIVE SO MUCH ATTENTION TO BLACKS?

I hadn’t thought of my “attention” to blacks as being attention to Blacks, until I received my third or fourth email about the subject. I’ve received a wide variety of emails asking me why I –a white guy—have an “unusually large” contribution to “African Americans.” The few I’ve received have in fact come from a wide variety of view points; from the mundane to the obvious Nasty-Nazi morons. While I simply ignore the morons, the less mundane –the ones that seem to be simply curious, but respectful—get an answer that is predominantly this:
There are two main reasons why you might find a heightened interest of blacks and black/white issues on my site:
First, in spite of common leftist rhetoric, there are many Americans, who happen to be black, who also just so happen to have the correct (my) politico/socio positions.
*Who is better at disseminating the Truth of Thomas Sowell’s message than Dr. Thomas Sowell?
*If I were to pick on one hand the best, correct-thinking debaters in this country Alan Keyes and Walter E. Williams come quickly to mind.
*Who would be more interesting –and more effective-- to listen to regarding what ails Black America than a conservative-minded, tenured, black, professor, from a liberal university, ala. John McWhorter from Berkeley, who grew up in, and found his way out of, the slums?
*Some of the very best literature, republican-esc thoughts, and challenges to all of America comes from The New Coalition at The Heartland Institute—Mr. Lee Walker is an intellectual force to be reckoned with.
And finally, on many occasions I have had the pleasure of meeting many otherwise-average folks (in and out of the military), who happen to be black, who lean to the right—meaning they understand government is not the answer and that liberty trumps freedoms and that rights are better then privileges. Meeting and learning who they were(are) is perhaps one of the reasons why I learned to see blacks as equal and capable and worthy of life, no more and no less, than I.
There are a lot of disillusioned folks of all colors, races, and ethnic backgrounds. I take people for who they are; individuals; tis democracy at its best that puts people in ethnic (and other class) boxes, not me.
To close, you will not find me referring to "African Americans" unless it is a quote. I do not think of myself as a German/Irish/Indian-American, and I do not think of blacks any differently. To me, An African-American would have to be an African-born native (black or white) who now holds dual citizenship, and has a preference for Africa (if he/she preferred America it should be "American-African," right?). How about many of us who have so-called black blood yet look primarly caucasion? What about a near-black skinned guy with a wider-than-normal[?] nose, pronounced lips, white palms, and brownish red straight hair who was born in Russia, now and American citizen, with parents from India and The Netherlands? He calls himself an American, and I call him my friend and my equal (you should see his kids; he married a great lady who is first generation American from Japenese decent!)
But what do I know, I'm just a truck-driving white boy, right? Well, if that's your attitude, then that's the light (or rather, darkness) you will be seen in, and I will continue to help you get over your narrowminded, biased ignorance.

The Winning Entry From William Tyler Page

The American's Creed
by William Tyler Page

I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed, - a democracy in a republic, a sovereign nation of many sovereign States; a perfect union, one and inseparable, established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.
I therefore believe it is my duty to my Country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey its laws; to respect its Flag; and to defend it against all enemies.
(The above Creed was copied from < http://www.rootsweb.com/~vafccdar/darcreed.html > which includes an explanation/history of the writing.)

"Duty is ours; results are God's"- John Quincy Adams

Monday, April 20, 2009

REPRINT: WHO IS BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

No comments:

Post a Comment

My Favorite Picture

Search This Blog