CHANGE
we can all believe in

Obama referred to his white grandmother as a "typical white person." So what do you think the response would be if Hillary Clinton referred to a black person, any black person, or even Obama as a "typical" black person? Is this language of Barack Obama the change we can all believe in if he is the nominee?

"Obama has repeatedly and effectively questioned Hillary's judgement for voting for the Iraq War. The Jeremiah Wright controversy has abruptly turned the tables: It is now Barack Obama's judgement that is under intense scrutiny. First, his political acumen. Did he seriously believe that after his two terms as a state senator and twenty-year membership in a church that celebrates and preaches black separatism he could launch a presidential bid on the theme of being an agent of racial harmony? What was he thinking? It all reeks of arrogance and is starting to resemble the perpetration of a massive con-job on the unsuspecting and naive. Would all those white people in Iowa who voted for Obama be the same that advocate giving the HIV virus to African-Americans?" - Beacon Street Journal

I haven't yet heard Obama condemn his minister of 20 years for his antisemitism and support of antisemites, have you? I haven't heard Obama say how he told his minister, who he considered to be just like an UNCLE, how inappropriate his views when they had one of their many private dinners together, have you? That is because he didn't. And if he didn't, you have to assume his policies and feelings are the same as his mentor, the Rev Wright.

I have NOT heard Obama say he condemned Rezko for any crimes he may be guilty of, as-if he didn't know when many of Rezko's projects were only blocks away from Obama's office - and were taking place even as Obama interceded for Rezko in obtaining millions of dollars of tax payer money to finance the crime.

The media is NOT critical of Barack Obama like they are of Hillary Clinton? How does this guy get so many media passes? If anything should bring him down now, it is his association with Minister Wright and yet the press, which like his liberal support is riddled with "white guilt" and doesn't really push the issue -- and the so-called "progressive blogosphere" disgustingly continues to drool over everything he says and does. That is not a legitimate left; not the left I remember. There is no left that is left anymore and the InterNUT, it seems, may have had some influence toward morphing GenX into a bourgeoisie conglomeration of idiomatic supremist elitist liberals.

Anti-Working-Class, Anti-Middle-Class Change

Obama, when speaking to a crowd of 20,000 at the Toyota Center in Houston, Texas, just after he won the Wisconsin primary proposed the "change" to what we need to spend on the national infrastructure, neglected for the more than the last 20 years. He said:

"If you're ready for change, we can start reinvesting in America, in the cities. We are spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. We can invest that money in rebuilding roads and bridges and hospitals right here in Houston, building schools, laying broadband lines, putting people back to work, employing young men and young women in our inner cities, in our rural communities. That is possible if you're ready for change." (Obama)

Those were his words. Is that really what he meant? It isn't nearly enough. His solution is not going to adequately address the problem anymore than his bandaid solutions on everything else to come out of his toolbox of ideas.

"In fact, Obama is only proposing to spend $6 billion a year on infrastructure repair--less than the monthly cost of the war in Iraq--and an infinitesimal drop in the bucket compared to the $1.6 trillion the American Society of Engineers says is required to bring the nation's infrastructure up to good condition." (Obama's Texas speech: Populist appeals with reassurances to big business, By Jerry White - 21 February 2008)

As for soaring college tuition, he said this:

"We're going to provide a $4,000 tuition credit [to] every student, every year, but, students, you're going to have to give back something in return. You're going to have to participate in community service. You're going to have to work in a homeless shelter, or a veterans home, or an underserved school, or join the Peace Corps." (ibid)

Change for Obama is the same old policies with a new face. George Bush's military adventures have expanded U.S. power to maintain hegemony in the Middle East to control the oil there.

It is also unlikely that Barack Obama's empty message of "change and hope", which resonates so well with Americans yearning for change, will in any substantial way alter reality.

And change in Iraq cannot mean capitulation, appeasement, and giving up on our obligation to insure Iraqi, American, and the region's security. We were wrong to interfere with the balance of power by invading Iraq, but what-if Saddam did possess those weapons of mass destruction that so many thought he had? What if the intelligence, which turned out to be flawed, was right and we didn't do anything? Sure, we can say now that the UN inspectors were doing their job and restraining Saddam from doing anything worse, but it is just as foolish to think he would not oppress his own people and attack Israel and if he ever obtained the WMD he wanted and had tried many times to obtain - and we can reasonably assume he would eventually have those weapons; at which time he would be inclined to use them. Then where would be be?

The administration, which has a responsibility to protect America and our allies, would be imprudent if it didn't act. So, we're there and perhaps it was a misstake? We can all pontificate in retrospect about what should have been done. The bottom line is the administration did what they did and even if we don't like it and many people died and were hurt, Osama is still free and releasing his propaganda videos to the West and Saddam was not one of the good guys. I'm glad he is no longer around.

The bottom line is if we now leave without providing some modicum of security, not just for the oil, but to prevent a bloodbath with Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds, and other factions, killing each other in a civil war. WE have a responsibility not to have the lives which were lost to have died in vain. We have the responsibility to forcefully, with U.S. power to try to prevent anymore carnage. We can't just leave. It doesn't work that way.

Hank Roth

All (if any) quoting per the Fair Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes pursuant to
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.

Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Alpha/ChA.shtml

Today is Wednesday July 23, 2008