Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Obama and the World: Pandering to the UN

I wonder if he will ever stop - finding reasons to criticize.  Does he not understand the psychology of moral equivalence.  I also wonder if Democrats, given a choice, and a new leader, and wide support, would even recognize him if he showed up at events or wherever.  I wonder if they understand how damaging his speaking can be to Americans and the world.  I do wonder this, often.

Does that mean some of what he has droned on about actually has some merit - sure.  At a time when, every word, every action, everything anyone does in the US is used and picked up by, and thrown back at us by ... everyone, perhaps using ones words carefully, even more so, judiciously would be beneficial, knowing that enemies of the United States will twist every word in any future verbal attack or worse.  He droned on about the US needing to let more migrants / immigrants into the US and the fact we don't want to, plays into the hands of ISIS ... oh my gosh ... his words support the violence of ISIS and other anti-American rhetoric around the world.  He gives them support by his continual criticisms, however much wrong they are, of the US.

Is there too much money in US politics?  Absolutely.  When Australia and Canada (or Australians and Canadians) have given more than $200 million to the Clinton foundation, or the tens of millions from Saudi Arabia ... absolutely.  There is too much.  It spoils and rots whatever it infects, but this has been a concern since the beginning.  In the early 20th century, the same was said of private money corrupting public power - namely the Rockefeller family as the biggest culprits.

Unlike in the US, many countries have multiples of issues - the political corruption is not in the election process, but in graft - whether it is their state oil company or an equivalent, whether it is in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Pakistan, Russia, Syria, Iraq ... I could continue.  And when it isn't money, it is political corruption - a country where one party dominated for more than 120 years, and lost a few elections only to return to power.  They don't even need money, they simply kill their opponents.

He also droned on about unions and loss of manufacturing jobs.  I wanted to laugh, but I started to choke, and then I needed a respirator which caused stress and I started having heart palpitations .... MAYBE the loss of our jobs is due to the corporations moving their manufacturing abroad - without any sigh let alone public denunciation by the Obama administration.  Whether AT&T, Ford, Microsoft, Dell ... abroad.  Manufacturing whether Apple or any company ... Unions weren't weakened, Unions helped send them abroad.  I want to choke.  All those countries he addressed have reaped the benefits of our jobs leaving.  They should have applauded.  I'm so glad he gave them a history lesson on how it occurred, even if he was totally wrong.

Is there too much partisanship?  That is such a tricky thing.  Assume we love Obama - then we would say the Republicans are too partisan.  They refuse to do what is in the best interests of the nation.  They hamper progress, they are unmovable and thus poor Obama must do what he can to do the right thing - even if it means stepping outside the lines of constitutional authority with every sort of presidential finding and directive.  Too partisan?  It has become more partisan since Mr Obama was elected.  That must mean it is the Republicans who are at fault.

A patchwork of laws makes it difficult for all Americans to vote he told the world - yes, we could see an increase if we did what some countries do - require everyone to vote for they are fined.  That doesn't mean anyone knows anything nor that they are politically engaged - just that they vote to avoid the fine. 

It is too easy to vote in the US, but Obama wouldn't understand that.  For him - everyone should be able to walk in and vote using just their name.  THAT would be a tragic mistake.  Everyone in this country must have an ID.  The fact the Supreme Court has yet to grasp this small detail, belies the larger issues.  In many countries possession of an ID is required by law, resulting in arrest if without ID when stopped.  Well, we could adhere to those national requirements and require an ID or face arrest.  If so, then that ID would be required to vote, and everyone would have it, no matter how rich or poor.   Oh wait, we already require that.  Drivers licenses, state ID cards, medical ID, social security cards - one of those is required for everything you do.  A police officer stops you and wants to see ID .. you must show them.  In our national interest, we should work to provide every citizen an ID - whether drivers license or a state ID.  If that is accomplished, why is it so much more burdensome to show that card when voting, in order to avoid fraud and prevent a federal crime from being committed.   This subject should again be discussed publicly because we need ID to vote.

When he spoke to the UN, many member states have serious penalties for federal crimes - death or many years in their prison systems.  Here we seem to encourage it.

He also mentioned something about our ideals and the last twenty five years.  Pretty much throws Bush under the bus ... but he also tosses Bill Clinton into the grinder as well.  I wonder how Bill and Hillary feel about that!  Hmmm.  To save his legacy he needs Hillary, but Hillary is one unforgiving bitch when she is crossed and ... well, ooops, he did it again!

One comment was especially telling, and I believe it underlies Obama's philosophy concerning the United States - the only way the world will become more secure is for powerful nations like America to “accept constraints.”

He should never have been voted into office.  His morality is relative and his ethics are questionable.
Utopian ideals usually end up with millions of innocents dead. 

Make Mine Freedom - 1948

American Form of Government

Who's on First? Certainly isn't the Euro.