This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
11 years have transpired since the events occurring in September 11, 2001. Eleven years later, huge changes culturally, socially, and technologically evolved in our world landscape. We live in a complex world. Still, the same principles of equality, mutual concern for our fellow man, and justice are still relevant in our present-day society. It is indescribable to outline all of the horrendous circumstances that were a product of 9/11. To this day, the victims and the relatives of the victims legitimately mourn the loss of human life. They should express that sense of mourning and other range of emotions. For me, I remember the time like it was yesterday. I was 17 during my freshman year in college when the attacks transpired. I think about the day all of the time. I experienced a lot of emotions during that time from shock, sadness, and anger. Although, the unjustifiable attacks never made me to assign blame to a specific religion or a specific ethnic group for these events. I always believed in treating my neighbor as myself, so I reject any form of bigotry. Religious liberty is a key motto of American society indeed. 9/11 caused me to be more politically attuned to the fact that there we are interdependent with each other as human beings. For example, the hunger and poverty in other nations has as much relevance as the tent cities and the homeless existing in the United States of America. If oppression directly affects a person, it still affects the rest of us indirectly. Even the massive supplies and goods that we purchase originate from countries throughout the Earth. Economic inequality isn't just a phenomenon that persists in the developed world. It's an evil that is hugely present in America. The top 1 percent of wage earners own so much of the resources of the globe. We have record low taxation in the USA, while there are a record number of people on
food stamps. This problem festered long before the brother President Barack Obama was elected President too. I don't respect the affirmation that illegitimate means will justify achieving certain “positive” ends. Instead, I believe that ends don't cut out of means, since you can't reach good ends with evil means. Still, we spend billions of dollars in surplus food and the military industrial complex, but we refuse to spend the same amount to fight against record job loss and poverty. Poverty in urban and rural communities doesn't deserve token remedies. These communities need a radical, national program where solutions are created. One solution out of many is a guaranteed income for all Americans including an economic Bill of Rights to address income disparities, discrimination, and abhorrent economic exploitation. 9/11 opened my eyes about political realities pertaining to peace. Now, I do believe that the war on terror is unjustified especially in our juncture. From 2001 to 2012, there has been the Western execution of torture, laws that violate human, constitutional liberties, and a sick covert campaign of drone attacks in multiple nations. Human life is very sacred and human life doesn't deserve dehumanization or reckless abuse. We shouldn't mistreat people and we should never murder people. We ought to respect the dignity and worth of all human life irrespective of someone's physical appearance, race, religion, age, gender, and of any background. All of the facts that relate to the September 11th, 2001 haven't been discovered. We are still searching information about foreknowledge, about the Twin Towers, about NORAD, and about other unique information of 9/11. Osama bin Laden made huge errors in his life. Yes, we know that Osama was wrong, but also the Central Intelligence Agency is wrong for assassinating many patriots fighting for progressive solutions in the world. The Western intelligence community (along with the theocratic & oppressive Saudi Arabian nation) blatantly aided Osama bin Laden in 1979 in an attempt to expel Soviet forces from the country of Afghanistan. Brzezinski back in the late 1970’s gave a speech to the Islamic radicals about how they are righteous in their deeds. Back then, Afghanistan had a democratically elected government. After that government was overthrown, it was taken over by more reactionary factions like the Taliban. Osama bin Laden is wrong for his nefarious activities, but the Federal Bureau of Investigation is wrong for using spying tactics like COINTELPRO to harm liberation-based movements. The FBI agitated conflict between the Black Panthers and US. The CPD (or the Chicago Police Department) even was directly responsible for the evil murder of the Brother Fred Hampton in 1969. Fred Hampton was a member of the Black Panther Party and he wanted the people to gain real control of their own communities. His oratory and leadership qualities were a threat to the establishment, so the establishment brutality murdered him without just cause at all. Other imperialist instruments are wrong for engaging in terrorism worse in scale than the actions of alQaeda. For example, the imperialists from Belgium killed over 1 million black Congolese decades ago. Other imperialists massacred the Boers in South Africa. Ironically, al-Qaeda related organizations and mercenaries are supported by NATO & its allies in their campaign of terror inside of the nation of Syria. The reactionary neo-conservatives’ bloodlust for a military intervention against Iran must be surely condemned by people of goodwill. The Non Alignment Movement in 2012 and beyond hopefully can hopefully act as a geo-political bulwark against the war mongering tendencies of the Western imperialists. 9/11 is a tragedy felt in New York, Pennsylvania, in Virginia (where I live at presently), and throughout the world. Every single day of my life, I think about 9/11.
One of the most important aspects of 9/11 was its unanswered questions or mysteries. The NIST classified the data they used to make their computer animation of the WTC 7 collapse. The WTC 7 collapse was mysterious in that not a single aircraft hit the building. Yet, WTD 7 fell in a symmetrical fashion. The DIA destroyed more than 2.5 terabytes of data on their Able Danger investigation, which reportedly identified four of the alleged hijackers years in advance of the attack. Why did this occur? The SEC even destroyed their records on the 9/11 insider trading question. On the morning of September 11, Pakistan's Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" behind the 9/11 hijackers was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House intelligence committees. The Sister Cynthia McKinney and others from around the world want to inquire why the Pentagon has 2.3 trillion missing dollars. Many people want these and similar questions answered. The victims' family members, the first responders, members of the U.S. military, legislatures, intelligence agents, heads of states, foreign dignitaries, and members of the public in the world desire answers and an independent investigation of all of the events that transpired during September 11, 2001. The unfortunate outcome of 9/11 was that the events were exploited by the Western machine as an excuse to promote military wars and the militarization of American society. New wars under the guise of "humanitarianism" even made a slick comeback for example inside of Libya & Syria. The U.S. and NATO united in brutal solidarity in order for them to execute controversial, reckless wars of aggression. Even so-called "progressive" voices outline support for war, for torture, and for the stereotypical slanders of certain Muslims. The mainstream media ignores the fact that al-Qaeda evolved from the CIA & other factions back from the Soviet/Afghan war. This fact is validated by even official documents from the U.S. Congress and other sources. Once, then President Ronald Reagan meet with the Afghan Mujahideen Commanders in the White House in 1985 as a means for the commanders to try to control all of Afghanistan. Government propaganda and mainstream media deception grew in strength, but 9/11 saw the rise of the alternative media as well. The neo-conservative movement is still here after all of these years. Many of them consume the administration team of Mitt Romney. In an op-ed for the New York Times on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, journalist Kurt Eichenwald, warnings about an attack by the Bush administration was met with indifference and ignoring the warnings. Eichenwald wrote that the Bush administration had a nonchalance attitude, because the neocon advisers told the President that the warning was just bluster. During that era, the neo-cons were obsessed with trying to attack Saddam Hussein not necessarily Osama bin Laden. Since 9/11, the alternative media definitely grew in leaps and bounds. That's a good thing. Individuals from all walks of life understand fully about economic justice, about freedom, about the dangers of excessive globalization, and about life in general. People have the right to search for answers and 9/11 Truth will never die. It will persist forever more. I will never give up. I will continue to fight for real freedom for we are not truly free. We are not truly free when our fellow people are experience lax opportunities or self-hatred. We are not truly free when I constantly heard real stories from men and women (not just children, but grown adults in our generation today) suffering ridicule, abuse, and disrespect because of their personality, physical appearance, race, gender, who they choose to love (for true, legitimate love is never evil nor a sin. We are born to love), and their age. Narrow minded people always existed
in human history. I encounter them myself during the duration of my life. Yet, Almighty God wouldn’t want to execute vengeance toward these narrow-minded, intolerant, and immature reactionary people. God would want us to believe in love and righteousness without variance or unjust hatred toward any human being. It’s our job to live lives, move forward, make necessary improvements in our souls, advocate justice, and treat human beings as we would want to be treated plainly speaking. It’s funny, because sometimes the person (in an ironic fashion) who abhors you heavily may in the future want to love you later on. This occurs all of the time. Now, just because a human being may be different doesn’t mean that person is inferior. No one is inferior to another human being. You are not inferior. You are equal. All people have value and are special in the Universe. The truth can never relinquished or stopped. The truth remains vibrant, ever real, and tolerable. We should advocate a war on illiteracy. We should promote a war on historical lies and a war on discrimination and any form of oppression against the human race. We should be spiritually inclined and moral, but morality is not about the hatred of the feminine principle. It's about the respect for it. No one gender is perfect. Both genders made mistakes and errors. Therefore, both genders should promote common ground in order for moral regeneration to transpire. Also, tons of females have brains or intellectual curiosity. We are not truly free when Western war crimes continue in the world. These crimes are in total contradiction of national law & international law. Even when the Iraq war commenced, the whole existence of the war was a product of deception and a violation of international legal parameters. Certainly, materialism is causing some deluded people to be excessively concerned with property and material possessions (like bottles, fur coats, Louis Button, and Gucci bags) beyond the moral concern for humanity. Such a sick society (which obsesses over sensual pleasures and an extreme version of individualism that mocks the poor & disinherited) signifies our horrendous priorities. We must be free as a product of confronting an oppressive system. We must be free by repentance and adhering to a real war on poverty. We must be free also by what the late President John F. Kennedy said in promoting world peace. The system must change for the current problems in the world are a mockery of true tranquility. Just because people may falsely classify disturbing acts 'freedom' as characterized by TSA molesting human beings or folks being unjustly arrested doesn't mean that this is the "true freedom." Some political movements may accept fanaticism, hostility to world peace, and an irrational hatred of the President (of course, I have numerous philosophical disagreements with the White House, but I don’t hate the President), but I will not go into that fashion. I will move forward in living my life and I will publicly advocate constructive solutions. The Internet is a great tool of sending information and it shouldn’t be involuntarily censored. Although, the Internet is just one tool out of many to get our voices across. We can use the Internet, independent groups, protests, almsgiving, and other avenues in helping the people. True freedom is characterized by redistribution of economic and political power. Dr. Martin Luther King was right to say that we need a radical redistribution of economic and political power. It also means that universal health care as a human right should be given unto all peoples of the world without exception. Total freedom means the end of not only physical slavery, but mental slavery (as being a product of white supremacy) that definitely plagues the citizenry of Western society including the rest of humanity.
It's a fact that GMOs are dangerous. There is a new study. It was conducted by French scientists. It was proven that rats who fed on Monsanto's genetically modified corn suffered cancer and
premature death. As you would expect, GMO apologists are coming out of the woodwork to cast doubt on the study. They want to discredit its findings. Now, the study allowed 50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats fed on a diet having NK603 (or a genetically modified corn produced by Monsanto. Monsanto is famous for its Roundup weed killer) suffered tumors and multiple organ damage. This caused the rates to die prematurely. French scientists from the University of Caen conducted the study. The results of the study are found in the journal called, "Food and Chemical Toxicology." The findings were publicly made known at a press conference in London. Soon, other scientists rushed to Monsanto's defense and claimed that the study was inaccurate. Tom Sanders is the head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London. He claimed that the rats studied were prone to mammary tumors when food intake is not restricts. He said that the statistical methods are unconventional and the authors of it went for a statistical fishing trip. However, the statistical methods are perfectly straightforward. Only 30 percent of males and 20 percent of females in the control group of rats that were not exposed to Monsanto’s products died prematurely – meaning males were 30 per cent more likely to die prematurely after eating Monsanto corn and females a whopping 50 per cent more likely to die. Sanders’ point about that particular breed of rat being prone to tumors treats the study as if it was conducted without using a control group of rats as a comparison, which is completely untrue. David Spiegelhalter is from the University of Cambridge. He claimed that the study has an untreated control arm made up of only 10 rats of each sex, most of which got tumors in his mind. Yet, his views ignore the fact that the rats whether they developed tumors or not were statistically far more likely to die prematurely if they were exposed to Monsanto products. The figures don't lie and that's the crux of the matter. Monsanto still points to other studies as a justification to promote GMO foods. Yet, all of those studies didn't go beyond the 90 day reporting period. See, the Caen study which tracked the health of the rats throughout their life span. It was only after four months that the tumors and organ damage suffered by the rats became evident. Monsanto is heavily unpopular in Europe. Their products in Europe have been heavily kicked out of the European marketplace. Ironically, some Monsanto-funded experts still try to promote GMO foods. In America, Monsanto and other GMO corporations have spent over 19 million dollars in an attempt to shoot down Proposition 37. Proposition 37 was the California bill that asks to require genetically modified foods and food ingredients to be labeled at the retail level. If GMO food supplies were safe, then why GMO producers (like Monsanto, DuPont, Bayer, Dow, BASF, and Syngeta) spent so much money to prevent the public from knowing about the compositions of their food supplies. Even health expert Mike Adams exposed the fact that GMO can cause huge environmental problems. “The era of GMO deception is history. A food revolution is upon us. And if governments will not halt the mass poisoning of our world by evil corporations, I have no doubt that the People will, by themselves, eventually invoke other necessary methods of halting this great evil,” he writes. In the final analysis, we should oppose this GMO agenda completely. We've made some process in the 21st century and we have a long journey ahead of us in this food/health revolution.
On the front of civil liberties, we have a long way to go in experiencing real civil liberties in America. This issue has been going on long before President Barack Obama was elected President. For many years, people having a food garden are arrested, and Americans even are being arrested for letting their children play outside. These actions are clear indications that police state like policies exist in the world (not only in the USA, but throughout the Earth). Although, some even in the alternative media falsely assume since oppression exists in the world, therefore any form of regulation or any form of communal activity is wrong. Sorry, but regulations gave us labor rights, it ended child labor, and it lowered certain pollution rates in the air. Not all regulations are evil. People working collectively to solve problems is never wrong either. There are tons of incidents of tyranny in America. In Oak Park, Michigan, Julie Bass faced jail time for just growing a "vegetable garden in front yard space." Americans are being harassed by utility workers. These workers are trespassing on private property and forcibly trying to install "smart" energy meters which spy on homeworkers. There was the case of Texas resident Julia Garcia. She was falsely imprisoned and harassed by Wal-Mart employees for attempting to buy goods with a 100 dollar bill the Wal-Mart cashiers erroneously claimed was false. Earlier this year, a Tennessee man was charged and jailed by the police after using an old $50 bill to pay for goods at a Quik Mart store which turned out to be genuine. The TSA has grown its grope down checkpoints not just in airports, but in highways, political events, and even school prom night. A teenager was recently visited by the FBI agents who grilled him over the content of a political Youtube video. Americans are being harassed and having their Fourth Amendment rights violated at so-called "border checkpoints" which are actually hundreds of miles within the border. The EPA is using spy drones to monitor farms as police use Predator drones to hunt down Americans for the crime of allowing cows to wander onto their land. Even veterans nationwide are falsely declared "mentally defective" on a whim by the state and having their firearms being seized. The federal government is backing al-Qaeda fighters in Syria while declaring some Americans to be extremists (based on ideological views) according to DHS documents. So, we have a long way to go in order for us to be in the land of the free. It is our job to learn our rights, love our rights, and defend our rights by any legitimate means necessary. People are talking about the soon coming debates between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. It's a fact that corporate power dominated the mainstream political system. For example, GE and the Council on Foreign Relations influence the daily news. The system will not speak up for the poor since the poor is regularly derided by mainstream society. The harm done to the working class and the Earth's ecosystem has been evil too. The confronting of corrupt corporate power is a must in the 21st century. During January of 2013, either President Barack Obama will be reelected or Mitt Romney will become President of the United States. We live under this the Left/Right paradigm. Some folks are victims of it. The oligarchy wants to cut many legitimate programs that help us from reaching total destitution. These programs are Medicaid, food stamps, Pell grants, Head Start, Social Security, public education, federal grantsin-aid to America’s states and cities, the Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program (WIC), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and home-delivered meals for seniors. The elite definitely want austerity by their documents, speeches, organizations, and their transparent intentions. In January of 2013, some predict that there will be automatic spending reductions. This is called the fiscal cliff. People realize the contradictory or hypocritical stances of Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney claims to be against Obama's health care law, but that law was based on his state health care plan of Massachusetts. Even the current President isn't perfect either, so it
isn't a one party deal. The White House pledged to issue a public option in health care, to close Guantanamo Bay, to increase the minimum wage, regulate Wall Street, stop torture, have a comprehensive immigration reform, and other things. Many of these pledges weren't fulfilled. That is why even the labor movement had to fight for collective bargaining in Madison, Wisconsin, Chicago, and across the nation. The White House agrees with the recommendations from the Deficit commission. It was led by Morgan Stanley board member Erskine Bowles and former Senator Alan Simpson (a Wyoming Republican). The Bowles-Simpson plan wants to cut 0.3 percentage points from the annual cost of living adjustment in the Social Security program. Cuts would come to Social Security in a 6 percent cut in 2 decades (and the retirement age will be increased to 69). Those on Social Security who continued to work and made more than $40,000 a year would be penalized with further reductions. Many cities and towns in America face the decrease of property tax revenues. Some pension payments annually for state and local plans have doubled to 15.7 percent of payrolls in 2011 from 6.4 percent a decade ago according to a study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. There is a lowering of expenditures and more jobs being cut by local and state governments including teachers plus other school employees. The costs of our most basic needs, from food to education to health care, are at the same time being pushed upward with no control or regulation. Tuition and fees at four-year colleges climbed 300 percent between 1990 and 2011, fueling the college loan crisis that has left graduates, most of them underemployed or unemployed, with more than $1 trillion in debt. Health care costs and food prices have increased in America. Since 2008, the Federal Reserve Bank and the Treasury Department have sent 16 trillion dollars to national and global financial institutions and corporations. That is why a state by state approach isn't enough in solving this dramatically bad economic situation. There must be a national plan of action to rebuild our economic apparatus. If a radical solution isn't shown, there could be serious problems financially in America. The corporate state is violating our civil liberties as well. This continues the anti-civil liberty policies of ex-President George W. Bush. The White House refused to restore habeas corpus, it has a policy to assassinate U.S. citizens without due process, FISA remains, and it has used the Espionage Act 6 times to threaten whistle blowers in the government with prison time. There is the controversial NDAA. Big oil and Big coal is in league with both major parties. There is the expansion of fracking and offshore drilling. Yet, the President and Mitt Romney aren't responsible for all of these things completely. The deal is that politicians are the public face of corporate power. The oligarchy uses Presidential campaigns as a mean to stifle alternative choices and maintain their dubious power. Both campaigns are projected to reach about 2.5 billion dollars. That is why we should work in our communities to promote freedom and justice irrespective who wins the November 4th election in America. We have to be practical. Voting is not just a constitutional right. It's a human right. Therefore, any law that tries to restrict the rights of minorities, students, the elderly, and others ought to be opposed (especially if such laws lower the time when people can have early voting too). We should vote, but voting should never be utilized as a fetish for us to experience complacency. Voting alone can never solve our problems. Therefore, we should promote the right to an education, the right to a job, the right to live in a clean environment, the right to organize unions, and other basic human rights.
“…We shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we must labor on—not towards a strategy of annihilation but towards a strategy of peace."
-John F. Kennedy from 1963
9/11 began a new era of human history. Being in this new stage of the human rights movement carries new responsibilities, but the same goal remains. Our goal is the same as it was during the era of the abolitionist movement and of the era of Poor Peoples Campaign. The goal is causing the whole human race to experience equality, freedom, and justice without exception or equivocation. Our intension is not to be limited in our thinking. Humanity has complex cognitive abilities and it's our duty to discuss a myriad of social and economic issues. That means that the protection of the environment (environmental issues definitely include: water safety issues, deforestation, air pollution, nuclear power troubles, and toxic waste poisonings) is a paramount agenda for us to adhere to. Continually, we should promote the dignity plus the rights of labor. An alliance of labor, civil rights groups, intellectuals, religious leaders, free thinkers, individuals from poorer communities, and other heroes can make the difference in making an enlightened community not a social Darwinist feudalist system. People deserve a job or an income if they desire to have one. It’s truly a disgrace to witness a decrease of wages among some in such a place where others experience massive economic affluence (plus record corporate profits among the 1%). That is why a national program of employment, an increase of the minimum wage into a living wage, and other public intervention programs are necessary to make the war on poverty during the 21st century successful. Men and women ought to be treated the same. 9/11, amidst its tragedy, gives me motivation to carry forward in my life. The victims of 9/11 certainly inspire me to fight for an independent investigation of all of the facts of 9/11. 9/11 also made me stronger in my attitude that respects mercy, tolerance, and great due diligence. You have to love humanity in promoting adequate, sanitary, & fair housing for people and believing that health
care is a human right. In the world, there are tons of people who are progressive and want the best for humanity. They live in America, Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia, Oceania, and throughout the world. Creativity and imagination can make real changes too for rigid ideologies can sometimes stagnant a real world revolution. A real revolution is dynamic not stoic in its composition. What is a revolution? A revolution is the complete, comprehensive overthrow of a current system in order for it to be replaced with a better system that can benefit the human race. It is what it is as they say. Therefore, the circumference of our lives must be on the right side of a world revolution. None of us are perfect and we are constantly evolving in being more perfect in our social aptitude. Daily, I strive to be a better human being in spite of my imperfections. Our social and intellectual growth is an audacious process, but it is a joyful process too.
It has been found that rising the Medicare age could leave hundreds of thousands of uninsured human beings. Some people wanted to include a hike in the Medicare eligibility age. This is a concession to those on the right who seem determined to see very deep cuts to the social safety net. A new report found out that up to half a million seniors could lose insurance if the eligibility age is raised. This report comes from the Center for American Progress points out a key fact that’s been mostly missing from the debate. The Supreme Court allowed states to opt out of the Medicaid expansion. This would inflate the number of seniors who could be left without insurance, because many would fall into the category of lower-income senior that would be expected to gain access to Medicaid through its expansion. (Jonathan Cohn has written about this extensively). Here’s how CAP reached its conclusion. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently concluded that a rise in the eligibility age could mean as many as 270,000 seniors are left uninsured in 2021. But that’s assuming ACA is fully implemented in all states. The CAP report points out those 10 states have publicly declared they will opt out of the Medicaid expansion, and more are undecided. The CAP study then totaled up how many seniors below the poverty line live in states that may opt out of the Medicaid expansion, using 2011 data. The total: Over 164,000. Add these to the aforementioned 270,000 seniors, and you get a total of approximately 435,000 seniors who could be left without insurance annually by 2021. And this is a conservative estimate — it’s based on 2011 data, and the population of seniors will grow significantly over the next decade. Although, it’s possible that these states will implement the Medicare expansion, but Republican lawmakers are also stalling in setting up exchanges and resisting the law in other ways. With the implementation of ACA up in the air, then it’s necessary to not rise the eligibility age in this risky time. “With opponents of the health care law still working to block it at every turn, many more seniors would become uninsured because they would have nowhere else to turn,” CAP’s president, Neera Tanden, tells me. “As a result this misguided proposal would undermine the promise of affordable health care for all.” On top of this, the report finds, raising the eligibility age could also undermine a key goal of the ACA by inflating medical costs and health care spending, for a range of reasons: Cost shifting, tampering with the health and age levels in insurance pools, and an increased reliance on private insurance, which isn’t as good as Medicare at controlling costs. The reactionaries are sick enough to believe that harming beneficiaries is necessary to fulfill their anti-debt fetish and economic paranoia.
The ending of the 2012 Presidential Election: The Presidential election is about to end. In my mind, the election of 2012 is an end of an era. It's the end of the era of total illusions and naiveté among some individuals. The veil has been opened as to the hatred that the reactionaries has to the oppressed. Many deniers once denied their hatred. Now, we know, because of the recent evil statements made by GOP puppets. New polls show what the majority (not only a minority) of certain people in America feel about people of color. Therefore, it's time to work for our selfinterests and for our community interests (of the real portion of the human race. It's time to more respect and love our brothers and our sisters. It is also important to respect the entire human race in its diversity plus unity regardless of what a poll says. Also, it's great for the government to help society. The government has helped society for thousands of years and that's a historical fact. On the other hand, the government can't do everything. It's also our responsibility to work in our own communities to help out our communities and to build up power plus programs to fight poverty, crime, and other complications in our land. So, both private and public efforts ought to be executed to solve problems. The government can't do it alone and we can't do it alone either. So, we also need assistance by working together. Life is individual and social, so it will take both individual and collective answers to solve problems. We understand fully about the two party system and the Left/Right paradigm (where political institutions and corporate entities control the majority of the political infrastructure of the two party system). There was a lot of euphoria made by the event of the election of our brother President Barack Obama back in the year of 2008. Some people have legitimate disagreements with the brother, while others have an irrational, ignorant, and sometimes bigoted (or racist) hatred toward the President too. Now, in our time some folks want to disrupt their hard earned rights under Social Security, Medicare, and other safety net programs. People understand that Mitt Romney is not only allied with Wall Street, but he agreed with Paul Ryan to partially voucherize Medicare, etc. Ryan once wanted a partial privatization of Social Security during the Bush Jr. years. The Romney/Ryan budget plan can possibly increase the deficit since their plans will cause a harsh burden on working people in the name of deficit reduction. The falsehood of tricked down economics have been known since the 1930's. The good news is that the vast majority of Americans oppose massive cuts to the social safety net. The President seems to not make his austerity cuts as the centerpiece of his campaign (he said the following: "...But I am absolutely confident that we can get what is the equivalent of the grand bargain that essentially I’ve been offering to the Republicans for a very long time, which is $2.50 worth of
cuts for every dollar in [taxes], and work to reduce the costs of our health-care programs..."). On the other hand, the Romney campaign is overtly touting the austerity agenda as the centerpiece of his campaign. It would be better to end the war on terror, and demand tax increases on the super wealthy (plus a Wall Street tax). There should be investments in biomedical research and the ending of the surveillance, police state of spying plus suppression of human civil liberties in America. We live during a time where the super wealthy is making a record amount of profits. Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future said that his group will soon release a letter (signed by 350 economists) that point out the dangers that austerity measures are (which could cause a new economic downturn). Therefore, I believe in a holistic approach of allowing the federal government, public sector, private sector, etc. to help society (in building up the general welfare. I reject the "you are on your own" philosophy or some state by state resources philosophy since many states are hard pressed for funding. That is why you need the federal government).
When I get older, I see things clearer in viewing hope as being superior to pessimism. The good news is that tons of the youth now in 2012 are leaders, they are fighting for reforms, and they sincerely adhere to the very principles that older heroes maintain in their souls. The beauty of America is that it isn’t monolithic. America has diversity with an amalgamation of wonderful influences, lifestyles, cultures, languages, and societal structures. There is beauty in diversity whether it’s found in Nature or humanity. Beauty is diverse not monolithic, therefore I appreciate greatly the diverse backgrounds of humankind. The youth, who are younger than me, are much more tolerant (more so than even five years ago) than in previous generations. That reality should be congratulated and respected, but we have a long way to go in order for all of us to witness that prize. Our eyes are still on the prize. On the other hand, the prize or the keys of the Kingdom isn’t in our reach yet. Progress sometimes will be gritty, hard, and filled with obstacles. Although, when it comes, progress comes full of life and great energetic power. I still have hope for the future. I am still convinced that true tolerance and legitimate activism can fulfill our quest for human equality & justice.
Appendix A: The Attacks in Libya and Egypt People are taking about the new turmoil in the Middle East. There came the unjustified, sick, and evil deaths of an Ambassador to Libya including other Americans. The Ambassador was murdered in Benghazi, Libya. People in Cairo, Egypt tore down an American flag, and they burned it. Criminals also assaulted both the U.S. consultant in Libya and the U.S. embassy in Egypt. This comes after the previous regimes in Libya and Egypt were overthrown. These events represent the fact that even some individuals in Western puppet states will act in an extremist, degenerate manner. The terrorists who lynched and murdered innocent black Libyans are now killing Americans. U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens' death was evil and we should express condolences to his family (and the rest of the victims' families). New images show the murderers parading his body around. He could have been tortured before he died. Other reports say that Stevens' car was attacked when he and 3 other personnel tried to escape the Consulate. The consulate staff members were shot and Stevens died of suffocation. Christopher Sevens' body was found in a Libyan hospital. The mainstream media says that the people protested a film produced in the USA that ridiculed Islam's prophet Muhammad. The bigger picture is that there has been a wild array of militant gangs of Muslim extremists pouring into Libya as a result of the NATO intervention in Libya. These extremists were backed by Western money and weapons. NATO backed the insurgents with links to al-Qaeda to end Colonel Gaddafi's rule in Libya. Some of these extremists even showed the black Al-Qaeda flag over courthouses in Benghazi. Today, a puppet regime mixed with extremists governs Libya with their murder of black people. Even a February 2012 report by Amnesty International proved that radical militants are mostly
out of control. They are killing thousands of detainees and many people are in prison to be tortured to death. All along, Libya was attacked and now corporations are getting their oil plus other resources. These extremists want to rule Syria too. NATO powers have flown the militants from Libya into Syria. The intervention of the White House into Libya has no constitutional authorization. Reuters believe that the Ansar al-Sharia (or the Partisans of Sharia) could be the gunmen involved in the murders in Benghazi. We don't know who is responsible for these attacks yet. Many folks from Yemen are protesting over the anti-Muslim video in the Internet. They protest at the U.S. embassy and the security forces turn the protesters back. The events in the Middle East are a battle between progressive/moderate Middle Eastern people and the more reactionary militant peoples. The President Barack Obama said the right words and I don't believe that he was sympathizing with the murderers (as Mitt Romney falsely claims). The President commented that he agrees with religious tolerance and at the same he will find justice for the killers who performed their murderous deeds. The President never apologized or sympathized with the actions of extremists killing innocent human beings. To assume otherwise represents some folks' intense hatred of the President. That hatred is truly sickening. I have disagreements with the President, but I don't personally have ill will towards the very intelligent brother at all. These incidents have nothing to do with a religion or with all of the people in those 2 nations. It has to do with a select number of extremists. Therefore, we shouldn't act in a xenophobic fashion as a means to promote the wicked "Clash of Civilizations" agenda. We still ought to adhere to rational actions and peace. We should not be like the neo-conservatives and advocate permanent war mongering, but we should always agree with a progressive, forward thinking foreign policy apparatus. Now, new facts are coming about the murderer of the innocent Americans. Now, we have a complex look at the whole situation. What we have here is the radical Salafi/Wahhabi militants vs. more progressive voices. People have the right to protest an offensive video in the Muslim world, but unjustified violence and murder are actions that are always evil. The West unfortunately financially aided these Salafi radicals for years. For example, even as early as the 1950's, the CIA aided the Salafis (in the Muslim Brotherhood) to go into Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a nation that's a brutal dictatorship and theocracy presently. The reason that the Salafis came into Saudi Arabia, because the then nationalist leader Nasser of Egypt suppressed the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood (after they attempted to assassinate Nasser). It's a historical fact that the Nazis supported the Muslim Brotherhood as a means to use them as a weapon to attack the British in Egypt (plus throughout the Middle East). The radicalism of the Wahhabis influenced the mentality of Osama bin Laden. Today, the leader of Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood member Morsi. The Arab Spring caused a battle between more progressive Muslims and the fringe. Today, individuals are protesting all over the Middle East over the controversial anti-Islamic film. The big lesson about the crisis in the Middle East is that 2 wrongs don't make a right. Western imperialism is wrong and it is also wrong for Americans to be murdered for illegitimate reasons as well. Both are wrong and both are immoral. Still, the evil act of killing diplomats doesn't escape the NATO war crimes in Libya. The leaders of Libya now are extremists, puppets, and NATO-aided terrorists. The extremists are even destroying Sufi shrines. Now, the administration is carrying Tomahawk cruise missiles to the Libyan coast. The President is sending Marines into the region in order for them to protect diplomatic centers. The death of Christopher Stevens should give us all the more inspiration to promote more peace,
oppose imperialism, and adamantly disagree with any war with Iran. Now, America, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and others are funding the rebel forces in Syria via weapons, funding, and logistical support. Human Rights Watch has issued reports condemning Syria’s rebel fighters for conducting a systematic campaign of kidnapping, torture, and atrocities carried out against security forces, government supporters, and civilian victims. We should continue to promote legitimate national law and international law too. Also, in spite of the protests in the world, we still ought to adhere to tolerance and religious freedom. All people should have the same dignity and respect as anyone else irrespective or their religious faith or creed. I don't believe that the President of the United States sympathized with the terrorists who murdered innocent human beings. The truth is that the White House made an early statement before the attacks on the consultant and the embassy building took place inside of the Middle East. One piece of good news is that a Wisconsin judge declared Governor Walker's anti-union law to be unconstitutional. Walker plans to appeal the decision. Nevertheless, I do believe that it's important to promote labor rights and collective bargaining protections for all workers in the world. Our battle for liberation is for the working class and the poor too. These issues of economic exploitation and oppression don't just exist in Dixie; they exist worldwide.
Washington is embracing MEK. MEK was delisted as a terrorist group by the American government. MEK stands for the Mujahedeen Khalq. It's a death murder cult and it was removed from the U.S. terror list. It tries to exploit Marxism and Islam as a means to perform crimes. For the record, Islam and Marxism as viewpoints aren't interrelated with horrendous acts of terror at all. Glen Greenwald in early 2012 proved that the MeK is funded and trained by Israeli and U.S. intelligence. This funding exists as a means for MeK to carry out the murderous and violent vanguard of the U.S./Israeli war against Iran. Some of the MeK targets are civilian people. MeK launders money from Israel and the U.S. through U.S. politicians who on one side of their mouths scream about the need to fight terrorism and take millions to promote the terrorist cult of MeK. So, the West is covertly attacking Iran using indirect means, even cyber-attacks. When some Westerners talk about the war on terror, they omit Western forms of terrorism spanning centuries in the world. That terrorism continues today in the 21st century. Leverett & Leverett wrote and excellent piece on the MEK terrorists. MEK is being used as a means to justify a military attack in Iran or regime change. Back in the 1990's, President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act with influence from Ahmad Chalabi), which paved the way for George W. Bush to invade Iraq in 2003. If America invades Iran soon or later, then our moral standing in the world will decrease more so than our invasion of Iraq. So, MEK is the client agent of the Western power structure. Historically, the West funded Muslim extremists and then the West is decrying the violence of the same people that they aided before. For example, America once gave aid and confront to Osama bin Laden, the dictator Shah in Iran, and Saddam Hussein (Rumsfeld shook Saddam Hussein's hand. During the 1980's, the U.S. gave Iraq explicit chemical and biological weapons). It isn't a secret that some Western factions and some individuals in Israel want to attack Iran soon. I hope to God that war in Iran doesn't happen, but others want a war (especially the neoconservatives and other radicals). There is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon that is operational, but some Americans still feel the need for Israel or America to strike at Iran. An U.S. aircraft carrier passed through the Strait of Hormuz saying that the ship is the first line of
defense in case of non-nuclear armed Iran decided to rein down "terror" on nuclear armed Israel (in response to any first strike attack on Iran by Tel Aviv). There are U.S. military bases encircling Iran and other neighboring countries. Yet, Iran isn't some threat to world peace. Iran isn't perfect, but imperfection doesn't merit some full scale invasion of Iran. A bombing of Iran will cause a widespread Middle Eastern war since Iran will retaliate. William Blum is a historian. He wrote that since 1945, the U.S. attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments. Most of these governments were democratically elected. It tried to suppress a populist or national movement in 20 countries. It interfered grossly in democratic elections in at least 30 countries. It assassinated more than 50 foreign leaders. It dropped bombs on people in more than 30 nations. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believes that Iran is destabilizing the world and its aggression must cease. Netanyahu omits that Mahmoud Ahmadejad never said that Israel should be destroyed off the face of the Earth, but people in Israel should decide its political fate. There have been assassinations of nuclear scientists in Iran. There have been cyber-attacks in Iran and the funding of anti-government militias in Iran. These acts try to destabilize Iran and it's a part of Western strategies waged against Tehran by U.S., Mossad, the CIA, or MI6. The West instigated terror in Pakistan, Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq. I am opposed to militarism and imperialism. Corporate cartels and other financial institutions want to dominate the world with their tax havens. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) may also be crying wolf over Iran’s intention to acquire a nuclear weapon, which is hardly surprising given that a US diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks describes the Director General of the IAEA Yukiya Amano as “solidly in the US court” and “ready for prime time.” The deaths of the 4 American diplomats ought to be condemned, but we shouldn't omit imperialism. Now, we see the CIA as confirmed by the NY Times in June of 2012 that presented information on how the CIA is said to have aided the steering of arms to the Syrian opposition. There are CIA officers in southern Turkey that provide arms to opponents of the Syrian government. There are diverse factions advocating this war mongering and they intersect in their common interests.
Some say don't apologize. A great man will always apologize for doing evil. Just because we apologize at some point in our lives, doesn't mean we are weak or we condone extremist behavior. We want to correct behaviors by our apologies. I do apologize to the peoples of the world and to Almighty God for the errors of Western policies. As for me in my life, I still believe in God, I still love the sanctity of human life, I respect civil liberties, I believe in love, I don’t agree with the prison industrial complex & the military industrial complex, I am pro-environment, I love immigration, I still accept individual freedom, and yes I do oppose economic inequality to the fullest.
Expressing a Point in Syria and Foreign Policy
Even Ed Shultz is wrong on this issue. Ed is right on many economic and political matters, but he's dead wrong on this issue. The truth is that the war on terror is evil. The President authorized covert U.S. support to these terrorist rebels (as reported on his network MSNBC) in the nation of Libya. Drone attacks are evil and Ed supporting this trash of the invasion of Libya by NATO is disgraceful. The American government for decades supported terrorists including Muslim militants. America covertly via NATO did supported al-Qaeda related rebels killing people. That's neo-imperialism. He supported the invasion of Libya where innocent black men, women, and children were murdered by sick people. The neo-cons have been consistent to support imperialism in both the Bush and Obama terms. Some progressives have been inconsistent by condemning Bush's crimes and supporting Obama doing drone attacks, warrantless wiretapping, and other evil foreign policies in 2012. America did support al-Qaeda for decades and the current administration support extremist rebels in Syria and Africom (promoting IMF control of African resources). Trading blood and treasure for imperialism is hypocritical on the part of some of these so-called “liberals.” Like Malcolm X, they are the foxes while the reactionaries are the wolves. Now, we see the truth. The truth is that the establishment liberals are just as wrong and ignorant as the Tea Party crowd. The rebels (who are backed by the West) are slaughtering Christians via bombings in Syria as well. Al-Qaeda terrorists have been armed, funded, and diplomatically recognized by the West is a reality. These rebels have detonated 2 car bombs in Christian-Druze quarters in Damascus killing dozens. This happened in a Christian-Druze neighborhood in Damascus. This is a product of sectarian extremism not democratic aspirations on the part of the rebels. The Associated Press or the AP tried to spin and downplay the act in their report. They try to claim that the people who die were folks were most loyal to President Bashar Assad. That's sick, because the people who died were Syrian civilians. This tactic of trying to justify these deaths by the AP, BBC, CNN, Fox News, etc. is disgraceful. Many people who oppose the rebels don’t view Assad as a great leader. They just oppose the destruction of their nation by the rebels. The vast majority of Syrians (from Christians, Druze, Shias, and moderate Sunnis) are targeted by sectarian extremists. These extremists include the same SaudiWahhabi terrorists that the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia have been fund, arming, and importing from across the region since 2007. These extremists are killing the Syrian people. We know these terrorists have a political front group found in Doha, Qatar. These terrorists aren't for freedom and democracy. Many of them are theocrats and extremists. Moaz al-Khatib is even involved with Western corporations and he wants an Islamic state. These bombings are causing refugees. Seymour Hersh's article called "The Redirection” proved that the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia planned as far back as 2007 to use sectarian extremists to overrun and overthrow Syria. They wanted to play the Sunnis and Shias against each other in order to weaken Syria (as a means to get more pressure against Iran, which is a mostly Shia nation). Hersh's report said that: "....the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations..." This is what is happening in Syria now. The US Army’s own reports indicate that very hotbeds of violence in Syria today, match precisely with 2007 identified Al QaedaMuslim Brotherhood epicenters that were supplying terrorists to Iraq to fuel similarly deadly sectarian violence there. The Syrian Christian populations are being killed by these extremists in Homs, Syria. You can make the case that this is genocide against Shias and Christians in Syria. The Libyan Madhi al-Harati of the terrorists Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is advising fellow
terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as “foreign invasion.” The United Nations is silent on this issue. The Western media is covering up the premeditated genocides or crimes against humanity. People know that NATO committed war crimes in Libya. The Libyan freedom fighters are exposed as having some links to Al-Qaeda (being supplied with Western arms, cash, and diplomatic recognition). Thee freedom fighters aren't humanitarians. They are criminals. The White House is considering having more direct assistant to the Syrian rebels. Up until now the US has just been playing the role of facilitator, with the CIA smuggling other nations’ arms into Syria for them through various intermediaries. Appendix B: The Nobel Peace Prize The Nobel Peace Prize going to the European Union is hypocrisy at its finest. The Nobel Peace has been given to people who have deserved it; but still now, this is a wrong decision on so many levels. It is not right for war criminals and controversial figurers to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The EU getting this award represents an attempt by the establishment to validate reactionary and immoral political policies in the world. In our days, some want to respect Wall Street criminality and neoliberal war mongering. The Republicans and the Democrats in some of their members love the audacity of Empire not the audacity of hope. The Nobel Committee members are a representation of privilege, imperial foreign objectives, power, and war. They don’t advocate many peaceful people now. Many bad characters getting the awards is not flattering at all. The Norwegian Nobel Committee claims that the European Union is an advocate of peace and reconciliation in the European continent. They claim that the EU worked in Europe to make Germany and France to become strong allies. The EU in the Nobel Committee’s eyes is a bulwark for human rights and democracy. The problem with this assumption is that the EU is allied with the war mongering group called NATO. The EU promotes laws that are against individual freedoms and national sovereignty. Many EU member states are in the NATO alliance. NATO was created to promote defense and even war not peace. NATO was instituted in the midst of the Cold War. The Cold War promoted paranoia and hysteria about Communism and an arms race came about. NATO has been involved directly in imperial wars from Truman to the age of Obama. 21 EU nations are NATO members. The Nobel Peace Prize was given to a war criminal like Henry Kissinger (he supported the Vietnam War, the dictator Augusto Pinochet after the CIA supported the coup of Chile’s Salvador Allende, he agreed with the genocide of East Timor, etc.). Kissinger supported the Khmer Rouge’s rise to power and reign of terror in Cambodia. He was one creator of the 1974 National Security Study Memorandum 200 (or NSSM 200). The document advocated genocide and forced population control of the peoples of the Third World (mostly, people of color since let’s keep it real here). He called for the elimination of 500 million people by 2000 and millions more annually. Kofi Annan was awarded the prize in 2001 as the UN Secretary General back then. He never tried to stop the evil Iraq sanctions that killed ca. 1.5 innocent men, women, and children. He did nothing to stop the war on terror and he agreed with the errors of Israel (as opposed to more progressive voices in Israel that really want peace. The Nobel Peace prize committee supported reactionaries like Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Rabin, and Shimon Peres. To Rabin’s credit, he woke up before he was assassinated. Netanyahu wants a possible war with Iran under certain circumstances). Al Gore won in 2007 and people know that he is pro-business, pro-war, etc. President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 when he follows the same foreign policies as the previous
administration (filled with drone attacks, laws that violate human rights, etc.). Now Alfred Nobel (or the name of the person in which the award is named after) was involved in inventing dynamite and he manufactured weapons. He was a 19th century war profiteer.
Appendix C: The First Presidential Debate of 2012 Sometimes lies are habitually shown by a business man. I can’t support a man that made disparaging comments about 47 percent of Americans. I can’t ally with a man that tries to justify trickled down economics. Mitt Romney has multiple positions in just one year, so he utilized confusion as a means to get his point across. The salesman and adherent to Mormonism made a great performance in the debate irrespective of how cunningly deceptive it was. Now, I don’t agree with the President on every issue, because I believe his foreign policy is too extremely militaristic. I believe that the President’s views on human civil liberties are blatantly incorrect (as it relates to the Patriot Act, NDAA, etc.). Mitt Romney was aggressive during the whole night of the Presidential debate. The President wanted to act Presidential, but Romney wanted to act more in your face. The debate was allowed Mitt Romney to express his views strongly, albeit how reactionary & extreme they were. The President in the middle of the debate composed himself and suddenly responded and the debate was even at the end. This debate was interesting. Both men controlled the debate themselves not the moderator. The moderator unfortunately enacted lax control over time limits. Romney denied promoting a 5 trillion tax cut over and over again (he wants to close loopholes and deductibles, but the math isn’t enough to make the numbers work. If Romney manipulates the deductibles involving homeowners, it can harm the homeowners). He made an error since his across the board tax cut will cost 5 trillion dollars. Just because a man is aggressive, doesn't mean that a man is correct. A flat tax won't work since the poor will pay more taxes in proportion to everyone else (if all people regardless of income are taxed the same percentage). The GOP acts like that a 1 cent of tax increase is a sin against the Lord or something. It is not. Also, the federal government hired millions of Americans (working in education, health, manufacturing, etc.), so all of the government isn't some beast as Rudy Giuliani lies about. A federal government job, which is legitimate, is not immoral. Also, rich people presently have record low taxation, record tax cuts, record bailouts and job growth can come via a variety of means (the poor should receive public help and the middle class should receive tax cuts. Massive spending during the Great Depression increased the power of economy, so more spending in the right way can assist our financial instruments. Spending money isn't taboo as the Tea Party believes). Also, regardless of what Romney support or what Rand Paul says, not all private endeavors are good (and private charities and private programs can't end poverty by themselves). Mitt Romney strongly expressed his viewpoints. The President looked down and was kidding around and Mitt Romney came for political jolting. In the middle of the debate was when the President gave his best rebuttals to Mitt Romney. The President told Mitt Romney that he wants some of Medicare to evolve into a voucher system (for younger citizens of America), which can harm health care costs nationwide. The liar Mitt Romney said that the federal government can’t care for the poor, but he forgets how Medicaid helped the poor. He forgot that other federal programs have helped the poor for decades and centuries. Also, there is something better than the thesis of the Affordable Care Act and the antithesis of Romney’s privatization of the whole health care system. Universal, single payer health care has worked in nations globally and America can experience that solution too. Even with the weaknesses of the
ACA, Romney’s proposal is a whole lot worse (and he lied and said that the ACA was some government takeover when the insurance companies helped to create the ACA without a federal government takeover of our health care services. That law was based on Romney’s state health care plan). Mitt Romney made the lie that he will not restrict those with preexisting conditions to receive his health care plan. The truth is people with health insurance alone with not be discriminated against, but if you have no plan, it doesn’t apply to you. I will admit that many good parts are in the ACA. It is not perfect. Health care is a national problem and you need a national solution to solve this problem excluding from piecemeal state-by-state token political maneuvers (as a the salesman said). Romney said that he will not lower the taxes of the super rich, which is blatantly false. The President was not overly aggressive, because he was afraid of being seen as angry or too aggressive. A debate is about winning, because you can't play tidily winks in a debate. Even when I debate, I show my aggression. So, what you have here are two moderate men debating each other for your vote basically. Romney is wrong, because massive tax cuts for the wealthy, sucking up to Big Oil, the worship of privatization, continuing the war on drugs, continuing our prison system as it is, creating more nuclear power, having war mongering, etc. don't work. Likewise, the President compromised with the reactionaries (via his love of the Simpson/Bowles commission, his support of NATO war crimes in Libya, etc.). Now, the reactionaries want more extremism. The debate was substantive. The story of the debate is that the President allowed Romney to get away with a lot of deception. Romney was allowed to promote radical austerity cuts. Romney once didn’t want public teaching jobs to grow (in June 8, 2012) and during the debate he promotes public school teachers. He’s a liar. He wants to cut subsidies to PBS when PBS’ funds are heavily from philanthropists and private sources. PBS federal subsidies are only made up of 444 million dollars. Romney wants to increase spending to the military industrial complex by 2 trillion dollars, which is even beyond what is necessary to fund the military adequately. He said that small class sizes are irrelevant to educational growth when studies prove the opposite. Even Paul Ryan’s proposed budget will cut Pell Grants. Romney advocates cutting federal aid to the school system; he wants to eliminate numerous regulations, etc. Oh, wait, at first, Romney said that he wants to end some regulations and then he promotes other regulations in trying to replace Dodd-Frank. The big story of the debate was that Mitt Romney made so many lies that it was amazing. We live in a big recession with record unemployment, hunger, layoffs of workers, and deteriorating public infrastructure. The free market alone is not going to rebuild America. There needs to be a massive redistribution of economic and political power (plus a national public works program including other solutions) to fight against poverty in America. No one in the debate talked about poverty at all. President Barack Obama got his dose of a wakeup call. I knew by instinct that the debate would not be a walk in the park for the President. The brother President Barack Obama in my opinion underestimated the liar. Sometimes in life, a man has to show passionate, energetic strength in order to validate deeply sincere beliefs. The lesson of the debate is: Never underestimate your opponent. The 2012 Vice-Presidential debate The Joe Biden and Paul Ryan Vice Presidential debate was historic. Many people love it and some folks hated it. I believe that on substance and style, Joe Biden won the debate. It wasn't a
cake walk either. Both men spoke on many domestic and social issues. Paul Ryan was so reactionary on foreign policy and economic issues, that Joe Biden had no choice but to expose Ryan’s extremism. The debate moderator was Martha Raddatz (who is a foreign correspondent for the military industrial complex). From the beginning of the debate, Joe Biden hit hard at Paul Ryan. Biden said that how can the White House be soft on foreign policy affairs when they created the harsh sanctions against Iran. I don't agree with those sanctions though, because they affect the people of Iran, which have nothing to do with terror. Joe Biden said that Iran doesn't have the fissile material to produce nuclear weapons. He is correct. Joe Biden said that most Americans want to send American troops home and allow the Afghan people to take up the responsibility to handle the situation in Afghanistan. Joe Biden made comments on Libya and an independent investigation is occurring to find out the total facts of the bombing of the consulate in Libya. Biden made his points on economic issues. Yet, both Joe Biden and Paul Ryan are nearly identical on foreign policy issues while Ryan tried to deny this reality. That’s the point. I fundamentally disagree with both candidates’ views on foreign policy since their policies are extreme, militaristic, and archaic. For example, President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney agree with drone attacks, anti-human sanctions against Iran, and funding questioning characters in the subversion of the government in Syria. No nation has the right to bomb, invade, and conquer any country it chooses at a whim. They advocated the NATO war crimes in Libya, which is blatantly wrong. Paul Ryan pretty much advocated the same corporate-sponsored reactionary economic agenda. Ryan wants to tax cuts for the super wealthy and have draconian cuts in our legitimate social services. Paul Ryan got best on economic issues in the debate too. Paul Ryan said that the U.S. corporate income tax is so high, but America has the lowest effective corporate tax rate in the world. Few U.S. companies pay the full 35 percent rate due to loopholes and deductions. Ryan refused to say if he would close the carried interest tax loophole where wealthy hedge fund manages use (ending that loophole will create 7.4 billion dollars in 5 years and 17.7 billion dollars in years). Joe Biden said that most seniors are satisfied with Medicare (which is true in the range of 90 percent). Paul Ryan will cause some of Medicare to transform into a voucher program in the future. Paul Ryan was a hypocrite on the stimulus since he said it was bad, but he accepted money from the stimulus law (and Paul Ryan supported the stimulus when Bush was in office back in 2002). The only way to fund Romney’s plan for 20 percent across the board is to increase taxes on the middle class period as admitted by studies. Also, Paul Ryan supports privatization plans of Social Security when Social Security is one of the strongest government programs in American history (if the privatization of Social Security came before the recession and the recession came, people in those private plans might of have their savings ripped out). Ryan made the lie that Social Security is going bankrupt including Medicare. Social Security is fully funded for another 20 years. Medicare can meet 88 percent of its obligations in 2085 if no changes are made. Ryan is wrong to say that the 716 billion dollar cuts in the ACA relate to Medicare beneficiaries. This cut comes from hospitals and health care providers in cutting down waste and increasing efficiency. Ryan claimed that his tax plan will not affect the middle class, but he wants to not guarantee protections to the mortgage deduction and other middle class programs despite having claimed his tax plan won't burden the middle class. I believe that the ACA doesn’t go far enough, but even I know that the ACA is better than the status quo. Ryan claims to believe that the ACA has a death panel like board, but he advocated similar boards in handling heath care. Although, the White House is wrong to advocate the closet austerity measures of the Simpson/Bowles commission though.
The debate didn’t talk about poverty, homelessness, or issues of the poor, which was unfortunate. The end of the debate talked about character, abortion, and religion. The reality is that we live under a system of a separation of church and state. I don’t believe in imposing my religious faith upon anyone in a theocratic manner. I do believe in the sanctity of human life (I definitely reject forced abortions as found in the One Child policy of China), but we can have common ground on this issue (like health care, public resources to help people, age appropriate sexual education, and other programs to reduce the abortion rate in America. Also, I reject eugenics and forced population control). Paul Ryan issued slick lies while Romney shown more brazen, overt lies in his debate. Joe Biden acted like a father talking to a son in defeating Ryan’s arguments on economics and foreign policy (when Ryan wants American troops to be placed in the most dangerous section of Afghanistan when the Afghans should do it). The hypocrites said that Biden went too far and was interrupting, etc., but Romney interrupted the President and the narrator during his first Presidential debate all night. This doesn’t mean that the President is God. The President is wrong on many issues, so that must be known for real. The President is dead wrong on war mongering, on civil liberties, and on his centrism (in appeasing with the Republicans on some issues). That’s not the audacity of hope. That’s the audacity of Empire. Yet, on some issues, Mitt Romney is worse than the President. The lesson of this debate is that I don’t follow centrism, but centrism is better than catastrophe & reactionary thinking as Cornell West eloquently said before. Independent thinking though is superior to both centrism and catastrophe. What a choice indeed (there are third party candidates that people can vote for too).
The Second Presidential Debate
The second televised Presidential debate in 2012 was more emotional. This was the greatest debate in televised Presidential history as George Will said. Both President Barack Obama and
Mitt Romney stood at each other to talk about many domestic and foreign policy matters. Regardless of what we think about the 2 party system, the President stood up like a man to debunk many of the lies and deception presented by Mitt Romney. President Barack Obama easily and handily defeated Mitt Romney in the debate. Polls show it and people know it. Like in every debate, Mitt Romney told numerous lies and President Barack Obama still believed in the war mongering rhetoric of neo-imperialism. Romney said that he wants to get the Pell Grants growing, but the Ryan budget will cut Pell Grants. Romney claimed that his plan will create 12 million new jobs in four years and rise take home pay. The Washington Post’s in house fact checker said that the math doesn’t add up to that claim. Romney claimed that now, oil production is down 14 percent on federal land and gas production is down 9 percent. That’s a lie. Overall, oil production is up 10.6 percent from 2008 to 2011 (from 566 million barrels in 2008 to 626 million barrels in 2011). In the current administration, there are 241 million more barrels of oil produced form public land than in the last 3 years of the Bush administration. Mitt Romney (whose advisors are neo-conservatives or war mongers) refuses to support a moderate Paycheck Fairness Act, which will give women the right to sue for equal pay. Mitt Romney opposes the stimulus when a centrist stimulus now has created ca. 3 million jobs by that stimulus alone. Romney lied and said that the President engaged in an apology tour. These are just a few of the lies he shown and the President refuted him on these issues. On economics, both men promoted solutions within the system. They try to present themselves as representatives of the common man. Yet, they will not go into extreme populism (or a radical redistribution of economic and political power) for fear of losing votes from certain constituencies. Each talked about the middle class, but the poor never received a mention. It’s seems like the concerns of the poor have been ignored by numerous debates in the Presidential arena for years. Reactionaries like Alex Jones and crew will talk about threats to assassinate Romney (which I don’t agree with and I think that’s sick. Regardless of who is President in November, a real person doesn’t threaten assassination about people). On the other hand, Alex Jones’ crew ignores the record death threats against the current President Barack Obama. You will notice that Alex Jones and crew ignore the shot fired in a Obama campaign center in Colorado or the people arrested for trying to assassinate the President in real life (beyond Twitter). They use agitation about riots and they present reactionary rhetoric as a means to promote division (and try to intimidate people into following the old policies of pro-corporate interests including laissez faire capitalism). You will notice that they will not support union rights, progressive human freedoms, and they ignore how Austrian economics is supported by the establishment (Rockefeller funded Mises for years. Bilderberger Thiel is a known supporter of Ron Paul. I can go on and on). Alex Jones and crew ally with the vicious reactionaries and Ron Paul (whose son supports the establishment’s ally Mitt Romney. Alex Jones is supportive of the disinformationist group of the John Birch Society. The JBS slandered the late President John F. Kennedy and civil rights heroes). Also, these liars (some are in the alternative media crowd) have slandered the brother Trayvon Martin too. Now, the reality is that the 2 party system has supported drastic cuts to social programs that millions of human beings depend upon. To build up our economy, we have to address poverty and unemployment via a national program of employment & a real war on poverty. Both men debated on immigration and the Dream Act. We don’t need attacks on immigrants, the opening up of public for energy exploitation, more corporate tax cuts, wars abroad, the privatization of all of public education, and austerity (which some in both parties recommend for us). Romney made the lie that single parent households are responsible for school shootings. The President won the debate, but I was shocked that he said that free enterprise is the greatest engine of prosperity the
world’s ever known. That’s the same economic system that put my and the brother President’s ancestors in chains. That’s the same system that ruin nations the world over. It isn’t it. The foreign policy agenda of both the President and Mitt Romney are nearly identical (which involves militarism). I still believe that the President is wrong on promoting anti-civil liberty laws, an extreme foreign policy, and gradual cuts to our social safety net. Both men were looking like that they want to fight each other via their body language. Candy Crowley was an excellent moderator in handling time limits and keeping the debate in order. She stood her ground and spoke her mind. The President should be treated as a man not a God (like many brainwashed Democrats act like). Both the President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney talked about women issues and foreign policy matters that dealt with the attack in Benghazi, Libya. Brothers like Tavis Smiley and Cornell West have been at the forefront in putting the feet to the fire of the President in great terms. They aren’t perfect, but I have more respect for them than a neo-con or a person unconditionally supporting the President no matter what.
It’s just that on some issues, Mitt Romney is much worse (he ignored that if you want to grow the economy, you need a national public job creating plan that addresses poverty and discrimination). Mitt Romney is wrong for constantly switching positions in a matter of not only years, but weeks (and his economic plan is sketchy with deceptive language of deductions). Overall, the President won the debate in an apparently strong fashion. So, we have a choice. Regardless of who you vote for, make sure it is the right choice for you. Don’t let anyone prevent you from voting period. Protect your rights and others around you for real.
The Last 2012 Presidential Debate
The debate was interesting and odd for Mitt Romney. The President Barack Obama criticized Mitt Romney and Romney decided to submit to some of the foreign policy positions. Each man wanted to fight, but they held back as a means to not offend or anger voters. The President was rather strong on foreign policy. Style-wise, Mitt Romney competed with the President on economic issues. I don't agree with Romney on financial matters, but it is what it is. Still, Romney lied and said that the government can't create jobs when the government has created jobs for years. For example, the WPA during the Great Depression created jobs. Government funds and public investments helped to establish the Continental Railroad back in the 19th
century. The late President Abraham Lincoln started that huge project. The Peace Corps and even Congress consist of governmental jobs. Yet, Romney was not too good on foreign issues. Romney tried to agree with the President on Iran, Syria, Libya, Israel, Afghanistan, drone attacks, and other matters. This debate doesn't change much in the scheme of polls, because supporters of each man will pick either Romney or Obama as the winner. President Barack Obama won the election of course. President Barack Obama was specific and strong on foreign policy and economic matters whether you agree or disagree with him. On foreign policy, both men tried to talk about how much they agree with each beyond the minuscule differences that they had. Mitt Romney blatantly denied some of his previous foreign policy positions. That tells me that he was desperate to win the Presidency. Mitt Romney used a lot of flexibility in his words as a political calculation to get votes. Both men are of course wrong on some of their positions of foreign policy. Both of them are wrong in believing that sanctions that harm Iranian civilians are morally just. They are wrong to assume that Iran could be some direct threat to American soil in the near future. They are wrong in ignoring the need for a real progressive peace agreement in the Middle East (that is favorable among the peace movements in Israel and Palestine). They are definitely wrong in trying to fall in love with drone attacks. In the final analysis, both men wanted to be extremely cautious throughout the debate. President Barack Obama has been consistent with his positions on foreign policy position while Mitt Romney expressed political schizophrenia on foreign policy matters. That means that he changes positions all of the time on matters of Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. Once, Romney opposed a timetable for withdraw from Afghanistan, but now he said that he advocates a total withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year 2014. They have debated on issues of China and economics as well. The President wanted tax cuts for the middle class and a slight tax increase on the super wealthy. Mitt Romney said that he wants across the board tax cuts and deductibles as a means to create millions of American jobs. Romney denied that the public sector can create jobs. History shows us that both the public sector and the private sector can create jobs with proper progressive policies and proper investments. Mitt Romney tried to justify his words on the auto bailout and wanted to have more jobs to be created. Another lie of Mitt Romney was about the apology tour. The truth is that the President didn't try to make an apology tour. He told the truth to the Muslim world that America made errors in its actions toward Muslims and that there should be a cultural reconciliation between the West and the Muslim world. That liar (who worked in the Winter Olympics) said that he can't be attacked in the debate, but the First Amendment cites the right of anyone to use free speech rights to criticize a man that believes in multiple positions on any given issue. I will mention what does Chris Matthews meant when he said to Joy wait you will have your turn in an angry tone (and he said to Michael Steele that you are like the Harlem Globetrotters). This shows that the liberal establishment can be just as patronizing and offensive as the conservative establishment. In my personal opinion, the debate is that Barack Obama won most of the debate with a tie at the end of the debate. It was a slight win of the President. It wasn't a cake walk. Both men love many precepts of the AUDACITY OF EMPIRE, which I reject. Some of us are more progressive than the President on some issues, but the extremists believe that President Barack Obama is a socialist. Many of us are anti-war, anti-U.S. Empire, we don’t agree with the policies of the bankster controlled FED, anti- police state, and believe in ending the evil War on Drugs. The brother President is a great intellectual and has great qualities. I will admit to that.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.