HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » freshwest » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 10:36 PM
Number of posts: 53,661

Journal Archives

And refusing to vote until our dream comes true, ensures continuing nightmares...

And is the luxury of those who still stand to benefit from an unjust status quo.

When pressed hard, one does not 'hold one's nose' while voting for the lesser of two evils. One embraces the opportunity to eliminate some evils in a world that is unjust.

Not voting is a luxury most of us cannot afford.

Tunnel vision or the success of the RW's brain hack through repetitive lies and disdain.

While 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' is not generally seen as a fair assessment of commonality, anyone who conflates public figures with their private woes, is missing the mark badly. Because it's not all about us as individuals, but how we wish to be treated and will grant that to others for a common good. Or else we will have nothing to stand upon, and would be Republicans. :barf:

As I have said repeatedly, HRC is not my choice. Her style does not appeal to me, and I blamed her for a lot, but learned a lot of nuance over the last decade or so that I did not formerly have.

And I have always given her and Bill the benefit of the doubt, watching how she and Bill and Chelsea were savaged and abused to give the RW power over all of us. I saw what his vision and what her vision was when he ran for office and she became First Lady, and how the MSM destroyed it.

Like Obama to a lesser degree, Bill and Hillary's liberal views and the intentions they had when he won the presidency, were dimmed by the irrational, vicious, dishonest PR sent their way. The RW media was flexing its muscle, perfecting its use of the baleful tone applied to PBO to deny the fulfillment of the victory of the people who voted for change both times.

Do the knee jerk haters recall what was going on at the time Clinton was in office? Or the deluge of hate and the real RW conspiracy that broke loose while Clinton ran for office, the low brow attacks, and then the full media coverage of alleged affairs and the blue dress?

The legal challenges that were set into motion as soon as Bill was sworn into office, to derail his plans for rebuilding what was being lost, that HAD to be responded to, just to maintain the presidency? The malicious, giddy pronouncements of doom for Bill and Hillary that were on display in every venue?

I watched all the news shows that sprang up with the same mendacious faces we have been treated to in cable news for twenty years. I remember how the RW increased their power with religious groups, and hearing Ann Coulter on a local Christian radio station late at night, bubbling with joy over the blue dress, chortling 'We got him now!' to the approval of the 'Christian' speakers.

So much hatred, worse than they dealt Carter, but a prelude to what was done to Gore and is still being done to Obama. When I read all these charges laid at Clinton or Gore, I know the writers have been taken in. Saying that Kerry or Gore were stiff, that they didn't run good campaigns, is proof of how 'American Idol' is now politics.

I watched Gore as he ran for office, and he worked just as hard as Obama did. He flew from state to state, seeing tens of thousands every day. I saw the crowds who wanted to see a man with his populist vision become president, not to win a popularity contest, but to see their values ascend once again after 12 years of GOP rule that was designed to eliminate all of the New Deal. One of the last campaign stops showed Gore leaving the stage outside, the sweat soaking the back of his shirt, just as we saw Obama do or being rained upon, still going.

Those men had a fire for ideals, and so did the multitudes who showed up and cheered. There was nothing stiff about Kerry, Gore or Obama, and there probably isn't about HRC. We knew Bill Clinton has charisma, but if that is all that Americans want in a candidate, we truly do deserve the Idiocracy that is galloping toward us.

Those who grew to majority in the Reagan era, have little to compare that with in terms of MSM, and see the RW tone as political criticism and 'holding their feet to the fire.' We're not talking deep thinking from the media, they've been playing every psychological technique know to brainwash listeners - and those who are online.

Go to youtube or many other sites, and you will see, even if you don't click, the negative images to dismay Democrats or encourage Republicans. It's a fact that images carry much more data and are much more powerful to the subconscious mind than text or even sound. Combine text, sound, moving imagery, music, tone of voice, familiar memes from all kinds of entertainment together. as is done cable shows and youtube and an alternate reality will be embedded in the brain where reasoning cannot enter.

It's been non-stop with such memes as 'Obama the arrogant, impeach Obama, fire Holder, get rid of Pelosi, stop Hillary.' Always with an unattractive image to go straight to the gut. That people are incognizant of the subliminal messaging and think those 'gut feelings' of disdain, discomfort and hate are honestly their judgment and originate in their experience, is a huge victory for the RW and a huge loss for us.

We had an OP herein which the article referenced said that in this media environment, Democrats are spouting RW memes, and don't even realize it as it's subconscious. The media is not serving its purpose under the First Amendment to inform, but to enrage and build their team up in their viewers, while destroying fair debate and the roots of democracy itself. A look at the dynamics of how speakers are arrayed against each other the lies that are always left unchallenged, leads a thinking person to know they are being played. But too many focus on the personalities that are paid for us to listen to and watch, and don't think or refuse to admit, they are caught up in a manipulative media product.

Those who are constantly on the look out for a strong leader with a 'backbone' or 'balls' and such are ripe for the picking by the demagogues. They are the first to call the Democrats 'weak' or 'spineless,' because that is how the power is set out on MSM.

They are looking for a savior, but those who help us and save our lives are discounted as not being good enough to get their support, not inspiring enough. They demand being wooed, as if they are the center of the universe, so they want to be sold something that has never existed in the first place, or they refuse to play.

Consumer politics is a GOP game and Democrats don't play, nor should they. Because the sell is not going to respect the needs and minds of people, it is not democratic, it's just a means of control.

The hand that helps to save a life in the real world may not be the 'right' color, gender, orientation, ethnicity, religion or political leaning to our own liking. They are never feted, and would not get a vote from those who are into brand name, consumer driven thinking. We are dismissing our own selves when we dismiss them and have no right to claim we are disrespected when we don't respect each other or ourselves.

Just a few thoughts.

LOL@ the Freudian Slip: 'A set of reproductive organs.' Had to bring that up, huh?

Just can't help themselves!

And bringing in Ann (women shouldn't be allowed vote) Coulter is definitely a winner!


Oh, yeah, we see you!

Is that for real? Disgusting magazine!

November 5th, 2014 if we don't GOTV:

Is ABC willing to lose this very important viewing demographic?

Since the 2008 presidential campaign, wharrgarbl has been frequently used... where a person continues to spew rhetoric in the face of often conclusive evidence to the contrary.


That describes Perry and most of the fact challenged crowd.

Yeah, popcorn sales are down in Nevada. It was great for a while:

Best comment on KOS, IMO:

The US strategy makes sense, in that respect:

We want to defend MURICA!

BLM: We're just trying to do our job.

Bundies: Just itchin' to shoot me a government agent!


Bundies: Gonna put the women and children up front so they get shot first on teevee!

BLM: You guys are crazy.

Bundies: You govment folk just try us!

BLM: Screw this, it's hot and we're not getting paid enough to deal with asylum escapees.

(They leave.)

Two weeks later...

They're gonna come and attack us any day now.

Aaaaaany day now.

(tumbleweeds float by)

Aaaaaany day now.

by catwho on Mon Apr 28, 2014 at 09:44:04 AM PDT
[ Parent ] 

You're made of tough stuff, TMN, but it's been a very rough year for you. I know this hurts a lot.

The year my father died, there was not a soul to talk to about it; had to just 'carry on.' When his cat was killed months later, the dam broke and finally the tears flowed. 'It was the end of an era,' the family said.

Just a few thoughts here, don't know if any of this applies to your beliefs, but my heart wants to reach out, as you have a very caring one yourself.


I stood by your bed last night, I came to have a peep.

I could see that you were crying, You found it hard to sleep.

I whined to you softly as you brushed away a tear,

“It’s me, I haven’t left you, I’m well, I’m fine, I’m here.”

I was close to you at breakfast, I watched you pour the tea,

You were thinking of the many times, your hands reached down to me.

I was with you at the shops today, Your arms were getting sore.

I longed to take your parcels, I wish I could do more.

I was with you at my grave today, You tend it with such care.

I want to re-assure you, that I’m not lying there.

I walked with you towards the house, as you fumbled for your key.

I gently put my paw on you, I smiled and said ” it’s me.”

You looked so very tired, and sank into a chair.

I tried so hard to let you know, that I was standing there.

It’s possible for me, to be so near you everyday.

To say to you with certainty, “I never went away.”

You sat there very quietly, then smiled, I think you knew…

In the stillness of that evening, I was very close to you.

The day is over… I smile and watch you yawning
 and say “good-night, God bless, I’ll see you in the morning.”

And when the time is right for you to cross the brief divide,

I’ll rush across to greet you and we’ll stand, side by side.

I have so many things to show you, there is so much for you to see.

Be patient, live your journey out… then come home to be with me.

~ Author Unknown


That applies to more than a pet...

President Obama Keynote EU Speech in Brussels (FULL Statement) March 26th, 2014 & Full Transcript:

to MrsBrady and to mercuryblues for bringing this up!


I searched for the video. There is a world of difference in the edited media version and the entire speech!

Full Transcript: President Obama gives speech addressing Europe, Russia on March 26

In his speech at the Palais des Beaux-Arts in the Belgian capital, President Obama urged European nations to back NATO on the standoff with Russia. (whitehouse.gov)
March 26

President Obama will meet with European Union and NATO officials in his first visit to Brussels, the bureaucratic heart of post-Cold War Europe, which he said this week at The Hague is threatened by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s military turn in Ukraine.

President Obama spoke in Brussels today; he’s there for meetings with European Union and NATO allies.

Here is the full transcript of his remarks, courtesy of the Federal News Service.

Thank you. (Cheers, applause.) Thank you so much. Thank you. (Cheers, applause.) Thank you very much. Thank you. Please, please have a seat. Good evening, (goedenavond ?), bonsoir, guten Abend. (Cheers, applause.)
Thank you, Lara (sp), for that remarkable introduction. On -- before she came out, she told me not to be nervous. (Laughter.) And I can only imagine -- I think her father is in the audience. And I can only imagine how proud he is of her. We’re grateful for her work, but she’s also reminding us that our future will be defined by young people like her.

Your Majesties, Mr. Prime Minister, and the people of Belgium, on behalf of the American people, we are grateful for your friendship.

We stand together as inseparable allies. And I thank you for your wonderful hospitality. I have to admit it is easy to love a country famous for chocolate and beer. (Laughter, cheers.) (Chuckles.)

Leaders and dignitaries of the European Union, representatives of our NATO alliance, distinguished guests, we meet here at a moment of testing for Europe and the United States and for the international order that we have worked for generations to build. Throughout human history, societies have grappled with fundamental questions of how to organize themselves, the proper relationship between the individual and the state, the best means to resolve the inevitable conflicts between states.

And it was here in Europe, through centuries of struggle, through war and enlightenment, repression and revolution, that a particular set of ideals began to emerge, the belief that through conscience and free will, each of us has the right to live as we choose, the belief that power is derived from the consent of the governed and that laws and institutions should be established to protect that understanding.

And those ideas eventually inspired a band of colonialists across an ocean, and they wrote them into the founding documents that still guide America today, including the simple truth that all men, and women, are created equal.

But those ideals have also been tested, here in Europe and around the world. Those ideals have often been threatened by an older, more traditional view of power. This alternative vision argues that ordinary men and women are too small-minded to govern their own affairs, that order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all-powerful sovereign. Often this alternative vision roots itself in the notion that by virtue of race or faith or ethnicity, some are inherently superior to others and that individual identity must be defined by us versus them, or that national greatness must flow not by what people stand for, but what they are against.

In so many ways, the history of Europe in the 20th century represented the ongoing clash of these two sets of ideas, both within nations and among nations. The advance of industry and technology outpaced our ability to resolve our differences peacefully. And even -- even among the most civilized of societies on the surface, we saw a descent into barbarism.

This morning at Flanders Field, I was reminded of how war between peoples sent a generation to their deaths in the trenches and gas of the first world war. And just two decades later, extreme nationalism plunged this continent into war once again, with populations enslaved and great cities reduced to rubble and tens of millions slaughtered, including those lost in the Holocaust.

It is in response to this tragic history that in the aftermath of World War II, America joined with Europe to reject the darker forces of the past and build a new architecture of peace. Workers and engineers gave life to the Marshall Plan. Sentinels stood vigilant in a NATO alliance that would become the strongest the world has ever known. And across the Atlantic, we embraced a shared vision of Europe, a vision based on representative democracy, individual rights, and a belief that nations can meet the interests of their citizens through trade and open markets, a social safety net, respect for those of different faiths and backgrounds.

For decades, this vision stood in sharp contrast to life on the other side of an Iron Curtain. For decades, a contest was waged, and ultimately, that contest was won, not by tanks or missiles, but because our ideals stirred the hearts of Hungarians, who sparked a revolution, Poles in their shipyards who stood in solidarity, Czechs who waged a Velvet Revolution without firing a shot, and East Berliners who marched past the guards and finally tore down that wall.

Today what would have seemed impossible in the trenches of Flanders, the rubble of Berlin, a dissident’s prison cell -- that reality is taken for granted: a Germany unified, the nations of Central and Eastern Europe welcomed into the family of democracies. Here in this country, once the battleground of Europe, we meet in the hub of a union that brings together age-old adversaries in peace and cooperation. The people of Europe, hundreds of millions of citizens, east, west, north, south, are more secure and more prosperous because we stood together for the ideals we shared.

And this story of human progress was by no means limited to Europe. Indeed, the ideals that came to define our alliance also inspired movements across the globe -- among those very people, ironically, who had too often been denied their full rights by Western powers. After the second world war people from Africa to India threw off the yoke of colonialism to secure their independence. In the United States citizens took Freedom Rides and endured beatings to put an end to segregation and to secure their civil rights. As the Iron Curtain fell here in Europe, the iron fist of apartheid was unclenched and Nelson Mandela emerged upright, proud, from prison to lead a multiracial democracy; Latin American nations rejected dictatorship and built new democracies; and Asian nations showed that development and democracy could go hand in hand.

The young people in the audience today, young people like Lara (sp), were born in a place and a time where there is less conflict, more prosperity and more freedom than any time in human history. But that’s not because man’s darkest impulses have vanished. Even here in Europe we’ve seen ethnic cleansing in the Balkans that shocked the conscience. The difficulties of integration and globalization, recently amplified by the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes, strained the European project and stirred the rise of a politics that too often targets immigrants or gays or those who seem somehow different.

While technology has opened up vast opportunities for trade and innovation and cultural understanding, it’s also allowed terrorists to kill on a horrifying scale. Around the world sectarian warfare and ethnic conflicts continue to claim thousands of lives. And once again, we are confronted with the belief among some that bigger nations can bully smaller ones to get their way -- that recycled maxim that might somehow makes right.

So I come here today to insist that we must never take for granted the progress that has been won here in Europe and advanced around the world, because the contest of ideas continues for your generation.

And that’s what’s at stake in Ukraine today. Russia’s leadership is challenging truths that only a few weeks ago seemed self-evident, that in the 21st century, the borders of Europe cannot be redrawn with force, that international law matters, that people and nations can make their own decisions about their future.

To be honest, if we define our -- our interests narrowly, if we applied a coldhearted calculus, we might decide to look the other way. Our economy is not deeply integrated with Ukraine’s. Our people and our homeland face no direct threat from the invasion of Crimea. Our own borders are not threatened by Russia’s annexation.

But that kind of casual indifference would ignore the lessons that are written in the cemeteries of this continent. It would allow the old way of doing things to regain a foothold in this young century. And that message would be heard, not just in Europe, but in Asia and the Americas, in Africa and the Middle East.

And the consequences that would arise from complacency are not abstractions. The impacts that they have on the lives of real people, men and women just like us, have to enter into our imaginations.

Just look at the young people of Ukraine, who were determined to take back their future from a government rotted by corruption; the portraits of the fallen shot by snipers; the visitors who pay their respects at the Maidan. There was the university student wrapped in the Ukrainian flag expressing her hope that every country should live by the law; a postgraduate student speaking for fellow protesters, saying, I want these people who are here to have dignity.

Imagine that you are the young woman who said, there are some things that fear, police sticks and tear gas cannot destroy.

We’ve never met these people, but we know them. Their voices echo calls for human dignity that rang out in European streets and squares for generations. Their voices echo those around the world who at this very moment fight for their dignity. These Ukrainians rejected a government that was stealing from the people instead of serving them, and are reaching for the same ideals that allow us to be here today.

None of us can know for certain what the coming days will bring in Ukraine, but I am confident that eventually those voices, those voices for human dignity and opportunity and individual rights and rule of law, those voices ultimately will triumph.
I believe that over the long haul as nations that are free, as free people, the future is ours. I believe this not because I’m naive. And I believe this not because of the strength of our arms or the size of our economies. I believe this because these ideals that we affirm are true. These ideals are universal.

Yes, we believe in democracy, with elections that are free and fair, and independent judiciaries and opposition parties, civil society and uncensored information so that individuals can make their own choices. Yes, we believe in open economies based on free markets and innovation and individual initiative and entrepreneurship and trade and investment that creates a broader prosperity.

And yes, we believe in human dignity, that every person is created equal -- no matter who you are or what you look like or who you love or where you come from. That is what we believe. That’s what makes us strong. And our enduring strength is also reflected in our respect for an international system that protects the rights of both nations and people -- a United Nations and a Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international law and the means to enforce those laws.

But we also know that those rules are not self-executing.

They depend on people and nations of good will continually affirming them.

And that’s why Russia’s violation of international law, its assault on Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, must be met with condemnation, not because we’re trying to keep Russia down, but because the principles that have meant so much to Europe and the world must be lifted up.
Over the last several days, the United States, Europe and our partners around the world have been united in defense of these ideals and united in support of the Ukrainian people.

Together, we’ve condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and rejected the legitimacy of the Crimean referendum.

Together, we have isolated Russia politically, suspending it from the G-8 nations and downgrading our bilateral ties. Together, we are imposing costs through sanctions that have left a mark on Russia and those accountable for its actions.

And if the Russian leadership stays on its current course, together, we will ensure that this isolation deepens. Sanctions will expand, and the toll on Russia’s economy, as well as its standing in the world, will only increase.

And meanwhile, the United States and our allies will continue to support the government of Ukraine as they chart a democratic course.

Together, we are going to provide a significant package of assistance that can help stabilize the Ukrainian economy and meet the basic needs of the people.

Make no mistake, neither the United States nor Europe has any interest in controlling Ukraine.

We have sent no troops there. What we want is for the Ukrainian people to make their own decisions, just like other free people around the world.

Understand as well this is not another Cold War that we’re entering into. After all, unlike the Soviet Union, Russia leads no bloc of nations, no global ideology. The United States and NATO do not seek any conflict with Russia. In fact, for more than 60 years we have come together in NATO not to claim other lands but to keep nations free.

What we will do always is uphold our solemn obligation, our Article 5 duty, to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our allies. And in that promise we will never waver. NATO nations never stand alone.

Today NATO planes patrol the skies over the Baltics, and we’ve reinforced our presence in Poland, and we’re prepared to do more.
Going forward, every NATO member state must step up and carry its share of the burden by showing the political will to invest in our collective defense and by developing the capabilities to serve as a source of international peace and security.

Of course Ukraine is not a member of NATO, in part because of its close and complex history with Russia. Nor will Russia be dislodged from Crimea or deterred from further escalation by military force.

But with time, so long as we remain united, the Russian people will recognize that they cannot achieve the security, prosperity and the status that they seek through brute force.

And that’s why throughout this crisis we will combine our substantial pressure on Russia with an open door for diplomacy.

I believe that for both Ukraine and Russia, a stable peace will come through de-escalation, a direct dialogue between Russia and the government of Ukraine and the international community, monitors who can ensure that the rights of all Ukrainians are protected, a process of constitutional reform within Ukraine and free and fair elections this spring.

So far, Russia has resisted diplomatic overtures, annexing Crimea and massing large forces along Ukraine’s border. Russia’s justified these actions as an effort to prevent problems on its own borders and to protect ethnic Russians inside Ukraine. Of course, there is no evidence, never has been, of systemic violence against ethnic Russians inside of Ukraine.

Moreover, many countries around the world face similar questions about their borders and ethnic minorities abroad, about sovereignty and self-determination. These are tensions that have led in other places to debate and democratic referendums, conflicts and uneasy co- existence. These are difficult issues and it is precisely because these questions are hard that they must be addressed through constitutional means and international laws, so that majorities cannot simply suppress minorities and big countries cannot simply bully the small.

In defending its actions, Russian leaders have further claimed Kosovo as a precedent, an example, they say, of the West interfering in the affairs of a smaller country, just as they’re doing now. But NATO only intervened after the people of Kosovo were systematically brutalized and killed for years. And Kosovo only left Serbia after a referendum was organized not outside the boundaries of international law, but in careful cooperation with the United Nations and with Kosovo’s neighbors. None of that even came close to happening in Crimea.

Moreover, Russia has pointed to America’s decision to go into Iraq as an example of Western hypocrisy. Now, it is true that the Iraq war was a subject of vigorous debate, not just around the world but in the United States, as well. I participated in that debate, and I opposed our military intervention there.

But even in Iraq, America sought to work within the international system. We did not claim or annex Iraq’s territory. We did not grab its resources for our own gain. Instead, we ended our war and left Iraq to its people in a fully sovereign Iraqi state that can make decisions about its own future.

Of course, neither the United States nor Europe are perfect in adherence to our ideals. Nor do we claim to be the sole arbiter of what is right or wrong in the world.
We are human, after all, and we face difficult decisions about how to exercise our power.

But part of what makes us different is that we welcome criticism, just as we welcome the responsibilities that come with global leadership. We look to the east and the south and see nations poised to play a growing role on the world stage, and we consider that a good thing. It reflects the same diversity that makes us stronger as a nation and the forces of integration and cooperation that Europe has advanced for decades. And in a world of challenges that are increasingly global, all of us have an interest in nations stepping forward to play their part, to bear their share of the burden and to uphold international norms.

So our approach stands in stark contrast to the arguments coming out of Russia these days. It is absurd to suggest, as a steady drumbeat of Russian voices do, that America is somehow conspiring with fascists inside of Ukraine but failing to respect the Russian people. My grandfather served in Patton’s Army, just as many of your fathers and grandfathers fought against fascism. We Americans remember well the unimaginable sacrifices made by the Russian people in World War II, and we have honored those sacrifices. Since the end of the Cold War, we have worked with Russia under successive administrations to build ties of culture and commerce and international community, not as a favor to Russia, but because it was in our national interests.

And together, we’ve secured nuclear materials from terrorists, we welcomed Russia into the G-8 and the World Trade Organization. From the reduction of nuclear arms to the elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons, we believe the world has benefited when Russia chooses to cooperate on the basis of mutual interests and mutual respect.
So America and the world, and Europe, has an interest in a strong and responsible Russia, not a weak one. We want the Russian people to live in security, prosperity and dignity like everyone else, proud of their own history. But that does not mean that Russia can run roughshod over its neighbors. Just because Russia has a deep history with Ukraine does not mean it should be able to dictate Ukraine’s future.

No amount of propaganda can make right something that the world knows is wrong.

You know, in the end, every society must chart its own course. America’s path or Europe’s path is not the only ways to reach freedom and justice. But on the fundamental principle that is at stake here, the ability of nations and peoples to make their own choices, there can be no going back. It’s not America that filled the Maidan with protesters. It was Ukrainians.

No foreign forces compelled the citizens of Tunis and Tripoli to rise up. They did so on their own. From the Burmese parliamentarian pursuing reform to the young leaders fighting corruption and intolerance in Africa, we see something irreducible that all of us share as human being: a truth that will persevere in the face of violence and repression and will ultimately overcome.

For the young people here today, I know it may seem easy to see these events as removed from our lives, remote from our daily routines, distant from concerns closer to home. I recognize that both in the United States and in much of Europe, there’s more than enough to worry about in the affairs of our own countries.

There will always be voices who say that what happens in the wider world is not our concern nor our responsibility. But we must never forget that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom. Our democracy, our individual opportunity only exist because those who came before us had the wisdom and the courage to recognize that ideals will only endure if we see our self-interest in the success of other peoples and other nations.

Now is not the time for bluster. The situation in Ukraine, like crises in many parts of the world, does not have easy answers nor a military solution.

But at this moment, we must meet the challenge to our ideals, to our very international order, with strength and conviction. And it is you, the young people of Europe, young people like Laura (sp), who will help decide which way the currents of our history will flow.
Do not think for a moment that your own freedom, your own prosperity, that your own moral imagination is bound by the limits of your community, your ethnicity or even your country. You’re bigger than that. You can help us to choose a better history. That’s what Europe tells us. That’s what the American experience is all about.

I say this as the president of a country that looked to Europe for the values that are written into our founding documents and which spilled blood to ensure that those values could endure on these shores. I also say this as the son of a Kenyan whose grandfather was a cook for the British, and as a person who once lived in Indonesia as it emerged from colonialism.

The ideals that unite us matter equally to the young people of Boston or Brussels or Jakarta or Nairobi or Krakow or Kiev.

In the end, the success of our ideals comes down to us, including the example of our own lives, our own societies. We know that there will always be intolerance, but instead of fearing the immigrant, we can welcome him. We can insist on policies that benefit the many, not just the few, that an age of globalization and dizzying change opens the door of opportunity to the marginalized, and not just a privileged few.

Instead of targeting our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, we can use our laws to protect their rights. Instead of defining ourselves in opposition to others, we can affirm the aspirations that we hold in common. That’s what will make America strong. That’s what will make Europe strong. That’s what makes us who we are.

And just as we meet our responsibilities as individuals, we must be prepared to meet them as nations because we live in a world in which our ideals are going to be challenged again and again by forces that would drag us back into conflict or corruption. We can’t count on others to rise to meet those tests.
The policies of your government, the principles of your European Union will make a critical difference in whether or not the international order that so many generations before you have strived to create continues to move forward, or whether it retreats. And that’s the question we all must answer: What kind of Europe, what kind of America, what kind of world will we leave behind?

And I believe that if we hold firm to our principles and are willing to back our beliefs with courage and resolve, then hope will ultimately overcome fear, and freedom will continue to triumph over tyranny, because that is what forever stirs in the human heart.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)


President Obama really knows what he is talking about there.

This is a post in the BOG, a safe haven for those who support the President and his policies, and not a forum. Please read the pinned threads to see the purpose of this group.

That's out of date. Conservative Bible Project Cuts Out Liberal Passages:

Rachel Weiner 03/18/10

Lo and behold, the Bible has gotten too liberal, according to a group of conservatives. And it needs a little editing.

That's the inspiration behind the Conservative Bible Project, which seeks to take the text back to its supposed right-wing roots.


Yes, even scripture is not orthodox enough for the modern conservative. Not that it's the fault of the author(s), exactly. The group cites a few reasons why the Bible is too progressive: "Lack of precision in the original language... lack of precision in modern language" and "translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one."

So how can the Bible be conservatized? The group has proposed a Wikipedia-like group editing project. Some of the ideas would only bring the translation closer to the original. But others would fundamentally change the text.

1. Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias

2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, "gender inclusive" language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity

3. Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level[3]

4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".

5. Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";[5] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census

6. Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.

7. Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning

8. Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story

9. Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels

10. Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."

Among the words to be eliminated: "government."

A conservative columnist at Beliefnet described the effort as "just crazy ... like what you'd get if you crossed the Jesus Seminar with the College Republican chapter at a rural institution of Bible learnin'."



What we're up against. That and:

Conservapedia is an English-language wiki encyclopedia project written from a self-described American conservative and fundamentalist Christian point of view. The website was started in 2006 by homeschool teacher and attorney Andrew Schlafly, son of conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly,[3][4] to counter what he perceived as a liberal bias present in Wikipedia.[5][6] It uses editorials and a wiki-based system to generate content.

Examples of the ideology of Conservapedia in its articles include accusations against and strong criticism of US President Barack Obama, the Democratic Party, evolution, a wide array of alleged liberal ideologies, Wikipedia's supposed liberal bias, of the theory of relativity as promoting moral relativism,[7] claiming a proven link between abortion and breast cancer, praise of a number of Republican politicians, praise of celebrities and artistic works that it views as "conservative" and/or promoting moral standards in line with Christian family values, and acceptance of fundamentalist Christian doctrine such as Young Earth creationism, as well as the divinity of Jesus. Conservapedia's "Conservative Bible Project" is a crowd-sourced translation of the Bible which Conservapedia claims will be "free of corruption by liberal untruths".[8]


Because Wikipedia is socialist or something. It looks like it's where Rush gets his material. What's repeated online comes unintentionally from that boilerplate. It's all over the place, which gives it the validity of 'truth.'

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next »