America’s Mr. MaGoo style foreign policy

Has Obama backed America into a corner with his Mr. MaGoo style foreign policies? How could he have not seen this coming? He seems to be able to trick congress into compromising itself to his will without any problems. But with Putin… he is the one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest, not quite being able to understand why he is the one bent over.

In review some time ago Obama threw a childish power tantrum and took out his crayons and drew red lines, on walls, floors, or on some maps…? Who really cares where the lines were drawn? All that Obama knew was that it somewhat worked for the leader of Israel so he copied it. No points for originality.

Sometime later Obama found out those lines drawn in sandbox’s with crayons doesn’t work, nor does it reflect power in the eyes of tyrant’s playing in the Middle East’s sand box. What to do?

Unleashing Kerry with some tough talk was the answer. After all “Lounge lizards” aren’t all that big on wimpy turning tough when dealing with bullies, but they’re long on talk. Kerry said in his best Harman Monster’s voice, “You better play nice or else…we may have to have some kind of military response.” But refused to say what this exactly was going to be. But to his credit did say, paraphrased “It will be an exceedingly small but muscular response.” Small but muscular??? Is that when you send the U.S. Women’s Gymnastics team to Syria and punish Assad and Putin into submission?

Today we have Putin the leader of Russia, so completely kicking America in the nuts politically speaking, that the Israeli’s are starting to moan and groan. It has never been about chemical weapons for Obama. After all he could have voices similar opinions when Saddam of Iraq gassed his own Kurds with “Chemical WMD weapons”! Instead he danced around blaming Bush for a war for Oil. It is hard to believe a man who supports late-term abortion. Honesty, when the attention of the world is drawn to some 400 plus kids killed by chemical WMD’s in Syria, but already Obama has a record with his silence of not giving a damn about chemical weapons, it’s about politics, not the future value of some terrorist’s offspring.

Obama would rather pass the ball to Putin. Whose record according to the UN is its self in violation with the chemical weapons act. So we are going to have Russia police a tyrant on how to eliminate questionable weapons that by themselves are having trouble being honest about?

All the while Putin puts out a op-ed  that demonstrates his ability to quote the “Declaration of Independence” better then Obama and crew, while making the claim that everyone is exceptional not just America. He said that everyone was made equal by God.

Obama only seems too stutter when he tries to mention God? Imagine Putin comparing a command and control style government that he is leader of as being the same kind of exceptional as America? With no real response from Obama to these statements, he must also be thinking Putin’s is right? Just the fact of Putin making statements in his op-ed to Americans, is a kind of slap in the face to Obama. After all Putin probably has a higher rating then Obama does now, as he tries to maneuver himself into the top running position for the next Nobel Peace Prize.

In short, handing the ball to Putin in the Syria’s game leaves the foreign policy makers saying one thing while doing another. We now are forced to support Putin / Assad against the opposition after we said we are for moderate opposition groups to take out Assad and replace him. I didn’t know there were Moderate terrorists, less lethal al Qaeda types screaming death to Israel and America / the big Satan?

Mr. MaGoo Obama, leader of the coom gang, can I give you a novice’s advice?

Having Russia broker a peace deal with Syria is a little like asking Lindsy Lohan to hold your drugs.

Even Mr. MaGoo could see without his magnifying glass….that what makes America exceptional over every other country in the world today and in history of the world. Is we are born with God-given rights that transcends the will of the Governments, and that we our government was founded with separated powers and enumerated powers based on the timeless principals—that all men were created from birth yearning to be free. Our exceptionalism comes from the fact throughout history until the founding of this nation (America) there has been no other type of government that places God above their own powers to govern.

Tyrants never come to power promising “Tyranny”, they come to power spewing “Hope and Change”!

Advertisements

The intentionality of political consumerism

The problem is not with any elitist separation between the have and the have-nots, but the intentionality and ideology behind consumption. If conservatives are to change any views of people up and down the economic ladder today? We must make our policies known as being about people helping people—not of arguing about things or policies, but explaining how every policy of government will help or hurt people, not just an explanation, we support this and we are against that.

Today; despite having a black president in office, why do we have what seems a bigger social divide and an increased amount of political special interest groups competing for a bigger slice of political consumerism?

Political powers or policies are being marketed to special interest groups in exchange for a perceived vote being cast for that political party’s policy. Political policies should be all-encompassing, designed for all the citizenry; after all it is government of the people and by the people? If it is about special interest groups or focused government, penalizing to some and rewarding to others. Where is the motto that we should be living by and supporting? Where is E-pluribus Unum?  Should we be buying into these federal government policies forgetting about our own states or more narrowly our individual ability’s? How easily do we exchange individualism, and independence, for cheap defective products produced by political deceptions?

Political consumption produces products where it is easy to escape reality, while producing a false sense of social prestige, while slowly killing the human independent spirit, or the human potential within. With purchases that we make, do we buy because we need these things, or do we buy because we want these things?

It is human nature as with all animals in nature, in picking our paths in life with the least amount of resistance, or efforts needed in reaching our goals. The problem with taking the easy way out, it produces a faulty sense of accomplishment when indeed it is more of a successful manipulation; a taking advantage of people while using them to do our bidding, allowing them to make those efforts that should have been ours to make while claiming success. Looking towards government in this way is easy, accepting  political consumption, policies to escape making a greater effort or escaping reality just the same, expecting social prestige in the proses as the easy way out, a temporary Band-Aid for our problems.

Do we buy into these political policies in order to help people or to validate self-worth? For people who see themselves as powerless it is a temptation hard to resist. But true power is in production, not in consumption. Policies designed to deceive in order to gain support is the product of government today. Accepting any notion that government is there to fix our problems in society only provides us with a faults sense, although economics and goods play a part in the quality of life, understanding the intentionality behind the political ideology leading us to choose to consume it or not? Is just as important to understand this no matter which side of the coin your on. There aren’t any government policies that will close the gap between the haves and the have-nots. But a clear understanding that government has created a society of consumption where on every level; consumption is exactly where there is the least amount of power and the maximum ability to manipulate. That is the nature of government, and how it quenches its thirst of ever greater power. The bottom line, power is in the production not in the consumption; you must produce to wield any lasting power, having the ability to save and invest even in yourself by changing lifestyles, are only talking points of some politicians but never widely supported policies of any political party or there pre designed future outcomes.

The ideology behind political consumption I contend is the major reason blacks as a special interest group remain near the bottom of the social ladder, because political consumption is a coping strategy designed to sooth insecurities and self-hatred while simultaneously eliminating a chance for economic progression.

I believe political consumption is why we have a border security problem, an illegal immigration problem as well. It is for the most part why government can’t ever accept free market solutions to society’s problems, but avoiding free market solutions in its self maintains the power pendulum on the side of government and a false sense of power within special interest groups courting government for special affections.

Government has created special interest groups in order to pool their resources together, focusing them as if it is their only way for survival as a whole; placing government and false policies as the only solutions. The only way to gain lost prestige, whether it’s social or economic. But the government has a secret vested interest in never providing a pathway towards success as preserved by these groups, by keeping them as consumers. These groups are willingly giving up their power and accepting a status of being a member of the permanent underclass, moving through false motivation in the direction of political shifting winds or desires at their own expense.

We celebrate “Independence day” the 4th of every July, Not dependence day by consuming government policies designed to strip power, dignity, and the can-do-attitude, formed the minds that need it most!

The more we demand of government, the more we have already accepted government’s role of being the producers, and citizens as being the underclass consumers.

Do we buy products like political policies, (the common belief of a charitable government) to help people or to validate self-worth?

The problem is not with any elitist separation between the have and the have-nots, but the intentionality and ideology behind the power struggle of government created consumption.