Archive | April, 2009

Rush Limbaugh’s anti-Semitic/Jewish reference to the Jewish Shylock as a representation of dishonest money lenders, what a shameful view!

28 Apr

Rush Limbaugh’s anti-Semitic/Jewish reference to the Jewish Shylock as a representation of dishonest money lenders, is a shameful perspective!

On his radio show Rush Limbaugh referred to an Obama mortgage web effort as the Shylock web. Since Shylock was a Shakespearean unscrupulous Jewish-money lender, Limbaugh’s reference is a clear and damning statement regarding the Jewish character. 

Inasmuch as Arabs are also Semites, the Limbaugh condemnation is not actually anti-Semitic, it is rather simply: Anti-Jewish.

For perhaps the most influential conservative spokes person in the United States, Rush Limbaugh, to refer to crooked money sources as Shylocks; is, in a word, much like a statement made by another important conservative voice, Ann Coulter, who suggested that Jews should become Christians in order to be all they can be, is shameful!

These are embarrassing statements by those who, among other things, represent the religious right, they are especially damning  in view of the fact that perhaps the most accomplished person in history, the one who impacted the world more than any other person, was a Jewish Rabbi by the name of Yeshua bar Yosef (more commonly referred to as Jesus Christ.) 

Based on anti-Semitic/Jewish statements by two leading conservative voices, can, or should, one assume that the United States conservatives are anti-Jewish? Or, should one realize that Coulter and Limbaugh are sensationalists who often shoot-from-the-hip just to get attention?

 

Advertisements

Inflexibility of most US political [media] voices such as: Limbaugh, Matthews, Hannity, Oberman, Coulter, Grapelo, Beck and Maddows, are destroying democracy which is founded on the priciple of civil discord, and honest discussion:

26 Apr

After the recent “tea party, Janeane Garofalo, on Countdown, the Keith Oberman television show,  insisted that it was purely a racial demonstration due to the fact that there is a black man in the White House. Since her vehement insistence that she was right, numerous liberal people who respect and even enjoy the fact that Obama occupies the White House, told that they participated in the tea party, and supported its message.

Speaking of the same tea party, Hannity and Beck claimed that it was a great success and that millions attended. Others, on the “liberal” end, claimed that only tens of thousands attended, and that it was a complete failure.

Limbaugh stated that he wanted Obama to fail, he later qualified his pronouncements and said that he only wanted Obama’s policies to fail; aren’t the man and his policy one and the same? Limbaugh essentially suggest that he is willing to let the baby go down the drain with the bath water, or to adversely affect the nation in order to destroy President Obama and his policies.

Both conservatives and liberals continue to state that they are the greatest. Wolf Blitzer never fails to mention that his is the best political team on television, while O’Reilley and other on Fox News, claim the same credit; could there be more than one best? Or, are they, in reality, the two worse?

Hannity complains that Obama is leading the country towards a failing socialistic system, not realizing that much of the US economic system is now, as it was under Reagan, and the Republican Presidents that followed him, laden with socialistic elements, some that the Founding Fathers included in the Constitution. There are no pure Socialism, or pure Capitalism practiced in the world; the nearest system to it may be the Israeli Kibbutz which includes numerous capitalistic segments in their governance’s.

Liberal and conservatives should start examining what is best for the country and find common ground for helping the United States be the best it can be. Leave semantics alone, become more pragmatic, talk to each other rather than lecturing to the whole world and telling all who would listen that they are the guardians of the truth, like Rush Limbaugh when he tells his audience that he is 91.1% correct and is always improving…

The United States is one country, it is wrong for the likes of Governor Perry of Texas to suggest that his state may leave the Union, or for liberal spokes-persons to wish for those in the Bush Administration who did what they felt was the best that they can do to protect the country and its values, to be punished for what might have been the torture of enemy prisoners, or the reduction of some citizens rights.

Dissent is good; but when times are hard, dissenters should be civil and attempt to improve the country even at the expense of what may be some of their political conviction.

Sarah Palin, the perfect Republican “sacrificial lamb!”

19 Apr

If Obama policies work to a reasonable degree, as they should, no qualified Republican candidate in her, or his,  right mind, would want to challenge the Democrats in 2012; so here comes Sarah Palin!  The Republicans can nominate her knowing that she cannot win, and hope to do better in 2016,,,

No qualified candidates would be willing to sacrifice their careers and challenge a successful Barak Obama, resulting in Palin standing out as a likely choice. Out of all potential Republican Presidential wannabees, Palin seems to be the only one with an intelligence low enough to accept the losing proposition of going against a successful Obama.

It is quite appropriate to have Sarah Palin, a person of religious conviction,  be set-up by the Republican party as a “Sacrificial-Lamb,” a fitting Biblical metaphor.

Had McCain been President, Captain Phillips would have probably been killed! While President Obama excelled in dealing with the pirates, Hannity and the like, the major conservative voices, are suggesting that President Obama, who dealt with the situation in an exemplary manner, desrves little or no credit…

13 Apr

A war hero, the son and grandson of high ranking military officers, John McCain would have not likely waited out the pirates, or given the FBI tine to set the stage for military action, as President Obama did. Quicker action by the United States could have possible spelled a quick end to Captain Phillips’ life!

The Founding Fathers were very insicive people, they realised that the military should operate under civilian authorities; McCain the retired war hero with extensive military history in the family, could not likely waited for the civilians (such as the FBI) to set the stage for effective military action.

Sean Hannity of Fox News, in a discussion with Bernard Goldberg, one of his yes man, suggested that President Obama only did what he was required to do by law. Goldberg, totally out of character,  tried to challenges hin and suggest that it is time Conservatives stopped looking for faults in everything President Obama does.

Not only do the Conservatives look for faults in everything President Obama does, the Hennety suggestion that the President only followed the law by doing what he did. is totally false. Obama rejected the first Pentagon request to use deadly force until the ground was properly for military action. When enough time passed, and the preparation were made, did President Obama give the Pentagon to use deadly force.  President Obama deserves a great deal of credit for the way he dealt with the Pirates situation, Conservatives claims to the contrary, notwithstanding.

It may be providence that made Obama President, he played all the cards right, and Captain Phillips was saved. The United States, and especially the Phillps family should thank the Creator for the 2008 election results.

The Koran is Islam’s decleration of war on non-Muslims including the [Judeo/Christian] United States. (Text reprinted by permission of www.zyonism.org)

6 Apr

The Koran is a declaration of war  n

on-Muslims! This translates to the fact that Islam is at war with the [Judeo/Christian] United States, Obama words to the contrary notwithstanding. President Obam: a told audiences in Turkey that the United States is not now, and will never be, at war with Islam. Barak Hussein Obama is either extremely naive, as he has demonstrated on numerous earlier occasions, or he is playing politics even while he should be governing.

Had the good and talented Obama took the time to read the Koran, he would have realized that all non-Islamic countries, and non-Muslims ARE enemies of Islam, including the United States and the parts of its non-Muslim population.

President George W. Bush started to speak of a divide Islam, he separated peaceful Islam from what he termed radical Islam. President Bush tried to spread the idea that only a small group within Islam is anti the United States. If President Bush meant that only a small group, those he called radical Muslims, is actively terrorizing the no-Islamic world, he might have been right. But it must be noted that the Koran calls for the elimination of all non-Muslims. All loyal believers in Islam MUST accept that to be a non-Muslim is a sin, more importantly, those believers who do not labor at trying to convert all non-Muslim to Islam, or otherwise find means to eliminate them; are also sinners!

Muslims are not necessarily bad people, but if they are followers of the Koran they are instructed not to accept the rights of non-Muslims to exist. President Obama stating in Turkey that the United States is not at war with Islam, and that it will never be, may be partially right.

The other side of the coin, however, suggest that Islam is at war with a [Christian] United States, and will always be. Barak Hussein Obama, since assuming the office of President, started overtures towards Islam at the expense of other allies, especially of the state of Israel, as soon as he assumed office. While speaking in Turkey, President Obama also appealed to the people of Iran stating, as he did in his video message to Iran, that the United States would like to communicate with Iran based on mutual respect, without insisting that Iran must relinquish its goal of destroying the state of Israel.

By giving his first television interview after entering the White-House to an openly anti-Israel news outlet, Al Arabia, he perpetrated an act that suggested a diminishing level of support to Israel, it was a message that the new administration will take a much harder line with Israel than did it predecessor. A few questions come to mind when reviewing Obama’s international policies.

There is very little doubt that President Obama is taking support away from Israel, and shifting that support towards Islam. Is the shift due to the fact the the Jews, represented by Israel, number less than twenty million on the blobe, while there are more the a billion Muslims? Is it due to the fact that Barak Hussein Obama is with Islamic birthrights? Or, could it be because the Islamic world control a great deal of oil that the United States still needs, while Israel has no oil?

Are the facts the fact that David Axelrod the President Obama’s senior adviser, that Rham Emanuel is the White-House chief of staff, are Jewish, and that Hillary Clinton was elected Senator from a state with a heavy Jewish voting population, make policy makers in the Administration feel that the Jews will consider Obama a friend regardless of his actions?

If that is the White-House thinking, the day will come that they will regret this unfortunate way of dealing with the world. One may ask if the fact that Israel elected a rightist government is, at least in part, a response to how the United States Administration is catering to the Islamic world?

The Constitution adopted its policy from the Ten Commandsments, and why some politicians just don’t get it!

1 Apr

The Ten Commandments are not instruction, they are just a set of boundaries! Only three of the Commandments are positive, and they are boundless…the other Commandments are telling people what is irrevocably unacceptable, and not allowed,  by the Creator!

The Founding Fathers of these United States offered people a set of boundaries in form of the Constitution. The Constitution does give assignments to the various branches of the United States government, but no detailed instruction regarding what they must do to perform their duties.

Representative Micele Backmamm demonstrated a complete lack of understating of the essence of their Constitution when questioning Secretary  Geithner about his source Constitutional authority for performing his job. The representative does not seem to realize that the Constitution does not provide specific “marching order,” to Government operatives.