The Left and Obama’s Foreign Policy
The Left, expecting nirvana with Barack Obama’s victory, is quickly discovering that the President-elect intends to govern from the center and apparently give them very little. The Democratic leadership, the left asserts, has not moved to end the war, stop the bailout or end what they see as the destruction of our civil liberties. And, much to their dismay, Barack Obama successfully admonished them not to take retribution on Senator Joe Lieberman for his great heresy- support to the campaign of John McCain. As James Kirchik writes, “the leadership of the Democratic Party isn’t as petty, vindictive and small as its left-wing supporters.”
Let us look at the critical area of foreign policy and national security. The appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is an indication that Obama has chosen a person supportive of our national security interests. Clinton campaigned as a fervent hawk, a defender of America’s interests and a leader committed to Israel’s security. It was Senator Clinton during the campaign who called for being tough on Iran, even to the extent of suggesting that if Iran moved against Israel with its coming nuclear arsenal, we would obliterate it.
What really upsets the Left, however, is what they see as Obama’s great betrayal on Iraq. Writing in The Nation, national security correspondent Robert Dreyfuss argues that Obama was seen as “the anti-war candidate,” and yet he fears that he now will claim he has no mandate to end the war and withdraw our forces quickly. Instead, Dreyfuss worries that his circle of advisers will pressure him to abandon his antiwar pledges, and are mainly “hawkish Democrats” who regard such campaign promises as bad policy. Dreyfuss sees Obama consorting with the likes of Richard Holbrooke, hawks close to Joe Biden, and assorted neoconservatives whose counsel he seeks. Seeing a potential showdown with his military advisers, whom Dreyfuss sees as supporters of General David Petraeus, he has a solution. Order them to pullout our troops as promised, or fire Petraeus and the Joint Chiefs just as Harry Truman fired Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War.
There is a major difference, however, between what MacArthur attempted during Korea and what Petraeus and the others advocate today. In the midst of battle, MacArthur countered policy and sought to take the war to China proper behind the Yalu River, thus risking a war with both China and the Soviet Union. Petraeus shifted policy to successfully implement Bush Administration policy by changing the results in Iraq, thereby lowering American deaths, stabilizing the country, and creating a situation that enhanced the chances of success for the existing policy.
The Left is also worried about the likelihood that Obama will keep Republican Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Gates supported the surge, and is of course identified with the Petraeus policy the Left dislikes so much. Most Americans will be pleased that the appointment of Gates indicates that Obama means to govern with a bi-partisan foreign policy consensus.
I have not read Robert Dreyfuss incorrectly. Just yesterday, he wrote that his hunches that Obama wants to “preside over a restoration of the bipartisan consensus that governed foreign policy during the cold war and the 1900s, updated for a post-9/11 world,” is correct. He sees Obama as an enemy, as a man who wants to increase military spending, boost the size of the armed forces, expand our intelligence agencies and maintain US bases all over the globe. Reading Dreyfuss, one might think that it was not John McCain, but Barack Obama, who in foreign policy is Bush III. He even fears that Obama might even strengthen the National Endowment for Democracy, the quasi-governmental agency that acts to strengthen civil society agencies abroad that promote democracy. Led by Carl Gershman, once Jeanne Kirkpatrick’s assistant Ambassador to the UN during the Reagan presidency, the NED is the quintessential neo-con boogeyman of the Left.
So Dreyfuss asks; “Are we surprised that the views of Obama’s conservative and centrist advisers are, in fact, coherent with Obama’s own? And are we surprised that his choices for his foreign policy and national security appointments are drawn exclusively from conservative, centrist and pro-military circles without even a single [one]…chosen to represent the antiwar wing of the Democratic party?” Dreyfuss even worries that under Obama, the US might take “tough military action overseas in case of humanitarian crisis,” particularly in the Sudan. My God, he might even act like Jack Bauer in last night’s episode of “24:The Redemption.”
Dreyfuss’ colleague at the Nation, Christopher Hayes, complains that “not a solitary, actual dyed-in-the-wool progressive has…even been mentioned for a position in the new administration. Not one.” Hayes thinks that the election showed that the consensus on all issues “came from the left.” Evidently, like all the ideologues on that publication, he ignores that in poll after poll the majority of the electorate identified themselves as moderate, centrist, or even conservative- and not supporters of the left. Hayes, like others on the Left, confuse their own certainty and ideology with that of the nation at large. It is fortunate for us that for now President-elect Obama seems not to agree.
“The Left, expecting nirvana with Barack Obama’s victory, is quickly discovering that the President-elect intends to govern from the center and apparently give them very little.”
Let’s hope you are right. I still remain suspicious of someone who I perceive to be a self-hating American. Still, I must concede that presently the far left has more to complain about than myself! The Daily Kos types must feel like Obama has stabbed them in the back.
This was a good article. All I can think about is my brother who voted for Obama telling me over and over, “he will get us out of this damn war.” I emailed him this article. [smile]
Regarding Barack Obama, I still say it is too early to tell. He walks like a liberal, talks like a liberal, but then appoints these Clinton retreads who are mostly moderates. Is this more about payback than change?
In reality I don’t see Obama being that key of player anyway. The man spends way to much time relying on others to take the heat or make the decisions. He only appears to be a “mouthpiece” to me. The Democratic majority in Congress is going to rule the roost. They will shove spending programs down our throats and ruin the whole game anyway. Obama will be sitting there wondering what in the hell happened to him — much like George Bush did in the past few years.
This is sadly funny – the Leftists feel betrayed by their Messiah, when they NEVER really paid any attention to what he actually said. Ask an Obamabot what he stands for and they will tell you either “He’s bringing the troops home” or “he’s going to lower taxes”.
He never said he was bringing the troops home (in fact, has always said quite the opposite) and the math on his taxes is not even close.
i think the left – and probably Team Obama – is already getting a grand demonstration of just how much the president actually affects reality. the aggravating thing is we elected a person who would remain at the mercy of events but whose appeal was precisely that he could enact the fantasies of the left. will the left learn that their histrionics about the bush administration were simply a hallucination animated by their arrested development and sustained by the professional commentariat and political scum to whom they’ve surrendered all their capacity for critical thought? my guess is: Nyet.
but i agree with the above poster: it is still too early to tell. obama’s biography and slender voting record do not argue for centrism and the charting of a middle way. i still believe the primary danger is the leftists who enter the government at the upper management level, and the character of the diplomatic work done outside of the public eye. it strikes me that in order to achieve maximum subversion one would have to engage in maximum public centrism, partly in order to render charges of subversion – usually difficult to prove – ludicrous.
but hey if he turns out to be the man of the centrist part of his campaign rhetoric and not the “i hate bush iraq is vietnam” guy, then all for the better. the man still has absolutely no strategic and military sense, though. a political campaign, even one for the US presidency, is not the world, not russia, china, and the shanghai cooperation organization. we’ll have to see.
Perhaps the dubious benefit of having a true narcissist and relativist as President is that he is more concerned about his image, legacy and success than he is about the destructive ideology he grew up with and was representing during his three years of voting 50% “present” and 50% wack-leftist in his thuggish district of Illinois.
The one thing Obama loves is the applause. We are applauding you Barry. Keep it up!
Obama is not yet President. Until then he is still wooing both sides. Do not jump to conclusions, like his birth certificate everything is under cover. He will show his true colours when he feels the time is ripe. Do not be deceived, he wants to be adored so for now will try to be all things to all men.
SIGN THE PETITION TO FORCE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA TO PRESENT HIS QUALIFICATIONS.
PETITION FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OF
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE
To: Electoral College, Congress of the United States, Federal Elections Commission, U.S. Supreme Court, President of the United States, other controlling legal authorities
Whereas, by requirement of the United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, no one can be sworn into office as president of the United States without being a natural born citizen;
Whereas, there is sufficient controversy within the citizenry of the United States as to whether presidential election winner Barack Obama was actually born in Hawaii as he claims;
Whereas, Barack Obama has refused repeated calls to release publicly his entire Hawaiian birth certificate, which would include the actual hospital that performed the delivery;
Whereas, lawsuits filed in several states seeking only proof of the basic minimal standard of eligibility have been rebuffed;
Whereas, Hawaii at the time of Obama’s birth allowed births that took place in foreign countries to be registered in Hawaii;
Whereas, concerns that our government is not taking this constitutional question seriously will result in diminished confidence in our system of free and fair elections;
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550
The above article appears on WorldNetDaily.
AMERICA’S REAL ECONOMIC CHAOS
Those in charge, trying to fix this economy, don’t have a clue:
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2008/11/americas-real-e conomic-chaos.html
The Supreme Court CANNOT DUCK Obama’s Birth Certificate Constitutional Crisis (albeit the media blackout on the issue). The messiah will NOT become President! This 90-minute blogradio program explains why:
http://politicalpistachio.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-is-obamas-birth-certificate-still.html
The man has not yet taken office, nor signed his first executive order.
Betrayal will be the signature of the Obama Administration. He will either betray the left and the Democrat base, or betray the country. Having regarded Obama as the Empty Suit from Chicago from the get-go, I suspect the former. The deluded nitwits who voted for him, fulfilling that prophecy of the great American seer P.T. Barnum, were born to be screwed.
Could it be possible that Obamas heavy pandering to the left was all a ploy to get elected?
When he starts breaking all his promises I will laugh so hard.
The question is not who he initially appoints to his executive — it’s how fast they resign when he commands them to do something anti-American of unconstitutional.
i am secure in the knowledge that the left (not to be confused with liberals – these leftists are alien pods from an outer galaxy) with their peculiar anti-american bent have been pushed back to the fringes, which is the only place they belong. perhaps behind the curtains showing just the tips of their pointy shoes, which is all well and good, so we can still monitor their movements.
obama’s appointments are inspired and the leftists who imagined themselves his base, aren’t. i am confident that he will do the best for our country. we should give him a break, support him fully, and just maybe we won’t end up spending the rest of our lives living in cartons on the streets or in the parks. and, we will at least have an administration that cares one way or the other.
I never understood why anti-Iraq war folks wouldn’t support Dennis Kucinich who put his money where his mouth was. Obama is just all mouth. He’s never done anything to jeopardize his political ambitions.
Message to the Left:
SUCKERS!
“Second, if Obama dares to take the Presidential “Oath or Affirmation” of office, knowing that he is not “a natural born Citizen,” he will commit the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). For, being ineligible for “the Office of President, he cannot “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States,” or even execute it at all, to any degree. Thus, his very act of taking the “Oath or Affirmation” will be a violation thereof! So, even if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court himself looks the other way and administers the “Oath or Affirmation,” Obama will derive no authority whatsoever from it.”
OBAMA MUST STAND UP NOW OR STEP DOWN
By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm
SIGN THE PETITION TO FORCE BARACK OBAMA TO PROVE HIS NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP
AS REQUIRED BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550
#18. Frank:
Could it be possible that Obamas heavy pandering to the left was all a ploy to get elected?
When he starts breaking all his promises I will laugh so hard.
Could it be possible that all this “pandering to the left” was mainly republican propaganda?
Quite frankly, Obama never promised to bring the troops home – only to move them to Afghanistan. He promised to go after main Al Qaida targets in Pakistan and step up the fighting in the Afghan/Pakistan boarder – the main front in the war on terror. He said that Iraq had been a distraction – hurtin the war on terror. This is the realist and traditionally republican stand, as opposed to the idealist Bush war in Iraq, fought to bring about democratic change.
Trash talking about Obama already and he has not even been sworn as president; Yet, he is
more active than the current LAME DUCK/TURKEY
BUSH!
You Repubs are very predictable, for 8 years you have had the power and all your leaders
do is divide the country, try to scare the population and enrich themselves. Have you guys been living in a black hole or can’t you all see the devestation wreaked by your parties control and games??
I think that instead of throwing stones at Obama, before he even takes the reigns, that you guys should take a good, long look at your party politicians and demand some answers and some change in your party!
Otherwise, you Republicans should be content
at sitting on the fence whinning about what the Democrats are doing, instead of in power,
making the changes necessary to put this country back on top.
Liberal? No, I am not! I am a realist that,
along with most of this nations voters, know
when enough is enough! Get used to the change
and stop crying, you got 4 years to straighten out your corrupt Republican party.
Why not make that priority 1 instead of trash talking while BUSH, the republicans Hero, rides out his shameful term sitting on his hands, while we all suffer!
24. Windingstad:
Could it be possible that all this “pandering to the left” was mainly republican propaganda?
Not Republican propaganda but a deliberate perception created by the Obama team because they knew that human nature being what it is perception is 90% of reality and they had to have the hard left and the younger voters on board to defeat Hilary in the primaries. Now that they are elected it is safe to throw them under the bus as the “useful idiots” that they are.
———————————————
By the way, I hope all you rich liberals out there are going to pay a bunch of taxes because Joe Biden said it’s your patriotic duty to do so and I am waiting for my share of the free stuff Obama promised me.
Why is it that every left-winger – in this case MiddleClassPeasant – comes across like an angry child when they post comments?
Re: MiddleClassPeasant (comment #25):
You barking BDS moonbats are so predictable.
George Bush has freed 50 million people from two of the most murderous governments on earth. He’s given them two U.N.-approved, constitutional democracies — instead of pro-American dictatorships. And he is protecting them — at high cost and no political benefit to himself — from even worse butchers until their own new governments can grow up enough to do it alone.
When the process is complete George Bush will be one of the greatest liberators in human history; and America under his leadership will be one yet again. There will be two new democracies beginning the process of joining the modern world, as Germany, Japan, Italy, South Korea, and the Philippines did 60 years ago; and as Eastern Europe did 20 years ago. If they get American help, they’ll be leading two new regions of the world — the Middle East and Central Asia — in the same direction.
As a bonus, America has developed a military that can defeat an Islamo-fascist insurgency even in the heart of the ancient Caliphate.
And there is no one on the barking moonbat left that would have done the smallest part of this better, as well, or At All.
Now give us a demonstration of how well you can change the subject and filibuster — as you lightweights always do.
He’s a marxist – sooner or later he won’t be able to resist cutting open the goose in a hunt for some golden eggs.
Say goodbye your 401K and say hello to nationalized health care
Both will be economy killers.
I’m enjoying the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the far-right.
There’s an emerging meme in Republicanland: Obama supporters are somehow “angry” with Obama because he’s “centrist” or (gasp!) “conservative”. Remember now, these are the same Republicans who earlier this month were howling that Obama was a Marxist who wanted to take Joe the Plumber’s imaginary $250k income and give it to welfare queens. Or something like that.
So now self-hating Republicans are pretending that Obama is one of them, and that his supporters are sooo upset about their misfortune.
I’ll remember this when I stand on the National Mall on 1/20/09 and watch MY candidate sworn in as our next President. And I’ll laugh. Hard.
Dream on, suckers. Your obvious state of denial amuses me.
Seeing Obama’s choices for advisors and cabinet, especially in economics and keeping Gates as Secretary of Defense –
will the Left start saying “Bush stole the election” again?
Note to Winner….He’s now OUR President so he will have to put up with having his feet put to the fire whether you approve or not. We are not “pretending” that Obama is one of us but now that he’s shown his affinity to sway in whatever the breeze of the moment is, we’re hoping against hope that he’ll swing our way. I’ll give you this, “your candidate” has the backbone of a jellyfish friend. I’m hoping you aren’t one of those far left liberals who were totally in the tank for him. He is surely disappointing that fringe right now. Hehehehehehe…..
Good post Thinking Person. Winner here are additional replies for you:
“There’s an emerging meme in Republicanland: Obama supporters are somehow “angry” with Obama because he’s “centrist” or (gasp!) “conservative”.”
So Obama supporters are actually pleased?
As far as platform and policy, today’s Obama is yesterday’s Hillary. Maybe you should vote again. Call ACORN.
“Remember now, these are the same Republicans who earlier this month were howling that Obama was a Marxist who wanted to take Joe the Plumber’s imaginary $250k income and give it to welfare queens. ”
Obama’s voting record and statements are the source of that concern. But as other posters have said, the proof will be in the pudding.
“So now self-hating Republicans are pretending that Obama is one of them, and that his supporters are sooo upset about their misfortune.”
That would not quite be a self-hating belief. Obama’s move to the center – from supporting Bush’s wiretapping policy, offshore drilling, to supporting security in Iraq – are 180 degrees from his promises to the Far Left.
It means that either:
1. Obama has has time to hear viewpoints from the Center and has decided not to let his previous views destroy his administration
2. As posted previously, he needed the Far Left and the MTV kids to wipe out Hillary. They are easily discarded, with passing loyalties anyhow.
“I’ll remember this when I stand on the National Mall on 1/20/09 and watch MY candidate sworn in as our next President. And I’ll laugh. Hard.”
Remember Pelosi’s election promises of impeachment hearings and immediate troop withdrawals. This has not been lost on Obama, who has used the far lefties
as useful idiots his entire career.
here’s what we read to the recent
Obama, Odinga & Kenyan Jihad
by Kurt Schulzke on February 25, 2008
Last night, I reported on Barack Obama’s active support of Kenyan candidate and Obama cousin Raila Odinga. What escaped mention was Odinga’s explicit plan to turn Kenya into an Al Qaeda terrorist incubator. A close analysis of Odinga’s MoU with Sheikh Abdullahi Abdi shows that — if Odinga had been elected as Kenyan president in the fall of 2007 — he would have made it impossible under Kenyan law for “any Muslim arrested for or suspected of Terrorism” to be tried anywhere but Kenya under Kenyan law.
Kenyan law, in turn, would henceforth be exclusively Shariah law in “Muslim declared regions” — the “coast” and “North Eastern regions” of the country – see the map, below — now visited by hundreds of thousands of western tourists each year. [See Odinga, Abdi & Obama: Which Islamic MoU is real? for an updated, detailed discussion of two competing versions of the agreement.] Obama and Odinga supporters want to label as a “lie” the MoU version discussed here. However, the evidence suggests the opposite is true.
It is no coincidence that this area of Kenya borders Somalia – for many years an Al Qaeda stronghold — site of the Clinton administration’s Bay of Pigs-redux, in Mogadishu, the event that serves as the basis for the movie Black Hawk Down. Also noteworthy is Kenya’s proximity to Tanzania, focus of much of George Bush’s efforts to save Africa and, arguably, where Bush is today most loved in the world.
In these “Muslim declared” regions, the Odinga-Abdi agreement would outlaw – among other things – Farmer’s Choice, pork, other “haram products” and “women’s public dressing styles considered immoral or offensive to the Muslim faith” for all women, not just Muslims. At the same time, Odinga would establish a Sharia law court in every Kenyan “divisional headquarters.” One foreseeable result of these machinations is that Al Qaeda would be safe-havened in Kenya, free to foment mahem and terror around the world. Little wonder that Louis Farrakhan has endorsed Obama for president.
The question every Democrat should be asking is how any American president – as Barack Obama seeks to become – could support a scheme so obviously designed to further the global jihad? Restated: With Americans like Obama, who needs Al Qaeda?
Conservative Republicans face a related question: In light of this information, could you in good conscience not vote for John McCain in November if the Dems stupidly choose Obama as their “daddy”?
here’s what we found out:People, in 2006 Obama went to campaign with his cousin Odenga in Kenya to turn kenya into a “safe-haven” for terriorist to turn Kenya into a SHARIA LAW state. Had they won the elections it would have meant it would be impossible to try prosecute “any” terriorist anytime/anywhere for their illegal crimes. The terriorst would have to be shipped off to Kenya where they would have been “safe havened”. Since they lost the elections there was a pre-planned ensuing blood bath. How many don’t know that in USA 2 days before election the press too issued a statement of a pre-planned blood bath had obama not been elected??
Couple days ago, the news announced that Pakistan is now a SHARIA LAW state.
Today we found out that the UN is in agreement to want to approve SHARIA LAW which means “anyone” will be punishable by death for claiming the islam/muslim/sharia law murders and criminal activity is bad.
Does that sound fair to you? does that sound equal to you?
Found out today that the SHARIA LAW wants to force the BANKING INDUSTRY to operate under SHARIA LAW religious laws as well. While this is blatantly unconstitutional it’s what is being attempted right now.
CLINTON IN 2000 gave his blessing to the whole globalist thing on the UN “INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC). The DEMOCRATS all along want to make US citizens SERVANTS TO THE UN AS OUR GOVERNMENT instead of a country governed by WE THE PEOPLE.
Thankfully Bush saw the serious threat this Socialist star chamber posed to our military and he told them to stuff a sock in it. Apparantly at that time the UN was insulted by it. Although the REPUBLICANS tried twice to negotiate immunity for US peacekeepers thru the Sec Council.
Well, the anti-Americans at the UN wouldn’t have any of it and the Abu Graib prison gave Kofi Annan the opening he wanted. The he tried to wrap himself in the human right mantle by claiming it would be unfotunate for someone to press for such an exemption given the prisoner abuse in Iraq.
We all know that if Mr. Amman really cared a thing about human rights he would have protested the revolving membership of certain countries with human rights track records. However, the Sanctimonious UN and Annan are always silent on the topic of human rights; except when it comes to taking cheap shots at the US
What they are really after is for the US to submit to the will of the UN and it’s International criminal court. What they want is for the US to relinquish it’s SOVEREIGNTY relagating WE THE PEOPLE of the US to the status of servants to the UN INSTEAD of being governed by WE THE PEOPLE
THIS would for example entail that any US servicemen serving in let’s say Pakistan could be apprehended by local Muslim authorities for an offense, real or imagined slammed into the ICC and flown to the Hage, netherlands where they would rot for months waiting for trial and done ENTIRELY without due process. they would get not trial and no confronting of accusers, No protection from double jeopardy and no unanimous verdict for a conviction.
Take a second to THINK about this all of the globalists within and without the USA think the murderous Al Qaida terriorists should have these rights HOWEVER NOT OUR US SOLDIERS.
However, the ICC doesn’t want to recognize the CONSTITUTIONAL rights that we as Americans are guaranteed. GET IT?? They too think our constitution is FLAWED.
Meanwhile the globalists Anti-American ICC supporters criticized Mr. Bush claiming we were “undermining international LAW, the reality, THEY were writing new INTERNATIONAL LAWS TO protect themselves.
Want to know WHAT were the “agreement on the Privileges and immunities of the ICC” ratified with the assent of ONLY 10 NATION–it flat out provides the ICC immunity from “every form of legal process anywhere”.
They stated that the “property, funds, and assets” of the ICC “shall be IMMUNE from search, seizure, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference. And, the ICC and it’s assets they said “are to be exempt from all direct taxes” including local taxes and customs.
Long and short of it—-the ICC MEMBERS have declared themselves IMMUNE form “personal arrest or detention, Legal process of every kind and immigration restrictions.
Oh then then lastly, the “salaries, emoluments and allowances” of the judges prosecutor deputy prosecutor and the registras of the ICC ARE EXEMPT from taxaition.
What hypocrites, it seems to run DEEP in the UN, but it indicates the lengths to which globalists will go to undermine National SOVEREIGNTY.
There’s no mistaking it, the ICC SEVERELY undermines our Sovereignty and has over the years placed our troops at great risk.
It CLAIMS complete jurisdiction over every person in the world and it makes no difference to them whether or not that nation has even ratified the treaty.
And, FRANKLY our own constitution may soon be up to the interpretation of 18 foreign -and for the most part hostile-ICC JUDGES.
Long and short of it, the ICC is literally a dagger in the heart of our US SOVEREIGNTY, our freedom and our independence.
DO you want to know what the ACLU thinks about how ‘STUPID’ they view Americans. Here is what Norman THOMAS one of the Founders of the ACLU says QUOTE Americans will never “knowingly” accept Socialism, but under “liberalism” Americans will accept every fragment; and one day wake up in a Socialist Nation and “wonder” how it all happened.
What we need to investigate is how the DEMOCRATS and ACLU think that they can continue to count on Americans being as stupid as the ACLU and DEMS thinks Americans are.
Prior to elections we constantly had to complain to the REPUBLICANS that our posts were being stonewalled because we are not posting PRO obama.
So we filed complaints with the Justice department.
to the present the problem persists.
Go see for yourselves how the American Center for Law and Justice is working to try to keep our WE THE PEOPLE protected. They need signature support to attempt to offset what the UN wants to do to our free speech. But if they don’t get the support there won’t be anyone to protect WE THE PEOPLE anymore.
Whom was the orator, president or author whom said–Tolerance becomes wrong and EVIL only when applied or given to criminals.
Whom was it that once said—-All that’s needed for tyranny to reign is for good men to do nothing.
We put it to you, WE THE PEOPLE has our Society gotten so warped that we need to be reminded of what these orators have said and how it applies to our Society?