Beyond the Cusp

December 7, 2014

President Obama, King Abdullah II and Israeli Elections

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,24/7 News Reporting,Administration,Amalekites,American People Voice Opinion,Amnesty,Anti-Zionist,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Approve Ballot,Arab Appeasement,Arab Israeli Citizen,Arabs,Ariel Sharon,Austerity Measures,Ayatollah Khamenei,Balanced Budget,Ballot Access,Bayit Yehudi Party,Border violence,Borders,Breakout Point,Budget,Building Freeze,Campaign Contributions,Capitalism,Chief Rabbinate,Civilization,Class Warfare,Coalition,Conflict Avoidnce,Core Beliefs,Cost of Living,Courts,Debate,Debt,Debt Ceiling,Defense Minister,Democracy,Deportation,Disengagement,Domestic NGOs,Early Elections,Earnings,East Jerusalem,Economy,Ehud Barak,Electability,Elections,Employment,Enforcement,Equal Opportunity,Equal Outcome,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Media,European Pressure,European Union,Experts,Extreme Leftist,Extreme Right,Failed State,Federica Mogherini,Financial Crisis,Foreign Funding,Foreign Minister,Foreign NGOs,Foreign Policy,Foreign Trade,Funding,Gaza,Gaza Blockade,Government,Government Control,Government Controlled Media,Government Waste,Government Worker,Green Economy,Green Line,Guard Border,Haaretz,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hatnua,Herzog,Hevron,Higher Prices,Holy Sites,Housing Minister,Housing Shortage,Illegal Immigration,Income,Infiltration Tunnels,Inflation,Internal Pressures,International Politics,International Socialism,Iran,Iron Dome,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Israeli Interests,Israeli Media,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Judea,Judean Hills,Justice Minister,Labor Party,Land for Peace,Leftist Pressures,Leftist Propaganda,Liberals,Likud,Livable Wage,Mahmoud Abbas,Mainstream Media,Media,Media Bias,Media Censorship,Middle East,Military on Borders,Minimum Wage,Ministers,Misreporting,Multiculturalism,Murder Israelis,Myth,Naftali Bennett,National Debt,National Socialism,Nationalist,Nationalists,Netanyahu,Nuclear Disarmament,Nuclear Program,Nuclear Weapons,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,P5+1,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Media,Palestinian Pressures,Parliament,Parliamentary Government,Partition Plan,Peace Process,Plutonium Production,Politically Correct,Politically Incorrect,Politicized Findings,Politics,Post-Zionist,Poverty,President Obama,Prime Minister,Prime Minister,Progressives,Promised Land,Proportional Representation,Protect Citizenry,Protective Edge,Public Service,Repatriation,Samaria,Secular Humanist,Secular Interests,Secularist Socialism,Security,Settlements,Socialism,Socialism,Society,Spending Cuts,Statehood,Submission,Supreme Leader,Syria,Talking Heads,Taxes,Tel Aviv,Temple Mount,Terror,Terrorist Release,Third Intifada,Two State Solution,Tzipi Livni,Under Employment,Unemployment,Union Interests,United Nations,United States,United States Pressure,Uranium Enrichment,Validate Elections,Vote of No Confidence,Voting,Waqf,Water Conservation,Wealth,Wealth Redistribution,World Media,World Opinion,World Pressures,World Without Zionism or America,Yair Lapid,Yasser Arafat,Yesh Atid Party,Yisrael Beiteinu,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 4:07 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

I probably should have included the United Nations Security Council in the title as well as that is where this drama will eventually play out. It’s a serious game of ‘who will blink first’ combined with ‘truth or dare’ all rolled up into a larger game of ‘chicken’ over the coming Israeli elections. President Obama really is tired of and hates Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. He despises his nationalistic pride, his belief in right and wrong as delineated by his religion, his fierce defense of his belief and most of all, his refusal to be dictated to and obey every last wise council and direction from President Obama. President Obama does not handle rejection very well, believes he is the most knowledgeable person in all matters and absolutely cannot handle when open defiance also results in proof that President Obama’s demands would have delivered disastrous results plus proving that everything the President held as factual was completely erroneous. What is rapidly pushing things beyond the cusp is the inability of President Obama to handle anybody challenging his authority combined with such denials proving the defiant person having a more grounded view of the realities of the situation proving beyond any doubt that the President’s grasp of the situation was completely wrong. Adding insult to injury, President Obama has chosen to fully back the European argument that the Palestinians are angelic innocents who only desire their rightful and historic homeland restored to them which they lost as a result of Israeli and Jewish aggressions and that all the related violence in the Israeli-Arab conflict would come to an end and peace and joyousness would spread across the globe if only the Israelis would yield to the Arab demands and surrender to the Arab demands. Now the game really comes to a head as the Israeli government has opted for new elections which will make the lack of congenial relations between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu who is seeking to remain in office by having his party, and potentially any other willing and like-minded nationalistic parties, to gain the largest number of seats in the next Knesset (parliament) to return him to the Prime Ministership.

 

The meme that will be used by the leftist parties and their candidates for the Prime Ministership and other spokespeople and candidates for Ministerships is that Prime Minister Netanyahu is risking the destruction of the close relationship between Israel and the United States which could result in some near disastrous ramifications if Netanyahu is not defeated and replaced by somebody more aligned and friendly towards the American President and his views. Never mind that what is driving President Obama in his views and dealings with Israel is an overriding desire to place Israel in such a disadvantaged position as to potentially make their continued existence virtually untenable. Of course should Israel fall in line and follow the desires of the European leaders, the United Nations, the Arab world, President Obama and some of the far leftist in Israel and surrender before all the demands of Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and surrender all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem, which includes all of the Old City and Temple Mount, for the formation of a twenty-third Arab nation, the resulting situation would place Israel in a severely compromised position which is considered by virtually every last military experts and actual commanders, including both Israeli and those of the United States, to be indefensible borders so vulnerable that they have been named the ‘Auschwitz Borders’, a name first given the pre Six Day War (1967 Arab-Israeli War) borders by Israel’s most articulate foreign minister and former United Nations Ambassador Abba Eban.

 

One might think that no Israeli leader seeking to be the Prime Minister would ever permit such a situation to come to be, but then many thought there was no way for President Obama to win reelection. This is one of the problems with any political system which depends on the people voting to choose their leadership, the people can be misled and follow a charismatic leader sown the primrose path to desolation and destruction. I think the labels given this situation by talk radio and other personalities in the United States is the problem of the low information voters versus the right-minded thinking of the high information voters. Unsurprisingly, Israel also has its share of low information voters; or at least those voters who live in their own bubble far enough away from any untoward events destroying their serene view of the universe who believe fervently in the far leftist polemical views and definitions of the situations facing Israel and nothing is capable of shaking their foundational beliefs. These people form the central core of those who believe that Bibi Netanyahu is a spawn of evil and everything he stands for is dangerous and must be opposed at all costs. Add on top of this the tendency of candidates to tailor their speeches and positions to match their audience and then you have the potential for sufficient numbers of voters led into voting with what they will later realize was a false sense of security. The last elections had a perfect example of such a candidate with Yair Lapid claiming that he was a far cry from any and everything his father stood for when he won a large following in his initial foray into politics coming from a news media personality. His father, Tommy Lapid, did not even receive sufficient votes the next election to gain entrance into the Knesset as voters were then voting on his actual record and not his campaign soliloquies. Yair Lapid campaigned on a nationalistic and rightist agenda which would have been a long cry from what his father proved to believe. Lapid talked the talk but after gaining the second most seats in the Knesset did not walk the walk. His true agendas came out and he was not as nationalist as he pretended, was actually a relative leftist and his main belief and aim is to become Prime Minister. What is even more frightening is that he desires to be Prime Minister not because he desires to serve Israel or the people, but because he believes deep down that he knows the true and best path and only he is capable of making Israel acceptable to the rest of the world and make a lasting and complete peace even with Israel’s most ardent of detractors who would only actually be satiated by the destruction of Israel and its people. But Yair Lapid is far from alone in these feelings as there are many others beyond just Tzipi Livni, Naftali Bennett and Isaac Herzog. I am lead to believe that it is part of the desire to lead a political party in Israel to believe that you are the rightful and sole person capable of leading Israel on a true and safe path which will provide the most advantageous leadership possible and definitely more advantageous than what any of the other party leaders would be capable of providing. Guess it kind of goes with the neighborhood.

 

Adding in Jordanian King Abdullah II, the Jordanian King recently had a head-to-head talk with President Obama after which President Obama was quoted by UPI as having stated, “We share concerns about the continuous tensions between Israel and Gaza. We are going to work together for a Palestinian State.” This is interesting in a frightening sort of way as currently Jordan sits in the United Nations Security Council and will assume the Presidency in January and is planning on presenting a proposal seeking a binding resolution under Chapter Seven setting a deadline for Israel to surrender to the territorial demands of Mahmoud Abbas permitting the formation of another Arab state consisting of all of Judea, Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. These lands will be necessarily denuded of their Jewish residents. This confiscation of their lands and businesses will be made without any manner of remuneration for their value; any financial compensation would be left to Israel to provide which basically comes to a form of double financial jeopardy. Of course all of this leads us to the recent revelation that President Obama and his close knot inner advisors are mulling exactly what sanctions they should place on Israel if Israel does not immediately adopt policies in line with the concepts which President Obama has expressed repeatedly to Prime Minister Netanyahu without any obedience from the Israeli leader. The particular area which has President Obama incensed is any building which Israel allows in areas beyond the Green Line, the 1949 Armistice Lines which denoted Israeli controlled areas up until the Six Day War in June of 1967. What makes this seem frighteningly identical to what Israel perceives as its perfect storm would be the presentation by Jordan under Chapter Seven Resolution bindingly stipulating that Israel surrender all lands beyond the Green Line and return to controlling only the lands it held before the Six Day War and force the Israeli Jews living currently in any parts of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem to be resettled within Israel at Israeli expense and have the United States refuse to utilize their veto and allowing the resolution to be adopted.

 

This may be the exact meaning of the threat supposedly revealed to the Israeli leftist newspaper Haaretz which printed the report this past week. This has been considered the opening salvo from the Obama White House team to affect the Israeli elections. American perfidy intervening in Israeli elections attempting to influence the results has a history. The Clinton White House dispatched members of their election team to Israel to assist the Labor Party and other left leaning Parties in their successful, well, one might call it a putsch others a campaign with a smidgen of foreign interference, whichever you prefer in assuring the then Prime Minister Netanyahu was not successful in retaining his position. The following results from this intervention led indirectly to the Gaza divestment under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who was elected to replace Netanyahu as the leader of the Likud Party as a result of his loss partially due to the intervention by President Bill Clinton’s operatives in the 1999 elections. President Clinton pulled this coup of sorts in order to put a more pliable leader into the Prime Minister’s office in order to permit him to reach that ever difficult Arab-Israeli peace accord. President Clinton went forth arm-in-arm with Prime Minister Ehud Barak who succeeded Netanyahu thanks to the political assist from the President of the United States onto make peace with Yasser Arafat by presenting him with the most generous of offers by the Israelis working with President Clinton. Despite their best combined efforts, the end result was a scene covered visually by many news reports showing United States Secretary of State Madeline Albright running to the best of her ability after Yasser Arafat in Paris calling out pleadingly for him to please return to the negotiations as Arafat strode out into his limousine and departed. Chairman Arafat found himself presented with a plan by Israel which met his every demand set forth the previous day which the Israelis made their offer as President Clinton gave them whatever assurances were required for them to make the sacrifices. We will never know whether President Clinton was being forthright or simply telling the necessitated tale to reach the desired goal as this offer was refused by Arafat by his walkout as he could not say no to the exact terms he had demanded, only walking out could provide the needed escape from reaching an agreement. Why President Clinton was taken at his word is baffling as previously President Clinton had made a verbal agreement with Prime Minister Netanyahu to release Israeli spy Johnathan Pollard in return for Netanyahu meeting some demand and after Netanyahu complied, President Clinton told him he was a fool believing that Pollard would ever be released by the United States. There were rumors of a more pointed rejection which will not be quoted here as there is no way to verify the comments.

 

All things considered, it will be interesting while covering the Israeli election cycle on how exactly President Obama sticks his fingers into the mix and attempts to stir it to his desired pleasure. The one guarantee is that there will be interference with the Israeli campaigning by not just President Obama and company but also many Europeans will do what they are able though their injections will come through the use mostly of NGOs that they pay to lobby Israel to meet European wishes. The European Union is liable to interfere more directly likely making bellicose demands that Israel consider certain realities before electing their next leader. Realities is defines as the world according to the European union and has little if anything to do with what is best for Israel except most often being directly opposed to what is best for Israel. Then there will be the campaigns and their loose dealings with the truth which in our case means disagrees with our sensible perceptions of reality. We will also continue to cover other items of concerns including the negotiations of the P5+1 and Iran, Arab terrorism, and general items of interest concerning Europe, the Middle East, the United States, the United Nations and the world and beyond, especially if that much anticipated UFO landing on the White House lawn, in front of the Knesset in Jerusalem, or on the Temple Mount in which case Israel will be blamed for attempting to destroy the al-Aqsa Mosque with their spaceship which had been hiding on the far side of the Moon.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

July 25, 2014

Israel Hated Similar Reasons as is the United States

Filed under: 1967 Borders,Administration,Alexander the Great,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appeasement,Arabs,Avigdor Lieberman,Ban Ki-Moon,Barbarian Forces,Bashir al-Assad,Blood Libel,Capitalist,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Crimes Against Humanity,Crusades,Cyrenaic Greeks,Demonstrations,Disaster Response Teams,Disengagement,Divestment,Economic Growth,Economic Independence,Economy,Electricity Conservation,Emergency Aid,Energy Conservation,EPA,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,Farming,Field Hospitsl,Foreign Aid,Foreign Trade,Government,Greece,Hamas,Hamas Charter,Hate,Hazmat Team,Hellenists,History,Humanitarian Aid,Indutrial Farming,Intifada,Iron Dome,Islamic Jihad,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,John Kerry,Kidnap Children,Kidnap Soldier,Land for Peace,Misreporting,Mortar Attacks,Murder Americans,Murder Israelis,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslim Brotherhood,Muslims,Navi Pillay,Netanyahu,NGO,Old City,Osama Bin Laden,Palestinian,Politics,President Obama,Protests,Rebel Forces,Response to Terrorism,Richard Falk,Riots,Rocket Attacks,Secretary of State,Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process,State Department,Syria,Taliban,Technology,Temple Mount,Terror,Turkey,United Nations,United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories,United States,War on Religion,Water Conservation,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 2:28 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

One of the mantras heard in the condemnation of Israel in the current struggle to end the rocket bombardment and destroy the infiltration tunnel networks of the Hamas terrorist forces is that while there are hundreds of casualties being suffered within Gaza there are relatively little damage and a near unbelievable lack of noticeable casualties amongst the Israeli populations and cities. This lack of such disaster spread throughout Israel is due to two basic facts, first, the Hamas rockets are unguided and inaccurate with the majority landing in open areas thus doing little other than difficult to measure psychological damage simply from the repeated sirens and the having to hurriedly head for shelters and spend anxious minutes or longer in tense anxiety and second, the next to impossible success of the Iron Dome interceptor batteries which have downed approaching perfect interception percentage which has spared Israel the damage and casualties which previously would reached frightful levels. Take away either of these two factors and Israel would be showing similar levels of damage and significantly higher casualties than are being witnessed in Gaza despite the facts that Hamas places their civilians in the path of dangers and risks their lives in order to attempt to prevent attacks on something they value more than their people’s lives, their rockets to launch in the hope of murdering as many Israelis as possible while Israel invests whatever is necessary to prevent any harm from coming to her civilians. For those hanging on every new broadcast hoping for news of a highly successful attack which brings devastation to those Israelis, it will only take one failure of the Iron Dome batteries which are tasked with protecting Tel Aviv for your dreams to be unfortunately realized. In central Tel Aviv are tall office buildings with ten having forty or more floors and one that clears fifty which could be struck by a Hamas rocket and some of their largest are capable of doing sufficient damage to collapse one such skyscraper making such a strike the worst terrorist strike in Israeli history with a potential of thousands of murdered Israelis as a result of that one rocket which might get through. Those who hold the disparate death tolls and damages as their reason for despising Israel and throwing their sympathies to Hamas in empathy for their greater losses are damning Israel because of her success at protecting her population.

If instead of measuring by damage taken one were to measure the presumed disparity by number of explosive bombs and warheads launched or dropped and number of attempted ground mission and took the period of time leading up to the Israeli ground assault beginning you might be surprised. This comparison does not include the over a thousand rockets launched by Hamas into Israel before Israel launched her first bombing mission and only those rockets and attempted infiltrations by Hamas measured against the number of Israeli bombs and commando raids. The explosive comparison had slightly over a thousand-five-hundred Hamas rockets while the Israelis retaliated with slightly over two-thousand bombs with Hamas having attempted around a half-dozen infiltrations against a single naval commando mission by Israel. When one looks at the attacks and attempts to impart damage, destruction and casualties on the other side the conflict between Israel and Hamas becomes far more even contest with the measurable difference being in the preparation and success in defending and protecting ones people from those attacks.

This holding Israel at fault because of her being the stronger and more technologically advanced also ignores one of the most vital and important facts, Israel did not initiate this war and Israel removed every last Israeli and removed every IDF troop and base from all of Gaza in August of 2005. When people point to the blockade it needs to be pointed out that when Israel removed their presence they tuned the greenhouses and working businesses worth millions of dollars behind for the Gazans to utilize giving them functioning and profitable operations and did not impose any blockade on Gaza until after Hamas took control of Gaza in a bloody and violent coup defeating the forces of the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas. As long as the Palestinian Authority was governing Gaza the Israelis felt little need to clamp strict control over the ports in Gaza but this sense of security dissipated when Hamas which is sworn to the destruction of Israel and the eradication of Jews worldwide stipulated in the clearest possible language in the Hamas Charter and is a unifying theme taught in their schools and portrayed throughout their media.

Anybody who has attended one of the liberal arts colleges or universities and received lectures from professors holding the typical anti-capitalist and anti-American views such as often lectured by such as Noam Chomsky you would be familiar with their anti-American programs. They claim that American culture is polluting the world and tainting the natural culture and altering societies claiming that this societal culture creep that is Americanizing many of the cultures in the third world presumably destroying these primitive cultures which they claim are superior to the crass American culture as the more primitive cultures presumably live in harmony with nature. They also claim that the United States is the worst polluter of nature in the world, something far from borne out by actual unmassaged statistics. Was the United States a large pollution engine a number of decades ago? Yes, though not necessarily the worst. The truth is that since the 1970s the United States has been the only nation that has actually met and surpassed the stringent requirements set by the Kyoto Protocols despite the fact that the United States never signed on to these standards. Another canard is that the United States economic wealth has stolen from the less developed world their share of wealth because since the available wealth is presumably constant, their claim, not mine, then by obvious measurement, by the United States having so much wealth they have to have made it unfairly by robbing the poorer nations. What they are intentionally suppressing is that wealth is not a constant and the United States historically has been the greatest creator of wealth.

What, you need some proof that wealth is constantly being created? To use the most obvious proof that wealth grows over time and directly proportionally to technological advancement one need look no further than ancient human history, real ancient human history. Original ancient man, as in Homo erectus, our ancient ancestors hunted with spears and possibly bow and arrows and the keeper of the fire would be put to death if he permitted the fire to be extinguished and was responsible for transporting the embers to spark the fire when the tribe migrated. We could now trend the advances and thus creations of wealth through the ages with the Greeks and Romans who used plumbing, aqueducts and relatively complex weaponry compared to spears but quite primitive and useless against modern weaponry. Then we see what we have today with buildings covering large swaths of Europe and the United States, automobiles and other items which not long ago were considered luxuries or were not yet invented. All of these are indication of increased available wealth and by claiming that American culture and production methods are ruinous to less advanced nations is actually a form of elitism which is using false arguments to keep the third world less advanced and inferior to the technologically modern world by claiming that their lack of modernity is a state of existence that needs to be preserved. Where this is actually more destructive ecologically can also be described by researching the production of a simple product which has been in existence for numerous centuries, the production of charcoal. Modern charcoal is produced using electrical heating elements with the wood chips placed in a chamber which is filled with CO2 which minimizes escaping pollution while the tried and true old school method is to make large piles of wood chips and allow them to smolder such that the ones buried in the center are oxygen starved and are made into charcoal but produce heavy amounts of smoke and if a large area is used to mass produce charcoal with numerous large mounds smoldering away the area can become absolutely toxic. Which way would any intelligent ecological activist desire to have people worldwide produce charcoal, with modern equipment or the good old fashioned way which is still used in much of today’s world? Criticizing the United States for having a worldwide cultural influence and a greater proportion of the world’s per capita wealth is a form of primitivism and a rejection of advanced technology. This is found in a number of other elitist fads such as rejection of most technological advancements in agricultural preferring “natural” products. The same crippling anti-success jealousy which has infected much of social academia is behind much of the anti-Americanism as it is also behind much of the anti-Israel hatreds. This is most evident in the condemnation of Israel for protecting her people while sympathizing with Hamas because they appear disadvantaged by the resulting casualty numbers and destruction of infrastructure despite the actual number and size of explosives launched by each side being relatively equal, and actually favoring Hamas if one includes the three week buildup of rockets fired into Israel before the initial Israeli response to those attacks. But it is so much more noble to favor the underdog and it gives one a sense of superiority but cannot be assumed to grant them any moral advantage, that takes a more reasoned, systematic and unemotional examination of facts and actual numbers and not kneejerk emotional spontaneous reactions.

Beyond the Cusp

April 20, 2012

The Real Presidential Choice Facing the United States

The loud, cacophonous, clamoring back and forth has only just begun. The candidates of the two main parties will be speaking in opposing terms battling each other on every possible subject exaggerating even the slightest crevice of a difference until it rivals the Grand Canyon. We can expect full-throttle vindictive salvos to be thrown by the Super-PACs even should either candidate choose to stay positive and avoid personal attacks. This coming election has the potential to be the most contentious in recent history if not in all of history. Putting it in the most basic terms possible, we can safely predict that either side has no plans on taking any prisoners and go straight for the jugular of the opponent aiming to render them broken beyond repair if not simply and utterly destroyed. So, what will be the issues most likely to be the main themes of the election and which one will be the singularly most vital question voters will need to address.

The most obvious issues according to the press coverage they are receiving are jobs, taxes, unemployment, the economy, gas prices, and the disparities concerning Warren Buffet versus his secretary. As important as all of these issues may be, they will very likely prove to be secondary when the judgment of history is written some time much later in the century. The underlying theme between the candidates on each of these contentious issues will be the role of government should play in finding the solution. One side will place great importance on the steps the government must take to assure that the people are given the tools to solve any difficulties they are facing while the other candidate will stress getting government out of the way and allowing people to empower themselves without government meddlesome interference. The two sides will argue on which is more advantageous, making the wealthy pay their “fair share” in taxation such that the government will have sufficient funds in order to address and solve the problems the people are facing while on the other hand the argument made claims that allowing the wealthy and everybody else to keep more of their wealth by lowering tax rates so those who are the engines that generate the jobs, such as small businesses, have the additional funds to enable them to invest and employ more people. These themes will be the foundation beneath the discussion on other subjects as well.

Take health-care and health insurance, both of which promise to be a hot potato for both candidates, and again the discourse will revolve around how much responsibility should be granted to the government and how much should remain with the individual. How this particular debate plays out will be of great interest as President Obama can reasonably claim that he molded Obama-care using Romney-care as the prototypical guide. Romney will stress that at least Romney-care was Constitutional as it was a state program while Obama-care is not Constitutional being a Federal program and thus against the limitations placed on the Federal Government by the Constitution. For many in the electorate it will be required of Romney that he convinces them he had a turning point on the idea of government getting so fully involved with health-care thus placing distance between his current position and the position allowing him to sign the Massachusetts Health-Care Insurance Reform Law.

Another subject will be the balance between oil, coal, nuclear, natural gas and green energies which will ensure a sufficient supply for the future while also improving the environment. This will also revolve around the role of government regulations, licensing, involvement and promotion in each of these forms of energy generation. What will be of particular interest on this subject is whether either candidate will have a singular position and remains consistent on their message when talking to the different audiences. Will their position ring with the same message when they are speaking in Texas as when they are talking energy in San Francisco. This is something that both extremes on this issue from the coal and oil workers and the strident environmentalists should be interested and both candidates should be fully vetted and revealed if their message is overly adjustable and tailored for the separate audiences. Energy policies are often a good indicator with which to test the honor and honesty of candidates as the wide gulch between the two extremes between differing audiences provides temptation for candidates to adjust their rhetoric tailoring the message to fit the audience thus proposing contradictory positions at different times.

But what is the seminal issue of this coming Presidential election? When looking at each issue it becomes obvious that even more than has been the historic norm, the role of government in our lives and in all segments of society are going to be the central theme. We are faced with a significant difference between the two candidates. The choice is whether we desire to restore government to the restraints of a limiting Constitution or if we wish to transform the way we interpret our Constitution towards making government proactive by removing the limitations over the role of the Federal government. Will we choose to restructure the United States by dismissing Constitutional constraints or reestablish a restrictive Constitutionally limited governance United States? This is the choice in the starkest of terms with which to demonstrate our choice when we enter the voting booth this November. Either we retain the guards against unlimited government power or transit to a government that can dictate every item in our lives. We will be choosing whether we place the individual over the government or place the government to be preeminent over the individual. Which one do you trust to make all the choices going forward, each individual person with the rights and responsibilities for their own actions or the bureaucratic governance making the choices taking the responsibility for all consequences and doling out rights as they find necessary. Do we desire the responsibility derived from individual liberty or the comfort of simple compliance derived from communal group-think?

Beyond the Cusp

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.