Saturday, May 22, 2010

Obama is NOT James Cameron

"President Obama on Saturday pledged to shape a new "international order" as part of a national security strategy that emphasizes his belief in global institutions "
Global Institutions?  What country does he think he is president of?  

Seriously, how do we survive this guy?   His objective is nothing less than the dissolution of the United States and its absorption into some kind of socialist/fascist/Nazi-like world government.   (Nazi:  "National Socialists...")

Not so ironically, in the last screenplay I wrote, an adaptation of an old Heinlein sci-fi novel, I inserted a sub-plot about an Obama-like leader shortly after the United States was dissolved.  As I wrote it, the guy maneuvered for a new World Charter to replace all the individual governmental systems around the world (including the Constitution of the United States) -- but with greatly expanded authority, including the right of the World's Chief Executive to declare unlimited martial law at his own whim.   Barring some significant resistance from the populace, I think that's where we're headed down the road, even if the final dictator isn't Obama, who is only dreaming if he thinks he will be King of the World.

At West Point, Obama talks up national security strategy

By Michael D. Shear
Saturday, May 22, 2010; 11:45 AM
WEST POINT, N.Y. -- President Obama on Saturday pledged to shape a new "international order" as part of a national security strategy that emphasizes his belief in global institutions and America's role in promoting Democratic values around the world.
Speaking to the graduating class at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point -- the ninth wartime commencement in a row, he said -- the commander in chief who is leading two foreign wars expressed his faith in cooperation and partnerships to confront the economic, military and environmental challenges of the future.
"The international order we seek is one that can resolve the challenges of our times,'" he said in prepared remarks. "Countering violent extremism and insurgency; stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and securing nuclear materials; combating a changing climate and sustaining global growth; helping countries feed themselves and care for their sick; preventing conflict and healing its wounds."
The administration is set to officially release the president's first national security strategy next week, and Obama's preview on Saturday suggests it will be far different than the first one offered by his predecessor in 2002. In that prior document, President George W. Bush formally called for a policy of preemptive war and a "distinctly American internationalism."
Obama has spoken frequently about shaping new alliances with the world, and of attempts to repair the U.S. image abroad after nearly a decade in which Bush's approach was viewed with suspicion in many quarters. In his commencement speech to the graduates, the president emphasized his beliefs in those alliances.
"Yes, we are clear-eyed about the shortfalls of our international system. But America has not succeeded by stepping outside the currents of international cooperation," he said. "We have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice -- so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities, and face consequences when they don't."
Obama said the United States will pursue a strategy of "national renewal and global leadership."
And yet, even as he calls for global cooperation, Obama has intensified America's own war in Afghanistan. And his administration has repeatedly confronted the dangers of Islamic terrorism on U.S. soil, including unsuccessful attempts to down a Detroit-bound airliner and to explode a car bomb in New York's Times Square.
To the men and women in the hall, many of whom are headed to Afghanistan because of the expansion of the war he announced here six months ago, Obama pledged "the full support of a proud and grateful nation."
The president expressed confidence in the military's ability to succeed in Afghanistan, but warned of a "tough fight" ahead as the United States helps the Afghan people to rebuild its civil institutions and its security system so they can battle the Taliban and other extremists on their own.
"We have brought hope to the Afghan people; now we must see that their country does not fall prey to our common enemies," he said. "There will be difficult days ahead. But we will adapt, we will persist, and I have no doubt that together with our Afghan and international partners, we will succeed in Afghanistan."
In Iraq, he said, the United States is "poised" to end its combat operations this summer, leaving behind "an Iraq that provides no safe haven to terrorists; a democratic Iraq that is sovereign, stable and self-reliant."
"You, and all who wear America's uniform, remain the cornerstone of our national defense and the anchor of global security," he said. "And through a period when too many of our institutions have acted irresponsibly, the American military has set a standard of service and sacrifice that is as great as any in this nation's history."
But he said civilians must answer the call of service as well, by securing America's economic future, educating its children and confronting the challenges of poverty and climate change. He said the country must always pursue what he called the "universal rights" rooted in the Constitution.
"We will promote these values above all by living them -- through our fidelity to the rule of law and our Constitution, even when it's hard; and through our commitment to forever pursue a more perfect union," he said.
To the cadets themselves, he praised their pursuit of being "soldier-scholars" and lauded the records of academic excellence the Class of 2010 has set. He also took note of the fact that the class's top two graduates this year are both women, reflecting, he said, the "indispensable role" that women play in the modern military.
As they become commissioned officers in the Army, Obama told the graduates of West Point that the country owes them a debt of gratitude.
"Here in the quiet of these hills, you have come together to prepare for the most difficult tests of our time'" Obama said. "You signed up knowing your service would send you into harm's way, and did so long after the first drums of war were sounded. In you we see the commitment of our country, and timeless virtues that have served our nation well."


  1. Robb asks, "How do we survive this guy?"

    As football coach Marv Levy once said, "the answer is simple but it's not easy".

    In this context the answer is: We make our case to the American people that Obama's ideas are bad and that we need better ideas implemented by better men.

    If reasoned argument persuades a significant number of Americans that limited government and capitalism are good, that defending our country and protecting freedom is good, that our rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are a noble cause, then we will win.

    In contrast, if Americans think that those things are bad, then we will lose.

    If Americans truly want their freedom, then no tyrant (domestic or foreign) can enslave us. On the other hand, if Americans wish to enslave themselves, then politicians will follow our desires. The politicians will follow what the American people want.

    Although specific bad policies promoted by specific politicians are important, they are merely the symptom (not the cause) of our deeper problems. And it is that deeper philosophical cause that must be addressed. In this case, this requires openly, proudly, and unabashedly promoting a philosophy of individual rights, limited government, and the morality of rational self-interest.

    All countries get the government they deserve. We're merely seeing that more clearly than ever.

    I know that many people are engaging in the crucial task of attempting to fight this battle of ideas in the public sphere within the context of their limited time and busy lives. To those who do, you have my heartfelt thanks. Those who don't -- what are you waiting for?

  2. Robb replies:

    Though I can sound pessimistic, which is a motivational form of "There's a giant meteor heading for the Earth! We have to do something!", I have to add, as addendum to Paul's comments, that I agree with everything he says -- the only thing that will save this country is if we can all persuade a significant number of people of the right ideas (especially the Tea Party types: individual rights, constitutional limitations on government power, etc, as described in or, which everyone of them should have a copy of) and the need to speak up and act to oppose what's going on. Passivity is our greatest enemy. If not enough people act, and soon, the United States will end up like Russia or Venezuela or Cuba or Uganda. As I said in my last post, google "Chavez Nationalizes" and you find (for a start) our future layed out for us in the absence of action:

    Chavez nationalizes French-owned retailer
    Chavez seizes U.S. food giant unit
    Chavez Nationalizes University
    Chavez nationalizes Venezuela's iron-makers
    Chavez nationalizes Bauxite producers
    Chávez Nationalizes Oil Service Companies
    Chavez Nationalizes Bank of Venezuela
    Chavez nationalizes two more private banks
    Chavez Nationalizes Cement Industry
    Chavez may nationalize gold mines
    Chavez Nationalizes Last Venezuelan Oil Fields
    Chavez seizes Hilton resort
    Chavez nationalizes coffee
    Chavez nationalizes French Supermarket Chain
    Chavez nationalizes ports, airports
    Chavez nationalizes steel sector
    Chavez nationalizes small shops...

    I'm not making any of that up. Substitute "Obama" if he gets a second term. And now I'm back to "There's a giant Meteor headed for Earth!"

  3. How do we survive “this guy” and Congress? And also suspect “Tea Party” winners like Rand Paul?

    The first task is to acknowledge that while Americans are as uneasy as a riled bear whose cave has been invaded by Islamic “militants” (see this humorous story here: they need ideas that will objectify that uneasiness. In that respect, Paul (our Paul, not Kentucky’s) is right. Work diligently, tirelessly to get the right ideas out there and in the minds of the electorate. Results are not guaranteed. On one hand, you can be rewarded with seeing a light turn on in someone’s face. Then you can feel like joining the Soldiers’ Chorus from Gounod’s “Faust.” On the other, you can experience the blank look of stupidity or the marble-like resentment of someone who has a vested interest in the status quo. I’m sure many Objectivists have experienced both reactions.

    Take also into account the revolt of many states against ObamaCare. These are not the same as the greatly preferable repeal of this nationalization of a large chunk of the economy. These actions may or may not be successful. They may be as fruitless as The Charge of the Light Brigade. See for a dramatization. The federal government has the guns and the unlimited resources. We might wind up like Erroll Flynn. But I contend that’s a better end than keeping our mouths shut and laying low, hoping the storm will pass over and not bother us.

    Our spiritual ancestors were defeated on the Lexington Green and at Bunker Hill. But they won the war. We’re faced with a far more deadly and ruthless enemy: Americans who promote, or Americans who will suffer, tyranny.

    Ed Cline

  4. Correction: The Light Brigade link is this.



Comments must be polite and well-reasoned, but passion is allowed when directed at the subject matter and not someone who posts -- violate this, and your comment doesn't get posted. Comments may not post immediately -- I'm pretty busy and don't live on the web.