Political Cowardice

The word ‘parenting’ is a meaningless word given to us from the PC police.

Whenever you hear this word ask the person if they mean fathering or mothering as there is no such thing as ‘parenting’. The word ‘parenting’ is used by the liberals and feminists to further destroy the family, debase men and fathers and blur the differences between men and women.

Thus we have the unisex, gelded ‘parent’.

Monica Lee and her ilk may think that taking the kids to the beach, buying ice cream and being “warm and fuzzy” and getting all touchy-feely and spending “quality time” are important traits of a good father and “proof” of “parenting skills”.

However, these traits and activities are more those of a mother than a father. Could this be because Obama was raised fatherless by his grandmother and is a ‘defective child’?

Read Lee’s piece of crap that passes as journalism on the phony website “examiner.com” where they apparently let any nit-wit become an “examiner”. “Obama proves he’s got parenting skills” by Monica Lee.

Perhaps what Monica Lee was really looking for was a babysitter for some of her five children while she attends college rather than taking care of her children herself. On a side note, another of her articles “Scholarship season” announces that college enrollment is high during the spring, perhaps due to the fact that that’s about when people are getting ready to graduate high school and move on to college. Shocking.

The problem is that we have not taught our children or even spoken of the real role of fathers for fear of the wrath of the feminists and the PC police. A father’s first responsibility is to provide for and protect his family. He is then responsible for leadership, making important decisions, providing discipline and organization for the family. Much of this is not done on the beaches of Hawaii. The father is the “rock” of the family, not “Michelle” as he claims.

This further proves that the liberals and feminists real agenda is to totally usurp the authority, responsibility and leadership of the father and place it in the hands of the “we got a program for that” government nanny-state.

Mike Truman Decline of the Family, Obama

On March 11, 2009, in Washington, President Obama signed an Executive Order creating the White House Council on Women and Girls; and by fiat, seeks to devalue fathers and men, and promote single parenthood as something young girls should achieve, and reinforces the creation of a whole new class of special victims “both at home and abroad” (whatever that means). Read release from the White House posted on their website.

Men and women in the role of parents, are two sides of the same coin and have to be seen as a single unit or ‘being’.

When speaking of men and women in terms of the family, or with respect to children, they are both two sides of the same coin. You can’t separate them, if you praise one, by inference you automatically disparage the other. The concept of parents as a team, indivisible, united, tied together in a symbiotic relationship, physically and emotionally, is being destroyed in this country by changing the notion of single parenthood from something to be avoided at all costs, as broken, defective, abnormal, shunned and shameful to be something to be promoted as good, heroic, supported, praised and worse of all, something that is ‘normal’.

It’s as if someone ran around proclaiming his right foot was something special and needed special treatment and protection above all other feet. What does this say about the left foot? About the person? Do you see the absurdity in this idea?

Exalting women, especially for something that normally should be a negative, devalues men, fathers and hurts children.

Obama, raised fatherless himself, is a “defective product” of our single parent, fatherless society he so often praises. Children raised fatherless often have a distorted view of women, their proper role in their relationships with men and their abilities and issues. They also have a distorted view of fathers and men. The distortion always tends to be sympathetic and positive towards women and single mothers, and negative and disparaging towards men. It is as if the mother’s anger towards men, their constant blaming for their dismal situation, lack of money or resources on the father, is transferred to the child.

This transference is done slowly, insidiously, subconsciously and not just from the mother, the emotionally developing child picks this blame game up from other sources in society such as television, Hollywood and politicians. Even if the message is very subtle, (and it normally is) the child gets it from inference and deduction.

What else would we expect? The single parent child is constantly hearing how difficult it is for his mother and how she “struggles”, how much she sacrifices for her children, how heroic she is.

If we have such a wonderful heroine, logically we must have an equally evil villain. Logically therefore, since the father is the other half of the coin, and all the other kids have fathers, and the father is not around to defend himself, the child sees the father as the villain.

Making “violence against women” a special class of crime creates a special class of victims, and therefore, logically, a special class of criminals and villains, all to be treated differently, worse then ‘regular’ criminals. Is not violence simply violence? Why can’t we just be against violence? If we somehow raise violence against women to a special place as being especially evil, are we saying that other forms of violence is somehow less evil? Are we now saying the men who commit violence against women are now especially evil? Worse than ordinary criminals?

If there is no ‘bad’, then, there is no ‘good’.

Obama and the liberals are invested in coming up with new ‘bad’. The liberals have always loved to constantly create new and more classes of victims. Why? Because if you don’t have victims, you don’t have a cause, a movement, a crusade, a fight. We all know that in a fight there are two sides, evil vs. good. Therefore, since the so-called ‘victim’ could only become a victim by an act of victimization by someone, and that someone logically must be an evil villain, the liberals now have a cause to join and, of course, they will join the fight on the side of “good” so they feel good about themselves!

Why would they need to feel especially good about themselves in the first place?

This is because that they know, perhaps subconsciously or instinctively, that what they are doing, is inherently wrong to begin with. Mothers, somehow sense that depriving a child of their father is wrong and being a single parent is not normal and is difficult on them both. So to compensate, they seek to make themselves feel better, they seek out praise and re-enforcement that they are doing the right thing and, therefore, based on the fact that they are good, the father obviously is to blame.

Good and bad are basic, instinctive emotional feelings and concepts. So is blame.

Don’t they realize what they are doing? No. If you want a quick fix and you operate on emotion as mothers are designed to do, you cannot evaluate your situation based upon logic or common sense. It simply is easier to explain to the fatherless child who yearns for his long ago rejected father, that “daddy is bad”. The liberals have seized on this as a way to get votes from females. Why else would Obama so often praise single mothers, denigrate and insult men and fathers in his “Father’s day Speech” in a church no less.

To sum it up Obama, a defective child himself is repeating the cycle of his fatherless upbringing. He has helped to create a whole bunch of women good-doers that want to feel good about themselves as they go about destroying families, their children and themselves.

They are taking a big sharp knife and stabbing it as hard as they can, in their left foot; simply because they hear it is good to spite their right foot.

Mike Truman Decline of the Family, Obama children, family, father's rights, fatherless

Great Communicator: Obama hides his double talk within his rhetoric

We all love to hear what we want to hear and it has never been easier than now with our silver tongued president.

When Obama says: “We have to look at offshore drilling”, the conservatives hear “Why of course we will have to open up these areas” and the liberal environmentalists hear “Why of course we will have to eliminate offshore drilling”.

In an era where we need to provide certainty and confidence to the markets, Obama and his real plans still remain an enigma to those listening to him talk.

On top of that investors are seeing a divide between what Obama says and what he does. Most obvious are the thousands of earmarks contained in the budget bill signed today. During the campaign Obama promised to eliminate earmarks if elected, however, his budget contains about 9,000 earmarks. Obama recently claimed that earmarks were taken care of when he was in the senate.

On top of all this, we still have a media that won’t allow anyone to challenge Obama, much less they themselves. The gullible press covering Obama are more like cheerleaders rather than hard-nosed reporters. I predict it will be said of the press that they let the country down at a time when they were needed the most.

Look at what happened to Limbaugh when he said he hoped Obama would fail and compare that to the reaction when James Carville said basically the same thing during a press conference in 2001 that he hoped George Bush would not succeed.

Barack Obama is a great pretender. He constantly says he’s doing things that he isn’t, and he relies on his powerful rhetoric to obscure the difference. He has made “responsibility” a personal theme, and the budget’s cover line is “A New Era of Responsibility.” He claims that the budget begins “making the tough choices necessary to restore fiscal discipline.” It doesn’t. –Presidential Double-Talk Robert J. Samuelson

Mike Truman National Political, Obama doublespeak, Obama

The fawning Nancy Pelosi out-claps Joe Biden.

“We haven’t seen someone so into clapping since that mother at the second-grade Flutophone concert.” – Top of the Ticket

Should we tell Michelle?

Looks like Obama has an incestuous relationship with another branch of government, that Pelosi woman. It was a “love-in” during that “speech” the other night, all we missed was seeing her drool.

I don’t know if it was those fawning eyes, too much Mountain Dew, or Botox but she looked like she wanted to plant a warm wet one right on his head.

Not to mention she was on her feet so fast and so often her chair never warmed.

You have got to see this:

Reminds me of that game: “Whack-a-Mole”

Mike Truman National Political, Obama Obama, Pelosi, speech

The liberals and the press love to compare Lincoln with Obama, however, nothing can be further from the truth.

Abraham Lincoln was a man of God, conviction and principles. That means he stood for something, he did not waiver or compromise in the face of political pressure, in a word, he had political courage. Lincoln rose to power after years of toil and struggle with failure and challenge; as president he gave us a day of fasting, humility and prayer.

Lincoln admonished the nation in his proclamation: “[we have become] Intoxicated with unbroken success…” Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day

“…heal their land..”

I wonder if Lincoln was thinking of : 2 Chronicles 7:14 “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” (Source: TBS ) when he wrote his proclamation.

Lincoln asked: “…that the united cry of the Nation will be heard on high, and answered with blessings, no less than the pardon of our national sins, and the restoration of our now divided and suffering Country, to its former happy condition of unity and peace.”

Obama rose almost magically, practically effortlessly, unchallenged in the greater sense, growing up in a protective bubble, untested, with dubious devotion to anything meaningful, lack of conviction, lies and deceit. In other words, a political coward. Obama gives us excess, weakness of character and promises that cannot be fulfilled.

We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. — Lincoln.

Political Cowardice:

Weakness of conviction should be the death knell in politics, but, today, it is worn as a badge of honor by the liberals who extol the virtues of compromise. In compromise, no one wins.

Obama, trying to please everyone, equivocates on the same-sex marriage issue in the face of the California Supreme Court’s decision. Both sides of the issue feel betrayed. – Salon

Huh?

A good compromise, a good piece of legislation, is like a good sentence; or a good piece of music. Everybody can recognize it. They say, ‘Huh. It works. It makes sense.’ — Obama

Obama like Lincoln is very smart, but, it’s not enough to be very smart; you have to stand for something.

“A compromise is like kissing your sister”. — PC

Mike Truman National Political, Obama

Change we don’t need:

Obama’s scheme to save our economy with massive federal spending, much of it for questionable earmarks and for programs advancing his hidden social agenda will plunge the world economy and our nation into deep financial trouble many experts say.

More details emerged this past week about Obama’s real goals as his budget percolates in the press and the muted, disorganized Republican opposition begins to grow louder and find its ground. The election after-glow is turning to gloom as the details begin to sink in, so say many polls.

After all, the evidence was there all along; but nobody listened. Remember Joe the Plumber and “spreading the wealth”? Don’t we really have a modern-day Robin Hood? The idea sounded great in the movies, except now that Obama is Robin’ from us, (tax burden shifts to wealthy) well perhaps not so great an idea. Maybe there is something to what the Right Wing commentators were saying.

As usual Obama has it backwards, we need to save, not spend. Our national debt is out of control and we are being held hostage by debt to foreign nations, many not our friends. Some predict under Obama, we will be paying more than $1 Billion A DAY in interest on the debt.

The national debt – the sum of all annual budget deficits – stands at $10.7 trillion. Or about $36,000 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.

Interest payments alone on the national debt will near $500 billion this year. It’s already the fourth-largest federal expenditure, after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense. — Obama’s economic stimulus bill and the national debt?

What is really scary is Obama is marching us like lemmings to a Marxist style socialism where government knows best and is looked upon as the ultimate “nanny”.

It’s hard to argue that this represents some unprecedented leap toward socialism… — Cathy Young writing in ‘Real Clear Politics‘

Slowly the bailout of institutions is really becoming de facto “nationalization”. Giving more power to the never-audited “National Bank” — the Federal Reserve and its chairman Bernake is a step towards that, however, Mr. Bernake likes to call it ‘partnership’. I wonder what George Orwell would call it?

Read: ‘Orwellian Doublethink… Nationalize the Banks… The language of deception‘ by Prof. Michael Hudson wringing in GlobalResearch.ca

Federal involvement in the US banking industry has moved into a new phase.

In a deal announced Friday, the giant bank Citigroup agreed to a plan in which the government intends to take as much as a 36 percent ownership stake in the ailing bank.

Call it partial nationalization if you want. Or, since many Americans don’t like the word nationalization, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke floated “partnership” as an alternative word this week. — Mark Trumbull writing ‘Uncle Sam takes a greater role in US Banking‘ in the Cristian Science Monitor.

The warnings from the right about Obama’s support of loony left wing radical and perhaps criminal organizations now rings true when you learn that the stimulus bill contains earmarks for such groups as ACORN and the brown supremacist, racist organization “La Raza”.

After initially refusing to release his 2005-2006 Senate earmarks requests, the campaign has finally released a HUGE list of earmarks from that period containing many questionable expenditure requests. Examining the earmarks in Obama’s federal budget request and the stimulus bill may provide some insight into what a utopian society would be under Obama.

Obama’s New Spending Bill Has 9,000 Earmarks.

The bill will contain about 9,000 earmarks totaling $5 billion, congressional officials say. Many of the earmarks – loosely defined as local projects inserted by members of Congress – were inserted last year as the spending bills worked their way through various committees. — William Douglas and David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers

Unless the Republicans can organize a strong opposition, which seems unlikely with Obamamainia in full force, we are destined for crushing debt, growing liberal radicalism, further nationalization and radicalization of our institutions and firmly on the path to ultimate socialization.

Mike Truman National Political, Obama