Saturday, September 28, 2013

The Petty Souls of Liberals, Socialists and Communists

By David Lawrence

By “petty” I don’t mean insignificant.  I refer to narrow-minded and spiteful.  I mean the petty grievances of trivial minded, bureaucratic people.
Liberalism, socialism, communism start at the top, trapped in the logical deductive brain.  They militate against the freedom of the body politic and free enterprise. They do not develop from within the population.  They squelch people from above like ideological suffocating bricks. They do not develop like organisms. They are restrictive, constraining philosophies.
Communists are anal retentive, obsessive-compulsives.  They are afraid of lack of control so they programmatically design an overly intrusive government.  They are neurotics who fear freedom and have anxiety attacks about loss of rigidity. They have petty souls. They are lost in the little picture rather than the panorama. They are afraid to step outside the framework of their hedged in philosophy. They are snapshots rather than free spirited movies.
Communists want to organize the economy, jobs and life styles so that they don’t have to confront the emptiness of the universe or the magical presence of a God.  
Communists organize because they are afraid of chaos.  They are afraid of chaos because they don’t trust their minds and are worried that they might themselves actually be criminals, rapists or uncontrolled animals.  They do not know themselves so they hide behind government; they worry that they themselves are ungovernable. They organize because they are afraid of openness. They have wild souls so they try to arrange themselves into little governmental bricks, walls of organizational solitude. They are cowards, afraid of freedom.
Communists are anxious that they can’t compete within society.  So they structure a system where everyone has a job and no one’s is considered better than the others.  A doctor and a garbage man have equal status. That way they all can feel good about themselves regardless of their embarrassing lack of  accomplishments.
Communism reduces the prestige of successes and raises the esteem of failures.  It is an inverse system of government that has failed more times in more countries than any other form of government.  Its essence is reinvigorating the prestige of failure. 
However, communism is a star system where the big shots in the Communist party are the rock stars.  It steals the prestige from the multiple successes in society and hands it to the bureaucratic, angry politicians. Its existence depends on stepping on the little people.  It’s ironic that communism boasts about distributing a fair share when all it does is take from people and peddle to the politicians and party members. 
Obama wants a consistent, socialistic system. As a dope smoking mediocrity in private school and college he would have never succeeded if he didn’t have a governmental avenue to his success. America is becoming a socialistic country where freedom to succeed is usurped by structured political bureaucracy.  Neurotic narcissists are always comfortable within the structure of governmental tyranny.  Obama sees himself reflected in the pool of large government.  He then pushes us into that pool and we drown like Narcissus in debt and military chaos throughout the world.
People think that Obama is bright because he speaks well.  What difference do words make when he is bankrupting the country?  And if he is so bright why does he sound like every other sophomoric liberal in Brooklyn?  He speaks in so many clichés that he has become a cliché.
Brooklyn is where my boxing gym is—Gleason’s. Thank God that I can get hit in the head there every day and clear up my thoughts. His pontificating words fall from my ears like wax.  It’s too bad that they stick to so many of my naïve, liberal friends’ ear canals.     
I am embarrassed for the millions of people who are fooled by him.  Stupid is the predisposition to say “yes” to his childish ideas when all the signs say “no.”
And the stupid local liberals think that conservatives are stupid?  Yet I live in a dialectic of various social philosophies while liberals  line up against the wall to shoot themselves in the feet. In an argument with liberals, they never know what I will say next.  I can predict their every opinion before they spout it.


Saturday, September 14, 2013

Syria is not Our Enemy

By David Lawrence

I wish Obama would quit playing up to his image of the good guy who saves innocent people. His attack on Syria will just lead to the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida and contingently murder more Syrians.
He plays Mr. Empathetic good guy but he is responsible for numerous deaths and the financial collapse within America.  His green energy ideas have bombed, cost us jobs and increased our deficit by billions.
His health care plans have raised the cost of insurance, cut the availability of doctors and reduced numerous full time workers to part time employees.
That people would still listen to his childish, sophomoric ideas is a joke. Mr. Pacifist is once again risking American lives. He thinks he will avoid boots on the ground in Syria but he doesn't have the military experience to assume that.
Syria is not our enemy.  It is its own enemy.  Obama is the one demolishing the American Way of life. He is Syria without the nerve gas. 
Obama has even hurt our traditions and morals, enabling same sex marriage, an emotional windfall but a moral disaster and a frightening horror to children. 
Obama has a good heart.  He wants the best for everyone.  But he has a truncated brain that sees the small picture and the immediate solution rather than the long term workability of thought-out ideas. His theories seem good in the short-term but in the long term hurt us. Psychiatrist Alfred Adler used to call this type of diminished thinking—short-term hedonism.    

The highway to hell is paved with Obama’s best intentions.  He went to an Ivy League College but never ingested the various, eclectic and dialectic ideas of the institution. He is not a thinker. He is a purveyor of clichés.   He is the brash ivy on the walls. 

Obama’s Threat to Global Peace

By David Lawrence

Speaking from Russia, Obama said (Daily News, 9-07-2013) “that failure to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons would be a threat to global peace and security.”  What does he mean by global peace?  Bashar Assad is fighting a localized civil war which has nothing to do with the rest of the world.  Rather Obama is threatening global peace by threatening to intervene in Syria and have countries like China and Russia line up against us.
Obama went on to fabricate that ignoring Syria’s chemical attacks “would send a signal to rogue nations, authoritarian regimes and terrorist organizations that they can develop and use weapons of mass destruction and not pay a consequence.”
Rogue nations are idiosyncratic and follow their own rules. They don’t respect America enough to determine that their behavior in Syria will spill over to their despotisms.  The world is a multifarious place.  Rules and practices change like the wind.  No dictator is going to be sitting in his tribal palace assuming that because Syria had its own indigenous situations that they will be treated similarly and that they have to worry about a consistent pattern of retaliation from feckless America.
Obama brags in the Daily News that he “was elected to end wars, not start them.” He certainly fooled the voting public.  He is coming close to being the cause of World War III.  His rhetoric is peaceful.  His actions are incendiary and warlike even though they spring from a base of cowardice. Back in 2008 I already predicted that Obama would become a Warlord and published it in Fullosia Press.  My liberal friends laughed at me.  I predicted that he would be the cause of Israel’s demise.  My Jewish friends dismissed me.  
Obama thinks that he can perform a limited action. Did he forget that the minor death of Archduke Ferdinand caused the murder of millions in WWI?  Things get out of hand.  Even for a socialist who is trying to control America like a nanny state.

Obama is a classic liar. His deeds bear no relationship to his speech.  Americans are his ridiculous dupes. 

Monday, September 2, 2013

Best To Avoid Syria Entanglement

The gassing of Syrians by their fellow countrymen will rank among the great atrocities of the 21st century.

However, beyond a stern verbal condemnation, is it all that wise for the United States to get involved at this point?

Do we really know for certain who is the responsible party?

This conflict is not Star Wars or Lord of The Rings with clearly discernible protagonists and adversaries.

Either side could be capable of doing such a thing.

On the one hand, you have a brutal dictatorship. On the other side, the so-called “freedom fighters” have been accused of cannibalism and granting of a religious dispensation allowing for the raping of women caught up in the conflict.

Most importantly, if the Obama Administration decides to get involved militarily, does the President have the resolve to do what must be done?

For example, what if a campaign to eliminate Syrian weapons of mass destruction is conducted half-heartedly in the manner in which the President undertakes so many of his policy initiatives and America returns home before the task is completed?

Since whoever is responsible has no qualms about about killing their own people systematically and in the most horrible manners imaginable, what would prevent them from doing so to the people of the United States?

The border is pretty much a siv and, if Assad is indeed responsible as Obama is insisting to the civilized world, the President has already announced his intentions to allow that particular Middle Eastern tyrant to remain in power where the ensconced despot can plot revenge at leisure.

By Frederick Meekins