Wake UP!: Obama’s Surprising State’s Rights Strategy

2 Responses for “Wake UP!: Obama’s Surprising State’s Rights Strategy”

1. Brian says:

   June 5, 2009 at 9:53 pm

   Thanks for the blog!
   Yes I think you are right on the money about Obama’s strategy on gays and states rights.

   So lets see how discerning you are on another question.Are we in a recession or a depression or is America in an orchestrated bankruptcy so we can be plunged into one world government.

   The second question is are the democrats visionaries or do you think they are pawns of the globalist and communist and muslims?
2. Chardon Moore says:

   June 7, 2009 at 12:16 pm

   Brian,

   Thank you, and what an interesting question! It’s ironic, I just had a conversation with a local political science expert (and a good friend) about the causes of the economic crisis a few days ago.

   I’ll address the conspiracy question first. Having worked in government, I generally err on the side of caution where conspiracies are concerned.

   Here’s the truth about governments…they don’t work together well. It’s almost impossible for departments within the same government to coordinate. There are many examples: The FBI and CIA were shooting each other in the foot in dealing with terrorism (and still are); the U.S. House and Senate can hardly agree with one another on anything; the federal government is incredibly inept at dealing with state government on most issues….HELL, Obama can’t even get Congressional democrats to work with him!

   The problem gets even worse when you talk about nations dealing with other nations (there’s a discipline within political science called “international relations,” which focuses on the study of how nations deal with one another, which luckily was my focus while I was in college).

   So how do nations deal with one another? The best analogy would be this: Imagine a group of a dozen or so toddlers who are left to their own devices in a locked room with a finite number of toys. Nobody watches over them to correct their behavior (there are no adults, just like there is no national oversight body governing over how nations work together).

   Some of the children share (U.S., Britain, France, Germany, and other countries who share with one another and give to needy countries…no matter their motives). Others don’t (nationalistic countries with protectionist policies like Russia and China). Some of them are tyrants and take everything they can get their hands on and hold them hostage (again, Russia falls into this category often times, as do some Middle Eastern countries). Some cry and throw things when people don’t pay attention to them and basically try to pick fights with people to make themselves more important (North Korea, Venezuela).

   Friendships are made and broken, sometimes alliances are made briefly to reach a common goal and then broken as soon as the goal as reached (similar to Russia and U.S. during WWII, in contrast with their modern relationship).

   But you know what? A room full of self-interested toddlers are incapable of coordinating with each other on one common goal.

   In order to orchestrate a worldwide economic meltdown, our toddlers (or the nations of the world) would have to cooperate with one another completely, agree on a strategy, and be willing to put their political careers in the dumpster. I don’t believe that’s the case, and here’s why: In a one world government, some governments would benefit but most would not. Russia and China, in particular, would fight this type of government tooth and nail. They want to have their people under their control and their control only…they don’t care about anyone else.

   As for the U.S., Britain, France, Japan, and other industrialized nations, well, they’re not even very interested in a one world oversight body like the UN! Britain, in particular, is dealing with a LOT of infighting about their decision to be a part of the European Union, and that’s a group of like-minded, similar countries. Could you imagine the logistics of talking EVERY country in the world into giving up their sovereignty for a one world government?

   I can’t even imagine every state in the U.S. giving up their state constitutions to be ruled entirely by the Federal government. God, wouldn’t that be a nightmare? Besides, when the meltdown started, thanks to Bush, none of our allies liked us very much. I’d be more likely to believe it was perpetuated by other countries to strike America down and teach us a lesson than that all our nations got together to create a one world government.

   We are in an economic downturn that seems to happen to wealthy countries every few decades…or sometimes every few hundred years. Check out the great Tulip economic meltdown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

   Sounds very similar to the kind of speculation that got us into the mess we’re in today, doesn’t it? It’s just a case of a lot of greedy people getting increasingly greedy and paying a lot of money for things based not on their value, but on their speculated or projected value. Whenever this imaginary speculation crashes into reality, our economy goes to shit. We never learn our lesson, we’ve done it before and we’ll do it again.

   As for democrats…visionaries? As a group, no…although every now and then they have a good idea. Pawns? Maybe some of them are pawns of big interests, but pawns of communists and Muslims? No way in hell. If they were, they wouldn’t have been complicit in extraordinary rendition (kidnapping people in one country and taking them to a country where they’ll be tortured in the hopes of getting information from thing, which was a program started by Bill Clinton/Al Gore, of all people!), they wouldn’t have allowed the Military Commission Act of 2006 to pass, they wouldn’t be having so much difficulty with housing suspected terrorists in their states, they wouldn’t be so supportive of war against Muslim countries, etc. As far as pawns for Russia? Russia hates us. If Dems were pawns for Russia, we’d have much better relations between the two countries and dems would consistently pass pro-Russia legislation.

   I’m unaffiliated, because I don’t believe that either party has the people’s best interests in mind (they’re more concerned with their own political careers). In fact, it’s not only that I don’t believe it, I KNOW they don’t. They may try, but they’re really more concerned about themselves, because that’s human nature.

   Hope that answers your questions…let me know if I missed anything!

Leave a Reply