Today President Obama had
his first face-to-face meeting with the popular new renegade running the Roman
Catholic Vatican, Pope Francis, already revered as the People's Pope. In the hours before the meeting the Vatican leaked out that Obama was really no
stranger to the Catholic faith as he was close to the Catholic Church in Chicago and even received
a grant from the church to jump start his career as a community organizer.
Of course he followed that
up with his joining the congregation of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the fire brand Obama family friend and preacher who preached
himself out of the Obama campaign for sermons like his "White folks' greed runs a world in need" racist rants. However, since taking over
the White House Obama has downplayed his religion, but not his spirituality I
might add, and seldom attends church.
Pope Francis lives in a
church when he is not out shattering all Vatican
protocols and sharing dinner with the people, kissing babies, washing feel, tending to the
sick, hugging humans, and acting like, well, like Jesus must have intended it
in ministering to the masses.
So how about some
How many popes have there
Pope Francis is pope
How many presidents have
Barack Obama is president
How old is the Roman
The church is 1,981 years
How old is the United States?
The USA is 238
How many constituents does
the Pope serve?
There are 1.211 billion
How many constituents does
the president serve?
There are 317 million
Americans including DC.
How many countries have
There are 201 countries
with Catholic population.
How many countries have US
There is one country and six
territories with US citizens.
of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, USVirgin Islands,
American Samoa & Northern Mariana Islands - about 1 million people total - 600,000+ in DC)
How many Catholics in United States?
There are 78.2 million
How many Democrats in USA?
There about 86 million
How many Catholics support
Democrats in USA?
In 1964 80-90% supported
Democrats but recent elections 50%.
What does that mean?
In order to win president a
democrat must get over 50% of the Catholic vote.
What is the Pope's approval
rating among Catholics?
The Pope has an 88% approval
rating among Catholics.
What is the President's approval
rating among Democrats?
The President has an 80% approval
rating among Democrats.
What is the Pope's approval
rating among all Americans?
The Pope has a 63% approval
rating among all Americans.
What is the President's approval
rating among all Americans?
The President has a 41% approval
rating among all Americans.
Francis is the first pope
from South America.
Obama is the first Black to
There you have it.And by the way, America never sends it's leader
anywhere without adequate protection and support staff so our president was accompanied by 700 security, staffers and White House press corps. Good thing Michelle wasn't with him since she was off for two weeks in China with her daughters and mother and a few hundred more security and staff personnel.
The agenda in Rome, well that remains
to be seen what was really discussed because no matter what the similarities
between the two and their policies of embracing the poor there are some stark
and highly explosive policy differences between them including ObamaCare forcing the church hospitals to dispense contraceptives, gay marriage, wars, massive refugee concerns and others.
As the truth of what
happened behind closed doors leaks out we will report on the latest
developments. By the way, did I mention Putin beat him to the Pope stopping by the Vatican on his way to hijacking Crimea?
Being an American it is
sometimes difficult to see the world through anything other than rose colored
glasses. Think about it.
Our principle source of
information on foreign policy is a media that long ago stopped reporting the
news and decided to make the news. Their
principle source for information are bureaucrats and politicians working for
agencies like the State Department, the intelligence agencies, and groups like
NATO and the United Nations.
Then there are the
international banks, international corporations, international financing
mechanisms like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank not to mention
the vast array of foundations, think tanks, pharmaceutical companies supplying
drugs to third world countries, defense contractors (including the most
powerful of all the arms dealers) among the many special interests with a
special interest in foreign affairs and all the money, power and perks found
around such money pits.
The world has been
controlled by these foreign affairs special interests since the beginning of
the 20th century and the dawning of world wars.The sad part of the truth is that they have all joined forces to find ways
to use government and private resources to manipulate events around the world
for the purpose of altering the foreign policy balance.
The sadder part of the
truth is that in the course of their manipulation they are totally devoid of
humanitarian principles and international law but serve a higher purpose,
feeding greed and accumulating wealth.
Of course the media consistently paints a picture of serving the higher
good by these groups but what they really meant was serving a higher god and
their god is greed manifested in power and wealth.
We have pretty much been
lied to about sinister purposes behind the foreign affairs of the past century
and most certainly been lied to about the worst abusers of misdirected foreign
policy.Maybe we will wake up, or maybe
we will keep having "isolated" conflicts that leave hundreds of
thousands of people dead, millions and millions of people condemned to refugee
camps, and more and more of the world's natural resources in the hands of
people loyal to no government but their god Greed.
Look around you. Listen to what the media is telling you. The cover story of the day is "Putin
is a bad guy - he wants to recreate Russia." You hear it from the mouths of the Obama
administration, it is parroted by the news media, echoed by our allies around
the world (although with far less enthusiasm than in America), and applauded by Wall
Street and the international banking community.
They also tell you Putin
has no respect for international laws, international treaties nor international
banking since he is destabilizing the world financial markets.
If I were the America public
I would search a lot deeper into the motives behind those condemning
Putin. So far the Russian forces have
done nothing more than to protect Russian assets in Crimea, namely a huge naval
base on the Black Sea.
As a result he has earned
the wrath of Obama and been bombarded by cream puffs called sanctions, economic
sanctions at that, and oh yeah, Russia
was tossed from the G8. Now we seem to
have a long history of using tough economic sanctions to punish errant nations
and force compliance with our will.
Libya has been under US sanctions since 2011. Sudan has been sanctioned since
2002. Burma since 1997. Syria since 1986.. Iran since 1979. Cuba since 1962. North Korea since 1950. We also had economic sanctions against the
former Soviet Union from 1948 until the
collapse in 1991.
But only once in the past
66 years have US economic sanctions really worked and that was when we
sanctioned our own closest allies, Great Britain,
France and Israel during the
Suez Canal crisis of 1956. The three were going to invade Egypt in response to the Egyptian
nationalization of the Suez Canal and the
Americans stopped them dead in their tracks when President Eisenhower started
dumping British pounds on the world monetary market and cut off all American
oil and gas to the three allies.
It might have been the
only time in world history that an invasion was stopped by economic sanctions
and probably the last time in history that sanctions actually served people
rather than the financial interests impacted by the area.No lives were lost in a costly invasion that
would probably have resulted in major damage to the canal and massive
disruption of the world economy since it was the gateway for oil to the western
So the bottom line is,
economic sanctions don't work.
Just ask the Cubans who
have lived with them for over 50 years. In
truth, economic sanctions only hurt the people in those countries who are
already victims before we got involved.
Then there is the issue of
violating international law, etc., etc. So far no one has proven Russia or Putin
violated international law. On the other
hand, the history books are filled with American violations of about every
international law and treaty that exists dating all the way back to our
treaties with the Native Americans.
People need to understand
we have made it a practice to ignore the law, local, state, federal or
international whenever it was useful for the economic interests of, well,
certainly not our nation but more appropriately the financial manipulators who
use our treasury as their money and our military as their private army.
Wake up...The latest NSA
mess has proven our government totally ignores laws protecting things like privacy
or unreasonable search and seizure and has run ramshackle over our Constitution
and Bill of Rights. It also violated
every international law and treaty we have with our allies and everyone else.
Is drug traffic
illegal? Not if our intelligence
agencies are involved like in Asia and South America.
How about the ultimate
abuse, political assassination? We've
been there and done that.
Illegal invasions like we
say Putin is poised to undertake in the Ukraine? Ask the Iraq
governments how they feel about that.
Indirectly we are behind
many more abuses of international laws and treaties like triggering the Arab
spring revolutions and so many more I could write a book.
Yet our president and
media stand up and declare Putin and Russia to be acting illegally and
like a bully? We, our government, needs
to look in a mirror before it starts condemning anyone for illegal activity.
And while we are at it, I
have cited a litany of ways we have directly violated international laws and
treaties but there are far more indirect methods that have been used so other
people take the blame.
Foreign policy today has
little to do with assuring the quality of life for people, or their health, education
or welfare. Those who think we are
spreading democracy throughout the world so we can thus protect the lives,
freedom and opportunities for the suppressed masses have got it all wrong.
In the vast majority of
the cases our foreign policy supports a financial concern of someone other than
the American people and that is a bigger crime than the crimes we already
commit violating international laws and treaties.
We need an independent
re-evaluation of our entire foreign policy strategy. We need to know if NATO and all other
international groups serve the agenda to help people or just help special
Putin was upset because
wanted to join NATO and the European Union and we were behind the scenes making
sure it happened.What does a country
like the Ukraine have to do
with a North Atlantic defense group? Maybe NATO has outlived it's usefulness and is
now creating conflict to justify it's existence?
Maybe it's time to stop
being hypocrites and start being leaders in finding peace, not causing war and
Save a few billion dollars
and fix what is broken - Romney in 2016
I doubt many people,
Democrats in particular, want to review the consequences of having elected
Barack Obama to the presidency the last two elections. First there were the empty promises whose
failure was blamed on Bush even though the Democrats controlled both the House
and Senate the last two years Bush was president and the first two years under
Blaming Bush for what had
to be approved by Congress is just plain hypocritical yet what did happen is we
got ourselves into an economic quagmire the likes of which we haven't seen
since the Great Depression.
Still, it was obvious to
candidate Obama in 2008 that we were in the midst of an economic catastrophe
and if elected he would have to get us through the mess.So he spent a billion dollars on his campaign
and won with 52.9 percent of the vote, a mandate in the eyes of the Main Street media.
Now I admit I don't
understand Ivy League math anymore than I understand voodoo economics but I do
know a little about numbers and I know if just 4 tenths of 1% of the vote had
voted for McCain instead of Obama then McCain would have been president. Since when was less than 1% a mandate?
So we got Obama and soon
it became obvious the promises of hope, deficit reductions, withdrawal from
wars, working together, serving all Americans, immigration reform, closing
Guantanamo prison and re-establishing America's prominence in the world were nothing
more than typical campaign promises, empty promises at that.
Obama did bail out General
Motors (who benefited from that?) and the banks but about 7 million people
still are not working nearly 6 years later and no fat cat crooks are in
jail. He also gave us ObamaCare, which
he personally guaranteed would lower the cost of health care, lower the cost of
insurance premiums, let you keep your old doctor and let you keep your health
Thanks to his health care
program he got re-elected in 2012, this time with just 51.1% of the vote after
spending yet another billion dollars in his campaign.Two billion dollars spent by Obama in just
two campaigns could have fed a lot of hungry children and met the health care
needs of a lot of refugees from his failed foreign policy.
Once again his Main Street media called
it a mandate and a vindication of ObamaCare since there was absolutely nothing
else to show for the first four years and by now the national debt had more
than doubled since Bush left office.
The Obama 2012 people's
mandate shrunk in half from 2008 and now a change of just 2 tenths of 1% of the
vote would have made Mitt Romney president.
As for his 2008 promises,
he did pass health care reform but everything else remained as it was before he
got into office. Oh he did end the war
in Iraq if you called
leaving thousands of Americans behind ending anything and now more Iraq civilians
than ever are being killed in sectarian violence.
As for the glorious
ObamaCare promises, so far, none of those promises have come true.Oh yes, and the national debt has now soared
to over $17 trillion and Obama has no intention of fixing our future.
He ran on the platform
that he had experience but I think we realize now that being a community
organizer and part time state and federal senator does not substitute for real,
hands on experience in the big jobs, the tough decisions and the ability to
bring people together.
Ironically he also treated his opponent Mitt Romney mockingly and with derision when Mitt said Putin was a danger to our foreign policy and Obama scolded him that the Cold War was over and Russia being a threat to anyone ended in the 1980's.
In hindsight Obama might have been a little less arrogant as Russia has blocked his every move on Syria, Iran and North Korea not to mention destabilizing Europe as he stole Crimea from the Ukraine and has amassed troops on the border of the Ukraine as we await his next move. Some paper tiger that Putin and again Romney was right but I hear no apology from the Obama camp.
This year he will lose
control of both the House and Senate and it will take Hollywood spin the likes
of which we haven't seen since the Clinton administration to hear what kind of
mandate he has for his last two years in office, spin like I didn't inhale or I
didn't really have sex.
What America needs is a
Reagan type with real world experience, a demonstrated ability to work with both
political parties, experience running a real office and organization, maturity
in respecting all nations and peoples of the world, common sense, and is not enamored
with the Hollywood crowd. We need a break from politics and politicians. Peace, stability, real hope, and integrity are sorely lacking in Washington but Romney just might be able to deliver them.
Oh my gosh, isn't that the
choice we had in 2012 when 2 tenths of one percent too many of the people
believed the Obama health care promises and re-elected him.As I recall, Mitt Romney offered all those
alternatives to the young, hip and confident candidate Obama.
If we only valued
experience more than flash, maturity more than stubbornness, compassion more
than partisanship and integrity more than expediency think how different things
might be right now.
There are a host of good
Republican candidates poised to run for president in 2016 but with Obama a
sitting, lame duck president and his hands tied by a GOP congress you can bet
the partisan rhetoric will be turned up even higher than right now.
Do we really want to spend
billions trying to decide who should be president when we already vetted one
candidate who survived the Obama onslaught and the media manipulation, was
every bit the gentleman we sorely miss, has proven he can work with people of
both parties for the public good, and even got health care right when he implemented
it in Massachusetts?
Mitt Romney is still out
there and time and again he has answered the call to public service whether in
state or federal government or the Olympics.He doesn't need to spend a billion dollars to tell you who he is.He does know how to fix the economy,
implement health care, and gain the respect of foreign nations.Finally, he would have a great group of young
and aspiring Republican governors and members of congress to bring into his
Think about it.It's never too late to admit a mistake and