How will we ever become a united country? Loyalty to a political party and by extension, its candidates, has become more important than the quality of the person running for office. People regurgitate the party line, giving no thought to its credibility. We elected a man President that very little was known about. Yes, he was not connected to George W. Bush and he promised hope and change. He said he would stop the seas from rising. He said he would cut the deficit in half. He said unemployment would sink to 5.5%.He said, in his first year, he would pass a sane immigration law.
Now, that man seeks re-election. Albert Einstein remarked, “Doing the same thing again and expecting a different result, is the definition of insanity.” I challenge any Obama supporter to reveal what they know of, Frank Marshall Davis, Rashid Kahlidi, Khalid Al-Monsour, Edward Said, Percy Sutton and how these men relate to Barack Obama.
I fully understand how people can HOPE. I also understand why people may want CHANGE. What I can not understand is when HOPE vanishes and CHANGE does not materialize, people go FORWARD along a path to no where. Have we become so enthralled with being a party member, that nothing else matters? Has history not taught us the folly of party loyalty?
Joel Brandes
Chestertown
joe diamond says
Hi Joel,
Here ya go:
Frank Marshall Davis,……… When President Barack Obama was growing up in Hawaii, his grandparents introduced him to Davis.[25][26] Davis’s connection to Obama was the subject of a conspiracy theory in the 2012 Presidential election when activist Joel Gilbert mailed DVD’s to voters attempting to get them to believe that Davis was Obama’s father based on claims that they look alike,[27] which is believed only by “the looniest of the right-wing.”
Rashid Kahlidi, The Khalidi tape. In 2003, Obama attended a party for his good friend, the radical Palestinian academic Rashid Khalidi. The event featured incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric. The LA Times broke the story, but has refused to release the tape–and so has Obama.
Khalid Al-Monsour, Al-Mansour met and befriended Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the world’s 19th-wealthiest person, when the prince was studying at Menlo College in California in the late 1970s. Al-Mansour’s law partner was representing the prince in a court case in California
Obama may have met him at Columbia while Obama was a student there and Al-Mansour was a guest lecturer. Obama refuses to discuss anything about his days at Columbia.
Edward Said, . . . the association between President Obama and Edward Said,. . As reported in David Remnick’s The Bridge, Barack Obama did indeed take an undergraduate course in modern fiction at Columbia from Edward Said. In 1998, State Senator Barack Obama and Michelle Obama were seated at a table with Edward and Mariam Said at a Chicago Arab-American community event at which Said delivered the keynote address.
Percy Sutton According to Newsmax columnist Kenneth Timmerman, “At the time, Percy Sutton, a former lawyer for Malcolm X and a former business partner of al-Mansour, says he (al-Mansour) was raising money for Obama’s graduate school education, al-Mansour was representing top members of the Saudi Royal family seeking to do business and exert influence in the United States.”
The other part of your question is more significant…………………….. how these men relate to Barack Obama?………………..you get to pick. There is a big conspiracy lobby out there and these guys are all mentioned. Best quote was that association with at least one of them would disqualify an applicant for the U.S. Marine band; the President’s Own. All were investigated by the FBI….. the records of the investigations were not cited. Even Hillary Clinton took some shots using these guys as ammunition back in the bad old days when she was considering being pres. herself.
So please give us your view.
Thanks,
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Close Joe, I’m impressed, most Democrats know nothing about these people. Indulge me while I expand on them. Davis, his mentor from age 9 to his leaving for college, was a member of the communist party and a black power advocate. For whatever it might mean, he was a friend of Vallery Jaretts father in law, also a communist. Kahlidi and Said are somewhat of a mystery. How much influence they had on Obama can only be guessed at, but his actions relative to the Palestinians invite speculation.
You might know Saudi Prince Alaweed bin-Talal is a large contributor to Harvard and Al-Monsour, his attorney has been a conduit for him. Al-Monsour and Percy Sutton who never met Obama, wrote letters of recomendation on Obama’s behalf, for entry into Harvard. Of course none of this would be evidence of conspiracy, in a court of law, but for political candidate, it could be a disqualifier, had it been widely known.
I am puzzled why Hillary and McCain who both had to be aware of this, never used it. In fact McCain prevented his 527s from using it. I don’t expect it will be used in 2012, by Romney. WHY?
joe diamond says
Hey Joel,
I didn’t know anything about them either until I saw your list. There is plenty of material out there on the net + a few undergraduate survey courses helped me with the nouns and verbs. In short summary, Communists were the devil in the late thirties until to about a week ago. As such anyone who knew or had lunch with one was a suspect. Writers and artists who attended a meeting or read the daily Worker were put on enemy lists. J. Edgar Hoover and Joe McCarthy built their careers being hard on Reds. They were and still are an embarrassment to the country. These guys and others are a sign of just how bad things can get( read the patriot Act) if we start convicting persons based on past associates.
There is nothing to “use” in a political campaign. I think a great amount of time could have been wasted by presenting these persons. They probably did influence Obama in one way or another. We are not at the point where past associates should be part of the disqualification process. Inuendo is not proof. Hillary Clinton (a lawyer) and John McCain ( heroic military officer) rose above the temptation to drag their messages down to the level of the mob.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Joe:
The point I was attempting to make, is that a man we know virtually nothing about was elected President. My concern is that voters are easily duped and any charleton can easily be elected to office.
THEY THAT SOW THE WIND SHALL REAP THE WHIRLWIND.
joe diamond says
I agree with you on that part.
I had never heard of him until he started making speeches and announcing his candidacy. I just assumed the party king makers had picked him. The machine in Chicago doesn’t just pull names out of a hat. Both parties use this same process and I don’t like it. Candidates are preselected for voters. My sense is that they are controlled by their party Pooh Bahs both before and after the elections most of the time.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Founding father, John Adams warned of the danger of a two party system. Adams called it, “The greatest political evil under our constitution.” No less an authority than George Washington, in his fairwell address, agreed with Adams. We are obviously too far gone to change the system, but we can educate ourselves to the point where we know about the person we chose to vote for. We can vote for the person, regardless of party, we feel best represents our desires.
I am not an advocate for third party candidates. In my opinion all they can accomplish is to negate the will of the people. I do believe that the primary election is good, but could be better. Independents should be permitted to vote in primaries. However, a member of one party should not be able to vote in the others primary. Switching party affiliation should not be permitted after an agreed upon date.
A cap on political spending needs to be imposed. That would apply to the party, the candidate and to PAC’s. Here in the 1st congressional district the cost per candidate has risen from $250,000 to over $3 million, almost overnight. How insane is that?
Keith Thompson says
As someone who is an advocate for third parties; the major flaw I see with primaries is that I (as a taxpayer) am paying for them, but I (as someone who is registered with a third party) is not allowed to participate in them. As far as I’m concerned, I’m being taxed without representation. I’m not fundamentally opposed to primaries, but primaries are not an election and therefore should be paid for and conducted by the parties themselves and not paid for by taxpayers and conducted by government run boards of elections.
However, there is a way to conduct primaries that doesn’t automatically favor the two party system and more importantly allows all taxpayers to participate and that is to open a primary to candidates of all parties (or unaffiliated with a particular party) and allow all registered voters to vote in them with the top two (or three) vote getters moving on to the general election. If this means that two candidates of the same party get chosen in the primary, so be it. The beauty of such a practice (which is used in a few states) is that it has the potential to render political parties irrelevant, especially in some regions of the country.
Joel Brandes says
Keith:
If I had my druthers we could have multiple parties in a system more like a parlimentary form of government. There are pitfalls to that system, but a vote of no confidence can bring about change when needed. It’s not going to happen. Like it or not, I doubt a third party candidate could ever win election. That being said, We do have primaries. If the primaries were not controlled by the parties that block people who don’t belong, we might have a more representative of the people candidate.
Al Townshend,DVM says
Amen to your Letter to the editor!!!!
joe diamond says
Joel,
I like the last one but I don’t think it will sell. How about excluding certain non communications that are, nonetheless, protected speech? I would exclude any costs related to media without message. This would include TV time for attack ads and snippets without a complete thought. This would include all lawn and roadside signs unless they communicate an idea. All unsolicited mechanical phone ads would lose their deductible status.
I would also change the format of the debates. Instead of the rhetorical event we now have I would like to see an open book test where the candidate and his expert team examines past and current events in a dialogue with the other candidate. This would almost suggest that whoever comes in second in the election, and their team, becomes the vice president and loyal opposition within the government.
As you correctly point out, both Washington and Adams did warn of the dangers of a two party system, but I have a sense they were looking at political parties of self interested persons who were able to exclude much of the electorate. In their times women, slaves, non property owners, immigrants and those I forget had no suffrage. Thus a tradition of parties forming along self interest lines with little regard for the nation began. We have evolved politically to the point where most of the electorate doesn’t bother to vote and those who do shout their position at an opposition who is not going to hear or change.
Corporations and even foreign countries spend to influence our elections.
John and George would have gone nuts!
Joe
Thomas E. Taylor says
Lets think outside the box. Suppose before a license to broadcast or print and distribute (TV, Radio, newspapers and magazines) could be obtained, these institutions had to provide a reasonable amount of time (XX hours), space (XX inches of type ((or number of words)) and pictures) at no cost (or for a fixed amount of money equal to each party, but the time limited to same XX hours). Suppose money could only be used from those who could vote. No monies from companies, organizations, unions, etc. ,or non US Citizens could be used for elections. Suppose all political phone calls were stopped. Suppose the proliferation of political signs was limited to space inside (windows, show cases, etc). (Does anyone know what the liabilities are should a driver be distracted by a sign and has an accident??) Suppose any excess monies not spent for use within these these limits, or for travel etc, where a person actually goes to a rally, would go toward paying the National Debt within three months after the election. I know, don’t hold my breath, but are these off the wall thoughts any crazier than the expenses we are witnessing?? What if only those who are as young as 18 earn the right to vote if they are in the active military (not just a member of ROTC while in a learning institution) until they are 21? I hope I am not nieve enough to vote for sombody only because I see their name and/or picture more than the other candidate, or because I like/dislike the color of their skin. Tom
gerry maynes says
Hi yes. John Adams and George Washington were refering to the Democratic Party under Jefferson and Madision. They were against Anyone who were against the Federalist their party. Please do not take things out of context iof the century they were spoken. The two party system has served us well. It has kept the dishonesty and a possible dictatorship that has over come other countriesw from happening here. So, If you are not happy with your current party, do what Lincoln and william Seward and Charles Francis Adams ( Johns Grandson) did start your own party ( Go Bye Whigs hello Repub licans) Or what John Quincy Adams did leave the Federalist, Join the Democrats, spit the Democrats and then form the Wigs. See, Stop complaining and do something.
Joel Brandes says
Gerry;
Please indulge me. It makes no difference what Adams and Washingtons reasons were. The point is that they were right about the danger of two parties. The Constitution is quite clear on what powers are given to the Federal government and that everything else is reserved by the states and the people. It is partisan politics that have distorted the Constitution. It’s not the fact that we have two parties that is the problem. It’s the fact that they have evolved into protagenists that are more concerned with retaining or obtaining power, than they are about the good of the country.
michael V Johnson says
President Obama is not connected to Bush that is true but, Romney is. Seventeen of his twenty four foreign policy advisers are from the Bush administration, authors and supporters of the “Project for a new American Century. So fixated on their imperialistic policy were these ideologues that they refused the Clinton Administration’s help, ignored several intelligence briefings , and allowed the US to be attacked on it’s own soil for the first time since Pearl Harbor.
Stop the presses ! Obama didn’t make good on all his campaign promises? First time that’s happened.! President Obama did all he could to make good on that promise and it didn’t happen. To give him all the blame is idiotic when you know damn well Boehner’s “Do Nothing Congress” refused to let every one of his jobs incentives pass. Romney’s running mate Ryan also held the farm bill, bills to help our veterans and “The Grand Bargain” which would have addressed our deficit hostage in committee because in his words, “it might make Obama look good”.
You want to talk about repeated behavior, voting party lines, and insanity. Try this Mr Brandes. Richard Nixon committed treason by sabotaging The Paris Peace talks and preventing the end of the Vietnam War as LBJ had negotiated it. This led to the death of an additional 20,000 American soldiers. His successor Gerald Ford was appointed on the condition he pardon Nixon for all his other felonies. The GOP demigod Ronald Regan once again used treason for election enhancement by trading guns to Iran on the promise of the Ayatollah to hold the hostages until he was president, and he flooded America’s inner cities with cocaine to finance the operation. From here Regan went on to rack up over 138 indictments and eclipse Nixon’s record. His successor didn’t actually use treason to get elected but he was complicit in Regan’s actions. This leaves one more modern republican president, W. I wish it didn’t need mentioning, but your words indicate it may. The supreme court circumvented the democratic process and stopped the vote count in order to insert him as president like this was some banana republic. You want to vilify voting party line ? You should google the word OBJECTIVE.
I find Joe Diamond’s letter to be xenophobic and inflammatory. I would have hoped we left McCarthyism behind us for good. Thinking that it’s ok for the Republican Central Committee to display signs implying that the Obama Presidency is the equivalent of Soviet Russia is nothing for this county or district to be proud of. This behavior may have a place at a meeting with hoods and burning crosses but not an American political campaign !
joe diamond says
Hi Michael,
I liked your summary of the transition from Clinton to Bush & 9 /11. Various intelligence organizations had been watching possible attackers but couldn’t put things together. I didn’t know the Bush people ignored the Clinton folks.
And I might have been a little shrill in previous signals………….but the sky IS falling.
Joe
michael V Johnson says
The sky is not falling. If Congress and the American electorate would either support or stop obstructing him we could make real progress. Obama Care is going to save small businesses money by letting them insurance from pools. Our abundant, cheap energy combined with new technology is going to create a rebirth of American industry. Catepilar and GE are already moving plants back to the US. If we redirect some of money we WASTE on defense and return tax revenues closer to historic norms the deficit will fade. Obama had a Grand Bargain in place and Ryan did indeed keep it locked in Committee against the best interest of the nation. America’s electorate has crossed a line where it is now willing to go against the best interest of the nation for personal political gain. The sign in the window of Republican Central Committee is evidence of that. Friday night a car had an axe driven through it’s hood for having an Obama bumper sticker, people were physically threatened for carrying Obama lawn signs. Disgusting and people at Republican Central Committee should be ashamed of evoking such feelings, if they were capable of such an emotion !
joe diamond says
The sky is falling,
Congress is , as you say……
Ryan did indeed keep it locked in Committee (acting) against the best interest of the nation. America’s electorate has crossed a line where it is now willing to go against the best interest of the nation for personal political gain.
This place ain’t Athens,
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Michael:
I enjoy your attempt to re-write history. For the first two years of Obama’s presidency, Democrats had total control of government. No one could prevent him from doing anything he wished. In 2010 the voters spoke. They gave control of the house to the GOP. You might not like it, but the voters evidently did not like the path Obama put the country on. That’s the consequence of elections.
On November 6th, we will discover the current will of the voters.
michael V Johnson says
What you say and whatever the election leaves us with doesn’t change the criminal nature of every GOP president post Eisenhower !