Eagle Forum of Sacramento

September 12, 2008
by Phyllis Schlafly
The past two presidential elections taught the losing Democrats a couple of political lessons. They learned that attacks on guns and defense of abortion are no longer winning issues for them, and this new awakening is reflected in their 2008 Party Platform adopted in Denver. The Platform grudgingly states: “we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms.” The powers-that-be in the Democratic Party have learned to tolerate a few pro-gun candidates. Feminist pressure won’t let the Democrats recede from their “proudly”-stated 2004 Platform position that “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.” This year’s Platform is just as pro-abortion, but uses slightly softer words, stating that the Democrats support “a woman’s ability to make her own life choices and obtain reproductive health care, including birth control” (throughout nine months and with taxpayers’ money, of course). Proclaiming that “we will end the Bush Administration’s war on science,” the Democratic Platform promises to “lift the current Administration’s ban on using federal funding for embryonic stem cells.” The genuinely pro-life Republican Platform calls for “a ban on human cloning and a ban on the creation of or experimentation on human embryos for research purposes.” The 2008 Democratic Platform stridently toadies to the feminists on all their issues. The Platform reaffirms support for the Equal Rights Amendment (which was declared dead by the Supreme Court 26 years ago), enforcement of Title IX (which has canceled hundreds of men’s college athletic teams, thereby costing us dearly in the recent Olympics), passage of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (which would use a UN treaty to keep abortion legal), and the Violence Against Women Act (which puts a billion taxpayer dollars a year into the coffers of the radical feminists). The Platform reiterates the phony feminist slogan that “women still earn 76 cents for every dollar that a man earns.” That figure includes women who have spent many years out of the workforce and, of those who do have jobs, about a third work only part-time. The Platform promises to “expand” the Family and Medical Leave Act. “Expanding” means forcing employers to pay wages to employees who are on extended leave at times of their own choosing. The Democratic Platform goes all-out in recognizing the support of their gay rights constituency. “We support the full inclusion of all families, including same-sex couples, in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections.” The Platform adds, “We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act.” Overwhelmingly passed in 1996 to prevent judges from forcing other states to validate Massachusetts’ same-sex marriages, DOMA was one of the most popular laws ever passed and it was even signed by Bill Clinton. Most of the Democratic Platform consists of promising benefits that will cost already burdened taxpayers aplenty. There’s no mention of how these extravagant handouts will be paid for. For example, the Democratic Platform enthusiastically endorses the incredibly extravagant worldwide handouts in the bill sponsored by Barack Obama called “the U.S. Millennium Development Goals, which aim to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015.” The Platform promises to “double our annual investment in meeting these challenges to $50 billion by 2012.” The Democrats’ mindset is that “we need stronger international institutions.” So, the Platform promises to “create a $2 billion Global Education Fund … with the goal of supporting a free, quality, basic education for every child in the world.” The Democrats want the government to take care of American kids from birth through college. “We will make quality, affordable early childhood care and education available to every American child from the day he or she is born,” and “we will provide all our children a world-class education, from early childhood through college.” The Democratic Platform is full of proposals to raid the pockets of John Q. Taxpayer and reduce the American standard of living. This includes “an economy-wide cap and trade program,” a plan to “reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or ten million barrels per day, by 2030,” and designing legislation based on the belief that “global climate change is the planet’s greatest threat.” These expensive plans will require a giant expansion of government money and government jobs. The Democrats must have had this result in mind when they promised they “will make government a more attractive place to work.” There is much more expensive foolishness in the Democratic Platform, but the plank that takes the cake is: “we oppose laws that require identification in order to vote or register to vote.” That sounds like the Democrats are planning on winning the 2008 election by stuffing the ballot box.

Barack Obama loves to spend money–your money. He wants universal health care, regardless of the cost or quality of service. He wants a train on every corner.

Obama does not mind killing jobs in the name of global warming and making sure gas gas $5-7 per gallon.

Now he has come up with a total transfer of money from America’’s poor and middle class–he wants to give $845 BILLION to the United Nations.

I guess that since he comes from Chicago, he is accepting of corrupt politics and thieves in government.

This will be a disaster for the United States. The UN and corrupt governments from around the world will get the money that belongs to our families. His goal is to level the field. Instead of bringing freedom to other nations, he is bringing our cash. In the end, we will become as poor as Europe–10% unemployment, stagnation and depression.

A vote for Obama is a vote to make America poorer.

Looking at the circus sideshow that has become the presidential race I am constantly amused by the irony, the canards, the misinformation, the double-speak, the mixed messages and the lies by those involved in this enterprise.

I think back in history and see giants: Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Lincoln, Truman, Reagan and even Jackson. I think of the various obstacles each faced and how they addressed them. They dealt with divorcing us from England, creating a workable and equitable government and the administration of the same. One faced a civil war pitting brother against brother and the attendant social issues of the day. Another opened Pandora’s Box loosing the greatest weapon of mass destruction ever unleashed in order to save exponentially more lives. One stared down our Cold War adversary and, while at times bombastic, almost single-handedly brought down not just the Berlin Wall but also the once-great Soviet Union. And, I just kinda like Jackson.

These men, in particular our Founding Fathers, while not perfect, had the courage of their convictions. They had high standards, would not back down and saw their public service as a duty and not an entitlement. Sure, we have had a few boneheads in the 43 men who have held the presidency and I am sure that we will have more. But if you were to have a sine-wave curve and plot the efficacy, integrity and honesty of the presidents (and many of the pretenders to the same office in the past generation) you would see a far greater concentration of those coming up short to be our contemporaries.

Ford was no prize, let’s face it. Carter, possibly the worst president ever, is still mucking up things for the non-Muslim world. Bush the Elder was no bargain. Had Hillary not been holding them hostage, should her husband had been able to use his set, he could have mitigated much of the worlds ills by doing the right thing. But, nooooo, he was too busy.

Perot, Anderson, al Gore, John F’n Kerry, Silky Pony John Edwards, $harpton, Nader and a laundry list of other would-be’s and also-ran’s can be plotted on this curve as well.

All in all, ‘its a sad state of affairs when people like these deem themselves as presidential and worse when they are elected.

But, let’s face it, the Presidency is not what is used to be. Again, many of the previous residents of the White House were scoundrels, charlatans, adulterers and more. The decline of the quality of man in that exalted position is not a new thing.

What also is not new is the fact that there was an “honor among thieves” kind of mentality in the past with respect to the press. Sure there were issues and scandals and the like but the minor stuff was kept pretty much sub Rosa. Even FDR’s infirmity was kept under the QT for as long as it could be hidden until his condition deteriorated to the point that it could not longer be hidden.

Even JFK’s now legendary life of excess and abuses is getting fuller scrutiny but back then, ssshhhhhhh, don’t tell a soul!!!!! His saving grace is that LBJ was at least as big of a lothario as was JFK, but without the drug use.

First television, then cable and VCRs then mobile phones, the internet, camera phones and the Good Lord knows what else is out there to get us news as it is happening. No, like a lot of other timesaving devices and all the creature comforts that we have now that our parents and their parents did not have, these things have caused us to be spoiled brats, we want our instant gratification.

Now, to the untrained eye, this might sound like a good thing. We now get news from all corners of the world in a constantly streaming line of data, unfiltered, from the scene of the crime right to our, TV, radio, computer, phone, iPod, cheese-grater perched on our heads or however we receive our information.

But this is sorta kinda like giving a 15 year old the keys to the family truckster and telling him to leave the bottle of Jim Beam under the seat alone. Or, like a liberal majority on the SCOTUS. Nothing good can come out of this.

The problem is two-fold.

Number one, despite how biased and slanted the MSM is or appears to be, at least in almost all the outlets (with the possible exceptions of the NEW YORK TIMES, MS/NBC and CNN), the news is vetted for accuracy double sourced. (Unlike the previous cited trio. When you make up your own news, these actions are unnecessary and impossible.)

The news can be presented in any way the outlet wants. For instance a bus with 50 people returning from the Democrat Convention is involved in a crash and two people are killed. One paper might say “2 People Perish in Horrific Bus Wreck”, another might say “48 Delegates Re-Count Their Lucky Stars to Survive Bus Roll Over” and another might say “2 Obama Supporters Killed in Freak Bus Wreck, Was Cheney Driving?” No matter how you slice, dice and julienne it, 2 people are dead and everything is Cheney’s fault.

(No, really, the news IS written or delivered like that. But more on that in a second.)

The second is that when you deliver the news, either as a bona fide correspondent of some kind, a free-lancer or just a lucky stiff who had his camera out as the policeman caught the baby falling out of a building, you can control the actual Intel.

You can show the dead Taliban freedom fighter with the turban on both parts of his head and an evil American soldier standing over his corpse (if you read NEWSWEEK you are familiar with this kind of story.) Or you can show the bad guy who kept his date with Allah with the American Hero who booked the date standing over him, the now useless remote IED detonator and a hundred kids playing in the school ground that was moments away from being a crater. (I guess the NEWSWEEK photographers camera could not zoom out or something.)

The competition between the real media and the ad hoc and self-appointed media escalates. And, like with Gresham’s Law of Currency, poorly reported news will drive accurate news out of circulation.

With the least common denominator becoming less and less and ever more so common, the bar has been lowered right on to the floor. With the content being moot, the delivery and spin take center stage.

“It is said that success has a thousand fathers but failure is an orphan.”

(This is the part where I get to the point.)

Well, take a look around, in particular towards our good friend Barry Hussein Obama.

Barry said that he would take public funds for his campaign. But when he had just too freaking much money he, well, had to use the money his private backers offered! Well the outcry from the media was just like.nothing, the sound of crickets chirping.

But, were it to be the other way, my gosh, McCain would have been pilloried and demands made for him to step down!

Change.

The ever-popular 2nd Amendment (well, it is in my house), which for some odd reason seemed out of date to the Constitutional Scholar from Illinois, had a renaissance with him with the narrow “victory” upholding one of our most sacred and core values. Anti-gun then, now pro-gun. (I guess there are enough of us walking around with our “Message to Obama, we will keep on clinging to our guns, religion and while we are at it, the Constitution” T-shirts on to have made an impact.)

Change.

Nuclear energy is not so good, said the Arab-American junior senator said. (Look it up. He is 6% African)

Change.

Can’t drill for oil anywhere. Not good, takes too long. Yet, had we drilled for oil 10 years ago instead of the philanderer-in-chief vetoing drilling (avoiding the cheap jab at him for now), we would be enjoying lower prices now because that oil would have been in our pipeline for years now. And, it does NOT take 10 years from exploration to gas pump.

Change.

The issue is that as success has a thousand fathers, Obama has 10,000 press secretaries.

Each and everyone swooning over the messiah of America. Each one giving him a pass over his gaffes. Each one ignoring his flips, flop and flubs. Each one considering him- or herself the luckiest person in the world to be in his presence. Each one selling their soul to the detriment of the Commonweal.

You are witnessing a canard of everestal proportions and it is not just the typical liberal self-loathing.

Obama claims that he needed to take private donations to off-set the possibility of the fact that there might be a situation that maybe the nasty Republicans might raise some money and try that swift-boat thing on poor old Barry.

Meanwhile, his campaign has hundreds of millions, MoveOn is threatening to raise millions more, Soros opened his check book. Reminds me of “don’t throw me in the briar patch.” Don’t make me take private funds! Don’t do it!”
Change.

Yes, I am officially fed up with the lies and the lying media who lionize this guy. He is a lightweight of the lightest of weights. Again, no one has told me anything that he has done. He gets away with everything and no one calls him on it. His wife goes on the view and with all the sincerity of a Clinton, and she is a hit.

Meanwhile Cindy McCain is on the cover of NEWSWEEK and it is a hit piece. If Michelle Obama did 1/10th of what Cindy McCain did, the libs would have carved her face on Mt. Rushmore. McCain learned how to walk again after a stroke and the article makes it sound like the stroke was her own dang fault. Meanwhile Michelle wears a dress and she is just so cool.

Stop it.

Change.

You want change, vote for Obama. You will get change.

If you think Congress is out of control now, if you think that the courts are redefining stare deices now, if you think the Constitution is in jeopardy now, vote for the Marxist from the land of Lincoln.

You want change? You ain’t seen nuttin’ yet!

God Bless and God Speed

Tuesday 17 June 2008, by admin, California Political News

Democrats claim to be the defender of women. Yet, in the Sudan, Iraq under Saddam, Iran and other nations, these folks are silent.

As this article shows, rape is used on a massive scale to control the population.

President Bush and Senator McCain want to stop this abuse, while Obama and his sychophants prefer rape to freedom. Do not listen to their words, watch their actions.

Why do Democrats worry if you use a headset well driving and using your cell phone, but care little about a government policy of rape?

Democrats love good speeches and bad policies. Too bad women are sacrificed by them.

Tuesday 17 June 2008, by admin/California Political News

This article shows facts that Obama and his radical sycophants do not want you to know:

“The fact is, polar bears aren’t endangered, either by oil companies or climate change, says IBD. The world polar bear population is at a modern high and growing:

* Mitch Taylor, polar bear biologist with the Government of Nunavut, a territory in Canada, puts the current population at 24,000, up 40 percent since 1974.

* Some 2,000 of these bears live in and around the Chukchi Sea, where the oil companies purchased leases worth $2.6 billion in February.

* There’s no proof of a single bear being harmed by oil operations in Alaska since 1993.

* Since 1960, when the Alaska oil hunt began, only two oil-related bear fatalities have been documented.”

In reality, the Obama Luddites want high energy prices and control of the economy. They prefer to kill jobs and harm families than protect Americans. Shame on them.

Posted by Bobby Eberle
June 17, 2008 at 6:19 am

I realize that Democrats want government to rule our lives — to be in every aspect of our daily routine — at the expense of our hard-earned tax dollars. They believe that “government” is some sort of separate being that should “care” for us, but they forget that government has no money of its own. Nothing is free, and when the government does something to “help,” that money is coming from our pockets.

Now, ultra liberal Barack Obama wants the government to pay fathers for being fathers. That’s right, instead of expecting fathers to have common sense to do the right thing in raising families, Obama wants the government to give the father a payment. As the father of two, and the son of a single parent, I find this proposal to be outrageous. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no desire whatsoever to pay even more taxes just to get some 18-year-old punk to act like a father.

In a Father’s Day speech, Obama said the following:

We should reward fathers who pay that child support with job training and job opportunities and a larger Earned Income Tax Credit that can help them pay the bills. We should expand programs where registered nurses visit expectant and new mothers and help them learn how to care for themselves before the baby is born and what to do after — programs that have helped increase father involvement, women’s employment, and children’s readiness for school. We should help these new families care for their children by expanding maternity and paternity leave, and we should guarantee every worker more paid sick leave so they can stay home to take care of their child without losing their income.

Letting this passage soak in and reading other parts of his speech, you see just how liberal and on the far left fringe Obama is. Leading up to the comments above, Obama said, “Because if fathers are doing their part … then our government should meet them halfway.”

What in the world is he saying? I’ll tell you… he’s saying that if a father does what he is supposed to be doing, he should get taxpayer-funded benefits. This is ridiculous! Let’s see an “Obama” example…. A father is ordered by the court to pay child support. The father complies with the law, and now part of my paycheck is supposed to be forwarded to this guy simply because he is obeying the law? What kind of sense does that make?

I understand that lower-income families have it tough. But tough times do not mean that people should get a break from doing stupid things. My father died when I was 15. My sisters were 13 and 6. My mother, who had no college education or regular job at the time, was thrust instantly into the role of breadwinner. She not only raised us and provided for us, she continued her education along the way. She didn’t need the government to tell her what her responsibilities were or how to be a good parent.

The black community has an absolutely dismal rate of families with no fathers, but it is up to the individuals to do what is right and change that mentality. They should not be paid by the government to exercise common sense and provide for their children. It is the community that has been accepting this behavior, and it is the community that must change. And it can change without my tax money.

by Patrick J. Buchanan (more by this author)
Posted 03/21/2008 ET

How would he pull it off? I wondered.

How would Barack explain to his press groupies why he sat silent in a pew for 20 years as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright delivered racist rants against white America for our maligning of Fidel and Gadhafi, and inventing AIDS to infect and kill black people?

How would he justify not walking out as Wright spewed his venom about “the U.S. of K.K.K. America,” and howled, “God damn America!”

My hunch was right. Barack would turn the tables.

Yes, Barack agreed, Wright’s statements were “controversial,” and “divisive,” and “racially charged,” reflecting a “distorted view of America.”

But we must understand the man in full and the black experience out of which the Rev. Wright came: 350 years of slavery and segregation.

Barack then listed black grievances and informed us what white America must do to close the racial divide and heal the country.

The “white community,” said Barack, must start “acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination — and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past — are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds … .”

And what deeds must we perform to heal ourselves and our country?

The “white community” must invest more money in black schools and communities, enforce civil rights laws, ensure fairness in the criminal justice system and provide this generation of blacks with “ladders of opportunity” that were “unavailable” to Barack’s and the Rev. Wright’s generations.

What is wrong with Barack’s prognosis and Barack’s cure?

Only this. It is the same old con, the same old shakedown that black hustlers have been running since the Kerner Commission blamed the riots in Harlem, Watts, Newark, Detroit and a hundred other cities on, as Nixon put it, “everybody but the rioters themselves.”

Was “white racism” really responsible for those black men looting auto dealerships and liquor stories, and burning down their own communities, as Otto Kerner said — that liberal icon until the feds put him away for bribery.

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America.

Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.

This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.

Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks — with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas — to advance black applicants over white applicants.

Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?

Barack talks about new “ladders of opportunity” for blacks.

Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for “deserving” white kids.

Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America’s fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena. And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.

From: Gary Bauer
Campaign for Working Families
Date: Friday, February 22, 2000

One month ago, tens of thousands of young Americans came to Washington for the annual march in defense of the sanctity of human life. It was an impressive sight to see so many youth willing to brave the cold to keep fighting against Roe vs. Wade 35 years after the Supreme Court issued that terrible decision. In the years since, millions of innocent unborn children have been aborted and countless women exploited.
Senator Barack Obama took time out from the campaign trail to issue a statement while pro-life marchers were standing up for life. The candidate of “hope” and “change” apparently wants no change when it comes to America’s current abortion-on-demand regime and, sadly, he offers no hope to the unborn. Here is what he said:
“Thirty-five years after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it’s never been more important to protect a woman’s right to choose. Last year, the Supreme Court decided by a vote of 5-4 to uphold the Federal Abortion Ban, and in doing so undermined an important principle of Roe v. Wade: that we must always protect women’s health.
“With one more vacancy on the Supreme Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a women’s fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe v. Wade. The next president may be asked to nominate that Supreme Court justice. That is what is at stake in this election.
“Throughout my career, I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.
“When South Dakota passed a law banning all abortions in a direct effort to have Roe overruled, I was the only candidate for President to raise money to help the citizens of South Dakota repeal that law. When anti-choice protesters blocked the opening of an Illinois Planned Parenthood clinic in a community where affordable health care is in short supply, I was the only candidate for President who spoke out against it. And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”
The idea of a “President Obama,” with a perfect 100% pro-abortion rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL, choosing our next Supreme Court justice, or the next two or three Supreme Court justices, ought to be enough to send every conservative who cares about the sanctity of life running to the polls in November.
Pro-Lifers For Obama?
Yesterday, I noted that recent polling data shows John McCain beating Hillary Clinton but narrowly trailing Barack Obama. The Illinois senator’s charisma is no doubt largely responsible for his popularity, but other polling data points to a potentially serious problem. According to LifeNews.com, Obama is polling better with pro-life voters than Hillary Clinton is, even though Barack may well be further to the left than Hillary on many issues, including abortion.
For example, looking at polling data among pro-life voters in Wisconsin, John McCain gets 65% of the vote, compared to just 27% for Hillary – a 38- point advantage for McCain. Against Obama, however, there is a ten-point swing, with McCain favored 60%-to-32% among pro-life voters. According to LifeNews.com, the same disparity has been recorded in polling in Virginia and Iowa.
One possible explanation is that Hillary is a “known quantity,” while Obama is a “blank slate” to many voters. If that is the case, the pro-life, pro- family movement needs to step-up its voter education efforts immediately!
Toward that goal, CWF has recently posted on our website a quick comparison sheet highlighting the stark contrasts between John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on some key pro-family, pro-life issues. You can check it out at http://www.cwfpac.com Click the homepage link under “Where Do They Stand?”

Eagle Forum of Sacramento
Georgiana Preskar-Director

The apology is destroying America! Last week John McCain took a defensive stand and apologized for radio talk show host, Bill Cunningham, for his supposedly rude language toward Obama, during a McCain rally. Cunningham used Obama’s middle name Hussein and made other humorous remarks that were no big deal.

McCain is not alone in being quick to apologize. Many Republicans, conservatives, and Christians find themselves in the defensive. Instead of being offensive, when it comes to comments or beliefs that are not inline with diversity thinking, there is a desire to make people “feel” good, thus the apology to anyone who claims being offended.

In Luke 13:51, Jesus says, “Do you think I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.” He never said we were to “feel” good because everything holds equal value, but that we would find peace if we followed His word, even if it meant division within our own families.

The Bible is clear on right and wrong, good and bad. Enforced diversity education encourages defensive action for those who are not tolerant or politically correct, and many fall into the compromise. But when we stand for God’s word then we push forward in offensive positions of truth that keep liberal activists on the defensive, instead of us.

If we want to take back America, we must become offensive and not wait for the evil ones to do their job. They are relentless and will never stop. They successfully degrade the American culture, the white race, and Judeo-Christian values, in order to make change, while traditional Americans continue to defend themselves.

We must become offensive by adopting attitudes, actions, and words that support the goodness of our nation and its culture. By being bold in the truth, we unwrap the deception of misguided activists and put them on the defensive, instead of us.

It is time for Republicans, conservatives, and Christians to change. We must stop apologizing for our heritage, our skin color, and for the Godly principles upon which our nation was founded.

Eagle Forum of Sacramento
Monday Morning Thoughts
Georgiana Preskar-Director

The dangers of diversity addiction are far reaching in the months prior to the next election. Many Americans are transformed already and countless people have moved into the compromise stage that encourages the acceptance of diversity thinking. The schools, workplace, and churches have done their job.

Already we see words being used that elicit feelings rather than reality. This is how diversity addiction works. Everyone wants to “feel” good and Obama mania offers “good” feelings of hope and security.

The new politics that Obama uses are front-row fainting females to show compassion and kindness. During each incident, he uses the same “caring” words as he throws the supposed fainter a bottle of water. Does he know they need one, or are his actions and words used to depict “healings” that move the audience toward feelings of euphoria?

He uses the words hope and change flippantly with shallow socialist programs to support them. Hope for what? Why are people so desperate to take the words hope and change and use them for solutions that are totally unrealistic?

Hope has become magic. All of a sudden everyone’s desires become possible through change and many American minds that have evolved into diversity thinking are vulnerable. Any methods to get what people perceive as their rights are acceptable and achievable by taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

This is amazing since when you analyze who will be affected, it is the very people who thought they would be helped. Citizens will be shocked when the Obama’ hope becomes the reality that they are now the rich people who must contribute to socialist programs.

This great change, ruled by hope, will find people sacrificing more than they want to give. Suddenly when they have to pay for their own health insurance and their neighbors, and don’t forget the entitlements, the average citizen will face the reality of the phony utopia promised them by Obama or Clinton.

The more of our life and the more money taken away from us by the government, offers us less freedom, not greater freedom. But as long as “feelings” are ruling the schools, workplaces, and churches, liberal and pseudo conservative citizens will continue to believe misleading rhetoric of hope leading them toward a new freedom.

The “fainting” continues and the mouth of America shouts Obama hope as it is led to its destruction. The only hope for traditional Americans, in the months prior to elections, is that our shouts to win back this great nation will be loud enough to be heard!