Censorship: What Radical Change Does To A Country

If Barack Obama becomes president, you can be sure that new elements of censorship will follow to protect his own causes. Radical leaders throughout history have shown that in order to preserve and sustain power, one must control the media. (I am sure non-radical leaders know this too.)

Hitler knew this, Stalin knew this, and many of the other whack jobs in history who have held positions of power knew this.

Hitler himself was quoted as saying: "By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise."

Oh and some of my other Hitler favorites:

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think."

With any good propaganda movement you have countermeasures in place to ensure that the dissemination of information is not disrupted.

The problem with this is that you will always have a group of people who will naturally resist and challenge the establishment if the group feels threatened or imposed upon. In the case of the oppression caused by censorship from the Chinese government, you have groups like the creators of "Goolag" to help combat the oppressor.

There is so much more to be discovered about Obama and his intentions, especially in regards to censorship and media usage. The information that we do have now about him, is enough to be concerned, very concerned.

People have been caught up in the "light bearing", euphoric, and seducing promises of an evil Obama campaign.

Fortunately for Obama, his followers don't think!

Obama's New Bumper Sticker

Get the message out! Beware of Obama!

To get your very own Obama Soviet sticker, go Here!

DRIVE HAPPY!!!

Beware: False Messianic Promises

An article from the American Thinker titled "Obama's Politics of Collective Redemption" poses some interesting parallels.

Barack Obama has been painted as a messiah to some and many have been caught up in the euphoric message of change much like the germans of the Hitler era, where in the beginning Hitler promised change and instilled a strong sense of nationalism in Germany that laid the groundwork for Nazi doctrines that would eventually threaten and ruin the world.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Hitler himself had a slogan when he was rising to power: "Alles muss anders sein!" ("Everything must be different!")

Change can be perilous, especially if it is combined with radical religious and political fervor.

Consider the comments of Pope Benedict:

"...where the Marxist ideology of liberation had been consistently applied, a total lack of freedom had developed, whose horrors were now laid bare before the eyes of the entire world. Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine, but demonic."

History has shown us that messages of radical change have paved the way for disasters that have not only threatened the country where they were preached, but also to the entire world.

Promises of change that involve making people more dependent on the government and weakening the working class and making America less competitive in this global economy, is this the kind of change that America needs?

Do we need change that involves catering to our enemies? Don't be confused by the message that we need to improve the American image in the international spotlight. Does America need to be diplomatic, yes of course. But America does not need to cater to an international community that does not have America's interests in mind.

Obama has created euphoria in America and is exploiting the hopes and dreams of hard working Americans with a false sense of meaningful and liberating change. Are we going to all of a sudden live in this utopian society where everyone has each other's interests in mind. It is an ideal situation, one not very well aligned with a capitalist society. Don't forget, capitalism is not the evil that Marxists and other anti-capitalists would have you believe. Capitalism should always go hand in hand with altruism. I am digressing here, but look at historical capitalists like Andrew Carnegie and the Rockefellers.

Obama's idea of political and economic change will ultimately weaken people and create further dependence on social programs, not to mention his idea of change will hit America in the pocket book and further cause the economy to go into a tailspin.

What do I say to Obama and his causes, Yes We Can't!

Obama: A Clear and Present Danger

In an address to a crowd in Oregon, Obama minimized the threat that countries like Iran pose to the United States, further demonstrating not only to the United States itself, but also to the world that this error in judgement is a clear and present danger and also an example of inexperience talking.



The facts are laid on the table and the Iranian president has made some very bold statements not only to the United States but also to countries friendly to the US such as Israel. Does "wiped off the map" ring a bell? Iran has also been pressured to stop supporting the insurgency that is present in Iraq fighting against and killing American troops. Iran supports terrorism, plain and simple, but more than that, they support any cause that undermines American foreign policy.

If Obama is to take a soft stance with Iran, what does that mean to the world, to the United States? What kind of message does that send to our enemies? Are we supposed to court them and give out cupcakes? Diplomacy only goes so far with fanatics like the ones we are seeing in Iraq and Iran. We need a leader that will not entertain thoughts of courting our enemies. Courting allows them to buy time to get stronger and a lot more dangerous. We also need to be midful of our enemies' allies, Iran is also friendly with Venezuela and Mr. Hugo Chavez, they have reps that sit on the same OPEC panel.

Here is an interesting question, if Iran is just taking an internal perspective and building a nuclear program for civil purposes, then why do they feel so threatened and demonstrate resistance and a defense stance when confronted?

Answer: Iran feels threatened overall by the US and it's foreign policies in that part of the world. Iran wants to establish supremacy in that region and it doesn't want it's ultimate goal of building a nuclear arsenal to be disrupted. It also does not want America to spread and establish a dominant influence in that part of the world. The US military has always had a huge military presence in that part of the world, especially after the first Gulf War.

With comments like what Obama uttered to that crowd in Oregon, it is apparent that we not only have a clear and present danger abroad but also right here in our own backyard.

Reference article: Obama comments on Iran