Obama Cult of Personality Scary

From Wikipedia:

"A cult of personality or personality cult arises when a country's leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships"

If that definition does not describe the media treatment of Barack Hussein Obama, I don't know what does!

As I watched the crowd wildly cheer a man who has yet to accomplish anything real, I can understand how dictators such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao were able to control the masses. It frightened me. Not to say that Barack Hussein Obama is in any way comparable to these evil dictators. However, the behavior of the crowd and the Obama-ites in general made me realize that it would not be impossible for the American people to be subjugated by a despot. I once thought this behavior was impossible from the American people. I now see that it is not. Paraphrasing Michelle Obama, for the first time in my adult life I was scared for the future of my country. This makes the fight for liberty all the more important for the rest of us non-kool aide drinkers. To listen to the mass media one would think Barack Hussein Obama could do no wrong. Even with his (along with Chief Justice Roberts) colossal screw up during the swearing-in, Barack Hussein Obama was treated with god-like reverence.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_oath_do_over

Listening to ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC, one might forget that nearly half the country voted for John McCain. These networks totally ignore the 47% or so that did not vote for Barack Hussein Obama. Is it any surprise why Fox News, which actually tries to address both sides, dominates the other news networks? Is it any surprise that the more balanced Wall Street Journal has a significantly larger newspaper circulation than the left wing New York Times?

President Barack Hussein Obama has a lot of power. All presidents have great power, but with the media and the lemming-like masses bowing at his feet, Barack Hussein Obama has more power than most. Let's hope he uses his power to increase, and not attack, liberty.


P.S.

Barack Hussein Obama likes to draw parallels between himself and Abraham Lincoln. Lest we forget Lincoln's greatness, I've included the Gettysburg Address below. Perhaps it's been a while since you've read it. I ask you to consider taking a moment to re-read this speech. While reading, be sure to consider the circumstances the country was under at the time Lincoln delivered the speech.
I've had the opportunity to read the Gettysburg Address at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D. C. and at the cemetery in Gettysburg, PA where the speech was originally delivered. The profundity of the speech impacts me every time I read it.

Barack Hussein Obama may be good, but he's no Lincoln!

The Gettysburg Address

Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that this nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate…we cannot consecrate…we cannot hallow…this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us…that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Right and Wrong Is Irrelevant This Time In Israel-Gaza Fight

Why there is any question as to what the US stance should be in the current fight between Israel and Hamas is baffling. In an increasingly complicated world, the citizens of the United States have seemingly lost sight of who is the enemy. Back in the “good ole days”, determining the enemy was easy. In WWII the Germans and the Japanese were clearly the enemies. Through the cold war the Soviet Union and communists were the enemies. Now, with the end of the cold war and the fall of the Soviet Union it appears people are not able to see the enemy. Let me help remind everyone: Muslim-based governments and Islamic extremists are THE enemy! They are responsible for nearly every military conflict across the world. Hamas represents Muslim-based government, terrorism, and extremism. Israel is the ONLY responsible government in the Middle East.

Imagine you are walking down the street and you see a fist fight between Adolf Hitler and The Pope. Would you stop to figure out who started the fight? No! You don’t care who started it, or even who’s right and who’s wrong. You would immediately help The Pope.

In this way, the citizens of the United States should be fully backing Israel in their fight against the Hamas terrorists. We don’t even need to know all the details to know this is the right think to do. It’s possible that Israel may have taken some inappropriate actions that could put them in the wrong. In this fight, it does not matter. If you think the Middle East is unstable now, imagine the Middle East if the one free and viable government in the region were removed.

Bristol, CT -- Another Example of Government Waste

The city of Bristol, CT has enhanced the quality of life in town by flooding a sand volleyball court in a municipal park to create a small ice skating rink. The rink is nothing fancy, but it's a good use of a town park during winter months when it mostly stands dormant. However, Bristol takes it a step further by posting a town worker at the rink to over see activities. Keep in mind this is a pile of sand with ice on it, not an NHL hockey rink. So, some town employee is paid to sit there are watch people (mostly kids) skate. Why is this necessary? Why is this necessary, especially considering the budget constraints under which the city is operating? The answer is that it's not necessary. After all, the town does not post a worker at the park during the summer months to supervise volleyball, basketball, softball, or the playground. Why are these summer activities any different from a small skating rink in the winter? I know many smaller towns that have made similar rinks. They leave the rinks open to public enjoyment. No supervision required. In order to save money (and common sense) Bristol should do the same, and get rid of the unnecessary "supervisor" at the town rink.

New Favorite Link Added to Blog

Liberty Alert has added new links to our list of favorite websites.

A link to the famous Cato Institute has been added.

Check it out at http://www.cato.org/.

Liberty Alert is now a "Basic" sponsor of Cato.

Book Review -- One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez

One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez is considered a masterpiece. It won the Nobel prize for literature after being published in 1967. It is the one of the best selling Spanish books of all time.

With all that being said, I did not enjoy the book. To me, the title seemed appropriate because it felt like I needed 100 years of solitude to get through the 450 pages.

The book chronicles the history of several generations of the Buendia family during the rise and fall of the fictional town of Macondo. The Buendia family is the founding and most prominent family in the town.

I can appreciate the unique writing style that Garcia Marquez invented with this book. I can also appreciate the great creativity required to create an intricate and colorful fictional town. However, I just did not find the book that entertaining. There is no real plot, in the traditional sense. The book reads more like a diary of a crazy old aunt recounting family history --filled with exaggerations, superstitions, and folk legend -- rather than an actual novel. The book also combines fantasy with reality. There were descriptions of day-to-day life in the Buendia family, when suddenly some supernatural miracle would occur. For example, one character suddenly floats off to heaven while folding laundry. Other characters live to be 150 years old. In that respect, One Hundred Years of Solitude reminded me of the Old Testament of The Holy Bible.

One other criticism was that the names of the characters were too similar. Several of the characters had the same first and/or last names (as children were born and named after previous generations). This made it often difficult to keep track of the characters. When I looked up the novel on Wikipedia, there was a family tree. I wish I had such a family tree available to me while reading the novel to help keep all the characters straight.

One Hundred Years of Solitude is highly acclaimed. It has been translated into 27 different languages, and won numerous international awards. It is taught in schools as a classic and propelled the author (Gabriel Garcia Marquez) into the highest echelon of modern authors. So what do I know? Perhaps I just don't "get it" when it comes to this novel, but the bottom line is that I was not entertained by the book. Isn't the point of reading a work of fiction to be entertained (or educated) at some level?

Why Are the Red Sox Not Making Any Moves?

The Mets have signed 2 top quality back-of-the-bullpen pitchers. The Yankees have signed 2 big free agent starting pitchers, and are in discussions for another pitcher. They continue to be in the mix for top free agent sluggers. Even if they make no additional signings, the Yankess have clearly gotten better. Yet the biggest move the Red Sox have made thus far is to announce new uniforms.

The Red Sox were beat out by a divisional rival (Tampa Bay Rays) last year in the playoffs. Yet the Red Sox have done nothing to get better this winter.

In baseball, if you're standing still, you're going backwards.

Red Sox Nation is starting to get restless. The Sawx need to fire up the hot stove! Rumor has it that the Blue Jays are dangling Vernon Wells and BJ Ryan. Wells would certainly be a nice upgrade offensively in center field without sacrificing defense. BJ Ryan would finally give the Red Sox that 8th inning guy they've been struggling to find for two seasons. Oh, and let's not forget Mark Texeria. The Red Sox need to get that deal done to legitimize their Manny-less lineup. Pedroria, Ortiz, Texeria, Wells, Youkilis, Bay, Drew would be a formidable offense, especially if the bullpen were improved. The Rockies have bullpen help available. The Red Sox could still use an upgrade at shortstop, and need to deal with their catcher situation.

There are lots of moves that could be done, should be done, and need to be done. I could go on and on. The point is, Theo and the gang need to get going to bring a merry Christmas to Red Sox Nation.

There Otta Be A Law...

I spend a lot of time on this blog complaining about silly government laws, and the "nanny-state" encroaching on our personal freedoms. Smokers are a huge target of over reaching government. Whenever there's a whiff of cigarette smoke in any venue that might be detected by a non-smoker, the government tries to pass a law. The general premise is that smokers do not have the right to smoke if it inhibits someone's right to breath smoke-free air.
Today I had an experience that made me question my personal rights versus the rights of someone else. A smoker did not usurp my personal rights, but my personal space was certainly violated! Yes, I had the displeasure of spending 4.5 hours in the middle coach seat of an airplane alongside an obese woman. This woman needed a seatbelt extension because the regular seat belt would not fit around her waist. She could not enter and exit her seat without moving the armrest out of the way. She could not even think about lowering the tray table. There I was, stuck next to her. Typical of my luck. People talk about the rudeness of smokers, but I would have rather sat next to Joe Camel than this woman. She had no respect for my personal space. Her arms, legs, elbows, etc. crowded my already small coach seat. And she did not care.
I don't have a problem with this woman being whatever size she wants. That's her prerogative. However, why is she allowed to fly in coach? If smokers are not allowed to smoke because it infringes on the comfort of others, why is this woman allowed to cause me discomfort? Here's my proposal for a useful rule that someone needs to institute: If the standard seatbelt does not fit, you can't fly in a single coach seat. Here are the alternatives:
1) Don't fly.
2) Buy the bigger first class seat.
3) Buy 2 coach seats.
4) Lose some weight.

I paid for a full airline seat, not 3/4 of a seat. I'm sorry, but every person cannot be accommodated in every situation. Smoking sections in restaurants went the way of the dodo because everyone realized how ridiculous it was to think that the cigarette smoke would only stay in one area. Well, allowing obese people on coach airplanes, or any other public venue with "regular" seats needs, to follow the path of the restaurant smoking section.

I fly this airline frequently. I am going to be complaining on my return trip. Stay tuned for the results of my complaint.

Link to Book Review -- Historic Photos of Connecticut

Below is a link to a book review I published on my other blog, Connecticut Outdoors:

http://connecticutoutdoors.blogspot.com/2008/12/book-review-historic-photos-of.html

Goodwin Hotel Closing a Bad Sign for Hartford

The Goodwin Hotel is an excellent hotel in the heart of downtown Hartford. It is directly across the street from Hartford’s biggest attraction, the XL center (formerly the Civic Center). The hotel is privately run, unique, and luxurious. The Goodwin hotel has hosted celebrities such as Neil Diamond, Bruce Springsteen, and Tina Turner while they were performing in Hartford. The Goodwin Hotel offers a good value with rooms available for less than $100 per night. The Goodwin Hotel is closing at the end of the year.
I had the occasion this past weekend to spend a night at the Goodwin Hotel. It felt like a stay in an old-time luxury hotel – the kind of hotel that existed before the big chains took over.

Hartford is a city that has long struggled with its image. It does not speak well to the health and vibrancy of the city that it cannot support a hotel like the Goodwin. The state of Connecticut has pumped a lot of money into Hartford in the past decade with the funding of the Adrian’s Landing project and the Connecticut Science Center. I fear that the closing of the Goodwin is a sign that the state taxpayer investment in Hartford may not have been a wise one at this time. Let’s hope I’m wrong.

2nd Amendment Protects Citizens From Incompetence As Well As Tyranny

The recent shooting in Mumbai, India could have been controlled. The bloodshed could have been significantly reduced, and maybe eliminated. The Islamic terrorists in Mumbai walked though the crowded city unimpeded by anyone. Due to laws making it close to impossible to get a firearm in India, the security guards in the various hotels and buildings were unarmed. The few police that were not fleeing only had bamboo sticks in which to fight back. Citizens only had stones in which to hurl at the attackers.

You can search the blogosphere and find several sites pointing out how if the Indian citizenry had the right to own guns, this disaster could have been largely abated. Putting that fact aside, regardless of what the citizens could have done had their rights not been impeded, the Indian government had absolutely no police or security force equipped to handle such an incident. Mumbai had no SWAT teams. No special forces units. They did not even have armed police officers! This goes beyond gun control. This is plain incompetence.

Imagine what the police response would have been to a similar incident in an American city. The terrorists my have been able to attack one place, but they would never get out. Even if the citizens did not defend themselves, police and SWAT teams would have surrounded the attackers in minutes. Streets would have been cordoned off. Snipers would have been on rooftops. Tear gas canisters would have been at the ready. A serious police force did not even arrive in Mumbai until the next day. Can you imagine gunmen running around Manhattan without any police resistance for an entire 24 hours?! It would never happen because the governments (local, state, and national) have some level of competence when it comes to fighting crime. It is hardly perfect, but comparatively, it is excellent.

Previous to this tragic incident, I had only thought of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution as a tool against government tyranny. However, after this incident I have come to realize that the Second Amendment is indeed protection against government incompetence as well as tyranny. It's now evident that the Indian government cannot be trusted to competently protect their citizenry. Therefore, the Indian people, and all people, should have a right to keep and bear arms similar to the rights spelled out in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Episodes such as the Mumbai shooting, and 9-11, prove the danger of putting too much blind trust in government to provide protection for you and your family. A person needs the right to protect themselves in situations in which the government cannot.