President Obama's Speech Should Inspire All Mankind

Good Morning Papamoka Bloggers! I thought President Barack Hussein Obama's speech this morning in Cairo was one of the most inspirational and impressive that I've ever heard, and that includes great speeches throughout history. I realize it may sound hyperbolic, but it's my opinion. I was moved to tears.

So, going with that premise, how do we discuss a speech of such magnitude? It would be redundant - and 24/7 news-channel-like - of me to simply reiterate point for point and discuss the policy potential ad nausea like every other pleb unworthy of the brilliance that is Barack Obama.

No, I would rather respond to the cacophony of Republican critics already out there shouting down the president's aspirations by taking a look at the historical impact of similar inspirational speeches. What impact did they have had on human history - or lack of impact. I realize we're not academics and cannot possibly cover the issue very well, but I say let's take a stab at it. It is a very interesting question.

As part and parcel we need analyze the critics of those great speeches. Who were they? That should help us understand motive when it comes to the critics of Obama's speech today. First, what were the great speeches? Second, who were the critics? That's our mission here. It will hopefully paint a clear picture about what shapes our history. Do inspirational speeches work? What, if any, is the impact? Are there themes of "negativity and opposition" that pollute human social evolution throughout time. They are all fascinating questions.

So, let's find out by exploring a few examples. Let's first look back at one of our more recent inspirational speeches, delivered by President Ronald Reagan standing before the Berlin Wall dividing East and West Berlin on June 27th 1987. I hate to admit it, but I remember it fondly.

He took it upon himself to describe an undivided East and West. He made the now famous appeal to the leader of the then Soviet Union (inspired by John Kennedy's original appeal) "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." So, who was opposed to that speech? Was anybody? Not surprisingly, it was the far right. It's true, the Democrats supported President's Reagan's call for more openness. The GOP was suspicious at the time.

It's all part of the now famous "Reagan Myth." Republicans like to think they were the progressives at that time, and today they suckle on the idea they supported him in his efforts to remake history. That's incorrect. Some moderates did, but the far right was highly suspicious of the changes promoted by the president. Most historians give credit to the Democrats for supporting Reagan's inspiration at that time.

The far right Republicans back then saw Reagan as too weak when it came to Gorbachev. Their fears climaxed during the Reykjavik, Iceland Summit when the far right saw Reagan promising to give away their precious nuclear arsenal to the Soviets. The far rights's fears were articulated at that time by Reagan's buddy Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the UK. Despite their close relationship, she criticized Reagan harshly for going off half-cocked when it came to relations with the soviets.

Most Democrats of the time believed Reagan's sincerity and inspiration, and were hoping and praying for his vision of a nuclear arms-free world. Many of us today see that as a reason why he was a great Republican president.

Another great inspirational speech is obvious to most of us with a brain, and it wasn't delivered by a politician. It is the I Have a Dream speech delivered by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on August 28th, 1963 in front of the Lincoln Memorial. So, who opposed the Civil Rights's Movement? That answer is somewhat complicated. Let's simplify by saying that right-wing Democrats of the time, based mostly in the South, opposed the movement. They were supported by right-wing Republicans at the time. Again, regressives show their true stripes, despite their party affiliation.

Left-wing Democrats and Republicans supported it. Lyndon Johnson's success ultimately fractured the Democratic Party in the South, leading to Nixon's Southern Strategy (divide and conquer conservative southern Democrats), and the birth of the modern Democratic and Republican parties. It is a fascinating time in American political science/history.

A final example of another great inspirational speech was heard just before Dr. Kings and was given by another Republican. It was the Farewell Address delivered by President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 17th 1961, and it was all about mutual respect and the need to alter the dangerous trends of the Cold War. He was fearful of an out-of-control arms race, and the "military-industrial complex." Once more, the far right, embodied by his VP Richard Nixon, opposed Eisenhower's aspirations and quietly undermined any progress.

Kennedy later embraced Eisenhower's approach, but his assassination and LBJ's expansion of our commitment in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia ultimately ended those American dreams. Still, the speech is a personal favorite, and relevant today.

So, my examples, among many other possible ones that I reviewed, support my theory. The political forces that inevitably rear their ugly head to oppose great transformative, aspirational and inspirational thinking throughout history seem to be the far right, or the regressives. They always seem to oppose proposed change. They always seem to oppose what is possible, choosing instead for the status quo. I welcome a real debate on this issue, but my cursory analysis seems to support my theory so far.

Ask yourself why do Democrats elect to use the term "progressive?" It wasn't all about the GOP trashing of the word "liberal." It had a lot to do with promoting our core governing philosophy, which is about change and focusing on the future and mankind's potential. While the GOP focuses only on what individuals can achieve, we progressives enhance our individualism by combining it with a trust in social institutions - like government - to help us achieve.

Why do I mention this? It's because I believe that - based on historical evidence - psychologically far right Republicans lack the genetics necessary to be inspired by their fellow man, especially if those men are in government. They do like strong leaders, but only if those leaders are focused on delivering one thing in various forms - personal security, financial security and tribal security. Their entire modus operandi seems to be based on FEAR and SUSPICION of others.

They are the proverbial Deaf or Tin Ear, Echo Chamber, and/or Paranoid Pete. They like to call themselves conservatives, but that's just a pretty way to describe what is in reality a human psychological disorder reacting to fear in all its forms. Let's admit it, it's more appropriate to call them by what they really are: paranoid regressives, or political/social cowards.

They are instinctively - or genetically - suspicious of everyone and everything. They are genetically UNINSPIRED and UNINSPIRING, and will fight to keep whatever control they can to make sure that nobody can hurt them, their family or their tribe.

At this point, please don't get mad at me for leaving your favorite speech out of this discussion. There are simply too many. If you want to identify your own inspirational speech, and discuss the opposition to make your own case, feel free to visit American Rhetoric to find their Top 100 speeches. You can read them, and even play the audio for some. It's very interesting.

My conclusion is that great speeches do affect change and effect history. The great men and women who deliver them don't always see the progress, especially since it's slowed by the foot-draggers of history I call regressives, but it does slowly happen. Great men like Barack Obama seem to be put on this Earth as triggers for progress. I believe that President Obama's vision in his speech today will come to pass. I just don't know how long it will take. Let's hope it doesn't take too long, so that we can all enjoy a better world.

President Barack Hussein Obama's speech was amazing. I hope the majority of Americans take the time to listen. If you didn't catch it, please take the 45 minutes or so to listen now - click here. It's time to push back against the regressives who have fought the progressive tides of history. It's time to stand up for positive change. Let us hope that most Americans aspire to live in a better world, and join together to do whatever they/we can to make this man's vision a reality.

Michael Boh
Papamoka's Left Coast Contributor
from Our Rants & Raves Blog

Israel and Gaza Conflict

Outside observers like myself or you will probably never understand the conflict going on between Israel and Gaza simply because we do not live with the stress of two people not wanting to ever be neighbors. There is an extreme sense of hate between these people and yet when it comes to living and working they rely on not just one another business wise but also as people trying to earn a living and cohabitate. Then you toss in extremist opinions and outside influence that feeds weapons to both sides and you have one hell of a time bomb that someone will set off.

At times like these I wonder how the conflict between England and Northern Ireland would have ended up if people with weapons of mass destruction would have supplied both sides just to see how the weapons work. What is the kill factor on this missile? How does this weapon work? I’m not saying that people are experimenting where the fire is the hottest but it does make one wonder how the weapons that the people of Gaza are getting hold of to launch into Israel? These kinds of weapons do not grow on trees!

I grew up with a father that hated the English so bad he went to his grave with that hate instilled. He never met anyone from England or Great Britain, but he hated them anyway. That hatred was instilled in him from the time he was a child here in the United States by his own father. His father was a fighter in Ireland in the early 1900’s against the English and I can’t be sure of what acts he committed out of his hate but he immigrated to the United States the same year the Titanic sank. It was that or be caught and hanged. The hate managed to make the swim across the Atlantic. I thank God that my mother was not party to that same hatred and broke the cycle of unquestionable hate. Mind you, I am still very proud of my Irish heritage but that is a post for another day.

Personally, I am proud of my Irish heritage but I am more proud of the Irish back in my families homeland that managed to find peace. It isn’t something that can be stuffed down your throat, you have to want it, believe in it, and make it happen. The two sides in Northern Ireland found a common ground, worked out a treaty for long term peace, worked on that peace, are living that peace. Bombs are not going off killing innocent people, and troops are not forced to shoot to defend themselves against angry mobs. People and children are living a peace and surviving to smile and love another day. That is the desire that the people of Gaza and Israel need to come to realization with.

No outside influence can demand peace for Israel or the people of Gaza. It has to come from within and if it does not, then they will continue to war against one another. Neither Israel or Gaza is innocent in this latest altercation and battle. Each side sees their own reason for the fight but each side will fill graves because of the idiocy of pride. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth will only go so far till everyone is blind and toothless but nobody is listening in the Middle East. Thus the battle continues full of hate.

It takes guts to fight, but it takes a stronger virtue to find peace. That virtue is within reach but they have to face the fact that no amount of graves will end this war between them.

I pray for peace between Israel and the Gaza Strip people. And yet I know that is truly up to them. No amount of diplomacy can end it till someone takes their damn fingers off of a trigger on a gun or missile.

Just if you were wondering, I am pro Israel for defending itself.

Papamoka

Ahmadinejad, The Voice of Iran?

Picture courtesy of Yahoo News

Crooks and Liars has this 60 Minutes interview...

Tell me that George W. Bush is the voice of America and you will get an earful from over seventy percent of the population. Tell me that Ahmadinejad is the voice of the Iranian people and you will here this Irish American with his Iranian American friends that will have an earful for you.

On the other hand, we have to listen to Bush with his theory on who is a terrorist. This is America and the man is welcome within the 25 miles of the United Nations because we are a nation of diplomats and peace keepers. We used to be anyway, and I’m sticking with my theory that we are a nation of peace keepers.

Let us just put this visit by the distinguished leader of Iran as what it is. It’s a rock star tour without the music, without the roadies that follow the bands, without the groupies and head bangers. Like Madonna or the Rolling Stones he is out on tour selling his music but the sad fact is that America can’t stand the lyrics. Something about September Eleventh and the chorus just doesn’t work.

What does work for him in his favor is that he has the guts to even come to this nation, a nation at war with world terrorism and speak at one of the greatest institutions our country has. Not just speak, he answered questions from the students. Whether they liked the answers or not was who the man is. Over at the Washington Post they have this great coverage and must read…

Ahmadinejad Met With Protests, Criticism at Columbia University
Iranian President Defends Country's Human Rights Record

By Robin Wright and William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, September 24, 2007; 5:26 PM

NEW YORK, Sept. 24 -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was greeted with student protests and withering public criticism during a visit to Columbia University Monday in which he defended his government's human rights record, denounced Israel and rejected U.S. efforts to restrict Iran's nuclear program.

Speaking to students and faculty at Columbia a day ahead of his scheduled address to the United Nations General Assembly, the hard-line Iranian president also asserted that his people, including women, "enjoy the highest levels of freedom," and he claimed that homosexuality does not exist in his country. - Washington Post

Okay, this is where I change my opinion of this guy from Iran that says he speaks for all Iranian’s and wants a peaceful world for all men and woman. There are no homosexuals in Iran? Did they move out? I have to wonder if they moved or were just shot? If this guy isn’t in the closet then there is a serious issue with his entire concept of humanity and the percentages of life on this planet. Something does not smell right and it isn’t the dumpster at the back of the United Nations.

It gets better or it gets worse depending on your political philosophy. You know how history has recorded the deaths at the hands of the Nazi’s. It did not happen that way according to this President of Iran. Nope, never happened. No wait, he’s changing his story. But you have to look at Palestine to prove it! HUH?

Ahmadinejad, who in the past has argued that Israel should be "wiped off the map," repeated his assertions that the Holocaust should be researched "from different perspectives" and said Palestinians should not be "paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with." - Washington Post

Rather than thinking that all Iranian people back this man one hundred percent we should look at him as not a man of the world stage that he is performing on. Reality, facts, and the facts of history are obviously not in the hallowed halls that is the Iranian Government if this man is the voice of Iran.

One of my closest friends that came from Iran and became an American who is also Jewish told me of the non stop persecution of people for any reason if you did not follow the set down by the religious government. That is why his family came to America. Same scenario was happening in the 1600’s here on our shores and the same thing will continue here as long as freedom is our beacon to the world. Religious persecution and personal sexual orientation is not in Iran because they force you out. Welcome to America.

One last thought. While this son of a bitch Ahmadinejad is preaching there are no homosexuals in Iran, how many other facets of human kind are not allowed in Iran. In the same breath you have to wonder how much of his personal philosophy is just right in line with our own President?
America used to be about diplomacy and talking to people and settling our differences. Even Ronald Regan talked with the Evil Empire! Bush talks to no one, and not one person listens in turn.

If our nation has no diplomacy or reaction to settle our differences around the world then America is no better than the administration that was Nazi Germany before World War II in Berlin.

Papamoka

Are all Fatwa Declarations Legitimate?

Picture courtesy of Guide Instanbul

Over the past few years we have herd of the term Fatwa from the Muslim people of the middle east and it intrigues me to learn what a Fatwa really is. Step in and correct me if I am wrong and please comment if I am wrong!

My former line of thought was that a Fatwa was similar to Jihad and yet now I find that they are two very different things. Seeing that we are at war with a nation and I presume an entire region I would think that it might be a good idea to educate ourselves as to what these terms that are thrown around by our so called enemies mean.

I don’t have anything against someone that chooses to be a Muslim or was born a Muslim. I don’t have a problem with someone born in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia or any other Muslim based theocracy and nation. Reading up on the faith that is Islam it is a very proud and non violent faith. Much like the Christian Bible, the Koran can probably be interpreted ten ways to Sunday and none of the interpretations is correct.

Take for instance the first Commandment of the Christian faith. Thou Shall Not Kill. If America is a religious Christian Faith society then according to this Commandment we should not have an army to defend us? No offense to all of my friends in service to our nation in the military intended. No pink slips will be issued to those in the military based on this post… Trust me on that one. My interpretation is very wrong but could the same mistake be made with the Koran?

Over at the Washington Post they explain what a Fatwa is from someone that should know…

Sheikh Ali Gomaa: When each person's unqualified opinion is considered a fatwa we lose a tool for reigning in extremism and preserving balance of Islamic law.
Almost two years ago the citizens of London were victims of a great atrocity. Those who perpetrated those crimes would like you to believe that they were inspired by the religion of Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There is nothing in Islam that could ever justify these blatant acts of aggression. Islam calls on Muslims to be productive members of whatever society they find themselves in. Islam embodies a flexibility that allows Muslims to do so without any internal or external conflict. This is why we see a vast variety of cultural, artistic and civilisational phenomena all of which can be described as Islamic, ranging from the Taj Mahal in India to the winding streets of Fez to the poetry composed by English converts that represents not only the rigor of English verse, but also encompasses the beauty of Islamic piety.

This flexibility is not just present in the cultural output of Muslims; it is an integral part of the Islamic legal tradition as well. In fact, you could say it is one of the defining characteristics of Islamic law. Islamic law is both a methodology and the collection of positions adopted by Muslim jurists over the last 1,400 years. Those centuries were witness to no less than 90 schools of legal thought, and the 21st century finds us in the providential position to look back on this tradition in order to find that which will benefit us today. This is one of the first steps in the issuing of a fatwa (religious opinion/ruling). - Washington Post

So I’m a little bit wiser today than yesterday. Fatwa is a religious opinion and or ruling on the religion of Islam. Islam is a religion that changes over the course of time and its history is relevant to the changes declared with a Fatwa.

So now I have to find out who is the equivalent of the Pope to find out how these Fatwa’s are issued and made part of the permanent Islamic law. Can anyone that is a Cleric issue a Fatwa? According to the article that is not the case. I’m wondering if the same rules apply as to all of those Jihad’s that everyone talks about in the Middle East?

My main point of this post is to think more about who we as a nation are as a target of Islamist misunderstanding of Americans as a people. If we can find the common links for change so two people can exist with understanding of one another then that is for the good of all people.

Papamoka

Recommend this post to a friend...
Link to this post and we will reply in kind...

Technorati Tags:islam, iran, iraq, sheik, washington post, war in iraq, president bush, diplomacy, state department, usmc, army, air force, navy, muslims, muslim faith, christian faith, catholic faith, benedict, pope, american religion, religious politics, faith and politics, peace in the middle east, saddam, israel, lebanon
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator

Another Lurch In the Global War On Diplomacy

Picture Courtesy of The White House

This post Stolen from Michael Linn Jones...

President George W. Bush is in Europe. And, he’s smiling. Why not? He’s not in the United States where his policies and actions have rendered him a rolling-up of the welcome mat in many places.

So, off to Europe for eight days of lecturing a number of nations in the fashion that he has become accustomed to back home. Like 70% of Americans, many around the globe just don’t get it. So President Bush is going to give another series of Jackson Square speeches that are, in the parlance of his native state, all hat and no cattle.

In trying to determine what President Bush’s strong points are, I find it best to use the process of elimination. It’s a long list, but mastery of the English language is not one. The ability to receive (let alone accept) contrary advice or opinions is another. Now I have to add diplomacy. Whatever is at stake is not going to be helped by this trip.

Jennifer Loven of AP has an article, BUSH: RUSSIANS HAVE DERAILED REFORMS .

Russian President Vladmir Putin has been in need of a lecture, and George W. Bush is just the man to deliver it.

“In Russia, reforms that once promised to empower citizens have been derailed, with troubling implications for democratic development,” Bush said, speaking at a conference of current and former dissidents.

The president asserted that this discussion of democratic backsliding in Russia under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin was just one part of a strong relationship. “America can maintain a friendship and push a nation toward democracy at the same time,” Bush said.

But the lecture, however gentle, was not likely to be well-received by Putin, already riled over what he sees as unwelcome meddling by the United States in Russia’s sphere of influence.
Most recently, Moscow has become increasingly irritated by U.S. plans to build a missile shield in Eastern Europe, on Russia’s doorstep.

U.S. officials have been alarmed by threatening statements from Putin and others over the proposed network. Russia believes the system — with a radar base to be sited in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in neighboring Poland — is meant for it. Putin has said he has no choice but to boost his nation’s own military potential in response.

President Putin may be a ruthless scoundrel. Then, he may not. He doesn’t appear to be a big proponent of democracy, and that is putting it mildly. But, to be fair, how would we react if the Russians established a “missile defense shield” in Cuba or Mexico, and reassured us that it was aimed at say, Bermuda instead of us?

Our president is telling the Russians that this shield is aimed at rogue states, such as Iran. He is also saying the Cold War is over. These type of statements might be addressed diplomatically. But what is regional or world stability compared to a good photo op?

There is a smell of Karl Rove to this; appropriate being that Rove is Bush’s Rasputin. There are, however, no more elections to be won. Only peace and stability and that is something that can be influenced diplomatically, but never by declarations.

Lecturing the leader of a nation like Russia is never a good idea, even in private. Doing so publicly is asking for trouble.

And I think it’s self evident that President Bush has already bitten off enough for other people to chew.

Great article Mike!!!

Papamoka

Technorati Tags:bush, diplomacy, secretary of state, politics, vladimir putin, russia, ussr, communist, cold war, missiles, defense, nuclear weapons, bush on nukes, nukes, 2008 elections, romney, mcain, hillary clinton, gore, biden, karl rove, libby, scooter, europe
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator