Election Race-Baiting in America and How the Democrats Thrive Off of Slander

Photo courtesy of guardian.co.uk

President Obama released his long-form birth certificate yesterday after a recent push by the so-called “Birthers” and possible presidential candidate Donald Trump to prove his citizenship. Within an hour of President Obama’s press statement, the media began to suggest that racism was behind the ordeal. I have come out of my writing hiatus to strike down these absurd claims and to reveal the true driving force behind the quest to prove that President Obama was born within the United States.

The Birther movement came to life thanks to the silent inquiries of our current Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton when she was a Democratic presidential candidate in 2008. After learning of President Obama’s interesting family situation and his habitation around the world, her campaign was hoping to discredit his candidacy and leave the door wide open for her to stroll into the White House. However, Obama’s campaign and his team of lawyers were able to deny the release of his long-form birth certificate and informed America that his certificate of live birth was legitimate proof that he was born within the United States. Two and half years later, following repeated requests and denials of definitive proof of his citizenship in the form of his actual birth certificate, President Obama has finally released it to the public. I, for one, have never believed he was a foreign national living in the White House. However, his repeated refusal to release something so important to the United States and our Constitution reeks of the arrogance that characterizes his persona and has always made me wonder what he is trying to hide. The media has been reporting that no president in our entire history has had to show their birth certificate to the public. This is completely false. As recent as 2008, John McCain had to go before a Senate hearing to prove his citizenship due to his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. All presidential candidates are vetted and must provide documentation or allow documentation to be seen by Congress to prove his or her birth occurred within our borders. Barack Obama is no exception.

The request to see his long-term birth certificate is neither racist nor is it the result of racism. It is the result of a super-nationalist movement that has spread across much of the country in the wake of the September 11th terror attacks. Americans want to be positive that our commander in chief, the person who is making all of our important decisions and running our country, has his citizens’ priorities in mind. Throughout Obama’s presidency, time and again we have seen situations in which he has been completely and utterly disconnected from the voices of the people. In addition to his haughty disconnect, President Obama carries an arrogance so profound that it leaves a bad taste in your mouth after some of his speeches. These characteristics, in addition to our society leaning on nationalism to get by during tough times, have created this debate. We would not be discussing this today if Obama had simply released his long-form birth certificate years ago.

The Left and the media in particular have begun to use this as a way to continue the classification of conservatives as racists who hate minorities and who want the poor, the sick, and the elderly to perish. Liberals are extremely good at bringing out the race card before up-coming elections and during debates over major legislation in order to rile up their base. If people want proof of Obama’s birth, that must mean they can not believe a BLACK person can be the leader of our country, therefore he MUST not be a citizen. I’ve heard a lot of nonsense coming from the Left, but this is ludicrous beyond belief. The vast majority of liberals I know are educated whites who believe conservatives are racist and want to bring down blacks and Hispanics in this country (blacks by legislation targeting Welfare, Medicaid, or other entitlement programs; and Hispanics by making them be like everyone else and enter the country legally, with documentation to prove it). I know very few white, educated liberals who even have a black or Hispanic friend! How can you be the champion of our two largest minority groups if you never interact with them?!? Taking pity on a race of people by throwing billions of dollars at them via programs that have done nothing to help them seems pretty racist to me. I find it incredible how many people fall for this slanderous rhetoric during every election cycle, but it is clear why the Democrats do it- it empowers their base and maintains the idea that conservatives, who wish for prosperity for all, are racists. I strongly believe that if you utilize the race card in order to purposely convince people to keep you in office or to help propel you into office, then you are the real reason why the United States is having a difficult time moving into the future and overcoming our past. You are the reason why we still have underlying racism in our society. Granted, overt racism is still around, but as the years go by and our country becomes more diverse, we will move away from such ignorant practices.

Once again, I want to reiterate that I am not a Birther and I have always believed President Obama is a US citizen who was born in Hawaii. However, his blatant refusal to release his birth certificate to anyone has always made me question what he was trying to hide. If he had released it two and half years ago when Hilary began the probe, then there would have never been any of this debate and discussion. I truly believe he did not release it because of (1) arrogance and (2) keeping it from the public eye created a movement of crazy people who believe he was born in Kenya and that, in turn, has allowed his party to play off of the race card (par usual) and keep the divide between Right and Left centered on racism and hate.

We should not be wasting our time and energy calling each other destructive names for the sake of politics. We should be striving to make this country better and focus on  eradicating the legitimate sources, ideas, and events of racism that occur today. It is shameful that Democrats take advantage of their base this way. Truly shameful.  I am actually offended when members of my party are called racists with no basis for the accusations. When you have been the victim of real racism, you are able to make the distinction between reality and fiction.

I leave you with a story of actual racism, one that has helped make me into the man that I am today and places emphasis on the overt racism still present in America.

When I was in high school, I was really big into sports, the Boy Scouts and academics. I did my very best to excel at all three and thoroughly enjoyed my relationships with my peers and the staff. Everything in my life was ideal and I was living the American dream (thanks to wonderful, supportive parents) until I began to take interest in certain females in my school. This is when all hell broke loose. I was playing football at the time and wanted to take one of our cheerleaders to the Homecoming Dance. We had been talking and doing the whole high school flirting thing and I thought we were in the clear. After saying yes to my request, she went home and told her mom, who happened to be our guidance counselor. This woman was someone who I had looked up to and who was always pleasant to me in the hallways and incredibly helpful to me when it came to my academics. Upon hearing that her daughter would be going to the dance with me, she was immediately told to inform me that she could not go to the dance with me because I was black. The girl in question drove to my house and proceeded to tell me this, crying, while we were sitting on my front porch. This was my first taste of racism.

Fast forward to the spring. My senior year is almost over and I am searching for a date to prom. I ask a girl who I was in youth group with at my church and who was a good friend of mine. I had been to her house and interacted with her parents in their home and at church and everything seemed great. That is, until I asked their daughter to prom. As if the incident in the fall wasn’t enough, I was rejected again because of the color of my skin.

To say that I was angry after both of these incidents would be an understatement. Anger seethed from every pore of my body and hate, something my religion states should never enter your mind, welled up inside of me and I carried it with me for a long time. If this had originated from people I had never met, I would have been extremely upset and I would have cast it off as just another ignorant hick who lives in my area. The fact that these people were able to routinely look me in the eye, smile, and carry on conversation with me as if I were a human being and then refuse to allow their daughters to attend a school dance with me based on the color of my skin is the ultimate slap in the face, one of the most emotionally painful things anyone can ever endure. It has taken me years to get over those two experiences and my hate has now turned into pity. I can honestly say I feel sorry for their lack of intelligence and pray for the salvation of whatever trace of soul they may have. The most important thing I learned from the entire ordeal is that you must search for the real motivations of people and learn about their character. Many people try to hide their inner feelings but if you develop a trained eye, you can begin to notice when people are being dishonest with you or acting condescending. This is why I have essentially washed my hands of my home town. Even with a trained eye, it is difficult to see through the film. I am well aware that many of you who know me and are reading this will know exactly who I was referring to earlier. If I have made anyone angry, so be it. To the rest of you,  just know that I have maintained relationships with the people who passed the test (although I have not kept in contact with some of you who are my friends due to the busy nature of my life right now. You know who you are and I apologize for being absent).

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a story of real racism. It exemplifies the disgustingly vile and vicious nature of the ignorance that breeds the hatred necessary to harbor racist beliefs. This is what we should be advocating against! We should not be wasting our time and money on frivolous accusations of racism perpetrated by the likes of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. They pad their pockets with your frustration and suffering. We need leaders who will stand up for you and help you make your life better, not make you dependent on the government and a slave to the system!

If you think that the majority of people who questioned President Obama about his refusal to release his birth certificate are racists, then you are sheeple and there is no hope for you. Although a small percentage are indeed overtly racists, I truly believe that most just wanted to know why he was never forced to release it and what, if anything, he was hiding. Now that his long-form birth certificate has been released, the Birther movement will die down. Now we will have to put up with the Left and the media calling us racists until Nov. 6, 2012. Stay strong America and let’s vote Obama out of office!

To Protect Lives…Then What? The Problem with Humanitarian Intervention in Libya

An anti-Gaddafi protester with his fingers painted in the colors of the old Libyan flag. Photo courtesy of www.thestar.com

About a week ago, the head of the interim government of Eastern Libya, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, pleaded to the international community for support in their struggle against Libyan government forces: “It has to be immediate action…the longer the situation carries on, the more blood is shed.” This quest for peace and liberation from oppression and aggression by long-term brutal dictator Muammar el-Qadaffi has been heard and answered. The world is at war once again. The United Nations Security Council has successfully passed Resolution 1973 calling on the international community “to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack”. As a result, the international partners, under the leadership of the United States, have effectively implemented a no-fly zone in order to prevent Qadaffi from carrying out attacks on his own population. There is overwhelming public and international support for preventing this ruthless dictator from committing crimes against humanity and waging war against his people. Why wouldn’t there be? That being said, the multi-nation Operation Odyssey Dawn, acting under Chapter VII of the Security Council, falls short in precisely addressing a wide range of issue such as failing to define a realistic and sustainable goal of its mission and purpose, not only for the soldiers and citizens of contributing countries, but more importantly, the people of Libya.

Humanitarian Intervention

The concept and legitimacy of humanitarian intervention is probably as controversial as it is contradictory and confusing. In order to uphold the Westphalia principles and state sovereignty, which should be associated with the defining principles of interstate relations and the foundation of world order, article 2(7) of the UN Charter clearly states that “nothing should authorize intervention in matters essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.” In other words, the principle of non-intervention allows sovereign states to freely choose the socio-economic and cultural policies to be adopted in one’s own territory on the basis of independence and legal equality of all states. Incidentally, Chapter VII entitles the Security Council to take action in cases of a “threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression”. This is where the doctrine of humanitarian intervention has evolved as a concept in international law, predominantly after the end of the Cold War. The most compelling argument for defining the intervention in Libya is humanitarian in nature; compatible with the definition of humanitarian intervention as a “justifiable use of force for the purpose of protecting the inhabitants of another state from treatment so arbitrary and persistently abusive as to exceed the limits within which the sovereign is presumed to act with reasons and justice.” Given its clear rational and moral justification, there is one major problem that stands in the way: humanitarian intervention conflicts with state sovereignty (one of the most fundamental principles of international law). As a consequence, a clear legal justification is necessary to validate its use.

Let’s say the international community has established legitimacy via multilateral intervention combined with a UN mandate–here are some areas where I see inconsistencies and long term strategic problems:

1.) Goal of the Mission

The coalition forces have repeatedly emphasized that they will act no further than the UN mandate’s capacity and limits. At the same time, the entire international community has demanded that Gadhafi step down and continues to do so. However, the problem is that the resolution falls way short of accomplishing such a goal. It merely calls for the protection of civilians, the establishment of a no-fly zone, as well as an arms embargo and the freezing of assets. At this stage of the war, with continuing violence by Gadhafi and loyal government forces, there is absolutely no chance that the lunatic is changing his mind and voluntarily giving up power any time soon. It is even more unrealistic to assume that there will be a peaceful and stable Libya if Gadhafi remains in power. This scenario would be a major setback and embarrassment for everyone involved in the intervention, especially the United States. As a consequence, I believe that one of these Tomahawks will eventually, and by that I mean accidently of course, hit another one of Gadhafi’s compounds, or one or many of the intervening countries will have to bite the bullet and send in ground troops.

2.) US Decreasing Role in Libya

After leading the way and providing the capabilities to implement a no-fly zone, President Obama has made it clear that the US mission is limited to the next few days and that no US boots will ever touch Libyan ground. If that is actually the case, and I am predicting that Obama will significantly decrease the US’ engagement in the war as soon as possible due to congressional pressures and well…being broke and still fighting two other wars, then who has the experience and willingness to successfully take over the leadership of Operation Odyssey Dawn? Europeans taking the lead, US in a supporting role – has the world turned upside down?

3.) Divided NATO/EU

At this point, no one really knows who will take charge of the operation in Libya when the Americans are forced to push back. The bureaucratic nightmare of European institutions is more visible than ever before. President Obama has openly demanded a strong role of NATO, however French President Nicolas Sarkozy sees his leadership role and “savior of Libya” image threatened and has decided to block a temporary NATO takeover as he is keen to establish an Anglo-French command under an EU umbrella. In one of the high-level meetings in Paris, Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen went so far as to accuse France, Turkey and Germany of intentionally constraining the work of the Alliance after which the German and French representatives furiously stormed out of the conference room. Moreover, Turkey, with its predominantly Muslim population, is dissatisfied with NATO plans and involvement, but that might have to do with the fact that they were not invited to attend the Libya summit in Paris. Rumor has it that some of the newer eastern European NATO members like Romania, Bulgaria and Czech Republic have put strong pressure on France and made clear that they are willing to help enforce the UN resolution and a no-fly zone in Libya. This has apparently led to a softening of Sarkozy’s stance on NATO’s future involvement. For now, members of the Alliance have agreed on the enforcement of the arms embargo against Libya. But will it also be in charge of the no-fly zone and further needed military operations? Who will maintain order and further prevent escalation? The point to make is that without the US in command, there is no definitive leadership. In a recent article in the Guardian, one observer of Anglo-American military adventures over the last 20 years tried to shed some light on the impasse and how NATO should run the operation. “It’s a bit like a barn dance, half of the people can’t dance, a couple are drunk and then there’s always the characters at the back with their hands up various skirts.”

4.) A New Era of Humanitarian Intervention?

If protecting the lives of inhabitants of another state from arbitrary and persistent abuses by its regime is the new premise for intervention, then we have to ask ourselves why nothing has been done in the Ivory Coast. We also have to carefully monitor and consider intervention in countries like Bahrain, Yemen or Syria where anti-regime protests have been answered with brutal force and targeted killing of civilians. As a result, the intervention in Libya not only needs a clearer mission statement but more importantly it necessitates a well defined exit-strategy, or otherwise the political consequences will be monumental.