am I the arbiter of a harsh reality?

has anyone else, out there, begun to draw a correlation between Barack Obama and someone else like, well, Fidel Castro?

this is one of the mixed blessings of being culturally, historically, and socially aware (the “Cultural Architect”, thing, eh).

don’t take my word for it, do your own research. pull-off some conclusions. and, don’t think I enjoy dredging this stuff up. I want Obama to be a leader under the vision of my personal hero, Thomas Jefferson, and his own checks-and-balance buddy, John Adams.

seriously… what the hell did Obama do while he attended Harvard?

if there is actually a degree in Social Work, maybe there shouldn’t be.

recently, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez praised Barack Obama for making both him and Fidel Castro look conservative by comparison. Chávez enthusiastically called Barack, “Comrade Obama!”  as a point of reminder, Hugo’s affectionate approval was based on Obama “nationalizing … General Motors.”  in fact, Hugo even gave a shout-out to Castro about Barack, saying,

“Fidel, careful, or we are going to end up to his right.”

Tea Party Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who is something of a rascal, is (was?) top of the Vice President list for 2012, in part because he knows how to dogwhistle to far-right Republicans.

in early July, Rubio responded to a Obama’s press conference statement that tax increases on the rich must be part of resolving the latest hostage situation by subliminally comparing Obama to Fidel Castro – the ultimate boogeyman for “far-right” Cuban-Americans like Rubio.

Here’s what Rubio told a no-name at National Review:

“Quite frankly, I am both disappointed for our country and shocked at some of the rhetoric. It was rhetoric, I thought, that was more appropriate for some left-wing strong man than for the president of the United States.”

look… when a Cuban-American conservative Republican from Florida says “some left-wing strongman,” he means Castro, eh.

but, getting back to Chavez, just to cement a point, here, I want you to, collectively, (when I write in this style, does it make you think of William Shatner playing James T. Kirk?) remember that the Venezuelan dictator successfully followed castor’s lead by abolishing term limits and shut down independent media outlets, two potential techniques for Obama to consider prior to the next few election cycles.

insiders will remind us all that during early negotiations over the debt ceiling with Republican leaders Obama threw a series of hissy fits and stormed out of chambers.

more and more often, the Obamacratic Democratic media are only offering us half-truths. we get small chunks of information that are misleading, at best. for example, Obama was telling the ignorant and elderly (sixty five percent of our nations population) that Republicans want to pillage the elderly and make slaves of everyone in Kentucky (I made that last part up, kind of. but, it actually makes sense). then within twenty four hours of the House then the Senate passing legislation that brought us back from the economic abyss, the media THEN lets us know that the economy is stalling. but, they won’t tell you that the new plan pushes much of the needed cuts in rampant government spending way past meaningful election cycles. and, that we could be stuck with a tyrannical bully who controls the media driving a socialist-oriented doctrine.

so… tell me I am wrong. why should we not be comparing Obama to Castro? sure… it’s an extreme view today. but, what about tomorrow? if Barack Obama thinks he is someone like Franklin Delano Roosevelt (he equates his thinking around “change” to a New “Deal”, right?), then at what point does he drink enough of his own koolaide to believe Dictatorship is acceptable? you can eat anything as long as it comes in small pieces. but, it can still kill you. and, it’s what you don’t see that can kill you first.

peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.

brian patrick cork

the story, with it’s perspective, is storming the internet with the House under siege, and the Senate soon, but not fast enough, to follow:

APPLE HAS MORE CASH THAN U.S. GOVERNMENT

Apple is now more liquid than the United States government, the Financial Post reports.

you needn’t take my word for it, point your browser, here: http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/07/29/apple-now-has-more-cash-than-the-u-s-government/

for the record, the hearty and ferocious Chip Brackley, it was, that first to alert me. and, my immediate response favored only the bold:

best practices as opposed to chimpanzees with shot-guns. so, here’s a thought… what if wanna-be Members of the House and Senate were required to pass a qualifying test, and sign an IOU or personal guarantee before they could take office?

WARNING, pointed visual effect:

the video above may be contrived. but, you likely get the point (about chimpanzees with guns, anyway). maybe we need to start discussing Laws of Natural selection on this blog agains seeing as how many Members of the House and Senate read it.

meanwhile, Chip’s quick witted response held greater promise:

“I am ALL for it.  A little accountability would be nice.  How about they get on our healthcare plan as well? We need the 2011 version of Ben Franklin and your boy Thomas Jefferson to step on the scene.”

there… this chapter in history, as I see it, is in the hands of posterity. and, with it you’ll not be able to lose the image of the chimpanzees with shot-guns, will you?

…will you?

keep it in mind come the next round of elections.

meanwhile, and certainly not soon enough as well, look for my argument why you might consider margining your Apple stock (did you start buying in in 2001 when it was at $15 a share like I TOLD you to – and, have been since?), and shorting Google. don’t let me forget, seriously.

Chip will likely remind me. he’s a good man.

peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.

brian patrick cork  

I appreciate the tradition. but, I also need to understand the reason(s) they exist. the foundation, if you will.

as the Founders of the “Republic” anticipated, American freedoms and liberties must constantly be defended against the corruption of the American Government – and, the media.  No one can do that for us. We must do it for ourselves.

we can’t believe everything we read or hear. I know there is a hint of irony, here, given my disposition towards strong, if not strident, opinions on this very blog.

however, all these words are meant to drive home the primary reason I bore most of you with my trivial thoughts, although they are certainly heart-felt, and reasonably well researched.

my Mom said:

“question everything, and accept nothing”.

I also heard my Grandad say, and often:

“there is the truth of the day”.

that means the truth, like facts that underly them, change and evolve. and, I believe this is one of many reasons the genius of the Constitution realizes itself constantly and continuously.

how often, for instance, has someone fallen in love, told a child to work harder, invented a god, or decided one of the most important things he or she can do in life is to “know themselves”.  I bet Socrates wasn’t the first person on earth to have gone around telling his fellow humans the unexamined life is not worth living and admonishing them to know who and what they are. not the first by far. not in all that time.

so, this is a nudge in terms of reminding you where a lot of my passion and moxy hail from. I was taught and then encouraged, by a strong line of mentors to question everything around me and seek the truth. that is the path of the Heterodox. in my case a Jeffersonian-Heterodox. I appreciate the tradition and the roots of the thought (then theory). but, I know the rules, and then the application – even the fairness change and evolve quantitatively.

I am often offended by Barack Obama. but, here is a thought… because he is so desperate to stay in power, it is feasible that our willingness to aid and abet him will enable him to evolve his actions, over the next four years, to actually get this country on a track that might work, for now. I don’t mean to say “on-track”, I want to be clear in saying “a track” that get things generally moving in a better (not right) direction.

here is an example…

Obama is carefully picking corporate and business leaders like, Jeff Immelt at GE, that he believes have global influence and partnering with them to create change abroad that will reflect back to our own shores and impact our abilities to lead. I think this might be one of many reasons he picked book smart people early on for his cabinet. now he is establishing business smart people to make for a global beachhead. mind you, I also believe he is setting the stage for an unprecedented attempt to secure an international seat of power – and, that may well involve the United Nations. GE partnering with China, India and Brazil won’t necessarily translate into jobs for our own citizens. but, it will make him popular abroad. I’m certain his aspirations make being President of the United States a stepping stone. that’s fine and dandy. but, to what end?

side note… and, it might be apropos… Michelle Obama is going to be at Northpoint Community Church next month celebrating the one year anniversary of a program close to her own heart. Northpoint is a veritable bastion of hearty and ferocious white Republican success stories. a Northpoint mission is to sidestep domestic concerns and drive Christ into the hearts of the global “unreached”. so, ironically, our Democratic president is aligned with Republican evangelical missions.

I don’t know about you, but I find the potential for promise or punishment provocative – and, possibly fascinating.

I think there is an Islamic maxim that goes something like:

“the promise is in the punishment, or the punishment is in the promise”.

by the way… I was also grimly advised (he was shouting, actually) years ago by a little man in uniform:

“it’s what you don’t know or see that will kill you”.

so, lets be ready. this means being aware. investigate, ask questions, pry, push (and, pull). do it!

peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.

brian patrick cork

The main purpose of a political party is to get its members elected to office and then push specific objectives that follow a sustained line-of-thinking.

Although our current president (I used small caps, purposefully) Barack Obama, is clearly more interested in staying in office for the sake of just being in office. He is apparently in mortal fear, now, of being ousted after a single term – an ultimate form of humiliation suffered by tense denizens of the Oval Office (see the hapless Jimmy Carter). This is the only reason he petulantly gave up his efforts to over-tax the wealthy (under his own earthly father’s vision). But, let’s all of us, collectively, firm up our satisfaction in knowing the fellow and his government whore group have been routed (as in seriously ass-kicked).

Meanwhile… Parties are, otherwise,  made up of people who have the same general idea and goals about governing. Once in power, the purpose of the Party is to accomplish its goals for the city, state, or nation. While not in power, the Party acts as the “loyal opposition” until it can elect a majority of its members to power.

Look for Obama to devolve into a form of petulant terrorist if he finds himself wobbling towards lame-duck status under eight years. I’m currently of the belief that he thinks wealthy people, not of his design, don’t deserve their status, and need their assets reallocated to fuel his ideals. More on this later. However, we need to be ready. That’s both the Heterodox and Jeffersonian in me – as well as the Prudent and Optimistic Gentleman.

To be clear… The Founding Fathers disliked political parties, calling them “factions” motivated by self interest.

Historical footnote: Then President, George Washington, was so disturbed over the quarreling between Hamilton (Federalists) and Jefferson (anti-Federalists) that he famously devoted much of his Farewell Address to the evils of parties. You need to understand that the people who supported Hamilton and Adams were called Federalists (ironically supporters of the Constitution) but they were not, in fact, an organized political party.

The first recognized party in America was made up of the followers of Jefferson, who, starting in the 1790s, called themselves Republicans (or, I love this, Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans). Hamilton and those who opposed Jefferson, kept the name Federalist and appeared to be content with a form of rabble-rousing.

Let’s be clear, Jefferson’s Republican Party has no ties to the current Republican Party. In fact, the current Democratic Party considers Jefferson and Andrew Jackson as the founders of their party. But, somehow, after Bill Clinton, the Democratic party forgot that they are public servants, and appear more intent on creating an environment that serves their own miserable means.

More later. Read between the lines. Talk amongst yourselves. Care.

There might be the gnashing of teeth. Possibly the shaking of fists. Certainly voices will be raised.

Peace be to my Brothers and Sisters.

Brian Patrick Cork